Saturday, June 12, 2010

A.B. Question Answered

In the case of A.b. the State Supreme court ordered an expedited return. There is a strong possibility that there will be an appeal. But, the same members on the court will hear this.

The new Justice from Spokane was the one who took the child in the first place. Because of that she was not allowed to sit on this case.

There is more I could say but there are a lot of doors to knock!

There is a lot going on...


Anonymous said...

I find the dissenting opinion by Chambers disturbing on many different levels. His opinion reflects the core of what is inherently wrong with public policy, which is what he is going by. It is this policy that we are fighting against - the belief that nobody in the court except the child has any civil rights and that the court listens to all other stakeholders except the parent and parent advocates. Again, this public policy originated with "Beyond the Best Interest of the Child" by Solnit, Goldstein and Freud. Everyone needs to read this book if in family rights to understand the twisted logic it contains and what we see in the court rooms. It is mandatory reading by family court judges.
Chambers sited rumors and what I suspect is straight lies and propaganda. It is unlikely that the child is "traumatized" by her visits or Salas wouldn't be pursuing this. If, after 100 visits, the child is resistant and hates her father, then why would he continue? He obviously feels they are bonding. What Chambers is siting is the department's version of the events based on a prosecution bent - and as we who are in this system knows - it is usually perjury with malice and forethought.
What the assenters have provided us is an opportunity to change the federal public policy and revamp the lower court's behavior. This is not to be taken lightly, and all family rights activists across the nation need to be writing amicus briefs to turn in should there be an appeal.
Chambers opinion reflects the majority of lemmings and parrots in public policy. If he can't exhibit more critical thinking skills than that, then he shouldn't be in that position.
Jan Smith

Lovingfitfather said...

Well said Jan.