Refutations Part III

I swear y’all, I’m only on of this response that goes all the way to X, and some of those have i –iv. The conclusion is also 3 pages. And this is only ONE response he has given to the courts. I think he needs a diary of his own honestly. There’s a place to spew your hatred and there’s a place not to. The courts don’t want to hear this. I could easily write all of his wrongdoings as perceived by me and send them off to the courts, but that would make me look bad and vindictive. I’d rather not, thanks. That’s why I have this blog! And the only reason this blog is in existence is because I’m fed up of the lies that I read.

Again, if you haven’t read the prior parts, please head backwards starting here.

In his point “r”, it states, “The Maltese court took responsibility to inform the mother of the filed action in accordance to due process and the law.” Not to be rude toward the Maltese legal system, as it worked very well for me when I was involved, but for me personally, there doesn’t seem to be a lot of “due process”. He can go ahead and try his best to place all the blame on the Maltese courts, but in the end, he could have let me know. As the courts pointed out….he sent me multiple emails and deliberately withheld that info while trying to trick me into signing papers to allow Zander to remain in Malta for a year. He criticized me for not agreeing to his suggestion after he had already filed for SOLE CUSTODY. He gets mad at me for not being stupid I guess. I find this quote from the Hague Order of Return interesting, “The Court notes that the decree issued by another section of the Family Court was pendente lite (provisional until the proceedings before the Court are concluded) handed during a mediation process; when the minor’s mother was not even aware that the father had initiated proceedings before the Maltese Courts; when the deputy curators appointed by the Courts to represent the mother, who was absent from these islands, had not only not communicated with the mother but had not even themselves been notified of the father’s application requesting provisional care and custody; when a chronological examination of the facts results that the father had not even informed the mother that he did not intend to send the minor back to the United States.” I don’t know, but it sure seems like to me that the Judge, who would know more about the legal system, is quite upset over the fact that You-Know-Who had multiple opportunities to inform me of his intentions to have a fair chance in the Maltese Courts. Lots of tricks and deceit to get that provisional court decree granting him temporary residential custody. Even the Director of the Maltese Central Authority called it a “banana show”. It was an order that according to Maltese Law, never should have been given a decree. And of course, let’s not forget, by July 13th, 2017, that court application was “definitively rejected” once my lawyer sent them information on what was really going on. I suppose, looking back, I could have easily involved myself in the family court section he had applied with and won, but I wasn’t going to do that. 

That’s one of the #1 pieces of advice that my advocacy job has taught me to inform other left-behind parents. Do NOT submit yourself to a foreign jurisdiction if the Hague is an option!

This next part is painful, but I think that for the sake of IPCA and parental alienation, in how both of these issues are SYNONYMOUS, I need to be transparent. In section “s”, You-Know-Who uses the child advocate report as evidence. The report is horrible, but it’s a prime example of the very epitome of parental alienation.

Once you read this report, you’d think to yourself – wow, this kid really hates his mother. She’s a horrible person. I never saw this report until recently. There were parts of it quoted in the Hague Order of Return – “The things that the minor told the Children’s Advocate contrast sharply with what results from these proceedings. During the course of these proceedings the mother obtained court authorization to hold regular Skype calls with the minor…The Director exhibited in the Acts of these proceedings the recordings and also the transcripts of telephone conversations between the minor Zander and his mother and his half-brother Killian that took place in April and May of this year. The Court listened to the playbacks of these conversations and finds that there is absolutely nothing in common between these conversations and what the minor said to the Children’s Advocate. In one of these conversations, Zander says ‘I want you to know I’ll be coming there soon. Because the year’s almost over, it’s already been like 100 something days. So, I’ll be there in like 200 something days, okay?’ The content of the conversations between Zander, his mother and brother makes it very clear that there is a very good relationship between and it certainly cannot be said that there is some resistance on the minor’s part to return to the United States. On the contrary, the minor expresses the desire to return soon. The Court does not want to speculate why it is that in January 2017 the minor spoke to the Children’s Advocate so  negatively against his mother while in May 2017 he tells his mother that he wants to go back.” I remember my Maltese attorney stated to me that the Court was implying here that the Children’s Advocate was “paid off” to report such things or simply lied to. Most professionals are easily fooled when it comes to the games of parental alienation. I say it’s safe to assume this woman was easily swayed by a seemingly charming personality and wasn’t educated in recognizing the signs of a schooled and pressured child.

The things Zander said? “she lies to me”, “she tries to trick me”, “she never lets me communicate with dad”. First and foremost, Zander doesn’t even call You-Know-Who “dad”. He was out of the picture during Zander’s formative years and that’s no one’s fault except his own. I can’t control his lack of travel when he was more than capable of doing so, in fact he did quite often to places like Australia for bike marathons. Priorities I guess…The only time that Zander had been with You-Know-Who was during the visitation, which equaled a whopping 18 weeks prior to this abduction. 18 weeks, 5 months from the years 2014 to 2016. How could, as was supposedly said in Zander’s own words, he be “so much closer to his father than his mother”? Everything in that report is a lie. I don’t talk to Zander about my “issues” with You-Know-Who. I never did. In fact, I have multiple emails I sent to You-Know-Who telling him he needed to STOP talking to Zander about these grown-up discussions. On Thursday, January 26, 2017 at 5:22 PM, before I ever knew what You-Know-Who was up to, I tried to talk to him. It reads as follows: “You are probably expecting this. But we have to discuss what’s been going on and spoken about over there. It is NOT okay to talk about adult issues with children. NOT OKAY…He was not old enough to experience typical changes between divorcing parents…I have never ever even used the word ‘divorce’ to him….We weren’t married and you weren’t even there when he was born, yet you think you can just fling the word ‘divorce’ around to suite your goals. You are harming Zander… Zander enjoyed time with you even though he didn’t understand why he had to be with you. Zander handled your impromptu visits very well. Until you started airing our dirty laundry to him. Kids ask questions; I get that. Especially Zander. But here’s the thing. As adults, we can choose how we approach something. As a parent, you can look at him and say he doesn’t have to think about these issues just yet. You can tell him to forget about it until he’s older. You don’t do that. When Zander is with me, I refuse to talk about it. I refuse to mess with his mind. After every single visit with you, he comes home messed up. He’s depressed. He’s sad. He’s confused. He’s withdrawn. Every single time…I know what you are doing. I knew the moment Zander asked me, ‘Why did you divorce him?’ Hmmm. Pretty obvious what you’re doing.” 

Here is his response to that email: “I was sorry to see that the tone of your correspondence was once again less than amicable. Zander has been asking me certain questions for 2-3 years now and have always been sensitive to his age, as I am aware of the process of informing children in a safe way. However, rest assured he has known about the concept of ‘divorce’ for a while, rest assured that whatever he has learned about it from me has been without malice or misinformation, and was done with full awareness of his age… However, when he comes here, he is able to get a considerably fuller picture of the situation. As a parent, you have a choice. You can either keep insulating Zander from the reality around him, or you can accept that he is an inquisitive, intelligent, and insightful child with a growing mind and awareness, and with natural and inevitable questions. The questions will come…So I will not apologise for explaining this to Zander…I don’t think that avoiding the need to address his concerns, questions, and fears out of hand simply by dismissing him as ‘too young’ or ‘a child’ is contributing to his healthy emotional and psychological management of the situation. However, I find your remark that you refuse to ‘explain yourself to your child’ over a decision that affected his daily life in the most profound of ways quite indicative.”

As you can see, his mentality is very concerning. Keep in mind that Zander was only EIGHT YEARS OLD, with special needs no less. Honestly, I have a really hard time with his thought process. I struggle so hard not to be consumed by anger because that’s not healthy. And in true narcissism form, he twists it around to sound like me choosing not to have these adult discussions with my CHILD are somehow “indicative” of my negative character (I wish my blog allowed emojis lol).

These are just some thoughts without the final addition to this equation. As I said earlier, I have only recently read the full report. When I did, although I knew none of it was true, I was still curious. I read parts of the report back to Zander. For just a moment, let’s go back to March 15, 2018. On that date, his birthday, Zander told me that You-Know-Who said all kinds of horrible things about me then told him to tell the psychologist every “bad thing mommy ever did to you”. So, I already knew that Zander was schooled by Zander’s own explanation. But I still asked him. I told him that I’m not mad at him at all, but if he truly does feel like any of that is true, I need to know. I told him that I can’t be the best Mommy that I can be without input from those around me. 

I don’t believe in parenting that resembles dictatorship. It’s like the recent trend floating around on social media that recognizes we should no longer force children to hug people or accept hugs they don’t want. 

Zander, of course, was quick to remind me that he already explained that he didn’t mean any of those things. I know that he feels responsible and ashamed for the things he said. I reminded him that he is not to blame. I do not blame him. This wasn’t him. A few things that I mentioned in the report, Zander became very indignant and said he never said those things. He said they were outright lies and “add-ons”. He then decided to share with me that the whole time he was alone with the “children’s advocate”, he was scared that You-Know-Who was listening and could hear him outside of the room. He was scared that he would get in trouble if he didn’t say the things that others wanted him to say. He told me that before he went into the room, You-Know-Who was telling him all these things, and Zander was like “Why would I want to say these things?” You-Know-Who got angry (in Zander’s eyes) and claimed he was only giving advice on what to say because all these things were true and they happened. Then Zander was scared that You-Know-Who would find out somehow or other what he talked about. This is why you should never accept any evidence derived from such a situation. If at any time I had taken Zander to a psychologist to talk about how he felt about You-Know-Who, I would have been accused of setting the whole thing up. 

You see, You-Know-Who has always perceived this entire ocean-divided-parenting thing the way that he wants. Which is that I’ve done everything I could to alienate him from Zander. Which isn’t true. HE believes all those things that were told to Zander. All those quotes in that report did not come from Zander. They were You-Know-Who’s explicit beliefs. I’ve heard them for years. I  never talked about any of that with Zander. We didn’t talk about You-Know-Who in our house. Zander never brought him up, why would I? He talked to him nearly every weekend. After his Maltese visits during the summer, he would sometimes talk about You-Know-Who. I just nodded my head and listened. I never offered anything back. I personally do not want to talk about that man. Never did. I didn’t like the way he treated me. If someone doesn’t like the way they are treated and spoke to, then that’s that. I’m not a bad person for avoiding a subject that caused me stress and anxiety and panic attacks. 

No one ever talked to Zander about the Skype issue. Even when my Mom took him to her job on weekends to Skype, we just said, “You’re going to speak to [You-Know-Who].” Yet he’s able to know the whole issue, by You-Know-Who’s perceptions, enough to discuss this openly with someone in Malta? No one can convince me this wasn’t schooling. Zander himself openly admits this. 

I can only pray that one day Zander realizes that he is not to blame for everything that happened. 

In a 2016 scientific paper, DSM authors Dr. Narrow and Dr. Wamboldt say that parental alienation may be diagnosed as Child Affected by Parental Alienation Distress (V61.29) if one is talking about the child. Parental alienation may be diagnosed as Child Psychological Abuse (V995.51) if one is talking about a parent alienating their child. This confirms that parental alienation is indeed in DSM-5. 

I researched these papers and examined them. Parental alienation tactics are clearly defined in those papers. I recognize those tactics in our case. Do I want to take Zander to a psychologist just to have this all diagnosed as Parental alienation? No I do not. Zander has been put through enough. Me knowing the results and conclusions based on research is enough for me. I also minored in Psychology for my brief period of time at University. I’m not a professional by any means of the word, but I have always had an inherent understanding of the subject.

This is the link to the clinical papers.

Just a few examples: Empowering the Child to Reject a Parent by emphasizing “child should decide on visitation”, “listen to the child”, and “advocating for child testimony”. My lawyer and I advocated to NOT involve Zander in the trial because we felt he was too young. The opposing side insisted and based their entire defense on Zander’s testimony. They insisted on making Zander talk about choice and who he wanted to live with. This is the very definition of parental alienation.

Instituting something known as “The Unforgivable Event” is another tactic of parental alienation. The one used in our case was You-Know-Who’s distorted and false claims that I kidnapped Zander when he was a baby.

When a child claims that the other parent is a “liar”, this is also an evident sign of parental alienation. How would this child know the other parent is a liar unless someone is telling them so? Just as You-Know-Who admitted in his email, he had been telling Zander “his reality” for the last 2-3 years. This is parental alienation. There is no reason for you to tell Zander any such things unless your goal is to alienate this child from his own mother.

Another clinical check off for parental alienation is Role Reversal Use of the Child, “It’s not me, it’s the child who…”. This is absolutely exactly what You-Know-Who claimed to everyone who would listen. “It’s not me who brought this up, it was Zander…”. “It wasn’t my idea, it was Zander’s…”.

My Maltese attorney stated based on what he witnessed during the trial, that You-Know-Who had his own interpretations of the parental agreement that were not true, legal interpretations. Just because someone perceives something a certain way, does not make it legally factual. I did not alienate. I lived my life avoiding this man, and I am not sorry for that. My family has been more than accommodating taking that role from me to save me from anxiety. My Mom finally knew what I went through. She finally saw You-Know-Who for what he really was in 2010, and she did all in her power to deal with You-Know-Who. To encourage communication between Zander and You-Know-Who. Just because I did not involve myself with those calls or talk to him on the phone myself or meet up with him in person for a sundae as he wanted, does not mean that I alienated Zander from him. 

I alienated him from myself. 

 

 

 

 

Refutations Part I

I like to view this blog as a means to defend myself. It’s my voice. It’s part of my right to Freedom of Speech. When it comes to You-Know-Who, he likes to exercise his right to free speech by slandering my name, painting this picture that I’m some horrible person and mother. For years I have remained silent and let the barrage of insults slide off me. I knew it wasn’t true so why engage with him? However, he likes to paint these images of me in court, with lawyers, with government officials, with both our families, and finally, our son. I can’t abide by this anymore.

Refuting everything he says will take time, organization, and lots of words, so there may be several “Parts” to my Refutations.

Admittedly, You-Know-Who is skilled in word subterfuge. He’s good at looking at parts of the issue and making a big deal rather than looking at the whole picture, because that small part suits him.

What I plan on refuting is the first response to my motion for modification that You-Know-Who filed January 31, 2018. I briefly touched on some of his fallacies in this blog.

I think it’s interesting how he thinks. I had my 2nd son October 2010. At the end of that year, my then fiancé and I, with Zander and Killian, moved into our own rental home. We couldn’t afford that house in Pennsylvania, but we were promised by an in-law that we would be financially helped. That proved to be false. The house used to be a crack-house, something which was not disclosed to us by said in-law (who happened to be into real estate and worked closely with the landlord). The basement would flood easily. The gas pipes were leaking, unbeknownst to us so our bills were $400+ a month. Financially, we were at our lowest. The house was only heated by propane, and we couldn’t pay the bill. I remember heating the downstairs with the oven by opening the door. I saved money by exclusively nursing my infant son and cloth diapering. I literally could not afford to buy formula or diapers anyway.

It was during this time that I took advantage of my perfect credit and opened up tons of credit cards just to get by. Peebles to buy clothes for the kids. Target to get a wider variety of needs. JCPenney for when I needed more clothes for the kids but Peebles was maxed out. 

Before I knew it, I was thousands of dollars in debt and had nothing to show for it. Even though I did not have to and had no obligation to share, I shared with You-Know-Who my “difficulties” as he puts it. For years he belittled me that all he wants to be is friends. He continues to mock me during Skype calls with Zander that “if only mommy can be nice, we can be friends”, yet that is exactly what I have always struggled to be, especially in those early years.

I shared with him things you only share with friends. I shared with him very personal and revealing family situations. I gave him exact monetary figures on WHY we were struggling. He didn’t care. He wanted what he wanted. So in his own words, “Following years of limited access due to reported ‘difficulties’ by the mother to allow things like; video conferencing, skype and limited photos”. I could not afford a decent computer. I could not afford a decent phone. I had an old used blackberry phone that had seen better days and was nowhere near the technology smartphones have today. I couldn’t afford internet. Heck, I couldn’t even afford my cell phone bill, but I was locked in a contract. You-Know-Who showed very little understanding and harassed me on a monthly basis. I received emails like this: “If you really want to make me happy do the following; a) Send at least 10-15 new pictures a month, b) Any smartphone on the market as far as I know allows sending e-mails not just replying so at least one update a week would be good, c) I know you have expenses and what not and sorry you are struggling but you need to get a phone or internet, this is unacceptable. If you do these 3 things THEN I will be VERY happy and not just happy. Apart from that your sympathy of the situation and apologies, do very little to make me happy. You wanted the cake now eat it. You got your divorce, now respect my right to my son, actively.”

Let me requote something: “You wanted the cake now eat it. You got your divorce”

It always ended up right back to that point. Anger over me divorcing him. It didn’t matter that he lived on a different continent and couldn’t see Zander. It was my fault. It didn’t matter that Zander was only 2 and 3 and couldn’t talk, let alone reciprocate on the phone, it was my fault. He spoke to my mother every week, which she openly shared all the updates I gave her to give to him. We frequently visited my mom, and she would talk to him and he was happy with hearing Zander in the background. Zander had autism and didn’t interact to us, let alone him. That was just the way of it. I did not deny access. Our parental agreement stated that I was to encourage communication between father and son. Not once did it say I was required to have webcam, which I couldn’t afford at the time anyway, but I facilitated all that I could with what I had. Which is more than most mothers are willing to do in that situation. I did my best. Yet to this day, nearly a decade after our separation and subsequent divorce, he is still bringing up every single fault that he feels I committed!

Next quote: “The mother withheld the minor child in breach of the signed agreement, effectively denying and rejecting visitation for the minor with his father in Malta for the years 2012 and 2013. The argument was on the basis of diagnoses for ‘autism’, which the father was excluded from until the evaluations and reports were prepared.”

Okay, I’ll be honest. This is partly true. However, in 2012, I was not legally obligated to send Zander that summer. We had a verbal agreement between us where I stated if he visited his son frequently in the United States then I would feel comfortable sending Zander to Malta a summer early. I did not do this because he did not visit Zander more than 3 days in a 3 year period. I was not legally in the wrong for this. He filed for access with the Hague accusing me of denying him any access to Zander. Then when they did nothing (because I wasn’t in the wrong), he filed contempt of court charges against me. During the course of getting served, I had hired an attorney who advised me not to send Zander to Malta for the summer of 2013 based on his autism diagnosis. Because I had professionals telling me this could harm Zander. His diagnosis was fairly new, and I was still learning how to help him. His psychologist, Mrs. Hatcher, felt he should not be removed from my care for more than 6 weeks. We went to court. The psychologist was involved. She gave her recommendations. You-Know-Who and his attorney objected to the 6 week offer at an attempt to mediate for the first summer. This is why mediation with You-Know-Who is pointless; it’s his way or no way. Always has been; always will be. Although court proceedings occurred so we could work everything out, You-Know-Who had to hire psychologists in Malta to help him, I did send him. Now the statement, “which the father was excluded from until the evaluations and reports were prepared.”

I told him exactly what I was doing. He told me not to. What did he expect me to do? Pay for his airline ticket and go together in person? How was I supposed to include a man on a different continent!? I informed this man of everything I did. I believe what he expected from me was his permission, which I did not have. I proceeded to have Zander diagnosed with autism despite his wishes. I then sent him the forms once I received them. That’s really all I’m legally obligated to do. I wasn’t going to medically neglect my child simply because the father didn’t want me to have him evaluated for something he didn’t agree with. #SorryNotSorry

And I just want to add, eventually You-Know-Who bought a laptop for the sole purpose of Skyping with webcam. The explicit rule was that I was not allowed to be involved or touch the laptop or have it in my possession. So this left my mom, who is technologically illiterate (not to say this to be disrespectful; I love my mom) to deal with setting these calls up so he could see Zander. It was very stressful on my mom. Zander wouldn’t hold still, but once successful, those moments would last 45+minutes. We tried to do them twice a month. Less than 6 months after purchasing the laptop and having long calls with Zander, You-Know-Who stopped requesting them. That was when he went behind my back and started Skyping with teachers at Zander’s school. And he wants to talk about exclusion? I guess it only counts if he thinks I’m violating the court agreement because he’s immune.

Next excerpt:

In here, he basically talks about what I talked about above. He filed again for “Denial of Access”, which really at that time, just equated to him throwing a hissy fit because I put my foot down. Notice how he puts condition in quotations. He’s mocking it. I just want to point out how he likes to talk about me being “rebuked” by the courts, but I didn’t get a contempt charge. Judge Hicks had his hands tied. He understood where I was coming from, but being a small town judge, he didn’t understand international law. He felt that because we had concurrently entered a child custody agreement with both the United States and Malta, he couldn’t modify the existing order to validate the sudden changes in circumstances – that being the autism diagnosis. What You-Know-Who fails to specify in his response to the court when he points out something the judge wrote, “any filing in modification would also  need to be filed in Malta, if not primarily Malta.” is the fact that the judge ordered You-Know-Who to take my attempts at modification and ask the courts in Malta if they wanted to hear the case. February 5, 2015, the result came back and ultimately, the Malta Court declined to accept jurisdiction of the matter and further ruled that jurisdiction lies with the American Courts. This is because the Courts in Malta understood how jurisdiction worked. I could have filed for modification if only Judge Hicks had allowed me. But in the beginning, my fear was because of Zander’s autism. I had very real founded worries, not including the fear that my child would not be returned. In this excerpt, he word plays to make himself look good. And me bad. I’m used to it. It’s funny that he brings up Dr. Elena Tanti Burlo, who assisted in Zander’s transition, because he had Zander “retested” for autism. They ruled that Zander did not have “autism”, he had “Aspergers”. Which is autism….The only reason it was called something different in America is because they changed their DSM. The psychologist who diagnosed Zander said if it weren’t for the fact they were changing everything around, she would have diagnosed him as Aspergers. I don’t see how me claiming repeatedly that Zander had high functioning autism was “inflating the condition of the minor”. The only thing I can gather is in their culture, calling anyone with “autism” is calling them mentally handicapped or disabled. Also for whatever prejudiced reason, You-Know-Who had a cousin who was included and allowed in that report to speak on his opinions. All my perceived “wrongdoings” were blasted in front of all professionals to paint me in a negative picture. On my end, I never spoke badly about You-Know-Who; I simply informed all parties that he was European and didn’t live in America. That was it.

Then in point “m” You-Know-Who states “Following the Summer visit in 2014, in Malta, with the father, the minor was lauded of his improvement in school and overall ability. The mother following some time further sought action to attempt a modification order and in addition further taxed and restrained communication between the minor and the father in retaliation of the improved father and son relationship the minor and father share.”

Okay, what exactly are you saying that I’m doing? Because this isn’t clear at all. This makes no sense to me. (I also want to add that I paid my attorney at that time to file for modification. This happened right before Zander left. He did not file an emergency hearing as I asked…then I heard nothing more from said attorney. I didn’t even know he had filed. No clue. Had no clue until I received an email from You-Know-Who. I couldn’t do anything because I had just given birth. I didn’t even realize anything had come of those hearings. Not until Zander’s abduction and I had to file for all transcripts from that time.)

Zander’s last school he went to, I had no idea that You-Know-Who had been communicating with certain people. I’m sure you all can take a gander on what exactly was talked about besides Zander. How horrible of a person I was and how I never let him talk to his son….yep. This is the time period that You-Know-Who purchased a laptop. My mom wrote down all the dates that they talked and the length of time. For half the school year, we worked out times for them to Skype. He sent me a rather nasty email during this period which states, “Stop being a pain in the ass!! I bought a laptop for your mother so i could see Zander every 2 weeks on skype and have some form of communication.” This is just a small piece of that email. During this time, I had a newborn. I had complications during my 3rd C-section which resulted in me walking around with a foley catheter for 10 weeks. I was unable to drive during this time period. During that time, I only managed one visit to my mom’s house in order for them to Skype. By October, we were able to coordinate more times. He continues to berate me, “By right it should be YOU to do this, but we have both agreed that you are incapable and immature to carry out this responsibility, so leave it to the adults. When i said BOTH i meant you and me. As far as i am concerned you confirm and admit to be irresponsible and immature by the way you act and behave . Myself i say you are that because i have yet to see a genuine act of where you meet me HALF way on anything to make this easier for me and Zander.” Remember, above I mentioned that when he purchased the laptop, I was forbidden from having any access to it. Despite the fact that he had 1-2 Skype calls with Zander for 45+minutes at a time, You-Know-Who went behind my back and began Skyping in school. This went on for months. The only reason I even knew was because Zander was coming home on certain days complaining he was hungry or didn’t get to play recess. I would ask him why and the response I got back was “Because I had to Skype with [You-Know-Who].” Yes, I was upset. Yes, I called the school and tried to stop it. I even explained, this is something that is to be done between us both. We were facilitating contact outside of school whenever he asked. My mom was getting the hang of it. I told the principal to please stop because it was affecting Zander’s routine, and he was coming home stressed on those days. If Zander didn’t have autism, I doubt I ever would have found out. I told the principal that he bought my mom a computer for just those reasons. My mother and I discussed amongst ourselves, why in the world would he choose 5-10 minute Skype sessions in school as opposed to nearly hour long sessions with my mom? We debated the issue. Finally, we both realized…he wanted to make me look bad. Poor him, deprived of his only child because his evil ex wife refuses to allow him the most meager of access.

He had been systematically destroying my image for years. This was no different. It was all for one end-game. Complete ownership and control over Zander. “The mother had issues with this access being granted to the father and felt it did not help her on-going agenda to further limit and alienate the minor from his father.” That’s not how I felt. It’s amazing how he just “gets” my feelings so readily. No, not really. When I read this stuff, the only thing I can really do is just laugh. He sounds like a broken record on my alienating tactics. This is his favorite example. My mom wrote an affidavit for the Maltese Hague trial describing in great detail how often You-Know-Who had access to Zander, whether it was phone calls every weekend or Skype calls when my mom was able to do so. When it came to the laptop and Skyping, I had forcibly been removed from that equation. He can’t hold me responsible for that.

I wish that You-Know-Who could have a real sit-down conversation with any one of the left-behind fathers that I know and have deep love and affectionate friendships with. Let them explain to him what real alienation and lack of contact is with your child and children.

Because he has no flippin’ clue!

To be continued….