A snake asked a man walking up a steep mountain to carry him to the top.
The man said he couldn’t because the snake would bite him.
The snake promised to be good.
The man carried the snake to the top upon their arrival the snake immediately bit the man.
The man said you promised to be good.
The snake said you knew my nature all along and for some reason you expected me to not act in my nature, just because I promised. All things will act in their true nature unless it benefits them to hide their true nature. I lived up to my true nature when you were no longer of use to me…
At that the man, who was a survivor and tired of all the poison in this world, flung the snake off the mountain where he was crushed to death by the fall. The man then sought out help for the poisoned bite.
After a time the man made it to a first aid station where he recieved help from people who cared for other mountain climbers. Since they were brave enough to live in the mountains in order to help others the man would live and after some time would recover.
After his recovery he decided to always carry a snake bite kit with him in order to help anyone he may meet harmed by a snake.
I took an old proverb and added a happy ending. It is what I hope we alienated family members can start doing as we move through life. How many times have you overheard someone speaking ill of a non-custodial spouse? How many times have you remained silent, even if you knew the other party wasn’t the “BAD PERSON” s/he was being made to seem like? Vow to carry a snake bite kit with you, and to have the courage to toss the snakes off their mountains. Leah Talley
Turner argues that indigent defendants facing incarceration through civil contempt hearings should have the right to appointed counsel under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Turner claims that the Court’s Sixth Amendment cases involving the right to counsel focus on the defendant’s need for the guidance that counsel provides, and the seriousness of the stakes involved. Turner asserts that in In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967), the Court determined that a juvenile is entitled to the right to counsel in civil juvenile delinquency hearings, which may result in institutionalization. The Court reasoned the juvenile had a right to counsel because the hearings could result in incarceration comparable to felony prosecution, and because the juvenile requires counsel to navigate the law and present an adequate defense. Similarly, Turner asserts that the Court determined in Vitek v. Jones that a prisoner has a right to counsel in civil commitment proceedings, because commitment results in a substantial restriction of liberty, and the defendant would likely require counsel to adequately exercise and protect his rights. Turner argues that these cases establish the proposition that a defendant in a civil proceeding facing incarceration has the right to counsel.
Rogers claims that Turner’s proposition is incorrect, because the Due Process clause does not create a presumptive right to counsel in civil cases where the defendant may be incarcerated. Rogers explains that the Court in Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778 (1973), held that minors do not have the right to counsel when facing commitment to a mental hospital. The Court found a “presumption that there is no right to appointed counsel in the absence of at least a potential deprivation of physical liberty.” Rogers asserts that Lassiter does not create a presumption of a right of counsel; potential incarceration is not in itself sufficient to create an exception to the general rule that there is no right to counsel in civil cases.
Rogers argues that due process does not require counsel for a defendant in a child-support civil-contempt hearing. In order to provide a complete defense, the defendant need only show that he cannot pay by bringing in tax forms, or employment or doctors’ letters. Rogers claims that defendants do not need counsel because there are relaxed procedural and evidentiary rules, no juries, and technical issues involving the statute of limitations or res judicata rarely arise. Rogers declares that if the defendant in a child support proceeding did have a right to counsel then the proceedings would become unbalanced; the child-support-seeking plaintiff would not have a corresponding right to counsel and likely could not afford to hire a private attorney.
The United States agrees with Rogers that Due Process does not require appointed counsel for defendants in child support civil contempt hearings where the defendant could be imprisoned. Nevertheless, the United States argues for reversal because the judge in this case did not provide the defendant with a way to prove that he could not pay the support, thereby violating due process. Inability to pay is a complete defense to a civil contempt charge for non-payment of child support. The United States contends that due process may be satisfied if the family court implements procedures, such as requiring financial forms, affidavits, or preliminary assessments of the defendant’s ability to pay.
‘‘(b) TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.— ‘‘(1) STRATEGIC PLANNING.—Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Attorney General shall begin to provide technical assistance to States and local governments requesting support to develop and implement the strategic plan required under subsection (a)(6). The Attorney General may enter into agreements with 1 or more non-governmental organizations to provide technical assistance and training under this paragraph. ‘‘(2) PROTECTION OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.—Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Attorney General shall begin to provide technical assistance to States and local governments, including any agent thereof with responsibility for administration of justice, requesting support to meet the obligations established by the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall include— ‘‘(A) public dissemination of practices, structures, or models for the administration of justice consistent with the requirements of the Sixth Amendment; and ‘‘(B) assistance with adopting and implementing a system for the administration of justice consistent with the requirements of the Sixth Amendment. ‘‘(3) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—For each of fiscal years 2017 through 2021, of the amounts appropriated to carry out this subpart, not less than $5,000,000 and not more than $10,000,000 shall be used to carry out this subsection.’’. (c) APPLICABILITY.—The requirement to submit a strategic plan under section 501(a)(6) of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as added by subsection (b), shall apply to any application submitted under such section 501 for a grant for any fiscal year beginning after the date that is 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act.
Originally posted on Children’s Rights: We the people of the Great State of Florida do hereby request that our current #GovernorScott issue the following executive orders. It is within his power to do so. 1. An immediate executive order inacting the alimony language as part of the now VETOED #SB668 since #GovernorScott has expressed…
RaeLynn, a lovely country singer best known for her time on television’s “The Voice,” put her experience as a child of divorced parents to music allowing us all insight to the emotional turmoil a child of divorce faces, sometimes well into adulthood..
“RaeLynn tells “People Magazine‘s” Danielle Anderson, “The whole point of family is to be a unit and to do a lot of things together and it’s just not that when your parents are divorced. I think there’s been a lot of divorce songs out there, but they’ve always been about the parents. They’ve never been from the kid’s perspective.”
She further reflects that seeing her parents on a court ordered schedule hurt her Dad as well, “My dad would pick me up every other Friday at 6, and drop me off by 6 on Sunday. Around 4 every Sunday, I remember him getting a little sad, because he wouldn’t get to see his baby for two weeks. I can’t imagine, when I become a mother, not being able to see my child for two weeks. That’s really hard, but that’s the truth, and that’s the normal for a lot of kids in divorced homes. They have to split their time and split their love. It really is not that fair, but it’s a lot of our normal and our truth.”
For more of her interview PLUS a live performance video of the song “Love Triangle” Click here.
As you might be realizing by now, this divorce is taking a toll. I have to come up with ways of finding humor where none really should exist:
One day I gave my kids permission to sing “Chuck” in the name game song (previously forbidden). Sing along now, “Chuck, duck, bo buck fee fie fo F*&#….”
I named my vacuum cleaner after the Step-Mom, yeah, it’s a Dyson so Jill never loses suction.
I remember the great times I had with my whole family, yes, even the former husband.
I think about the day my kids discover that they were used like pawns, fodder, just to hurt me.
I try to imagine the day that the Former Spouse meets St. Peter, in my imagination his making up rationalizations for his treatment of me is riotously funny.
I pretend I am in disguise and watching my son in a play.
I sing songs loudly which I dedicate to Chuck, Jill, her sister Robin, and my once monster-in-law: some great ones are
“Mean” by Taylor Swift and
“Pigs, Three Different Ones” by Pink Floyd.
I imagine Jill actually catches him being unfaithful.
but my favorite one is the one where these guys just get over hurting me and decide to work together as an extended family.
UPDATE AUGUST 29, 2016
I’m writing a documentary about Television and movies and their role in Parental Alienation. The focus will be how society is almost encouraging the breakdown of family, and its long tern effect upon adult children.
The popular press has reported many stories about adults who suddenly remember having been abused as children. Some media reports have emphasized the unusual circumstances or content of such recovered memories while other reports have declared that the “recovery” of memories of abuse is false for a variety of reasons. Little in the press, however, has dealt with the science relating to memories of childhood trauma.
is working on life affecting issues arising from trauma exposure of many origins. According to their research memories can not only be false, but they can be planted by others!
Q: Are Recovered Memories Always Accurate?
Scientists believe that recovered memories – including recovered memories of childhood trauma – are not always accurate. When people remember childhood trauma and later say their memory was wrong, there is no way to know which memory was accurate – the one that claims the trauma happened or the one that claims it did not.
Q: How Might False Memories Develop?
A great deal of laboratory research involving normal people in everyday situations demonstrates that memory is not perfect. Evidence shows that memory can be influenced by other people and situations; that people can make up stories to fill in memory gaps, and that people can be persuaded to believe they heard, saw or experienced events that did not really happen. Studies also reveal that people who have inaccurate memories can strongly believe they are true.
Q: Is it Possible to Forget Childhood Trauma?
People forget names, dates, faces and even entire events all the time. But is it possible to forget terrible experiences such as being raped? Or beaten? The answer is yes – under certain circumstances. For more than a hundred years, doctors, scientists and other observers have reported the connection between trauma and forgetting. But only in the past 10 years have scientific studies demonstrated a connection between childhood trauma and amnesia.
Most scientists agree that memories from infancy and early childhood – under the age of two or three – are unlikely to be remembered. Research shows that many adults who remember being sexually abused as children experienced a period when they did not remember the abuse. Scientists also have studied child victims at the time of a documented traumatic event, such as sexual abuse, and then measured how often the victims forget these events as they become adults. They discovered that some people do forget the traumatic experiences they had in childhood, even though it was established fact that the traumatic events occurred.
Q: What Makes People Remember a Traumatic Event after Such a Long Delay?
At the time of a traumatic event, the mind makes many associations with the feelings, sights, sounds, smells, taste and touch connected with the trauma. Later, similar sensations may trigger a memory of the event. While some people first remember past traumatic events during therapy, most people begin having traumatic memories out side therapy.
A variety of experiences can trigger the recall. Reading stories about other people’s trauma, watching television programs that depict traumatic events similar to the viewer’s past ex perience, experiencing a disturbing event in the present, or sitting down with family and reminiscing about a terrible shared episode – for some people, these kinds of experiences can open the floodgates of frightful and horrible memories.