Kristy Moore's motivations - Assault on Judicial Integrity by Child Custody Evaluators - Part XI

In Part X of this series I left off telling you that I would reveal the possible motivations for Kristy's actions, the elements of her personality type that drive this and the effect it is having on the children.

Prior to signing the mediated agreement Kristy was already preparing for a custody battle. That process began seven months after signing the child custody agreement. At trial Kristy spun a web of baseless allegations that centered around her claim that she and Brian were unable to communicate and that Brian is an unfit parent who is abusive to the children. Some of the more bizarre claims included that Brian had visited her home in the middle of the night – harassing her by banging on the door repeatedly – and had also slashed the tires on her car at some point. Neither incident was reported to police nor corroborated by any direct evidence but to Kristy they felt real.

In court Kristy detailed her course of action to build a war-chest for the custody battle. She detailed some of the adjustments she made for her and the children. These included living with her parents, sacrificing having a new car and not being able to adequately provide her share of support for the children. When the coffers were stuffed she made her move, literally. She relocated from her parents home to a house in Pendleton and then commuted back to Indianapolis for her work at IPS. She likely thought this would elevate her standing in regards to factor five: The child’s adjustment to the child’s home, school, and community. They now had their own home, lived in a new community and had to adjust to the strange environment.

Kristy certainly made some points in her presentation and it seemed as though Jonathan Deenik had been advising her well which, for $20,000, he should. That is the amount that Kristy claimed to have in her war-chest. But under cross-examination by Brian, Kristy's tower seemed to collapse. Particularly when asked if it makes sense to spend $20K on an attorney but not the support of the children, such as their education, she replied – No! Deenik was unable to redeem her. Judge Heather Welch proclaimed that she was able to “see through [Kristy's] scheme.” The Court reduced Kristy's exposure to the children from that of every other week to the time after work [around 5:00pm] until they they are put on the bus to school the following morning on Monday afternoons through Friday mornings. Except for the first and third Mondays each month when Brian keeps them overnight.

As has been consistent throughout Brian continued to communicate with Kristy about parenting time matters and the well-being of the children. This included regularly offering to her opportunities for mediation which have been either ignored or rebuffed. She has, however, been amenable to engaging Brian in discussion about his offers of additional parenting time to her. In realizing the need for the children to maintain their new relationships in Pendleton and to experience meaningful interactions with each parent, which include ample opportunities for leisure activity, Brian has offered to Kristy one weekend per month of additional parenting time. This would give her a parent-child relationship of more than evening household duties and morning preparation for school.

Although Kristy has, according to her, depleted her legal expense war-chest; been told by the judge that her testimony is “not credible”; has had her effective parenting time substantially reduced; has by any measure of even a casual observer not made a compelling argument of a change of circumstances; and, contrary to her assertions about lack of communication, has continued to communicate effectively with Brian regarding her opportunities for additional parenting time – still continues to fight. Can there be any rational reason for this course of action? Can it be easily explained. The answers are yes and no.

Anyone would say, just as Kristy did, that it doesn't make sense to neglect your child's education or other needs just to carry on a baseless legal fight. It's just not rational. But to the irrational mind there is no conflict. Although I don't believe that personality type is a scientific predictor of future behaviour I do feel it can be correlated to past actions. In child custody terms Kristy has the mind of the “protector”. In her mind she is motivated by empathy for the children and a sense of needing to assure their well-being. This would explain the basis for her establishing her plan and building the legal fund war-chest.

Post-divorce children need stability and security. Especially those who are youngest, such as the pre-school Moore children were at the time Kristy filed for divorce. These children may endeavor for their parents reconciliation over a span of years. They often feel an intense sense of loss as parents rebuild their lives – economically, socially and sexually – and fail to engage in former routines such as bedtime stories or being socially engaged in the community or school. The effect becomes more acute when a parent relocates and creates a distance that renders participation by the other parent more difficult. New residences or new partners coming and going from the residence contribute to the feeling of insecurity and often exacerbate the outcome. These outcomes are often anger, loneliness, lack of trust and recoiling unto themselves. They learn to hide their feelings and pretend that things are fine.

Their hurt isn't so easily hidden though. When a child needs stability and continuity most he isn't getting it. This is why it is essential that parents continue to communicate. While dinner habits, bedtime routines and rules of the house may just seem like different parenting styles that each parent may now fully express in his or her own home, to the child they represent incongruity, instability and a lack of parental cohesion. Therefore, parents should attempt to establish as much conformity for the child as possible while still respecting each others differences. It takes effort, sometimes more than a parent who has come home from a stressful day at work wants to be confronted with by three email messages sent throughout the day.

The protector sees the signs of problems in the children and attributes them to the other parent. The child who withdraws into a near incommunicado state may be perceived as being sexually or otherwise abused. The protector parent won't correctly attribute the child's undirected anger as being the result of that parent being an absent parent in the home. After all, he or she is there, is providing material necessities and is himself or herself feeling more stable and secure now that the divorce is over. With all these positives attributes the only cause of a problem in the child's life must be the other parent. The problems provide a confirmation to the “protector” parent.

In observing Kristy in court, reviewing her court filings and reading years of email and text messages one can attribute a personality type to her. Some of the clearest observable traits about Kristy is her inability to think logically, to draw inferences or conclusions based upon available information. On the witness stand there were two distinct people. The first being the poised, confident and empathetic caring parent who fully answered Jonathan Deenik's questions with relevant responses. Moments later would appear the lost, confused, imaginary spirit who was nearly mute or rambled on with delusion based tales irrelevant to the proceedings during cross examination.

Kristy can easily be seen by coworkers or friends as easy to get along with, patient and flexible. She is a good team member, loyal and needs harmonious relationships in her life. She likes to live for the moment and is artistic. She is very accepting of people and doesn't try to peer into motives or meanings behind actions but takes them at face value. She is sensitive to conflicts and disagreement but this can also be a setback for her. Feedback, whether it be employment performance or parenting related, is taken personally. Suggestions of change are an offense to her and she tends to become discouraged or hostile. She has difficulty understanding more complex systems, especially interpersonal relationships. She often overlooks long-term consequences and doesn't prepare in advance. Her actions are motivate more by feeling than logic. She functions best in a structured and ordered environment while being prodded by others yet she does best when not having to confer with others when deciding important matters.

This personality type is not a statistical anomaly. In fact, it is quite proportional among personality types. So why is then that there is such conflict between her and Brian and that this can't be resolved yet while in its third year? In the next segment I will analyze Brian's personality and how that has contributed to this morass.

If you need assistance in refuting an Indiana child custody evaluator then please visit my website and contact my scheduler to make an appointment to meet with me.

If you would like to follow my activities more closely then send a friend request to my Political FaceBook page.

Subscribe to this blawg.

More information about child custody rights and procedures may be found on the Indiana Custodial Rights Advocates website.

©2008, 2013 Stuart Showalter, LLC. Permission is granted to all non-commercial entities to reproduce this article in it's entirety with credit given.