Family Court Abuse
Government gives family court power over families who are not "intact". Parents who are never married or are getting divorced find themselves ruled by Judicial orders and assignment of for-profit court affiliates making parenting and money decisions. Parents who leave a relationship because of its abusive nature, find themselves entrenched in the professional abusive arena of family court. Family Court has multiple systems guaranteed to re-abuse and profit from abusers. The list includes:
  1. Appointment of for-profit service providers who bill parents - mediators, counselors, custody evaluators, guardian ad litems and/or attorney for children, co-parenting coordinators, parent educators, and more. These court-ordered appointees are unschooled in abuse and are profit motivated to diminish and ignore abuse in order to prolong their appointment, thereby their profiting off the abuse.
  2. Extend litigation by appointing service providers, encouraging abuser to pursue his "rights" to the children, thereby prolonging resolution of final money and parenting decisions.
  3. Permit one person (usually the male) to control the majority of financial assets for extended periods, thereby giving the legal advantage to one parent.
  4. Blame the abused for the abuse by calling abuse "high conflict", thereby giving parity to abuser and abuse.
  5. Permit fraudulent evidence and false witness of service providers, forbid real witness and evidence, thereby permitting fraud.
  6. Judges, lawyers and MHPs collude, work together, to get fraud on the record and keep truth out of record.
To read about court abuse of litigants, go to

Fatherhood programs embolden family abuse because they deny that abuse exists. The Office of Child Support Enforcement and Access/Visitation (custody) fatherhood program funds courts handing decision-making over to service providers without considering abuse. "In the late 1990s when interest in federally funding responsible fatherhood programs first gained national attention, some women's rights groups, such as the national Women's Law Center and the National Organization for Women (NOW) were concerned that an emphasis on the importance of fathers could lead to undervaluing single parent families maintained by mothers, that services for fathers might be at the expense of services for mothers; and that the "pro fatherhood" discourse could give father's rights groups more leverage in challenging child custody, child support, and visitation arrangements. Although that underlying tension has not disappeared completely, then and now, it was thought that the policy debate on responsible fatherhood initiatives had to be based on the view that the welfare of fathers, mothers, and children were intertwined and interdependent. Many analysts asserted that otherwise the debate would be very divisive and unproductive." CRS report "Fatherhood Initiatives: Connecting Fathers to Their Children" 2013.