Let’s set up the stage of the typical non custodial father story: Sicko ex-wife has pressed unfounded charged of child-abuse against non-custodial father. Biased justice system complacently listens, grants an order of protection to sicko ex-wife. At this point, guilty or not, the non-custodial father has lost everything: he has to prove his innocence during an endless trial; meanwhile, he cannot see his children but through supervised visitations. Of course, the justice system makes sure that non- custodial father pays child support.
In many areas where the public sector does not set the rules, the market takes over and does the job miserably. The market of supervised visitations is perhaps, after the private health insurance business, the worst ever. Unlike the flea market, you will never find the pearl here, but you surely will find lots of junk, whose business titles commonly declines the word family : “Family First”, “Helping Family” … etc. Lucky me, I got ” Comprehensive Family Services”, (305 Broadway, New York City), that my lawyer recommended. I should have known better; What in hell does this mean? Do they park your car when you help your kid do her homework? Truly, there is only one thing comprehensive here: the nullity of the director, Richard Spitzer; Avoid absolutely.
Let ‘s unveil Spitzer’s used car salesman’s trick: he brags he will deliver reconciliation that will put the broken 
pieces of the family together. He is the magician of the transition toward the resumption of unsupervised visitations. Does he have the means to deliver? Not the first. Sicko ex-wife does not want any change in the regime of visitations and Spitzer cannot enforce any. Why would he? Is Spitzer accountable for his performance to the Court? Manhattan family court could care less about his performance. What matters to the law guardian Octobre and Judge Sturm: no storm. The more supervised visitations there are, the smaller the risk the Court takes with a potential abuser. Why should Spitzer care more than the Court does? So enjoy, prolong supervised visitations, that’s good for business. The outcome of this jungle-like, totally unregulated market of supervised visitations: sucker non-custodial father pays the bill and his relationship with his children goes down the drain.
Oh, that’s just the tip of the iceberg. In my experience, custody-evaluators to whom your are ordered by the court (and paid for by the same county after they raid your wallet) aren’t answerable to the court. In fact, “participants” must first sign a waiver acknowledging that they CANNOT BE CALLED TO TESTIFY ABOUT THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS.
Folks, this means there is ZERO accountability for their recommendations. When the lives of family members are at stake as are their relationships… who gives people that much power without accountability?
FAMILY COURTS DO!
There is no incentive to listen. There is no incentive to consider all sides of the story. There is no incentive to review situations and evidence that supports (or doesn’t) either parent’s accusations. In fact, they could sleep through every session, throw a dart at a dartboard, write up a recommendation that has no basis in the reality of your situation – and the court gives it great weight while you cannot say, “HEY! SOMETHING STINKS HERE! I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT HIS/HER CONCLUSIONS!”
You’re shit-outta-luck.
How do I reach you. I don’t want to upset you or offend you because I am a mother going through exactly what you are going through. I agree with you strongly regarding Richard Spitzer and what I refer to as (In)Comprehensive Family (Dis)Services. I also am in contact with Alec Baldwin. I believe it is the system that is corrupt and allows the sick to win.
I’d like to think there is strength in numbers and we, together, would be more effective than on opposites sides.
Dena does have a point. Together we stand, divided we fall…etc.
Richard Spitzer – CFS other facilities have made a pretty good ‘cottage industry’ for themselves over court mandated custody issues. Family Court needs to be reformed. Remove all the entrenched bitter judges and magistrates asap. Regulate CFS with intensive oversight authority.
I’m going through an upsetting experience of custody and support issues with a women who I don’t really know. We had an affair for 3-4 months at the most and she decides to have a child. Infact, really only wanting money. My daughter is now 3 1/2 yrs old now.
Lawyers do not have the will or spirit to fight for non-custodial parents’ rights. Do any exist in NYC? All interested please contact me. At xenla@yahoo.com
little background:
It just seems like a waste of energy to go to court to figure this all out. Just because a stipulation agreement can’t be honored. Unfortunately the mother cannot stick to it.
Infact, it seems strange for the mother to contact me then put us and the child through this court stuff and ask for supervised visitations when there is no need other than to satisfy her comfort level and to portray a false need of security. Plus to fund CFS-Richard Spitzer as well as added legal fees.
It is disrespectful for the mother to cancel at the last minute visits with me and my daughter and then ask for continued supervised visits/exchanges. We should be able to reach an agreement on our own: by both parents being there for the child and putting unresolved issues, hurt feelings or otherwise aside. We should put the interest of the child first. But that is not what’s happening.
There were 3 phases of visitations since the her petition was filed on Feb 9th, 2010. The court suggested then ordered visits through CFS.
First, supervised visitation without CFS; the mother canceled to many times.
Second, supervised entire visitation with CFS involvement with favorable reports;
Third, and now supervised exchanges with CFS.
During all phases the mother canceled at the last minute (within 24 hours) or was very late sometimes 40 minutes late. The turn-side is that she would complain if I canceled. But I never canceled within 24 hours ever. I have a log.
Judge Sosa-Lintner on April 8th corrected the order of Custody and Visitation. She wanted to bring all parties in because the Stipulation of Settlement was meaningless to her. For some dumb reason I convinced Judge Lintner not to do so at that time and let the Stip. take it’s course. She mentioned to put in an Application if the mother violates the Stip. which she did by canceling within 24 hours 4-5 times. Several visits were canceled by the mother since the filing of the petition Feb 9th, 2010. And unfortunately, the Judge did not wave the CFS fees. (which funds a cottage industry) The Stipulation of Settlement was up for reevaluation between May 15 to June 1, 2010. But I’m fed up with the mother’s actions and paying CFS charges. (the mother should pay 100% as we move forward or no CFS at all).
Visitation was suspended due to non-payment by both parties. My last visit was April 18th. But Friday May 7th, 2010 I paid enough to commence supervised exchanges again. It has been 4 months since I’ve seen my daughter. Since it is the mother’s wish to use CFS for exchanges to satisfy her comfort level then the mother should pay 100% or at least 80% of CFS charges. Or grow up and have no CFS involved. But based on her track record of disrespect, contempt, and violations I will have no choice but to go back to court in full gear (pro se) and ask Judge Sosa-Lintner to appoint a Law Guardian; a mechanism put in place if cancellations occur; sole custody to joint custody; and release of my daughters medical history and education records, which I still don’t have. And I still do not know where she is going for daycare. The one she claimed does not exist. Thank you for reading all of this.
Emmett
xenla@yahoo.com
@ Emmett, what a mess! I can totally relate but we are in the reverse situation with the father actually appearing tomorrow in Supreme on Contempt charges led by our youngest child’s law guardian.
During this process, the father was found to be alienating the older children from me yet has never suffered any consequences for his actions! I feel quite sure he will have done the minimum and when he must face the judge, he will be able to squeak by and continue his unconscionable actions.
I notice your post is from two years ago. I’m curious to know your outcome?
M