Rachel Goodell | RachelGoodell.com

Parental Alienation
IS
CHILD ABUSE!

Parental Alienation is also known as "Parentectomy."

Rachel, this is Rachel, a dear friend of mine from New Braunfels
where I used to live and who I named you after.

"Parentectomy" is both a "hate crime" as well as child abuse. Parentectomy is the the removal, erasure, discounting, diminution or slandering of a parent in a child's life, following separation or divorce with the vast majority of these child abuses conducted by women against the child's father.

Parentectomies are typically waged by bitter and scornful divorced women who use a father's child or children as "pawns" in the woman's sick, demented and evil war against her ex-husband in an attempt to hurt him - but ultimately devastate the child/children of divorce. Divorced women that engage in parental alienation and parentectomy do NOT love their child/children and are deeply disturbed and mentally ill.

An example of a Parentectomy is when one parent moves away - or is "driven away" from his child/children through a failed family court system used by bitter ex-wives and "mothers" just as they use parental alienation. Parentectomy covers a large range of parent removal from partial Parentectomy including "you can visit your Daddy on every other weekend" to the total and complete Parentectomy which is the complete absence or removal of the child's Dad. Again, the ultimate victims of a Parentectomy are the children as well as the dads whose love can never be replaced or substituted for. A Parentectomy is the most cruel infringement upon children's rights to be carried out against human children - typically by "mothers" using the tactic of parental alienation and family courts to achieve their evil "victory." Parentectomies are psychologically lethal and devastating to children and their dads (and moms - when this happens in reverse to them).

The following letter is found on the internet from the grown child who was a victim of a Parentectomy in Montreal, Canada.

Dear Editor,

Having been raised in a home with divorced parents, I am thrilled to have an opportunity to share with the Yated readers a happy ending to a sad an unfortunate childhood. I have, Boruch Hashem, finally reunited with my alienated father and now we, and his new family, have established a warm, solid relationship together.

I am now 20 and happily married.

I was a product of parental alienation by my mother, who kept me away from my father. She fed me a host of lies, false allegations and sheer drama, and thereby robbed me of a relationship with him due to her selfish personal war that she waged with him all the years. It was almost an obsession to completely blot him out of our lives. She should have sought help for herself, since this was about her own selfishness and not about what was right for her child.

It is only fair to mention that I had a loving mother and I have many fond memories growing up, but despite all of that, there was a steady sprinkling of lies relating to my father’s whereabouts, which left me quite confused.

How I finally sorted things out is a story too long for this column, but when I started dating, issues about my father kept creeping into every conversation with shadchanim (matchmaker) and I was stunned to discover that my father was, in fact, an outstanding human being, quite well known and respected, with a loving family. I set into motion a plan that ultimately led me back into his life.

The grief he suffered is indescribable. He shared with me his own journey with rabbonim (rabbi), dayanim (senior rabbi), friends and family who were all equally helpless in effecting some sort of visitation due to my mother’s relentless compulsion with revenge.

Unfortunately, rabbonim (rabbi) are not equipped with much to enforce agreement. Despite their best efforts to reason with my mother, pointing out the wickedness of such alienation and the impact on my childhood, nothing changed.

What she caused, a parentectomy of sorts, is unforgivable. The emotional manipulation I suffered for nearly 20 years will take me a lifetime to make sense of. Couldn’t she have seen that this would backfire?

I am happy today beyond words. I have a new family, siblings and grandparents who embraced me and my husband. I am trying to make up for lost time. I am trying very hard to focus on that and not on the resentment I have for my mother who caused so many individuals so much pain. She is now suffering the backlash, the wrath of her child, for having precipitated this enormous loss, because our relationship today is cold at best. In time, I honestly hope things will improve on that front too, but for now it comes down to my own personal healing experience and my new found happiness.

It is my sincere hope that by sharing my story, I will encourage others in similar situations to seek professional help to try, at all costs, to avoid a lifetime of unresolved pain and regrets to their children.

Name withheld, Montreal, Canada

"The Rapture Will be a Sign-less Event.
We are on the cusp of seeing Damascus become a ruinous heap and
seeing Isaiah 17 fulfilled, which will lead to Psalm 83."
Mid-East Prophecy Update
by Pastor JD Farag
Sunday, December 29th, 2013

"And now I have told you before it come to pass, that,
when it is come to pass, ye might believe." ~ John 14:29

"And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and
lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." ~ Luke 21:28

"And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep:
for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed. The night is far spent, the
day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on
the armor of light." ~ Romans 13: 11-12

In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound,
and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. ~ 1 Corinthians 15:52

And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended
up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them. ~ Rev 11:12

"Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God."
~ 1 John 4 verse 15

Parentectomy is the most EVIL and DESTRUCTIVE
of all hate crimes as it's conducted by someone
who is supposed to be loving and trusted and
perpetrated against the young and innocent.

These divorced women with children who even THINK about
harming or abusing innocent children with "Parentectomy,"

EX-WIVES, REMEMBER THIS BEFORE YOU HARM INNOCENT CHILDREN
AND ATTEMPT TO
"POISON" THEM EMOTIONALLY
OR OTHERWISE BRAINWASH THEM AND
TURN THEM AGAINST THEIR DAD:

"For the day of the Lord is near upon all the heathen:
as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee:
thy reward shall return upon thine own head."

~ Obadiah 1:15
King James Version (KJV)

"Parentectomy" is the removal, erasure, discounting, diminution or slandering of a caring parent in a child's life, following separation or divorce.

Parentectomies are typically waged by bitter scornful women who use a father's child or children as "pawns" is a war that ultimately devastate the child/children of divorce.

These truly "evil" women will make up incredibly vicious lies and stories - and coerce the child/children and others such as her parents and other family members to assist her in "brainwashing" the father's child and to inform others about these lies in an attempt to turn a father's child/children against him.

When these evil women believe the child/children has the made-up story of abuse memorized, these vindictive women then get CPS or teachers/schools involved in an attempt to get the CPS teacher(s) or school on "their" side.

Typical fairy tales used by these sick women include various forms of child abuse, including sexual abuse, "locking children in closets for not eating their vegetables" and even telling teachers at school the father doesn't feed the child breakfast - even when the father just so happened to videotape a very happy and enjoyable breakfast between him and his daughter, on one of the dates he took his daughter to school - who then told the school counselor she was "starving" as her daddy (again) didn't feed her breakfast and the school nurse gave her Pop-Tarts that the evil mother left with the counselor in an attempt to also coerce the counselor into believing this bizarre story.

"Evil" and very sick/emotionally-disturbed women after divorce masquerade as "mothers" but are really "monsters" who are driven by their hate toward the father of the child/children, and are anything but a loving, nurturing parent.

These truly evil monsters pretending to be mothers, hate their ex-husbands more than they love THEIR children. Driven by their scorn, these women make-up fairy tales of abuse & false allegations - coercing and brainwashing THEIR children and others into believing their evil lies. This is all done in their attempts to get their children to hate their dads and to no longer want them to be a part of their dad's lives.

The emotional and psychological damage inflicted by these monsters on children of divorce is significant, life-changing and LIFE-LONG with horrific repercussions to our society. The lives of these innocent children that were damaged by these monsters, will never be "normal" as they will always be wounded by the abuse, lies, fairy-tales, brainwashing and being taught to hate their own dads, was "not" in the child's DNA. These wounded children of divorce carry their wounds for the rest of their lives and to the detriment of all of their relationships as well as to our society.

The range of actions taken by a mother to attempt to alienate her children from their father is impressive. For example:

One mother lied to her children that she could no longer buy food because their father had spent all of their money on women in topless bars.

A doctor’s wife forced her 10-year-old son to apply for federally funded free school lunches to delude the boy that his "daddy has made us poor."

A woman who for years was very close to the children in a custody battle, was asked by their mother to give up neutrality and join her campaign against the father to "dance on his grave." When the friend refused to give up her neutrality, the mother falsely informed her children that their father was having an affair with this woman.

These behaviors, if successful, could lead a child to not only hate the father, but perhaps go years without seeing him. As Cartwright (1993) has noted: "The goal of the alienator is crystalline: to deprive the lost parent, not only of the child’s time, but of the time of childhood." (p.210).

The second component of the first major criterion where the mother attempts to punish the husband, involves manipulating other individuals to engage in malicious acts against the father. Examples of this kind are as follows:

During a custody battle, a mother lied to a therapist about the father’s behavior. The therapist, having never spoken with the father, appeared as an "expert" witness to inform the Judge that the mother should be the primary residential parent and that the father needed to be in therapy.

One angry mother manipulated teenagers to leave anonymous threatening notes at the ex-husband’s home.

A mother who had lost legal custody of her children, manipulated a secretary at the child’s school to assist in kidnapping the child.

In the above examples, it is important to note that the person manipulated by the angry mother has, in a way, been "alienated" against the divorcing husband. Typically, the individual "duped" takes on a righteous indignation, contributing to a rewarding climate for the mother initiating malicious actions.

There is little question that either party in a divorce or custody proceeding is entitled to appropriate legal representation and action.

Individuals suffering from Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome, however, attempt to punish the divorcing husband by engaging in excessive litigation.

A belligerent and unreasonable mother verbally attacked her ex-husband whenever she saw him. Over time, his response was to ignore her. She then took him to court, asking the judge to require the ex-husband to talk with her.

One mother told a judge that her daughter was not really her divorcing husband’s child

One woman refused to stop attacking her ex-husband through the courts, despite numerous attorneys being fired or voluntarily leaving the case. Over a three-year period, seven different attorneys were utilized.

Data exist which can help in determining the range of excessive litigation. For example, Koel et al. (1988) report on the frequency of post-divorce litigation in a sample of 700 families. Their data indicate that only 12.7% of families file one post-divorce petition to the court, whereas less than 5 percent file two or more petitions (Koel et al. 1988); less than one percent file four or more petitions.

Experts are in relative agreement that regular and uninterrupted visitation with the non-residential parent is desirable and beneficial for children, except in extreme circumstances (Hodges, 1991). In fact, some states, such as Florida, have laws written to reflect this view (Keane, 1990). Unfortunately, even when the father and children have legal rights to visitation, individuals with Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome continue to interfere with it.

A mother who previously attacked her ex-husband physically during visitation transfers of the children, refused to provide the children when the ex-husband had the police attend to monitor exchanges.

When one divorced father arrived to pick up his children for visitation, the mother arranged for her and the children to be elsewhere so that the father could not visit with the children.

One mother had her physically intimidating boyfriend assault her ex-husband when he came to pick up his children for visitation.

The President of the Council for Children’s Rights (Washington, D.C.) notes that such alienation is considered a form of child abuse (Levy, 1992). Unfortunately, the police typically avoid involving themselves in such situations. Furthermore, unless a victimized father is financially capable of returning to court on an ongoing basis, there is little that can be done to prevent such mothers’ behavior. Finally, even when such cases are brought to trial, the courts are often inadequate in supporting fathers’ visitation rights. (Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial System, 1992).

Given the physical absence of one parent, the telephone plays an important role in maintaining the bond between child and non-residential parent. Individuals suffering from Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome engage in an array of actions designed to circumvent telephone access.

A father called to speak to his children and was told that they were not at home when, in fact, he could hear their voices in the background.

When one father called to speak with his children, the mother put him on "hold," informed no one, and then left him on hold.

Knowing that the children’s father was away on vacation, one mother encouraged them to leave several messages on his answering machine to call back immediately only if he would like some additional visitation time with his children.

Some fathers find the alienation attempts so painful and fruitless that they eventually are extinguished from calling their children; they simply "give up." Placed in a no-win scenario, the father’s "abandonment" (Hodges, 1991) unfortunately achieves the precise result aimed for by the individual suffering from Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome.

An integral part of the process of maintaining one’s bond with one’s child is to participate in activities that one did before the parents separated. School plays, team sports, and religious events are just some of the type of activities of importance. Malicious Mothers frequently engage in maneuvers designed to prevent participation in these activities.

One father was deliberately given the wrong date and time for an important event for the child. The child was asked by the mother, "I wonder why your father didn’t want to come to see you today"?

One mother refused to provide the father with any information about any extra-curricular activities in which the children were engaged.

Prior to a child’s soccer game, one mother told many of the team parents disparaging falsehoods about the visiting father. When he came to watch his son’s soccer game, many of these parents looked at him with angry eyes, refused to talk with him, and walked away when he moved toward them.

Malicious Mothers who engage in such behaviors rarely have to face penalties for such actions. Judges, attorneys, and policemen cannot involve themselves in every instance of blocked paternal access. Furthermore, most fathers cannot afford the financial requirements involved. As such, the cycle of access interference perpetuates itself.

Given their developmental status, children in a disputed divorce situation are quite vulnerable. When one parent decides to attack the other by lying to the children, examples of this type of malicious behavior may include some of the following:

One divorcing mother told her very young daughter that father was "not really" her father, even though he was.

An eight-year-old girl was forced by her mother to hand unpaid bills to her father when he visited because the mother had falsely told the daughter that the father had not provided any economic means of support to the family.

One mother falsely told her children that their father had repeatedly beat her up in the past.

These examples of malicious lying can be contrasted with the more subtle maneuvers typically seen in Parental Alienation Syndrome, such as "virtual allegations" (Cartwright, 1993). Here, the mother setting up a Parental Alienation Syndrome may hint that abuse may have occurred, whereas the individual suffering from Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome falsely claims that abuse has actually occurred.

Individuals suffering from Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome may engage a wide range of other individuals in their attacks upon the ex-husband. However, with this particular criterion, the individual with Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome specifically lies to other individuals in the belligerency against the father. Some examples include the following:

One furious mother called the president of the (1500 employee) workplace of her divorcing husband, claiming falsely that he was using business property for person gain and was abusing their mutual children at his work locale.

One woman falsely told state officials that her ex-husband was sexually abusing their daughter. The child was immediately taken away from him and his access to her was denied.

During the course of a custody dispute, one mother falsely informed the guardian, who was investigating the parenting skills of each parent, that the father had physically abused her.

Snyder (1986) has reported on the difficulty imposed upon legal authorities when confronted with someone who is an excellent liar. Consistent with research on the inability of "specialists" to detect lying (Ekman and O’Sullivan, 1991), a skilled fabricator can be a compelling witness in the courtroom (Snyder, 1986). While sometimes seen in borderline personalities, Snyder (1986) notes that pathological lying (Pseudologia Fantastica) is not restricted to that particular character disorder.

Individuals suffering from Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome, have few, if any boundaries in their campaign against the divorcing husband. Violations of law are common in many cases, although the laws broken may be relatively minor. However, in some cases, the violations of law may be quite serious.

One woman deliberately drove her automobile into the house of the ex-husband where their mutual children resided.

In the midst of a custody battle, one woman broke into the residence of her divorcing husband and stole important business papers.

An angry divorcing mother called a Christian evangelical television station and pledged $1,000, giving the name, address and phone number of her divorcing Jewish husband as the pledge.

The above descriptions may remind the reader of certain personality disorders (e.g., antisocial, borderline, sadistic) but these behaviors may be demonstrated by individuals with Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome who do not appear to meet official diagnostic criteria for an Axis II disorder. Further, in each of the four examples provided above, none of the Malicious Mothers involved was sentenced for such behavior by a Judge.

In assessing the Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome, it is important to note that many of the above clinical examples seem to have occurred in individuals who had no prior mental disorder diagnosis or treatment. In fact, one mother who engaged in extreme maliciousness toward her divorcing husband had several mental health professionals testify that she was not suffering from any type of mental disorder.

In the author’s experience, for each mental disorder that might come to mind to account for some of this behavior, an exceptional case presents. For example, in some cases, an Adjustment Disorder might seem an appropriate diagnosis, yet one woman still denied her ex-husband visitation 10 years after the divorce. Other cases might suggest a possibility of a personality disorder diagnosis, yet one woman who repeatedly violated the law in attacking her ex-husband, received no personality disorder diagnosis despite being evaluated by masters level and doctoral level examiners. In some instances, Intermittent Explosive Disorder might be considered, yet the anger for many of the mothers does not appear to be intermittent.

Finally, the reader should appreciate that while diagnostic accuracy for certain psychiatric difficulties is not as good as one would like (e.g., the personality disorders, see Turkat, 1990), the problem is compounded in family law where incompetent mental health examiners sometimes become involved in the judicial process (Turk, 1993). Clearly, the relationship between Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome and other mental disorders is a complex one which requires significant investigation.

The above description of the Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome raises a variety of important clinical, legal and scientific issues.

From a clinical perspective, families that involve a Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome are subject to serious episodes of stress and distress. Yet, there is no scientific evidence on how to treat this phenomenon. It is particularly compromised by the fact that many of these cases that appear to meet the proposed diagnostic criteria deny that there is anything wrong with them.

An additional difficulty is that many therapists are unaware of this pattern of malicious behavior (Heinz and Heinz, 1993). As such, there are malicious therapists who are "fooled" by such cases and, as noted earlier, will come to court testifying that there is nothing wrong with the mother involved.

From a legal perspective, there are some attorneys who may unintentionally encourage this type of behavior (Gardner, 1989). On the other hand, there are some attorneys who deliberately encourage such behavior as the financial rewards for them are time dependent. In other words, the more involved the litigation process, the greater the profits for the attorney. (Grotman and Thomas, 1990). However, even for the subset of attorneys for whom this may be true, there is a point of diminishing returns. Furthermore, independent of economic considerations, many who become involved with family law courtrooms find that these types of cases are not handled well (Greif, 1985; Levy, 1992).

The woman who is not disturbed "enough" to lose custody of her children in the courtroom will not have money denied to her because she engages in this behavior; nor will she go to jail. Thus, many clients report significant frustration when they and their children are exposed to this type of behavior, and the courts seem to do little.

In a review of pertinent law literature on bias against men in family law proceedings, Tillitski (1992) concluded that there is widespread discrimination. This is well illustrated by one family law Judge’s statement that, "I ain’t never seen the calves follow the bulls, they always follow the cow; therefore, I always give custody to the mamas." (Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial System, 1992, p. 741). Similarly, it is noted that visitation rights of fathers are not enforced as rigidly as are child support orders (Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial System, 1992.) Such bias against men in family law proceedings results in a unique group of fathers who unintentionally become relatively helpless victims of the system (Tillitski, 1992). This situation would seem to reinforce much of the vicious behavior displayed by women suffering from Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome.

The issue of sex distribution of the disorder certainly needs to be addressed. The overwhelming majority of custodial parents are female (Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial System, 1992). Gardner (1989) has noted that Parental Alienation Syndrome appears most commonly in females, although it is possible for a male who has custody of the children to engage in the same type of alienating behaviors. The author’s experience with Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome is similar to Gardner’s. However, the present writer has yet to see a case of a father engaging in all of the criteria listed. This does not mean that it is not possible for there to be a "Malicious Father" Syndrome. In fact, Shephard (1992) reports that there is significant abuse of some custodial mothers by non-residential fathers. On the other hand, it should be noted that there are females who are required to pay child support, but we have yet to hear about "Deadbeat Moms." Given at the present time that a case in which the father met all of the criteria for Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome has yet to be documented, it appears advisable to await scientific evidence to guide issues of nosologic labeling.

How prevalent is the Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome? The answer is unknown. Gardner (1989) reports that approximately 90 percent of all custody battles involve some aspects of parental alienation. Further, Kressel (1985) reviewed data indicating that up to 40 percent of maternal custodians denied visitation to the ex-husband in order to punish him. Relatedly, Arditti (1992) reported that 50 percent of a sample of divorce fathers (N=125) indicated that visitation was interfered with by the mother. While aspects of parental alienation may be common, it is highly unlikely that such a percentage of maternal custodians would meet all of the criteria for Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome.

In regard to incidence, it would appear through the title of this syndrome that the malicious behavior is precipitated by the divorce process. However, this is clearly an empirical question. While the malicious actions may first be noted during a divorce process, it is possible that maliciousness may have been present earlier but undetected. Research on pre-divorce parental conflict (Enos and Handal, 986) supports this speculation. Relatedly, it may also be that there are some cases of pre-existing mental disorder that have not been discovered until the stress of the divorce itself unfolds.

Finally, it should be noted that research on the nature of post-divorce family functioning is beginning to emerge. Some data exist on the role of parental conflict in children’s post divorce functioning (e.g. Frost and Pakiz, 1990; Furstenberg et al., 1987; Healy, Malley and Steward, 1990; Kudek, 1988), but studies have yet to appear on the more extreme cases of Parental Alienation Syndrome and Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome.

The Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome represents an important societal phenomenon. The disorder affects children, parents, attorneys, judges, guardians, mental health professionals and others. Until this phenomenon is explored more thoroughly in the scientific and clinical literature, the problems imposed by individuals suffering from Divorce-Related Malicious Mother Syndrome will continue to plague us. Hopefully, the present manuscript will stimulate research so that clinical and legal management guidelines can be developed.

Arditti, J.A. (1992). Factors relating to custody, visitation and child support for divorce fathers: An exploratory analysis. J. Div. Remarr. 17:23-42.

Beal, E.W., and Hockman, D. (1991). Adult Children of Divorce, Delacorte Press, New York. Cart wright, D.F. (1993). Expanding the parameters of parental alienation syndrome. Am. J. Fam. Ther. 21:205-215.

Commission on Gender Bias in the Judicial System. (1992). Gender and justice in the courts: A report to the Supreme Court of Georgia. Georgia State Univ. Law Rev. 8:539-807.

Ekman, P., and O’Sullivan, M. (1991). Who can catch a liar? American Psychologist, 46: 913-920.

Enos, D.M., and Handal, P.J. (1986). The relation of parental marital status and perceived family conflict to adjustment in white adolescents. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 54:820-824.

Frost, A.K., and Pakiz, B. (1990). The effects of marital disruption on adolescence: Time as a dynamic. Am. J. Orthopsychiatry 60:544-555.

Furstenberg, F.F., Morgan, S.P., and Allison, P.D. (1987). Paternal participation and children’s well being after marital dissolution. Am. Sociological Rev. 52:695-701.

Gardner, R.A. (1987), The Parental Alienation Syndrome and the Differentiation between Fabricated and Genuine Child Sex Abuse, Creative Therapeutics, Cresskill, N.J.

Gardner, R.A. (1989). Family Evaluation in Child Custody Mediation, Arbitration and Litigation, Creative Therapeutics, Cresskill, N.J.

Grutman, R., and Thomas, B. (1990). Lawyers and thieves, Simon & Shuster, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.

Healy, J.M., Malley, J.E., and Stewart, A.J. (1990). Children and their fathers after parental separation. Am. J. Orthopsychiatry 60: 531-543.

Hetherington, E.N., and Arasteh, J.D. (eta.) (1988). Impact of Divorce, Single Parenting and Step-Parenting on Children, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J.

Heinz, H.R., and Heinz, S.A. (1993). Emotional incest: The tragedy of divorcing families. Am. J. Fam. Law 7:169-174.

Hernandez, D.J. (1988). The demographics of divorce and remarriage. In Hetherington, E.M., and Arasteh, J.D. (eta.), Impact of Divorce, Single Parenting, and Step-Parenting on Children, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J., pp. 3-22.

Hodges, W.F. (1991). Interventions for Children of Divorce, (second edition), Wiley, New York.

Koel, A., Clark, S.C., Phear, W.P., and Hauser, B.B. (1988). A comparison of joint and sole legal custody agreements. In Hetherington, E.M., and Arasteh, J.D. (eta.), Impact of Divorce, Single Parenting, and Step-Parenting on Children, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J., pp. 73-90.

Kurdek, L. (1988). Custodial mothers’ perceptions of visitation and payment of child support by non-custodial fathers in families with low and high levels of pre-separation interparental conflict. J. Appl Devel. Psychol. 9: 315-328.

Laos a, L.N. (1988). Ethnicity and single parenting in the United States. In Hetherington, E.M., and Arasteh, J.D. (eta.), Impact of Divorce, Single Parenting and Step-Parenting on Children, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J., pp. 23-49.

Snyder, S. (1986). Pseudologia Fantastica in the borderline patient. Am. J. Psychiatry 143:1287-1289.

Tillitski C.J. (1992). Fathers and child custody: Issues, trends and implications for counseling. J. Ment. Health Counsel. 14:351-361.
Rachel Goodell

Turkat I.D. (1990). The Personality Disorders: A Psychological Approach to Clinical Management, Pergamon, New York.

Turkat, I.D. (1993). Questioning the mental health experts’ custody report. Am. J. Fam. Law 7:175-179.

This is Eddie, a friend of mine I met when I lived in Waco and went to Baylor, with his friend Elvis. Eddie and Elvis were very close friends. Elvis would stay with Eddie and his family in this house (I took you to see in Waco) when Elvis was on leave from the Army in Killeen. Elvis would travel to Waco to stay with Eddie and his family almost every weekend. Eddie owned this house and rented it out after they moved to a bigger home in Waco. In 1993 or 1994, Eddie and I were in downtown Waco at his office (near this house) - Eddie asked me if I would like to see Elvis' "home away from home," and of course I said yes, so Eddie called his tenants (which were also his friends) and asked if he could show the home to me. They said to come right over, so Eddie gave me a tour.

This was the last picture taken of Eddie (by me) on Saturday, April 9th, 1994 as we were going to have lunch together. As it turned out, this was only 3 days before he passed away. While at Eddie's home, (only a few blocks from where I lived in Waco) Eddie received a phone call from Richard Ellis, the Athletic Director of Baylor University who wanted to stop by and visit and I thought it would be a good idea to take a picture of them. Unfortunately for Richard Ellis, this turned out to be the last picture in my 35 mm camera, and when I received the pictures back, Richard was cut-out/not on the film.

This is your Gramps with his aunt Genevieve
She is my Great Aunt Genevieve
and your Great Great Aunt Genevieve! You remember her!

The very 1st orange you picked (and ate) from an orange tree
was in Aunt Genevieve's backyard (of this house).

Your Gramps, 1st Lt. Mont Goodell & Fighter Pilot in front of his P-61 Black Widow Night Fighter
with Arnie, his radar operator on the island of Saipan.

Your dad's last day as a student at Baylor University
Graduation day - August 12, 1995
and only 13 months before you were born!
Baylor graduate - Master's degree.