Broken Family Court System

Broken Fathers - 2015A Broken Family Court System:
‘What are You Prepared to do?’

Ignorance is bliss in some scenarios, and as a father having been involved in a contentious divorce and custody ordeal it was a luxury I found myself longing for at times. Facing a situation where one’s back is against the wall, in a court environment overtly hostile towards those who represent themselves, as a pro se litigant is a place parents should venture with extreme caution. In my situation it came to a point where in keeping up with my own case at times I began to become curious and observe what I knew to be odd behavior and activity within the court and its players.

Continue reading

Broward Sheriff’s Office Child Protective Investigations Section is in a state of crisis.

Contact Florida Governor Rick Scott - 2016Broward sheriff’s child protection unit now ‘a shamble,’ former employee says

Investigators say children’s safety at risk

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla.Broward County is No. 1 in a category nobody wants to win, topping the state in the number of reported child abuse cases. With more than 15,000 cases a year, serious allegations are being made against the agency that handles those abuse complaints — the Broward Sheriff’s Office Child Protective Investigations Section, or CPIS, which many past and present investigators said is in a state of crisis.

“Absolutely children’s safety is at risk,”

…said one veteran investigator who recently left CPIS.

Christina Bullins, an agent for the International Union of Police Associations, which represents CPIS employees, said the union has heard complaints from about 50 investigators in the unit, starting with what she said are their staggering workloads. National standards for child protection investigators call for 12 cases at a time, but BSO records supplied to the union show that many of the BSO investigators are working double and triple that number, with three investigators working more than 40 cases each.

Continue reading

Florida Family Law Reform 2016!

causes.com/causes/409526-children-s-rights

Parental Alienation Dynamics ·Support Judge Gorcyca - Parental Alienation is Child Abuse - 2016

Let no good deed go unpunished. With good intentions Judge Gorcyca acted in the best interest of children. Now that a judge has finally listened, we must stand and rally.

Pathogenic parenting is a child protection issue NOT a ‪#‎childcustody‬issue. When addressing ‪#‎PathogenicParenting‬, mistakes can and will be made attempting to do the right thing. Mistakes can be fixed. When it comes to a parent emotionally and psychologically abusing children through ‪#‎ParentalAlienation‬ and hostile aggressive parenting, “there is no right way to do the wrong thing.”

*********************ba768-divorce18 CL: If you are a parent that has to deal with lies that have been untested, interference by the custodial parent and a full campaign of hatred from your kids and the ex, you need to speak up on behalf of this judge.

We don’t just encourage you to read these posts, we encourage action. It is only by protecting the vulnerable judges who on occasion get it right and that do punish alienation can we send a message to the entire judicial bench that we are sick of it.

Please write on behalf of this judge showing she used her judicial independence to heal this family because of the toxic brainwashing of the mother. Her conduct might not sit well with the board but her decisions were in the best interests of the children to end the parental alienation and dispense of testimony that did not make sense from the brainwashed children.

Let the Michigan Supreme Court and Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission know that you ‪#‎supportGorcyca‬.

MSC, CHIEF OF STAFF
Larry S. Royster
(517) 373-0120

MSC, PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE
John Nevin, Communications Director
(517) 373-0129

MJTC
Phone: (313) 875-5110
Fax: (313) 875-5154
E-mail: judicialtenure@courts.mi.gov
Parent League

Family Law Reform - 2016

Continue reading

Complaints of Judicial Misconduct Findings in Florida

The Harm Caused By Family Court System - 2016
You do have a say!purple-keyboard-a
My Advocate Center‘s photo —  CNN/YouTube presidential debates  Lawson E. Thomas Courthouse
Miami, FL, United States

‪#‎Vote‬ and use your voice to support those you believe will rule with integrity from the bench and not succumb to influence.

Fathers’ Claims Against Judges Over Child Custody Hearings Tossed

“Fraud On The Court By An Officer Of The Court” And “Disqualification Of Judges, State and Federal”

1. Who is an “officer of the court”?

2. What is “fraud on the court”?

3. What effect does an act of “fraud upon the court” have upon the court proceeding?

4. What causes the “Disqualification of Judges?”STOP ABSOLUTE DISCRETION OF FAMILY COURT JUDGES

Continue reading

The system has been corrupted by money

Florida Family Court CorruptionHelp Me!  #StandupforZoraya - 2015
STOP Court’s DENIAL of REASONABLE Parent/Child CONTACTLogo 2- 2016

PEMBROKE LAKES ELEMENTARY - PARENTAL ALIENATION PROOFPlease sign the petition to Florida 11th Judicial Circuit Chief Judge Honorable Bertila Soto please pledge to Contact the Florida Courts – Demand Judge Manno-Schuerr’s Recusal – Reinstatement of Timesharing

STOP Court’s DENIAL of REASONABLE Parent/Child CONTACT

9b9ba-justice2bmoving2bpicAccess To Civil Justice?

How do you put a face on what it means to have an equal opportunity for access to civil justice? That’s difficult — but the Feb. 15 edition of The Florida Bar News attempts to do just that in their article, “Putting a human face on the civil legal access gap: Access Commission learns how the system is broken”
Look no further than the story of Miami’s Maria Garcia, said Commission member and Third DCA Clerk of Court Mary Cay Blanks during a recent January Commission meeting. Garcia was fired from her job of 15 years, denied benefits and didn’t know where to turn. When she visited Blanks’ office to file an appeal, the attendant simply handed her forms and wasn’t permitted — by law — to give her any legal advice. Unable to afford a lawyer,

Ms. Garcia left feeling frustrated and unsure of what step to take next, as if the system had failed her.

That has to change, said Blanks.

“The challenge we face in my office is being able to assist them in a meaningful way without crossing that line of giving out too much information and worrying about the unauthorized practice of law,” Blanks told the Commission. “So we err on the side of giving less information because we don’t want to cross that line. The perception is that we’re unhelpful; it causes a lot of people leaving the office disgruntled, and feeling like they are not getting their day in court, or we’re not going to help them get their day in court.”

Read why and how that process soon will change: http://bit.ly/1uwFLMS

ff7d4-well2bbeing2bof2bchildMemo To Followers: The Ugly Truth About Why States Don’t Want Shared/Equal Parenting (Continued): 2

You may recall that I recently posted a memo describing how States are profiting from the creation of absent parents (see the link below for the original post).

Well, in that post, I only described part of the money picture the States are getting.

And while I’m still working on it, below is copy from an email I recently sent to FatherandFamilies.org that provides a bit more clarity and detail about how The Feds providing financial incentives to States who create absent parents and/or maximize child support payements.

Again, if you feel lost, the original post is linked below.

“Hi Robert:

I’ve actually been working on honing in on exactly how all this works, because even in the post you’re referencing, I acknowledged some fuzziness within my own understanding.

I’ve also been working trying to get some recent budget data on this to sort of back test what my understanding of the laws are. However, the OCE hasn’t published it’s budget since 2008.

In any case, here is my understanding of it:

There are three revenue sources for States associated with the collection and administration of child support payments defined under the broad cover of the Social Security Act:

(1) 66% reimbursement for allowable expenditures, which are:

a. Costs for locating parents
b. Costs for establishing orders
c. Costs for collecting child support payments
d. Costs for establishing paternity
e. Any other misc. costs approved by the Secretary for reimbursement.
f.  And exception of 90% matching for the following two expenditures
i.  Improving management information systems
ii. Blood testing

(2) Welfare recovery and matching:

a. Recovered TANF payments are split between the Federal Government and States consistent with Federal reimbursement of medical benefits (I’m still not clear about exactly how this part works in practice.)

(3) Incentive pool (Public Law 105-200, the Child Support Performance and Incentive Act of 1988 ( enacted July 16, 1998 ))

With the incentive pool, states must compete for their share of the funds, which I believe currently, is around $530MM to $535MM.

A. The incentive amount = State Incentive Pool (x) State Incentive Share

B. State Incentive Share = Incentive Base Amount For The State (/) Sum of Incentive Base Amounts For All States

C. Incentive Base Amount = Sum Of Applicable Percentages {defined by paragraph 6 of the Act} (x) Corresponding Maximum Incentive Base Amounts for each bonus category:
Bonus Categories Are:
A. Paternity Establishment Performance Level
B. Support Order Performance Level
C. Current Payment Performance Level
D. Arrearage Performance Level
E. Cost Effectiveness Performance Level

D. Maximum Incentive Base Amount = State Collections Base (as measured in performance categories A,B,C) + 75% state collections base ( performance categories D, E).

E. State Collections Base = Sum ( 2 (x) amount collected in which support is assigned to the State (bonus categories A or E), amount of support collected that was at the time of collection, not required to be assigned), total amount of support collected)

Summary of Observations:

If the incentive structure gives you headache, take heart. I’m an econometrician by training, and it gives me one as well. And this is why I wanted to actual figures that I could use to test this stuff out.

In any case, here is how I’m visualizing the incentive program:

Think of it is a pie; we know this is a closed mathematical domain. So, the objective for each state is to maximize their share of the pie (incentive base amounts relative to other states). And in this regard, you’ll note that the Fed’s apply a 25% penalty to the maximum incentive base amounts for two categories: (1) Support collected in arrears, and (2) Support Costs. Number two kind of puzzles me. The only thing that makes sense to me here, is that this deflation is intended to hit those states with particularly high costs per amount collected harder than those who perform better.

Secondly, you’ll note that the Fed’s place double the weight of state administered child support payments assigned to the State for collection; either by order or agreement.

So, with respect to incentive pools, I’m deducing:

(1) An incentive to maximize the amount of child support ordered.
(2) An incentive to maximize the amount of child support collected.
(3) An incentive to avoid high collection costs.
(4) An incentive to assign collections to the State for Administration.
(5) A penalty to incentive base amounts for child support amounts in arrears.Enforce Visitation NOT Child Support - 2016In other words, the name of the game here for States, is to generate the biggest number possible (incentive base amount) constrained by the maximum incentive base amount. Once these numbers are in for the year, shares are created and the pie is split up.

Now, as it relates observation (3), this is why I really wanted the budget data. States already get reimbursed for 66% of their hard costs, and get a little bit of extra in there for a couple of other things. The part that’s concerning, is the allowable expanse for “other” expenses approved by the Secretary. Because as I see it, it would not be all that difficult shore up the remaining 34% with all kinds little creative accounting tactics if the political sentiment supported the behavior – this is a political black box in the accounting (as I see it).

Summary:

(1) States get reimbursed for 66% of the hard costs of collecting and administering child support.

(2) States bonus funds for welfare programs using a formula consistent with Federal medical program reimbursements.

(3) States get bonus funds from a shared incentive pool, in which those incentives are driven by the nominal amount of child support collected and the performance in collecting it. And nowhere in the Act, do I see language that mandates how this incentive money is to be spent by states (as opposed to (1) and (2). In my mind, this makes it a Federal subsidy landing in the discretionary (general) budget of the States. ”

We need a winner - 2015

A fine group of elected officials we have here.

It really does seem to be all about the “Best interests of the children.”

Not.

~ Michael

Original Memo:

https://loveandiron.wordpress.com/2012/08/28/the-ugly-truth-why-states-and-courts-dont-want-shared-parenting/

The Ugly Truth: Why States and Courts Don’t Want Shared Parenting 10Judge Judy on Timesharing - 2016

This is a repost of the following Facebook Memo I posted on 8/28/12:

Memo To Followers:

Federal Title IVD Payments and Bonuses to States For the Collection and Administration of Child Support Payments.

Recently, I’ve been getting some queries about why I’ve been hammering so much on the issue of child support payments. And, I suspect, we’ve lost a follower or two because I’ve sort of ratcheted up the rhetoric on this topic a bit lately.

In fact, a couple of weeks a ago, we were having a discussion on this page in which I was asserting that States can receive anywhere from $1 to $2 in Federal subsidy payments for every dollar they collect and administer in child support payments.  And it was during one of this discussion that one of our followers asked the simple question, “Do you have any documentation on this?”.

Well, at the time, the only information I had available was budget information from the Office of Child Support Enforcement from 2009. So I contacted Michael McKormick at the American Coalition for Fathers and Children and he confirmed that my information was also the most recent published data he had as well (He also noted that Obama administration has been highly resistant to publishing any current budget data on this matter….).

In any case, enter my new best friend, Rita Fuerst Adams from Fathers and Families (Fathersandfamilies.org).

Because Rita was able to track down for me the actual act that describes exactly how these payments and bonuses are calculated.

I’ve Attached The Link For You Below. But Here Is The Short Story Version:

*The program is administered by the Office of Child Support Enforcement within the Administration of Children and Families; which is governed by the Department of Health and Human Services.Extorting Fathers - 2016

* The Act governing the program is known as the `Child Support Performance and Incentive Act of 1998′.

* There are bonus and penalty measures that determine the funding.

* Incentive Payments to States –

(1) IN GENERAL- The incentive payment for a State for a fiscal year is equal to the incentive payment pool for the fiscal year, multiplied by the State incentive payment share for the fiscal year.

(2) INCENTIVE PAYMENT POOL-

(A) IN GENERAL- In paragraph (1), the term `incentive payment pool’ means–

(i) $422,000,000 for fiscal year 2000;

(ii) $429,000,000 for fiscal year 2001;

(iii) $450,000,000 for fiscal year 2002;

(iv) $461,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;

(v) $454,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;

(vi) $446,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;

(vii) $458,000,000 for fiscal year 2006;

(viii) $471,000,000 for fiscal year 2007;

(ix) $483,000,000 for fiscal year 2008; andFlorida Child Support System Reform Cyber Protest - 2016

(x) for any succeeding fiscal year, the amount of the incentive payment pool for the fiscal year that precedes such succeeding fiscal year, multiplied by the percentage (if any) by which the CPI for such preceding fiscal year exceeds the CPI for the second preceding fiscal year.

(B) CPI- For purposes of subparagraph (A), the CPI for a fiscal year is the average of the Consumer Price Index for the 12-month period ending on September 30 of the fiscal year. As used in the preceding sentence, the term `Consumer Price Index’ means the last Consumer Price Index for all-urban consumers published by the Department of Labor.

*** So essentially, the pool value increases every year at growth rate equal to the consumer price index. Which for 2012, would put the incentive pool at a little over 530,000,000****

(3) STATE INCENTIVE PAYMENT SHARE- In paragraph (1), the term `State incentive payment share’ means, with respect to a fiscal year–

(A) the incentive base amount for the State for the fiscal year; divided by

(B) the sum of the incentive base amounts for all of the States for the fiscal year.

Now, here’s where it gets important, because this is where the base value figures are established:

(4) INCENTIVE BASE AMOUNT- In paragraph (3), the term incentive base amount’ means, with respect to a State and a fiscal year, the sum of the applicable percentages (determined in accordance with paragraph (6)) multiplied by the corresponding maximum incentive base amounts for the State for the fiscal year, with respect to each of the following measures of State performance for the fiscal year:

(5) MAXIMUM INCENTIVE BASE AMOUNT-

(A) IN GENERAL- For purposes of paragraph (4), the maximum incentive base amount for a State for a fiscal year is–

(i) with respect to the performance measures described in subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of paragraph (4), the State collections base for the fiscal year; and

(ii) with respect to the performance measures described in subparagraphs (D) and (E) of paragraph (4), 75 percent of the State collections base for the fiscal year.

Skipping some stuff here…NADAD - Advice - 2016

(C) STATE COLLECTIONS BASE- For purposes of subparagraph (A), the State collections base for a fiscal year is equal to the sum of–

(i) 2 times the sum of–

(I) the total amount of support collected during the fiscal year under the State plan approved under this part in cases in which the support obligation involved is required to be assigned to the State pursuant to part A or E of this title or title XIX; and

(II) the total amount of support collected during the fiscal year under the State plan approved under this part in cases in which the support obligation involved was so assigned but, at the time of collection, is not required to be so assigned; and

(ii) the total amount of support collected during the fiscal year under the State plan approved under this part in all other cases.

(A) The paternity establishment performance level.

(B) The support order performance level.

(C) The current payment performance level.

(D) The arrearage payment performance level.

(E) The cost-effectiveness performance level.

**So, you can see two important things here.

First, the reimbursements, payments, and bonuses are NOT determined by a reimbursement of State expenses incurred. In fact, the minimization of State Collection Costs is a bonus item.

Secondly, and this is really important, the figures used are the child support funds that States have under administration.

*** See the link for the actual tables for calculating bonuses, etc****

And here is something I found interesting. Check this out:

(c) TREATMENT OF INTERSTATE COLLECTIONS- In computing incentive payments under this section, support which is collected by a State at the request of another State shall be treated as having been collected in full by both States, and any amounts expended by a State in carrying out a special project assisted under section 455(e) shall be excluded.

***i.e. If two States are working together to collect funds, they both get credit for the purposes of establishing bonuses – this is pure gravy.Family Court vs Criminal Court - 2016

 

Note a couple of things here.

First, the bonus values are doubled for the categories of paternity test performance and cost performance.

So why would the Feds care about State costs? Because this is the bonus and incentive program, and States already receive a 66% dollar for dollar reimbursement for administrative costs (and I’m not sure, I’ll have to check, but i think there is a way they can finagle the remaining 34% to get even dollar for dollar match) under a different section of the Social Security Act.

So, there you have it.

States can get up to 100% reimbursement for administrative costs plus up to two times the bonus pool share for two categories along with the rest of it.

Now add to this, the fact that Courts often charge fees for posting these certified payments, and may assess additional fees and fines for enforcement, and you’ve got a very lucrative incentive for States and Courts to maximize child support payments.fam law guilty  - 2016

In Other Words, It Should Be No Surprise That:

(1) Child Support payments are maximized, regardless of whether the NCP can afford them. States and Courts don’t care; the debt can’t go way or be retroactively reduced.

(2) Equal and Shared parenting is disincented – this will reduce revenue to the States and Courts.

(3) More and more States are requiring mandatory garnishments and payment administration. People who are already paying on time will improve their performance ratings for bonus calculations.

(4) States like TX make it difficult for non-paternal parents relieve themselves of child support burdens.

And lastly,

(5) Why States and Courts are not persuaded by reasonable and humane arguments for shared parenting reforms.

The system has been corrupted by money and the Feds are driving this corruption.

It’s time to fire politicians.

~ MichaelViolence and Crime linked to fatherlessness - 2015votefamily-us-201511

Source:http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cse/pol/related/3130.htm

The Love and Iron Project

You may recall that I recently posted a memo describing how States are profiting from the creation of absent parents (see the link below for the original post).

Well, in that post, I only described part of the money picture the States are getting.

And while I’m still working on it, below is copy from an email I recently sent to FatherandFamilies.org that provides a bit more clarity and detail about how The Feds providing financial incentives to States who create absent parents and/or maximize child support payements.

Again, if you feel lost, the original post is linked below.

“Hi Robert:
 
I’ve actually been working on honing in on exactly how all this works, because even in the post you’re referencing, I acknowledged some fuzziness within my own understanding.
 
I’ve also been working trying to get some recent budget data on this to sort of back test what…

View original post 909 more words

Central Florida Judge Orders UCF To Release Study On ‘Gay Parents’

Click on the image above to read the full article.HRC: Florida judge orders university to turn over records from study used to ‘demonize’ gay parentswww.facebook.com/groups/ChildrensRightsFlorida/

HRC reports that a Central Florida judge has ordered the University of Central Florida to turn over records related to a 2012 study by Mark Regnerus about gay and lesbian parents.

Regnerus is an associate professor of sociologyat the University of Texas at Austin.  Bilerico Project journalist John Becker sued UCF for the documents.

Becker on Tuesday wrote that “Mark Regnerus’s dubious and discredited New Family Structures Study falsely claimed to show that children of same-sex couples do worse than children raised by opposite-sex couples.”

Stop Family Court Civil Rights Violations - AFLA Blog2016Here is the HRC news release and the court opinion:

Continue reading

Effects of Trauma on Family Court Cases

causes.com/campaigns/44305-world4justice-lobby-forum-justice4children

causes.com/campaigns/44305-world4justice-lobby-forum-justice4children

Miami Demo16LEGAL ABUSE SYNDROME

Effects of Trauma on Family Court Cases:
What is Trauma and Why We Must Address It?
By Linda FieldstoneMiami Demo5

“My children are a gift that God gave me. The state did not receive those children from God and then forward them on to me with conditions. God gave those children to me. I will stand before Him to be judged on how I raise my children, and I don’t believe it’s appropriate for the state to step in and either play God– or play parent.”Purple Keyboard Campaign 4Justice - 2015

The Purple Keyboard & World4FamilyJustice Reform : Cyber Protest Campaign in 2016!

Family Courts are injuring “fit” parents by allowing false allegations of domestic violence strip a father’s right to access his child. There are several well documented “Family Court CAUSED” Post Traumatic Stress Disorder cases logged with the Florida Department of Health. To make matters worse the children are hurting because of the lies. False allegations of domestic violence IS domestic violence. AND Parental Alienation is CHILD ABUSE!!! These lies are formulated by attorneys, recommendations to the clients to file FALSE POLICE REPORTS (Information Only Reports). Parents are unjustly denied access because of the PTSD injury the “Family Court CAUSED”; believing accusations without REAL evidence, not an “Information Only Police Report”. Ironic? YES and ILLEGAL!! (USC Title 18 Section 242) Furthermore it’s DISCRIMINATION by a Family Court Judge who has “Absolute Judicial Discretion” in an EMPTY COURTROOM!!! So lets say you walk into family court to do the right thing, as a petitioner, asking for contact, responsibility, “to pay” child support; then the Judge hits you with her mallet and cripples dad. Then, dad enters limping back into Family Court, the Judge says “you cannot see your child because you’re crippled”. Then the Judge removes herself from the case when dad (petitioner) tells the Florida Bar AND the Judge about the ILLEGAL POLICE REPORT AND PERJURY BY MOM. The requirement and Standard for Preponderance of Evidence to separate a child from a parent IGNORED!!! 08-29595 Evidence inadmissible because it is the primary product of an unlawful act or because it was obtained by the exploitation of an unlawful act: 18 U.S. Code § 3504 – Litigation concerning sources of evidence (a) In any trial, hearing, or other proceeding in or before any court, grand jury, department, officer, agency, regulatory body, or other authority of the United States— (1) upon a claim by a party aggrieved that evidence is inadmissible because it is the primary product of an unlawful act or because it was obtained by the exploitation of an unlawful act, the opponent of the claim shall affirm or deny the occurrence of the alleged unlawful act; (2) disclosure of information for a determination if evidence is inadmissible because it is the primary product of an unlawful act occurring prior to June 19, 1968, or because it was obtained by the exploitation of an unlawful act occurring prior to June 19, 1968, shall not be required unless such information may be relevant to a pending claim of such inadmissibility; and (3) no claim shall be considered that evidence of an event is inadmissible on the ground that such evidence was obtained by the exploitation of an unlawful act occurring prior to June 19, 1968, if such event occurred more than five years after such allegedly unlawful act. (b) As used in this section “unlawful act” means any act the use of any electronic, mechanical, or other device (as defined in section 2510 (5) of this title) in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States or any regulation or standard promulgated pursuant thereto.

Legal Aid Florida refers Father to “potential” Pro Bono Family Law Lawyer Cynthia Deinstag. Father becomes traumatized and ill after seeing this very large poster hanging inside of Ms. Deinstag’s office and realizing the lawyer specializes in “female” clients only. Ms. Deinstag refuses to accept Father’s Pro Bono Representation Request. Florida Legal Aid abandons Father and ignores his request for Pro Bono Family Law Lawyer / Guardian Ad Litem request and contact attempts. — at http://www.Causes.com/ChildrensRights.

April 9, 2014 · can you please share this pic – family has been missing since july 2013 – possible locations – GEORGIA – savannah , sylvester areas OR its possible they are in FLORIDA thanks xxxx

Please SHARE… as too many lives are ruined FOR LIFE due to our BROKEN systems.

Lets fight to band lawyers & judges from the child custody & support process and put it into the hand of an agency with people that are truly educated and versed in the well being & health of our families. Families members should not be treated like criminals.
Shame on our systems & shame on those that keep children away from good parents!

Your army looks strong! I like the work your doing. Thank you, I’m sure you don’t hear it enough. Please share our flyer with other fathers.

JUSTICE? WITH THESE JUDGES?!

December 23, 2015 · Dear Sir or Madam, Notably this is a very hard and sad time of year for those trapped by the well hidden, socialist state dictatorship, family courts Australia, war on children and families. This time of year yet higher suicide rates are seen around so called family court Where children and families are torchered by atrocities, forced separation, contempt of justice, at the hands of the evil end of town, the aggressive ruthless thug army, of politicians and their lawyers, trafficking children and destroying families.

Will County Pro-se

(( TRUTH- PTSD is a WOUND )) How many families have been exposed to harm by judicial abuse and or government abuse. Protect the child, the family and our HEROES from those who conceal the truth for their PROFIT. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkWwZ9ZtPEI
“Now, After” (PTSD From A Soldier’s POV) [contains graphic imagery]

http://www.youtube.com

I went to film school at USC after returning from Iraq. This is what life was like for me then, and this is 100% a true story. Hopefully others – especially …

View original post

An outdated gender stereotype pervades the system.

The system creates debtors prisons
Twenty-nine percent of the families in the child support system live below the federal poverty line. This makes completing payments a challenge for many parents. The situation gets even worse if a parent loses their job. Child support doesn’t stop during unemployment. That debt starts to accumulate and it can suddenly become impossible to catch up. NADAD - Advice - 2016

The court also has the power to say it thinks an individual is capable of finding a meaningful job and a parent can be incarcerated if they continue failing to make payments. Once imprisoned, the arrears continue to accumulate and suddenly they’re stuck in a never-ending cycle.The system financially destroys the support system of parents who can’t pay.family court insanity - 2016

Not All Dads Are Deadbeats is “North America’s Leading Equal Parenting Organization” that provides free support and educational resources for Parents, Grandparents and Children.

Continue reading

Happy Birthday Daughter

MISSED
2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015
BIRTHDAYS!!

Lawson E. Thomas

Courthouse Center

175 N.W. 1st Avenue

Miami, Florida 33128

Dear Honorable Judges:

The purpose of this letter is to and for verifying that I am the Natural Mother and that David M. Inguanzo is the Natural Father of David K. Inguanzo born on the 20th of September 1999. I have known David M. Inguanzo since 1992 when we met at St. Thomas University. In 1995 we began living together which led to our marriage and the birth of our son. Our marriage ended on June 4th, 2004. I remarried in 2007 and have 2 more children named Noah and Faith.

Since we met, during our relationship, and up to the present David and I have had our share of differences which I think is normal in human nature as not everyone can agree on everything and most times we just have to agree to disagree. However any and all of the differences that David and I have experienced have always been overcome and in the end we have always, and I am sure that we will always continue, acting in the best interest of our son.

Moreover, David is a devote and loving Father and has enjoyed liberal timesharing with our son since our divorce. He takes excellent care of our son and I encourage that they spend as much time together as possible. During the school year our son resides with me and during the summer school break our son resides with his Father.


Our son has traveled extensively with his Father on cruises, road trips and annual skiing trips to Utah. David (the Father) is very sports oriented and our son has taken after his Father and loves to play baseball, racquetball and swimming just to name a few.

David is worldly wise and highly intelligent and has taught and continues to teach our son the most important life lessons and virtues such as responsibility, honesty, and most importantly honor. He teaches him about good morals and ethics, patience, determination and resilience, and religion and spirituality. In addition to my Father and my husband, David is one of the best dads on this planet! My other two children love him and I completely trust him with our son and them.

Life’s most persistent and urgent question is, ‘What are you doing for others?’

David has demonstrated time and time again that there is not a moment that he would hesitate to take our son to the doctor, to school, to church, to play sports, to roller-skate, to buy him clothes and food wherever he may be with our son and regardless of his own personal interest. David’s has demonstrated to me that his life revolves around his children; David and Zoraya.

He has made sacrifices in his life to ensure that David and Zoraya always have what they need and they will always be together as a family. Zoraya has been raised together with our son David and is always thinking about her. David (the Father) has taught our son the importance of “Family.”

Co-Parenting our son with David has been very enlightening to me. We treat each other with respect and understanding, helping each other to promote and provide a safe, loving and nurturing environment.

At times David can be very vocal in his ideas, beliefs and thoughts on how to best raise our son, we have always put our best points forward and from this we have learned together thus making us better Parents. In our relationship as parents we do not argue…we mediate as adults and together decide what is best.Please know that I have never seen David act out of control, in anger and or in hatred towards me and or to another person. I am absolutely certain that he would never harm anyone and am sure that anyone who really knows David believes this including Zoraya’s Mother, Ms. Nixa Rose.

I can honestly and reverently declare that having David as my son’s Father has been a blessing.

Please feel free to contact me should the need arise.

Respectfully submitted,

Danniza L.

Copy furnished to: Mr. Joel E. Greenberg, Esq

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

 

BY COURT ORDER ISSUED TODAY, DATED OCTOBER 10TH, 2013, BY THE HONORABLE JUDGE VALERIE MANNO-SCHURR OF THE 11TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT’S FAMILY COURT DIVISION IN/FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY FLORIDA.

Greeting card from my daughter’s mother

~

  1. ALL IMAGES THAT MY DAUGHTER’S FATHER POSTED ON THE INTERNET (THIS BLOG) OF HIS DAUGHTER ARE TO BE REMOVED.
    – ACCORDING TO THE “RULES” OF SHARED PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY IF MY DAUGHTER’S FATHER DOES NOT HAVE PERMISSION OF MY DAUGHTER’S MOTHER TO POST PHOTOS OF THEIR DAUGHTER.
  2. PETITIONER/NATURAL FATHER ORDERED NOT GO TO HIS DAUGHTERS PUBLIC SCHOOL TO VISIT HER.
    – BECAUSE HE HAS SHARED PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY HE MAY BE INFORMED OF HIS DAUGHTERS EDUCATION, ATTEND AND COORDINATE PARENT-TEACHER CONFERENCES, ATTEND SCHOOL EVENTS, SCHOOL MEETINGS, PTA AND SO FORTH. KEEP IN MIND THAT PETITIONER/NATURAL FATHER ALSO HAS A SON IN THIS COUNTY’S PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM SINCE 2005.
  3. ANOTHER 12 WEEKS OF SUPERVISED VISITATION AT THE FAMILY COURTHOUSE.
    – IN THIS CASE THERE HAVE BEEN PERIODS OF 9 AND 10 MONTHS THAT MY DAUGHTER AND MY DAUGHTER’S FATHER WERE WITHOUT ANY CONTACT. THE COURT AND THE OPPOSING PARTY REPEATEDLY IGNORED MY DAUGHTER’S FATHER PLEAS FOR RESUMPTION OF FATHER-DAUGHTER CONTACT. IN THIS CASE A TOTAL OF 2-3 YEARS OF SUCCESSFUL “TEMPORARY” SUPERVISED VISITATION OCCURRED AT THE DAUGHTER’S DAY CARE CENTER BY MY DAUGHTER’S FATHER (NOT AN OFFICIAL SUPERVISED VISITATION AGENCY) AS ORDERED BY HONORABLE JUDGE DENNIS IN 2009. THEN IN 2012 THE PETITIONER/NATURAL FATHER SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED THE COURT’S ORDERED 12 WEEKS OF SUPERVISED VISITATION AT THE FAMILY COURTHOUSE ENDING JANUARY 5TH, 2013.
    – NO CONTACT BETWEEN FATHER-DAUGHTER THROUGHOUT THE REST OF JANUARY, FEBRUARY, MARCH, APRIL, MAY, JUNE, JULY, AND AUGUST OF 2013.
Childrens Rights Florida shared Pablo Arriola‘s photo.

“Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful people with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan “press on” has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.” ~ Calvin Coolidge – 30th President of United States of America (1872 – 1933)