Messages

According to a retired Judge in MA, such ex parte orders were "handed out like candy".  

Decide exactly what you feel is best for your child, specify such in a proposed parenting agreement, and don't settle for less.  

The mother bias is incredible, and the only thing you can do to mitigate it is to push the focus where it belongs - the child's best interests.

seven years and a lot more expensive, but there is nothing more worthwhile.

PAS is a behavior, not a diagnosis.  This is more than semantics as the behavior is what you address, both in your court filings and in your guidance to your kids.

Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) often generates behaviors such as PAS, but no specific disorder is a guarantee of PAS.

The letter could be provided to a GAL or a FOC to get them to check and get a direct report.  Sometimes they don't follow through unless they are faced with something in writing.

And yes, the old timers may often be too busy to come out of the wood work (too busy raising our kids, Hallelujah).

Mental health may indeed be the issue and the ticket.  Are you looking for a GAL?  If so, avoid one of the shyster GALs (attorneys et al) and get a forensic psychologist for a GAL.

Has BPD been diagnosed by a medical professional?  If not, you will have to ask the court to appoint a GAL and have your lawyer ensure that the GAL is a forensic psychologist.  Otherwise, nobody in court will listed to a BPD argument.  Outside of CA, most family courts simply refuse to attempt to recognize BPD ("after all, if it is'only borderline', it must not be the issue").

1.  I like the presumption of joint custody that has been
     repeatedly proposed.  In MA this was proposed as an
     initiative, but the legislature is still resisting taking it up.

2.  When I read the actual law, I do not see the extreme bias that I
     experienced in the courtroom.  Furthermore, I actually see laws
     against much of the most egregious behaviour thatgoes on in the
     Family courts.  The problem starts at the top and is controlled by
     the judges who run their courtrooms.  To fix the system we need
     some very simple and easily implemented accountability.

     a.  Judicial appointments must be open for public review.  In MA
          the judges are appointed by secret cabal, who are not required
          to post their meetings or the contents of the discussions that
          occurred.

     b.  Judicial appointments must be subject to periodic review.  In MA
          there is absolutely no such review.  Several judges have been
          removed in recent history, but only because of outrageous
          behaviour along with the cooperation of prosecutors who were
          becoming tired of the embarassment.

     c.  Digitally record (and automatically transcribe) all proceedings
          and post these on some form of sharepoint site.  Passwords
          can be required to restrict access.  The current practice of
          generating poor quality audio recordings and restrcting access
          by the imposition of fees and the destruction of the recordings
          in short order prevent any reasonable review.  I took the
          recordings to a legal transcriptionist, who complained of the
          poor quality.  Multiple cases have been filed accusing the courts
          of altering these recordings.

     d.  Results of court orders must be posted into a database for
          statistical review.  Again in MA this has been prevented and the
          courts filed injunctions against individuals who attempted to
          manually collect results statistics.  Theoretically the information
          is public record (except for the financial disclosures and items
          specifically sealed).

I'm far too stupid to have any words of wisdom.  Just take care of yourself and your son as the drama roller-coaster that some ex's seem to enjoy is hurtful to all.  Trying to hurt kids with good-byes is despicable at best, but yes I have seen it too.  

You don't need to rely on a judges memory - you should refresh it.  And yes, the other posters are spot on when they suggest that lawyers lie, and reinvent the results of a hearing to get what they failed to get in the actual hearing.