Ex-Wife Ordered Jailed for Alienating Children from Father
Monday, June 14, 2010 at 9:36AM The article is from NJCCR-Support@yahoogroups.com and "Randy Dickinson" randy_fafny (at) yahoo (dot) com. Comments were written by David L. Levy, J.D., custody consultant.
June 8, 2010
A Long Island, N.Y., judge has sentenced a woman to six weekends in jail for repeatedly undermining her ex-husband's relationship with their two daughters.
Supreme Court Justice Robert A. Ross in Nassau County ruled that the mother, Lauren R., willfully violated a court order by deliberately alienating the elementary school-age children from her ex-husband, Ted R.
Ross held Ms. R. in civil contempt and ordered her to report to the Nassau County Correctional Facility every other weekend this summer.
Her term was to have begun on Friday, but was temporarily stayed pending appeal by a judge from the Appellate Division, 2nd Department, on Thursday.
"The evidence before me demonstrates a pattern of willful and calculated violations of the clear and express dictates of the parties' Stipulation of Settlement," Ross wrote in Lauren R. v. Ted R., 203699-02.
"The extensive record is replete with instances of attempts to undermine the relationship between the children and their father and replace him with her new husband, manipulation of defendant's parenting access, utter and unfettered vilification of the defendant to the children, false reporting of sexual misconduct without any semblance of 'good faith,' and her imposition upon the children to fear her tirades and punishment if they embrace the relationship they want to have with their father."
The extraordinary hearing to determine whether Ms. R. should be held in contempt for violating the couple's stipulation of settlement began in May 2009 and stretched over 23 days of hearings over the next nine months.
During the hearing, Mr. R. testified to dozens of occasions in which his ex-wife either interfered with his visitation rights or purposefully alienated the children from him.
The judge described about a dozen such incidents or patterns in his eight-page decision.
In the winter of 2007, for example, Ms. R. prevented Mr. R. from seeing his daughters for six weeks, Ross wrote.
"I observed the plaintiff smirk in the courtroom as defendant emotionally related how he was deprived of spending Hanukkah with his children, and was relegated to lighting a menorah and watching his daughters open their grandparents' presents in the back of his truck at the base of plaintiff's driveway," the judge wrote.
Mr. R. also testified that Ms. R. consistently scheduled theater outings and social activities with her children so that they would conflict with his visitation, thereby putting him in the position of either consenting to a missed visit or risking disappointing his daughters.
The "crescendo" of Ms. R.'s contempt involved false accusations of sexual abuse against Mr. R., the judge wrote.
"Allegations that defendant had injured the child were found to be baseless and, by making such allegations, plaintiff needlessly subjected the child to an investigation by Child Protective Services, placing her own interests above those of the child," Ross wrote. "This report was not made in 'good faith' -- rather, the investigating agency warned the mother not to re-utilize the allegations and her children in her custodial litigation with the defendant."
In addition to the contempt finding and the temporarily stayed jail sentence, Ross ordered a hearing to consider a change of custody and to hear Mr. R.'s application for more than $134,000 in attorney fees. Those hearings were postponed pending Ms. R.'s appeal.
Ms. R.'s attorney, Kieth I. Rieger of Barrocas & Rieger in Garden City, N.Y., praised Ross, but criticized the decision, likening it to last week's missed umpire call that cost a Detroit Tigers pitcher a perfect game.
"I think all of us make mistakes, and I think he's just made a good-faith, honest mistake in his assessment of this case," Rieger said. "That's why there's an Appellate Division. I think he just did not accurately assess my client."
Stanley Hirsch, also of Garden City, represented Mr. R.
"I'm very hopeful that this case will be some type of warning to those who don't have the children's best interests at heart when they conduct themselves with their spouses," Hirsch said. "It has great significance to my client, but I think it has a terrific overall impact on people who are going through a divorce and not getting along and involving the children in their disputes."
Added note from custody consultant David L. Levy, J.D.
Either parent is capable of alienating the child from the other parent. The parent with custody of the child is generally in a stronger position to cause alienation, because that parent has the child the majority of the time, and thus more opportunity to alienate the child from the other parent. Researchers have pointed out that if one starts with the child's "best interests," one must determine whether the child is the victim of sexual or physical abuse, or possibly poor parenting skills, as a reason why the child does not want contact with a parent. Absent that, alienation may be a factor.
David L. Levy, J.D can provide further information on this topic to parents and fellow attorneys.
Reader Comments (8)
Good for her. Some parents really need to be sent in a corner or put on time out for the things they show their children.
It's no wonder society today is on a downward spiral toward self destruction.
This illustrates one of the major hazards/hurdles to be overcome in a contested child custody situation. It shows how important it is to be aware of these tactics, and to know how to handle the situation when they are used. Unfortunately, the outcome in such cases is seldom what is described above - usually, the vindictive spouse succeeds, at least partially. Get your hands on a reliable Custody Strategies Guide to learn how to combat these tactics.
This is just SAD. Can you imagine the long term ill effects on those girls? It takes two to tango, and in the case of divorce it is so important for both parties to grow and think about the kids. It's not impossible to put personal problems aside and focus on a common good, it just takes maturity. I side with the judge.
This is really sad to know, but most importantly, how can you be there emotionally for your kids, to help them accept and adjust to their new life. When you're at the end of your rope, realize that you are tougher than you think, and ultimately, you and your children will survive.
Indiana DUI lawyer
It's hard to believe that one person can hold resentment towards another for such a long period of time. Sad, really. I feel especially bad for the kids!
It is so important in divorce cases to have a parenting time schedule and that it be followed. However, if he is actually guilty of sexual abuse, he should never be allowed to be around his or any other children.
you know what, it makes me sad to read these kinds of incidents. Parents should always put their children's needs first before their own, especially with that of a mother. I hope she learned her lesson from this incident.
Sad to hear about the situation. Children should be in consideration first before anybody. Lessons learned from this experience.