Championing for child victims and their protective parents | a 501(c)3 nonprofit

Gaming the System by Abuse of Process

Pictured above: Guardian ad Litem Dana Outlaw


This is the ongoing exposure of a case in Missouri. We first wrote about it here. The complaint against the former Guardian ad Litem, Jared Frick, is here. The complaint against Commissioner Lisa Dubé is here.

The mother is affirmed as the protective parent, a loving, persistent advocate for her child in the face of overwhelming defamation, personal insult, and dismissal. We wonder what the father has done to afford so much preferential treatment, to be granted full custody of a child he had abandoned for years and the freedom to isolate her in a home where she was abused.

The new Guardian ad Litem, Dana Outlaw

On January 4, 2021, Dana Outlaw (pictured above) was assigned as Guardian ad Litem for the subject child on the case before us.

Approximately three months passed before Dana Outlaw  spoke with her actual client, the subject child. During this three month period, Dana made a number of decisions, none of which benefited her client’s best interest.

Even after being informed of the dishonesty of the former GAL, Jared Frick, Dana decided to keep the original report instead of fulfilling her obligation to her client by doing her job.

Phone call indicating bias

On January 30, 2021, Dana Outlaw and the protective parent mother had a scheduled phone call that lasted almost an hour. Dana was assertive and expressed a very obvious biased opinion going into the case. At one point during the phone call, which the mother recorded, Dana began to yell at the protective mother.

The mother interrupted the opinionated GAL and stated she felt like Dana was not entering this case as a neutral party. Dana did not deny the accusation, but simply toned down her assertive attitude for a very short time.

The child hospitalized without the mother’s knowledge

Not long after Dana Outlaw was assigned to the subject child as her Guardian ad Litem, the child in a desperate attempt to escape her situation tried to run away from her father. The child then reportedly attempted suicide.

The child had even attempted to call in a wellness check, but simply trying to get help caused her to be admitted to an institutional hospital for troubled teens.

When the child was released, she was returned to the father’s home where she has been in isolation since.

This was all done without the mother’s consent or knowledge. No one informed the mother about these events until the WebEx court date on January 19, 2021.

Dana Outlaw prevents communication

Once a week the subject child has a two-hour visit with her mother. this visit is supervised, even though her mother is of no threat to the child.

One time, on January 29, 2021, the father allowed the subject child to call her mother. When Dana Outlaw found out that the child had called her mother, she made sure that this communication would not happen again without her consent.

Our analysis of Dana Outlaw

Ms. Outlaw gives every evidence of being unconcerned about the best interest of the child, or of being a neutral party upon entering this case.

Instead she chooses to support endangering the child by forcing her to stay isolated in an environment that has been shown to be damaging to the child for at least one third of the time she has already been alive.

She is further traumatizing this mother and child by minimizing contact between the two, contact that even the controlling father seemed to be willing to allow.

The analysis of the FCVFC is that Dana Outlaw has abused any power she has been awarded by her position and should not be allowed to damage the lives of children any further.

Statements from the Protective Parent Mother

(with headings added, and slightly edited for clarity and anonymity)

Dana Outlaw was appointed by Commissioner Lisa Dubé as the GAL for my daughter. This appointment follows the disqualification of the former GAL, Jared Frick.

I have only spoken to Dana twice, the first time being a court date over WebEx on January 19, 2021 where I was issued a preliminary injunction with false accusation treated as facts.

First time to talk with Dana: confusing misstatements in court

In that court session, Dana asked me if I was aware that my daughter had a cell phone when arriving at her father’s that my parents provided her. I replied no I was not, my parents returned her cell phone and retrieved it before she went into his care.

She told me my friend by a name that she stated I had never heard of before, then provided her with the phone. I thought she was asking me a question and replied no, which was not a lie because my friend, A—–, who had to leave her with her father while I was in jail, did give her a phone so she wouldn’t be trapped with no way to call for help if she needed it.

Dana did not ask if my friend A—– provided her with a phone. This phone in discussion was given to my daughter after I was arrested and is reported as stolen property since her father confiscated it. This phone is being treated as evidence and has clearly been discussed without my presence. Since I am pro se that means without one of the parties present, which is illegal.

Second time to talk with Dana: disrespect and rudeness

I had a scheduled phone call with Dana Outlaw on January 29, 2021. I recorded this conversation where Dana was very pushy and demanding. She accused me of all the wrong and attempted to argue my daughter’s father’s innocence in the matter.

When she could not justify this, she even raised her voice to me. At one point I had to listen to her disrespect, and I told her I did not feel she was entering this case as a neutral party. She had been rude. She never denied what I accuse her of, but simply toned it down for a brief amount of time.

Dana Outlaw has failed to protect the subject child

Dana Outlaw is responsible to have my daughter’s best interest in mind. She has failed to do so horribly.

Dana Outlaw was the GAL when my daughter was taken to Crittenton Children’s Center for mental health treatment because she had tried to leave the residence where she is being held against her wishes.

The house my daughter tried to leave is the house where those who were supposed to care for her allowed her to be sexually abused, even raped, from the ages of 4 to 9.

My daughter is being held away from her family with no contact. This is causing further damage to a child who has already suffered a great deal.

On April 1, 2021, during my supervised visit with my daughter, she informed me that she finally spoke to Dana over WebEx for the first time.

Dana Outlaw has been my daughter’s GAL since the beginning of the year and voiced her very strong opinion, all without ever speaking to my daughter.

She is failing my daughter and endangering her.


Get Help Today

Contact Form Demo

Related Posts

Skip to content