DomesticViolenceByProxy

Pointing out perceived fallacies of opposing views is a component of discussion and debate. Whether it is fallacies you find in my pov or I believe exist in yours.

The reason she did not tell the bio-father is that she was already married and it would complicate her marriage. If she had other reasons why she didn't want the man in the child's life why did she lay down with him in the first place? Seems to me she should have done the obvious and not had sex with him and been faithful to her then husband. Not only was the bio-father good enough to lay down with but the ex-husband was good enough to hold responsible for child support for a child that was not his. In this scenario, the ex-husband never raised the child past age 5 and the bio-father neve

Paternity fraud is a form of adultry. "Family Values" and morality is broken. According to German laws, Hitler broke no laws in killing Jews but does that make it ok? I said you created a 6th option that equates to option 1 which already existed.

That much we can agree on.

In not answering the question, you have answered the question. If you need to be a family member who has intimate knowledge you are that. If you are the family physician, you are that. If forensic evidence were to operate as such, then I suppose it would be inadmissable in a court before a jury at a murder trial because the jury wasn't present at the time of the murder.

Clearly the child has say red hair or say- blonde hair and blue eyes. The ex husband's lineage going back several generations clearly does not include these recessive traits. Better still, to remove all doubt, let's say the ex husband is black or asian. The biological father has fathered another child that looks nearly identical to her half sister. You have ALL of the facts you could possibly need. Should these sisters grow up never having known each other? Should the father not know his child? Let's even say they have donated blood and the ex-husband and daughter are clearly not related

We are assuming you know the people intimately and that the evidence is clear and convincing. If I write all of the facts then I am often told my posts are too long. If I don't write enough facts we don't have enough information. So in this instance assume you have all the facts that you could possibly need.

I would add that when I post there are those that can carry the torch farther than I can. Jane Ty and Stradial for two examples. Frequently the message is lost when it becomes about me. It's not about me it's about the message. So if someone else can deliver the message in this community better than I can, I welcome and encourage them to do so. If I tell someone a building is on fire, should they remain seated in the building because they don't like the way I told them?

I've seen your posts before so when you offer advice I give it consideration, even if it doesn't seem so initially. I am not so obstinate that I do not self reflect on how to better deliver the message. I am just willing to accept that you cannot convert everyone. Applying Pareto optimality you cannot save everyone or possibly even most. Some will have to learn for themselves when it is their turn to experience this tragic crime. There will be those that reject a message simply because they don't find it's delivery palatable. Medicine doesn't always taste good but it is usually good for yo

Anytime you witness a crime and choose to do nothing, you are apathetic. Avoiding the word doesn't make you less apathetic it just offers you the illusion of false comfort. Yes, grease it up a bit so it goes down a little easier but at the end of the day you had an opportunity to do the right thing and you walked away from it.

In my opinion anytime you witness a wrong and you say nothing as if you did not witness it, you are apathetic. She felt my response was wrong and jumped in with her opinion in a nasty tone. It wasn't her place to respond. If the previous commenter who I replied to didn't like my response it was her place. I do disagree with her choices of when to be apathetic. Butting her nose in my comment was ok to her but ignoring any crime should not be ok. If a sin is a sin, I suppose minding your business when a murder is committed is ok too? Paternity fraud is a crime. Parental alienation is child a

Well it's difficult to come up with a scenario for maternity fraud. OK let's try this one. A man gets a woman pregnant other than his fiance and chooses not to tell the fiance before their wedding. You know this secret. Should you keep it or tell her before she marries him?

Isn't discerning morality the topic of the thread?

Actually, parental alienation is not gender specific. There are more women that have liked my facebook page and my daughter's facebook page than men, by a 3-1 margin. Women are just as fed up with alienation. Women such as stepmoms, aunts, grandmothers, sisters, etc. Women are more likely to perpetrate alienation because they are awarded custody in 90% of cases. Though there are more women that are breadwinners than ever before and that have degrees and graduate degrees than men. Parenting time and income have shifted in the 21st century but the courts remain in the 20th century.

I'm not going to go back and forth in someone else's thread. You may have the last word.

And this is what I'm talking about when I tell you that my snarky comments are always preceded by a belittling comment. To selectively ignore the preceding comment and say that I am the one who is rude is an incorrect assumption. Unless you think the preceding comment below is polite.

I'm glad you speak for "everyone". PCom is a small community but I didn't think the 10 or so of you that disagree constituted everyone. Since my threads seem to receive a fair number of views, I think there are others that have similar experiences. They either cannot speak out because they have pending cases or they choose to take the privacy route. From both my and my daughter's facebook page and her website (50,000 monthly unique visitors), I notice a lot of people have interest in these topics but they can't participate for reasons mentioned previously.

Good evening to you too. Parental alienation and Paternity Fraud are not victimless crimes. Your acceptance of them do nothing for your credibility or your morality.

That would be no. 1. You choose bystander apathy. WWJD?

Here is a scenario for you. A woman has kept a secret for 23 years that her child conceived while she was married was actually fathered by someone other than her former husband. The mother keeps this secret even after her divorce when the child was age 5. Remembering that a child who has had half of their family tree unknowingly stripped from them is a victim of parental alienation. 1) Do you hold true to bystander apathy and tell no one, keeping her secret? 2) Do you tell the now adult child? 3) Do you tell the mother to own up to her dirty deed? 4) Do you tell the bio-father he has a

I give what I get. So if you see an asshole it is only a reflection of what was first presented to me. I do not initiate hostilities but I do not allow my boundaries to be crossed. You shouldn't be selective about your observations of conduct. You will never see me initiate hostilities.

If being able to speak out about the truth without fear of libel makes me an ass0, then I'm guilty of being an ass0 as charged. Speculation is really poor on your part. I'm so much an ass0 that two of my daughters chose to side not with me but with the truth. No matter how much truth I speak there are those that will find fault on pure speculation without any factual basis. That's just a fact.

Thank you. I'll do better in the future to adhere to this advice.

If I thought you were interested in the truth I would tell you. I have written the truth. If what I said concerning my case was not true it would be libelous. The fact of the matter is that I have seen my daughter twice in 20 months. My daughter has not freely seen two of her sisters in the same period of time. I pay the court ordered child support of $719/mo and receive no help paying college expenses for our daughter that is currently a freshman. After over $5000 in legal fees, the so called "guardian ad litem" refused to write a "report of the guardian ad litem" when I specifically requeste

This is a general discussion and is not directed towards anyone. It is merely opinion. Agreement or any specific response is not being sought or required. To the contrary of agreement, challenge is always a good thing as it may force introspection. It is another opportunity to refine or remake a better you. One of the things I often neglect is to use softening statements when I introduce an idea that is likely to draw initial opposition making the idea abrasive to the reader. I may be guilty of this again now. Just to be clear, I am here to raise awareness, stimulate critical thought and e