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.

In the Best in Interest of Children ~ Children’s Rights Facebook Group

In the Best in Interest of Children

Quite often, I write about parental alienation and family court bias. Both, of these things do and will continue to occur in its present form unless, something dramatic changes. When we set foot into a family court environment to decide parental responsibilities, we have certain expectations that the term “best interests” of our child will be applied in the fullest measure possible.

Within the family court realm, there are essentially three people who will ultimately have a hand in the decision making process of where our child will live. First, you have an attorney for Mom, an attorney for Dad and finally, the judge who will decide the merits of the case. Obviously, the attorney’s job is to advance their client’s position and most times isn’t worried so much about the best interest standard.

This leaves the family court judge. These judges handle a great many cases that range from criminal to civil to family and anything else in between. As such, it is unreasonable to think that they are experts in all aspects of the law pertaining to the various disciplines. Also, they have limited knowledge of the family outside of what is presented to them in the courtroom. As a result, this can cause a judge to issue an order that may or may not be in the child’s best interest.

When applied, the term “best interest” should meet the legal definition. If, it does not then it is simply a useless phrase that is coined by the administrators of these proceedings to justify their rulings. Just so we’re all on the same page, let’s take a look at this term and what it implies. Though, each state may vary a bit in its definition, they all mention the main points.

Though, there are too many aspects to list in this article however, I will attempt to highlight some of the more obvious and relevant ones used in determining what constitutes the best interests standard. To see a complete list for your individual state, you can do a search of the term. The following are as listed, not necessarily in order.

*The age of the child;
*The relationship of the child with the child’s parents and any other persons who may significantly affect the child’s welfare.
*The preference of the child, if old enough to express a meaningful preference.
*The stability of any proposed living arrangements for the child.
*The motivation of the parties involved and their capacities to give the child love, affection and guidance. *The capacity of each parent to allow and encourage frequent and continuing contact between the child and the other parent, including physical access.
*Methods for assisting parental cooperation and resolving disputes and each parent’s willingness to use those methods.
*The existence of domestic abuse between the parents, in the past or currently, and how that abuse affects the child.
*The existence of a parent’s conviction for a sex offense or a sexually violent offense.
*Whether allocation of some or all parental rights and responsibilities would best support the child’s safety and well-being.

As you can see, there are many different aspects that judges must take into account when deciding the issue of parental responsibilities. None of these should ever be taken for granted lest, the child suffer due to the absence of one of these considerations. However, not all of the above mentioned are equally applied and sometimes, are ignored.

Should one of the parents display an unwillingness to follow these guidelines of best interests, then allocation should be given to the parent who is a willing participant. However, this does not always happen. There are times when the judge in these cases have demonstrated a certain level of hostility and bias towards one of the parents, attorneys or both, Further, their lack of understanding family law to the fullest, ignorance of motivating factors such as, parental alienation is a fairly common occurrence.

It is for these reasons that judges should be required to outline the guidelines, according to their respective state and go through them line by line explaining why each one is in compliance with their orders. I believe, that should a family court judge be required to do this, the very essence of transparency would eliminate any erroneous ruling and the best interest standards would be fully administered and served.

Finally, family court judges must be required to take educational classes to learn about a child’s best interest, as it applies to governing law. Lastly, family law cases must be separate from criminal and civil courts to insure that the judges are not only qualified but, also specialized in these matters. In allowing these things to take place, we may start to see some semblance of “best interest” standard being applied.

By David Shubert

Please, help spread the word by sharing this article on your timeline, with family and friends!

Visit me at www.facebook.com/BringBackChianne to read more articles or www.facebook.com/HopefulFather and click on friend request or even better, click on Follow me for notifications of new articles!

Source: Children’s Rights Facebook Support Page

The Florida Family Law Reform Advocacy Group

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Justice Denied - No Jury in Family Courts - 2016

Source: New bill could mean big changes for alimony in Florida

Continue reading The Florida Family Law Reform Advocacy Group

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