Child Abuse and a Child Protection and Development Charter Part 1

by John G
(Massachusetts, USA)

Additional comment after you published my story: 
Darlene, I have posted my child abuse story from John G on your website, and feel your site and work are of tremendous importance to all people everywhere especially children.

Its quite obvious to me that children are mistreated by people who are responsible for them. When families break up, the court system, attorneys, DSS, health care providers more often than not do not protect the children they claim to protect. I saw firsthand and am currently living through the problems first hand with a son who got a divorce from his wife who had many male friends while married to my son. They have three young daughters who for three years lived with the father, agreed to at the divorce. The mother didn't want custody after the divorce, she wanted to be free to socialize with her male friends but wanted visitation on her schedule. After three years she went to court because of a change in circumstance supposedly, to modify the relationship with the daughters. The oldest daughter stopped visiting with the mother because she didn't like the way the mother was manipulating her or trying to. While going through the court activities over this situation I read on the walls of a conference room in the court building, suggestions by way of murals that the children be heard and their feelings known and integrated during the court hearings. These girls loved living with their father and did not want to go and live with the mother and her recent new husband, who they didn't like. They wanted to continue with her having them over weekends. They emailed the mother's attorney and the court letting them know they didn't want to live with the mother and her new husband who is now on his fourth marriage. The mother told her daughters about her new husband after she married him. The judge on this case decided to give the mother full custody of the girls because he said the father was unfit to have custody of these girls. He stated he was alienating the girls against the mother and that would hurt the girls' relationship with the mother. The oldest daughter had six months prior to the judge's decision to give custody of the girls to the mother, refused to see the mother at all because of the way the mother was trying to manipulate her. The judge only allowed the father's communication with his daughters to be via email and three hours supervised visitation on Saturday mornings. The mother was given the sole right to decide if the father was a good father or not and could terminate the visitation at any time and for however long she felt she wanted to. The father decided he was not going to have anything further to do with his daughters, because he had them taken away from him like he was a criminal. He would forever have to do what his ex wife asked him to do and that he could not live with knowing what kind of person she was. The oldest girl locked herself in the car that she came in to the place of transfer of the girls to the mother and refused to get out and go with the mother. Even the state police who happened to stop by at the time of the transfer refused to make her get out of the car. The girls that went with the mother were very upset at the time and didn't see or talk to the father at all for the next 7 months and that was ok with the court and the mother. This story goes on with similar activities. I mention this story because the court, judge, atty's (6 in all) psychologist, guardian ad leitum never once asked the girls who were 12, 10, and six years of age anything about what they wanted, who they wanted to live with or how they were treated by either parent. They were too young to know what was good for them said the judge and when he read their emails said that the father wrote them. In fact the father didn't know the girls wrote any emails until after.

My feeling is that the courts, judges, attys, and others associated with the system should not make decisions regarding the dispositions of children in divorce cases. Let the children decide with whom they want to live. You can't tell me three girls ages 6, 10 and 12 who were all crying almost uncontrollably during the required transfer didn't know what was happening to them. I can tell you for sure that when I was 6 years old I remember all too vividly many things that happened to me. My wife and I picked up the two girls who went with the mother, during their spring break, which was the first time we saw them in some 2 1/2 to 3 months. The 10 year old cried for 1 1/2 hours of the 3 hour trip to our home before she could speak so that we could understand what she was trying to say. This is a system that is looking out for childrens welfare, I think not. So that children should not be subjected to abuse in all its forms some things need to be changed. First of all the children should be allowed to decide with whom after a divorce they want to live. There needs to be an organization made up of people who do not benefit financially, earn a living making decisions about childrens custody situations during and after a divorce. The judges from what I have seen have no clue about childrens mental capacity to decide with whom they want to live with during or after a divorce. In my opinion they are the most qualified to decide with whom they want to live with and it may not be with either parent. My son hired 6 different attorneys one after the other to handle his divorce and on day one they were enthusiastic and day two something happened. You could see their motivation changed and money not the childrens or the father's welfare was the focus of their actions. Psychiatrists that I have met were for the most part trying to stretch out the visitations of the patients. I saw very little evidence where they were really interested in the children. They tried to make a big case out of everything. There are many for sure that are very credible but I have not met any myself and certainly not in this case.

People who plan to get married should be required to go through some sort of required training course that is mandatory that teaches them the requirements for raising children. They also need to know their responsibilities in child care such as providing food, shelter, education about the basics in life which include love and affection, family structure. People should learn when in high school the responsibilities of parenting. I have never heard anywhere where young kids are taught the responsibilities of parenting when in school. It's like they know that stuff, many do not at least they don't show it. DSS from what I can see does nothing except provide job security, theirs. There needs to be an organization of concerned educated people who have documented knowledge in protecting children from abuse in all its forms that decide and not the courts the outcome of child custody cases. This body needs to have the necessary power to make these decisions and not the courts who have proven not to be qualified in protecting children. You hear horror stories every day concerning the abuse of children as a result of court actions. It's not necessarily 100% true that the courts screw up all the time but far too often. I don't see where it's that difficult a situation to decide with whom the children should live. They can tell you with whom they want to live and you can start from there. If you follow the lives of these children the answer becomes very apparent almost right away.

See Part 2 below

Child Abuse and a Child Protection and Development Charter Part 2

by John G
(Massachusetts, USA)

Continued from Part 1 above: 
Thinking about child protection and development there should be an organization by that name created in each area of the country that should be responsible for the welfare of children. This organization should have the power to decide where children live, and with whom, when there is a problem or conflict with children and their welfare. This organization should have jurisdiction when it comes to children involved in any form of child abuse situations. Their charter should spell out the process and assignment of children that insures that the children are happy and that all their needs are met. Their needs should include shelter, protection, food, clothing, education and a loving environment. Each assignment of a child should have a system of feedback that insures that in fact the child has been placed in a happy, productive and loving environment. A system of evaluation should be used to determine most of all what the child wants and needs. If the child has problems due to the result of abuse or health related issues, these need to be taken care of before the child can participate in the process of his or her future decision making.

The Child Protection and Development Charter, CPDC or something like that should be the name of this organization. It should be made up of educated caring people that have demonstrated backgrounds in child development and care. The number of people in each group should be based on the need for a given area. The number of people in any given area that have the knowledge and capacity to benefit that particular charter.

Each charter should have a principal office in a private, commercial, Town, City or State facility. They should not have any requirement placed on them regarding their purpose or operation because of their operating location. The facility they use should be donated without attachments of any kind associated with their purpose and function. They should operate in the not for profit area so as not to interfere with its goal of child protection and development purpose.

The source of funding to cover the costs associated with the running of these charters should be pure and simple donations without attachments period.

There needs to be a central charter that coordinates the efforts and operations of the satellite offices.

It may be necessary to start this sort of Child Protection and Development Charter partnering with other not for profit organization that have the skills in this area of operation. I will look into this situation.
John G.