Canadian Expert Recognizes PAS Centers as Quackery

      The recent Canadian court decision by Justice Faye McWatt legally kidnapped children from their mother, because the father demanded this and spent a fortune attacking the mother for years in court inflicting ongoing legal abuse in addition to the controlling, domineering, and harassing way he interacted with the mother and children. The father, aided and abetted by two lawyers, Harold Niman and Donna Wowk, a biased Guardian Ad Litem, Elizabeth McCarty, who refused to listen to the wishes of the children she was supposed to be representing, and colluding Parental Alienation Syndrome accusing professionals, including Dr. Barbara Fidler, all ganged up on this mother who was doing nothing more than being a good mom. It was David versus Goliath. There were apparently reasons that the mother and children did not enjoy interacting with this man who obviously reigned down terror on them. The daughters must be experiencing their worst nightmares coming true being forcibly taken away from the parent they love, who obviously cares about their happiness and well-being. Anyone who thinks being captured and taken to some experimental quack treatment center like a prisoner against their will is a good thing ought to imagine themselves in the place of these children.

     Anyone who thinks programming centers are a good thing ought to watch some of the classic dystopian movies such as Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, and George Orwell’s 1984. Imagine, if you don’t think and act the way that someone else wants you to, you could be forcibly taken to a programming center and BRAINWASHED into changing your thinking. Maybe some of these quack doctors ought to be treated to a taste of their own medicine. Somehow, it would be unlikely that any person subjected to this treatment would ever find it to be a good thing, unless they somehow lost the inability to think for themselves. It is reminiscent of one of the worst psychological experiments ever conducted by Dr. Harry Harlow, who removed rhesus monkeys who had already bonded with their mothers and placed them in a stainless steel vertical chamber device alone with no contact in order to sever those bonds. Many of these monkeys came out of the chamber psychotic, and many did not recover.

     The following article started out good, but maybe the editor lost the nerve to forcefully criticize what is going on. There are still people out in the world that know that PAS is junk science, and that this rise of the psychologists should be something every person who enjoys free thought should recognize for the danger it is. The custody of these children was bought and sold by profiteering professionals using phony theories to justify their actions as being in the children’s best interest. The only interests being served are that of the father who now has total control over these children, intentionally ALIENATING them from their mother, and the money-hungry experimenting psychologists who want to try out their brainwashing techniques.

FAMILY COURT

Judges sending children to U.S. for quack therapy, expert charges

Centres aim to treat parental alienation

KIRK MAKIN

February 2, 2009

JUSTICE REPORTER

Parental alienation centres in the United States are using unproven “quackery” to deprogram children ordered into their care by well-meaning Canadian judges, a leading Ontario child psychologist has charged.

Peter Jaffe says the programs may even damage children by destroying overnight their primary support bulwark: the alienating parent whose care they have been under.

“It is not a good thing if a child has bonded to an alienating parent, but disrupting that child and pulling them away from whatever sense of security they have may end up being more harmful than good in the long run,” said Dr. Jaffe, a professor at the University of Western Ontario in London.

“When you’re going to provide a treatment, you have to know what the unattended consequences or side effects are,” he said. “You may be solving one problem but creating a whole host of new problems.”

The deprogramming issue erupted last week after a Toronto judge forcibly removed three girls from their mother and sent them for treatment to a U.S. centre in an undisclosed location. It was at least the third time that an Ontario judge has taken the extreme measure in the past year.

The parental alienation centres, which operate in relative secrecy, in part to avoid surprise visits by angry parents searching for children who have been seized, is to be debated at an Ontario Bar Association conference today.

Dr. Jaffe said the spate of judicial orders runs counter to a laudable trend of granting children more rights. “It really doesn’t matter whether you are sending them to a locked ward of a hospital somewhere in Pennsylvania or you are sending them to Disneyland, I think it’s a significant infringement on their rights to take a Canadian child and force them to enter a treatment program in the U.S.”

Sol Goldstein, a Toronto child psychiatrist familiar with the U.S. programs, said they typically devote four or five days to intensive discussion, visual presentations and “logic and kindness,” to prod alienated children into critical thinking. He said children also have opportunities to spend relaxed, recreational time with the parent from whom they are estranged.

“Nothing can change like that within a week,” Dr. Goldstein added. “It’s like doing major surgery. The follow-up is crucial.”

Donna Wowk, a Toronto family lawyer, agreed that while securing time away from the parent who caused the alienation “is critical” to successfully treating a child, relapses are a major risk. “You can have great counselling sessions, but as soon as they are back with the alienating parent, it’s all undone,” she said.

Toronto family lawyer Harold Niman, who represented a non-custodial parent whose children were recently sent to a U.S. parental alienation centre, conceded that much remains unknown about the treatment.

“There is no doubt this is uncharted territory,” he said. “To a certain extent, we don’t know where this is all going to lead, but I think it’s like chicken soup. It can’t hurt. It is something designed to be therapeutic for the children, and I can’t see how it could hurt.

“Part of what is going on is an effort to find a solution to a very difficult problem. We are talking about a very, very narrow group of parents and they are almost invariably dysfunctional. These are parents who are toxic people.”

Dr. Jaffe said that if the Ontario family court system were less dysfunctional, children at risk of being alienated from a parent would be identified and treated early.

“I’m not criticizing the judges,” he said. “I understand their degree of frustration. But these cases really are a monument to the failure of the system to intervene early.

“There are bits and pieces in place in Ontario, but nobody is really in charge of the system,” Dr. Jaffe said.

—End of Article—

In response to the comment in the article above by Howard Niman:

“It can’t hurt. It is something designed to be therapeutic for the children, and I can’t see how it could hurt.”

     How can it hurt? FYI-There have been cases where the children try to commit suicide because of this unethical PAS BS. From the article on this blog about the PAS Racket, one the of the children in that case attempted suicide and had to be hospitalized – Dalia Saffa Biller, Martha Jacobson, and Jan Faust in collusion with GAL, Vicki Plant, were involved in that case. In a Pennsylvania case, a boy named Nathan Grieco committed suicide by hanging after being repeatedly forced to visit his father, and being subjected to the horrible overall treatment that children that unethical psychologists subject children to when they claim parental alienation – Richard Gardner was the psychologist in that case. There are numerous cases were the children resort to self harm or other destructive behavior. In a Texas case, a child shot and killed his father when being subjected to forced visitation and unethical treatment by PAS accusing psychologists – Reena Sommer was involved in that case. Of course, these UNETHICAL psychologists who claim to be able to determine with 100% accuracy that it is the MOM who causes the child to feel the way they do as if they have a crystal ball. The fathers are exalted and the entire rest of the family is accused of lying. Just who do these crackpots think they are, that they decide who is being truthful. Amazing how entire families are accused of lying, even after the children are over 18, like Jennifer Collins, who repeatedly denounces this PAS garbage after her family was given asylum in the Netherlands. Her dad beat her mom, her brother, and herself, and there are medical records to prove it. Yet, the unethical evaluator, Susan DeVries, the colluding GAL, Mary Laughead, and Judge Charles A. Porter all deny the reality of the abuse. There are many more examples of cases in other blogs listed in the blogroll, and at Stop Family Violence. Also, checkout the very specious evaluations of  Dr. John Zervopoulos, who uses the same rhetoric in case after case to remove children from their mothers for profit with horrible results for the children.

     Someone please help these girls, and all the other children who might fall pray to this scam! There was another recent decision in Canada that took a boy away from his father and sent him to a US “reprogramming” center. Despite the pro-mom slant of this blog, no child should be taken away from a parent they are happy living with. If the boy was happy with his dad, why couldn’t he live with him? Likely the forced evaluations, forced therapies, and constant pressure put on these children makes them resent and dislike the non-custodial parent even more than if they were left alone to sort out their own feelings. These PAS Purveyors just enjoy fabricating phony syndromes to profiteer off kidnapping children from custodial parents. There will certainly be nothing good to come from this.

 

To read more on this subject, check out the following posts:

Canadian Judge Recognizes PAS Treatment as Quackery

Ethical Scientific Experts Denounce “PAS” Reprogramming

Doctor Who Intentionally Severs Bonds With Mothers Is a Monster

 

New Times Wants to Know About the GAL Racket

The New Times has featured numerous articles on the amoral goings on in courtrooms. This article asks the question about the Guardian Ad Litem Program in Broward County – if it is a racket. They must already know the answer.

Well…if it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, then it must be a duck. Or how about this one…Does a bear $#!t in the woods?

How about some court ordered extortion?… Ordering parents to pay whatever fees are charged by the Guardians Ad Litem, the psychologists recommended by the GAL, and anyone else that they collude with to churn fees and destroy the life of the child who is the victim of this corruption, like parenting coordinators, therapists, et al.

New Times has had numerous articles on the Guardian Programs, so there must be some awareness that there are serious problems:

Fleecing of the elderly: Guardian Games

Firing of a volunteer Guardian who aggressively advocated for children: Guardian Gone

Excessive billing in custody litigation and questionable appointments: Guardians Ad Chargem

The Guardians are in a position of power and immunity. Little can be done about unethical conduct, especially with so many in the legal community profiteering off cases whenever there is money available. With the level of corruption already pervasive in the legal system, the last thing needed in a custody case is to be court ordered to pay another lawyer. It frequently occurs that that GAL lawyer is going to please the person with the most money and keep their gravy train rolling. The person with fewer financial resources often has to fight against the GAL just as though they are the opposing attorney. This just isn’t going on in Florida, but these unethical cronies congregate in wealthy communities. This same problem is occurring in California, New York, Illinois and other wealthy metropolitan areas. One area in Illinois appears notorious for GAL case manipulation, for more info see: Cook County Illinois Custody Change Fraud

For more info on the problems with Guardians Ad Litem see: Court Appointed Parenting Evaluators and Guardians Ad Litem: Practical Realities and an Argument For Abolition

For background on this post, check out: Is This More Broward County Florida Divorce Court Injustice? commenting on a previous New Times article.

Joel Steinger’s Strange Sense of Priority

New Times Broward Palm Beach

The Daily Pulp By Bob Norman

Monday, Mar. 16 2009 @ 1:07PM

So I’ve been following this Mutual Benefits scam pretty closely, especially the actions of mastermind Joel Steinger. Following Steinger’s divorce, I learned that there was a hearing this morning regarding alleged contempt by his ex-wife, Diana Steinger.

I showed up at the hearing this morning in Judge Susan Greenhawt’schambers with hopes of catching up Joel Steinger himself. Alas, he wasn’t there, but it still turned out to be pretty interesting.

Lawyer Bill Gardiner is holding the threat of contempt over Diana Steinger until she pays about $6,000 in guardian ad litem fees and interest. Gardiner hasn’t gone after the guy with the money, Joel Steinger, because Steinger has already paid the fees.

Joel Steinger may be an unrepentant criminal but he is smart — and he knows how to get the legal community behind him. How? Why, he hires a huge number of lawyers. He’s buds with a lot of lawyers and lines a lot of their pockets. Little known fact:Judge Larry Seidlin and Joel Steinger are very close buddies (until the indictment, anyway). That’s right, Judge Larry used to hang out with the felon on a regular basis.

From what I’ve seen, his largesse has led to Diana Steinger being half-drummed out of court, as if she were convicted felon under federal indictment for fraud and money laundering rather than the other way around.

Understand this: Broward County’s lawyers, by and large, are an amoral lot who pray to the mighty dollar. And nothing else. They play right into Joel Steinger’s hands.

But if Diana Steinger is telling the truth then Joel Steinger has his priorities seriously screwed up. Diana — who refused comment after the hearing —  told Judge Greenhawt that their seven-year-old son has been booted out of private school at Nova because Joel hasn’t paid his half of the tuition. She said the kid has been out of school for three weeks and that she doesn’t know what to do.

Let’s see; he pays the fees of Gardiner and guardian ad litem Randy Bovan, but fails to pay for his own son’s tuition. Ooh. The smell is getting worse coming from that New River mansion Joel’s still living in.  

(By the way, can somebody tell me what’s going with the Broward guardian ad litem program? Is that a racket?)

“It’s wrong, I don’t want my son being out of school,” Diana Steinger said.

“I agree,” Judge Greenhawt said. “He should be in school.”

I hope Greenhawt, who has ruled with Joel Steinger religiously but seemed very fair at this hearing, rights the situation. No reason a child should pay for Joel Steinger’s sins. But in the meantime, I give Diana Steinger the quote of the day:

“My friends pay everything for me … but they don’t want to pay attorney fees,” she told Greenhawt. “They say it just gets wasted. (Pause) I agree.”

—end of article—

 

Guardians Ad Chargem

Guardians Ad Chargem

Appointed by a judge to act in a child’s best interest, some lawyers can also help themselves by billing a small fortune

By Bob Whitby

Published on June 03, 1999

For most people who help kids entangled in the legal system, the only reward is the warm glow that comes from having done a good deed. For a lucky few, however, the payback is more pecuniary. Downright lucrative in some cases.How do you go from being a concerned citizen to being a concerned citizen who gets paid? By becoming a private guardian ad litem. But there are a few hurdles you’ll have to clear first.

First you’ll need a law degree, and membership in the Florida Bar helps to get in this club. Besides, there’s really no better way to meet and schmooze with family court judges, which is the second thing you want to do. Make sure the judges know you like kids.

Then sit back and wait for a juicy divorce or custody case to pop up, preferably one involving at least one rich parent able to pony up big time and several kids. You might have to handle a couple smaller cases for 1000 bucks or less to prove your worth. But sooner or later, if you’ve done your networking, the judge might remember you fondly and put your name on an order appointing a guardian ad litem in a contentious case involving well-heeled parents. If you’re extra lucky, the judge won’t dictate how much you can charge or how many hours you can put into the case. Now you’re in the money.

A guardian ad litem is a person appointed to act in a child’s best interest in legal proceedings, usually a shield between warring parents. The guardians are also investigators. In custody cases, for example, the court needs to know which parent is best suited to have primary custody. Parents who don’t want to lose their children are not the best sources of objective information, so it falls to the guardian ad litem to make a recommendation.

Every circuit court system in Florida has a publicly funded Guardian Ad Litem Program. Usually administered by a few overworked staffers, these programs recruit and train laypeople — non-lawyers — to be guardians ad litem, which is Latin for “guardians at law.” These guardians are volunteers; they serve because they want to help kids and are to be commended for it. Putting oneself in the middle of a disintegrating family is, as one guardian put it, “like sticking your head in a meat grinder.”

Volunteer guardians are assigned in cases where the parties cannot afford a private guardian. (Broward County is in desperate need of volunteer guardians, with about 1000 kids waiting for their services.)

But if a judge decides one party or the other can pay, then pay they must. That happens in a small percentage of cases and usually only in divorce or custody matters. Dependency cases, where abuse and neglect are the issue, tend to involve foster children and people who simply don’t have much money. As one guardian ad litem put it, “Dependency is the redheaded stepchild of the court house.”

A private guardian ad litem is almost always a lawyer (but isn’t serving in that capacity, which would be a conflict of interest), and that’s when the bills can start to mount.

Unless you regularly sit in on court proceedings, there is no way to determine which lawyers repeatedly get assigned as guardians ad litem. The county’s Guardian Ad Litem Program keeps tabs only on volunteers, not private, paid guardians.

Court watcher Eleanor Mendlein has sat through a lot of divorce and custody cases in the last few years, and she sees patterns in who gets assigned. “The same people get appointed over and over again,” says Mendlein. “It’s money. If you have deep pockets, you get due process.”

Through the court watchers, New Times found three instances in which paid guardians made big money — as much as $40,000-plus for a single case — advocating for children. Not surprisingly, such dollar figures raise questions of bias. If your ex is paying a guardian ad litem thousands of dollars, will the guardian be influenced by the one who foots the bill?

“The concern is real, but I don’t know if it’s justified,” says Melinda Brown, a family-law attorney who also works as a private guardian ad litem. “I deal with a whole lot more issues than who pays me.”

But the people who’ve been through the system in divorce or custody cases think differently. “These guardians don’t care anything about kids,” says Teresa Cummings, who battled with her ex-husband over custody of their two children. “Believe me, they don’t.”

After their divorce, Cummings’ husband decided he wanted custody of their children. The judge appointed a private guardian ad litem, and Cummings’ ex-husband paid the bills. “They got money from the person who has it, which in this case was my ex,” she says.

She can’t quite put her finger on it, but Cummings had the feeling the guardian ad litem was swayed by her ex-husband. “She would say things to me to aggravate me,” Cummings says. She also says she had no idea the guardian was an attorney and didn’t realize who was paying the bills until the case was almost over.

Perhaps Cummings’ fears were overstated, because she ultimately prevailed in the case and kept primary custody of her children. The guardian’s bill was about $5000.

That’s small change compared to a $27,000 bill for guardian ad litem work in the case of Ulbrich v. Ulbrich.

John Ulbrich and Christina Coolidge Ulbrich were already divorced when guardian ad litem Jeffrey Bryer came into their lives. At issue was visitation for Christina’s daughter, Nichole. Though he is neither Nichole’s biological nor adoptive father, John wanted visitation rights with the child. Christina didn’t feel her ex was entitled but gave in to avoid a costly legal battle. The case was settled out of court but not before the guardian ad litem wrote a 55,000-word journal on every aspect of the Ulbrich’s lives and charged John Ulbrich $75 for each of the 365 hours he spent doing it.

“I think he is a frustrated writer,” says John Ulbrich.
And not a very good guardian ad litem to boot, he adds. “It was just an absolute horror, a nightmare. [Bryer] had no ability to gain confidence with my daughter.”

Bryer recommended that John Ulbrich be granted visitation rights and devised a somewhat complicated schedule to that effect. Though he was the one who requested that a guardian ad litem be appointed in the first place, Ulbrich refused to pay what he believed to be a wildly inflated bill. Not that he couldn’t have paid if he wanted — Ulbrich owns a Jaguar dealership on Sunrise Boulevard. Bryer, who did not answer repeated phone calls for this story, settled for $16,500.

And then there’s the granddaddy of all guardian ad litem bills, a $40,000-plus whopper for services rendered in the divorce case of Gumberg v. Gumberg.

Again the pattern: Rich husband pays the bill, less financially endowed wife feels shafted by the system.

The Gumbergs’ divorce case defines contentious — the case file sprawls over 21 volumes. Lorraine Abruzzo Gumberg says her legal bill alone is more than $200,000. She estimates her ex-husband’s bill at close to $800,000, a figure which could not be confirmed because Andrew Gumberg did not return phone calls from New Times.

At the heart of this mess is the custody of a four-year-old boy. The guardian ad litem recommended custody be awarded to the father, with the mother having visitation rights. Not surprisingly, that didn’t sit well with Lorraine Gumberg. “I didn’t stand a chance,” she says. “I lost custody of my child.”

Gumberg says the guardian ad litem criticized her for picayune things, like feeding her son from a bottle though he was 20 months old and letting him sleep in bed with her. The guardian also suggested that, should custody be awarded to the husband, the wife should live close by so the child’s life would not be unduly interrupted. Gumberg scoffs at the notion, noting that her ex-husband, whose worth is put at some $32 million in court records, lives in a $2.5 million waterfront home in Fort Lauderdale. “The idea was that Jordan should not have to go from dad’s beautiful house to mom’s trailer park,” she says. “That’s bullshit.”

Anne Alper, the guardian ad litem in the Gumberg case, was out of town and could not be reached for this story.

In the end Gumberg says her ex-husband got the best legal help money could buy. “I just don’t think the system works right,” she says. “I think the system sucks. He has money. I don’t. That’s the bottom line.”

Contact Bob Whitby at his e-mail address: Bob_Whitby@newtimesbpb.com

—end of article—

And be sure to check out:

The PAS Racket

PAS Racket 2-Vicki Plant & the “Whores of the Courts”

Cook County Illinois Custody Change Fraud

Also check out the recent disciplinary action against a Minnesota judge for his unethical referral relationship with an attorney:

Minnesota Judge Blakely Faces Possible Sanctions for Unethical Relationship With Lawyer

Is This More Broward County Florida Divorce Court Injustice?

Although this mother appears to still have some access to her child in the Steinger case written up in New Times, it is alleged that the settlement was less than equitable. The situation seems to be not that unusual in Broward County Florida, especially when there is wealth involved. Judge Susan Greenhawt has had at least one decision reversed and remanded on appeal due to abuse of discretion in another case involving wealth and alleged domestic abuse. See The PAS Racket for another case involving Judge Greenhawt and the infliction of severe Maternal Deprivation Abuse to the children and their mother.

There is also alleged to be some disagreement over the fees of the Guardian Ad Litem that has filed a lien in the Steinger case below, possibly because the GALs often bill a small fortune as written long ago in the New Times in an article titled: Guardian Ad Chargem 

Per the article that follows, the mother is reported to be appealing.

From New Times of Broward and Palm Beach (emphasis per BMLCTA):

Mutual Benefits czar Joel Steinger manipulated local politicians and the state legislature. But divorce court too?

By Bob Norman

Published on February 17, 2009 at 3:18pm

Joel Steinger is a shrewd operator who gained great sway over local politicians and the Florida Legislature while he perpetrated one of the greatest frauds in South Florida history.

His billion-dollar Ponzi scheme, Mutual Benefits Corp., was busted in 2004. This past December, the feds indicted him on fraud and money-laundering charges. But that hasn’t kept Steinger from living like a king at his $9 million mansion on the New River in Fort Lauderdale.

And that has been made possible in part due to his success at a whole new game: divorce court.

When his wife, the mother of his 7-year-old son, sued him for divorce, Broward Circuit Judge Susan Greenhawt allowed the 59-year-old Steinger to keep full ownership of his lavish waterfront estate and let him off without having to pay alimony or child support.

Curiously, Greenhawt also sealed the felon’s financial documents from public view, leading some to complain that she was actually protecting the criminal from scrutiny.

The contentious, expensive, and often ugly battle came after a six-year marriage. The couple had been regulars at exclusive charity balls, and they were known for throwing lavish parties attended by the political elite, notably Broward Mayor Stacy Ritter and former state Sen. Steve Geller.

Joel Steingerpoured hundreds of thousands of dollars into the political process, fostered a friendship with Geller, and hired Ritter’s lobbyist husband, Russ Klenet — all moves that helped him continue operating his fraudulent company with the Legislature’s nascent blessing.

Court documents show that while Steinger was ripping off Mutual Benefits investors, he was also accepting millions of dollars from Colombian drug cartels to fund the business and hiding illicit profits in bogus companies and offshore accounts.

The Securities and Exchange Commission shut down Mutual Benefits in 2004 and ultimately forced Steinger and his underlings (including his two brothers) to pay about $30 million in penalties. A government-sponsored receivership is now running what’s left of Mutual Benefits and is going after any assets it can find that are connected to Steinger, including tens of millions he had invested in racehorses and an Ocala farm.

The only major known asset he has left is the Fort Lauderdale estate, which is protected from creditors. Not surprisingly, the mansion was the central issue in the divorce.

Diana Steinger, an attractive woman born to a wealthy family in Venezuela, originally filed for divorce in 2005 and also got a restraining order against her husband, alleging verbal and physical abuse. She sought child support and for the house to be put in a trust fund for their son, whose custody is split between his parents.

Both sides employed high-powered lawyers for the dispute, which continues today. Last April 8, Judge Greenhawt issued a final order allowing Joel Steinger to keep the estate. The judge gave Diana Steinger and their son just six days to move out of the 8,500-square-foot home with her possessions in tow.

Greenhawt,who was appointed judge by former Gov. Jeb Bush in 2003, declined to comment for this article, citing the ongoing divorce. But the judge made it clear in the order how she felt about Diana Steinger.

“The husband thought he was getting a beautiful wife, but she turned out to be smoke and mirrors,” Greenhawt wrote in her order. “The wife thought she was getting a wealthy husband, but the business collapsed.”

Harsh words for a now-single mother, especially considering that Florida is a “no-fault divorce” state. But Greenhawt didn’t even write the order; it was actually composed by Joel Steinger’s attorney, prominent divorce lawyer Karen Amlong.

At the bottom of the document is a line of computer code indicating that Greenhawt’s order originated from Amlong’s computer. Amlong says she wrote the order at the judge’s request, but she says it was consistent with Greenhawt’s pronouncements in court. Amlong says Diana Steinger has several divorces in her past and was never interested in a long-term marriage.

“What is amazing is that the wife owes [the law firm] Baker & McKenzie over $1 million for representing her — all to walk away with her jewels and secondhand furniture and her designer clothes,” says Amlong. “It was a short-term marriage.”

The truth is that Diana Steinger, according to the order, wasn’t allowed to take any furniture, only personal possessions that she owned before the 2000 wedding.Diana Steinger declined to comment, but a close friend said she was mischaracterized by Joel Steinger and his attorney in court.

At one point, said the friend, Amlong intimated that Diana Steinger was an exotic dancer, a laughable allegation since the only dancing she has done is ballet.

“She’s a good mother and good person,” said the friend, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “And she has gone through hell.”

Backing up the friend’s characterization is the fact that Diana Steinger is receiving a humanitarian award from the Florida Grand Opera for her volunteer work.

Amlong says the ruling was fair in part because Joel Steinger took on the brunt of the millions in debt he’d accumulated.

The judge, not surprisingly, echoed that sentiment. Greenhawt wrote in the order that forgiving Diana Steinger her husband’s debt, which he’d acquired in a criminal enterprise, “resulted in a vastly disproportionate distribution in favor of the wife.”

 

The judge didn’t mention that the home, under the state’s homestead laws, is protected from those judgments and creditors.

The comparison to Bernie Madoff, who is accused of masterminding a $50 billion Ponzi scheme, is unavoidable. While thousands of investors have lost their savings, Steinger is so far doing just fine. Today, Joel Steinger continues to live in his mansion. He’s under house arrest but is free to towel off in his two-story pool house, lounge at his mahogany bar, and use any of the eight bathrooms in the giant abode.

And the victims don’t think the house should belong to the husband, the wife, or the child — they think proceeds from its sale should go to them.

“It’s sickening,” says Larry Scartz, whose parents lost most of their nest egg in the Mutual Benefits scam and who has been assisting victims around the country. “I don’t understand it. It makes no sense.”

County records indicate Steinger isn’t hurting for cash. There are still many millions of dollars unaccounted for in the Mutual Benefits fraud. It’s unknown if Steinger has access to any of that, but county records show that just ten weeks after Greenhawt’s final order was issued, he received a $602,000 loan from longtime friend and Miami attorney David Goldstein.

Listed as collateral for the loan is the Fort Lauderdale estate, which is still in dispute. The ex-wife is appealing the judge’s ruling.Her current attorney, Barry Finkel, argued at a hearing before Greenhawt on January 9 that Diana Steinger deserves her portion of the home’s equity.

There, Finkel argued that the house — or at least the $800,000 portion of the equity in it deemed a marital asset — should be shared with the ex-wife and argued that Greenhawt excused Joel Steinger “from paying child support because of his past and pending criminal conduct.”

Amlong countered that the judge had no obligation to alter her ruling and that the house could be used by Steinger for bond in light of the indictment.

Greenhawtdenied Finkel’s request, prompting Diana Steinger to complain that her son’s private school is threatening to expel him because Joel Steinger had failed for several months to pay his half of the tuition.

“Maybe you should take care of your child instead of your appeal, ma’am,” Amlong sniped at the mother.

And with that, Diana Steinger left the hearing the way she’d arrived: empty-handed.

—end of article—

More From Broward County Florida and Judge Greenhawt:

The PAS Racket

Maternal Deprivation Research

There have been numerous studies regarding Maternal Deprivation, with a large source of information coming from Bowlby, based on Spitz and Goldfarb, and also from unethical animal experimentation. Overwhelmingly, research shows that severing this natural bond between a mother and child causes severe emotional and behavioral problems, such as depression and psychosis. The phrase maternal deprivation is the terminology used in the early work of psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, John Bowlby on the effects of separating infants and young children from their mother. Some of the research was previously used to discourage mothers from working or using childcare, but it seems important to revive these studies as children are being deprived of their mothers intentionally by abusive men who claim to be “parentally alienated” in an ongoing scandal that rivals that of the Catholic Priest sexual abuse cover up.  

Maternal Deprivation Abuse (MDA), has been identified as occurring with great frequency in legal proceedings, with specific unethical lawyers, psychologists, and judges perpetrating the the same scam on mother after mother with similar horrific results for the children. There has been death by suicide, suicide attempts, depression, academic distress, retaliation by a child against a PAS claiming father, and untold misery for the victimized children and mothers.

Based on Bolwby’s theories, Maternally Deprivation affects children as follows:

• Complete or almost complete deprivation could “entirely cripple the capacity to make relationships.”
• Partial deprivation could result in acute anxiety, depression, neediness and powerful emotions which the child could not regulate.
• The end product of such psychic disturbance could be neurosis and instability of character.(Bowlby J. (1951) pps. 11–12)

 

“Mother love in infancy and childhood is as important for mental health as are vitamins and proteins for physical health.” (Bowlby, 1953.)  Child psychoanalyst John Bowlby (1907–1990). 

 

Maternal Deprivation Abuse

Maternal Deprivation, or Motherlessness, is occurring with alarming frequency due to the unethical treatment of women and children in family court. Maternal Deprivation is inflicting abuse by severing the mother-child bond. It is a form of abuse that men inflict on both the mother and children, especially men who claim they are “parentally alienated” from their children when there are complaints of abusive treatment by the father.

Maternal Deprivation occurs when men seek to keep their children from being raised by their mothers who are the children’s natural caretakers. Some men murder the mothers of their own children. Others seek to sever the maternal bonds by making false allegations of fictitious psychological syndromes in a deliberate effort to change custody and/or keep the child from having contact with their mother when there are legal proceedings. A twisted form of Maternal Deprivation is to kill the children, so that the mother will be left to suffer. Sometimes there are family annihilation murders where the father kills the children and himself (or dies by cop), but the mother is not killed because she has received protective orders and her children have not as in the case of Jessica Gonzales.  

In seeking to define this form of abuse certain common elements are found in the Maternal Deprivation scenario as follows:

• History of domestic abuse that could be physical, psychological, sexual, and/or social abuse occurring on or off again, occasionally, or chronically which could be mild, moderate, or severe, including homicidal and/or suicidal threats. 
• Legal proceedings relating to abuse
• Hiring of “Fathers Rights” attorney
• Use of “Hired Gun” mental health professionals to make accusations of psychological disorder against the mother and children in deliberate effort to excuse abuse and change custody or grant visitation that is contrary to safety concerns. Another name for these unethical professionals are “Whores of the Courts“
• Raising claims of “psychological disorders” against the mother such as “Parental Alienation Syndrome” (PAS), Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome, Malicious Mother Syndrome, Lying Litigant Syndrome, Hostile Aggressive Parenting or any other mother-blaming psychological disorder that can be used by the unethical professional to re-victimize the victims.
• Infliction of “Legal Abuse” by continually and excessively filing motions so that the mother continually has to defend herself and her child(ren) causing financial and emotional devastation.
• Can occur in response to child support legal proceedings as retaliation.

The intent of “Maternal Deprivation” is to punish the mother and the child for revealing the abuse and to falsely claim that they are not abusive. This very commonly occurs as there are more and more “abuse-excuse” parental alienation accusing professionals who use this scientifically invalid theory over and over to achieve specific goals of the person paying them. Maternal Deprivation can also occur in response to child support legal proceedings. When occurring in this manner, Maternal Deprivation is a response to the financial demands as retaliation. Suddenly the father who had little prior involvement wants to take the kids half the time to avoid child support obligations, etc. When the men are really abusive, they ask for sole custody and demand the mother of the child pay them.

Although some people call this “Maternal Alienation”, a distinction needs to be made as the pro-pedophilia “Parental Alienation Syndrome” and the use of the word “Alienation” are most often used AGAINST battered women and abused children. There needs to be a distinction between the phony psychological syndrome and the intentional infliction of abuse on a mother and child by intentionally severing their natural bond. This distinction can best be made by NOT using the label of “Alienation” which will always be associated with the pro-pedophilia monster Doctor Richard Gardner.

Some of the characteristics of the especially heinous abusers who inflict Maternal Deprivation include but are not limited to the following:

• Angry
• Abusive
• Violent
• Coercive
• Controlling
• Threatening
• Intimidating
• Demanding
• Domineering
• Harassing
• Stalking
• Tyrannical
• Oppressive
• Forceful
• Manipulative
• Deceptive
• Unethical
• Un-empathetic (Lacks Empathy)
• Entitled
• Immature
• Self-centered
• Neglectful
• Guilt inducing
• Pushy
• Intentionally tries to humiliate mother and/or child
• Harsh, rigid and punitive parenting style
• Outrage at child’s challenge of authority
• May use force to reassert parental position
• Dismissive of child’s feelings and negative attitudes
• Vents rage, blames mother for “brainwashing” child and takes no responsibility
• Challenges child’s beliefs and/or attitudes and tries to convince them otherwise
• Inept and unempathic pursuit of child, pushes calls and letters, unannounced or embarrassing visits 

There is a distinct overlap of the intimate terrorist type domestic violence abuser with the Maternal Deprivation abusers as follows:

 

• Coercion and threats
• Intimidation
• Emotional abuse
• Isolation
• Minimizing, denying and blaming (Hallmarks of PAS)
• Using children
• Economic abuse
• Male privilege

The people who most often engage in Maternal Deprivation Abuse are most often: 

• Abusive men
• Vindictive second wives who don’t want to deal with the real mother of the children
• Paternal grandparents who raised dysfunctional children (abusers)

The effects of Maternal Deprivation often cause the children to become psychotic, depressed, and sometimes suicidal or to have suicidal ideations. Another terrible reaction is when the child retaliates against the parent who accuses Parental Alienation Syndrome as in a Texas case where the child killed his father. Other times when the Maternal Deprivation abuser completely takes over the will of the child by using brainwashing techniques similar to those used in prison camps where deprivation and isolation are used to force ideological changes in captives, these children often have a sort of trauma-bonding with the abuser and model their behavior. Sometimes these children will also abuse the mother in the same manner as the father. Another generation is created to carry on the abuse, and will likely do the same to their own spouse and children.

 

 

 

For more articles involving Maternal Deprivation:

Failure of Family Court System Leads To Death and Devastation

Doctor Who Intentionally Severs Bonds With Mothers Is a Monster

Child in imminent fear shoots father – vindicated in appeal – PAS fraud nightmare

Cincinatti PAS

VAWnet Joan Meier on PAS-Parental Alienation Syndrome & Parental Alienation: Research Reviews

And many more articles throughout Battered Mothers Lose Children to Abusers and all the links on the sidebar.

Maternal Deprivation Abuse will be featured on BMLCTA Blog in an effort to wipe out this heinous crime against mothers and children.

 

Doctor Who Intentionally Severs Bonds With Mothers Is a Monster

This Dr. Harry Harlow was not just unsympathetic, but a monster just like the unethical doctors who forcefully remove children from loving mothers by claiming parental alienation to give them to their abusers. Why do they do this? Because they get paid by the abuser to do this! It’s a fraud on the courts that needs to end!

From the Top Ten Unethical Psychological Experiments
The Well of Despair 1960

     Dr. Harry Harlow was an unsympathetic person, using terms like the rape rack and iron maiden in his experiments. He is most well-known for the experiments he conducted on rhesus monkeys concerning social isolation. Dr. Harlow took infant rhesus monkeys who had already bonded with their mothers and placed them in a stainless steel vertical chamber device alone with no contact in order to sever those bonds. They were kept in the chambers for up to one year. Many of these monkeys came out of the chamber psychotic, and many did not recover. Dr. Harlow concluded that even a happy, normal childhood was no defense against depression, while science writer Deborah Blum called these, common sense results.
     Gene Sackett of the University of Washington in Seattle, one of Harlows doctoral students, stated he believes the animal liberation movement in the U.S. was born as a result of Harlows experiments. William Mason, one of Harlows students, said that Harlow kept this going to the point where it was clear to many people that the work was really violating ordinary sensibilities, that anybody with respect for life or people would find this offensive. Its as if he sat down and said, Im only going to be around another ten years. What Id like to do, then, is leave a great big mess behind. If that was his aim, he did a perfect job.

Any doctor removing a child from their mother using the fraudulent theory of parental alienation or other phony psychobabble BS needs to be exposed for the monsters they are. They come up with phony rhetoric and say it in a convincing manner, much like they did back in Salem when they accused women of witchcraft.  

This Parental Alienation Custody Change Fraud is going to go down in history as one of the most unethical psychological social engineering experiments of all time. The scandal is on the same level as the cover up of sexual abuse by the Catholic Church. It’s time people start to wake up and recognize that these doctors are covering up for all types of domestic abuse against women and children for PROFIT.

If you click on the links regarding Dr. Harry Harlow, you will find out that he received awards from psychological associations. Maybe this will start to get people thinking that there are groups of people doing unethical experiments and they do support each other on their theories and cover up for each other. The APA also published the Rind Study which tried to justify child sexual abuse as being acceptable and not that harmful to children. There is a common thread between all of these sick studies that push quack theories to justify unacceptable behavior. Only with Parental Alienation Theory, the whole idea is to call the victims liars which re-victimizes them. All that is needed to do this is to pay an unethical doctor to testify who will ignore real evidence and substitute in their fraudulent rhetoric.

When people realized the horrible treatment of animals that Harlow inflicted, the result was an animal liberation movement. What needs to happen as a result of these unethical parental alienation scams is for children to have a liberation movement and demand to have rights to be heard and to make their own decisions.

And Intentionally Scaring Monkeys

PAS Racket 2-Vicki Plant & the “Whores of the Courts”

In a previous post, the book the “Whores of the Courts” was referenced for exposing the fraud of psychological testimony. A Guardian Ad Litem in Broward County Florida profiteers off of cases using this scam claiming parental alienation and/or other psychological fraud in numerous cases all following the same scenario. This is the second case posted involving the same guardian ad litem. Vicki Plant has been in the Broward County Florida Court system for about 20 years, manipulating custody cases by suppressing real evidence and manufacturing fraudulent rhetoric. This same scam is used in case after case where there is MONEY.

 

In this next example, the child is now 20 years old and more than able to speak out about the torture inflicted on him by Vicki Plant and psychologist, Sherrie Bourg Carter. Vicki Plant sought to give custody to the father (a very wealthy and not so moral person). The child said that he wanted to live with his mom, and visit his dad. Despite the teenage child being able to fully express himself, when Vicki would go to court, she would lie and claim that the child said he wanted to live with his dad.

 

Vicki had Sherrie Bourg-Carter repeatedly talk to this child. Both Vicki Plant and Sherrie Bourg Carter would then go into court and change around what was said and claim the fictitious psychological syndrome of parental alienation. Numerous times the child was forced to talk to these unethical people. This is so obviously a set up to the children who are subjected to this treatment. They are quite aware that after they speak to these people, and they tell them how they feel, or about specific incidences, then the exact opposite of what they want is inflicted on them, it is soon quite apparent that these people are up to no good.This child was quite aware of his father’s lack of ethics and it was quite apparent that these two women were colluding with the wealthy father.

 

This unethical “treatment” went on for years. Vicki was then attempting to force the child to relocate to another state. She forced the child to fly with her on a plane to visit the father.Vicki Plant even had dinner with the father and child in another state at the father’s expense. During this dinner, Vicki Plant claimed that the child’s mother had called her, and said that it was alright for the child to live with the father in another state. Fortunately, this child was smart and stood up and said that his mother would never say such a thing. Then he proceeded to call the mother to ask if this was true, and, of course, it was not true. Vicki then proceeded to torment this child by repeatedly telling him that he would have to live with his father. The child cried on the plane and this was witnessed, but the witnesses were suppressed from testifying in this fraudulent setup.

 

Plant continued her quest to force this child to live with his father against his will. She repeatedly forced him to speak with the unethical psychologist, Sherrie Bourg Carter, the two of them would collude and testify against the mother to the child’s detriment. Plant tormented this boy so much that he was distraught. Plant then tricked him asking him if he wanted it to end. The child desperate for relief, of course, wanted this seemingly endless torture to stop. Plant told him that he just had to sign a piece of paper, but didn’t tell him what it said. She tricked the child into signing a paper that said he wanted to live with his father. Then a hearing was scheduled and it was setup for Plant to take the child. Plant took the child from school and held him in a room at the courthouse against his will, terrorizing him. Then the child was brought in front of the judge. Fortunately, this child was able to speak for himself, and was actually listened to. The judge asked if he wanted to live with his father, and the child said that no he didn’t want to. Plant then tried to claim her usual scam claiming that the child was “brainwashed”. Fortunately for that child the judge didn’t buy it and said, “Poor Vicki, Poor, Poor Vicki [Child] won’t join your crusade”

 

Thank goodness that the child in that story was a teenager and was able to speak for himself. Other children, have not been as fortunate and there have been instances in Vicki Plant’s cases were there has been extreme mistreatment of the children by changing custody to the person the child named as their abuser, unsupervised visitation with abusers, unethical, torturous and ineffective forced “therapies”, recording the child’s actions with video and/or audio, all while billing excessive amounts for this unethical inhumane treatment by her and her cronies, resulting in a suicide attempt and other self harm by more than one child, and in more than one case.

 

This guardian ad litem profiteers off of cases to the detriment of children. She repeatedly uses psychologists to commit fraud, to cover up evidence of abuse, and to manipulate the outcomes of cases. An investigation should be done on cases where she is involved. There is likely a very high percentage of cases where the wealthiest party prevails with Vicki Plant manipulating the case upon her involvement.

Thanks to http://www.randijames.com/ for this story.

 

Check out the PAS Racket – Part 1

The PAS Racket

Networks of lawyers, GALs, mediators, psychologists, therapists, parenting coordinators, et. al. collude and conspire in these Parental Alienation Fraud cases. The mother and children are attacked every step of the way. The GAL may ask to speak with the children. If they too have been abused as is very frequent with domestic abusers, the GAL then calls in a child abuse report, intentionally, or this may be done in response to a domestic violence injunction. The GAL then calls in one or more of this network of therapists and evaluators to attack the mother and children from every angle. All accusing the victims while exonerating the perpetrator who pays hefty “legal bills” and “evaluation bills”, basically buying visitation and/or custody in this racketeering fraud. It’s like black market human trafficking with the appearance of legitimacy, all done with virtual immunity through the court system.

Here is one such brutal example with Judge Susan Greenhawt that was overturned on appeal to Florida’s 4th DCA. The guardian ad litem, Vicki Plant, has allegedly been involved in multiple cases using the same psychologists and same strategy to further victimize abused women and children. The therapist, Dalia Biller has also worked with Vicki Plant on other cases using the same strategy. Also, involved in this reportedly vicious attack on the mother and children was Martha Jacobson as evaluator, and Jan Faust as undisclosed expert. Interestingly, Jan Faust owns a home with the judge on the case, Susan Greenhawt per Broward County Public Records book 44956, page 1035. This abuse of discretion custody change caused severe trauma to mother and children with one of the children having to be hospitalized. This sadistic group allegedly continued to inflict harm by blaming the mother and depriving the child of the mother’s love and support. This is called Maternal Deprivation Abuse.

The family reportedly continues to suffer as the children are under 18 and litigation continues.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM 2005
S.S. Appellant, v. P.S. Appellee.
CASE NO. 4D04-455
Opinion filed January 19, 2005

Appeal of a non-final order from the Circuit
Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit,
Broward County; Susan F. Greenhawt, Judge;
L.T. Case No. FMCE 03-15749 3793.

Lynn G. Waxman of Lynn G. Waxman, P.A.,
West Palm Beach, Sari Teichman Addicott and
Michael L. Addicott of Addicott & Addicott,
P.A., Hollywood, for appellant.

Nancy W. Gregoire and Joel L. Kirschbaum of
Bunnell, Woulfe, Kirschbaum, Keller, McIntyre
& Gregoire, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
PER CURIAM.

We grant the motion for rehearing, withdraw
the opinion issued on November 10, 2004, and
substitute the following.

Appellant, S.S., appeals from
the non-final Order on Temporary Injunction for
Protection Against Domestic Violence and Other
Temporary Relief. She argues that she was
deprived of due process at the hearing because,
contrary to Florida Family Law Rule of
Procedure 12.363(b)(1) (2003), the trial court
permitted the use of the custody evaluation
psychological report which was completed and
delivered to appellant’s counsel the day before
the hearing. We agree and reverse.
Pursuant to section 741.30, Florida Statutes
(2003), the trial court held a hearing on the
temporary injunction for protection against
domestic violence issued against appellee and
considered the issue of custody of the children
of the parties. Two months before the hearing a
custody evaluator was appointed. On Sunday,
the day before the hearing, which had been
continued twice, the report was completed and
delivered to the parties’ attorneys. The report
was thirty-five pages single-spaced and
recommended that the children be removed from
appellant’s custody due to the severe alienation
of the children by their mother (appellant) from
their father. Finding that the circumstances
amounted to an emergency, the trial court, over
the repeated objections of appellant that she
needed more time to prepare, permitted the
testimony of the psychologist, which was based
upon the report.

We find that the circumstances of this case do
not rise to the level of the extraordinary
circumstances required to find a true emergency
as held in Stanley-Baker v. Baker, 789 So. 2d
353, 355 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). Thus, the trial
court’s decision to permit the testimony of the
psychologist that was based upon her report,
which was received by appellant the day before
the hearing, was an abuse of discretion and
deprived appe llant of procedural due process.
See Crifaci v. Crifaci, 626 So. 2d 287, 288 (Fla.
4th DCA 1993).

REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR
FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.
GUNTHER, TAYLOR and HAZOURI, JJ.,
concur.

 

Thank you for all the concerns over the therapist in this case. Here is an update:

NOTICE OF RELOCATION/ TERMINATION OF PRACTICE: Dr. Dalia Saffa-Biller at

 Posted: Sunday May 18 , 2008

• Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
• Event Date: 6/15/2008

Description:

NOTICE OF RELOCATION/ TERMINATION OF PRACTICE: Dr. Dalia Saffa-Biller at the Weston Center for Psychological Svcs will be relocating and no longer available to provide service to users in Broward County, Florida effective June 15, 2008. Dr. Biller will remain the records custodian. To request records call (954) 389-5563 or send Correspondence to 13349 Chasewater Dr, Charlotte, NC 28277. May 18, 25, June 1, 8, 2008

 South Florida Sun-Sentinel ad id: 13536317

 

 It is believed that this therapist is under investigation yet again. Anyone wishing to file a complaint, please use this complaint form regarding Florida psychologists.

Be sure to check out the PAS Racket-Part 2