If anyone has a problem with female judges presiding over family law cases, they should leave the USA, as IME, most of these judges are female. I have not seen any indication of that kind of prejudice in this thread, but then again, I am not looking for that. One can usually find what one is looking for, if they look hard enough.
“The father is the one who could have stopped pressing the issue any time.” The father may not have had that option. Once the court is involved, Choices often get very limited.
Why limit the mother from visitation? IF she is influencing the kids to defy the court order, this is a fairly reasonable way to stop the influence.
Tell you what, let us know what your solution to this defiance of a court order would be. Do not include foster care, as it usually takes much longer then two months to find a home for an older sibling group of three. If they are allowed to be separated in foster care, how is that NOT punishing the entire family?
“What could the mother have done to avoid the kids being sent to jail?” Complied with the court order?
The mother has refused to comply with a court order to bring the children to supervised visits. Supervised visits means that a court appointed adult, (often a LEO), is in the room when the visit is happening. The mother should have no problem with that, as the kids are safe & the observing adult will write up a report on the visit. If the father is abusive, then it will be recorded. This would help her case to terminate visitation rights. If he is not abusive, it does not hurt her case, as the judge knows that most folks can be good for an hour.
Children can be, and are, “handed back and forth like suitcases”. Ask anyone involved with foster care, especially the foster child.
As to the lunch with father in the courthouse cafeteria, even if the judge did not require it to be supervised, (& I bet she did), If it is like any of the other courtroom cafeterias I have been in, there are plenty of LEOs eating there. The children would have been safe.
IMHO, (& I hope I am wrong), The mother is the one that caused the children to be defiant. They were just modeling her.
Please keep in mind, we do not have all of the facts.
I don’t know if I’d force my child to go to school or not, but normally at school there are many children and adults around. If they don’t want to be alone with someone at school, I would support that.
The phrase “female judge” was used repeatedly. They’re just called “judges” now, there is no need to keep stressing her gender as if it is relevant.
The judge basically offered him that option and he apparently did not take her up on it.
She is apparently the custodial parent and the only one they wish to see. Denying them access to her is beyond cruel. Even children jailed on murder charges typically are allowed visits from mom.
Foster care is not a punishment for children, regardless of whether they dislike it. The unpleasantness is a side effect, not the intention. Jail is a punishment, and is deliberately unpleasant. Do you actually not see the difference?
They are not babies. She can’t just pack them up and drop them off. See how the judge couldn’t make them see him? What should the mom have done? And if the father is abusive, should she make her kids see him?
Ugh, I’d never put my kid in that situation.
Nope, they are still people, no matter how you treat them.
LEOs marched the kids off to jail. I wouldn’t consider them safe.
If the mother did something wrong, she is the one who should be punished, not the kids.
I live in the area, so this has been big news. I think the judge has been feeling the pressure since the story went out in the media because the latest news is she’s releasing them from juvenile detention into a summer camp for the rest of the summer.
I understand how a parent can alienate a kid from the other parent. It’s happened in my family. If this mother has been hit by her ex-husband, did she file a police report?
Another thing that makes me question the father: since the kids were taken to detention on June 2, the father has been abroad in Israel on business. If you read the court transcripts the judge did give the father the power to get the kids released, but he’s nowhere around.
I question a parent who would not consider this a family emergency and cancel his business trip to tend to the welfare of his children.
Yes, there’s a lot we don’t know, but sounds like mom and dad are both a bit of a me.
This case has been going on for over 5 years, with the same judge presiding that entire time. Each child is represented by a lawyer, none of whom objected to the placement in the detention center. The wife’s claims of abuse were investigate in 2010 and dismissed. The kids refuse to TOUCH FOOD THEIR FATHER HAS TOUCHED. This is not normal behavior from children who were 3, 4, and 9 when all this began. This is a classic case of parental alienation, and I would imagine that after 5 years of watching it unfold, the judge knows a bit more of the story than we do.
Sending a nine-year-old and a 10-year-old to jail from June to September — and demanding they be separated — for not eating lunch is reprehensible. It’s bad enough she imprisoned all three, but it would not be as terrifying for a 14-year-old.
Now that the torches and pitchforks are out, she back-pedals to save her own ass, but long after those kids, who no doubt felt abandoned, because they had been, were warehoused in some shithole. (Every jail is a shithole.)
I think that judge is a few cards short of a full deck.
Now that all three kids have been send to juvi where they’re not allowed contact from their mother and their father was in Israel on business, so basically they had no visitors. How does this help with parental alienation? Sounds to me, the judge helped the mother’s cause. Can’t image the kids liking their dad any better after this, no matter whose fault it was originally. Especially the 14 year old, teenagers tend to butt heads with their parents anyways. This will just cause him to be even more stubborn.
Why do people act like that matters? She sent them to fucking jail. The kids probably are actually poisoned against their father. Sending them to jail will not in any way change that.
And their father who had the ability to take them out did not. He just went on his business trip. Even if said trip was too important to cancel, the fact that he has business trips in Israel means he’s got enough money to pay someone else to take care of his kids for a while, instead of LEAVING THEM IN FUCKING JAIL.
This is also a judge who has gone on and on about how the father is a great man, respected in the community. That shouldn’t matter one bit, since that describes most abusers. Abusers are mostly well liked people. They abuse in private. But, more importantly, the fact that he wouldn’t try to take those kids out of jail when he had the chance shows he doesn’t give a shit about those children.
If this judge really wanted to deal with this issue, she would have sent them to a fucking psychologist who would actually know what to do with them. Instead, she admits that it was about them refusing a direct order to have lunch with their father. She talks about how it is offensive that the children don’t want to see the father. Not about how it’s bad for them, just about how offended she is. She even constantly talks about bad it is for the father, as if he’s the only party who matters.
Her own comments and actions vilify her. This is about forcing the kids to do what she thinks is right instead of about the well-being of those kids.
I will repeat, we do not have all of the facts, so we are guessing about what happened.
I can see that I am wasting my time trying to give you some insight from someone who has dealt with “The System”. Your mind is made up, & you will not be swayed with facts. However, I will give it one more shot. Some other reader may gleen some insight from it.
If the judge gave the father the option of the children to not go to jail & he still gets to see his kids, then you have a point. Did she? Or was he given the option to let the mother refuse to let him see his kids & the children do not go to jail. There is a big difference. Do you see it?
Again, IF she is influencing the children against their father, she should have the children in her care?
And again, foster care for older sibling groups is simply not available at a moments notice. Much as I wish it were. You have presented no viable option. Try again.
You have said that the place the judge sent them was “jail”. I need your definition of jail. IME, Most juvenile detention centers for pre-teens are more like a strictly scheduled boarding school then jail, no bars on the doors & windows, no guards roaming the halls at night. Probably a big fence to keep the bad guys out & the children safe.
IMHO, Most foster families are better then jail. Once again, it may not be available.
“They are not babies. She can’t just pack them up and drop them off. See how the judge couldn’t make them see him?”
Yes she can. She takes them to school every day. She chooses not to comply. The judge was unable to make the children see their father, perhaps because of the “parental alienation” that the mother caused. (Parental alienation) good description!, thanks bobkitty, et al.
“What should the mom have done? And if the father is abusive, should she make her kids see him?”
Again, comply with the court order? Read what I said. It is in your next quote. Actually read it for comprehension. I know that you can.
If you were in a similar situation, I would hope that you are wise enough to see how this could help your case. Remember it is SUPERVISED visits. Of course you could choose to do as she has & get to spend some time in jail. A real jail. While it would be unpleasant for you, it would not help the children. Not a good choice IMO.
I said “Children can be, and are, “handed back and forth like suitcases”. Ask anyone involved with foster care, especially the foster child.”
Where in there do you read that I said that children are suitcases? Children are NOT suitcases, They ARE people. (See, we can agree on somethings), but “The System” often treats them as if they were suitcases. Your denying this fact does not make it go away. I wish it could.
LEOs also have to obey court orders. If it were not so, we would live in a police state. So far we do not. The LEOs did not harm the children, so where do you get “I wouldn’t consider them safe.” Your own prejudice perhaps? Maybe I should ask for your definition of safe.
“If the mother did something wrong, she is the one who should be punished, not the kids.” Hey! Look! We agree again!
However, this time it was the children who chose to disobey a court order. Perhaps it is time to punish them for this action. Or do you not believe in correcting bad behavior in children?
Again keep in mind that we do not have all of the facts.
I really do not have the time to spar about this with someone who has made up their minds already. If I can give someone insight into “The System” as a former foster parent, I am happy to give some of my time for that purpose.
It’s like you assume that if an authority has declared that something should happen, it’s automatically correct and anyone that dares to disagree is morally in the wrong.
I read in an Observer article that the judge’s order was for all three kids to stay at the jail until they were 18 years old. I hope that is not true. That’s a nine year sentence for the youngest! Telling a little kid she is going to jail for the entire rest of her childhood and then permitting her no contact with her loved ones for the past two weeks is child abuse. Can you imagine the mental agony these poor children have been through?
Thanks to public pressure, the kids have finally been released to summer camp. I’m glad most people are able to see the horror of this judge’s actions or who knows when they’d have been released, but the damage she has done so far is inexcusable.
This is horrible. The real problem is these children are being treated like property. They are human beings but apparently with less rights than one who is 18.
Contempt of Court charges for children? That’s messed up.
In the court transcript the judge makes it clear that the dad didn’t want the kids to go to juvi.
And, no, the dad did not have the power to get them out either. The judge made it clear the kids had the power to get themselves out as soon as they started behaving civilly towards their dad.
[Quote=KAndre]
That’s how I see it - if the mother is at fault, yeah, lock her up.
[/quote]
Wait, what?
What crime did the mother commit? Poisoning a relationship is not a crime. Saying bad things about the father is not a crime. (Unless it reaches the level of slander, and then it would be a civil matter, not criminal.)
With all the demands flying around that this person or that person should be jailed, why hasn’t anyone suggested jailing the judge? Putting kids in prison for a frivolous reason sounds a lot like abuse to me, but I guess government employees get a different standard than everyone else.
When we, as a society, decided to give the courts power to make and enforce joint custody agreements for millions of families, that meant the courts were suddenly micromanaging the lives of millions of kids. Abuses of power like this are inevitable.
I made an error in judgement about my ex (who was a complete and total asshole). However, I also realized his relationship with my son is is between the two of them and theirs to control (my son, by the time he was 16, also realizes his dad’s an asshole, but they have their own relationship). It’s wrong to “poison the well” and there should be consequences for that.
But if the mom is the one running the show, as the judge seems to imply, and responsible for the situation, then yes, if she’s done wrong, she should do the time. I just don’t see how sending the children to a detention center (no matter how benignly it’s described) as punishment for not demonstrating the correct emotion response to the judge makes anything better.
In reading the transcript, the judge sounds like she despises the children. That they are just horrible (Charles Manson? Really?) and their dad is made of angel farts and they should just worship the ground he walks on. The judge doesn’t say, “I’m sending you to a place where you can be helped” (especially if she things they’ve been “brainwashed”; she basically threatens a 9-year-old girl with:
And looking at the judge’s defense of her actions, I’m still not seeing where her actions in any way foster a good relationship with anyone.
My comment was simply to address those that are saying that the father wanted the kids to go to juvi, or that he could have kept them from going, or that he could have gotten them out - all of which are false assertions from people who apparently haven’t read the court transcript.
I didn’t really want to get into the debate - I just wanted to point out a couple of factual errors that were being thrown around. But since you asked - they don’t want to live with dad, they need to be removed from the toxic influence of the mother, all of their relatives apparently live in Israel, and setting up foster care takes time. So juvi seems to be the only option at the moment, but it should have been done more for their benefit and not as punishment for contempt.
I feel that going back to live with mom and the status quo is not in the kid’s best interest and it would be really unfair to the father. But, I think she should be able to have supervised visits with them though, so she can see them but not be allowed to continue poisoning them.
Do we as a society think one parent should be allowed to get away with poisoning the kids against the other parent and ruining their relationship with that other parent?
Jewish children can be alarmingly self-willed when they believe they are in the right. The judge reacts to what she’s faced with by thinking about the Manson Family? Bring in a Jewish judge!