Cracking the Code of the Family Court Cult: ADA Remedies for Women Accused of “PAS”

New York Lunatic Asylum, Blackwell’s Island. Crowded condition of the establishment. 1898 woodcut.

She’s crazy.  That bitch is whacked.  She’s just being hysterical.  She’s too emotional.  She’s not emotional enough; she must be lying.  She’s a malicious c–t.  She’s a maneating succubus.  She’s alienating me from the kids.  I’m gonna screw that bitch in court.

Sound familiar?

Karin Wolf, Executive Director of the MCLU, recently filed a new federal ADA lawsuit against the State of New Jersey for using the misogynistic and discredited theory of “PAS” to discriminate against her and her two children, and all women and children similarly situated, in order for the State to extract federal funding via the controversial Responsible Fatherhood initiative.

When women are accused of “PAS” or otherwise being treated as if they have some phantom mental illness in family court, they are being discriminated against under the regarded as prong of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA/ADAAA) and sex-based stereotypical assumptions of “PAS.”  This puts them on unequal footing – they do not have a meaningful opportunity to be heard; they do not have full and equal access to the courts.  This is a violation of the ADA.  States and state agencies such as DCF, CPS, family courts and their judges – are all public entities within the meaning of Title II of the ADA.  When they violate the ADA and are receiving federal funding, they can be stripped of that funding under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and made to pay compensatory damages.  Under Title II and Title III of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, states, judges, attorneys, and custody evaluators do not have immunity; they’ve waived it as a condition of receiving federal financial assistance.

This is not saying any woman in family court has a mental illness. It’s saying that if the family court is going to treat a woman like she’s got one, they’ve likely opened up a Pandora’s box of broken federal regulations for which they are now liable.

“PAS” is junk science, and using it in family court proceedings as if it were a real mental impairment, violates the ADA.  A court can’t take away someone’s kid(s) based on perceived notions of a mental illness, and assumptions and stereotypes of that perceived disability (i.e. Richard Gardner’s misogynistic stereotype that women are the foremost culprits – a convenient excuse for men raping their kids and vehicle for Jedi mindf–king women and children).

“Crazy is the new ‘c’ word.” – interview with Karin Huffer, Therapists: When your traumatized client must face an abuser in court, the federal ADA law can help.

Women being accused of parental alienation (“PAS” and “PAD”), Bipolar Disorder, Malicious Mother Syndrome, being “emotional” (code for Hysteria), or, wait for it, an “unknown mental illness” (code for “PAS” and “PAD”) – all are ADA violations.

Women in the family courts might as well be Victorian-era ladies “suffering” from Hysteria and wandering wombs at Blackwell Island Insane Asylum.

Yet, Gardner’s disciples, many of whom are occult, I meant cult, members of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC), keep zealously pushing “PAS” and pitting the Responsible Fatherhood initiative against the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) to generate a cyclical “need” for federal funding and profit.

Because Richard Gardner’s “PAS” theory originated in Bergen County, NJ, all women in all 50 states and U.S. territories might have a claim against the State of New Jersey for allowing him to keep his license and spread discrimination by testifying in over 400 child custody cases.  Those claims may even extend to adjudication in the International Court as we see women in countries such as Australia and Canada facing the same discrimination.  Incidentally, the AFCC has international chapters in those two countries.

Gardner zealots, such as a one Dr. Judith Brown Greif, has dispensed misogynistic training all over the U.S.  Licensed in NJ and NY, and also doing business in PA, MA, DE, CT, VA, and MN, chances are Dr. Greif has come to your area at some point, training your local family court judges, CPS social workers, GAL’s, etc. to discriminate against women.  Those who know, would tell you she’s New Jersey’s dirty little secret.

So, here are some insights and Karin Wolf’s recent federal filing further below.  And by the way, if a flurry of ADA complaints by women started flooding the USDOJ and federal courts, hmmm….did I mention that the U.S. Attorney General has a duty to investigate pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 12133 and 12188 ???

“Parental Alienation Syndrome” (“PAS”) falls under the regarded as prong of the ADA.  See 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (1)(C) and (3)(A); and 42 U.S.C. § 12131 (2).

“Persons with disabilities may not be treated on the basis of generalizations or stereotypes.  For example, prohibited treatment would include the removal of a child from a parent with a disability based on…stereotypical belief.”  See 28 C.F.R. § 35.130 (b)(3) and (h)

See ADA Technical Assistance Manual published by the U.S. Dept. of Justice (DOJ) and U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services (HHS):

Protecting the Rights of Parents and Prospective Parents with Disabilities: Technical Assistance for State and Local Child Welfare Agencies and Courts under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act

In addition to filing a federal lawsuit, complaints can be filed with both the USDOJ and HHS:

To file an ADA complaint with the U.S. Dept. of Justice (USDOJ), click here

To file an ADA complaint with the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services (HHS), click here

Wolf v. New Jersey

To view Karin Wolf’s federal ADA complaint, click here.

Thank you to Karin Huffer for cracking the code on how the ADA applies to child custody proceedings when “PAS” is alleged, and Susan Skipp for shining a light on this.

Karin P. Huffer, M.S., M.F.T., PhD, is an American marriage and family therapist, who is known for identifying a potential consequence of legal abuse, the condition known as Legal Abuse Syndrome (LAS), a form of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) which can be caused by ethical violation, betrayal, abuse of power, lack of accountability, or fraud within the legal system. – Wikipedia

Susan Skipp is a Director at MCLU, has a Masters in Education (MEd), and is a certified Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) Advocate and Forensic Disability Specialist.


This entry was posted in Family Court Corruption. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Cracking the Code of the Family Court Cult: ADA Remedies for Women Accused of “PAS”

  1. Wonder Woman says:

    Also an actual disability like ptsd, hearing loss, bi-polar disorder etc. cannot be used as a means of discrimination and remove children from their mothers.

  2. Nellie says:

    I hope many other discriminated against and/it disabled mothers can figure out how to see they can use this to file their own compliants!

  3. Nellie says:

    I hope many other discriminated against and/it disabled mothers can figure out how to see they can use this to file their own compliants!

  4. Another Wonder Woman says:

    USC 42 § 12101 – 12203 and the NPRM and Judicial Conferences that provide functional regulations re: confidentiality.

    1. Threats to disclose, or disclosure of, disabled litigants’ confidential information is a form of discrimination and violates the Constitutional right to privacy. The Constitution also provides that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws and provides for Due Process of law. Disabled litigants’ right to confidentiality is inherent in the entire ADAAA statutory scheme as well as protected under several federal and state laws, including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”). The ADAAA applies in conjunction with other federal and states laws, provides protection at a level greater or equal to that provided by other federal and state laws, and prevails over any conflicting State laws. ADA Title II Technical Assistance Manual, II-1.4200.

    2. Threats to disclose, or disclosure of, disabled litigants’ confidential information is also a type of retaliatory and coercive conduct which is illegal under the ADAAA’s anti-retaliation, anti-coercion, and anti-intimidation provisions. 42 U.S.C. § 12203. See also 28 C.F.R. § 35.134; ADA Title II Technical Assistance Manual, II-3.11000.

    3. Without ADAAA accommodations, disabled litigants’ cannot engage in equal participatory and testimonial access in court proceedings on the same footing as other litigants.

    4. The foundation of many of the specific requirements in the ADAAA regulations is the principle that individuals with disabilities must be provided an equally effective opportunity to participate in or benefit from a public entity’s aids, benefits, and services. ADA Title II Technical Assistance Manual, II-3.3000.

    The Federal Guide for Judicial Policy, a policy manual for the US Courts has many of the authorities on the ADA and methods of implementation of auxiliary aids. The most recent one that I am aware of is Volume 5 issued in 2012. The Authority of the GJP is based on the 28 USC 604, 1827 & 1828 (infra).

    “These guidelines are promulgated by the Director of the Administrative Office (AO) as authorized by 28 U.S.C. §§ 604(a)(14), (15), and (16) and 28 U.S.C. § 1827 and § 1828. The guidelines incorporate references to Judicial Conference policy and case law related to the use of court interpreters. Under 28 U.S.C. § 602(d), the Director may delegate any functions, powers, duties, and authority to other officers and employees of the judicial branch of the government, subject to such terms and conditions as the Director may consider appropriate.” GJP §120 Authority

    The Federal Guide to Judiciary Policy is applicable generally to the Federal Courts of the United States:”Applicability This volume applies to the federal courts as defined in 28 USC §610. It does not apply to the Supreme Court of the United States.” GJP §130

    DRE, designated responsible employee: each Court is supposed to have an ADA Administrator.

    “Each court is required to identify a specific office or individual(s) to serve as access coordinator from whom participants in court proceedings may request auxiliary aids or services. The access coordinator must be familiar with the judiciary’s policy of providing reasonable accommodations to persons with communications disabilities to ensure that the policy is properly implemented. The access coordinator must have a ready working knowledge of the types of auxiliary aids and services available to serve the needs of disabled persons and of the local sources from which auxiliary aids and services may be procured. Personnel in each court are to be instructed as to the judiciary’s policy and the identity and location of the access coordinators in their particular court. Each court will appropriately publicize the identity and location of its access coordinator through, for instance, courthouse signs, bulletin board announcements, pamphlets, and announcements in the local press.” GJP §255.40(a)

    They are supposed to have a process of appeals as well:

    “Courts may, but are not required to, establish specific procedures through which requests for auxiliary aid services are to be submitted, such as requiring that they be submitted to the access coordinator in writing or that they be submitted in advance of the court proceeding involved. Courts may also establish procedures through which persons dissatisfied with the court’s proposed provision of auxiliary aids and services may seek review or reconsideration. Any such procedures must be appropriately publicized. These guidelines are not intended to extend or modify existing law.” GJP §255.40(b)

  5. [Dallas, Oregon] On March 10, 1996, I was forced, by an Order of the Court, and by my ex-husband, his attorney, his family and religious supporters, to do something that raged against my good conscience, my common sense and against all my motherly instincts. After a temporary custody hearing, a Court Order signed by Judge Albin Norblad forcibly removed children, including my nursing baby, from me. I obeyed the Court Order and gave my children over to my ex-husband. I drove to the hospital, rented a breast-pump and later collapsed and went into shock. I could not understand what had happened and why. I have not yet recovered from the shock; perhaps I never will….​

    When I sought safety for my children and myself in January 1996, the Court allowed me to live in hiding with my young children prior to the court hearings, due to the testimony and affidavits of numerous witnesses. I retained an attorney and reported the crimes that had been committed against my children and me.

    ​The price for my own safety and freedom in 1996 was an imposed, unnatural and unwanted separation from my eight children, including my nursing infant. The injustice committed against me is not just the physical separation from my children, but the willful desecration of the mother-child relationship and bond, a sacred spiritual and emotional entity.

    Women trapped in relationships with abusers come to expect horrendous misbehavior and violence from their partners. What they cannot fathom is the maddening reinforcement commonly provided to abusive men by the justice system, the religious community and the public at large. Tragically, the key abuse collaborator is the custody judge. Of all the bad actors in a battered woman’s life, none wield more power over a mother and her children. It is beyond infuriating when women discover that their custody judges either lack understanding of domestic violence or intentionally collude with abusers to take away women’s financial resources and, even worse, their children.

    Many mothers who seek safety from abuse are routinely prohibited from having even the most basic contact with their own children, not because they were unfit parents, but because they were outspent, out represented, and out-maneuvered in a court atmosphere that seems to favor those who inflict domestic violence. Battered women may lose their babies and children, their homes, their friends and their livelihood. Survivors of childhood abuse will often even lose their families. Rarely does society recognize the dimensions and long lasting effects of this reality for the victim.

    Forcibly taking a mother’s children, and then controlling her emotionally by withholding contact must be publicly recognized as one of the greatest forms of ‘mis-use’ of the American justice system and one of the greatest hidden vehicles for wide-spread socially approved physical and emotional abuse and control.

    What I learned through these past few decades is that domestic violence, rape, child abuse and child sexual molestation is socially acceptable in our society and often in many church settings. This needs to change!

    It is said that Lady Justice is blind, but she should not be mocked.

    Please read my OPEN LETTER to Oregon Governor Kate Brown, Lawmakers, Advocates & Clergy: Mother of 8 Battered & Raped in the Name of ‘God’

  6. Patricia bachman says:

    After reading this..i realized that many more woman have been abused by the court system by literally not having money..the threats that come with being on welfare and going back to work and being sued for welfare fraud..
    Constantly being watched and monitored by a system that will never let you off of probation until your fine is payed…mine took 9 years to over payment of 900 ..300 a month for three months that I didn’t report..i ended up being sued in Jefferson county Colorado for 9600 dollars and taking a felony 4 ..that was 27 years ago and to this day I am deeply affected by this.. let alone seeing what has happened to my son with Jefferson county accusing him of being a showdi..simply because his address was unincorperated.and he was being charged by 4 jurisdictions at through that with him and watching how that traumatised him..and how all the court costs that he owed he couldn’t afford to go to school..had to begin working at 16 to pay off all the court fines…jefferson county colorado.. the name is Bachman..look us up.. ps my grandfather Albert Bachman was a land owner in Golden Colorado..

  7. Hannah says:

    U.K. Courts helping promote abuse and domestic violence.
    Refusing to protect mothers and their children.

  8. Patricia Byers says:

    I am preparing my case to be heard in the US Supreme Court on the unconstitutionality of the “discharge of property settlement in Chapter 13 Bankruptcy” stripping women of their divorce awards under Title 11 U.S.C. 523 (a)(15). I need any case law possible supporting my disparate impact theory, or any legal argument helping me support my cause. My email is

    I am pro se, rendered indigent and stripped of my domestic support obligation under the false nomenclature regarding the term “property settlement.” Head your email to me “Loss of Property” and include a scanned copy of your Court Order denying payment authorizing the Discharge in Chapter 13. Let me know if the Bankruptcy Form B281 or B2810 was or was not made available to you in your proceeding in waiver of your court fees and attorney rules as your due process right.

    The adversary proceeding is also unconstitutional and must be stopped.
    Thank you for sharing your experience with me.

    We should start a class action lawsuit, except that we can never recover our true damages from IIED and 14th Amendment loss of property. Slavery was abolished. Why are women treated worse than slaves, who were at least provided housing?!?!?!

  9. Nellie says:




  10. Pingback: Coral Anika Theill | Mothers of Lost Children Resource List | believethechildadvocatede

  11. Jayne says:

    Your answer was just what I needde. It’s made my day!

  12. Kathleen says:

    I don’t know if it is right to keep trying or what to do, this happened to me but it has been 8 years and I am in Australia. It is a discredited theory but it is definitely what was done to me, also I had federal family court orders, and my ex used child protection then it went back to family court to sign off on his having our child. The abuse he inflicted on myself and the children still haunts our lives until this day, also that he removed Grace and just did not care at all, first us, then after I fought to get her back he took her again and the government helped him. Because I came forward about being abused as a child and they had all these records, I would be better off if I never told, about that and about his abuses on my children and myself. I don’t know anymore, it has felt like a long time, and I am 49, I would be 54 before I can see her under the court order in six years time. I don’t think I will make it my heart and mind is so broken, and I don’t have any financial capability to give her the life he does. Which is what is in the family report writer document they all used.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *