“To Whom It Might Concern:
I am writing you the PBS president and CEO out of very great concern regarding a program (documentary) I understand you will be airing nationally on PBS Thursday October 20 called “Breaking the Silence – Children’s stories” which discusses domestic violence, custody litigation and “Parental Alienation Syndrome” (PAS) I also understand your network will be articulating, on the air, the following statements or concepts regarding PAS and custody statistics:
“……a controversial theory called “Parental Alienation Syndrome” (PAS) has been used as a courtroom tactic to silence abused children and their mothers. This so-called syndrome is not based on systematic research, is not recognized by mental health professionals, is not viewed as a psychiatric diagnosis, and has been rejected by valid scientists and ethical practitioners. Nevertheless, PAS continues to be routinely used in courts across the country, resulting in the removal of children from loving, safe, and fit mothers to fathers who batter the mother, abuse the child, and/or have a substance abuse or criminal history.”
AND
“While there may be a perception in society that the family court system has a maternal preference, statistics show that, in the past twenty years, fathers are more often being awarded custody. Furthermore, in family court cases where mothers allege battery, fathers are given custody two-thirds of the time.”
It is obvious to me, and numerous other individuals [especially non-custodial parents, most notably divorced/separated fathers], that these specious statements have been fed to you by someone involved in a feminist organization – individual(s) with their own agenda of misandry. Your underlings seem to have adopted these uninformed and incorrect opinions, and very false statistics, without much if any objectivity or close examination.
These statements you are purporting to pass along as “truth” are entirely off the mark. And, the fact that PBS will be associated with propagating these brutal misconceptions will undoubtedly ultimately have very negative ramifications for PBS. – and loss of credibility I really would have expected PBS to be more discerning about these “factoids” and to have done more research involving custody data or such a “controversial” topic as PAS before promulgating a feminist version of them.
As far as custody statistics and domestic violence are concerned, data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the Department of Justice show that of ALL custody cases (contested and non contested) father custody has in fact remained at around 10% for many years and if the number of cases defaulted the father due to maternal unfitness (incarceration, desertion, drug addiction, etc) are excluded from that total, the real number of custody cases awarded the father in litigated cases of custody approaches 5% or less. Government statistics show unequivocally that in the VAST majority of custody cases – over 85% – mothers are awarded child custody and fathers ordered to pay child support.
Although the awards of joint “legal” custody have increased the past 20 years, the mother still retains primary physical custody in these cases so that the custody here is again essentially mother custody. False allegations of family abuse are committed most often by mothers as a strategy to gain temporary custody and courts are loathe to change this situation once the final custody hearing occurs. Over 95% of allegations made by mothers – most which trigger immediate restraining orders against innocent dads – are later proved to be false and contrived – yet the courts do nothing to sanction the mother or change the custody award. The public perception of a court bias toward mothers is real and documented. Only feminist organizations like N.O.W. dispute these statistics and despite contrary statistics. A favorite N.O.W. feminist ploy is to dramatize one or two cases publicly and extrapolate all cases from these few. I am very surprised PBS is buying into these malicious myths.
As a leading member of several family rights organizations in North Carolina, I have been witness to literally HUNDREDS of cases where fathers have been driven off from seeing their children by false allegations of abuse made by custodial parents [primarily fathers] alienating children so badly that they don’t want to “visit” their fathers anymore. Children are especially vulnerable to suggestion and indoctrination, and it is all too easy for hostile mothers of divorce to take out their enmity and angst for their ex-spouses by turning the children against their fathers in many different ways. In fact, I have seen this done ROUTINELY in most all high conflict custody cases involving children, and realistically, mothers have been the main perpetrators in most cases.
PAS most definitely is real and it is a syndrome or set of behaviors that categorically defines it – just as surely as post traumatic stress syndrome is a “syndrome.” I am not so certain PAS has been rejected by the medical community as the feminists assert. Is it perhaps one or two papers published by a few invested individuals that the majority assume – and lack of widespread scientific studies?
If you would just stop for a moment and look at the actual US Department of Justice and other government statistics documenting who gets custody and who commits acts of violence you will see that mothers get custody in well over 90% of disputed cases in court, and that domestic violence is perpetrated approximately equally by males and females (in fact, acts of physical violence, including murder, against children are perpetrated significantly more by single mothers). These statistics can be forwarded you or you can look them up.
Your press release reads inexcusably anti-male and anti-father. Your statements imply that abuse is a fairly common act committed by fathers and as speciously that arguing PAS is used fairly commonly by divorced fathers in court as a tactic fighting for their children – that somehow men use this to obtain custody and succeed. This is WRONG. Yet, the vast majority of allegations of abuse against fathers in court are shown to be malicious and contrived and most if not almost all mothers are given custody of the children.
Please do not be hoodwinked by the specious arguments you have been fed, as this will only help destroy the credibility of PBS and help spread lies. This cannot be good in any way for a social situation involving families, fathers and children, that is already in great peril. The statement you are making is almost verbatim what I have read many times expressed by the rabid feminist organization the National Organization for Women (N.O.W.) which has largely been discredited, especially for misandry and gender bigotry, even by its original founder. If you persist in your plans, you will be nothing less than a hapless pulpit for N.O.W.
The late Dr. Richard Gardiner has written extensively on PAS and documented it in detail. I invite you to read his material. PAS does not just include false allegations of abuse made by the mother to the children; there are a whole host of over a dozen equally alienating behaviors. Gardiner tried, unsuccessfully, for many years to have this syndrome established formally medically, but was constantly met by extremely strong resistance from feminist extremists who had much to lose and campaigned vehemently against him, especially to the AMA and APA. This whole arena obviously has a lot of political implications – which you know are controlled by money interests and the feminists traditionally have handsomely funded – and enjoyed great influence – with most government agencies and medical establishments.
I trust my colleagues will be forthcoming in providing you material and documentation that will effectively further rebut the arguments or definition of PAS you plan to air on your program.
I trust you will take what I have said seriously, and look into this matter deeply and responsibly before any unfortunate mistakes. Airing this program – propagating its anti-male, anti-father bias and outright lies (let’s not mince words) – would be a tremendous mistake. Someone went to great pains to use PBS as their unassuming political puppet and responsibility for this lies totally within PBS.
If you intend to broadcast this fraudulent and unsubstantiated information, you will not only be sued for presenting false claims through a media broadcast, as well as fraud, and other tortuous claims, but complaints will be filed with the FCC for violating their non-discrimination directives and regulations.
Either get your facts correct and from reliable sources, or don’t broadcast them to the world at all.
You are hereby noticed to cease and desist from broadcasting said program below, as it is not too late to pull the plug on this ill-conceived program.
Please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely yours,
me”