Scott Adams is working to Nationally Bar/ban parental alienation

Scott Adams

Judges, Lawyers, and Child Custody: A Recipe for Disaster - The alienation of one parent by the other often goes unnoticed by the courts because most of the judges and lawyers have not been trained to identify the signs of parental alienation. On average, in looking at the biographies and credentials available for many family court judges and lawyers, you find a lot of the same type of educational degrees, legal backgrounds and superficial accolades. While everything has exceptions, rarely do you see evidence where those in power have any specialized training or in psychology, children, and parenting.

This is alarming considering the courts claim they act and make decisions under the banner of a child’s best interests. Many decisions get made in favor of one parent over another based on motion filings and hearsay. There is seldom any neutral evaluation by a third-party trained to identify the psychological aspects of custody and divorce. Such an expert would be better suited to assess parents and children and uncover signs of alienation.

Combine this with the many unethical and manipulative tactics used by lawyers and players in custody and divorce ordeals and you have a recipe for disaster. We the people have entrusted individuals who, by their very nature and training, are prone to adversarial conflict in the form of litigation and courtroom displays to make decisions and steer outcomes regarding a child’s well-being. It is in this way that children often become more like pawns on a chessboard, as opposed to having their best interests genuinely prioritized and safeguarded.

Given the sensitivity of these types of cases and the many public outcries—complaints and ethical concerns raised about those sitting on the bench and practicing in the matrimonial bar—it begs the questions as to what type of individuals find this area of law appealing? Even more than practicing law in the divorce and custody arena, it would be interesting to know the psychological profile of those who run political campaigns to be elected as judges in it.

These are courts whereby the lawyers’ and judges’ very livelihoods are dependent upon a steady and reliable stream of cases with outcomes resulting in negative repercussions. With a divorce industry estimated to pull in approximately $50 billion annually by many accounts, one has to wonder if the allure by some judges and lawyers to this area of law is truly based on serving a child’s best interests or protecting and preserving their own. It seems quite dumbfounding as to why tougher screening methods and stricter barriers are not in place for those making rulings or practicing law in the arena of child custody and divorce.

4 people have helped so far

86 people haven't responded

Michelle Anthony
Hasn't responded
Ron B Palmer
Hasn't responded
Thommy Noodlez
Hasn't responded
Vanessa Grigg
Hasn't responded
Bessie Hudgins
Hasn't responded
Janice Grenadier
Hasn't responded
Bill Reynolds
Hasn't responded
Richard Lopez
Hasn't responded
Donald Tenn
Hasn't responded
Christine Desiree
Hasn't responded
George Keys
Hasn't responded
Tina Pozzie-Granstrom
Hasn't responded
Joseph Kenick III
Hasn't responded
Naiviv Brainsyntax
Hasn't responded
Deborah McGill Webster
Hasn't responded

1 message for Scott

to comment