Reunification Therapy as Ordered by Family Court Judges across the United States as of January 2024: The Real Facts, The Real Picture, From the Real Victims in their Words and Experiences

For a detailed scholarly review of the origins of so called reunification therapy, evolved through the cottage industry of parental alienation and custody transfer from protective parents to the custody of documented abuser offenders, we refer you to the website fcvfc.org – “Gardner in his own Words”

Reunification therapy is not a mental health practice that exists according to any scientific, clinical, and mental health treatment program associated with any legitimate medical, psychiatric, or psychological practice. The family court system has imposed torture on children through the use of reunification therapy and the Gardner concept of parental alienation.

As a result of the manipulation of Title IV-D, the program of federal funds designated to aid needy and dependent children, it has been weaponized into functional family court practices to expedite custody transfer from the protective parent to the abuser parent. This erroneously suggests that children are being rescued from a bad parent.

The bar association’s capacity to capitalize on the unique circumstances provided by family courts’ use of judicial discretion avoids constitutional due process and practices based on rules of discovery and evidence.

In fact, judges can make custody decisions based on their direct, exclusive knowledge of the case. The use of discretion was intended to be based on trust of the character and knowledge of judges, appointed to the bench on the presumption of superior character and sensitivity. That presumption has been thoroughly violated over the years and shown to have absolutely no relevance or weight in today’s judicial appointments. The family court system has evolved into a money making enterprise and an autocratic, criminal, child trafficking, and racketeering establishment across the United States.

Litigants as a Captive Audience –

Judges’ Fast and Loose Interpretation of Law, and Autocratic Baseless Orders that Violate Legal Protection and Endanger Protective Parents and Vulnerable Children 

Litigants subject to family court jurisprudence have become the captive audience of judicial abuse of process and subject to the autocratic directives of judicial discretion. Evidence based defense along with credible expert witness testimony has been dumbed down to a level of assembly line processing that expedites custody transfer of children. It has nothing to do with best interests of children and in fact violates the best interests of children, in line with the profit motive associated with the transfer of children into the custody of abusers based on the manipulation of funding available through the implementation of transference of Title IV-D federal funding aid for dependent and needy children to the states.

The script as to who is the protective parent and who is the abuser is flipped in favor of the abuser. The child is a defenseless and expendable commodity in a process that is geared to the transfer of funds from federal coffers to state coffers based on the fraudulent theory of parental alienation, a process that exists for the purpose of child trafficking and racketeering and has no connection whatsoever to benefits for children and all who love them.

The fabricated theories that have to do exclusively with factory processing of children from the custody of protective parents into the custody of abusers is a theory made of whole cloth with no substance, no basis in scientific or medical practice, and meant for the purposes of fraud, child trafficking, and racketeering. The end product of this process is the destruction of millions to billions of lives and the end of the ability of a democratic society to function.

First, the family court judges are completely ignoring statutory standards that govern the laws associated with modification for custody transfer of minor children.

Second, these transfers ignore legally required conditions consistent with children’s best interests.

Third, demand for radical custodial arrangements directly contradicts records that include specific expert opinions against transfer to a parent who has been documented to courts as someone who has seriously abused children.

Fourth, as the children aggressively resist association, the court becomes more aggressively aligned with the abuser and transforms the resistance into an interpretation that the children are alienated. This perspective is a false and unfounded interpretation. The liberal interpretation and manipulation of childrens’ behaviors forced them to fit the court’s agenda and not the reality of the child and protective parent’s experience.

Fifth, custody transfer is being used by the courts to serve as a penalty for alleged litigant failure to submit to any given order by the court, however egregious and counter to justice. Judicial authorities are commanding protective parents to force children into a relationship with a parent whom the children have excellent reasons to fear and resist. Courts are ignoring documented physical, psychiatric, and emotional evidence of childrens’ suffering as a result of the inclusion in their lives of an individual whom they have experienced as dangerous to their wellbeing. Furthermore, the use of custody as a punitive measure against a parent is strictly forbidden by applicable law and what can only be viewed as a statement of agreement on character and decency.

A Brief Portrait of the Subject Population

Gender shaming is not relevant in the character and diagnostic issues when describing victims and abusers. While the numbers between men and women may vary, the behavior related to perpetrators of harm and subject victims remain consistent.

Financial advantage

The perpetrator of harm who has been separated from his spouse and children for a period of time, suddenly seeks to re-enter the custody picture to benefit from the financial advantages that have evolved as a result of the ability to manipulate funds under Title IV-D. They seek to reunify with children who have been separated from parents for an extended period of time. Though the intentions of the program were excellent, the ability to pander to the worst instincts has become the dominant factor in transferring children from a protective parent into the custody of an abuser.

Personality Attributes: History

Abuser Traits

1. Initial presentation of the abuser partner was that of an extremely appealing, mesmerizing personality.
2. The abuser often presents as a person of staunch religious and ethical beliefs.
3. The abuser often presents as eager to engage in marriage and having children. The expectation of nurturing by the marital partner is often a subliminal wish for personal repair of their own past deprivation and the wished-or ability to create an ideal family. When it becomes apparent that the wished-for instant repair is not going to happen, rage against the unsuspecting partner becomes part of a pattern of irrational complaint against them.
4. The abuser has often suppressed information about a seriously disturbed and dysfunctional youth involving sex, drugs, alcohol, violence, and early abuse in their family of origin.
5. Once married, the emergence of Explosive Rage Disorder/Intermittent Explosive Disorder, which often involves the afflicted person’s recurrent failure to resist impulsive, aggressive, and explosive behavior, by which the victim experiences destruction of property, verbal assault, or assault from which might be considered inappropriate to the preceding event.
6. The abuser’s personality tends to be self-justifying, self-involved, filled with a lack of empathy, and a sense of recrimination and concern for others, no matter how destructive and harmful it is to others. The capacity for a nurturing, stable relationship with children makes it impossible for these self-involved individuals to engage in or sustain a nurturing, stable relationship with children. The impulsiveness and prevalence of instability in the relationship makes it impossible for children to anticipate what is coming next. Thus, the child’s ability to focus on their own thoughts, feelings, and their own growth and attention to their own developmental stages becomes impossible.
7. Once married, violent physical and sexual behavior toward the abuser’s children and partner tend to be unrestrained.

Non-Abuser Traits

1. The initial presentation of the non-abuser is naive, ingenuous, stable, and a non abusive family history.
2. Once married, the non-abuser experiences explosive rage from the abusive partner.
3. Non-abuser is a stable, tentative, nurturing individual with a strong relationship to the children and a strong protective stand with regard to protecting their interests.

Experiences of Abuse of Minor Children and Partner

Examples of Unconscionable Physical, Sexual, and Emotional Abuse

The courts believe that the named protective parent has been the source of incentive for children to reject the abuser parent, not the clear and convincing evidence of abuse. Abuse should not need to be extraordinary or life-threatening for a consensus to be achieved that the parent seeking rescue should in fact be converted into the chosen parent for custody. And yet, the compelling movement in courts across the United States as of 2024, is to press children to be transferred into the custody of heinous abusers under the assertion that the named protective parent is creating a false narrative of abuse where this is clearly not true. The child must adapt to the abuse that has existed, which is unsustainable and irrational as well as an unconstitutional view of jurisprudence. Courts cannot place orders that put children in grave danger of physical, emotional, and intellectual jeopardy, and then order a parent who is noncompliant with those orders to place their child in jeopardy. The court cannot claim that the parent is noncompliant and subject to penalties consistent with contempt. The implicit values and arguments are entirely irrational, inconsistent, and unlawful. The behavior of judges across the country who are placing childrens’ lives in danger and placing the lives of protective parents in danger, is unquestionably in violation of constitutional law.They should be criminally prosecuted for willful disregard for child safety and a willingness to perpetuate a false narrative in order to allow states to access federal funds through Title IV-D under false pretenses.

That being said, the only noncompliance with law, both in fact and spirit, is that which is displayed by judges ordering protective parents into compliance with a so-called treatment that is clearly harmful on every level of contest and consequences of implementation.