2 of 3
2
A Critical Assessment of Child Custody Evaluations: Limited Science and a Flawed System
Posted: 02 March 2014 05:31 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4413
Joined  2008-08-14
Occam. - 01 March 2014 12:45 PM

Wow, that guy, doubturopath, is so far from reality that he doesn’t even recognize someone who is arguing for his points.  tongue rolleye

Occam

Really?  I never get that from George’s posts.  I get racial bigotry and ignorance disguised(loosely) as science.
George is a racist by the truest sense of the definition.
It’s frickin’ obvious!

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 March 2014 05:39 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4413
Joined  2008-08-14
mid atlantic - 02 March 2014 12:55 AM

The OP was not about deadbeat dads; it’s about active fathers being made to pay for therapies which don’t have any scientific validity.

We don’t live in a science world.  We live in a legal world that is sometimes based on science or trial and error. Or statistics.
The Constitution isn’t based on any scientific validity. I don’t hear you bitching about that.

The court justly and rightly takes the opinions of experts in all fields in order to render decisions on the populace.
If everybody agreed with the experts(unlike you guys and the psychologists in this case)then we wouldn’t need Courts and juries
to enforce the views of the experts would we?

[ Edited: 02 March 2014 05:41 AM by VYAZMA ]
 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 March 2014 06:44 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2631
Joined  2011-04-24
VYAZMA - 02 March 2014 05:39 AM

We don’t live in a science world.  We live in a legal world that is sometimes based on science or trial and error. Or statistics.

Or personal feeling for that matter. But yes, this is something that can’t really be reconciled with “legality”. However when there’s a profit to be made, there’s always less room for improvement.

VYAZMA - 02 March 2014 05:39 AM

The court justly and rightly takes the opinions of experts in all fields in order to render decisions on the populace.
If everybody agreed with the experts(unlike you guys and the psychologists in this case)then we wouldn’t need Courts and juries
to enforce the views of the experts would we?

This is a specious argument, because the experts are just whoever is in power at the time.

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 March 2014 12:19 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5487
Joined  2010-06-16

Quoting Vyazma:

Really?  I never get that from George’s posts.  I get racial bigotry and ignorance disguised(loosely) as science.

  I wasn’t defending or attacking George’s arguments (although you have a point LOL ).  I was only pointing out that doubt____ had proposed a number of ideas and that George was sort of backing them.  I thought it was funny that doubt____ didn’t see that and then attacked George’s post.

Occam

Wow, in trying to make a minor edit, I ended up getting a half duplicate addition which made a mess.  I’ve cleaned it up.

[ Edited: 02 March 2014 06:45 PM by Occam. ]
 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 March 2014 01:40 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4413
Joined  2008-08-14
mid atlantic - 02 March 2014 06:44 AM
VYAZMA - 02 March 2014 05:39 AM

We don’t live in a science world.  We live in a legal world that is sometimes based on science or trial and error. Or statistics.

Or personal feeling for that matter. But yes, this is something that can’t really be reconciled with “legality”. However when there’s a profit to be made, there’s always less room for improvement.

I see your point about profit, but it isn’t avoidable and it isn’t anywhere near rotten to the core concerning courts and psychologists-
as you want to make it out to be.
Who do you think is going to ultimately make decisions in these sticky family-custody-divorce etc type cases? Who or what?

Mid A-This is a specious argument, because the experts are just whoever is in power at the time.

It’s a type of bureaucracy. But what isn’t it?  Again you are over hyping it. It works good enough, most of the time.
Who do you want making these decisions? Plumbers? Race car drivers? Somebody has to untangle all of these stupid familial relationships that people get themselves into. Divorce, property, children, homes, abuse, drugs etc etc etc…

[ Edited: 02 March 2014 02:04 PM by VYAZMA ]
 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 March 2014 01:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4413
Joined  2008-08-14
Occam. - 02 March 2014 12:19 PM

I wasn’t defending or attacking George’s arguments (although you have a point LOL ).  I was only pointing out that Quoting Vyazma:

Really?  I never get that from George’s posts.  I get racial bigotry and ignorance disguised(loosely) as science.

  I wasn’t defending or attacking George’s arguments (although you have a point LOL ).  I was only pointing out that doubt____ had proposed a number of ideas and that George was sort of backing them.  I thought it was funny that doubt____ didn’t see that and then attacked George’s post.

Occam

Yeah sorry Occam. I quoted the wrong thing from you.
This is what I wanted:

Occam-And come on, George, I know that you are far too well adjusted to believe all that stuff you post, but are only trying to use reductio ad absurdum to prove the point.  LOL

It doesn’t matter. It’s off topic anyways.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 March 2014 02:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9292
Joined  2006-08-29

Saying that white race is dying out is racist? How so?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 March 2014 06:52 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5487
Joined  2010-06-16

Quoting Vy:

Yeah sorry Occam. I quoted the wrong thing from you.
This is what I wanted:

Occam-

And come on, George, I know that you are far too well adjusted to believe all that stuff you post, but are only trying to use reductio ad absurdum to prove the point.  LOL

Sorry, Vy, I was being a wiseass and using irony.

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 March 2014 11:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2602
Joined  2012-10-27
mid atlantic - 02 March 2014 12:55 AM

The OP was not about deadbeat dads; it’s about active fathers being made to pay for therapies which don’t have any scientific validity.

Yes but George, for one, took it in another direction and I was responding to him. 

In any case there is a reason for the state of affairs we have now with psychologists running things—something had to be done because of the chaotic situation that presented itself.  These things don’t happen in a vacuum. I don’t think psychologists are the answer either, but it’s a system that grew out of incredible dysfunction. What would you have done?

Lois

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 March 2014 02:17 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2631
Joined  2011-04-24
Lois - 02 March 2014 11:17 PM

In any case there is a reason for the state of affairs we have now with psychologists running things—something had to be done because of the chaotic situation that presented itself.  These things don’t happen in a vacuum. I don’t think psychologists are the answer either, but it’s a system that grew out of incredible dysfunction. What would you have done?

Lois

Is this a rhetorical question? Vyazma asked the same thing.

If not a rhetorical question, I think the families should handle these matters themselves. No government involvement. However, some people in these positions don’t have reliable families, so “street justice” should be the next step, IMO.

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 March 2014 05:27 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2602
Joined  2012-10-27
mid atlantic - 03 March 2014 02:17 AM
Lois - 02 March 2014 11:17 PM

In any case there is a reason for the state of affairs we have now with psychologists running things—something had to be done because of the chaotic situation that presented itself.  These things don’t happen in a vacuum. I don’t think psychologists are the answer either, but it’s a system that grew out of incredible dysfunction. What would you have done?

Lois

Is this a rhetorical question? Vyazma asked the same thing.

If not a rhetorical question, I think the families should handle these matters themselves. No government involvement. However, some people in these positions don’t have reliable families, so “street justice” should be the next step, IMO.

Which is why we have the chaos we have. Some people try to relieve the chaos while people like you call for more. So far your side is winning.

[ Edited: 03 March 2014 05:32 AM by Lois ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 March 2014 05:28 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4413
Joined  2008-08-14
mid atlantic - 03 March 2014 02:17 AM
Lois - 02 March 2014 11:17 PM

In any case there is a reason for the state of affairs we have now with psychologists running things—something had to be done because of the chaotic situation that presented itself.  These things don’t happen in a vacuum. I don’t think psychologists are the answer either, but it’s a system that grew out of incredible dysfunction. What would you have done?

Lois

Is this a rhetorical question? Vyazma asked the same thing.

If not a rhetorical question, I think the families should handle these matters themselves. No government involvement. However, some people in these positions don’t have reliable families, so “street justice” should be the next step, IMO.

Why are you wasting people’s time here? 
You’re probably a big dispenser of street justice aren’t you? LOL
Adolescent.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 March 2014 01:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5487
Joined  2010-06-16

I guess M-A feels we need an expansion of the “Stand Your Ground” laws to, maybe, “Prevent Any Behavior Different From Your Own” that would allow anyone to shoot any other person who doesn’t comply with the first one’s ideas of proper behavior.  This would be defined as “street justice”.

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 March 2014 10:44 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2631
Joined  2011-04-24
Lois - 03 March 2014 05:27 AM
mid atlantic - 03 March 2014 02:17 AM
Lois - 02 March 2014 11:17 PM

In any case there is a reason for the state of affairs we have now with psychologists running things—something had to be done because of the chaotic situation that presented itself.  These things don’t happen in a vacuum. I don’t think psychologists are the answer either, but it’s a system that grew out of incredible dysfunction. What would you have done?

Lois

Is this a rhetorical question? Vyazma asked the same thing.

If not a rhetorical question, I think the families should handle these matters themselves. No government involvement. However, some people in these positions don’t have reliable families, so “street justice” should be the next step, IMO.

Which is why we have the chaos we have. Some people try to relieve the chaos while people like you call for more. So far your side is winning.

How is “my side” winning?

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 March 2014 10:48 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2631
Joined  2011-04-24
Occam. - 03 March 2014 01:59 PM

I guess M-A feels we need an expansion of the “Stand Your Ground” laws to, maybe, “Prevent Any Behavior Different From Your Own” that would allow anyone to shoot any other person who doesn’t comply with the first one’s ideas of proper behavior.  This would be defined as “street justice”.

Occam

I said no to more government intervention.

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 3
2
 
‹‹ Koch Brothers      Is this racism? ››