The Spanish Inquisition relied on denunciations that were anonymous - the courts tortured and condemned heretics - depriving them of their worldly belongings. In many cases these heretics were executed as a means of saving their souls.
Several hundred years later we have the family court system that is alive and well in the state feeding off of the stress, pain and confusion of parents. While modern society has progressed beyond the physical torture to purify the soul our courts and officers of the courts have perfected psychological torture as a means to purify parents and keep them in line. It is warped thinking on the part of an industry that has grown by leaps and bounds over the past decade as Judges have outsourced their powers to the courts underlings - Guardians ad litem and Parental Coordinators - modern societies inquisitors.
While the names have changed the role has not. Modern inquisitors (Guardians ad litem, Parental Coordinators, Family Lawyers and the special interests) use the power that Judges have lent them and expanded upon that gift. Taking common sense and squeezing every drop of sense out so that people entering the court system are entering a system that is twisted and insane. Where all the rules of human decency are thrown out and where hearsay is fact when uttered by Guardians ad litem and Parental Coordinators. No where else but in today’s court is it acceptable for people to burn a child, abuse them, deprive a child of their childhood and time with one or both parents. All of this is done with the shield of "In the child's best interest" being used to protect warped reasoning and violating your Constitutional rights.
Think about this - in reviewing the actions of your Guardian ad litem or Parental Coordinator how open minded have the courts been in listening to you? Do you really believe the courts and the Inquisitors that work for them will change? In almost 40 years of having Guardians ad litem mixed up in the court system the only solid change that has come about has not been for the child or parents. Change has come for the benefit of the Guardian ad litem at the expense of your child(ren) and yourself. To believe that the courts are now capable of reform and have the ability to move from the card board box age into the digital age of management and oversight and you are just kidding yourself. Change is in the air not because of the realization our benevolent courts system have but because those forced into the use of the courts inquisitors have started to fight back. Any meaningful change to the system has to involve all parties - or the system will fail like it has for the past 4 decades.
Please contact us at NationalGALalert@gmail.com or find us on Facebook for more information.
Sunday, April 28, 2013
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
Guardians ad litem and Judges Routinely Violate Parental Rights
Are divorcing parents being discriminated against by Guardians ad litem and the courts? There have been and are cases in Maine where there has been unwarranted removal of a child from one parent to another. In doing so the Guardian ad litem and by default the courts are preventing a parent from exercising their parental rights. These rights are protected substantively under the Constitution of the Untied states.
When a Guardian ad litem makes this kind of recommendation to the courts and the courts enforces this recommendation (as we have seen time and again) - placing a child under primary control of one parent. It is being done so through the use of unchecked and unsubstantiated use of the state's power. This is discriminatory and prevents a parent from passing on his/ her beliefs to their child(ren).
For more information please contact us at NationalGALalert@gmail.com or find us on Facebook for up to date information and ideas.
When a Guardian ad litem makes this kind of recommendation to the courts and the courts enforces this recommendation (as we have seen time and again) - placing a child under primary control of one parent. It is being done so through the use of unchecked and unsubstantiated use of the state's power. This is discriminatory and prevents a parent from passing on his/ her beliefs to their child(ren).
For more information please contact us at NationalGALalert@gmail.com or find us on Facebook for up to date information and ideas.
Friday, April 19, 2013
Do the Stakeholders in Maine Board of Overseers have your Best Interest?
In 1978
the The
Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar was created by the Supreme
Court of Maine. It is a private organization entrusted with the
responsibility of oversight of Maine's lawyers. It is the only
private organization that offers oversight of any group and or
organization in the state.
The
Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar is also being endorsed by the
Judiciary, Family Lawyers and Guardians ad litem as a means of
offering oversight and management of Guardians ad litem. March 28,
2013 saw testimony from many people – almost exclusively those that
endorsed the idea of oversight of Guardians ad litem through the
Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar were lawyers. Or they had a law
background. Those that opposed the idea of using The Maine Board of
Overseers of the Bar were parents.
The
Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar has been used by consumers to
complain about a lawyer they felt acted with impropriety. Not one
made it by the initial “gate keeper” - the person who decides
whether or not your concern is worthy enough to be heard. It is a
highly legal process and is a dream for anyone in the legal
profession. This is being endorsed and lobbied by stakeholders (are
like stockholders and have a financial interest) – by those who
have every reason for supporting the idea of Guardian ad litem
management and complaints with the Maine Board of Overseers of the
Bar. The following are those that may have an interest in the Board
of Overseers and the regulation of Guardians ad litem through that
private agency – the question you should ask is if they have your
interest at hand:
This
list is by no means complete but it does call into question whether
your interests and concerns are really being heard. Or will the
special interest of those who stand to lose should an equitable
process of management and oversight finally come to Maine. You be the
Judge and tell us and tell your Representatives what you think is
right. Maine GAL alert encourages you to comment on this blog through
email at NationalGALalert@gmail.com
or find us on Facebook.
Friday, April 12, 2013
Violation of Maine's Constitution by Judiciary and Guardians ad litem
The following letter suggest that there are serious issues with regards to LD522 and whether if it is implemented would be a violation of Maine's Constitution. This is not the first time where we have seen what would be an infringement of ones Constitutional rights here in Maine. This though holds the potential of being on a much larger scale.
April 10, 2013
Maine Judicial Committee
100 State House Station
Augusta, Maine 04333
Dear Judicial Committee Member,
Please find within a friendly reminder regarding LD 522; upon accepting your State of Maine Government position, you took an oath and made a pledge to up hold both the Maine and United States Constitutions.
The Maine Constitution is very direct and clear that powers and responsibilities delegated to the Legislator, Governor, and Judicial Branch cannot be under any circumstances sub-delegated.
Whereas, LD 522 clearly does in fact sub delegated the responsibilities and power of oversight regarding Guardian Ad Litem’s to a private and non-government entity; being the Board of Overseers of the Maine Bar.
Therefore, as a member of this judicial committee, you have a responsibility and must reject LD522 and if it should be move forward to the State House and Senate floor; could be a possible act in clear violation of the Maine Constitution. If for some reason, should LD522 be forward to the House and Senate floor; it must contain a proper disclosure that it may be in violation of the Maine Constitution.
I personally find it very troubling that some committee members whom should have a commanding knowledge of the Maine Constitution; would even consider supporting LD 522. Moreover, what is even more troubling is that LD522, was recommended by the Judicial Branch, which should have clearly known that these government powers and responsibilities cannot be sub-delegated to the board of overseers of the Maine Bar!
Another major U.S. Constitutional issue is the sub-delegation of powers in granting immunity or quasi - immunity to attorneys, or guardian ad litems that only represent individuals or a small group of individuals of the general public is prohibited; compare to attorneys that represents the vast majority of the general public with Constitutional rights which is acceptable. Therefore, LD 522 granting guardian ad litem quasi – immunity is in clear conflict with the U.S. Constitution and the U.S. Supreme Court opinion’s which have made it very clear as whom can be granted immunity and quasi-immunity. Therefore those attorneys, or guardian ad litems which only represent a child, or small group of children in a particular family will not qualify for any type of immunity, or quasi - immunity.
In closing, this committee should not recommend or allow LD522 to continue on to the floor of the Maine House, or Senate; due to what appears to be major Constitutional violations and conflicts.
Respectfully submitted by,
R Baizley
If you have an interest in bringing about Guardian ad litem reform please contact us at NationalGALalert@gmail.com or find us on Facebook.
April 10, 2013
Maine Judicial Committee
100 State House Station
Augusta, Maine 04333
Dear Judicial Committee Member,
Please find within a friendly reminder regarding LD 522; upon accepting your State of Maine Government position, you took an oath and made a pledge to up hold both the Maine and United States Constitutions.
The Maine Constitution is very direct and clear that powers and responsibilities delegated to the Legislator, Governor, and Judicial Branch cannot be under any circumstances sub-delegated.
Whereas, LD 522 clearly does in fact sub delegated the responsibilities and power of oversight regarding Guardian Ad Litem’s to a private and non-government entity; being the Board of Overseers of the Maine Bar.
Therefore, as a member of this judicial committee, you have a responsibility and must reject LD522 and if it should be move forward to the State House and Senate floor; could be a possible act in clear violation of the Maine Constitution. If for some reason, should LD522 be forward to the House and Senate floor; it must contain a proper disclosure that it may be in violation of the Maine Constitution.
I personally find it very troubling that some committee members whom should have a commanding knowledge of the Maine Constitution; would even consider supporting LD 522. Moreover, what is even more troubling is that LD522, was recommended by the Judicial Branch, which should have clearly known that these government powers and responsibilities cannot be sub-delegated to the board of overseers of the Maine Bar!
Another major U.S. Constitutional issue is the sub-delegation of powers in granting immunity or quasi - immunity to attorneys, or guardian ad litems that only represent individuals or a small group of individuals of the general public is prohibited; compare to attorneys that represents the vast majority of the general public with Constitutional rights which is acceptable. Therefore, LD 522 granting guardian ad litem quasi – immunity is in clear conflict with the U.S. Constitution and the U.S. Supreme Court opinion’s which have made it very clear as whom can be granted immunity and quasi-immunity. Therefore those attorneys, or guardian ad litems which only represent a child, or small group of children in a particular family will not qualify for any type of immunity, or quasi - immunity.
In closing, this committee should not recommend or allow LD522 to continue on to the floor of the Maine House, or Senate; due to what appears to be major Constitutional violations and conflicts.
Respectfully submitted by,
R Baizley
If you have an interest in bringing about Guardian ad litem reform please contact us at NationalGALalert@gmail.com or find us on Facebook.
Monday, April 8, 2013
Canada Recognizes Problems with Family Courts - Does your State?
The United States is not the only area where
there are very real issues surrounding the family court system. In
Canada – where there has been ongoing problems within their family
court system – the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that an
overhaul of the system needs to take place. That the family courts
have operated in a dysfunctional way for decades much as they have
here in much of the US. In this country though there is often a resistance to any kind of
much needed reform from our courts and the divorce industry – this
is one of the reasons why in several states there is a push for reform of the
broken Guardian ad litem system.
Presented
below is some of the article from the Globe and Mail:
Report to Supreme Court chief justice calls for family law overhaul
An
unreleased report commissioned by the country’s top judge is urging
a radical overhaul of Canada’s family law system.
The
report to Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, scheduled for release
next month, calls for restructuring the family law system from the
ground up, with a focus on streamlining the court process and ending
a fixation on combat.
The
report, from a committee headed by Supreme Court Justice Thomas
Cromwell, goes on to make more than two dozen recommendations,
including the creation of specialized judges who can shepherd a
family law dispute from beginning to end.
The
family law system has been under attack for much of the past two or
three decades over litigation that drags out and the destructive
effect of the adversarial process on couples who are vulnerable and
prone to go on the attack. And the inordinate costs of litigation
have led to a massive increase in the number of litigants who
represent themselves – now as much as 70 or 80 per cent.
A copy
of the report, obtained by The Globe and Mail, says that estranged
spouses and their children are seriously damaged by the adversarial
system; and that judges, lawyers and law schools must embrace a
culture of mediation and settlement.
The
ground-breaking report also recommends the imposition of painful cost
awards against litigants who behave badly or impede settlements.
Full
story: Globe and Mail
Additional
material on family law as presented by the Globe and Mail: SupremeCourt Leadership
For
more information and support please contact us at NationalGALalert@gmail.com or find us on Facebook.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)