« If It's Monday It Must Be Dad's House: Helping Children With Transitions Between Homes |
Main
| Negligent Babysitter - Tragic Results »
 While on Nancy Grace, criminal defense attorney Don Schweitzer provides legal commentary on Lindsay Lohan, who, according to her father, is addicted to Oxycontin. Click HERE to watch the video.
« Lindsay Lohan's Hit And Run Accident |
Main
| Lindsay Lohan Addicted To Oxycontin »
A divorce is stressful for all members of the family in different ways. An ongoing stressor for children is moving between two homes. Young children find it confusing to remember who is picking them up and where they will be when a friend asks them for a Saturday play date. They may worry about Mommy or Daddy being all alone when they go to another home, or they may feel guilty about telling a parent that they left a beloved teddy bear at the other’s home. There are many complex feelings and issues around these transitions, and it is important that parents stay attuned to what their child is saying and what they are showing through their behaviors.
It is important to remember your child’s developmental age and capacity for transitions when moving towards this new phase in his/her life. While research indicates that children can successfully navigate having two homes, there are important considerations in helping your child make this transition along the way. It can help if the “receiving” parent calls the child or children, a day in advance to review any upcoming events and the drop off time and talk about necessary items the child may need to switch homes.
Parents should try to keep their children’s best interests in mind when the kids are moving from house to house. I like to tell parents, “If you love your kids more than you hate your ex – you’ll really do what is best for your kids.” Evaluate your capacity to communicate with your ex. If there is no effective communication, keep the exchange short and only about what is pertinent for the children. If there is more amiable communication, the person who is receiving the children may come inside the ex-spouse’s home and chat while the children gather last minute necessities. If your children are younger, parents should help them with packing essentials. This time is stressful for your child, who may have concerns about leaving one parent alone. You need to help them, and not add to the stress by having any open conflict between parents.
Some children are not allowed to bring any toys or clothes back and forth between homes. Think about it: Every week you change residences. You have to remember what clothes are you allowed to bring and if your laptop is allowed out of the house. You are also worried about performing at work and socializing with your friends. This scenario would easily stress out most adults, who have many more coping strategies than children.
As parents, it is your responsibility to handle all of the “stuff” that goes along with transitions. If the transition happens during school, parents need to arrange pick up and drop off of the child’s things. Young children should not have a heavy backpack or suitcase at school with them. Each parent should have a school calendar and a master calendar of the child’s activities. If anything is left behind, do not blame the child for “forgetting.” Do not expect your child to function as a messenger to the other parent.
Remember that transitions can be points of stress for some children and they may exhibit some regressive behaviors. Younger children can be more clinging or fearful. They may have temper tantrums, school problems or self-destructive behaviors. Help your child to understand all the feelings that may be going on as they move from home to home. Children need time to reconnect with each parent after they have experienced a separation – allow them that space to warm up to you. Encourage them to contact the other parent when they need to. And talk with your child about the schedule to see if he/she likes it.
Ahrons, C. (1994). The Good Divorce: Keeping your family together when your marriage comes apart. New York, NY: Quill.
Elkind, D. (2001). The Hurried Child: Growing up too fast too soon. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing.
Ricci, I. (1997). Mom’s House, Dad’s House: Making two homes for your child. New York, NY: Fireside Books.
Stahl. P. (2000). Parenting After Divorce: A guide to resolving conflicts and meeting your children’s needs.
Atascadero, CA: Impact Publishers
Linda Bortell, Psy.D.
625 Fair Oaks Ave. Suite 270
South Pasadena, CA 91030
626.799.7941
FAX: 626.441.4893
« The Presumptive Father Doctrine Under Family Code Section 7611(d): Where Behavior May Trump DNA |
Main
| If It's Monday It Must Be Dad's House: Helping Children With Transitions Between Homes »
Walking the streets of Los Angeles is becoming more and more hazardous, given the amount of drunken celebrities on our roads. This past weekend we became aware that Lindsay Lohan was arrested in Los Angeles for hit and run, and driving while under the influence of alcohol. It also appears that the police located a white powdery substance believed to be cocaine either within Ms. Lohan’s vehicle or personal possession. The preliminary information gathered from the police revealed that Ms. Lohan had two passengers in the car at the time she crashed into a curb and some shrubbery, causing injury to herself and her vehicle. Ms. Lohan then fled the scene of the accident without notifying the police. She was later located at a nearby hospital by the police who observed she was exhibiting signs of alcohol influence. Apparently this was the third car accident for Ms. Lohan within two years. Ms. Lohan, who has been in and out of a rehab center for alcohol abuse, is obviously a dangerous driver. From the prosecutor’s point of view, Ms. Lohan should be sentenced to a significant amount of jail time for this offense, possibly six months. Any defense attorney in Los Angeles will tell you that the District Attorney’s Office and the Courts do not treat cases like this lightly. The aggravating factors involved with this case include: 1) Ms. Lohan fled the scene of an accident; 2) There were two passengers within her vehicle who could have been injured; 3) Ms. Lohan has a history of bad driving; and 4) She caused injuries to herself. In California, first time DUI offenders are sentenced to attend a DUI class, pay approximately $1,100 of fines, and placed on three years summary probation. Hit and run offenders who have caused injuries, on the other hand, can be charged with a felony, and usually receive stiff prison or jail time, depending upon the seriousness of the injuries. Unfortunately, the Los Angeles courts tend to coddle our celebrities, so I am not expecting Ms. Lohan to be sentenced similar to what an ordinary citizen would receive under similar circumstances. In my opinion, we are not doing Ms. Lohan or the public any favors by treating this crime lightly. There is no better way to catch a person’s attention than to sentence him or her to a healthy dose of jail time. Ms. Lohan is also a huge role model for thousands of would be actresses. I believe we send the wrong message to our youth when we treat celebrities as royalty, as if they are above the law. The impression we do not want our youth to have is that law enforcement gives these people special treatment because being drunk and out of control are essential ingredients to success. In cases like this numerous commentators discuss the stress of the actress and the demands of her jobs as an excuse for her behavior. I agree that celebrities do suffer from a lot of stress. However, in no way can they be excused for drunk driving. Celebrities like Lindsay Lohan, more than most people, can afford a private driver, call a cab, or call upon a friend to drive them home. From the defense point of view, there may be a “no drive” defense, given that the police did not observe Ms. Lohan driving and we know there were two other people in her car, who could claim to have been driving. However, as I tell my clients who face similar charges, we will not know what defenses, if any, are available until we see the police reports. In this case, the passengers may have told the police that Ms. Lohan was driving, and it appears there may have been a photographer that places her behind the wheel. In the meantime, Ms. Lohan's attorneys have wisely placed her into the Promises Residential Treatment Center in Malibu, Caliornia with the hope they can convinve the judge she has finally cleaned up her act. Written by Donald P. Schweitzer Click HERE to watch the video.
« Sanctuary Movement For Illegal Aliens |
Main
| Lindsay Lohan's Hit And Run Accident »
Who is a “parent” in the eyes of California law? Is this title a result of behavior? Is it a matter of biology? Or is it a combination of the two? What is required to assert one’s rights as a parent? In California, parental rights and responsibilities are most closely tied with one’s DNA. In other words, a person’s biological make-up typically determines whether or not he or she is deemed a “parent.” This is especially true when there is no marital relationship to establish a presumption of parentage (the Family Code provides that children born during a marriage between two parties are presumed to be the children of that man and woman). When two parties are unmarried, and have shared a sexual relationship that may or may not have resulted in children, and there is no Judgment of Paternity in existence, at least one party will typically insist on a DNA test to prove (or disprove) that a party is a biological parent of the minor child(ren) at issue. This process is somewhat expensive, costing in the neighborhood of $500.00 to $1,000.00 for testing of three parties (mother, child, and presumed father). The results from this analysis are helpful to the court and the parties, but not necessarily conclusive. They can provide closure for some parties who are not interested in accepting the responsibilities of parenting, but may also disappoint a party who had hoped to enjoy various parental rights. Thankfully, the courts have recognized that biology may only be a part of the overall analysis in determining parental rights. Within the Family Code, there is a specific provision one can use to bolster a non-biological parentage claim. The language can be found in Section 7611(d), within a Chapter of the Family Code entitled “Parent and Child Relationship.” The applicable section states that “A man is presumed to be the natural father of a child if he meets the conditions provided…He receives the child into his home and openly holds out the child as his natural child.”
This section allows any interested party to assert a claim as a presumptive father despite the fact that he may already know that he is not the biological father of the child at issue. In order to support a contention that one has received a child into one’s home, a party should be ready to show that he has cohabitated with the child at issue, although this is not necessarily required. He should also be prepared to substantiate financial and emotional support of the minor. This can be done in various ways: 1) bank and credit card statements to show payment for the child’s expenses, 2) payment of official child support orders (if ever mistakenly filed for by another party, 3) birth certificate records, 4) baptism/other cultural or religious records, 5) tax returns showing a child claimed as a dependent, 6) health insurance coverage for a child, 7) testimony by any family members/friends/others who have witnessed his decision to hold the child out to the world as his own. Often times, there may be a competing presumed father claim. If you are a non-biological father attempting to be named the natural father, you may be forced to contend with a biological father’s claim. If the court has two separate and distinct claims of fatherhood to resolve, it must settle on one. In other words, there cannot be two natural fathers. In such a case, the court must weigh the competing presumptions, and the presumption that is founded on the weightier considerations of policy and logic will control. In reality then, the “natural parent” status may have little to do with nature. Written by Kayla Horacek
« Paris Hilton Appeals Her Conviction |
Main
| The Presumptive Father Doctrine Under Family Code Section 7611(d): Where Behavior May Trump DNA »
A coalition of U.S. religious groups is launching a sanctuary movement to harbor illegal immigrants. Apparently, Roman Catholic, Protestant, Jewish and Muslim groups are opening churches and synagogues to shelter families of illegal immigrants. Proponents of the Sanctuary Movement speak of the immigration system that is broken and argue that the recent raids by the U.S. immigration authorities are immoral because they split families. The arguments made by representatives of the Sanctuary Movement have many flaws, including: - If the immigration system is “broken” it is because the laws have not been enforced vigorously, not because the existing immigration laws are flawed. The only flaw within our system that needs to be fixed, it that our government needs to become serious about enforcing our current laws and needs to devote adequate resources to the problem.
- The most important thing we can do to deter people from coming here illegally, is to send a message that there is no safe harbor once you have arrived. It is a well known fact that enforcement of the law deters crime. Conversely, when we fail to enforce the law, crime flourishes. The problem with the Sanctuary Movement is that it sends a message to all of those would be illegal immigrants, that if you manage to get to this country, you will be safe since the laws here are not enforced.
It is wrong for the Catholic Church or any other religious group to conspire with millions of people to violate our laws. If the church was protecting people from going back to face dangerous political oppression I may have a different view. But this is not the case. Instead, the church seems to have adopted this “Sanctuary Movement” because it will disturb “good people” and/or split families. In truth, the Catholic Church is taking a political position out of fear that it will lose members of the church.
There is nothing new about our country refusing to allow immigrants to remain here, even when it means that families will be split. Go to Ellis Island and hear the stories of men and women being sent back while their family members were allowed to enter our country. Our country has always been about allowing immigrants into our country. However, we have always reserved the right to be selective of who allow into our country and the number of people we want at a given period of time.
We already have a track record of giving people amnesty and we can now see how it did not work in curbing the massive inflow of illegal immigrants. Remember the 1980’s? In the 1980’s our country granted millions of people amnesty, with the promise that from that point on we would enforce our immigration laws. When we fast forward twenty years and see the 12 million new illegal immigrants who are taking residency within our communities, it is easy to see that being soft on immigration does not work. Instead we should try the simple and most proven approach . . . , the enforcement of our existing laws!
Written by Donald P. Schweitzer Click HERE to watch the video
« Paris Hilton Sentenced To Jail Time |
Main
| Sanctuary Movement For Illegal Aliens »
 While on Nancy Grace, criminal defense attorney Don Schweitzer comments on Paris Hilton and what she can expect while in jail. Click HERE to watch the video.
« Paris Hilton Goes To Jail |
Main
| Paris Hilton Appeals Her Conviction »
 On the O'Reilly Factor, criminal defense attorney Don Schweitzer describes what Paris Hilton can expect from her stay in county jail. Click HERE to watch the video.
« Criminal Charges May Be Brought Against Anna Nicole's Doctor |
Main
| Paris Hilton Sentenced To Jail Time »
 While on Nancy Grace, criminal defense attorney Don Schweitzer provides legal commentary on Paris Hilton on her last days of freedom before turning herself into the sheriff's department in Los Angeles County. Click HERE to watch the video.
« Female Teacher Sex Scandal |
Main
| Paris Hilton Goes To Jail »
 Criminal defense attorney Don Schweitzer discusses Anna Nicole Smith's death. Click HERE to watch the video.
« Richard Gere And Eric Baldwin Display Obscene Behavior |
Main
| Criminal Charges May Be Brought Against Anna Nicole's Doctor »
While on Nancy Grace, criminal defense attorney Don Schweitzer provides legal commentary on the female teacher from Paradise Valley who is accused of having sexual relations with two male students. The two teen boys claim they had sexual relations on separate occasions with the teacher at her home and in her car. Click HERE to watch the video.
|
