(It does so desire, beginning at the father. It does so literally every chance it gets. America had the grace to maintain and keep her family alive beyond the generosity of her home country, God Bless it, but it is also riddled in cultural sexism. It consigned and abandoned her children to parental rights that wouldn’t even protect their right to obtain counselling, was so institutionally spineless and inept as to abrogate every avenue of help; (only the corridors of immigration recognized the situation for what it was and went above and beyond the call, though so did her attorneys in their capacity). It was additionally so corrupt as to abandon her to be attacked at the whims of a social predator, and leave her children subject to his manipulating them to attack her by threatening the children. Her home country would have protected her and her children (hold that thought); the United States and the state of Florida failed them miserably at every juncture other than basic survival. With ‘no fault” divorce, abuse in the confines of a marriage that is merely a confine to provide for abuse is rendered irrelevant in the eyes of the court; it’s never even aired.
"Since the adoption of no-fault divorce, the fact-finding role of family courts has atrophied." -Richard Ducote
With 50% of US marriages ending in divorce, we have a system which, through forcibly enforcing unsupervised visitation and creating double binds at every turn creates a net outcome of forcing women to cohabitate with batterers for fear of unleashing those batterers on their children without any witnesses. Without witnesses, their children have no protection. By enforcing divorce as the worse case scenario, patriarchy has its new system of enforcement to force women to accept battery within the famiy structure en masse. The perpetuation is now the same in either outcome. Divorce as an escape mechanism was barely allowed to exist. It has merely been marketized and industrialized (a $50 billion dollar a year industry) to create the same net results, the intra-generational enforcement of patriarchy through trauma.
We were sent to juvenile detention for refusing to live with our father - The Washington Post
‘Visit violent dad in prison - or join him’ - The Sunday Telegraph
So you can begin to get a glimpse of the current climate of family divorce court in the US, what it is designed to enforce, and what variety of sub-standard hell the family was put through, here are some articles on the subject:
Protecting Kids: Rethinking the Hague Convention (60% of the violators are mothers trying to flee abusive spouses, -so, imagine the legal force applied compelling women to stay subject to the Hague (not that this helps); the reverse effect is an invisible social catastrophe -cases)
International law permits abusive fathers custody of children, study finds
The Hague Convention's Unforeseen Development: Perpetuating the Subordination of Domestic Violence Victims
Ordered to live with an abuser: How and why American family courts fail children -so, if the easiest way to lose custody is to allege domestic violence and/or sexual abuse in a marriage, what do you think the silencing effect is, what is going unreported and un-aired in court, and what is the net result?
How Many Children Are Court -Ordered Into Unsupervised Contact With an Abusive Parent After Divorce?
How Gender Neutrality Perpetuates Court Licensed Abuse
The Power to Protect
Are mothers and children being silenced in the Family Court?
Beware Child Protective Services
The 'Silent Scandal' of Courts Putting Children with Their Abusers
'Mothers on Trial'
No Way Out But One: Custody, Abuse and the Family Courts
Failure to Protect: The Crisis in America’s Family Courts
California Family Courts Helping Pedophiles, Batterers Get Child Custody
How Family Courts Punish Abused Women
APA: Fathers who batter their children’s mothers can be expected to use abusive power and control techniques to control the children
Making Washington Hear the Children Forced to Live With Abusers
When Home is Where the Hurt Is
A sample of how Child Protection confines and blames the victim by threatening her with her children based on exposure to male violence (in a case where the victim and male DV perpetrator lived separately), which caused her to stop reporting incidents (p.10):
"Example 1 – Mr and Mrs Purple
Male as sole perpetrator – fear and control
Mr Purple had 24 incidents of domestic violence against his female partner recorded over two and half years. The nature of the abuse meant that it was extremely difficult for the woman to get away from the man. Mr Purple and Mrs Purple lived together on and off, and he repeatedly tried to get into the house when he had been told to live elsewhere. He assaulted Mrs Purple, threatened to kill her on a number of occasions including threats with a hammer and a knife. There were four children, who were eventually removed by Social Services to live with the grandparents. Mrs Purple was also provided with an alarm by the public protection unit. The police record notes on one occasion that the woman was refraining from involving the police because of further negative consequences from Social Services: ‘She has nothing to do with [man] but he keeps turning up at her address, most of the time drunk. She doesn’t always ring the police because Social Services have told her if she has more domestics she won’t ever get her children back’. While the man was arrested for BOP (on numerous occasions), for possession of a weapon, assaults (s47 and s39) and was taken to court for common assault (s39), he was never convicted. The reason appeared to be that the woman repeatedly retracted her statements and they appeared to be continuing the relationship. Towards the end of the research period Mrs Purple was recorded by the police as saying that ‘she is fearful of [man] and only sleeps with him occasionally to stop him damaging her property or threatening her’ indicating that it was fear of her partner that had stopped her from further engagement with the criminal justice system."
It is primarily the women who are penalized for exposure to male violence in family custodial situations by CPS (as in, leave this instant or we'll hold you culpable for these allegations as the neglectful parent for exposing your children to him), while women are simultaneously put in the vice grip of being FORCED by equal sharing divorce family custody policy to PUT THE CHILDREN WITH THE PERPETRATOR UNSUPERVISED, since to not do so is the way they are most likely to LOSE CUSTODY. You created a vice designed to threaten her with her children either way between CPS and Family Court, where there is no possibility of 'winnning' or protecting her children, only the danger of losing them.
CONGRATULATIONS. Your complementary cultural vice grip designed to doom women from both sides is still in full effect. Your form of hostage taking is the children. Your form of social torture is the enforced risk and inevitable damage of her children. The only thing being protected is the potential for perpetuation of inter-generational abuse.
Amusingly enough, you somehow exist in the moral prestension that your society is civilized, so much so that its overweaning militarism exists to spread civilizing impetus. What a self glorifying utterly delusive crock. Christ's parable was meant for you.
Matthew 7:3-5 (KJV)
3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? 4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? 5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.