Custody Evaluator's Report Part II

A continuation of the first custody evaluator post.

According to the report, the custody evaluator, Dr. Blakelock, spoke on the phone with Dr. Dettenmeier, who had evaluated my mom almost three years before in April 2007. She told him that Mom had "coached the children in her efforts to alienate them from their father." She further stated that "Michelle lacked positivity and was 'vehement' towards Brian." Blakelock wrote, "Michelle's parental interference escalated beyond her immediate family as she negatively influenced extended family, friends, counselors, neighbors, spiritual leaders, etc. by sharing with these individuals Brian's therapy progress notes, Dr. Roby's complete psychosexual assessment report . . . ."

Despite Dr. Dettenmeier's conclusion that my mom had coached us, my Mom still was granted primary custody of us at that time. She was our primary custodial parent from 2004 until 2011. It was this report by Blakelock that resulted in my dad getting custody. 

Basically, Dr. Blakelock found my dad to be less abusive than my mom, despite her "coaching" stemming from her legitimate NEED to warn us to be careful around our dad who admits to multiple instances of sexual behavior toward children. Yet I had NO knowledge of any of these details until I found this report this week. All my mom ever wanted was for my dad to get the help he desperately needs for his severe problems, and to keep us protected from his impulses that have put children at risk.

So, my dad entered into sex offender treatment voluntarily, and did it for 18 months. Yet these three men "questioned the appropriateness of his treatment":

1. Dr. Ririe (psychosexual therapist who was hand-picked by special master Sandra Dredge to be Dad's therapist after she lied and said that Dr. Roby no longer wished to be my dad's therapist, which he refuted in an affidavit, btw);
2. Dr. Jay Jensen (who owns and runs ACAFS, the company who gets assigned by the special master to be the go-between between parties in acrimonious divorces, and who also conducted conjoint therapy for the Wolferts family);
3. Dr. Blakelock (custody evaluator).

Blakelock found my dad's 2005 abuse finding by DCFS to be inconsequential. My dad's multiple admissions of sexual behavior toward young children didn't seem to matter at all to Dr. Blakelock. 

My sisters and I have been betrayed by the officials who were supposed to protect us. 

A personal note to all those mothers out there who are fiercely defending my dad and seeking that my mom be prosecuted to "the full extent of the law" for protecting my sisters in hiding: if your children had been spending every other weekend with a father who had engaged in multiple instances of sexual behavior toward children in the past, and admitted to it well into his adulthood with children of his own at home, of course you would seek to get supervised visitation for him in order to protect your young daughters! Of course you would seek to warn them to be careful about not being alone with him, especially if the courts let your request for supervised visits drag on for over two years. Of course you would seek to protect them after the courts failed to listen to their accounts of abuse at his hands over the last FOUR YEARS of living with him primarily. 

I do not believe that any mother who loved her children would not be protective of them under the said circumstances. My mom was being preventative and warned us to be careful of anyone tried to invade our safety zone and touch us. Despite all these things she knew my dad had done--again, things that I never knew until very recently--and despite the way my dad treated us, she always encouraged us to see the good in him. That is a fact. I am a witness to it, and I know Syd and Dani will testify of the same fact when they are back, because we all lived through it.