Remember the Tsimhoni kids sent to juvie for refusing to spend time w/their Dad?

[Sdel]

Yes, women can and do have NPD.  We have support threads here for people who deal with NPD Moms, etc.  But in terms of custody cases....and abuse....and domestic violence.... it is also often a case of having the funds to have a lengthy legal court.  

 

I'm sorry, that is no excuse for discussing emotional abuse of children via family court in the terms of such abuse coming from men only.  There is also a fair share of women who have the means to over power the man in family court.  In fact, it is well known that divorce as a whole favors women.

 

No one here knows what is going on in this case or any other case.  They are all different.  It is equally likely that these kids are the victims from parental alienation from their mother as it is that the dad is the abuser.   At one point, and still to this day, my youngest step kid would refuse, even under threat of juvie/jail, to go to dinner with his dad.  My husband is not an abuser....it is in fact his mother that has methodically made his dad out to be the ultimate boogeyman and jerk since he was around 6 that has ruined the relationship.

 

Stefanie

[Joanne]

Yes, women can and do have NPD.  We have support threads here for people who deal with NPD Moms, etc.  But in terms of custody cases....and abuse....and domestic violence.... it is also often a case of having the funds to have a lengthy legal court case.  Regardless of what many of us wish, men still make more money than women in this country.  There is not parity.  It's still 77 cents for the dollar.  When we look at retirement savings, social security, etc. it is much worse for women who have been SAHMs or divorce.  And for those of us who give up excellent careers to homeschool our children, we are at an even larger financial disadvantage in custody cases and divorces because we simply do not have the reserves to fight such cases, and getting back into the workforce is extremely difficult.  Most studies have  shown that women never recover financially.  

 

 

Institionalized power for males. Because of it and the history of patriarchy, the ability for NPD/abusing men to drive the "abuse through the legal system" is larger.

Men also have access to more *power* that NPD exploits.

[Joanne]

I'm sorry, that is no excuse for discussing emotional abuse of children via family court in the terms of such abuse coming from men only.  There is also a fair share of women who have the means to over power the man in family court.  In fact, it is well known that divorce as a whole favors women.

 

Stefanie

 

The bold is statistically and documentably false. Dramatically so.

[umsami]

I'm sorry, that is no excuse for discussing emotional abuse of children via family court in the terms of such abuse coming from men only.  There is also a fair share of women who have the means to over power the man in family court.  In fact, it is well known that divorce as a whole favors women.

 

No one here knows what is going on in this case or any other case.  They are all different.  It is equally likely that these kids are the victims from parental alienation from their mother as it is that the dad is the abuser.   At one point, and still to this day, my youngest step kid would refuse, even under threat of juvie/jail, to go to dinner with his dad.  My husband is not an abuser....it is in fact his mother that has methodically made his dad out to be the ultimate boogeyman and jerk since he was around 6 that has ruined the relationship.

 

Stefanie

 

Emotional abuse can come from either side, yes.  But I disagree with you 100% that divorce favors women.  It is not the case anymore that divorce favors women in any regard.  Permanent spousal support/alimony is extremely rare these days, even for women who were SAHMs or gave up a career to support their husband and help him succeed with his.  Child support payments are minimal in many states.  Very few states are like California where 10 years equals a long marriage and assets are split 50/50.  Father's rights movements in male dominated state houses have changed the game considerably.

 

I'm not sure where your beliefs come from, but numerous articles have shown that financially...women are more likely to end up below the poverty line.  Even women who divorced in the 1970s, before the changes, did not ever recover financially unless they remarried.  Women who divorced are more likely to receive public assistance, be in poverty, and have less household income.  How is that favoring them? 

 

Some more items on the impact financially of divorce on women (and this does not just apply to SAHMs)...

...women's standard of living drops by 27% while her husband's tends to improve

...US Census Bureau  shows that women's family income declines by 37%

Yet another article (this one from Australia) talking about a study that showed that divorce affects women more financially and men more emotionally....  

"Women are much poorer than men after a marriage breakdown but men are much lonelier, sadder and their mental health is more fragile immediately after, a big study reveals.

 

Within fours years, however, men have begun to recover emotionally and their finances have improved considerably. But women's incomes have gone backwards."

 

 

 

They have higher levels of psychological stress and more health issues. http://hsb.sagepub.com/content/47/2/111.abstract

 

 

There's also the fact that many women never receive one cent of child support, but not receiving child support is not a reason to not allow visitation with one's co-parent.  

 

 

In terms of custody issues, even then, women are no longer guaranteed custody.  Some states have "best interest of the child"....but more states are going to automatic shared custody.   It is a well known tactic in domestic violence divorces, for abusive spouses to force the custody issue as a way of control.  

 

Some states do have DV exemptions, but many require conviction.  DV convictions are not easy to come by, and seeking prosecution puts a woman and her children at more risk.  For many, it's not worth it.  Think of it like rape.   Only 3% of rapists ever do a day in jail.  DV convictions are only for physical abuse as well, and do not take into play financial and emotional abuse.  

 

With regards to the Tsmihoni case, yes, many of the documents are public (read the whole thread).  The judge's verbal abuse of the children is public.  Her sentencing them to jail is public.  The fact that the "reunification" counsel has only a high school diploma is public.   The elder son testifying that his father was abusive is public.   

[Rosie_0801]

I'm sorry, that is no excuse for discussing emotional abuse of children via family court in the terms of such abuse coming from men only.  There is also a fair share of women who have the means to over power the man in family court.  

 

Well, I wish I knew how they did it. The only cases I've seen where the woman has managed that, the man has chosen not to fight because they didn't know there's no use in playing nice with crazy.

 

It seems to me that the family court favours whoever is prepared to act the worst. But my story isn't over yet, so I am keeping my fingers crossed.

[swellmomma]

I am so glad that despite it taking 14 years to even get my divorce we never went to court.  Ex made it easy for me, he was out of the picture for 10 years.  Then he decided he wanted visitation with the kids.  I was fine with that.  Fast forward 4 years, he still barely knows the kids, and he keeps saying/doing things that are slowly dismantling any relationship with them.  Recently they had a visit scheduled (he only sees them a couple times a year) when they discovered they had a very special cadet weekend training camp, one that had not happened in the last 10 years, so they cancelled with him to go to it.  He got mad and sent messages to me and them asking if cadets was more important than him, getting mad at me claiming I made them cancel, that I am not taking his relationship with them seriously etc.  It ticked the kids off even more.  They are 16 and 17, barely have a relationship with him, other than the occasional "poke" on facebook and a visit a couple times a year he has no contact (they talk with their step mom at least once a week on fb but he does not contact them) and he wants to point fingers and claim I was preventing him from seeing them.

When we were first apart he would threaten to take me to court for custody, claim I was with holding the kids (despite the fact that even when we moved away I drove the 5 hours to take them to see him) etc.  6 years after we split I filed for full custody, he has not seen them for about 5.5 years at that point, he signed off on it.  WHen I located him to serve him the papers it turned out he was living in the same city as us but never told us.  

He still occasionally starts up about how he wants custody, the kids have made it clear they won't live with him, he likes to blame me for that, he can not see that he is the one that destroyed that relationship.

[Scarlett]

Well, I wish I knew how they did it. The only cases I've seen where the woman has managed that, the man has chosen not to fight because they didn't know there's no use in playing nice with crazy.

 

It seems to me that the family court favours whoever is prepared to act the worst. But my story isn't over yet, so I am keeping my fingers crossed.

This is so true Rosie. I was able to strong arm my xh on the issue of custody and I absolutely do not regret it. Then when he decided to sit down with me and work out a schedule for visitation I was very kind to him and said I knew he wanted what was best for our son and that included minimal interruptions to Ds's schedule.

 

Over the years he has made a few threats of 'revisiting visitation' but we both know it is too late now. He hasn't had him over night in a year and ds is almost 16. The worst was when I first moved out of state....he had his pit bull attorney send me a letter with a crazy standard visitation schedule...she said sign off on this or we are going back to court. Well his attorney is not the boss of me so I totally ignored her. And I never mentioned it to xh. Or to ds. I, was however, totally hysterical inside waiting for the court summons to arrive but it never did. I immediately began a 'kill him with kindness' campaign. I sent him pics of ds sever times a week. I sent him updates on school, information on family and friends. I was very flexible on visitation and did the driving as much as I could since I still had family back where xh was.

 

About a year later xh asked me if I ever got a letter from his attorney. I was very low key about it....just said oh yes I did but I was really confused because the schedule was nothing like you and I had discussed. He said, oh and that was the end of that.

[Scarlett]

Emotional abuse can come from either side, yes. But I disagree with you 100% that divorce favors women. It is not the case anymore that divorce favors women in any regard. Permanent spousal support/alimony is extremely rare these days, even for women who were SAHMs or gave up a career to support their husband and help him succeed with his. Child support payments are minimal in many states. Very few states are like California where 10 years equals a long marriage and assets are split 50/50. Father's rights movements in male dominated state houses have changed the game considerably.

 

I'm not sure where your beliefs come from, but numerous articles have shown that financially...women are more likely to end up below the poverty line. Even women who divorced in the 1970s, before the changes, did not ever recover financially unless they remarried. Women who divorced are more likely to receive public assistance, be in poverty, and have less household income. How is that favoring them?

 

Some more items on the impact financially of divorce on women (and this does not just apply to SAHMs)...

...women's standard of living drops by 27% while her husband's tends to improve

...US Census Bureau shows that women's family income declines by 37%

Yet another article (this one from Australia) talking about a study that showed that divorce affects women more financially and men more emotionally....

 

 

They have higher levels of psychological stress and more health issues. http://hsb.sagepub.com/content/47/2/111.abstract

 

 

There's also the fact that many women never receive one cent of child support, but not receiving child support is not a reason to not allow visitation with one's co-parent.

 

 

In terms of custody issues, even then, women are no longer guaranteed custody. Some states have "best interest of the child"....but more states are going to automatic shared custody. It is a well known tactic in domestic violence divorces, for abusive spouses to force the custody issue as a way of control.

 

Some states do have DV exemptions, but many require conviction. DV convictions are not easy to come by, and seeking prosecution puts a woman and her children at more risk. For many, it's not worth it. Think of it like rape. Only 3% of rapists ever do a day in jail. DV convictions are only for physical abuse as well, and do not take into play financial and emotional abuse.

 

With regards to the Tsmihoni case, yes, many of the documents are public (read the whole thread). The judge's verbal abuse of the children is public. Her sentencing them to jail is public. The fact that the "reunification" counsel has only a high school diploma is public. The elder son testifying that his father was abusive is public.

Divorce did not favor me. I did the work to get sole custody...it wasn't decided by the court. And financially of course I came outMUCH worse than him because he is still making his huge salary. It is ok though because I have enough to live on and I got the most I,portent thing of all...our son.

[Cammie]

I'm not sure if it is a female/male dichotomy or the earning partner/at home partner dichotomy that we are talking about.

 

Yes, the partner who was out building a career and earning more will continue to benefit from that decision.

 

Yes, the parner who was home with the children, going to doctor's appointments and handling education will benefit in the custody determination/visitation schedule.

 

When there are two working partners you can see that it is not really a gendered issue as much as a priorities issues.

 

Overall, studies show that women tend to be worse off financially after a divorce.

 

Overall, in my experience practicing family law, the primary caregiver preference in my state worked out to a mom preference because of the ways that familes had structured themselves.

 

I do think it is a bit more nuanced than is being portrayed here. 

[mommaduck]

I looked the GAL up. Yep, he's had a lot of complaints against him.

[Rosie_0801]

This is so true Rosie. I was able to strong arm my xh on the issue of custody and I absolutely do not regret it. Then when he decided to sit down with me and work out a schedule for visitation I was very kind to him and said I knew he wanted what was best for our son and that included minimal interruptions to Ds's schedule.

 

About a year later xh asked me if I ever got a letter from his attorney. I was very low key about it....just said oh yes I did but I was really confused because the schedule was nothing like you and I had discussed. He said, oh and that was the end of that.

 

You were lucky. 

 

Lucky is good.  :grouphug:

[Guest JusticeTsimhoni]

The tsimhoni case has gotten even worse I'm sad to say. They do have court today Dec 2nd so I'm hoping it gets better.

 

The kids are still with their abusive father. Who is now wanting to separate them. He's wanting to send Liam the oldest boy to wilderness camp. Keep Roee the youngest boy. And wants to send the 9yr old daughter to foster care.

 

But it gets even worse than that, these children were straight a students in advanced placement. They are now ds and fs students. Miss school ALOT. And when they are at school they've told school personnel they didn't wanna go home that their dad is STILL violent and STILL abusive.

 

Yesterday a document became available that we (my group of advocates for the tsimhonicase children) bought. It talks about cps is involved again and one of the kids had to go to hospital for abuse they endured in dad's care. So mind you 2010 there was a substantiated cps report. 2015 another incident happened the DRS went to court to testify but gorcyca didn't even want to hear it or give them a chance to testify about abuse. And instead locks kids up and ultimately gives them to their father for brainwashing. Now daddy dearest that she loved so much has abused the kids again and cps and Dr's are involved again.

 

When all it amounts to is the dad said what he could and screamed parental alienation, in order to cover the abuse and playing victim. But in doing so the court actually victim shamed and punished the true victims in this case.

 

 

Anywho, I'm the girl that Omer Tsimhoni attorney(Middleditch) tried to subpoena for releasing the already public Cps report. I run a group, and a page on Facebook and I also have twitter.

 

If you wanna stay updated about the case and not just what the media released please visit at www.facebook.com/JusticeForTsimhoniChildren

 

Dropbox of docs is: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/4jy2q37q3axx62a/AAASuO68l7LZn2GoLR705-lPa?dl=0

 

Also check out twitter @JusticeTsimhoni

[Scarlett]

Hoping for good sense to prevail today.

[umsami]

Ah...so it's about time...the judge is in big trouble.  

 

http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/columnists/brian-dickerson/2015/12/16/judge-gorcyca-accused/77365840/

 

"Unless the facts alleged in a 17-page complaint Michigan's Judicial Tenure Commission filed this week prove utterly false, the Michigan Supreme Court will likely cut short Oakland County Circuit Judge Lisa Gorcyca's seven-year career sometime early next year."

[Scarlett]

Ah...so it's about time...the judge is in big trouble.  

 

http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/columnists/brian-dickerson/2015/12/16/judge-gorcyca-accused/77365840/

 

"Unless the facts alleged in a 17-page complaint Michigan's Judicial Tenure Commission filed this week prove utterly false, the Michigan Supreme Court will likely cut short Oakland County Circuit Judge Lisa Gorcyca's seven-year career sometime early next year."

I read that this morning.

 

So glad.  Hope it means someone with some sense will take a look at this custody case.

[MinivanMom]

Ah...so it's about time...the judge is in big trouble.  

 

http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/columnists/brian-dickerson/2015/12/16/judge-gorcyca-accused/77365840/

 

"Unless the facts alleged in a 17-page complaint Michigan's Judicial Tenure Commission filed this week prove utterly false, the Michigan Supreme Court will likely cut short Oakland County Circuit Judge Lisa Gorcyca's seven-year career sometime early next year."

 

That is fantastic news for the children.

 

There was supposed to be a hearing with Judge Gorcyca today. Right? I think this was to rule on the request to place the eldest in "wilderness camp" and the little girl in foster care, as well as to rule on Dad's request that the children have 90 additional days of no contact with mom. 

 

I don't know if the timing coincidental or if the Judicial Tenure Commission filed this week in order to prevent Gorcyca from holding today's hearing, but I am thrilled for the children. I hope Gorcyca is removed from the bench, and that the children are never forced to be in her presence ever again.

[ErinE]

Ah...so it's about time...the judge is in big trouble.

 

http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/columnists/brian-dickerson/2015/12/16/judge-gorcyca-accused/77365840/

 

"Unless the facts alleged in a 17-page complaint Michigan's Judicial Tenure Commission filed this week prove utterly false, the Michigan Supreme Court will likely cut short Oakland County Circuit Judge Lisa Gorcyca's seven-year career sometime early next year."

While I'm glad she may be out, I think it's a travesty it took this long for her removal. The transcript of their hearing (where the kids refused lunch with dad) should have been cause for her immediate removal. No kid should be threatened with jail because they don't want to see their father.

[umsami]

I saw something about the hearing, but I'm not sure if anything happened.  Although I think Hanukkah ended already, I would have loved the kids to be with their Mom.  I'd like to think they'd be home for the winter break, but who knows.

 

OK, found this...

 

"2-16-15 Hearing for Tsimhoni vs. Tsimhoni, Oakland County, MI has been concluded.

It has been reported to us by a court watcher that Judge Gorcyca said that she would respond to the motion in writing. It was also stated that Maya's attorney, Wilson Tanner, cited case law that suggests that Judge Gorcyca should dismiss herself in light of the Judicial Tenure Commission's formal complaint. The hearing was concluded shortly thereafter."

 

 

[MinivanMom]

Okay, does anyone else think it's weird that the only kid dad wants to keep is the 11-yr-old boy, the child he's been accused of physically abusing? When I first heard about the motion to keep only one child (while placing the other two in "wilderness camp" and foster care) I naturally assumed that he wanted to keep the 9-yr-old girl. I was really surprised to learn that he wanted to place her in foster care while keeping the 11-yr-old boy (of course everyone was correct in speculating that it was the eldest that dad wanted sent to "wilderness camp").

 

It really bothers me that dad would want to keep the one child who he has (allegedly) physically abused in the past. I picture the little boy all alone with an angry father and feeling very scared.

 

I also feel very worried for the children's safety in coming days/weeks. The international coverage has been wonderful for bringing light to the plight of the children, but I recognize that the spotlight could also act as a major stress on the parents. Dad may not react well to the prospect of Gorcyca being removed from the case or the kids potentially being returned to their mother. There have just been too many cases where the (allegedly abusive) parent has killed the kids when faced with the prospect of losing them.

[Farrar]

It's a Hanukkah miracle! I hope this helps things begin to get right as they can for these kids.

[umsami]

I would also worry about parental abduction, but I'm assuming that the kids passports have been confiscated. 

 

I seem to remember reading that this custody case has taken place in both Israel and the US.   I believe Israel is a signee of the Hague Convention, too.

[Plink]

"The commission's investigators specifically accused Gorcyca of ridiculing the divorcing couple's children in court, exaggerating the legal punishment she could impose for their continued failure to engage with their father, and generally scaring the stuffing out of them."

 

Hilarious writing style aside, hooray for the commission in bringing this woman to justice. I wish there was more they could do than simply remove her from the bench. She has brutalized those 3 children.

[umsami]

"The commission's investigators specifically accused Gorcyca of ridiculing the divorcing couple's children in court, exaggerating the legal punishment she could impose for their continued failure to engage with their father, and generally scaring the stuffing out of them."

 

Hilarious writing style aside, hooray for the commission in bringing this woman to justice. I wish there was more they could do than simply remove her from the bench. She has brutalized those 3 children.

 

I could see a civil lawsuit on behalf of the kids for pain and suffering.  It wouldn't surprise me....although one wonders how much money Mom has left after her dragged out divorce.

 

[TammyS]

Ah...so it's about time...the judge is in big trouble.  

 

http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/columnists/brian-dickerson/2015/12/16/judge-gorcyca-accused/77365840/

 

"Unless the facts alleged in a 17-page complaint Michigan's Judicial Tenure Commission filed this week prove utterly false, the Michigan Supreme Court will likely cut short Oakland County Circuit Judge Lisa Gorcyca's seven-year career sometime early next year."

 

So, this is in reference to a hearing in June?  Am I getting that right?  If so, am I getting it right that it has taken them 6 MONTHS to decide to do something? 

 

This is why I don't trust the government.

[MinivanMom]

So, this is in reference to a hearing in June?  Am I getting that right?  If so, am I getting it right that it has taken them 6 MONTHS to decide to do something? 

 

This is why I don't trust the government.

 

Not only has it taken them 6 months, but during that time Judge Gorcyca has transferred sole custody from mom to (allegedly abusive) dad without an evidentiary hearing (is that the right term??).

 

Gorcyca also ordered that mom was not to have any contact with the children for 90 days, which has now stretched out much longer. My understanding is that mom has had absolutely no contact with the children since August. All this was supposed to be supervised by a court-appointed therapist, but dad has refused to take the kids to therapy appointments with her. He hired his own (non-court approved) therapist instead. There have been court filings by the children's GAL outlining this whole back-and-forth, as well as the kids' deteriorating condition. From the Dec. 7th Huff Post article (which quotes court documents):

 

"Since then, according to the aforementioned document, the children have been described as "depressed, frightened, ill, [redacted], exhausted, despondent, tearful, struggling in school, absent often from school, and missing their mother, their pets, and their real home." School personnel contacted Child Protective Services in response to the children's present distress and reports of fear to go home with their father. The children continue to report that they are afraid and to assert their desire to live with their mother. One therapist reports that the children continue to insist that their father is "an unpredictable violent man" and "will not change."

 

Many people following the case have speculated that the redacted word in court documents is "suicidal". I sure hope not.

[goldberry]

I could see a civil lawsuit on behalf of the kids for pain and suffering.  It wouldn't surprise me....although one wonders how much money Mom has left after her dragged out divorce.

 

 

Isn't there something that keeps people from being able to sue judges even for misconduct?  I remember being horrified when I read about it.

[Mimm]

I hate reading about this case. It makes me feel so angry, just furious with that horrid evil woman. I hope her career is ruined, and she never had the slightest bit of power over another living being for the rest of her life. Though I know that's not likely. She shouldn't be trusted to make life decisions for a freaking goldfish.

 

[Farrar]

This poor woman can't visit her kids and yet the Nauglers get all theirs back. Family court is not right, y'all. Not right.

[umsami]

This poor woman can't visit her kids and yet the Nauglers get all theirs back. Family court is not right, y'all. Not right.

 

OMG. I forgot about the Nauglers....how on earth they got their kids back so quickly is beyond me.  Is Kentucky's system that strained? 

 

[Farrar]

OMG. I forgot about the Nauglers....how on earth they got their kids back so quickly is beyond me.  Is Kentucky's system that strained? 

 

 

I think it's just a sign of how varied and uneven our family court system is. But also, like one of the articles in this thread (forget which...) points out - how much unchecked power with so few guidelines judges have in that system. They can do whatever they want even more so than in other courts. It's so messed up.

[Magnolia Rain]

I know this isn't a thread about the Nauglers, but reading the mention of their name has reminded me of a new blog I saw on FB.

 

http://www.blessedlittleblog.com

[umsami]

So, this is in reference to a hearing in June?  Am I getting that right?  If so, am I getting it right that it has taken them 6 MONTHS to decide to do something? 

 

This is why I don't trust the government.

 

Yup.... my understanding is that prompted an investigation...and then, get this, the Judge lied to the people investigating her, which makes it 1000 times worse.

 

Isn't there something that keeps people from being able to sue judges even for misconduct?  I remember being horrified when I read about it.

 

Is there? Ugh. I think there shouldn't be, especially in cases of such gross misconduct.  

[swellmomma]

So, this is in reference to a hearing in June?  Am I getting that right?  If so, am I getting it right that it has taken them 6 MONTHS to decide to do something? 

 

This is why I don't trust the government.

From what I understood is the hearing happened.  The committee did its own investigation (which takes time) and found the 2 incidents where she lied right to them.  Once the investigation they did was complete they filed for her removal.  Had she simply said to them "you're right, I was wrong to speak that way" she would have gotten a slap on the wrist like a suspension.  Instead she got cocky, lied to them, got caught and now is facing this. 6 months seems like a long time but really isn't if you factor in them investigating, interviewing her, reviewing courtroom footage, and everything else they have to do to file such a long motion.

 

In my experience 6 months in the legal world is very fast haha

[Mimm]

From what I understood is the hearing happened.  The committee did its own investigation (which takes time) and found the 2 incidents where she lied right to them.  Once the investigation they did was complete they filed for her removal.  Had she simply said to them "you're right, I was wrong to speak that way" she would have gotten a slap on the wrist like a suspension.  Instead she got cocky, lied to them, got caught and now is facing this. 6 months seems like a long time but really isn't if you factor in them investigating, interviewing her, reviewing courtroom footage, and everything else they have to do to file such a long motion.

 

In my experience 6 months in the legal world is very fast haha

 

And yet, such a long time for a child to not see or speak to their mother. A long time to live with an abusive and unstable father.

[Anne in CA]

I wish this judge could be sent to a "detention facility" and then a nice long wilderness camp. One narcissist supporting another, that's what this case is, pure and simple.

[swellmomma]

And yet, such a long time for a child to not see or speak to their mother. A long time to live with an abusive and unstable father.

I agree fully, don't get me wrong.  But unfortunately the way the justice system seems to be (and not limiting to just the USA here, Canada's system is flawed too) that everything takes so much time to accomplish anything.

[MistyMountain]

Sometimes I wonder in what planet do I live on where cases like this where there is abuse happen and the kids are ordered to live with their abuser and the abusers claim they are the ones being wronged. It really boggles my mind the way those children got treated and that this still happens. I am glad the judge may get fired but I hope the children are able to get out of their situation.

 

All these stories make me sad. It really is hard for women who are in bad situations to leave both because of the 50/50 custody thing and the income thing.

Edited December 18, 2015 by MistyMountain

[ErinE]

Yup.... my understanding is that prompted an investigation...and then, get this, the Judge lied to the people investigating her, which makes it 1000 times worse.

 

 

Is there? Ugh. I think there shouldn't be, especially in cases of such gross misconduct.

That really irked me.

 

Bully a kid, but apologize. Professionally okay.

Threaten the child with jail for refusing a relationship with a father. Illegal, but if you felt bad about it - forgiven.

But lie to other judges. Well, that's gone too far!

 

I'm in my corner of the world wondering if these people know a single thing about children and their psychology.

[FO4UR]

Family court is not right, y'all. Not right.

 

 

Single most damning factor for the victim of domestic violence.

 

If she has kids, she risks THIS if she leaves.

 

Why doesn't she leave?  She loves her kids more than herself.  It isn't that she thinks being with their dad is best for them.  It's that she knows that she cannot trust the judicial system to protect her kids from their dad.  If she stays, she can be the buffer between...maybe.  If she leaves, she is court-ordered to turn a blind eye when her child is abused.

 

A parent with a known violent background should never be given unsupervised visitation, let alone 50/50 custody. It happens every day in America.

[ktgrok]

Single most damning factor for the victim of domestic violence.

 

If she has kids, she risks THIS if she leaves.

 

Why doesn't she leave?  She loves her kids more than herself.  It isn't that she thinks being with their dad is best for them.  It's that she knows that she cannot trust the judicial system to protect her kids from their dad.  If she stays, she can be the buffer between...maybe.  If she leaves, she is court-ordered to turn a blind eye when her child is abused.

 

A parent with a known violent background should never be given unsupervised visitation, let alone 50/50 custody. It happens every day in America.

 

My mother has recently said that with the automatic 50/50 custody thing if she were young now she wouldn't get married. She'd have a baby with a sperm bank because she couldn't handle the risk. We've known too many awful fathers who get 50/50 custody, and do it mainly because they don't want to get a job and pay child support. 

 

And yes, I know that in the past the situation was reversed and men faced this fear, but we're speaking to our own experience. 

[TammyS]

From what I understood is the hearing happened.  The committee did its own investigation (which takes time) and found the 2 incidents where she lied right to them.  Once the investigation they did was complete they filed for her removal.  Had she simply said to them "you're right, I was wrong to speak that way" she would have gotten a slap on the wrist like a suspension.  Instead she got cocky, lied to them, got caught and now is facing this. 6 months seems like a long time but really isn't if you factor in them investigating, interviewing her, reviewing courtroom footage, and everything else they have to do to file such a long motion.

 

In my experience 6 months in the legal world is very fast haha

 

It might be faster than is common, but it is still wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too long, when you are talking about people's lives.  It did not need to take months to get that done.  They just let it take that long.

 

This kind of stuff is why people move to the ends of the earth and do whatever they can to stay out of the government's sight.

[La Condessa]

So bizarre.

 

One thing that stood out to me.

The judge said these kids had the most severe behavior she had seen in 46,000 cases.

46,000 cases? Is that possible, that she's seen that many cases?

If she's been a judge/lawyer for 46 years, works 48 weeks a year, that's over 20 cases a week.

 

 

Ummmm, google tells me she's only 47 years old.

Many, many DHS cases go uncontested, and so take very little time for the court.

[MomtoCandJ]

I think it maybe the state.... My brother has been fighting for permanent custody for 3 YEARS for his 3 children. The courts keeps giving the mother chances to rectify her wrongs and she just won't. She receives a bunch of services (including free transportation for visits, gas cards though she doesn't have a car or drivers license, counseling, housekeeping help though she doesn't work and no longer has the kids, and such), she doesn't pay child support (she's supposed to but has yet to go to jail for behind support ($2000), my brother was behind $100 (he had just gotten laid off and the courts hadn't received his paperwork) and went to jail for it), it's just messed up.

[FO4UR]

I think it maybe the state.... My brother has been fighting for permanent custody for 3 YEARS for his 3 children. The courts keeps giving the mother chances to rectify her wrongs and she just won't. She receives a bunch of services (including free transportation for visits, gas cards though she doesn't have a car or drivers license, counseling, housekeeping help though she doesn't work and no longer has the kids, and such), she doesn't pay child support (she's supposed to but has yet to go to jail for behind support ($2000), my brother was behind $100 (he had just gotten laid off and the courts hadn't received his paperwork) and went to jail for it), it's just messed up.

 

 

...and the judge makes a huge difference.  I know another case where one parent is a very violent person but b/c the violence hasn't been directed at the child YET, they are moving towards a 50/50 arrangement.  The child is on the spectrum and non-verbal.  That puts the child at greater risk of being harmed (b/c violent parent has no clue how to work with child who has lots of "quirks") and if/when something does happen the poor kid cannot communicate. 

 

 

It's like a game of Russian Roulette with the lives of children.

[Harriet Vane]

 

 

It's like a game of Russian Roulette with the lives of children.

:iagree:

[LMV]

The whole situation is concerning (and sad). I unsure it is truly as one sided as many on this thread believe.

[goldberry]

My friend took about two years of court to get her ex stripped of visitation rights.  The kids would be dirty and have bug bites all over them when they came back from his house, they testified that he hit them, dragged them across the room, the list went on.  He kept being given chances to change things.  The only reason the court finally ruled in her favor was that he became so unstable he quit showing up for court dates.

 

During all this time he didn't pay a dime of child support, although he had enough money to hire a very expensive lawyer.  

 

Yes, I totally see why DV victims stay because they are afraid of something like this happening.

[umsami]

The judge was disqualified from the case.  http://www.fox2detroit.com/news/local-news/65033303-story

 

This article says she disqualified herself.  Either way, good.  http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/oakland-county/2015/12/28/judge-gorcyca-withdraws-custody-battle-complaint/78000996/

Edited December 29, 2015 by umsami

[MinivanMom]

Wonderful! 

 

I hope the Michigan Supreme Court removes Gorcyca from the bench as well. Let this be a lesson to other crazy family court judges: don't lie about your actions when there are both transcripts and video recordings of the court session that show what actually happened. There are a lot of crazy things you can get away with as a judge, but perjury is not one of them.

[Ravin]

In my state, juvenile dependency and delinquency are handed in a different court from divorce/custody issues, and at a certain age it's statutory that a child has a right to input in the custody situation. This scenario I doubt would happen here, not like this anyway.

 

The 50/50 parenting time default also does not mean no child support, because the formula depends on relative incomes as well as how much time is shared.

 

This story is whack. I'm glad that judge is off the case.