Biblical Counselors have said this for years and this really negates everything the forensic psychologists use as weapons in family court. They should all be banned from family court immediately. Please don't think this negates the reality of the problems you or your loved ones are experiencing. Quite the opposite, now there is hope! And interestingly Saving Fatherhood is planning on doing a Hope series based on the Biblical Counseling book by Dr. Richard Ferguson. You can by that book here - https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0863FBSHR/ref=as_sl_pc_tf_til?tag=863264209-20&linkCode=w00&linkId=b923a4a88a5b48703e8024893f397e80&creativeASIN=B0863FBSHR

Reports from Kash's lawyer say he didn't do it and there's no evidence that he did. Also reported is that on October 22nd there will be a hearing that may give us some more insight. One would seem to think that Kash with his success in the political arena would be smart enough and controlled enough to keep himself from going to far with judges but we all hit our breaking point. We pray that Kash didn't hit his and he is exonerated.

Psychology is antithetical to Christianity but Christians going into the family court are regularly subjected to the opinions of psychology. Does the church support or reject psychology? Why hasn't the church pushed back against the culture to protect its members from psychological abuse?
Matthew 23:23 - 23“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others.
Christians should be exempt from anything in family court that is non objective and counter to their 1st amendment right to worship God. They should be exempt from psychological analysis because it promotes a non-material world not recognized by Christianity.

Most folks walking into family court think they are presumed innocent of wrongdoing unless someone proves they did something wrong. Nothing could be further from the truth in family courts. Everyone is guilty in a court of Equity. By filing a grievance in this court you have asked them to take control of your life because you can no longer handle it on your own. This is a very important concept that most folks heading into high conflict divorces miss.
This decision by the NJ Supreme Court could change some of that. In the attached cast the parents were presumed guilty. As per usual the burden of proof was on the accused parents to prove they didn't abuse their children.

Thank you to attorney Laura Prather for conveying the information that the Texas Supreme Court Rules Advisory Committee has established a subcommittee to evaluate Rule 18(c) to deal with the issue of cameras in the courtroom.

Instructions by a judge - ANY JUDGE - that instructs a person who is viewing or participating in a hearing to NOT video or audio record a hearing is troublesome at best, and may be an infringement on free speech, which is a prior restraint of free speech. These admonitions are absolutely NOT permissible

Not only should the biological father's child support begin before the birth, but also much more.

Thoughts?

Child support debt, compared to credit card and loan debt, has serious negative consequences for adolescent outcomes
SF Commentary - No kidding? These guys are rocket scientists.

“Across the U.S., 77 percent of cases in the child support enforcement system have debt, totaling $117 billion. Most of this debt is held by very low-income fathers. Seventy percent of these fathers have less than $10,000 in income and 60 percent have no income.

Child Support is usually based on the potential earnings and then you take the difference between the two earners, then Dad pays 66% of that. Did this rapper get off easy under 2%? What do you think? Why don't they report on the amount of parenting time he gets? What's that assumption say to you?

Arguably the most troubling aspect of justice system response to intimate partner violence is custody courts' failure to protect children when mothers allege the father is abusive. Family courts' errors in assessing adult and child abuse, and punitive responses to abuse allegations, have been widely documented.

A significant contributor to these errors is the pseudo-scientific theory of parental alienation (PA). Originally termed parental alienation syndrome (PAS), the theory suggests that when mothers allege that a child is not safe with the father, they are doing so illegitimately, to alienate the child from the father. PA labeling often results in dismissal of women's and children's reports of abuse, and sometimes trumps even expert child abuse evaluations. PAS was explicitly based on negative stereotypes of mothers and has been widely discredited. The term parental alienation – while treated as distinct – is still widely used in ways that are virtually identical to PAS. Nonetheless, because PA is nominally gender neutral (and not called a scientific syndrome), it continues to have substantial credibility in court.

Wisconsin is considered a leader in the movement to treat fathers as equal caregivers when parents separate. Shared parenting is usually better for children — but the model fails for many women forced to co-parent with their abusers. (SHARED PARENTING IS NOT THE PROBLEM - FAMILY COURT IS THE PROBLEM) - They quote a 2019 study also on this scroll.