Phillip Garrido is technically “a father.” He allegedly kidnapped Jaycee Dugard when she was 11, sexually assaulted her, so that she subsequently gave birth to two children. Some have had difficulty attaching the term “father” to Garrido. One news report I saw said, “He allegedly “sired” two children.” These children (both girls), are reportedly 11 and 14. We do not know if Garrido also sexually assaulted the children.
This week I would like to discuss a difficult subject and ask some difficult questions. Because I am using the case of Phillip Garrido to guide this discussion, we are considering fatherhood. However, I believe the same points can be raised regarding motherhood.
Here are the questions:
At what point is a father not a father? At what point does a child not need both parents? At what point does a father’s treatment of a mother justify the termination of his parental rights? Should criminal behavior be considered in custody/visitation cases? At what point is a father so mentally ill that children should not see him? Should a child’s wish to see his/her father play a role in these decisions?
I’ll say up front that in the extreme case of Phillip Garrido few if any one will argue that a court should have the girls brought to visit him in prison. For most people the question of whether Garrido also sexually assaulted the girls would be a deciding factor. For the sake of this discussion we will assume that the question of sexual assault cannot be proven one way or another and that the girls won’t talk about that. We are going to make that assumption because in the vast majority of cases I know of that is the situation.
At what point is a father not a father?
State laws say that a rapist does not have parental rights. O.K. that makes sense for stranger rapes, but what if the rape occurred within the context of a relationship? What if a woman is raped, feels humiated then decides to continue a relationship with the “attacker” so although a rape occurred on Tuesday she consented on Friday and we don’t know which act resulted in conception.
What if there is coercion within the relationship. The man says, “Unless you take care of me sexually, I’ll divorce you and get custody of __________ (an existing child).” Out of fear the woman consents to sex sort of and gets pregnant again. In this case coercion is psychological as opposed to physical.
Now if you think that coerced sex is rape. What about covert coercion? I mean conning? What about the woman conned into the relationship? In this case her beliefs about the man and the nature of their relationship that caused her to consent were all based on lies. Had she known the truth, she would never have agreed to the relationship or to sex. What then?
At what point does the father’s treatment of the mother justify the termination of his parental rights?
In many cases the family courts have tried to separate the relationships of the family believing that a man’s treatment of his partner has nothing to do with his relationship with his children. It appears that even Phillip Garrido provided for these children in that they were supported financially. He also claims he nurtured and loved them.
If you say that kidnap and rape of the mother justifies termination of parental rights. I can tell you of a case where the woman initially consented to the relationship. The man who is a psychopathic con artist, eventually held her prisoner. She gave birth during that time and is now fighting to have the man’s parental rights terminated. He was arrested and is in prison for assaulting a sibling, the woman’s other child, but he is still “a father”- according to at least one judge.
Does a woman held prisoner have to constantly try to escape in order to “prove” she was not a “willing victim”? The victim in Garrido’s case did not apparently attempt escape. Are we to say she voluntarily lived with Garrido?
At what point is a father so mentally ill that children should not see him?
It is clear that in addition to being sexually deviant, and personality disordered, Garrido is also psychotic (delusional and hallucinating). Should children be protected from parents with psychosis? If so why? People with cluster B personality disorders have difficulty with interpersonal relationships and when the disorder is severe are not capable of placing another person’s welfare above their own. What then?
Should criminal behavior be considered in parental rights cases?
There are many children who are ordered to visit parents in prison. Why are these girls an exception? (Provided that they were not assaulted).
Should a child’s wish to see his/her father play a role in these decisions?
Garrido’s victim’s family members are quoted in the news as saying that the situation has been difficult for the girls since “He was their father.” Children have a natural tendency to seek to be with those who have raised them. Why do we use this tendency against them? Why do we think this is always a good thing? Shouldn’t concerned healthy adults make a decision based on reason, instead of a primitive drive children have?
My answers
We all have to stop denying that the above questions exist, put our heads together and come up with a just system for dealing with these questions. In the United States, I am afraid this should be a Federal Issue. It will be very difficult for us to fight to change the laws in every state separately. To say that a child always needs both parents is clearly absurd, as Garrido’s case shows us. If we look at each aspect of Garrido’s case we see there are some clear guidelines that can be developed to deal with situations where:
One parent harms the other.
One parent terrorizes, coerces and/or imprisons the other.
One parent is a criminal.
One parent is mentally ill.
Although cases where a child has two disordered parents are common (and most tragic), cases where there is one relatively healthy parent should be the focus of change. I assert this because by forcing a parent to deal with a disordered other parent, we condemn that person to suffer during what should be the happiest most productive years of their lives. Let’s face it, 18 years is a long time. Also since the psychiatric disorders are partly genetic, these children need the best, least stressful upbringing the least disordered parent can give them.
Please use the comments section to weigh in on your answers and post your own story with regard to these questions.
Boy, Liane, you ask some difficult questions—and not being Solomon, I can’t answer all of them in EVERY CASE—-
Some parents are psychotic when off their meds, but “sane” when on them. Where do you draw the line? WHO draws the line?
Some “criminals” with felony records are fairly okay parents, and some are violent psychopaths.
Define “mental illness”
Define “harms”
Define “terrorizes, coerces, imprisons”
Define “is” define “be” LOL
Yea, I know, he “did NOT have sex with THAT woman.”
Since family courts are under the STATE’s control, how can a federal law cover this?
Because, in my opinion, none of these things has a black or white answer in ALL cases (how could it?) we keep on with the very POOR way of judging things (Look at the Dr. amy Castillo case!)
Un fortunately the people who “make the laws” (mostly attorneys in public service) DON’T UNDERSTAND anything about mental illness or personality disorder or the fact that there “isn’t some therapy” that will “fix” it ALL. I think too that the courts are more focused on “parent’s rights” than on CHILDREN’S RIGHTS.
There is also a huge shortage of foster homes, and the theraputic placement of juviinile “cluster Bs” is a huge tax burden.
Good questions, but I sit here and shake my head and say, I can’t really answer any of them, but I WISH I COULD.
Like OxDrover says so eloquently–I can’t really answer these questions, but wish I could. However, as the less disordered parent of my daughter, I would like to make note of the fact that there are times when children’s voices should ABSOLUTELY be listened to by the court–when they express fear of the other parent, when they recognize that the other parent does not properly care for them, either by neglect or abuse, or both, and when they express a strong desire not to see the parent because they want to avoid the abuse. Not all children are predisposed to loving the abusive parent–so I would definitely resist the idea of not letting children’s voices be heard at all.
I wholeheartedly agree that we as a nation have gone too far to protect the parental rights, and have consequently created situations where the children suffer. There is no black and white, easy answer to this. When parents are both whole and mentally healthy, they present needed guidance and direction for a child. But who determines the health of the parents? We know from everything written here that the understanding of the psychopathic spectrum is limited in the courts as in the general society. I think it truly gets back to education–we need to press for education and study of psychopathy, narcissism and sociopathy. Every lawyer, judge and social worker in the family court system should be required to take courses, read books, and learn to recognize the signs of these disorders. I think that may be the only way to protect children in these situations.
Ironically, the courts often protect the parental rights of people who were never parental in the first place. Because the xs was a husband, he automatically enjoyed the label father. It’s an assumption made by courts, lawyers, judges, everyday people. An avocado with a mustache and a dirty ballcap could easily have fulfilled the same husband-ly and fatherly duties the xs did…but by God the court insisted he enjoy the same rights and privileges as any life form above what he actually was.
In some ways, laws have to be written in black and white and blanket statements in order to be written…unfortunately, not everyone fits under the blanket. How do you legislate the “gray” area? What about the price? I’ve heard other parents spend $3k-$5k on psych evals alone…only to have the disordered parent refuse to do it…and the judges allow them to skip it. I know I didn’t have $3K laying around after I threw the xs out. The cop told me to rent a hotel room while the xs was a fugitive, to put it on a credit card. Like the xs allowed there to be a non-maxed out credit card in the house? In fact, at that moment, he had my bank account $153 in the hole.
My own atty, who spends most of his time defending criminals thought sociopaths were “really rare.” I laughed and told him I was probably 1 of maybe 3 of the people he knew who weren’t- including his secretary. I’d sat in the waiting room enough (nearly 2 yrs)- I’d seen plenty. I gave him Dr Hare’s name and asked that he please Google it. I also asked him if justice was getting a fair punishment for the guilty or “gettin the bastard off”?
Without him going to prison for sexually abusing a child, I am quite sure that the xs would be continuing to demand his court mandated parental rights (because of what I’ve learned, here and otherwise, I can assure you I would be putting up a hell of a fight…the over my dead body kind of fight. My particular xs has a few skeletons in his closet that might one day prove to be useful.). But for the most part, without black and white, the kids are defenseless.
HOW do we GET the legal system interested AND educated on the personality disordered? I also think that the mental health experts need to come closer together on how to diagnose- too often some “hired gun” gets on the stand and says things like “he’s depressed and can’t hold a job because he misses his kids,” when he’s really a very bad man. We can’t add another layer of hoops for them to jump through and have someone label them “normal, just sad.”
Side note- I did meet a few people “in the system” who get it- not to disparage them…they are just too few.
As a foster mom, I saw kids’ longing for their biological parent, especially their mother. I took two foster kids to lunch, who were just meeting, and watched them both sit there and lie to each other, each pretending they knew their mom and had a wonderful mom, both assuming the other child was telling the truth. It was one of the saddest things I’ve watched among children. I’ve seen kids reunited with their mom’s and meeting for the first time. One girl, a teen, was gorgeous. She met her mom, who decades of drug use were apparent, including the missing teeth. The teen was enthralled with her mom and talked about how beautiful she was. She had wanted to have her “real” mom “love” her for so long!
Yet, I remain a firm believer that one of the most harmful things our foster care system does today is allow visitations with parents who are disturbed. I would see foster kids making great progress, then would come a visitation, and they were right back into emotional upheaval. Much like ourselves with NC. You have to maintain that NC to heal.
Likewise, trying to give a mom repeated chances with her kids , letting her have them back repeatedly can sometimes result in the death of a child.
But more commonly, what it does is delay permanent placement and adoption of children for five to six years. The window of opportunity for making a difference in a child’s life slips away, and further more the child is exposed to more violence, even rape, etc. I am not speaking hypothetically, but rather factually about three children we took in. What finally made the courts give up was when one of the children was found outside in below freezing weather in her underwear. But prior to that, the courts had “forgiven” the girls being raped by their father (he did go to prison for it, remarkably…as they often get away with it…. ) , one girl having to have her stomach pumped after getting into a bottle of meds that almost killed her, etc etc.
By the time we got them, the girls were sexually molesting each other and the boy was very violent, got expelled for trying to knife another…KINDERGARTEN kid.
So as much as I understand kids’ longing for their biological parent, I have very little patience with trying to make the biological family work. Those foster kids grew up to be very disturbed kids. Whereas I have friends from bad situations, who started out life with a diagnosis like reactive attachment disorder who are productive and happy people today, because they got adopted into a loving home.
Liane,
Your question is worthy of Jesus himself because it demands that we turn the entire justice system on its head. Instead of trying to meet the letter of the law (how to stay out of jail), we need to look at the spirit of the law – which is ultimately how to make our society a better place for each individual.
Jesus had many difficult questions posed to him so he would answer them in parables.
Here is my attempt:
If the father is a slave owner and the mother is a slave, what are the offspring? Slaves or children? Possessions or Persons?
If a person has kept another prisoner, controls that person’s (regardless of the method of control) is he not a slave owner? If that person gives birth to his children, what are the chances that he will not treat them as slaves? What would be his incentive to see and respect their personhood? Should a slave owner have the rights that a parent has? NO! because by definition he sees them as possessions and children need to be viewed as persons in order to grow up and become maximally productive members of society.
Jesus said he came to ‘tear down the church and rebuild it again”. He taught against the laws of the old testament, the laws of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. He was accused of breaking the sabbath because he healed the sick on the sabbath, but he told the pharisees where to stick it.
The old law tells people the minimum requirements for being lawful and so it addresses the lowest common denominator.
That is how our laws are: what to do to keep out of jail.
By contrast, Jesus came to tell us what we should ASPIRE to be, what is the highest good: the beatitudes.
Narcissism personality disorder is a spectrum on which we all fall to some degree. That degree should be measured by the degree of selfish control we strive to impose on others. Then the courts should take that into account when passing judgement.
This seems easy enough until you realize that our entire culture is increasingly based on controlling other people with lies. Sales people would be the first to be carted off to jail.
I struggle with this same issue. It isn’t a question in my mind. I am ready to give up all I have to protect my child. His older siblings have allowed me to use their college funds to show the truth to the world (for, as you know, truth comes at a high price). Yet, when it comes to the actual trial, how much of the psycho mambo jumbo are they willing to hear? Is this the reason why FBI wanted list has all these professional women who leave careers and run for their lives with children? is this why several attorneys told me to pack up and move away from my home, my town, my very dangerous X? I have no doubt in my mind, that some parents should not have any rights to their offspring. I also think that in a very high conflict custody battle, joint anything is a sentence to the children who do fall in the middle. But, the judges, the attorneys, and even the clinical court personnel do not read these blogs. So, what can we do to bring our views to their attention?
PInow,
Judges need to understand this information because it is the root cause of all the problems in human interactions and all crimes: The inability to feel empathy.
But first we really have to understand the ramifications of this information. “we have met the enemy and it is us”.
None of us is worthy of throwing the first stone because narcissism is an inherent aspect of humanity. Healthy narcissism is a protective mechanism but the boundary is fuzzy and because no one is perfect we have all crossed the line.
But still, empathy is the front line against unhealthy narcissism. If we were somehow to get thousands of copies of the books that explain narcissism and slip them into the judges’ mailboxes…. what percentage would read them?
Even a small percentage could begin to tilt the scales…just a thought.
Judges are a good start, but they only interpret the laws, legislators enact the laws and they are narcissists influenced by the votes of their constituents… these changes cannot happen fast enough for me.
My sons haven’t seen their “father” in over a year. That 16mos of supervised visitation prior was hell on earth for me- I got to watch him, without the fog, interact with the children. Chilling. Nauseating. It did help me realize that his mother was also a huge part of his problem…if they add enabling to the Olympic Games, we have a gold medal in her.
Once he was gone and in prison, there was an adjustment period. The toddler was just instantly happier (he’d been having night terrors). The 8yo was a bit angry, easily distracted, and a few other things that he normally wasn’t. It lasted a couple of months at most. He and I had a talk about choices and hurting people- nothing graphic and I certainly didn’t name names. The unwavering theme was, “Daddy made bad choices and can’t live with us anymore/has to go to prison.”
The only symptom that really lingered was he seemed DESPERATE for male interaction. Any male- so at that stage he was very vulnerable- I watched him like a hawk, I didn’t date, and was very selective about what males were around our family. Each of my sisters had a boyfriend. One is a great guy, one is a douche. As time went one, my 8yo gravitated towards the decent bf and started avoiding the douche. It was like a sign that he was healing and getting “over” the traumas inflicted by his “father.”
I have a father who is a good and decent man- he just has physical limitations that make it hard for him to rough and tumble or run around the yard. But my dad has tried really hard to bond with the boys- and he has. They are very close to their grandpa. And the decent bf is still around- TG my sister FINALLY dumped the douche! LOL I think having stable male role models around them (whom I am not romantically involved with- so there isn’t that “competition” for attention) made a difference.
My 3yo told me the other day he wanted a daddy. (Think DEER IN HEADLIGHTS). I managed to say, “Some people have mommy’s and daddy’s, some people have a mommy OR a daddy. YOU have a mommy, and grandma and a grandpa who love you very much. Not everyone has that.” Then he pointed to a ballplayer on the tv and said he’d like THAT ballplayer to be his daddy. LOL. I laughed, not only is that ballplayer too young for me, I think his current wife would object. Then there is that whole pesky “he doesn’t know I exist” thing. 🙂
I think that stability is key. Without the constant conflict of their “father’s” nonsense and my living my life very carefully and peacefully, my sons have been able to feel secure and just be little boys. The xs would never have “allowed” that. Today is another day I am glad he’s gone. Thanks for this topic- it’s been a tough week for me all around and this reminded me of the things I’ve done RIGHT lately. (I’d also like to mention I had/have a very supportive family. I don’t think we’d be as far along as we are without them.)
Maybe we also need case studies of kids who were ok and better without one parent to go with the “how to spot a lying sack of poo in YOUR courtroom.”
I’ve given this some more thought.
Since judges are all attorneys—and have practiced SOME kind of “law” before they are appointed or elected to office, that also means that they are POLITICIANS. We all know about our “politicians”(in MY opinion) which is that many of them are VERY narcissistic—it’s kind of like being a salesman I think, the better “persuader” you are, the better “salesman” (sellling YOURSELF) the more likely to get the position.
They have NO training, education, etc. in psychology even if they have training in “family LAW”—-and we know who wrote the laws–yep, POLITICIANS, many times more than not, they too are LAWYERS without training or education in anything except LAW.
I always go back to Dr. Amy Castillo, the “poster child” of a woman crying to a judge against HER PSYCHOPATH’S THREAT TO KILL HER CHILDREN—-and what did the “judge” do? He gave the PSYCHOPATH VISITATION, so the Psychopath KILLED THE CHILDREN, just like Dr. Castillo told the judge he would.
Judge: “OOPS!!! So Sorry, I just followed the law, I’m guiltless”
Dr. Castillo: “Yes, but my kids are still dead.”
The judges are totally immune from any CONSEQUENCES of their “decisions.” If they make a “mistake” OTHER PEOPLE GET THE CONSEQUENCES.
Our advocereal form of law with the parents “fighting” over the child like they are a couple of dogs fighting over a bone is part of the problem. It isn’t who is “right” but who can hire the best and biggest WOLF or PIT BULL as a stand in for them in the court fight.
Another thing that makes me upset is that a person is PRESUMED TO BE TELLILNG THE TRUTH UNDER OATH—well, we know how TRUTHFUL a psychopath is—under oath or not!
Still no ANSWERS in my head, just more questions and more problems with the system, but it does concern me very much.
The best thing I ever did for my youngest son was to get the psychopath father out of his life completely. I dedicated 12 years of my life to it. It was worth every cent and every minute. When my son turned 12 the court recognised his desire not to see the psychopath parent. Until that time a patriarchal society rules that the child does not know what is best for him. It seemed to me that I had to do somersaults, climb mount Everest and walk on water to get rid of the deviants and psychopath people in the courts and out to win this battle. I left no stone unturned. My whole life for that time was getting the psychopath father out of our lives.
It worked. My youngest son is not a psychopath. He is a beautiful kind hearted gentleman who remembers how it was when his father still terrorised us. Today we don’t even know where the psychopath father lives. We havn’t known since my son was 13. He is now 20 and we love it that way.
My older two children are the victim of their psychopath father who has always been a big part of their lives.. My oldest daughter IS a psychopath. I only just acknowledged this after 30 years of hell.
My middle son is incapable of intimacy, having been raised mostly by the psychopath since the age of 12. He is lonely, an island having had to be so to survive.
Women have no say when it comes to the rights of their children, until the child is 12, in Australia. Up until then the courts rule and the courts are made up of men. So whilst it makes no difference what I say, I will say it anyway.
1. Pedophiles, psychopaths and rapists are incurable. They are addicted to their behaviours and they havn’t found a cure for them yet. So they will DEFINITELY abuse again. The only question involved is : will it be today or tomorrow?
2. Fathers are not fathers unless they are loving, supportive, nurturing people who love their children and do the best they can with what they have to give their children an opportunity to be loving (of themselves first) and caring useful functional citizens in society.
Anything less is not a father. It has nothing to do with blood. As Oxy says, “ABUSE is thicker than WATER!!”
3. The majority of mentally ill people go undiagnosed. So they cannot parent their children properly. The diagnosed ones have case managers in Australia, who stay in close contact with the families. However, in Australia, “DOCS” or the “dept of community services” that are supposed to intervene in these situations have an EXTREMELY bad reputation. This is due to inadaquate filtering and training of their staff.
4. The state of South Australia has a very well known ring of wealthy judges, politicians, magistrates and policemen who are called “The Family”. It is said that they are responsible for most of the unsolved pedaphilia and cold cases of children missing. “The Three Beaumont Children” went missing well over twenty years ago in South Australia. “The family” has been going since then.
5. It is impossible to infiltrate because the psychopaths/pedophiles/murderers are all in positions of power and wealth.
End Of Story.