A fugitive people within a nation is tyranny.

Posts tagged ‘domestic’

Government Abducts Newborn Daughter

A few readers may be shocked by a recent U.S. government abduction of a child from parents. New parents Stephanie and Johnathan say their child was taken from them and placed into public care solely because the baby’s father Johnathan Irish has links to a Constitutionalist organization known as the ‘Oath Keepers’. A state official cited domestic violence and child abuse allegations as the reason for the abduction. The parents deny government allegations. They sponsored a demonstration outside Concord Hospital, a public protest at their child being removed from their care just hours after her birth. “Innocence until proven guilty” has been thrown out the window.

Oath Keepers is a non-profit organization founded in 2009 which advocates that its members uphold the U.S. Constitution and when necessary resist unconstitutional actions of the government. Mr Irish claims police officers and state officials took his daughter away on Wednesday because of his involvement in the group.

For generations, the United States has been touted as  a “democracy.” Freedom of expression and thought has been a constant companion of most free-thinking Americans, or so we’ve been told. Over the years, judges have taken on new authority that throws the founding documents of this nation into an abyss. More and more, the government is turning against what it sees as challenges to its’ authority. The gentle voice of freedom is turning into one of a dragon.

News Blaze Article

Government Abducts Newborn Daughter From U.S. Federal Resistors

*Share With Friends

By Claudia Strasbaugh

U.S. Government grabs infant one hour after birth to safeguard it from parent political beliefs

A few readers may be shocked at this week’s headlines “Government officials remove couple’s newborn baby due to father’s involvement with anti-totalitarian group.” A few, but probably not many of us.

Oath Keepers
When people espouse beliefs not in line with Federal goals it may be time to start impressing children’s minds before they get to public schools. Younger is better according to New Hampshire, where a couple’s newborn baby was taken from them by officials because the father is involved with a group opposed to government suppression.

New parents Stephanie and Johnathan say their child was taken from them and placed into public care solely because the baby’s father Johnathan Irish has links to a Constitutionalist organization known as the ‘Oath Keepers’.

A state official has however cited domestic violence and child abuse allegations as the reason for the abduction.

Parents in this case however, deny allegations. On Friday they staged a demonstration outside Concord Hospital, a public protest at their child being removed from their care just hours after her birth.

Stephanie and Johnathan were joined by demonstrators rallying against what they termed the state’s unconstitutional interference in a family matter.

Oath Keepers is a non-profit organization founded in 2009 which advocates that its members uphold the U.S. Constitution and when necessary resist unconstitutional actions of the government.

Mr Irish claims police officers and state officials took his daughter away on Wednesday because of his involvement in the group.

The Division for Children, Youth and Families, however, said the authorities took the child away because the father has a record of violence and abuse.

According to the statement, a judge decided action should be taken given the ‘lengthy history of domestic violence’ between the parents. They did not state what that was, only that their documents say the mother has “failed to recognize the impact of domestic violence in her life and the potential danger it poses to a newborn baby”, while Mr Irish had ‘not acknowledged any responsibility to date and remains a significant safety risk to an infant in his care… Without the intervention of the court, the infant will be at risk of harm’. Court papers referenced, “The Oath Keepers,” described as a ‘militia’, and the fact Mr Irish had a number of run-ins with Epsom police over firearms.

In response, he says he never abused the mother or children and accused authorities of ‘stealing’ his child.

The Oath Keepers group describes itself on its website as a ‘non-partisan association of currently serving military, reserves, National Guard, veterans, Peace Officers, and Fire Fighters who will fulfill the Oath we swore, with the support of like-minded citizens who take an Oath to stand with us, to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help us God. Our Oath is to the Constitution.’

Its motto is: ‘Not on our watch’.

Founder Stewart Rhodes announced a rally held outside the Rochester Family Division Court on Thursday in protest at the removal of the infant ‘in support of the First Amendment-protected right of freedom of association’.

Reference to the Oath Keepers as a ‘militia’ has angered many of its members who see that as an attempt to suppress political speech.

From their website here’s what they stand against: http://oathkeepers.org/oath/

“OATH KEEPERS: ORDERS WE WILL NOT OBEY

1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people.

2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people.

3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal.

4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state.

5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.

6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.

7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.

8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to “keep the peace” or to “maintain control.”

9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.

10.We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.”

What Often Happens When Men Are Victims of Domestic Violence?

handcuffedThe deputies drew their weapons. David’s little daughters came running out of the back bedroom pleading, “Leave Daddy alone! Mamma tried to hurt him with a knife!” Men are often victims of domestic violence and virtually helpless facing the law and maternal sociopaths.

I called the largest domestic violence shelter agency in Sacramento County several times. They told me, ‘Men are perpetrators of domestic violence; women are victims of domestic violence,’ and hung up.

No One Believed Me

When men are victims of domestic violence.

original MSN article

by Glenn Sacks, M.A. and Ned Holstein, M.D.

Four Sacramento County Sheriff’s cars pulled up in front of David Woods’s house. He tried to explain to them what happened. But the lead deputy cut him off: “Yeah, that’s fine. Put your hands behind your back.” David said, “No, wait, she stabbed me … there’s the knife. See the knife? See my neck wound? See?”

“Put your hands behind your back. Turn around,” the deputy replied. “No,” David protested. “She stabbed…” The deputies drew their weapons. David’s little daughters came running out of the back bedroom pleading, “Leave Daddy alone! Mamma tried to hurt him with a knife!”

One deputy, a woman, took the children in the bedroom and shut the door. David stood there, cuffed.

How the fight began

David’s wife Ruth had taken the kids out for a walk in 39 degree weather — for seven hours.

“By the time she got back their fingers were blue, their lips were blue, their ears were blue,” David says. “The children were soaked; she was soaked. We argued for an hour. We had to put them in a warm bath to warm them up; they were hypothermic.”

“Then she started cutting up vegetables for dinner. She had a serrated vegetable knife with a blade about seven inches long. She turned around and she stabbed at me.”

“I tried to block it, but I was surprised. I was off balance…the knife went right through my collar and gave me a little nick on my neck.”

“She reared back to stab me again. I tried to block it again…I hit her in the mouth. She dropped the knife, ran to the telephone, called 911, and told them, My husband is hitting me! I think he’s gonna kill me.”

“When she dropped the knife, I stood over it. I wouldn’t let her hide the knife. I was going to say to the police, ‘See? She tried to stab me.'”

The truth came from the kids

After 15 minutes, the female deputy returned from the bedroom after talking to David’s children. She told the other deputies, “It’s true. Both of the daughters saw it. She tried to stab him with the knife.”

They took the cuffs off David. “Your wife obviously needs help,” the lead deputy said. “She works for Kaiser, you’ve got health insurance that covers mental health, you need to call the emergency number and get her an appointment.”

David says there’s a double standard when it comes to charging men. “Now, isn’t that strange? When she had a fat lip, it was a felony and I was going to jail. But when they finally realized that she tried to stab me in the neck, it stopped being a crime, and instead it was a mental health issue.”

The history of their case

David Woods is a partially disabled former Marine who endured years of abuse at the hands of his wife Ruth and the law enforcement and domestic violence system which unwittingly enabled her.

Woods, a former construction worker, suffered disabling work-related injuries early in his marriage. He says:
“The violence really began in our family about 10 days after Ruth realized that she had all the power [financially]. I knew I had to get my kids out. I called the largest domestic violence shelter agency in Sacramento County several times. They told me, ‘Men are perpetrators of domestic violence; women are victims of domestic violence,’ and hung up.

“I had no way out. I had no money. Whenever we bought a car, Ruth insisted that the car be in her name only, so that if I took it and went to the movies without her approval she would call the police, and report, ‘I’m estranged from my husband, and he stole my car.’ She did that several times.”

Worst of all is what David’s children endured. One daughter says, “No one would help. Teachers, parents of friends, anyone I tried to talk to about what was going on at home told me I didn’t understand, that my mother couldn’t possibly be the violent party. When the police came to our home, they would always be ready to arrest my father, sometimes putting handcuffs on him. It was up to me to scream as loud as possible that it was my mom and not my dad, so they wouldn’t take him away and leave me alone with her.”

Domestic violence committed by women against men is generally ignored or minimized, yet more than 200 studies have found that women initiate at least as much domestic violence (DV) against their male partners as males initiate against their female partners. Research shows that men comprise about a third of DV injuries and deaths. Women often compensate for their lack of physical strength by employing weapons and the element of surprise — just as David Woods’ wife did, and just as recently murdered former NFL star Steve McNair’s girlfriend allegedly did.

But in 2008, David Woods was partially vindicated. He was the principal plaintiff in a successful lawsuit against the State of California. The Third District Court of Appeals ruled that it violates equal protection that California’s funding of domestic violence programs that offer services only to women but not to men.

Recent research on domestic violence

The most recent large-scale study of DV was conducted by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention researchers and published in the American Journal of Public Health. The study, which surveyed 11,000 men and women, found that according to both men’s and women’s accounts, 50 percent of the violence in their relationships was reciprocal (involving both parties). In those cases, the women were more likely to have been the first to strike. Moreover, when the violence was one-sided, both women and men said that women were the perpetrators about 70 percent of the time.

The Obama administration recently appointed Lynn Rosenthal as the first-ever White House Advisor on Violence Against Women. Vice President Biden, who wrote the Violence Against Women Act, said that creating the post will help the White House focus on stopping domestic violence.

Many of the world’s leading authorities on domestic violence recently gathered at the “From Ideology to Inclusion 2009” conference in Los Angeles and detailed new research contradicting this view and offering solutions that will benefit all. Researchers emphasized their findings that ignoring female-perpetrated DV puts children, men, and also women in harm’s way. The conference was presented by the California Alliance for Families & Children and co-sponsored by the Family Violence Treatment & Education Association.

DV researcher Deborah Capaldi, Ph.D., a social scientist at the Oregon Social Learning Center, told the conference that the most dangerous DV scenario for women is that of reciprocal violence, particularly if that violence is initiated by women. The best way for many women to be safe is to not initiate violence against their male partners. “The question of initiation of violence is a crucial one … much DV is [reciprocated], and initiations — even that seem minor — may lead to escalation,” she explained.

Dr. Capaldi’s research shows that whereas men are often thought of as the only abusers and also as serial abusers, a young woman’s DV is just as predictive of her male partner’s future DV as the man’s own past DV.

While Rosenthal and numerous others have created many programs and services to help abused women, there are very few services available to abused men. Those who seek help often face hostility or indifference from domestic violence hotlines, service providers, and law enforcement.

Denise Hines, Ph.D., of Clark University in Worcester, Mass., has studied why many abused men hesitate to leave their female partners. Hines told the conference that while some of the men’s reasons for not leaving were similar to those of abused women (love, not believing in divorce, hoping the partner will change, etc.), the men’s overwhelming concern was for their children.

Men often don’t want to leave their wives because this would leave their children unprotected in the hands of an abuser. If the men choose to take their children away from the home, when they’re found, the children are likely to be taken away and given to the mother, and the men might be arrested for abducting their children. Moreover, they would possibly lose custody of their children in the divorce anyway, again leaving their children in harm’s way.

In Hines’s study of male victims of domestic violence, 64 percent of the men who called a DV hotline were told that they “only helped women,” and over half were referred to programs for male perpetrators. Overall, only 8 percent of the men who called hotlines classified them as “very helpful,” whereas 69 percent found them to be “not at all helpful.” Worse, when an abused man called the police, the police were more likely to arrest him than to arrest his abusive female partner.

Children end up victimized

In any kind of spousal violence, children often end up being victimized. In the highly publicized Socorro Caro murder case, Socorro often abused her husband Xavier, a prominent Northridge, California rheumatologist, and once assaulted him so badly he had to have surgery to regain his sight in one eye. Trapped and not knowing what to do or where to go, Xavier endured the abuse, once telling his wife, according to reports, that “One day you are going to do something that cannot be undone.” A short time later, Socorro shot and killed three of their four children. Their baby survived only because Socorro ran out of bullets. She was later convicted and sentenced to death for the murders.

According to John Hamel, LCSW, a court-certified batterers’ treatment provider, even when the children themselves are not abused, “There is an overwhelming, irrefutable body of research indicating that children are adversely affected by witnessing inter-parental violence, regardless of the perpetrator’s gender.”

David’s daughter gives her example:

“I grew up paranoid and feeling like the safety in my house was something only I was responsible for. If Mom became violent, it meant I failed. I learned the only way to survive was to watch every argument they had and be ready to interject myself as a distraction before violence happened…. My next task was to try to break it up: the screaming, threatening, pleading, whatever. I had to make sure no details escaped me, because if the cops got called they’d just believe my mom without question. It was my job to make sure the truth got heard.”

Human Rights and Child Support in the U.S.

Tag Cloud