represented. The four common witnesses attending that day in chronological order were Dr. Hanlon, Stephanie's inclusion teacher (Bonita Reimer) from the Baker school, Shannon Kelly of CYS, and psychologist Scott Lambert.

As I had expected with the exception of Mr. Lambert, every witness who had extensive contact with Ms. Frederick, prior to the hearings, would begin their testimony struggling to give an appearance of impartiality. Within a few minutes, each witness except Mr. Lambert would start to slant their testimony in favor of the plaintiff mother. Three of these witnesses confirmed that their professional interactions with Stephanie were solely based on my wife's input and perceptions of Stephanie. Scott Lambert said he considered input from Ms. Frederick and myself

In summary, Dr. Hanlon's testimony was primarily restricted to her medical treatment and physical condition of Stephanie. She had also displayed an unusual closeness to Ms. Frederick and believed her to be an ideal mother who deeply loved her daughter. Dr. Hanlon described Stephanie's visit to her office as normally uncooperative and tumult when accompanied by her mother. In contrast, she saw Stephanie as cooperative and well behaved when accompanied by her dad alone. I asked Dr. Hanlon if she ever heard of Munchausen by Proxy? She answered yes, it is a condition that mother's have who make their children physically sick and then they have them medically treated. I asked Dr. Hanlon if that would also include making their children appear to be mentally ill. She hesitated and then answered yes, they can do that. I asked Dr. Hanlon if these Munchausen by Proxy mothers have the unique ability to fool doctors? She answered yes, they do.

When Ms. Mears asked her first question on cross examination, I found her purported neutrality to be absolute bunk. It was a direct attack at me.

In summary, Ms. Reimer's testimony centered on Stephanie's behavior pattern in school. She testified to observing Stephanie biting herself, pulling out the hair on her head, becoming aggressive towards teachers, picking at herself until sores developed, poking at herself with a pencil, repeatedly tying and untying her shoe laces, outbursts, openly bringing family problems up during class discussions, falls asleep in class, couldn't stay focused on school work, and made demands that her one on one tutor do her class assignments and turn the pages of her book. Ms. Reimer further testified that before each school day began my wife would approach the school teachers and give an account of Stephanie's mood for the day and what they should expect to deal with. Because Ms. Reimer was vague on the exact time period the shared custody took effect, I am sure it was by accident that she testified to seeing Stephanie happy for the for the first time in March 1999, (see IEP school report) after the joint custody agreement was reached, since entering the Baker School.

When I questioned Ms. Reimer, I gave her a list of psychological symptoms that were indicators of severe emotional abuse. Ms. Reimer agreed they fit her behavioral profile of Stephanie. She went on to admit they were aware that these were signs of emotional abuse that the school had been watching for some time.

In summary when Shannon Kelly testified, she tried to portray me as this uncooperative father who just couldn't believe his daughter was mentally ill. Accordingly, I just couldn't get behind CYS's suggestions or Dr. Baker's and Dr. Eugene Polmueller's treatment regimen of Stephanie.

About five minutes into my cross examination of Ms. Kelly, it came to my attention that she failed to bring as much as a piece of paper to the witness stand let alone CYS records as was directed by subpoena. I asked Ms. Kelly where the CYS records were? Judge Carpenter quickly intervened and asked if I was interested in something particular? I answered yes, their daily casework sheets. Judge Carpenter then negotiated with me that perhaps Ms. Kelly could give him those records later and he would review them. He asked what I wanted from those records in particular? I told him I was interested in how many complaints Ms. Frederick filed against me after the custody agreement was reached. Judge Carpenter asked if I would care if the records were given to him and he would look for that information privately. Reluctantly, I agreed. However, my very next question to Ms. Kelly was, were there complaints filed by Ms. Frederick after the agreement? She answered, yes. I asked Ms. Kelly if CYS ever thought that my wife was trying to undermine the custody agreement? She answered no.

I then questioned Ms. Kelly if she was aware of Stephanie being abducted by knife point? She answered yes, CYS knows about it. I asked her if this could be considered emotional abuse. She hesitated and then answered, she didn't know. I asked if Stephanie had told her that mom said her daddy never wanted her. She answered yes, but I couldn't believe that Stephanie's mother could say something like that to her. I asked if this actually occurred would this be emotional abuse? She answered, I don't know. I sarcastically asked Ms. Kelly if this was child protective services? She answered yes, well I know if someone told me my dad never wanted me it would bother me. I then read Ms. Kelly the same list of emotional abuse symptoms that I gave Ms. Reimer and I asked her if the symptoms reminded her of anyone? She answered "yes, Stephanie. I asked Ms. Kelly if she was aware of Munchausen by Proxy? She answered, she was. I asked Ms. Kelly to define this condition. She described it as mothers who make their children sick and then pretend to have these illnesses treated. I asked Ms. Kelly if she was saying that other mothers can make their children sick, but not Ms. Frederick? She answered, I didn't say that. I shot back, ma'am you just testified to that.

On re-examination, Ms. Frederick asked Judge Carpenter if she may ask Shannon a question about something that was said to her in confidentiality? Mr. Carpenter said, she could. Ms. Kelly, could you tell the court what your opinion of Mr. Kearns is after a telephone conversation you had with him? Yes, I said Mr. Kearns is insane.

In summary, Mr. Lambert had testified that he was appointed by the school system to delve into Stephanie's emotional problems in the school environment. Mr. Lambert said from talking with Stephanie and his observations of her in class she was a likable normal girl who was under a lot of stress caused by the divorce situation. He saw Steph as being extremely perceptive to strangers entering her class room, especially if the teacher was pulled aside to talk. He believed that the parents not cooperating was the cause of her emotional instability. However, he acknowledged that Stephanie's deterioration was exacerbated by outside individuals (CYS and other professionals). He further reasoned Steph was to the point she was being pushed over the edge by the constant intervention into her life, but at the same time couldn't be left dealing with her problems alone.

I questioned Mr. Lambert, if Stephanie's emotional deterioration was necessarily the result of both parents or could one parent effect her the same way? He answered one parent could cause it. I told Mr. Lambert that Stephanie had been put through several traumatic events in her life. He said that Stephanie's behavior's could be indicative of Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome and he never thought to explore that avenue. I asked Mr. Lambert if he saw Stephanie as being to the point of a nervous break down? He answered that Stephanie was just about ready to crack. He then told the court to excuse his language, but if you want my opinion the "Hell" has been beat out of Stephanie.

During the April 6th, 2000 hearing, three witnesses testified in chronological order: Mrs. Diane Beiswenger, Dr. Eugene Polmueller, Diane Beiswenger (finishing up), and Mr. David Kearns.

Mrs. Beiswenger's and Mr. David Kearns' testimony centered on Stephanie's behavior before and after the marriage breakup. Essentially, they described Stephanie as a kind, likable, well-behaved girl before the breakup. They described her attitude and behavior during visits with the paternal family virtually the same as the post marriage breakup. Mr. Polmueller's testimony hinged on his treating Stephanie with mind altering drugs and his psychological conclusions that were primarily and regularly formulated on the input from Ms. Frederick.

Taking the same approach with Polmueller as I did with Ms. Kelly and Ms. Reimer, I asked him to listen to a list of the behaviors that Ms. Reimer and Ms. Kelly admitted to observing while professionally interacting with Stephanie. I then read him the list of psychological symptoms of emotional abuse that I had given Ms. Reimer and Ms. Kelly. Given that, I asked Mr. Polmueller to supply a definition to those symptoms? He answered that could indicate emotional distress. I asked would that mean emotional abuse? He answered "yes."

continued on Page Six