Defining the Divorce-Related
FETID FATHERING SYNDROME
By liz, B.S., J.D., LL.M., D.B.A., P.T.A., Ph.T., N.N.F.L.P.,
and MoM.E. (1997)
With the increasing commonality of divorce
involving children, a pattern of abnormal behavior has emerged that has
received little attention. The present paper defines the Divorce Related
Fetid Fathering Syndrome. Specific nosologic criteria are provided with
abundant clinical examples. Given there is no lack of empirical data available
on the disorder, issues of classification, etiology, treatment, and prevention
appear overripe for investigation. I.e., it's about damn time.
INTRODUCTION
A divorced woman gains custody of her children
and her ex-husband vents his love and concern by shooting
all of them.
A man in a custody battle has sex
with his offspring because his divorcing wife finds him repugnant.
A father forces his children to sleep in
a car while he downs a few in a bar on their way home.
The actions illustrate a pattern of increasingly
common behavior that has emerged as the divorce rate involving children
has grown. Today, half of all marriages will end in divorce (Beal and Hochman,
1991). The number of children involved in divorce has grown dramatically
(e.g., Hetherington and Arastah, 1988) as well. While the majority of such
cases are "settled" from a legal perspective, outside the courtroom
he continues to abuse and control, frequently rationalizing his behavior
as merely divorce-related "battle."
The media have spent
considerable effort raising public awareness about the problem posed for
divorced mothers who do not receive court-ordered child support payments.
Hodges (1991) has noted that less than 20 percent of divorced mothers receive
all child support payments three years after their divorce. Research on
the decline of women's economic status following
divorce (e.g., Hernandez, 1988; Laosa, 1988) has contributed legislation
of not much use in addressing the "Deadbeat Dad" problem, but
has encouraged a backlashing trend of misogynistic propaganda and specious
"research," in the ostensible interests of "presenting two
sides of an issue" which never had a whole lot to offer on the wrong
side in the first place.
While the media correctly portray the difficulties
imposed upon women and children by the "Deadbeat Dad" phenomenon,
the cameras have yet to honestly capture the warfare waged by a
select group of fathers against child supporting, nurturing mothers.
Everyday, attorneys and therapists downplay the many horror stories in
which vicious behaviors are lodged against innocent mothers and children.
Unfortunately, while there is considerable empirical data on the subject,
researcher's agenda'd writeups and the scholarly literature have pretty
much ignored the problems.
By contrast, the drivel prattering on and
on and on in an effort to bolster Fetid Fatherings is reaching absurd proportion.
A noted example can be found in the writings of Gardner
(1987, 1989) who has concocted a marvel of propaganda called the Parental
Alienation Syndrome. Supposedly, a custodial parent successfully engages
in a variety of maneuvers to alienate the child from the non-residential
parent. Once successfully manipulated, the child becomes "...preoccupied
with deprecation and criticism of a parent-denigration that is unjustified
and/or exaggerated" (Gardner, 1989 p. 226). In the typical case of
Parental Alienation Syndrome, both mother and child supposedly engage in
an array of actions against the father. Gardner views "brainwashing"
as a concept "too narrow" (Gardner, 1989) to capture the psychological
manipulation involved in turning a child against his/her non-residential
parent. Of course, the entire theory is pure shit, but then again, so was
Freud's theory of penis-envy, and a whole lotta other things people like
to think are true.
While Gardner's fetid anti-woman descriptions
of "Parental Alienation Syndrome"
provide a major contribution to obfuscating the realities of men's child-involved
hostilities, the present paper is concerned with a more global abomination.
As noted in the examples provided in the beginning of this manuscript,
lethal attacks on divorcing mothers take place which are beyond merely
manipulating the children. Further, these actions include a willingness
by some fathers to violate societal law. Finally, there are fathers who
persistently engage in fetid behaviors designed to continue to allow
them to exert control over the mothers of their offspring, despite being
unable to show any good reason why they should have the right to do so.
From yammerings on about the alleged harms of "fatherless" households,
to the demanding of a "shared parental responsibility" post-divorce
that they never undertook during marriage when she
begged them to do so, these men epitomize the reason that for eons, societies
have ended up engaging in wars, and atrocities of justice have never been
quelched, and the reason that irrational male-mob-mentality, however ostensibly
sophisticated, and however ostensibly educated, continues to be the rule
of the day.
The purpose of the present paper is to
define and illustrate just one aspect of this global abomination with the
hope of generating increased honesty
in the scientific and clinical investigation of the real problem.
DEFINITION
The present section provides a beginning
definition of the Divorce-Related Fetid Fathering Syndrome, which has been
derived from clinical and legal cases. As in all initial proposals, it
is anticipated that future research will lead to greater refinement in
the taxonomic criteria.
The proposed definition encompasses four
major criteria, as follows:
1. A man who unjustifiably punishes his
divorcing or divorced wife by: a. Attempting to remove the children from
their closest attachment b. Involving others in fetid actions against
the mother c. Engaging in excessive litigation
2. The father specifically attempts to
"possess" or "access" i.e. control and manipulate what
he considers to be his human chattel, i.e. his ex-wife and the children
by, among other things, a. Refusing to maintain a regular and consistent
visitation schedule, refusing to regularly make payments of child and spousal
support, refusing to continue the marital pattern
of primary caregiving, etc. b. Attempting to purchase the affections of
the children c. Sudden unwarranted and undesired interference with the
child(ren)'s school, life, and household routines.
3. The pattern is pervasive and includes
fetid acts towards the mother including: a. Lying to the children b.
Lying to others c. Violations of law
4. The disorder is not specifically due
to another mental disorder, although a separate mental disorder may co-exist.
And usually does, albeit it's routinely ignored by therapists and the legal
system. It's called Patriarchal Psychosis and Sense
of Entitlement.
CLINICAL ILLUSTRATIONS
In this section, I will provide clinical
illustrations for each criterion using the reference numbers provided above.
As criteria 1-3 are behavior specific to the Fetid Fathering Syndrome, I
will provide a series of clinical examples. The fourth criterion which
addresses the relationship of the proposed syndrome to other mental disorders,
will be discussed more generally.
Criterion 1A: Demanding "Rights"
to the Children
The range of actions taken by a father
to attempt to remove the children from their mother is impressive. For
example:
One father lied to his children that he
could no longer buy food because their mother was getting all of his money
via child support, and spending it going to male strip bars, shopping,
and having her nails done.
A doctor's husband forced her 10-year-old
son to apply for federally funded free school lunches to delude the boy
that it somehow was his successful mother's fault that daddy was an alcoholic
ne'er-do-well.
A woman who for years was very close to
the children in a custody battle, was asked by their father to give up
neutrality and join his campaign against the mother to "dance on her
grave." When the friend refused to give up her neutrality, the father
falsely informed the children that their mother was a feminist dyke who
was having an affair with this woman.
These behaviors, if successful, could lead
a child to not only hate the father, but perhaps go years without seeing
him. Of course, the father will immediately claim that the children's reaction
is the result of their mother's behavior, backed up by such idiots as Ira
Turkat. Another example would be Cartwright (1993) who
flatulated: "The goal of the alienator is crystalline: to deprive
the lost parent, not only of the child's time, but of the time of childhood."
(p.210).
Criterion 1B: Involving Others in Fetid
Actions
The second component of the first major
criterion where the father attempts to punish the mother who gave life
to his children at huge sacrifice to herself, involves manipulating other
individuals to engage in fetid acts against the mother. Examples of this
kind are as follows:
During a custody battle, a father lied
to a therapist about the mother's behavior. The therapist, having never
spoken with the mother, appeared as an "expert" witness to inform
the Judge that the father should be the primary residential parent and
that the mother needed to be in therapy. See, e.g. Karen
Anderson's case, as well as the case of the child who killed
himself after this sort of horsepucky by Gardner.
One angry father manipulated teenagers
to leave anonymous threatening notes at the ex-wife's home.
A father who did not have legal custody
of his children manipulated a secretary at the child's school to assist
in kidnapping the child.
In the above examples, it is important
to note that the person manipulated by the angry father has, in a way,
been "charmed" into siding against the mother. Typically, the
individual "duped" takes on a righteous indignation, contributing
to a rewarding climate for the father initiating fetid actions. Commonly
"duped" third parties are not only family law professionals,
but also second wives, girlfriends, and the mothers of these men.
Criterion 1C: Excessive Litigation
There is little question that either party
in a divorce or custody proceeding is entitled to appropriate legal representation
and action.
Most commonly, however, it is men who have
the greater access to litigation funds, as well as community contacts,
and interim legal fees and costs are seldom awarded.
Individuals suffering from Divorce-Related
Fetid Fathering Syndrome, therefore, attempt to punish the divorcing wife
by engaging in excessive litigation.
A belligerent and unreasonable father verbally
attacked his ex-wife whenever he saw her, which was often, because he also
was engaging in stalking. Over time, her response
was to try to avoid him. He then took her repeatedly to court, thereby
using the legal system to force her to have contact with him.
One father told a judge that his daughter
was not really his child, demanding a paternity test, and attempting to
make the mother appear to be a free-wheeling slut.
One man refused to stop attacking
his ex-wife through the courts, despite numerous attorneys being fired
or voluntarily leaving the case. Over a three-year period, seven different
attorneys were utilized.
Data exist which can help in determining
the range of excessive litigation. For example, Koel et al. (1988) report
on the frequency of post-divorce litigation in a sample of 700 families.
Their data indicate that only 12.7% of families file one post-divorce petition
to the court, whereas less than 5 percent file two or more petitions (Koel
et al. 1988); less than one percent file four or more petitions.
Criterion 2A: Claiming Visitation Denial
Experts are in agreement that regular and
uninterrupted visitation with the non-residential parent is not harmful
for children, albeit little research
substantiates that it is of any benefit. (Cf Hodges, 1991). Despite this,
however, because of the incessant drumbeat of pro-father propaganda, some
states, such as Florida, actually have laws written to reflect the view
that such visitation is "crucial" to child well-being. (Cf Keane,
1990). Unfortunately, even when it is recognized that the mother and children
also have legal rights to some semblance of stability and normalcy in the
post-divorce household, individuals with Divorce-Related Fetid Fathering
Syndrome continue to interfere with it, using, inter alia, usually false
claims based on ridiculous exaggerations, that visitation is being denied.
A father who previously attacked his ex-wife
physically during visitation transfers
of the children, refused to return the children as required when the ex-wife
obtained a court-order that exchanges be monitored by the police. Fathers
also counsel each other on tactics to make the mother look like the party
at fault, such as claiming a need for police to accompany them to exercise
visitation that is not being denied in the first place.
A common strategy of Fetid Fatherers is
to exercise visitation sporadically, frequently failing to show up at all.
Then, on an occasion when they do arrive (late), to make a brouhaha the
first time when, weary of consoling disappointed children, and tired of
having days on end and her own schedule repeatedly ruined by the manipulative
pointless waiting, the mother and children decide
to pursue other plans.
One father had his twenty-year-old girlfriend
repeatedly pick up the children for visitation, during which times she
would make snide comments to the mother, and gleefully inform her that
the children would be in her care for the weekend, inasmuch as the father
was "working overtime."
The President of the father's rights group
pompously misnomered as Council for Children's
Rights (Washington, D.C.) refuses to acknowledge such tactics, let
alone that they really are a form of child abuse (Cf Levy, 1992). Unfortunately,
the police typically avoid involving themselves in such situations, unless
it's to aid the father. Furthermore, even if a victimized mother is financially
capable of returning to court on an ongoing basis, there is little that
can be done to prevent such fathers' behaviors. Finally, even when such
cases are brought to trial, the courts are often inadequate in protecting
the custodial family's interests, instead choosing to give lip service
to fathers' visitation rights. (Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial
System, 1992).
Given the physical absence of one parent,
the telephone plays an important role in maintaining the communications
between child and non-residential parent. Individuals suffering from Divorce-Related
Fetid Fathering Syndrome, however, engage in an array
of actions designed to abuse telephone access.
A father claimed that he called to speak
to his children and was told that they were not at home when, in fact,
he could hear their voices in the background. In fact, what happened was
that this was the father's third call that day, he already had spoken twice
at length to the toddlers, the toddlers were napping, and he was interrupting
the mother's Brownie Scout meeting.
One father claimed that when called to
speak with his children, the mother put him on "hold," informed
no one, and then left him on hold. In reality, this was yet another stalker-type,
who had called upward of twenty times already that day to talk to the mother
(not the children), and she put the phone down, rather than listen to the
incessant ringing.
Another father even managed to claim that
a mother's good intentions were somehow thwarting his "rights."
He claimed, when she encouraged the children to call him (after not hearing
from him for weeks), that she somehow "knew" that he was away
on vacation and did this to "turn the children against him."
Some fathers claim that "alienation
attempts" are so painful and fruitless that this is the reason they
eventually stop calling their children; that they simply "give up."
In reality, their original calls were for the purpose of stalking and harassing
their ex-wife, and when this became of less interest, they moved on to
other women. Speaking with their children was never of any but casual passing
interest in the first place.
Criterion 2C: Claiming that Mothers Deny
Them Participation in Extra-Curricular Activities
An ancillary aspect of the process of maintaining
one's relationship with one's child is to participate in activities that
one did before the parents separated. School plays, team sports, and religious
events are just some of the type of activities of this type. Fetid Fatherings
frequently engage in maneuvers designed to make it appear that they have
been prevented from participation in children's activities as a cover for
their lack of interest, and also as a cover for their historic
lack of participation altogether in other kinds of parenting activities
that, while not of the sort that would garner public notice and kudos,
might well be more meaningful, e.g. housework.
One father, who decided he preferred a
happy hour with the new receptionist at the office, claimed he was given
the wrong date and time for an important event for the child, thereby placing
the blame for his own misplaced priorities on the mother who already was
doing all the calling, scheduling, shlepping and arranging. The child was
asked by the mother, "I wonder where your father is?" Incredibly,
the father managed to convince the custody evaluator that this was thinly
disguised "parental alienation"
by the mother.
One father claimed that the mother refused
to provide him with any information about any extra-curricular activities
in which the children were engaged. Nevermind that the family hadn't heard
from him at all in six months.
While coaching a child's soccer team, one
father told many of the team parents disparaging falsehoods about the child's
mother, and how she was engaging in "malicious mother syndrome."
When she came to watch her son's soccer game, many of these parents essentially
"betrayed" the father by telling the mother what he had said,
thereby bolstering his specious claims that the mother was engaging in
"parental alienation syndrome."
Fetid Fatherings who engage in such behaviors
rarely have to face penalties for their actions. Judges, attorneys, and
policemen do not involve themselves in every instance of obnoxious social
behaviors, nor should they. Furthermore, most mothers cannot afford the
financial requirements involved to go to court again and again. As such,
the cycle of harassment and threats and lies continues.
Criterion 3A: Fetid Lying to the Children
Given their developmental status, children
in a disputed divorce situation are quite vulnerable. When one parent decides
to attack the other by lying to the children, examples of this type of
fetid behavior may include some of the following:
One divorcing father told his very young
daughter that he was "not really" her father, which was not true,
except in the biological sense, and incredibly inappropriate and cruel.
An eight-year-old girl was forced by her
father to act as messenger to deliver copies of paid bills to him when
he visited on the basis that he was entitled to an "accounting"
of all the child support money the mother ostensibly had misspent.
One father falsely told the children that
their mother, whom he had repeatedly beat her up in the past, was really
the "batterer" in the relationship, even citing to (and misusing)
Gelles and Straus research.
These examples of fetid lying can be
contrasted with the more subtle maneuvers typically seen perpetrated by
men, such as claiming that a mother has made "virtual allegations"
(Cartwright, 1993). Here, a mother supposedly setting up a "Parental
Alienation Syndrome" makes some casual or off-the-cuff comment overheard
by the child about abuse by the father that may have occurred, and the
individual suffering from Divorce-Related Fetid Fathering Syndrome falsely
claims not only that abuse has not actually occurred, but that the mother
is engaging in "alienation."
Criterion 3B: Fetid Lying to Others
Individuals suffering from Divorce-Related
Fetid Fathering Syndrome may engage a wide range of other individuals in
their attacks upon the ex-wife. However, with this particular criterion,
the individual with Divorce-Related Fetid Fathering Syndrome specifically
lies to other individuals in the belligerency against the mother. Some
examples include the following:
One disgruntled father called the president
of the (1500 employee) workplace of his divorcing wife, claiming falsely
that she was using business property for personal gain and was abusing
their mutual children at her work locale.
One man falsely told state officials that
his ex-wife was sexually abusing their daughter because he suspected that
she was about to get wise to HIS sexual abuse of the child. The child was
immediately taken away from her and her access to the child was denied.
During the course of a custody dispute,
one father informed the guardian, who was investigating the parenting skills
of each parent, that the mother had physically abused him and then made
"false allegations" when she obtained a restraining order.
Snyder (1986) has reported on the difficulty
imposed upon legal authorities when confronted with someone who is an excellent
liar. Consistent with research on the inability of "specialists"
to detect lying (Ekman and O'Sullivan, 1991), a skilled fabricator can
be a compelling witness in the courtroom (Snyder, 1986). While sometimes
seen in borderline personalities, Snyder (1986) notes that pathological
lying (Pseudologia Fantastica) is not restricted to that particular character
disorder, so commonly attributed to mothers,
as to whom experts for Fetid Fatherings can actually find nothing really
mentally amiss.
Criterion 3C: Violating Law to Attack the
Wife
Individuals suffering from Divorce-Related
Fetid Fathering Syndrome, have few, if any boundaries in their campaign
against the divorcing wife. Violations of law are common in many cases,
although the laws broken may be relatively minor. However, in some cases,
the violations of law may be quite serious.
One man deliberately drove his automobile
into the house of the ex-wife where their mutual children resided. Another,
on visitation, doused his sleeping children in gasoline and set them on
fire.
In the midst of a custody battle, one man
broke into the residence of his divorcing wife and removed a number of
personal and irreplaceable papers. Another cleaned out the house, lock
stock and barrel.
One enraged father emboldened to "pursue
his rights" confronted his girlfriend and infant on an Atlanta street,
picked up the child by the feet and smashed his head into the concrete
pavement repeatedly. Another shot his son to death when a New Jersey court
decided the child's mother had an equal right to name the child.
The above descriptions may remind the reader
of certain personality disorders (e.g., sociopathic) but these behaviors
may be demonstrated by individuals with nothing more than Divorce-Related
Fetid Fathering Syndrome who do not appear to meet official diagnostic criteria
for an Axis II disorder. The important thing to remember is, when concocting
a bullshit politicized theory of psychology, you want to present horror
stories and then make it seem as if your diagnosis could apply to every
normal person, giving the impression that the most innocuous and mild behaviors
could be foreboding mass murder and mayhem. So, continuing...
Criterion 4: Not Due to Another Disorder
In assessing the Divorce-Related Fetid
Fathering Syndrome, it is important to note that many of the above clinical
examples seem to have occurred in individuals who had no prior mental disorder
diagnosis or treatment. In fact, one father who engaged in extremely fetid
behaviors toward his divorcing wife and children had several mental health
professionals testify that he was not suffering from any type of mental
disorder (as if this has anything to do with facts about what actually
happened.)
In the author's experience, for each mental
disorder that might come to mind to account for some of this behavior,
an exceptional case presents. For example, in some cases, an Adjustment
Disorder might seem an appropriate diagnosis, yet one man still carried
on about alleged visitation denial 10 years after the divorce. Other cases
might suggest a possibility of a personality disorder diagnosis, yet one
man who repeatedly violated the law in attacking his ex-wife, received
no personality disorder diagnosis despite being evaluated by masters level
and doctoral level examiners. In some instances, Intermittent Explosive
Disorder might be considered, yet the anger for many of the batterers and
stalkers and abusers and controllers does not appear to be intermittent.
Finally, the reader should appreciate that
while diagnostic accuracy for certain psychiatric difficulties is not as
good as one would like (e.g., the personality disorders, see Turkat, 1990),
the problem is compounded in family law where incompetent mental health
examiners sometimes become involved in the judicial
process (Turkat, 1993). Clearly, the relationship between Divorce-Related
Fetid Fathering Syndrome and other mental disorders is a complex one which
requires significant investigation.
DISCUSSION
The above description of the Divorce-Related
Fetid Fathering Syndrome raises a variety of important clinical, legal and
scientific issues.
From a clinical perspective, families subjected
to Divorce-Related Fetid Fathering Syndrome are subject to serious episodes
of stress and distress. Yet, there is no scientific evidence on how to
treat this phenomenon. It is particularly compromised by the fact that
many of these cases that appear to meet the proposed diagnostic criteria
deny that there is anything wrong with them.
An additional difficulty is that many therapists
purport to be unaware of this pattern of fetid behavior (Heinz and Heinz,
1993). As such, there are fetid therapists who are "fooled"
by such cases and, as noted earlier, will come to court testifying that
there is nothing wrong with the father involved.
From a legal perspective, there are some
misogynists whose "theories" may encourage this type of behavior
(see, e.g. Gardner, 1989). On the other hand, there are attorneys who deliberately
miscast such behavior as the financial rewards for them are dependent on
male business. In other words, the more involved the litigation process,
the greater the profits for the attorney. (Grotman and Thomas, 1990). However,
even for the subset of attorneys for whom this may be true, there is a
point of diminishing returns. Furthermore, independent of economic considerations,
many who become involved with family law courtrooms find that these types
of cases are not handled well (Greif, 1985; Levy, 1992).
The man who is not disturbed "enough"
to lose visitation rights to his children may well succeed in gaining custody
outright. Rarely will he be sanctioned, and seldom will he go to jail.
Thus, many mothers report significant frustration when they and their children
are exposed to this type of behavior, and the courts seem to do little.
In a review of pertinent law literature on gender bias
in family law proceedings, Tillitski (1992) concluded that there is widespread
discrimination. A frequent claim by Fetid Fatherings and their advocates
(contrary to what a review of the literature actually shows) that the bias
is against men, is exemplified by one codger's oft-repeated truism. Some
old family law judge in Georgia supposedly said once that, "I ain't
never seen the calves follow the bulls, they always follow the cow; therefore,
I always give custody to the mamas." (Commission on Gender Bias in
the Judicial System, 1992, p. 741). Similarly, it is noted that custodial
rights of fathers are enforced as rigidly as are child support orders (Commission
on Gender Bias in the Judicial System, 1992.) Such bias against the value
of mothering and the efforts and experience of women's lives in family
law proceedings results in a clamoring of fathers who claim, with thwarted
senses of entitlement, that they are "victims" of the system
(see, e.g. Tillitski, 1992). This situation would seem to reinforce much
of the vicious behavior displayed by men causing women and children to
suffer from their Divorce-Related Fetid Fathering Syndrome.
The issue of sex distribution of the disorder
certainly needs to be addressed. The overwhelming majority of custodial
parents are female (Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial System,
1992). Gardner (1989) uses this to claim that "Parental Alienation
Syndrome" appears most commonly in females, although it's suggested
possible for a male who has custody of the children to engage in the same
type of alienating behaviors. The author's experience
with Divorce-Related Fetid Fathering Syndrome is not similar to Gardner's,
however. The present writer has yet to see a case of a noncustodial mother
engaging in all of the criteria listed. This does not mean that it is not
possible for there to be a "Fetid Mother" Syndrome. But, Shephard
(1992) reports that there is significant abuse of some custodial mothers
by non-residential fathers. And while it should be noted that there are
females who might appropriately be called "Deadbeat Moms," it's
rare that we hear of a mother who shoots her ex-husband and children because
she doesn't want to pay that "bastard." Given at the present
time that a case in which a mother's meeting all of the criteria for Divorce-Related
Fetid Mother Syndrome has yet to be documented, it appears advisable
to await scientific evidence to guide issues of
nosologic labeling.
How prevalent is the Divorce-Related Fetid
Father Syndrome? The answer is unknown. Gardner (1989) reports that approximately
90 percent of all custody battles involve some aspects of "parental
alienation." That would imply that there could be Fetid Fatherings
in that number of cases, if not the litigants, then some of the therapists,
custody evaluators and attorneys involved.
Further, Kressel (1985) reviewed data in
which men claim up to 40 percent of maternal custodians denied visitation
to the them, in order to punish him. And there's a possible 40 percent
Fetid Fatherings right there. Relatedly, Arditti (1992) reported that 50
percent of a sample of divorce fathers (N=125) indicated that visitation
was interfered with by the mother. Fifty Percent. It's epidemic.
While claims of parental alienation may be common, it is highly unlikely
that such a percentage of fathers would meet all of the criteria for Divorce-Related
Fetid Fathering Syndrome, so this author believes that writers, such as
Ira Turkat, are in fact moving much of the problem.
In regard to incidence, it would appear
through the title of this syndrome that the fetid behavior is precipitated
by the divorce process. However, this is clearly
an empirical question. While the fetid actions may first be noted during
a divorce process, it is possible that fetidness may have been present
earlier but undetected. Research on pre-divorce parental conflict (Enos
and Handal, 986) supports this speculation. Relatedly, it may also be that
there are some cases of pre-existing mental disorder that have not been
discovered until the stress of the divorce itself unfolds. And it may well
be a substantial reason why 2/3 of divorces are filed
by women.
Finally, it should be noted that research
on the nature of post-divorce family functioning is beginning to emerge.
Some data exist on the role of parental conflict in children's post divorce
functioning (e.g. Frost and Pakiz, 1990; Furstenberg et al., 1987; Healy,
Malley and Steward, 1990; Kudek, 1988), but as Ira Turkat admits, studies
do not document the so-called cases of Parental Alienation Syndrome and
Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome. It's bogus. Bogey. Bullshit.
BULL shit. Fetid Fathering exaltation.
The Divorce-Related Fetid Fathering Syndrome
represents an important societal phenomenon. The disorder affects children,
parents, attorneys, judges, guardians, mental health professionals and
others. Until the words "Fetid Fathering" are schmeared more thoroughly
in and around the scientific and clinical literature, such that we all
come automatically to associate the alliterating duo, the problems imposed
by individuals suffering from Divorce-Related Fetid Fathering Syndrome will
continue to plague us. Hopefully, the present manuscript will stimulate
research so that clinical and legal management guidelines can be developed.
REFERENCE
AAAliznotes
(1994-2002). Available online at http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/contents.html
Arditti, J.A. (1992). Factors relating
to custody, visitation and child support for divorce fathers: An exploratory
analysis. J. Div. Remarr. 17:23-42.
Beal, E.W., and Hockman, D. (1991). Adult
Children of Divorce, Delacorte Press, New York.
Cart wright, D.F. (1993). Expanding the
parameters of parental alienation syndrome. Am. J. Fam. Ther. 21:205-215.
Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial
System. (1992). Gender and justice in the courts: A report to the Supreme
Court of Georgia. Georgia State Univ. Law Rev. 8:539-807.
Ekman, P., and O'Sullivan, M. (1991). Who
can catch a liar? American Psychologist, 46: 913-920.
Enos, D.M., and Handal, P.J. (1986). The
relation of parental marital status and perceived family conflict to adjustment
in white adolescents. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 54:820-824.
Fatherhood
and Family Law: The Myths and the Facts. What the Research REALLY
says. http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/017.htm
Frost, A.K., and Pakiz, B. (1990). The
effects of marital disruption on adolescence: Time as a dynamic. Am. J.
Orthopsychiatry 60:544-555.
Furstenberg, F.F., Morgan, S.P., and Allison,
P.D. (1987). Paternal participation and children's well being after marital
dissolution. Am. Sociological Rev. 52:695-701.
Gardner, R.A. (1987), The Parental Alienation
Syndrome and the Differentiation between Fabricated and Genuine Child Sex
Abuse, Creative Therapeutics, Cresskill, N.J. Gardner, R.A. (1989). Family
Evaluation in Child Custody Mediation, Arbitration and Litigation, Creative
Therapeutics, Cresskill, N.J.
Greif, G.L. (1985). Single Fathers, Lexington
Books, Lexington, MA. Grutman, R., and Thomas, B. (1990). Lawyers and thieves,
Simon & Shuster, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. Healy, J.M., Malley, J.E.,
and Stewart, A.J. (1990). Children and their fathers after parental separation.
Am. J. Orthopsychiatry 60: 531-543.
Hetherington, E.N., and Arasteh, J.D. (eta.)
(1988). Impact of Divorce, Single Parenting and Step-Parenting on Children,
Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J.
Heinz, H.R., and Heinz, S.A. (1993). Emotional
incest: The tragedy of divorcing families. Am. J. Fam. Law 7:169-174.
Hernandez, D.J. (1988). The demographics
of divorce and remarriage. In Hetherington, E.M., and Arasteh, J.D. (eta.),
Impact of Divorce, Single Parenting, and Step-Parenting on Children, Lawrence
Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J., pp. 3-22.
Hodges, W.F. (1991). Interventions for
Children of Divorce, (second edition), Wiley, New York.
Keane, G. (1990). Florida Divorce Handbook,
Pineapple Press, Sarasota, FL.
Koel, A., Clark, S.C., Phear, W.P., and
Hauser, B.B. (1988). A comparison of joint and sole legal custody agreements.
In Hetherington, E.M., and Arasteh, J.D. (eta.), Impact of Divorce, Single
Parenting, and Step-Parenting on Children, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale,
N.J., pp. 73-90.
Kressel, K. (1985). The Process of Divorce,
Basic Books, New York.
Kurdek, L. (1988). Custodial mothers' perceptions
of visitation and payment of child support by non-custodial fathers in
families with low and high levels of pre-separation interparental conflict.
J. Appl Devel. Psychol. 9: 315-328.
Laos a, L.N. (1988). Ethnicity and single
parenting in the United States. In Hetherington, E.M., and Arasteh, J.D.
(eta.), Impact of Divorce, Single Parenting and Step-Parenting on Children,
Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J., pp. 23-49.
Satire, Whatis (2002). http://www.fsu.edu/~CandI/ENGLISH/power/farm4.htm
Shepard, N. (1992). Child-visiting and
domestic abuse. Child Welf. 71:357-367.
Snyder, S. (1986). Pseudologia Fantastica
in the borderline patient. Am. J. Psychiatry 143:1287-1289.
Tillitski C.J. (1992). Fathers and child
custody: Issues, trends
Turkat,
Ira Daniel. Defining the Malicious Mother Syndrome.
Turkeys, thewholelottayou. Who would take
seriously for one second, let alone believe the dishonest, self-centered,
unbalanced, transparent, ridiculous, paranoid and puerile drivel and spit
parading as "scholarship" that emanates from the fecal matter
even some Ph.D.s apparently use these days instead of their brains.
|
A parody of Ira Turkat's Malicious Mother Syndrome.
