Family judge admits pedophilia! Would you allow your children in his chambers?

Project Fatherhood FL 11- 2015Bring awareness to the corruption and fraudulent acts of Family Courts and Child Protective Services. Our children, parents and families are being abused, destroyed and in some cases, murdered while the APA maintains its “no policy” policy, which we believe contributes to the problem which consist with the corruption within the system that is supposed to be in the best interest of our children and families.

Welcome to Leon Koziol.Com

img_0510 Removal order obtained by Dr. Leon Koziol from his custody judge, Bryan Hedges, who was declared to have a “reputation beyond reproach” until removed from family court after admitting to sexual misconduct on his handicapped, five year old niece.

By Dr. Leon Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

As a dedicated dad, I came close to contempt of court many times trying to protect my little girls from harm in New York’s family courts. As an attorney before that, I never once faced such a threat. But as today’s story will prove, fate or the good lord was looking out for us. Brace yourselves for this one!

Many of our followers remain incredulous over my public disclosures of a pedophile family judge, Bryan Hedges, who once presided over a custody war started by my ex-spouse, Kelly Hawse-Koziol (with monumental ignorance). Here at Parenting Rights Institute, we protect unsuspecting moms and dads…

View original post 910 more words

Fathers are the key to child behavior.

Fathers the key to child behaviour.

Children who have contact with their fathers following a family break-up suffer fewer behavioural problems, academics said today.

Youngsters who have a close relationship with their natural father after their parents split up are likely to be less disorderly, anxious or aggressive.

Researchers discovered that children who had infrequent or no contact at all with their non-resident fathers were more likely to externalise and internalise problems.

Professor Judy Dunn from the Institute of Psychiatry at Kings College, London, analysed data collected from 162 children whose parents had separated over a two-year period.

Of those children, 18% had no contact with their father, and 16% had contact less than once a month.

The research was part of the continuing Children Of The 90s project based at Bristol University, which has been monitoring the progress of 14,000 children in the Avon area since 1991.

The findings were published in the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry.

Prof Dunn said: “There is a practical message here – parents should make a great effort to get on well after they split up.

“They should put their differences behind them for the sake of the children. The more contact there is the better the outcome for the children.”

Researchers interviewed all 162 children (initially at an average age of eight and a half) about their relationship with their mothers, fathers and stepfathers.

The mothers were asked to report on children’s behaviour, on whether they were aggressive or delinquent (externalising behaviour) or withdrawn, anxious, or depressed (internalising).

The research comes in the wake of an attack on the Prime Minister with a purple flour bomb by campaign group Fathers 4 Justice.

Rights

The group claims current laws are failing children and fathers and wants better parenting rights for fathers.

Prof Dunn said: “This research is the best kind of thing to support the case of some desperate campaigners who want more access to their children.

“Our findings were unequivocal: more frequent and more regular contact was associated with closer more intense relationships with non resident fathers and fewer adjustment problems in children.”

Prof Dunn noted that the amount of contact between a child and a father was related to the relationship between the parents.

She added: “This underlines the importance of parents developing a good working relationship over children’s issues and of keeping any problems in their own relationships separate from their parenting.”

The research showed there tended to be less contact between children and their fathers if the mothers had been relatively young when pregnant.

Continue reading Fathers are the key to child behavior.

The injustice that gave rise to the movement for presumptive joint custody

The Future of Custody Law Reform|Law Blogs|

At the current time there is a professed aversion to custody “labels” in legal circles, coupled with a shift of emphasis from deciding who gets custody, to deciding how parental decision-making and time with children will actually be structured between two parties. The latter is sometimes described as a “shared parenting” paradigm.

Insofar as it forces courts to make particularized determinations in preference to declaring all-or-nothing outcomes, shared parenting legislation can be viewed as a positive development. As I have demonstrated in a previous blog post, though, the custody “label” really does continue to matter even after shared parenting legislation is enacted.

This is why shared parenting legislation typically requires shared parenting orders to make a custody designation, even if it is “solely for the purposes of enforcement.” Short of a nationwide (and worldwide) agreement to abolish custody designations, it will continue to be necessary for courts to address who gets custody, no matter how hard judges and legislators try to deflect attention away from that problem.

The injustice that gave rise to the movement for presumptive joint custody cannot simply be wished away.

It may bblog2b-2bscale2bof2bjusticee possible to subdue the problem by ignoring it for a while, but at some point it will become necessary to address it head-on. When that time comes, it will be useful to have an understanding of the key issues that need to be addressed when considering presumptive joint custody reforms.

Legal vs. physical custody

Legislation establishing a presumptive right to joint custody should clearly state whether it applies to legal custody, physical custody, or both.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Continue reading The injustice that gave rise to the movement for presumptive joint custody