Saturday, April 23, 2005

Memorial Post for Little Jerica and Her Mother Lisa Mason


Be near me, Lord Jesus!

I ask Thee to stay

Close by me forever

And love me, I pray.

Bless all the dear children

In Thy tender care

And take us to heaven

To live with Thee there.



More on the Sad Story of Jerica Rhodes

Well the credits of Judge Bivona keep rolling on.

If only someone had thought to re-open the records of this man after this ruling to see how many other children were placed in dangerous situations due to this particular Judge NOT following New York State Law.

A seven year old might still be alive today.

It appears that just as he did seven years previously with Jerica Rhodes, Judge Bivona handed custody of a child over to a man found guilty of domestic abuse. Granted this time it was a teenager, who it was probably already too late to have much impact on, as her mother should have left years earlier…

Of course, Judge Bivona and his ilk are probably a large part of the reason this mother did NOT leave earlier, as she was probably held hostage in the relationship by threats of losing custody through a biased Judge, if she did leave.

"Panel Upsets Father’s Custody over Domestic Violence Issues
November 8, 2002
Byline: By Cerisse Anderson

Issuing a strong warning that judges must weigh the effect of domestic violence on children even when they are not the targets of violence, an appellate court has reversed an order granting a father custody of his teenage daughter.

The Appellate Division, Second Department, on Monday unanimously rejected as “sorely inadequate” Family Court Judge Andrew P. Bivona’s consideration of the father’s domestic violence history before awarding him custody of the now-16-year-old daughter two years ago."

Of course, this is a moot issue for the most part, as a 16 year old in our state is allowed to decide where to live, so this ruling changes nothing for the individuals involved. It just shows us what we already know: that the records of this particular Judge need to be re-opened and reviewed to see if other children (younger then this one obviously) who have no voice, are in dangerous situations due to him flouting the laws of New York State, which by the way are a reflection of the will of the people of New York State.

“Justice Sondra Miller, writing for the four-judge panel, noted that EXCEPT FOR THE ABUSE OF HIS WIFE, DAVID WISSINK APPEARED TO BE A ‘TRULY MODEL PARENT”…”


Clearly when we are dealing with this level of contradiction at the appellate division, it’s no wonder our lower court Judges are confused or feel they can get away with off-beat interpretations, as guidance needs to come from above. AND just for the record, in case there are those who do NOT understand YOU can NOT beat up your wife for years and then be considered a model parent…you just can’t. Whether or NOT the community or his daughter knew about it makes no difference.

The fact that neither might have known about it does NOT show me a model father, citizen or person but rather shows me a man who is very devious in nature and probably has done many other things that we don’t as yet know about. It doesn’t make him a model anything, but particularly sneaky, that’s all.

This comes back to another issue which I think women in their role as mothers needs to face, as much as we would like to avoid it. That issue is the total and utter uselessness of many of the professional women now functioning as Judges that we, other women, assisted to get into positions of power. These professionals, many of them officers of the court, have shown themselves to be weak sisters during this crisis mothers and their children have had thrust upon us and sadly, have been of little or no use throughout it.

Actually if we are going to be totally honest, female Judges appear to have morphed into bigger and more useless idiots then the patriarchs that we put them in to replace.

Thus they must be removed from these positions of power they currently occupy, so that the rest of them get the message, that just like very other interest group, women do not expect to put people into power and then get spit on by those very same people.

The only question is how to go about it discreetly enough so as to not discredit the entire women’movement…but there is no question in my mind that go, they must…

Monday, April 11, 2005

Bridget Marks...Good for her Children...No Help for Others

Custody Ruling Addresses Reliance on Expert Opinions

"It seems apparent, in reviewing this record, that the ultimate decision as to the key issue in this case, i.e., whether to award custody to the father because of the mother's attempts to undermine his relationship with the children, was made on the basis of the experts' testimony. Courts should be ever mindful that, while the forensic expert may offer guidance and inform, the ultimate determination on any such issue is a judicial function, not one for the expert," Justice Joseph P. Sullivan wrote in a decision signed by Justice David B. Saxe, in John A. v. Bridget M., 4976.

"In this regard, it should be noted that there is an ongoing debate in both the legal community and the mental health profession as to the implications of expert psychological opinion in custody litigation, especially when the opinion is a conclusion as to the ultimate determination as to where to award custody so as to serve the child's best interest," Justice Sullivan added.

The decision marks the first time an appellate level court in New York has recognized the debate within the mental health community over whether "it is ethically proper" to give opinions on the best interests of the child "when there's no empirical base to support them," said matrimonial attorney and Albany Law School professor Timothy Tippins, who is also a Law Journal columnist.

Such opinions cannot be supported, he added, because psychologists and psychiatrists are unable to scientifically measure and predict the effects of different factors on the future well-being of a child. There is no way to ethically study, for example, the effect it would have on a child to place him in a home with schizophrenic parents.

Therefore, after a mental health expert offers opinions regarding the effects of, for instance, depression or spousal abuse, the judge should be the one to opine as to the child's best interest, Mr. Tippins said."

Information courtesy of Mark Fass, New York Law Journal, New York, New York, 2005..

Although I initially viewed this decision as a major victory for single mothers and their children, sadly, it appears to be far less. The court COULD have made a simple ruling to address and put a stop to these constant attempts by men, enabled by greedy lawyers and over-reaching Judges, to make an end-run around New York State custody laws. That’s what COULD have happened. Instead the court avoided the more fundamental issue and chose to make a more complicated ruling to wit: which “experts” should be allowed to make a custody decision. Should the expert come from the legal or the medical profession.


May I say, and I think I speak for many when I say it, that I am sick to death of these constant custody shenanigans, most instigated by men trying to change custody frequently to avoid paying child support. I am sick of them. The saddest part of the whole thing is that the appellate courts had an opportunity to make a strong statement AGAINST this constant flouting of New York State custody laws and instead chose to focus on which profession was better placed to make a custody decision, AFTER the laws are ignored.

The bottom line is that Bridget Marks had defacto custody of her children for three years while their father lived in California and visited them whenever he was in town. Their father John Aylsworth was perfectly content to leave the twins in the exclusive care, custody and control of their mother in New York for three years while he lived in California. Now, just because he changed his mind was NO reason for a Judge to entertain a change in custody that was not warranted by any substantial change in circumstances in the custodial mother’s household. PERIOD.

The key to settling the ‘problem’ of parents constantly using up the resources of our courts with these endless custody disputes is to enforce the laws we have on the books right now…To wit: a substantial change in circumstances is supposed to take place in the custodial parent’s house BEFORE custody can be changed…PERIOD.

The primary focus should NOT be whether a medical or legal expert is the proper person to decide on the change in custody. It misses the whole point of the Marks’ case, which is that the father here should NEVER have been allowed to bring this case to court to change custody. PERIOD…as no substantial change in circumstances had occurred in the custodial parent’s household.

Thus, the Marks ruling STILL does nothing about the bigger problem, which is NOT which experts should be deciding where our children will live. The real problem remains that basically anytime a ‘daddy come lately’ decides to, he can turn up even years after the fact, and turn upside down both a mother and her childrens’ lives by deciding he wants to change the custody arrangement that has been in place for years without any substantial change in circumstances taking place, as required by the New York State law…

That’s the real problem that needs to be addressed…as I guarantee you that this whole situation would NEVER have happened if the Judge involved had enforced the laws we ALREADY HAVE ON THE BOOKS as soon as the competing parties entered the courtroom.

We don’t need new laws or court rulings designating which experts from what professions should be empowered to make custody decisions. We need to ensure that the laws we already have on the books are strictly enforced and that parents, mainly fathers, understand that they do NOT have the right to throw their kids’ lives into an uproar just because they have decided they want to change the rules all of a sudden.

Sunday, April 03, 2005

The Closing Act of Terri Shiavo: Full of Greed, Hate and Spitefulness

Schiavo Cremated Amid Feud

TAMPA, Fla.—Terri Schiavo's body was cremated yesterday as disagreements continued between her husband and her parents, who were unable to have their own independent expert observe her autopsy.
[Full Story]

Information Courtesy of the Toronto Star, April 3, 2005

In the end this act says more about Michael Schiavo and his motives then anything else anybody has either said or done up until now. For this final act labels the entire episode as what it really is…basically the action of a hate-filled and spiteful human being named Michael Schiavo.

This man took Terri Schiavo’s doctor to court suing him for a million dollars with the stated purpose of using the money to care for Terri…then shortly after receiving it decided that Terri claimed she would never have wanted to live in a ‘vegetative’ state and tried to have her feeding tube disconnected BEFORE ALL THE MONEY WAS USED UP ON HER CARE. Well you know what, he should have turned around and been forced to give that doctor back his money then.

Let’s make no mistake about this, the ONLY reason Terri Schiavo remained alive as long as she did was because her parents fought this selfish and greedy man tooth and nail. AND we have to give credit where credit is due here as Terri’s family, including her brother and sister, fought a hell of a fight right up until the final agonizing hours. They did what they could and acted honorably right up until the end. Actually the fact that they fought so hard had at least one benefit. It stopped that Michael Schiavo from profiting off his wife’s illness, as he surely would have walked away with a cool million of that settlement to piss away on himself if they had said and done nothing…

So I thank GOD for that one mercy.

Thus there is a small measure of justice in this world, little comfort as that might be to Terri’s parents.

Nevertheless, Michael Schiavo got his pound of flesh from Terri’s parents for not allowing him access to that money, which is all spent now on Terri’s care as it should have been. Michael Schiavo got his revenge by being allowed to starve their daughter to death and now cremate her body. So it appears that even in death, her parents couldn’t have this unfortunate daughter back. Ultimately however, we must understand, there wasn’t much that would have changed the final outcome here. Since nothing was going to stop this greedy and selfish man, as the only thing the parents could have done to appease this monster was to say nothing and that would have had the effect of allowing him to kill their daughter sooner, rather then seven years later.

Sadly to say this was a lose-lose situation for righteousness, no matter how they handled it.

As Abraham Lincoln once said and it still holds true today: you can fool SOME of the people ALL of the time and ALL of the people SOME of the time BUT you can’t fool ALL of the people ALL of the time…and I’m encouraged to see from the reactions of much of the public to Michael Schiavo, that the American people (for the most part, although, there will always exist a group of useful idiots) however, most of us have not been fooled by Michael Schiavo. Like myself, they appear very well informed on the motivation behind this whole travesty of justice and appear to hold the real culprit here fully responsible for his actions.

Again, I thank GOD for that…