December 15, 2008

Say a prayer..........................

NJ Judge: Targets of Parental Alienation Can Sue for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress'

New Jersey is one state that often gets it wrong when it comes to domestic violence and child abuse while in the context of a divorce/dissolution. This is just more evidence that they are still getting it wrong. Abused women will now have to suffer at the hands of their abusers because if they get divorced, they will be accused of alienation of children and sued and then how could she ever support the children? The abusive father will then swoop in and take these children from their primary caretaker for god only knows what types of abuse. Women thought it was bad before with abusive men getting wind of the alienation tactic used in family court, imagine how terrified women will be now that abusive men will be able to sue for monetary damages in civil court. All the quacks out there who believe in PAS will now have another avenue of funding to explore. THIS IS DANGEROUS FOLKS!!!! IF YOU READ THIS PAGE PLEASE REPOST AND ALERT EVERYONE YOU KNOW.

We also have Glenn's select few who are responding to this thread. Sadly they are all under the mistaken impression that PAS/Alienation exists. Some are even considering taking this action in order to get out of obligations. Seems it matters only that the ex is well to do, so she does not deserve any of the monies that should have been paid when the children were young. Who knows whether this ex had to borrow money in order to care for the children? Does it even matter? The monies are owed to her and as such they should be paid. If you do not pay any other debt, then the business or person that the money is owed has the right to start legal action in order to get paid? So should this ex-wife. There are other posts about suing - one such post states that for every win in a suit such as this, it will fund two more lawsuits.

I personally think all of these "supposed" alienated children are very much like Einstein's children - as so eloquently written about on Sacks' site days earlier. They simply do not want to speak to someone who has hurt them or hurt their mother. The mother should be allowed to tell her children that the actions of the father were wrong, if he was abusive. And abuse could have happened whether or not there was a finding in criminal court. The standards in criminal court do not lend well to the "he said, she said" dilemma of domestic violence and child abuse claims.

No comments: