Posted on 12/03/2005 6:17:47 PM PST by FreeManDC
I completely agree. I am against wife beaters, not men in general. I love men and have had many wonderful men in my life (my dad, my male relatives, my current husband coworkers), but I am against domestic violence and know it exists, both because I have experienced it and I have had friends that have also. Too many people think DV awareness is anti-male propaganda.
October 20, 2005
The National Organization For Women On "Breaking The Silence: Children's Stories"
Here is what N.O.W. has to say about "Breaking The Silence: Children's Issues":
Must See TV:
Must See TV on PBS Tonight
On Thursday October 20 at 10pm EST, PBS will be airing a documentary titled "Breaking the Silence: Children's Stories," depicting a national family court scandal that is putting children into the hands of a physically or sexually abusive parent. Nationwide, supporters of battered mothers in custody challenges have been demonstrating at family courthouses and other locations in support of the documentary and in protest of the court scandal.
The film is generally set to air on Thursday, October 20, but different show times are possible, including Friday or the weekend. To get more information about the documentary and to see when it is airing in your area, go to: http://www.pbs.org/stationfinder/index.html and type the title of the documentary in the search field. If the PBS station in your area is not airing it, please call your local station and insist that they do. Your local station phone numbers can be found at the web site listed above.
It is important that we make sure that all local public television stations air the show and that we tune in for this program to show our support for PBS and their commitment to showing this documentary. Please send your own message to Pat Mitchell, CEO of PBS to show your appreciation to PBS for airing this important film.
Your emails are especially important, as we know that PBS is being flooded with emails from bogus "fathers' rights" activists opposing the airing of the film. You may use our suggested comments or enter your own.
******
EVENTS
Third Battered Mothers Custody Conference. 6th, 7th, 8th January 2006
Revision: 10/14/05 "Battered Women, Abused Children, and Child Custody: A National Crisis III: Unity—and Action!”
The Third Battered Mothers Custody Conference
January 6th, 7th, & 8th, 2006
Siena College, near Albany, NY
Visit www.batteredmotherscustodyconference.org for registration, brochure, schedule, topics, fees, fee waiver, hotel, and other details.
The First National Battered Mother's Custody Conference (BMCC), held in January, 2004, brought together experts from across the nation to discuss the serious injustices faced by battered women who seek protection for themselves and their children in this nation’s family court/divorce court system.
Building upon the momentum of that conference, the BMCC II, held in January, 2005, provided a powerful networking opportunity for professionals, domestic violence advocates, organizations, and advocacy groups who are working to expose these problems and develop solutions. The Third Battered Mothers Custody Conference, scheduled for January, 2006, will provide a venue for the crucial next step of the Protective Parents Movement: the development of unity among all of those affected by these problems and the sharing of action steps that have been proven effective.
Presenters include:
Dominique Lasseur and Catherine Tatge, Producers, Breaking the Silence: Children’s Stories
Amy Neustein, Ph.D. ,co-author (w/ Michael Lesher, Esq.) of From Madness to Mutiny: Why Mothers Are Running From the Family Courts and What Can Be Done About It
Barry Goldstein, Esq., battered mothers’ attorney, author of Scared To Leave, Afraid To Stay
Charles, Diane, and Kristin Hofheimer, Esq., Nationally known legal team whose Virginia practice is devoted to representing women in divorce, custody, & visitation cases
Geraldine Stahly, Ph.D., CA, researcher on the legal problems of protective mothers nationwide
Timothy M. Tippins, Esq., Former Chair, New York State Bar Association Family Law Section
Garland Waller, producer of Small Justice: Little Justice in America's Family Courts
PBS's negative picture of fathers
By Cathy Young | November 21, 2005
snip
Film producer Dominique Lasseur told me he was shocked by the backlash. ''I have nothing against fathers," says Lasseur, a father of two, ''but I have outrage about children being given to abusers."
There is no question that our legal system fails children all too often. But the PBS documentary presents a skewed and sensationalist picture.
snip
In at least one case, involving a 16-year-old identified as ''Amina," there are serious questions about the film's accuracy.
Official documents supplied by the girl's father, Scott Loeliger, and posted at www.glennsacks.com, show that there were fairly serious child abuse allegations against ''Amina's" mother. Moreover, the only spousal abuse mentioned in these documents is violence toward the father by the mother.
snip
Lasseur told me that if he had encountered cases in which an abusive mother was awarded custody of the children, he would have reported on them. I asked about the claim on a battered men's advocacy site that a man named Tom Gallen had approached him with exactly such a case. Lasseur conceded that Gallen had a well-documented story but explained that, relying on his ''instinct as a producer," he felt that Gallen wouldn't be the right person to use.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/11/21/pbss_negative_picture_of_fathers/
Breaking the Science: Ostrich Syndrome
By Mark Rosenthal (11/04/05)
snip
the real bombshell happened Wednesday, when Glenn Sacks' website published a report stating that one of the mothers in the film had been found by a court to have committed eight counts of child abuse, and that the filmmakers were informed of that fact, yet chose to portray her as the victim anyway.
snip
It's been more than week since I submitted questions through Connecticut Public TV to be forwarded to the filmmakers. Among the things I asked were how many potential interviewees did the filmmakers decide not to use, and of those rejected, how many told stories that would have contradicted the film's premise?
To date they have sent no response. But other sources may shed some light on the questions I submitted:
· Mike McCormick, director of the American Coalition of Fathers and Children says that Dominique Lasseur had scheduled an interview to take place in ACFC's Washington, D.C. offices last April, but at the last minute the filmmaker called to say the cameraman was sick. When McCormick called back to reschedule, Lasseur told him he already had enough material for the film.
· Lee Newman, president of Stop Abuse For Everyone/NH, reports receiving a similar inquiry from Lasseur, but Lasseur lost interest when it became clear that Newman's inclusive perspective was quite different from the perspective evident in the final cut of the film. After several attempts by Newman to follow up, the filmmakers eventually they responded saying they already had enough information.
· Tom Gallen, who was married to a violent woman for 17 years, was willing to tell his story of having been kicked, hit, punched, and bitten, hit in the groin while he was driving, and attacked with a knife. In spite of this provocation, he never hit back. He was never charged with anything. Yet, in spite of a dozen police reports documenting his wife's abusive behavior, the divorce judge assigned custody of their three children to the violent mother. Gallen provided a copy of email correspondence between him and Lasseur last April, in which Lasseur thanks him for taking the time to talk on the phone and asks Gallen to fax any documents Gallen thinks are relevant. Gallen says Lasseur told him he'd like to bring him to New York to film an interview, but Lasseur never followed up and wouldn't reply when Gallen tried to get in touch.
· Gallen also told Lasseur he could put him in touch with someone else who'd convinced a skeptical judge that PAS was a factor in that person's case by producing journal written by the mother that said God wanted the father dead because he was evil. Although this is directly relevant to the topic of the film, Lasseur showed no interest in following up on this.
Other rejected interviewees may yet surface.
snip
http://tinyurl.com/eycsu
FamilyFun.com
Taming the TV Monster
"Independent New York television producers Dominique Lasseur and Catherine Tatge spend their days working on TV documentaries."
PARENTING
Talk about specific shows your children have seen. Your goal today, and whenever you discuss TV with your kids, is to sharpen their understanding of what's on the screen and make them think about what they're seeing. Dorothy Singer says as little as 10 to 15 minutes a day of watching together can help kids settle some important questions. For younger kids: What's real? What's fake? Do bad guys really live inside our Trinitron? For older viewers: What's a stereotype? Have any stereotypes shown up on TV lately, like a smart person wearing glasses, or a helpless handicapped person? Arming kids with answers helps develop good taste about what to turn on and off.
Independent New York television producers Dominique Lasseur and Catherine Tatge spend their days working on TV documentaries. When they get home, it seems natural to continue talking while they watch television with their five-year-old son, Julien. Both are particularly concerned about violence on shows for kids. That was the focus of their PBS show, hosted by Bill Moyers, called WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT VIOLENCE?
They don't prohibit Julien from watching cartoons - often filled with fantasy violence - but they do try to watch with him when possible and accompany the action by interjecting questions and comments. Gee, a lot of people are getting hurt. Who's going to take care of all the people who are injured? I'd be unhappy if this were real.
Julien is used to the routine - although many other kids would tell Dad to put himself on pause. The commentary opens the door for his reactions, like "This is sad." He's learning to distinguish factual from fake. And he's tuning into his parents' values. He himself begins thinking, "It's good this isn't real, because real violence is a problem."
His parents don't always watch with him. When they miss Julien's shows, they make a point of asking him what he's seen and getting a replay over dinner so they can ask and answer more questions. Without this dialogue, kids can harbor misunderstandings for years. Children watching an evening news lineup of crime stories, for example, can get an exaggerated sense of danger on the streets. Many kindergartners believe commercials are just short shows.
http://tinyurl.com/anywj
bump
I am glad this is getting recognized now. I lost my daughter because I would not retaliate in kind when my ex chose this weapon.
In a fair world, this would be classified as criminal child abuse at least on a par with a severe beating, but because it is not overtly violent or physical, it is not. I ascribe that to an anti-male bias in our society. Very generally, men fight physically, women use tactics like PAS.
Lasseur is holding himself out in public as being "unbiased", but a quick review of his activities shows a very clear and consistant agenda indeed.
Lasseur is just plain lying. I have first-hand knowledge of DOZENS of divorce cases and in every case where I have known a woman to make a domestic violence claim the police were very supportive.
They are NOT generally supportive if a man makes one.
Lasseur is a big phony. When the complaints about the film were first made, he made a press release that said that he had no preconceived notions.
What a shameless liar that guy is.
There is a whole list of shows PBS will not dare run. For example, they would never run a show that shows how badly children of homosexual couples turn out, or the psychological problems they end up with. Nor will they show anything that examines the medical problems of being gay, and the fact that most gays die by mid 40’s.
The name should be changed to PCBS. Politically Correct BS.
Why would they? This is where their future business is created.
I hope PBS and NPR make a thousand of these type of "stories" so we can shut them down once and for all.
Veteran producers...frequent contributors to Moyer's Now program...
Exactly. Serial disinformation experts.
They atarted with an anti-male agenda - and hey presto - they made some anti-male propaganda.
________________________________________________
Correct. Leftists/secularists/Anti Christians have infiltrated foundations large and small which then fund leftist liberal groups who purvey their trashy research.
Most foundations fit my description...Mary Kay whatever included.
>>Make sure everyone knows about the incredible new book available from Barnes and Noble entitled "From Madness to Mutiny: Why Mothers are Running from the Family Courts--and What Can Be Done About It" by Amy Neustein and Michael Lesher
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Silent No Longer
The Other Side Of Abuse Allegations
by Sherry Orbach
Editor's Note: In recent months The Jewish Press published two articles by Amy Neustein the first a ,feature piece in the Family Matters section, the second an op ed column in which she recounted her longstanding allegations that her ex husband abused their daughter. Ms. Neustein's daughter, Sherry Orbach, requested this opportunity to respond.
Although I have not seen my mother, Amy Neustein, in sixteen years, I remember her clearly. She claims the reason she repeatedly accused my father in the media of sexually abusing me was to gain custody rather than fame. Yet when she did have custody of me long before the legal battles began I remember her voluntarily sending me off to live with my grandmother in upstate New York, after which I rarely saw her.
I remember, on one of my rare visits to my mother's house in Brooklyn, watching her softly stroking her hair with an antique silver brush as she gazed at herself in her bedroom mirror and wondered out loud whether she was pretty enough to be famous.
I remember my mother sitting with me on the plastic covered couch in my grandmother's country home at age five as if it were yesterday. We had been rehearsing for hours. She would begin by telling me a sordid and false story about my father, such as a detailed account about how he had molested me or about how he had thrown me violently against a wall. She then instructed me to repeat the story word for word until she was satisfied with my rendition. At the time, my father had indicated he would be filing for custody. My mother warned that if I did not tell these lies to the judge, I would be taken from my grandmother.
After my mother lost legal custody, I visited her once a week. During these visits, my mother used to tape record me and pose me for pictures in order to gain material for her next media performance. I fought back in the only way I could. Once, I chased her around a table in an attempt to snatch her tape recorder.
For eighteen years (I am now 24); I was silent as my mother spun lie upon lie about my father and me. According to her story, she is the victim of a conspiracy involving my father, Brooklyn Family Court, federal and state appellate courts, the Legal Aid Society, the Brooklyn Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, Ohel family services, and several leaders of the Jewish community. These co conspirators, my mother insists, punished her for revealing that my father had sexually abused me by taking me away from her.
The truth, however, is that my father never sexually abused me, and that reporters and alleged victims' advocates who supported my mother chose to retell her lies without adequately checking the facts.
The reason my family and I did not seek media attention to counter my mother's allegations is that we wished to maintain our privacy. My family believed that my mother's publicity would fizzle out, and that it was best to avoid the media spotlight as much as possible so that I could live a normal life. But my mother has been relentless in her exploitation of me. Recently she embarked on another media tirade, and has published her false allegations in this paper and others.
The worst article I have yet to see this year contains my full name as well as photos of me as a child and as an adult, along with sickening and absurd lies about my father and me. Even if the allegations were true (which they are not), it is a widely accepted principle of journalistic responsibility and of everyday morality that it is wrong to invade the privacy of victims (alleged or actual) by publishing their full names and photographs. Kal v'chomer (how much more so) when the allegations are false. Such deceptive reporting is so damaging and hurtful that I feel I no longer have any choice but to break my silence.
I do not hate my mother; I see her as troubled. Nor do I seek revenge. I am only speaking out to stop her, and her supporters who profess to care about me, from continuing to exploit and torment me. With no other recourse, my mother has tried to counter my denial of her allegations by claiming that I am being brainwashed and used by my father and other alleged members of the so called conspiracy who "desperately fear public scrutiny and government inquiry"
Anyone who knows me well will vouch that I am independent minded and not the weak character my mother makes me out to be. The only parent who tried to brainwash me is my mother. The only people who are using me to advance their own careers are my mother and her allies. I vividly remember my mother sitting me on the couch at age five and coaching me to lie about my father. These are my memories and not anyone else's.
I do not profess to know how typical my story is. I hope it is the exception and not the rule. However, the research involving allegations of child sexual abuse in court custody cases indicates that false allegations can occur in anywhere from 2 percent to 60 percent of such cases, and so it is far from an exact science. In these instances the accuser can often be the most vocal, the most sympathetic, and thus the most believable: But sometimes the real victim is the accused. And the one who pays the biggest price of all is the child. What I have learned from my case is that you can find "experts" to say anything, and that journalists are sometimes more interested in a good story and don't want to be confused by the facts.
The damage caused by the irresponsible reporting and advocacy of my mother and her supporters extends beyond my family. Not only have they stained the credibility of the victims' rights movement they claim to speak for, but they have diverted attention from the true needs of children in the family court and child welfare systems by misrepresenting what I, and similar children, required. What I did not require, contrary to my mother's claim, was for the family court to be opened to the media.
I, for one, owe my existence as a normal young adult to the family judges, Ohel foster care, and the Legal Aid Society attorney who helped me reunite with my father in the face of considerable opposition in the media.
Most of all, I am grateful to my father for the sacrifices he has made for me over the years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.