[SeanEBoy]

No, I don't have their names. But all professional opinions have been part of the eight years of litigation--due process denied, indeed--and part of the consideration of the three guardians ad litem that have been appointed and all come to the same conclusions.

[thoughtomator]

The guardians at litem I've researched... the latter two have serious conflicts of interest and cannot be considered credible. The 2003 guardian was particularly bad, IIRC. I wasn't able to find enough info on the first.

[northernlightsII]

Oh so you come here attempting to impeach the credibility of doctors you know nothing about,asserting on the other hand the validity of the diagnosis of of other doctors whom you know nothing about,; all the while basing your argument on the correctness of the finding of the judge when the whole point of this affair and the congressional act is that Greer's finding of facts will not be considered and there should be a trial de novo.

[thoughtomator]

The problem is that when you delve into the details there are conflicts of interest all over the place, and a distinct pattern of considering only evidence that supported the husband's position.