|
FLORIDA FAMILY LAW APPEALS -- All Florida Courts:
Palm Beach
Divorce Lawyer Lisa Marie Macci and Fort Lauderdale Family Lawyer Elizabeth J. Kates.
Article
on Parenting Coordination can be found at:
Parenting
Coordination, a bad idea
http://www.thelizlibrary.org/therapeutic-jurisprudence/parenting-coordination.html
Also see:
Parenting Coordinator Practical Considerations
And: A "child-centered divorce"?
Parenting coordination is
an inappropriate delegation of the judicial function
Parenting coordination is
an impediment to court access
Parenting coordination is
a denial of due process
Parenting coordination violates
privacy
The parenting coordinator
concept encroaches on family liberty interests
Parenting coordination represents
arbitrary dictate by a person, in denigration of rule of law
Parenting coordination is
a make-work role newly invented by psychology trade promotion groups
No studies indicate parenting
coordinators make good decisions
No studies indicate parenting
coordination improves families' lives or child wellbeing.
Nothing qualifies a stranger to
make family decisions for other people
Nothing qualifies a mental
health professional to interpret a court order or legal document
Nothing qualifies a lawyer
to play at being an unlicensed, unregulated therapist for hire
Nothing qualifies any third
party to "fill in the gaps" in someone else's contract
There is no definition of
what constitutes a successful parenting coordination
Parenting coordination does
not, in the long run, alleviate court docket congestion
It creates additional issues and leaves the door open for
return trips to resolve them
Parenting coordination provides
a new forum for squabbling over petty disputes
Parenting coordination is
an additional expense that many can ill afford
Parenting coordination enables
one parent to spend the other's funds
Parenting coordination is
time-consuming and tedious
Parenting coordination is
not confidential
Parenting coordination constitutes
continuous government discovery, 4th Amendment
Parenting coordination constitutes
continuous discovery by each parent into the affairs of the other
Parenting coordination can
never be "voluntary" because it implements unwanted court orders
Parenting coordinators demand
that the parties sign "consents" that give up constitutional
rights
Some have demanded that
parties give up the right to go to court, contact police, or involve their
lawyers
They are hired or appointed
under shadow of the threat of court sanctions or loss of custody
They are agreed to by parties
ignorant of the repercussions, in fear, out of funds, or overwhelmed
Parenting coordination does
not result in increased family well-being
Parenting coordination does
not make children happier, healthier, or better adjusted
Parenting coordination is
not therapy but coercion backed by the state's police power
Parenting coordinators tend
to be hostile to, and at odds with attorney-client relationships
They align with GALs and
other court appointees in a pretext of "focus on the children"
They encroach on parental-child
relationships and decision-making
They undermine the parental authority
children require for a sense of security and well-being
Instead of at least one authoritative parent,
children have no authoritative parent
Petty tyrants place a premium on the perception of who is
cooperating with them
Cooperation with the parenting coordinator is court-ordered and
They alone decide if a parent
is "cooperating" with them
They are given unwarranted
authority to impose or recommend sanctions against parents
They are given unwarranted
authority to speak with extended family, friends, and collaterals
They are given unwarranted
authority to speak with children, teachers, and school officials
They are given authority
to demand private medical and therapy records
They are able continuously to undermine
the credibility and competence of parents to third parties
They are able continuously to divulge private family issues to
third parties
They are given authority
to demand meetings, and meeting times and places
There are no studies of
parenting coordination methods or techniques
There is no research into
parenting coordinators' efficacy, and there cannot be
Decisions are based on the
parenting coordinator's private agendas, values, and beliefs
Most parenting coordinators
lack psychological insight
Parenting coordination is
not "co-parenting therapy" which rarely works anyway
Mental health professionals
are ignorant of the repercussions in law of their ideas
There is no valid "training"
because there is no body of knowledge to base training on
Decisions are made without
actual knowledge of people's households and daily lives
Parenting coordination provides
a forum for the arguing of minutiae, not just major decisions
Parenting coordinators frequently
make bad decisions
The parenting coordinator
has absolutely no incentive to work himself or herself out of a job
Parenting coordinators tend
to be individuals who can't make a go of practicing their profession
Many have axes to grind;
others need to re-live and normalize their own family-of-origin issues
Parenting coordination is
unregulated and practicably unable to be regulated
There is no effective oversight,
and there cannot be
There is no recourse against
the parenting coordinator for malfeasance or malpractice
Parenting coordinators have
control to self-generate their work and churn fees
The claim of parenting coordinators
that they sought this role in order to "help" people is specious
Parenting coordination proceedings
are informal, outside court, and not subject to effective oversight
Parenting coordinators can
report conversations and events differently from how they really happened
Parenting coordinators can
cover themselves by blaming parents for the failure of the venture
Parenting coordinators can
and do give parents make-work at whim
Parenting coordinators may
not have any personal parenting experience
Parenting coordinators may
not have experience being primary caregivers, or as single parents
Many of those drawn to the
field are by nature meddlers, incompetents, or petty tyrants
Parenting coordination is
dangerous, founded on erroneous beliefs about "high conflict"
Parenting coordination is
a tool to force fit parents and children to invest in abusers' rehabilitation
"High conflict"
means "abusive relationship", not "difficult learning situation"
"High conflict"
means "threats to security and well-being", not "lack of
communication skills"
Fears and concerns are real,
not irrational, vindictive, or merely personality disordered
"High conflict"
means that the "parenting plan" is inappropriate, unjust, unhealthy,
or unsafe, and
there is no "adjustment
period" to get through or equal "co-parenting relationship"
to regain
Parenting coordinators have
missed domestic violence
Parenting coordinators have
inflamed emotions and exacerbated legal issues
Parenting coordinators have
assumed facts that are not true
Parenting coordinators have
perceived emergencies or situations incorrectly
Parenting coordinators have
mischaracterized events
Parenting coordinators have
made egregious judgmental mistakes
Parenting coordinators have
lied outright
There is no basis to presume their "good faith" or their "neutrality"
There are no ethical guidelines
that practicably can be enforced
There are, and can be, no
enforceable practice parameters, only vague aspirational generalities
Parenting coordinators will
be biased because of the nature of human relationships and the role
Court oversight is illusory
because the parenting coordinator has more credibility than either parent
Court oversight is illusory
because the parenting coordinator has the ear of the judge, and
because the parenting coordinator
has relationships with supportive guardians ad litem, and
because the parenting coordinator
has other courthouse referral relationships who will back him or her
Court oversight is illusory
because it's easy to claim a parent is uncooperative or lying
Court oversight is illusory
because it's expensive
or there is not enough time
to get a hearing
or the party doesn't have
a lawyer post-decree, and
because the judge who appointed
the parenting coordinator did so because he didn't want to hear it
Most of all, parenting
coordination is proof that joint custody does not work
ADDITIONAL READING
Protecting
Victims of Domestic Violence
Out of control parenting coordinator (Hastings case, FL 2nd DCA, 2002) Caveat custody modification standard
Out
of control parenting coordinator and a recused judge who relied on him (Wade case, FL 3rd DCA, 2013)
Decision includes information about judicial bias warranting recusal as well as guidance on what constitutes
an inappropriate referral for a psychological evaluation.
The Florida judge relied on the ridiculous musings of parenting coordinator Chicago attorney
Howard Rosenberg. (Good work by Lisa Macci, attorney for the mom.)
(More -- news article, 10/23/13).
DVLeap brief in 2010 case (Washington, DC) arguing some of the constitutional issues
More from DVLeap
"The Court's parenting coordinator orders unconsitutionally
delegate judicial power and violate due process... The Special Master Order's requirement that Appellant
pay for the parenting coordinators to whom she objects violates law and public policy... The Special
Master Order requiring Appellant to waive her medical privilege violates her statutory and
constitutional rights to privacy..."
Martindale, D. A., False promise of parenting coordination, Matrimonial Strategist, 25:8 (2007)
"...a forum in which sniping can continue unabated... [M]ost jurisdictions do not sufficiently address issues of due process... When neither evidentiary rules nor due process protections apply
... the probability of unjust decisions is increased... Can those who are being paid to
render a service objectively evaluate the need for or effectiveness of that service... we must not lose sight of the various elements of the process that create a risk of iatrogenic harm."
Delegation of Judicial Authority to Experts, A. G. Behjani, 2007 Utah L. Rev. 823
CCFC Amicus Brief, Tadros v. Doyne (discovery issues,
how due process gets undermined)
Former Fla. Gov. Jeb Bush explains 2004 veto of parenting coordinator legislation
Example of unconstitutional judicial mandate for involuntary PC appointment (Florida)
Sample Order of Referral to Parenting Coordinator (Florida)
Article on parenting coordination bill in Florida and domestic violence
AFCC Parenting Coordinator Guidelines (aspirational generalities, no malfeasance oversight)
An attorney father describes his experience with parenting coordination in his own case
http://www.thelizlibrary.org/parenting-coordination/hastings.pdf (Hastings case malfeasance)
How
to Represent Parents Accused of Child Abuse (Florida Bar CLE) (hint, hint)
http://www.thelizlibrary.org/parenting-coordination/wyckoff.pdf
http://www.5dca.org/Opinions/Opin2009/012609/5D07-3461.pdf
http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/2005/sc04-1012.pdf
http://www.thelizlibrary.org/parenting-coordination/norris.pdf
http://www.2dca.org/opinion/February%2001,%202006/2D04-2609.pdf
http://batteredmomslosecustody.wordpress.com/
CASE MANAGERS -- an obscene concept (April 2012 article Kansas)
Kansas brief on this CASE MANAGEMENT case, Karen Williams
Shrinks Gone Wild Willick Law Group, Nevada
Shrinks Gone Wild 2 Willick Law Group, Nevada
|
