Tired of paying child support? Want to flip custody? The child hates you and wants nothing to do with you? Here's a plan taking place wherever there are working agreements between hospital psychiatric wards and family court Referees.
Bring a custodial proceeding in front of a family court Referee. Allege mental instability of the custodial parent.
Allow the proceeding to progress until the custodial parent gets tired of repeatedly appearing.
Get the custodial parent to miss a few consecutive appearances. The Referee, out of pique artfully articulated on the record, will flip custody.
The Referee will refer the parent and child to a court mental health professional who is programmed to find parents and their children dysfunctional. Popular diagnoses include adjustment disorder and anxiety disorder and are fabricated in twenty minute interviews. Reports are prepared and filed.
The Referee will then order the child committed to the connected psychiatric ward. Discussions will be made with the head of that department on an ex parte basis. The Referee will defend these contacts as the hospital not being a party to the action and that all chats were for ministerial reasons.
The child will be in-processed at the hospital but typically, there will be no diagnosis made. A course of treatment for a non-existent diagnosis will typically commence and the court will rely on the fact there is ongoing treatment to substantiate continued placement of the child in the ward.
In the meantime, the child will be hammered to accept the new custodial parent. Treatment will include reunification procedures to slowly allow the child to accept the new custodial parent. The former custodial parent will be cut off from contact via red tape. Phone calls will be monitored.
Hence, the real reason for the incarceration at the hospital is to forcibly flip custody and then program the child to accept the opponent parent.
In the courtroom, orders for periodic hearings are crafted in order to avoid testimony as to the diagnosis (which in a corrupt hospital scheme will be made on an ongoing basis rather than fixed at the start of the incarceration).instead, a head of the unit may be brought in to discuss the professionalism of his unit and its adherence to policy. A treating psychologist will be brought in to emphasize that treatment is needed and is ongoing (psychotherapy rather than behavioral therapy), but the psychologist will not know what steps were taken to actually diagnose the child. Hence, treatment is ongoing for conditions that either do not exist or do not merit hospitalization.
The Referee will do everything to sanitize the record: force the defense to treat the psychologists as fact witnesses while the court asks questions as if they are expert witnesses. The Referee will layer the lawyers for the child so that cumulative questioning is assured while sustaining objections as to the defense having asked and answered a repeated question previously. This allows the record to be built up by the forced accumulation and repetition of testimony. The Referee will sustain objections as to the diagnosis because that is irrelevant to the proceedings.in the worst cases, the Referee will ask hypotheticals that yield responses that the child is still in need of treatment. The Referee will make faces at defense questioning of witnesses. These and other evidentiary violations of the law require a separate treatise to fully explain.
The treating psychologist will cover up the fact that the child vehemently does not wish to reside with the new custodial parent and reveal that reunification procedures are ongoing throughout.
A court's jurisdiction is limited by way of the Family Court Act. However, by the simple expedient of the custodial flip, the forced placement can be converted into a voluntary placement where the child holds the keys to his own release as long as he decides to go to the new custodial parent. The former custodial parent may be ordered to psychiatric evaluation by the Referee, and refusal to comply will justify continued custody in the new custodial parent.
The new custodial parent is therefore coercing the child to accept the new parent via continued placement at the hospital. The child is torn away from friends, school and from the former custodial parent. Tax payers are ripped to the hilt.
The best method to cure this is exposure. The hospital's staff does not want it known that they are helping a Referee flip away a child who is unwilling from the former custodial parent. They also do not want it known they are hospitalizing the child without a diagnosis that would support a hospitalization.
Even if there is a diagnosis, the hospital cannot commit people for dysfunction that can be treated on an outpatient basis. This is akin to being hospitalized against your will for having a headache treatable by tylenol.
The Referee's chain of command may have no idea this is going on.
0 comments