Victim of the Scam

Use of ‘Parental Alienation’ Needs to be Eliminated from Family Court Hearings

In Dr. Richard Gardner, DSM-V, Parental Alienation, Parental Alienation Disorder, Parental Alienation Disorders, Parental Alienation Syndrome on February 19, 2010 at 3:31 am

From The Capital Weekly:

Parental Alienation must be excluded from all custody hearings

By Preston Thymes | 02/18/10 12:00 AM PST

Parental Alienation is a perilous accusation that should never be recognized in courts or viewed as particularly compelling in cases deciding the custody of a child, especially when resolving profoundly difficult questions concerning the scary scenario of  placing that child back into the home of a domestic violence abuser.

By definition, Parental Alienation is a “syndrome” that manifest in the process of divorce when a parent suffering from “deflated self-esteem” as “part of a normal grieving response to interpersonal loss” to “enforce their agenda” and “The alienating parent may or may not be consciously aware of manipulating the child and the legal/social systems. Alienating parents often believe that the accusations they make are true, but have developed those beliefs by a faulty reasoning process.”

First, it is important to begin by evaluating the premise of Parental Alienation, which is not a recognized syndrome by the American Medical Association.

Second, American Psychological Association has never issued a position on Parental Alienation. Third, nowhere in the vast database of the Harvard Medical School Countway Library stacks of the History of medicine and medical discoveries from the 16th–21st centuries, is there any information on Parental Alienation syndrome.

Fourth, that may underline why vocal proponents of, Parental Alienation Syndrome such as Glenn Sacks is the Executive Director of Fathers and Families, are captious in their language stating, “Mental Health professionals have been making progress in increasing recognition of PA.” I am not entirely aware if the claim warranted by  The California Alliance for Families and Children who state “It is of our opinion that the way forward to address everyone’s concern is through better education on the issue,” is based on an awareness that such research is not possible through The Center for the History of Medicine Archives and Records Rare Books, Databases or Dictionaries at Harvard Medical School or Harvard School of Public Health?

Admittedly, proponents of Parental Alienation find their support in precedent from not “preventing a court from considering evidence that a parent had deliberately engaged in tactics and behavior that intentionally estranges a childs bond with their other parent,” but that is where their view deviates from the often lengthy, brutal and inhumane violence that occurs right in front of a child’s eyes forced to witness a domestic violence relationship proceed night after night.

Furthermore, many of their citations omit any specific objections to the use of Parental Alienation in a real-life situations where a victim is unable to obtain restraining order barring abusers from estranged loved one so the hope left is flee the danger.

Arguments to the contrary stand in stark contrast not only to the history of California Protective Orders Laws, codes and statutes but also the evidentiary precedent, in which a victim “alienating” a child from a monster not as procedural posture, but as survival instincts that arises when violence is emanate.

I struggle to understand how a “syndrome” that manifests in the process of divorce changes the fact that escaping domestic violence, even if by “alienation” merits relief no matter how it is arrived at.

As the head of Public Relations for one of only two domestic violence survivors shelters on the Central Coast, here at Shelter Outreach Plus, we see the faces of the children wet from tears as a parent is forced to keep them out of school for a week, because the estranged parent showed up at the attendance office at the child’s elementary and tried to take them away.

At Shelter Outreach plus, we render any claims of Parental Alienation  invalid, because as often the last hope for a women in crisis who has no idea if her abusers will turn the violence from her onto the children, we absolutely do everything we can keep that person away from those children be-it our legal advocates through restraining orders, our The Domestic Violence Response Team (DVRT) through hotel vouchers or one of our 2 secret facilities throughout the region to encourage “alienation” and foster hope.

At Shelter Outreach Plus, we view Parental Alienation as less of “syndrome” in the mind a helpless child of more of a twisted form of  retribution in the twisted spirit of a domestic violence abuser.

At Shelter Outreach Plus, we believe the California court system should look to establish every safeguard possible to avail a domestic violence victim a way to mend a broken heart and concurringly seek out emergency shelter without fear of facing Parental Alienation in a future custody case.

We fully support AB 612, which is coming up vote in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee to ban Parental Alienation Theory,  and we fully support Assembly Member Jim Beall, Jr. (AD 24th) as author of the Bill. His continuing efforts to give voice to the battered women who on their own, could never find the courage to articulate the desperation they felt as the moment they knew they had to take their children and disappear.

Parental Alienation is at best, a deterrence that only diminishes whatever possible benefit that might be received from restoring the love that obliviously once was there in the home of a family by searching for justifications to delay a child’s removal from a terrifying situation.

In closing, I strongly believe that such views, no matter how steadfastly held by proponents of Parental Alienation or how many times successfully cited to the Senate Judiciary Committee as preventing “various loyalty tests” by misguided supporters of Parental Alienation, only miss the story that each victim brings with them into their first night in an emergency shelter where their goal is in no way “alienating parent may or may not be consciously aware of manipulating the child and the legal/social systems,” but to avoid the scary scenario of  placing that child back into the home of a domestic violence abuser.

Advertisements
  1. Q : You think violating BBS laws and Statutes is Ok? Janelle Burrill is invincible and above the law?

    Third Edition – Violation of BBS statutes and laws will lead to the corrupt fraud Janelle Burrills permanent LCSW 16216 license revocation. The evidence of misconduct, fraud and perjury is clear (Black and White). It is compelling, convincing evidence in public domain. It cannot be suppressed anymore.

    Q: What are the BBS Statutes and laws related to the practice of Clinical Social Work?

    Article 2 deals with Janelle Burrill Sacramento license revocation for unprofessional conduct. The evidence provided by “Victims” of this corrupt fraud Janelle Burrill substantiates the enforcement actions and penalties for violation of the following sub sections of article 2

    Q : What are the violations, facts, evidence behind the dozens of BBS complaints/investigations against Janelle Burrill?

    Penalty for Violation of Article 2 Sections (b), (f), (j), (l), (s), (p) for fraud, deceit, misrepresentation, dishonest act related to her qualification, false advertising & performing services beyond the scope of her competence or Janelle Burrill LCSW 16216 license

    (b) Securing a license or registration by fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation on any application for licensure or registration submitted to the board, whether engaged in by an applicant for a license or registration, or by a licensee in support of any application for licensure or registration.

    (f) Misrepresentation as to the type or status of a license or registration held by the person, or otherwise misrepresenting or permitting misrepresentation of his or her education, professional qualifications, or professional affiliations to any person or entity.

    (j) The commission of any dishonest, corrupt, or fraudulent act substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of a licensee or registrant.

    (l) Performing, or holding oneself out as being able to perform, or offering to perform, or permitting any trainee or registered intern under supervision to perform, any professional services beyond the scope of the license authorized by this chapter.

    (s) Performing or holding oneself out as being able to perform professional services beyond the scope of one’s competence, as established by one’s education, training, or experience.

    (p) Advertising in a manner that is false, fraudulent, misleading, or deceptive, as defined in Section 651.

    Evidence: Burrill claims to be an expert in psychology, projects herself as a Doctor of Psychology and told her victims that she is licensed by the board of Psychology – she has determined and diagnosed many of her victims as psychotic, suffering from bi-polar disorders and doles out DSM-V diagnosis and prescribes psychiatric medicine as candies after talking to them for a few minutes. We talked to the Board of psychology and found out that she failed the board exam multiple times. She has been trying to get licenced for the last three years and failed miserably. The only assistant licence she had was terminated in 2006.

    Burrill asserted to her victims that she is a lawyer and can practice law in the state of California. She knows family law and understands how to address the best interest of children and families. Burrill failed the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination and the California Bar Examination multiple times. She is not licensed to practice law anywhere – let alone in California. She is not listed as a lawyer in the California Bar.

    Janelle Burrill has a fake online degree (2001 unaccredited correspondence school NCU PhD or Dr in PAS), failed California Bar exam with no license to practice law anywhere, failed Board of psychology exam and no license to practice psychology. She misrepresented her credentials to BBS in her license renewal and is a classic example of fraudulent false advertisement.

    Fraud Burrill is no Doctor – she attaches a Dr, PhD, JD, LCSW, Board Certified Diplomate in her marketing documents, business cards, recommendations and reports.

    Penalty for Violation of Article 2 Sections (d), (i), (e) for gross negligence, intentional emotional harm, violating and conspiring to violate BBS regulations

    (d) Gross negligence or incompetence in the performance of marriage and family therapy

    (e) Violating, attempting to violate, or conspiring to violate any of the provisions of this chapter or any regulation adopted by the board.

    Evidence: Burrill abused many children in her office and destroyed their lives with vindictive retribution. She threatened perpetuated emotional abuse on children who questioned her expertise and qualification, her ethics, motivations or credentials. Audio recordings of these sessions between the children and Burrill, the certified transcripts clearly shows this narcissistic whacko Burrill abusing children. It is not just gross negligence. It is criminal conduct and will be prosecuted . The District Attorney’s office, Federal and State Law enforcement agencies, CPS and other government agencies have evidence of Janelle Burrill perpetuating Child Abuse.

    Burrill violated every norm of professional conduct. She projects herself as invincible – not subject to the laws of the profession. She conspired with her husband attorney John Odonell and other cronies to violate every available provision of this chapter. To prevent the enforcement of BBS statute she concocts findings, fabricates, misconstrues and outright lies.

    When presented with the evidence of her misconduct she threatened the victims, conspired with others in the court system, pursued vindictive retribution and continued to follow through with her threat to further harm her victims. The chronological evidence of her conduct in all the cases establishes her modus operandi. She colludes with one party that can provide her with the most money, manipulates, practices unprofessional conduct, perpetuates financial fraud, threatens retribution, In cases where the victim files a complaint, makes a vindictive report harming the parent who does not submit to her financial demands, fabricates and outright lies under oath in court. Finally when exposed resigns from the case after inflicting all the harm. This pattern of behavior permeates all the current cases under investigation.

    Penalty for Violation of Article 2 Sections (n), (o) for failing to disclose fees, altering fees, extortion and soliciting consideration for $$$$.

    (n) Prior to the commencement of treatment, failing to disclose to the client or prospective client the fee to be charged for the professional services, or the basis upon which that fee will be computed.

    (o) Paying, accepting, or soliciting any consideration, compensation, or remuneration, whether monetary or otherwise, for the referral of professional clients. All consideration, compensation, or remuneration shall be in relation to professional counseling services actually provided by the licensee.

    Evidence: In most cases Burrill gets a lower priced financial agreement in place originally and once the service is started pushes a new modified agreement with increased fees. She threatens and forces her victims to sign this new revised agreement with aggravated charges. She accepts bribes, extorts her victims to pay her thousands of dollars for consideration. These monies are often demanded for services that were never performed. Her victims that did not yield to her financial fraud were victimized by her retribution with their children removed from their custody. The evidence of this financial racket of extortion and criminal conduct is with law enforcement. These court appointed power brokers abuse their position and fill their pockets with despicable means. It is a harvest as much when you can greed mentality that drives the corrupt Burrill. Evidence of her financial misconduct is with the investigators.

    Penalty for Violation of Article 2 Sections (q) practicing, pushing and preaching Junk science called Parental Alienation Syndrome for purposes of assessment

    (q) Reproduction or description in public, or in any publication subject to general public distribution, of any psychological test or other assessment device, the value of which depends in whole or in part on the naivete of the subject, in ways that might invalidate the test or device.

    Evidence: Burrill victimized many parents, grandparents with junk science called Parental Alienation Syndrome driven solely by her narcissistic ego and vindictive retribution. This so called science lacks any foundation and is debunked by the literate world. This junk science is Burrills revenue source. Her many wrong, unreal, out of the world pathetic recommendations to the courts reflect her incompetence, fraud and malicious intent. All of these reports are in evidence with BBS. The PAS phenomenon lacks any objective scientific basis and is fraudulent. It is not part of any DSM toolset for psychological assessments. Anyone who did not submit to Burrills greed and extortion for money, questioned her credentials they were victimized as the alienator with recommendations for removal of their children.

  2. Janelle Burrill – “QUACK” without a license to practice psychology

    We spoke to the board extensively and the enforcement division recommends us to file a complaint against Janelle Burrill because practicing psychology without a licence is a crime. Please take a few minutes and file a complaint online .

    https://app.dca.ca.gov/psychboard/complaints.asp

    Janelle Burrill presented to her victims as an expert in psychology. She assessed, diagnosed and determined many of her victims as psychotic, sociapath, impulse control freaks, suffering from bi-polar disorders and doles out DSM-V diagnosis and prescribes psychiatric medicine as candies after talking to them for a few minutes.

    She had a registration to work under the supervision of a licensed psychologist for a couple of years which was terminated in 2006. PSB30484 (Mar 18 2004 – July 21 2006). If she engaged in the practice of psychology from 2006 onwards – which we believe, she did then she committed a crime. The practice of psychology is defined as rendering or offering to render for a fee to individuals, groups, organizations or the public any psychological service involving the application of psychological principles, methods, and procedures of understanding, predicting, and influencing behavior, such as the principles pertaining to learning, perception, motivation, emotions, and interpersonal relationships; and the methods and procedures of interviewing, counseling, psychotherapy, behavior modification, and hypnosis; and of constructing, administering, and interpreting tests of mental abilities, aptitudes, interests, attitudes, personality characteristics, emotions, and motivations

    California Board of Psychology Rules and Regulations #2903

    Licensure Requirement; Practice of Psychology; Psychotherapy; Fee

    § 2903. No person may engage in the practice of psychology, or represent himself or herself to be a psychologist, without a license granted under this chapter, except as otherwise provided in this chapter. The practice of psychology is defined as rendering or offering to render for a fee to individuals, groups, organizations or the public any psychological service involving the application of psychological principles, methods, and procedures of understanding, predicting, and influencing behavior, such as the principles pertaining to learning, perception, motivation, emotions, and interpersonal relationships; and the methods and procedures of interviewing, counseling, psychotherapy, behavior modification, and hypnosis; and of constructing, administering, and interpreting tests of mental abilities, aptitudes, interests, attitudes, personality characteristics, emotions, and motivations.

    The application of these principles and methods includes, but is not restricted to: diagnosis, prevention, treatment, and amelioration of psychological problems and emotional and mental disorders of individuals and groups. Psychotherapy within the meaning of this chapter means the use of psychological methods in a professional relationship to assist a person or persons to acquire greater human effectiveness or to modify feelings, conditions, attitudes and behavior which are emotionally, intellectually, or socially ineffectual or maladjustive.

    As used in this chapter, ‘‘fee’’ means any charge, monetary or otherwise, whether paid directly or paid on a prepaid or capitation basis by a third party, or a charge assessed by a facility, for services rendered.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: