Thursday, March 6, 2014

Abuser Seeking To Terminate Parental Rights of Protective Mother Inlcuding Third Party

I was recently in court on reduction of child support since the current child support order orders over 60% of my pay in child support PLUS attorney's fees or I will face a 6mo prison sentence on April 16, 2014 despite my current disabilities, unemployment, and efforts made to comply with current order prohibiting me and my ability to survive at a basic minimum. It shall be noted that I made numerous attempts to file this motion since June 2013 with stall tactics by the courts and refusal to allow the filing til after August 2013. I waited over nine months to be heard with constant threat of imprisonment every time I went to court. Where is fair due process?

While in court, my abuser verbally petitioned the court to terminate all my parental rights. The judge and my ex tried to get to me agree to the termination in court without legal representation and without the offer in writing despite my reluctance to make such a harsh decision.

What is ironic despite the ludicrousness of this, my abuser has only cared about money as demonstrated by actions throughout the time I have known the man. This also includes the admitted theft of several financial accounts including my father, putting him in Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. He has NEVER demonstrated any actions that were the best interests of the children as evidenced at trial and court documents.

It is bad enough he is now petitioning to terminate my parental rights, but another thing to petition the court to hold me accountable for any third party actions.

Excerpts As follows on February 25, 2014:

"In an effort to totally resolve the issues which continually bring you and Mr. Joseph to Probate Court, Mr. Joseph proposes the following:
  1. You are to have no contact, i.e. no meetings, no phone calls, no texts, no presents, no gifts, no emails, no letters, no third-party contact, no communication of any nature, with any of the children until each attains the age of 18 years old. At that time you may contact each 18 year old daughter as they and you agree, or not.
  2. (8) ... The parties further agree that they will not cooperate with any 3rd party who may attempt to bring legal suit against either party for monies owed.
  3. (9) You will not post anything of any nature regarding the children, Mr. Joseph, or his wife Andrea in writing. This includes, but not limited to, the Internet, websites, articles, or blogs.
Failure of you to adhere to the terms of a signed Agreement, containing the provisions in this letter, will result in reinstatement of all monies owed, including but not limited to $55.00 per week from the date of the original Order from Judge Roberts. In other words, if you comply with the Agreement when you owe him nothing and if you should breach the Agreement, then you will owe all the money that you presently owe plus $55.00 per week that you would have had to pay in the absence of this Agreement."

First of all ... after my ex slipped in a one liner in my divorce decree at the signing table that says that I will indemnify him harmless for any monies owed to my father. At the time I assumed it was regarding a $3,000 car loan we still owed my father for Saturn we bought. I had NO IDEA he was referencing that I indemnify him harmless in an actually criminal act of stealing my father's entire life savings. He later admitted in a testimony in Court in 2012 to taking the money and using it for personal use. The check was made out to him personally and they VERY withdrawal form from my father's account was in my abuser's handwriting. Therefore, acting as my father's securities representative without a license to do so and using the money for personal use not as he said he would by investing it for my father. The family court judge who overheard this case and the evidence supplied to the courts demonstrating a crime had committed did nothing...not even a forward to the DA's office for investigation.

I learned my lesson from that horrible experience. To this day I still harbor enormous guilt that 1) I married a man who could do such a horrible thing to my father who was so good to him 2) I did not know what had transpired until after the act was done. I would never have signed such a document if I knew what happened. 3) later finding out how verbally abusive my ex was every time my elderly father inquired to the status of his monies. My father worked hard for his money and is at a time in his life he should be enjoying life and semi-retired, not still trying to keep a roof over his head at 73.

I will not repeat that same mistake again. I will NOT sign away any third party rights to go after my abuser civilly or criminally. I learned my lesson the last time. That clause has NOTHING to do with my parental rights. Clearly by the mere fact he added that statement in there, I must know something or some legal action has already ensued that I am not aware of as of yet. Just like the last time when I signed my divorce decree.

If all my abuser has been seeking since I have known him, is money then why all of a sudden is he willing to waive it NOW after asking the judge on at least 4 occasions in the last year to incarcerate me for six months while falsifying evidence and refuting 100% compliance with orders at that time?

What is it that he is so insistent that I do "not cooperate with any third party"? Does this include do not speak to the FBI or State of Massachusetts or IRS or SEC etc who may contact me. These are all agencies I know there are possible pending legal actions.

So what if the children's godparents, cousins, grandparents, uncles, aunts,  or agencies like DCF contact them, and I am held responsible for their actions? Termination of MY parental rights does not preclude the rights of any third party and I can NOT nor will I be held accountable for any third party actions as I can not control that.

So  if I understand this correctly, I post that I miss my children on my facebook page and may even post a #throwbackthursday picture constitutes violating this agreement?

Your thoughts on the topic would be greatly appreciated.  Thank you

Letter to Jeff Kuhner WRKO on Massachusetts Family Courts Bias In Custody and Abuse Cases

ARE FATHERS GETTING A FAIR STAKE IN FAMILY COURTS IN MASSACHUSETTS? This is a DETAILED account of the current family court system in Massachusetts summarizing research in Massachusetts over the last 24 years since the Gender Bias Study of Massachusetts Courts in 1990.
The United States spends over one trillion dollars on health care, crime and economic loss annually as a result of domestic violence.
The statistical information, data and numbers can not be ignored.
We think we have a health care and economic problem now? Unless something is done about how family courts render custody to abusers, the economic toll to the tax payer will be devastating. It is time to stop ignoring the issues victims of abuse face every day and start becoming a part of the solution. Whether we realize it or not, by ignoring the problem directly impact our children, our families, our communities and our wallets.

My Letter To The Jeff Kuhner Show

WRKO 617-266-6868
Email Jeff at


My name is Laura Joseph and I was one of your callers that called in on Wednesday morning 2/26/14 regarding whether or not fathers are getting a fair stake in custody in the State of Massachusetts.

I wanted to forward some information onto you that is FACT based not story based as my father who listens to you every morning tells me you are a straight up fact based kind of guy.

“Whenever family courts in America give custody to abusers, or ignore credible evidence of domestic violence or child abuse in making custody decisions, it is a gross injustice. When it happens all across the country and occurs on regular basis, it is a national scandal.” (Nolan & Waller, No Way Out But One, 2012)

Here are some troubling statistics/facts Nationally:

  1. Batterers will gain custody of the children 70-85% of the time in Family Court at record rates and problem is increasing. (Ass. Of Judges) (New England School Of Law, 1990)[i]
  2. Judge Salcido, a former California Family Court Judge, spoke out on the tactics the state of California used to train judges to automatically disqualify any mother’s concerns or allegations of abuse.[ii]
  3. ACE Study backed by CDC[iii] (Kaiser Permanente, 1998-2006) - The ACE Study findings suggest that certain experiences are major risk factors for the leading causes of illness and death as well as poor quality of life in the United States.  Children exposed to domestic violence will suffer more illnesses and injuries throughout their lives and have shorter lives,
  4. The annual health care costs of intimate partner violence are between $333-750 billion.  The higher amount is likely because even in a medical setting patients routinely deny their partner’s abuse for safety and other reasons.[1] (Academy on Violence and Abuse, 2009)
  5. The United States spends over one trillion dollars on health care, crime and economic loss annually as a result of domestic violence.  This is in effect an abuser subsidy.  Best practices based on the Quincy Model would quickly save $500 billion annually of this expense.[2] (Goldstein)
  6. Every year 58,000 children are sent for custody or unprotected visitation with dangerous abusers.[3] (Silberg)
  7. A U. S. Department of Justice study found that the standard and required training for evaluators, judges and lawyers does not provide the necessary domestic violence expertise.  This is the worst possible combination because the professionals do not have the understanding they need of domestic violence, but think they do so fail to consult with genuine experts and make the same mistakes over and over.  This explains why so many true allegations of domestic violence and child abuse are denied.[4] (Saunders, 2011)
In Massachusetts, data has repeatedly shown that Fathers who actively seek custody obtain either primary or joint physical custody over 70% of the time” (New England School Of Law, 1990).[iv]  This statistic is the same across the country as documented through various studies by the Department of Justice and the Association of Judges and over the years has shown a drastic increase of custody to fathers to a rate as high as 85%. 

Since the Gender Bias Study has been published in 1990, not much has changed in Massachusetts. Starting with the Gender Bias Study in 1990 to the Fox News Report “Lost In The System” interview with former Family Court Judge Salcido in 2013, billions of dollars are being spent on domestic violence programs in a broken system. The system now compared to 1990 is not much safer if at all for victims especially when confronted with family court judges who routinely discriminate and punish victims and protective parents for trying to protect their children from abuse as you will see.

In 1990, the Gender Bias Study cited other serious concerns in regards to child custody determination in Massachusetts Family Courts. “The presumption in favor of shared legal custody that is currently held by many family service officers can result in the awarding of shared legal custody in inappropriate circumstances. We also found that abuse targeted at the mother is not always seen as relevant to custody and visitation decisions. Our research indicates that witnessing, as well as personally experiencing, abuse within the family causes serious harm to children.” (New England School Of Law, 1990)

The Gender Bias Study also showed serious concerns involving domestic abuse citing that domestic abuse cases in the civil and criminal arena may not receive the emphasis they merit and that this underlies the poor coordination between the courts and law enforcement agencies.” (New England School Of Law, 1990)

Victims of abuse many times have difficulty leaving their abusers due to financial controls, abuse, lack of resources. Most are unable to afford housing or an attorney due to lack of resources and retaliations by Family Court Judges, and many times the abuser sabotages the victim’s ability to maintain employment. According to the Gender Bias Study, the committee discovered that women in general experience a serious lack of access to adequate legal representation: many women cannot obtain  [*747]  the assistance they need, particularly in the crucial first days and months after separation. Women without legal representation (pro se) find the system difficult to navigate, and free legal services are often not available to them. Private counsel may be unwilling to represent women because of the difficulty obtaining adequate awards of counsel fees during, and sometimes after, a trial. The second issue is repeated concern expressed by family law attorneys regarding the accuracy of financial data presented to the courts and the failure of the courts to take seriously the rules surrounding discovery in family law cases.” (New England School Of Law, 1990)

How bad is it? In 1993, then-Senator Joe Biden conducted a three-year investigation into the causes and effects of violence against women with a startling report that led to the 1994 passage of the original Violence Against Women Act. In that report, Biden wrote, “…violence against women reflects as much a failure of our nation’s collective moral imagination as it does the failure of our nation’s laws and regulations…it deserves our profound public outrage.”

What has changed since 1990? Unfortunately, not very much where family courts, custody and abuse are involved in Massachusetts.

MASSACHUSETTS SNAPSHOT ABOUT ABUSE:[v] (Massachusetts Failing To Protect Victims Of Abuse, 2011)

  •  In 2010, nearly 1 in 2 women and 1 in 4 men in MA have ever experienced sexual violence victimization other than rape. 
  • Nearly 1 in 3 women and 1 in 5 men in MA have experienced rape, physical violence and/or stalking by an intimate partner in their lives.
  • Eleven percent (11%) of high school students and six percent (6%) of middle school students reported being physically hurt by a date sometime in their life.
  • 56% report being late for work due to tactics by batterers.
  • Just in the last ten years alone, child abuse has doubled in the State of Massachusetts since Governor Deval Patrick took office, while funding to services and protections to victims of abuse have been slashed.
  • 2004 Study by Harvard University states, Family Courts in Massachusetts are failing victims of abuse and their children.[vi]

There have been many well-known individuals and experts who have been outspoken about the problems surrounding family courts in Massachusetts and abuse. To name a few who have been outspoken in Massachusetts include, Wendy Murphy, Barry Nolan, Garland Waller, Kristen Lombardi, Lundy Bandcroft to name a few.

Wendy Murphy is an adjunct professor at New England School of Law and ex-prosecutor who has represented many victims of abuse pro se and authored many articles criticizing the State of Massachusetts for their failures to protect victims of abuse. In one of her articles in the Patriot Ledger in 2011, she cites that "...During Patrick’s administration, the rate of domestic violence murders skyrocketed”. She also blasts many of the local domestic violence organizations for their failures citing “victim advocates in this state don’t fight for justice and tough punishments. They ask the public to “speak out” about domestic violence and to call a battered women’s program when abuse happens....And because advocates have been co-opted with ideology-driven promises of trivial sums for their piddly “training and education” budgets, in exchange for silence about the failure of political leaders to give a damn, we can be assured of more dead bodies in the future." (Murphy, 2011)

Kristen Lombardi is another writer who was courageous enough to expose the corruption and bias in Family Courts against victims of abuse. In her 2003 article in The Boston Phoenix, “Custodians of Abuse” (Lombardi, 2003), she cited three studies regarding child custody and abuse in family courts; all with the same conclusion. “The nation’s family courts are failing to protect children from abuse.” Kristen Lombardi also documented what is repeatedly being reported nationally, that not only are victims of abuse losing custody to abuser at alarming rates, but Family Courts across the country are prohibiting the protective parent from having any contact with their children. No phone calls. No visits. Nothing. Family-court judges simply don’t believe the protective parents.

Lombardi also cited a study from Amy Neustein stating that “The system retaliates against mothers with such ferocity that they lose their rights….Family-court judges, for example, hold women in contempt, throw them in jail, scale back their visitation privileges, and even forbid them to seek psychological care for their children. In some instances, judges have gone to the extreme of ordering women not to have any contact — no letters, no phone calls — with their children.” (Lombardi, 2003) Her article is detailed, thorough and well researched citing many credible sources on the epidemic problem in family courts and abuse.

Lombardi further cited the November 2002 sharp critique of the Massachusetts family court system as part of a three-year research effort known as the Battered Women’s Testimony Project (BWTP) by the Wellesley Centers for Women at Wellesley College. The report contends that officials who work in the Massachusetts family courts “regularly commit what the report described as “human-rights violations” against battered mothers.” (The Wellesley Centers For Women, 2002)

A 2004 Harvard Study also cited Family Courts failures to protect victims of abuse and corroborated with same or similar statistical information as previous studies. In their study, “several themes emerged that corresponded to a consistent pattern of potential human rights violations by the Massachusetts family courts”. (Silverman, 2004)  According to Silverman and his team, these included:

1.      Granting physical custody of children to men who had used violence against the mothers or both the mothers and their children

2.      Granting unsupervised visitation of children to men who had used such violence

3.      Failing to accept or consider documentation of domestic violence as relevant evidence in child custody determinations

4.      failure to investigate allegations or consider documentation of child abuse

The Harvard study goes on to cite that “many family courts view such concerns as either irrelevant or a tactic to be ignored in cases of divorce, said Silverman. This failure directly leads to courts placing children in harm's way.” (Silverman, 2004). As result of these failures, the state of Massachusetts and the family courts have also failed to sufficiently consider the following:

1.      "right to due diligence" as described in the UN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women;

2.      The "best interests of the child" as described in the Convention on the Rights of the Child;

3.      The right to "bodily integrity," a fundamental human right enshrined in both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;

4.      And the "right to equal protection" under the law described in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

In June 2007, Judge James Menno of Plymouth/Brockton Family Court was the key note speaker for the Fatherhood Coalition for incarcerated fathers on how to gain visitation and custody of their children paid for by a Father’s Rights Coalition and The State of Massachusetts. (Holland, 2007)[vii] There are NO such programs for incarcerated mothers in the state of Massachusetts. Who is getting a fair share in custody courts?  In this 2007 press release, incarcerated fathers noted gained FULL legal and physical custody within 2wks after release for manufacturing and drug distribution of meth. No reports on where the mother is or why mother not involved.

Why is this relevant? Judge Menno has recused himself three times in his career – ALL domestic violence related cases (mine being one of those cases). There are 20 known cases so far with Judge Menno granting custody to documented abusers … some documented child sex abusers.

What is Judge Menno’s track record in custody proceedings?  Let’s just say some research and watch dogs groups need to take a closer look, because, Judge Menno has rendered some very troubling custody decisions in abuse cases. Judge Menno is just one example of a systemic problem in the state of Massachusetts.

In September 2012, Boston’s Barry Nolan wrote an article in Boston Magazine summarizing the under reported problematic issues surrounding domestic violence as well as  the lobbying and political efforts by groups being funded by abusers whose agenda is to undermine the protections and laws put in place for victims of abuse in Massachusetts. This is a must read article and the threats of protections to victims need to be taken seriously. These protections that threaten victims affect all of our children too. (Nolan, Attack of the 50-Foot Feminist Agenda, 2012)[viii] 

Barry Nolan is also the co-producer with Garland Waller for the award winning documentary, No Way Out But One, which is about the first American woman to be granted asylum by the Netherlands on the grounds of domestic violence. (Nolan & Waller, No Way Out But One, 2012). This is a must see film that documents one family’s atrocities regarding custody, abuse, and the family courts. 

Finding this hard to believe? In 2013, Judge Salcido, a former California Family Court Judge, spoke out on the tactics the state of California used to train judges to automatically disqualify any mother’s concerns or allegations of abuse. The key is that California was directly targeting mothers to disqualify and punish them for raising any concerns of abuse valid or not. You can see her commentary on the Fox News series Lost In The System. (FOXLA, 2013)

Batterers have been gaining custody at a rate of 70-85% of the time in contested cases[ix] (American Judges' Foundation). The cost of society IGNORING abuse exceeds $333 BILLION annually just in healthcare alone not taking into the account of the cost to the prison system, welfare, Medicaid, housing etc. (CDC, 2013) The cost may be as high as $750 BILLION, because even in a medical setting, patients routinely deny their partner’s abuse for safety and other reasons. (Academy on Violence and Abuse, 2009) "The economic burden rivals the cost of other high profile public health problems, such as stroke and Type2 diabetes." (CDC, 2014) 
The United States spends over one trillion dollars on health care, crime and economic loss annually as a result of domestic violence.  This is in effect an abuser subsidy.  Best practices based on the Quincy Model would quickly save $500 billion annually of this expense.  (Goldstein)

Want to know why the cost of healthcare so high? The failure of family court to properly conduct early intervention, medical professionals improperly coding domestic violence, and protect the victim of abuse is one reason and based on our research the number reported by the CDC is grossly under-reported.  The medical community is beginning to recognize the seriousness of screening for interpersonal violence, but still fails to address the proper coding. (Skolink & Clouse, 2014)

Why do I say that? I attended a conference at Harvard University sponsored by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health in 2009 where the Department of Public Health said that it was costing the state of Massachusetts taxpayer $15 million a year to treat victims of domestic violence.  I asked where the Department of Public Health got that statistic and their reply was based on what's called a CPT billing code for domestic violence and mostly due to emergency room visits.

We looked at our data with the cases that we have to see if any of our cases were reflected in that data.  We had over 20+ cases the time just families involved in domestic violence related custody cases in family court. When you add the children involved, that number increases to 80 cases and not one of those cases were factored into the numbers being reported to the Department of Public Health despite medical reports documenting abuse.

The ongoing ACE study is the longest study that start in 1997 with over 17,000 participants (Kaiser Permanente, 1998-2006). The study focuses on childhood abuse, neglect, and exposure to other traumatic stressors which is termed adverse childhood experiences (ACE).  The short- and long-term outcomes of these childhood exposures revealed a multitude of health and social problems. Those who adversely affected are at higher risk for the following health problems:

·         Alcoholism and alcohol abuse
·         Cancer
·         Aids
·         Diabetes
·         Eating disorders
·         Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)
·         Depression
·         Fetal death
·         Health-related quality of life
·         Illicit drug use
·         Ischemic heart disease (IHD)
·         Liver disease
·         Risk for intimate partner violence
·         Multiple sexual partners
·         Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs)
·         Smoking
·         Suicide attempts
·         Unintended pregnancies
·         Early initiation of smoking
·         Early initiation of sexual activity
·         Adolescent pregnancy

Furthermore, as a result of systemic failures of early intervention, researchers found that high levels of symptoms of mental health issues such as anxiety, depression, and PTSD to be directly linked to domestic abuse after reviewing 67 relevant studies. (King's College London and University of Bristol, 2013) Those with diagnosed with anxiety disorders were more than 3.5 times more likely to have suffered domestic abuse. For those diagnosed with PTSD or post-traumatic stress disorder were even seven times more at risk.

In one long-term study, as many as 80 percent of young adults who had been abused met the diagnostic criteria for at least one psychiatric disorder at age 21. These young adults exhibited many problems, including depression, anxiety, eating disorders, and suicide attempts” (Silverman et al., 1996). (CDC, 2014)

Are fathers getting their fair share in family court? My answer is abusers in general have the upper hand in court. Good parents and children are losing to the racket of family courts. Victims of abuse are routinely being harmed with staggering statistics for long term damage and cost to the tax payer for the family courts failures. The statistical information, data and numbers can not be ignored.

We think we have a health care and economic problem now? Unless something is done about how family courts render custody to abusers, the economic toll to the tax payer will be devastating. It is time to stop ignoring the issues victims of abuse face every day and start becoming a part of the solution. Whether we realize it or not, by ignoring the problem directly impact our children, our families, our communities and our wallets.

My story is just one of many listed in all this statistical data enthralled in one of the worst legal battles in the history of Massachusetts involving many aspects that would make a great movie plot. I won’t belabor the facts behind my case due to the fact, when my story is told (backed with facts) it is usually overwhelming for the listener or reader. However, I can provide you evidence and proof of everything from corruption, cover-ups, theft, extortion, as well as depriving me and my children a loving relationship since 2007 for speaking out about the abuse perpetrated upon me, my family, and other families alike despite state DCF and appointed supervisor testimonies and evidence to corroborate my story. I have never been declared an unfit parent. I do not drink. I do not do drugs. I have never been convicted of a crime. I have never abused my children. My only crime in the eyes of family court, is trying to protect my children from an abusive father. My case started out as a domestic violence case, and I have had little to no contact with my children since September 2007 AFTER I went to court seeking protections from abuse. If you wish to learn more about my case or about the general problem in Massachusetts, I would be happy to provide you with names, numbers, and documentation to back up my story and claims. I would even consider being a guest on your show if permitted to discuss the systemic problem in general, not necessarily my case. (Bonetzky-Joseph, n.d.)

I look forward to hearing back from you in something we are both passionate about …. Protecting children from harm and injustice.


Academy on Violence and Abuse. (2009). The Hidden Costs of Healthcare: The Economic Impact of Violence and Abuse. Academy on Violence and Abuse, Eden Prairie, MN. Retrieved from .
American Judges' Foundation. (n.d.). Domestic Violence and the Court House: Understanding the Problem. Knowing the Victim . Williamsburg, VA. Retrieved from http://aja.ncsc.dni
Bonetzky-Joseph, L. (n.d.). Blogger Profile And Links To Case. Retrieved from Google:
CDC. (2013). Intimate Partner Violence: Consequences. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. Retrieved from  
CDC. (2014, January). Injury Prevention & Control; Child Maltreatment: Consequences. Retrieved from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control:
FOXLA. (2013). California - FOXLA Children Lost in the System Series; Judge Salcido. Retrieved from Massachusetts Mother Calling For Family Court Justice:
Goldstein, B. (n.d.). Not a Private Matter: Ending the $500 Billion Abuser Subsidy . Robert D. Reed.
Holland, C. D. (2007, June 27). More than 1,600 Offenders Have Become Better Fathers Thanks to Probation's Fatherhood Program. (O. o. Probation, Ed.) PRESS RELEASE: The Massachusetts Court System. Retrieved from
Kaiser Permanente. (1998-2006). Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Division of Violence Prevention. Retrieved from
King's College London and University of Bristol. (2013, May 29). Link between domestic violence and perinatal mental health disorders. PLOS Medicine. Retrieved from
Lombardi, K. (2003, January 9). Custodians Of Abuse. Boston Phoenix. Retrieved from
Massachusetts Failing To Protect Victims Of Abuse. (2011). Domestic Violence Facts: Massachusetts. Retrieved from  
Murphy, W. J. (2011, August 8). Wendy J. Murphy: Deval Patrick’s deadly silence on domestic violence. The Patriot Ledger, p. Commentary. Retrieved from
New England School Of Law. (1990). The Gender Bias Study. New England Law Review. Retrieved from The Gender Bias Study; 1990 New England School of Law; New England Law Review  
Nolan, B. (2012, September). Attack of the 50-Foot Feminist Agenda. Boston Magazine. Retrieved from
Nolan, B., & Waller, G. (Producers). (2012). No Way Out But One [Motion Picture]. Retrieved from
Saunders, D. G. (2011). Child Custody Evaluators’ Beliefs About Domestic Abuse Allegations. US Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from
Silverman, J. P. (2004). Researchers Say Massachusetts Family Courts Fail to Protect Battered Women and Their Children. Harvard Univeristy, Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH). American Journal of Public Health. Retrieved from
Skolink, A., & Clouse, A. M. (2014, February 1). Clinical Guidelines: Screening for intmate partner violence, abuse of vulnerable adults. Family Practice News, 44(2), 1, 19.
The Wellesley Centers For Women. (2002). Battered Women's Testimony Project (BWTP). Three Year Research Effort on Massachusetts Family Court System, Wellesley College, The Wellesley Centers For Women.


[1] T. Dolezal, D. McCollum & M. Callahan, Eden Prairie, MN, Academy on Violence and Abuse; 2009
[2] Barry Goldstein, Not a Private Matter: Ending the $500 Billion Abuser Subsidy (in press, Robert D. Reed, publishers)
[4] Daniel G. Saunders et al., Child Custody Evaluators’ Beliefs About Domestic Abuse Allegations: Their Relationship to Evaluator Demographics, Background, Domestic Violence Knowledge and Custody-Visitation Recommendations, Final Technical Report Submitted to the National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice, Oct. 31, 2011,

[i] The Gender Bias Study; 1990 New England School of Law; New England Law Review - Fathers who actively seek custody obtain either primary or joint physical custody over 70% of the time. Reports indicate, however, that in some cases perceptions of gender bias may discourage fathers from seeking custody and stereotypes about fathers may sometimes affect case outcomes. In general, our evidence suggests that the courts hold higher standards for mothers than fathers in custody determinations  
[ii]California - FOXLA Children Lost in the System Series; Judge Salcido
[iii] Kaiser Permanente; Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study; CDC; The initial phase of the ACE Study was conducted at Kaiser Permanente from 1995 to 1997. More than 17,000 participants completed a standardized physical examination. No further participants will be enrolled, but the CDC is tracking the medical status of the baseline participants.
[iv] The Gender Bias Study; 1990 New England School of Law; New England Law Review  
[vi] Researchers Say Massachusetts Family Courts Fail to Protect Battered Women and Their Children; Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH); May 27, 2004
[vii] For more information about Judge Menno and stats, please visit the blog: Massachusetts Failing Victims of Abuse; 13 Families Violated by ONE Massachusetts Family Court Judge and growing
PRESS RELEASE: More than 1,600 Offenders Have Become Better Fathers Thanks to Probation's Fatherhood Program; June 27, 2007; Office of the Commissioner of Probation; The Massachusetts Court System;
[viii] Nolan, Barry; Attack of the 50-Foot Feminist Agenda; Angry, radical men’s groups believe males are being victimized by out-of-control judges and politicians. They’re wrong and they’re dangerous and they need to be stopped; Boston Magazine; September 2012
[ix] American Judges' Foundation. Domestic Violence and the Court House: Understanding the Problem.Knowing the Victim . Williamsburg, VA: Author. (see, Forms of Emotional Battering Section, Threats to Harm or Take Away Children Subsection: )  Fathers are often awarded sole custody even when their sexual and physical abuse of the children is alleged and substantiated. According to the American Judges Association, 70% of the time the abuser convinces the court to give him custody.