This guy, who has JOINT CUSTODY, kills his 3 young daughters and then calls the ex to let her know:
Slaying of 3 River Falls Girls Stokes Community Fears of Domestic Violence
Schaffhausen and his ex-wife had joint custody of the girls, and on the day of the killings, he contacted her to ask whether he could see the children, who were being watched by a baby sitter. Jessica Schaffhausen agreed, the criminal complaint states.
Less than two hours after the sitter left the girls at the home with Schaffhausen, he called Jessica Schaffhausen and said, “You can come home now because I killed the kids,” according to the complaint.
She called police, who then found the girls dead from cuts to the neck. The youngest girl also had been strangled. Schaffhausen soon after turned himself in to police.
On Friday, Wojcik said crimes such as the River Falls killings are less about violence than they are about power and control.
“He didn’t just murder them, he then called her to say (what he had done),” she said. “It’s a final act of trying to control that person and inflict the most harm they can on them.”
I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: How many of these stories do we have to read before these family court judges get a clue? Joint custody is for mild to moderate conflict, which are NOT typically the cases you see in family court. It’s just re-traumatizing to keep reading these cases. The media has to do its job, too, and provide some context. This is a pattern and deserves the media’s attention.
Media Misses 
I was updating my “blogs I follow” widget and stopped by, saw this article. You would be doing women like myself a HUGE favor were you able to look through some of my blog; I follow and investigated (AS a DV survivor) the issues in the Family Law systems which end up like this article — as very many have in my area also have. The coalitions cannot report on organizations that also take funding from HHS, but who are making sure mothers (specifically women with children) almost NEVER get completely free from abuse — because they must co-parent with these men. When they report, truthfully, their exes have threatened to kill, or kidnap, their children (generally to punish them, or sometimes also to get out of a child support order), they are not believed.
They specifically are not believed because of federal funding to “the other side” of the custody challenge, through single-state agencies (as to “Access/Visitation” funding) distributed to nonprofits, through the child support agency (which has been re-tooled to encourage more fatherhood involvement, which is a bonus for the states – -not necessarily the children) and in general, get the whole system socially engineered to cause constant conflict between the parties, which brings more money into the system.
In my case, both one of my daughters, AND I, knew that the father was going to “snatch” and he did. The entire situation was set up from the start; after he got out of child support, and having no real love for his children, he then dumped them off (shortly after) with a woman he’d picked up, and came back after me (called “stalking.”) In essence, the person does not accept my right to divorce, or his responsibility to seek and maintain a work ethic. You can imagine how it might feel at this end.
I am widely networked, know many of the leading organizations (some by direct contact, others by simply looking at their financials, conferences, grants, etc. — and habits). Please stop by my blog(s) when you can.
Tomorrow is Thanksgiving, a hard time (I have no real family contact with my own, now-adult daughters; they were taken overnight as I mentioned, and alienated, also destroying my post-DV work life…) I cannot follow up too much on this particular commentary, but just for the record, the HQ of the primary agency trying to diminish reporting of abuse & DV, promoting shared parenting and removing children from their nonabusive mothers — is AFCC, and its HQ is in Wisconsin. After each new murder, or slaughter, the mainstream media goes to interview the local DV coalition — not usually the family court who produced the dangerous co-parenting situation, or ever thought that putting a violent man out of own house might have some blowback upon the family. Now there is one distraught mother, three dead girls and a father in jail.. I guarantee you, if one or more of the children had survived, there would be a fatherhood program to fetch him out of jail and recommend visitation with them. it probably would be facilitated by a church (faith-based) group, too.
I forgot to mention — your blog looks good; it is clean and easy to read. Contact me if you have further questions.
Thanks so much for replying. And, i’m glad you found my blog helpful and easy to read. I haven’t updated in a while now – I’ve been going through some transitions in life – but I do hope to get back to it soon. I hope you’ll come back again…
J-
Yes, the visual appearance is uncluttered, not too splashy.
I noticed I had a May 2011 post up which says (pretty much, the basics, a lot of detail). It’s a comment on this article.
Women are uninformed about the fathers’ rights funding because groups the approach for help simply didn’t feel it important to look up, or report — I guess. I am less for anecdotal reporting than analyzing the system components. See blogs. Some people of the groups to the right know about me, or the blogs, and have had the ability to go to TAGGS.hhs.gov and look this material up, study it for a while, etc. But probably if it wasn’t tied to an organizational purpose of (for example) the nonprofit (which can be seen in their articles of incorporation, and/or tax returns), no one saw fit to report this.
That’s why individual mothers need to make sure the voices speaking loudly are their own; we already know what tunes the courts are deaf to. But WHY are they deaf? WHY don’t they care?
Maybe that question is just too hard to face the answer for, psychologically.