FATHER ABUSES SONS & GETS SOLE CUSTODY

FATHER SEXUALLY ABUSES 3 SONS & IS AWARDED FULL CUSTODY 

Ms. L is the loving yet very distraught mother of three boys ages 7, 10, and 13. Ms. L has not seen her sons aside from very limited supervised visitation for the past 10 months. Instead they have been placed in the hands of a very dangerous man.

In 2003, Ms. L., beaten down by years of abuse (including unprovoked rages toward her in front of very young children) separated from her husband.

In 2005 the court ordered an interim order of 50/50 parenting time.  Despite the fact that 
just prior to this interim order for shared physical and legal custody and after 2 years of intense fear of even seeing his father, the oldest boy had begun to disclose reports of sexual and physical abuse.  Child and Family Services got involved in the case and interviewed the boys. The accounts were graphic as the oldest boy, then 8 described his father licking his bum, being made to all shower together with him, and being made to take turns sleeping in his bed. Even the then 2-year-old was made to %u201Click Daddy%u2019s penis%u201D.  The 8 and 5 year old both told the police they were hit often by their father, and how the father had %u2018smashed the 5 year old on steps, dragged the 8 year old by the neck throwing him on the floor in the bedroom, and slapped their 2 year old brother so hard across the face, he fell to the floor crying mama, mama. 

Child protection case workers stopped all contact between the children and their father for 5 months and the children thrived during this brief period of stability and relief.  CFS did not substantiate the allegations, although they did recommend to Ms. L. she seek an emergency motion for sole custody and supervised visits with the father.  Ms. L. had already paid 12,000 in legal fees by this point and her lawyer, after informing her that an emergency motion would cost 20,000, recommended she go to legal aid.  Despite the evidence of the boy%u2019s disclosures and their distraught refusals to go where they felt unsafe, and despite the fact that the custody evaluator recommended sole custody go to the mother, and that the boys be put in therapy, the decision made by the Judge from a week long trial in 2006 was to re-implement the original temporary order from July 2005 which called for 50/50 parenting time, yet this time the judge ordered that the visits be one week on and one week off. 

During the next few years Ms. L was continually threatened with contempt of court if she was not able to FORCE the boys to go according to the half time court order. Between 2007 and 2008 each child disclosed more incidents of sexual and physical abuse, including that their dad%u2019s penis would %u2018get big and stick out in the shower every time they had to shower with him, the  youngest, then 5 disclosed, that his father had him lick his penis and bum and would do the same to him. The youngest, who became increasingly resistant to going, said he didn%u2019t want to go because his dad %u2018sticks his penis in his butthole%u2019. After this serious disclosure to the mother, the youngest, then 6 years old, disclosed to the CFS worker  (the only time a worker met with him) that his father touches his private parts and makes him touch his.  This was not taken seriously enough to prompt a police investigation, despite the pattern and consistency of disclosures of abuse among three children from the same male. The boys would beg, cry, and plead with their mother not to send them.

The oldest boy was so afraid to go that he would literally get to the point of becoming physically ill, acutely anxious and having panic attacks. The mother tried for years to get therapy for this child, but with joint custody the father had the veto power to deny consent.

In 2009 after a 2nd 9 day trial where Ms. L .was self represented as she wasndenied legal aid and did not have the $50,000 she was told by lawyers it would cost to be represented. The judge put into place an interim order granting the father, Mr.L, sole custody and only limited supervised visits for Ms.L. The allegation was that Ms. L had coached her children as a way of alienating them from their father. The Judge deemed the mother willfully in contempt of court,  and accused Ms. L. of making false allegations. This interim order was put into place as a means of restoring the father%u2019s relationship with his sons.  Since this traumatic removal from their mother%u2019s care and their home with her, the 10 and 13 year old boys have talked of suicide. Ms.L. was not able to have them assessed for post traumatic stress or get them counseling as she has no rights now, and the father would not approve of it. For the past 10 months Ms. L has only been allowed to visit with her boys for 2 hours a week under strict supervision where she pays to see her children. On February 10, 2010 the interim order was to be lifted with a final order being put into place. During the past 10 months this mother complied with everything that was expected of her, including, but not limited to, a complete psychiatric evaluation.

In court Ms. L explained to the judge that she was prepared to listen to what the court was saying which concluded that the boys were not being sexually abused and that alienation from either parent is extremely detrimental to the boys. The judge listened to what she had to say and then made a final order, granting sole custody to the father, Mr. L, with even more limited visitation to Ms.L., reducing the supervised visits with the oldest boy from weekly with his brothers to bimonthly.  Since the trial Ms. L. has spent more than 15,000 in legal fees in this battle to be reinstated into her children%u2019s lives as their mother.

Doesn%u2019t it seem strange that what the judge seemed to think was most damaging to the boys was alienation from their father, and now what the judge decides to do is issue an order requiring permanent alienation from the mother? At this point Ms. L. desperately fears for the welfare of her boys who, based on their disclosures, are at great risk of ongoing abuse, and as a result of this cruel and inhumane order, are suicidal and are receiving no professional help.

We, the undersigned, are asking that this case be immediately re-opened for investigation, during which time, at very least, the shared 50/50 parenting time be restored and that all three boys be given the professional help they so desperately need.

We don%u2019t want to hear that you cannot intervene in family court. We don%u2019t want to hear that this is just another domestic dispute between ex-spouses or merely a high conflict divorce. The fact of the matter is that everyday children are being brutally abused, sometimes to the point of death, or committing suicide because of inhumane decisions such as this one that are being handed down by judges who quite obviously have a rather separate allegiance and a very different agenda other than seeing to it that our children are kept safe. Research clearly conveys the reality that children if anything under report abuse, minimize the extent, and deny or recant, especially when the abuse is perpetrated by someone they have to live with. In divorce cases where children report abuse they are treated with skepticism, ordered to live with their alleged perpetrator and are given no assurance of protection by the agencies that are given this responsibility.  

We refuse to believe that one judge after another is readily fooled into believing that children everywhere are lying in matters of life and death. Before Ms. L%u2019s three boys become yet another statistic we are asking that a government official who cares enough about the welfare of children step forward and put an end to this craziness once and for all. All the red flags are up in this case. It will simply take one caring, empathetic, and humane individual to say %u201Cenough is enough%u201D to save the lives of these three young boys. We, the undersigned as well as many more, are waiting and watching to see how the government handles this highly critical matter.