All over the U.S.
New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Oklahoma, Missouri, Maryland, New Hampshire—the protocol for racketeering and moving children into the hands of a foul abuser is the same: it is all about the money.
And no consequences for the professional criminals who preside over the crimes, apparently the more monstrous the better.
Each case is orchestrated. The racketeering nightmare that naïve parents thought they were going to fight is moved ahead to a prefix outcome that meant certain destruction of Protective Parents who love their children.
They watch with open-mouthed horror, powerless to take action against this runaway train.
This is what happens
In every single case when hired gun evaluators are brought into high conflict custody litigation, the racketeering protocol is set before the trial begins, even with the first look at the financial statements.
Behind the scenes the lawyers have already set the scenario of each family’s expenditure and outcome, agreed upon by the judge, with the lawyers and the set of chess piece player – GAL, lawyer for the children, therapist for the children, each parent, case coordinator, reunification therapist – all court ordered at an expense of thousands per month – not including trial process and depositions to try to limit or contest what rulings have been already authorized. Hired gun evaluators are part of the limited, restricted list authorized by the court, selected and approved by the lawyers/ judges.
And so the narrative begins:
The allegations against the abuser are false. The protective parent alienated the children. The children’s relationship with the protective parent is so toxic, so impenetrable, that for the children to build a relationship with the alleged abuser, the children must be totally isolated from the protective parent for six months, nine months – then never to return.
Richard Gardner and “Parental Alienation”
The process that was fully incorporated into the court custody scene in the 1990s was first introduced via the self-published works of the deranged mind of Richard Gardner, MD.
Before he committed suicide in 2003, Gardner was an apologist for pedophiles accused of child abuse. His theory of Parental Alienation stated that child sexual abuse did not exist because fathers had the right to have sex, engaging in whatever form of perversion they cared to commit. Whatever accusation was made, according to Gardner, was untrue, because mothers are jealous of the prerogatives of the father.
The Gardner theories were embraced by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts. As the AFCC became the forum for teaching and elaborating on the Gardner theories, the AFCC also became the meeting ground all over the country for interdisciplinary meeting/bonding between various types of professionals and judges. And so the process ignited.
Paul Dasher and briefcases of cash
The dastardly career of Paul Dasher provides the portrait of one monster among many.
In 1999 Paul Dasher PhD had already established his reputation as a hired gun—someone who would take money to write false allegations using the new theory of “Parental Alienation.”
Paul Dasher worked the courts in Patterson, New Jersey, as he lived in the wealthy suburbs of Ridgewood. He knit together false scenarios with no factual content, in order to remove vulnerable children from the parent they loved and who loved them.
As of 2001 Paul Dasher, psychological evaluator in New Jersey, was just securing his footing as the “crook du jour.” His career as the go-to person for fabricated, nearly incomprehensible reports was established with the court-ordered custody transfer of the three Elkaryoney children.
These three children were transferred first into the custody of New Jersey DCF, and then from DCF into the authority of the Egyptian father whose trips back and forth to the Middle East were always explained by the death or dying of his mother in Egypt. Elkaryoney, a pediatrician in Egypt, was a “taxi driver” in the US, yet he owned numerous taxi medallions and conducted business, as documented in the reports of his children, with briefcases of cash when he went to the home of Paul Dasher.
In 2001, years before the formation of the FCVFC, I was quietly advocating for the Elkaryoney children, gathering witnesses and legitimate expert reports from such luminaries as the psychiatric director of St. Claire’s Hospital. Even then I was warning of the scourge of criminality about to overtake the courts that I later referred to as the “killing fields.” Children’s rights leaders came to my home in Nyack, NY, discussing calls for parents to carry pictures of their children and march in the streets.
And then Islam Elkaryoney, at the age of 12, killed himself.
Paul Berman and “toxic alienators”
Paul Dasher is not the only serial destroyer of children and families.
As a so-called “evaluator,” Paul Berman PhD gives the same pronouncement in each vile evaluation, that is, essentially, “This [protective] parent is so disturbed, so toxic to the child that he / she should never be allowed to see the child again.”
Case after case ended with the same pronouncement and a long, complex diatribe of statements formed out of the truly evil, fertile imagination of the confabulator. As the reports were sealed by the judge, Berman never had to worry about leakage of false information.
The leading lawyer, who orchestrated the team that neither set of litigants knew they hired, picked the matched cronies who would be dismantling the lives of children and protective parents for many years to come.
Erik Frazer and “Munchausen by Proxy”
Other professional pretenders who lack substance and skill but have made it through one PhD program or another are those such as Erik Frazer and his one-time partner Linda Smith in Connecticut. Their unique posture was to apply rare psychiatric diagnoses, even though they were apparently unable to apply correct standards.
The cronies then built an armature so dire, with such severe consequences to children, that the command to transfer custody from the targeted parent was an automatic conclusion.
For example, “Munchausen by Proxy” is an extremely rare disorder, a disorder made up of complex elements that must all exist at the same time and with specific conditions in order for the disorder to be stated with some confidence.
But the pronouncement of this disorder, with no further elaboration, creates the atmosphere of the entrance of Frau Blucher, Dr. Frankenstein’s nurse in the film Young Frankenstein. Frau Blucher’s name is mentioned and lightning strikes, horses neigh and rear on their hind legs. In court the pronouncement of “Munchausen by Proxy” is followed by the judge’s order to send the police to remove the children. The mother (as Munchausen by Proxy is a disorder of women) must never see the children alone again . . . or better yet, should never see the children again, period!
And in the meantime . . .
Experts for the defense have advanced the naïve thought that the solution is to be found in educating the courts with theories of domestic violence and nonviolent communication. These naïve experts have written books based on questionnaires completed by audiences of domestic violence survivors—the same survivors that have flocked to hear these experts present their theories at the Battered Mothers Conferences in Albany.
These audiences of battered and protective mothers have lost their children through court cooperation, the courts that have been educated by the expert witnesses they themselves paid for, experts that have been introduced at conferences by other experts who write books many of them cannot afford.
Experts profit from all ends of the spectrum, as greater and greater numbers of protective parents lose their children and the fees for litigation dealing with costly criminals has exponentially increased.
Power to the profiteers has now packed courts with corrupt judges, lawyers, and of course, “experts.”
And politicians? In the words of Peter, Paul, and Mary, “Oh, When Will They Ever Learn?”
The situation must change before we lose an entire generation of children.
We must shed the fear of standing up to, reporting, and removing those professionals who use their professional licenses to exploit protective parents engaged in custody litigation.
Those who falsify reports, to promote a false narrative of characterological and psychological instability, create a montage of misery. They must be exposed.
