this program as a dedicated public service designed to help these emotionally disturbed children be productive citizens in society. Ms. Chandler also went through a list of emotional symptoms that they observed in Stephanie while being in the PHP program. The list included: picking at scabs, eye lids, wore hat to cover bald spot, attention seeking, defiant, and angry outbursts now and then. (It should be noted these are symptoms of children being emotionally abused). Ms. Chandler also testified that Dr. Bennett, the program's psychiatrist was looking into Stephanie's problems as being that of Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome..

In cross-examination, my strategy was to make the PHP program appear as what it is, a business to make money. I asked, Ms. Chandler, how many children are in the program free of charge? Her answer was, none. I asked, Ms. Chandler, what the percentage of the program's success was in curing these children's emotional problems? She didn't have any idea. I asked what the program does to make these children happy? She answered, we don't try to make them happy, we try to make them adjust. I asked if being happy wasn't a part of healing? She guessed it was. I asked what the program has better to offer Stephanie than being home with a family who loves her and she's happy? She answered, we have trained professionals. I asked Ms. Chandler if the program was taking credit for Stephanie not pulling her hair out? She answered, I didn't say that. I asked Ms. Chandler if the program was a school setting? She answered, it is similar in structure. I asked, Ms. Chandler, is there an isolation room to punish children? She answered, yes, we have one but I don't like calling it that. I asked, Ms. Chandler, when children give reports of being abused, how is this dealt with? She answered, that staff will determine the validity and if there are indications of abuse, CYS would be called in. I asked where the program received it's input information pertaining to Stephanie's historical emotional difficulties? She answered, from Ms. Frederick. Because Ms. Chandler couldn't substantiate the worthiness of her PHP program for Stephanie, she became angry with my questions and stood up to walk off the witness stand. She was offended that I was attacking her program and she wasn't going to argue about it, anymore.

The court then asked Ms. Mears to present her next witness. Ms. Mears asked to have a few seconds so that she could talk with her witnesses in the hall. When she returned, she said she had no further witnesses.

Judge Carpenter asked what witnesses I would like to present. Accordingly, I called Ms. Diane Beiswenger to the stand. I asked Diane to describe the first day that Stephanie entered the PHP program. Diane described the event as being asked by the Baker school to come to the school and assist Stephanie getting off to the PHP program for the first day. Diane explained that Stephanie was happy to see us and she entered the school van to leave, without difficulty. I asked Diane to describe what she observed in Stephanie after returning home from the PHP program the second day. Diane said she was at my home when Stephanie got off the van. She put her arm around Steph to give her a hug and Stephanie said her shoulder hurt. Diane said she asked her the reason. Stephanie said, Ms. Reimer and her argued. Stephanie said, Ms.Reimer called in a school guard and forced her onto the PHP van by twisting her arm behind her back.

I then called Mr. David Kearns to testify as to what he observed of Stephanie since being placed in the School Districts Individualized Educational Program. Judge Carpenter stopped my questioning, asking what this had to do with the PHP program. I told Judge Carpenter it is all part of the IEP program. Judge Carpenter wanted to know where my questioning was going? I told him more child abuse! He told Dave to proceed and then suddenly stopped Dave, saying he wasn't going to allow it. Judge Carpenter closed the hearing citing he would allow Stephanie to remain in the program for now until he made his pending custody ruling. He warned that he was definitely going to remove Stephanie from one of the parents life. He reasoned the program may help Stephanie through this serious custody change. Judge Carpenter also directed Ms. Mears to send him a letter of custody recommendation. Judge Carpenter told Ms. Mears it doesn't have to be one, you can send several, if you wish.

On June 23, I had an appointment to see Dr. Richard Bennett at the PHP building. Dr. Bennett asked me what I thought was causing Stephanie's emotional problems. I told Dr. Bennett that Ms. Chandler testified that you were looking at Post Trauma Stress Syndrome as a possible cause for Stephanie's emotional difficulties. He answered, that he was considering it as a possibility. I told him that I agree with that thinking, because Stephanie had gone through numerous traumatic events in her life since November 1996. I told him, I didn't want to elaborate on those events, because I would rather be develop his conclusions through Stephanie. Dr. Bennett said, your daughter is not mentally ill why is she on these medications? I answered, because her mother wants her on them. He then asked, why is she in this PHP program? Dr. Bennett said he has been observing Stephanie playing games during recreation periods and had talked with her. He saw Stephanie as a polite, young lady. I told Dr. Bennett that Stephanie was always a nice girl and she is very coordinated at athletic events, in spite of her weight gain. Dr. Bennett said, he noticed that.

Dr. Bennett said, I have heard from someone that your belief is Stephanie fantasizes a lot as a means of escaping her problems. He said, I agree with you that is what she does it for. He said, Stephanie is not immature. She is just innocent and not knowledgeable on worldly things. You probably wanted to raise her that way. I agreed.

Dr. Bennett said it would be helpful to him if I could give him some specifics of the traumatic events Stephanie went through. I told him I hate to do that, but divorce is traumatic for children. He said yes, but they eventually overcome it, can you be more specific? I said, Stephanie was removed by knife point on the night of the marriage breakup. Stephanie was then kept away from my family with no means of communication. She was dragged out in the middle of the evening and put in a mental institution. She has been told by her mother that she will never see me again. And just recently she was beat up in a bathtub by her mother and half-sister and that is how she ended up in Conemaugh.

Dr. Bennett said, he wants to have Stephanie off the medications by the end of summer. I told him he would have a hard time convincing Stephanie's mother. He said, you know her better than anyone, how can we get her to agree to take her off the medications? I told him, you won't. He suggested that he has his ways of doing it. I told him, that would be great. (see Mr. Bennett's letter of March 19, 2002, after custody was given to the mother)

On July 8th, I received a copy of Ms. Mears' letter dated June 26th, outlining her custody recommendation that she sent to Judge Carpenter. Her letter had Ms. Frederick and I running equal in our beliefs and concerns regarding Stephanie's well being. We both love Stephanie very much. We were both involved with her education and neither one of us would deliberately hurt Stephanie. This I viewed as her opinions. However, Ms. Mears became flagrantly deceptive when she wrote two outright lies. First, she said Ms. Frederick and I were investigated by Children and Youth Services and neither were found to have abused Stephanie. The second lie stated that I would not cooperate with Stephanie's mental health care should I have custody. In both cases, she was well aware that testimony disclosed that (1) CYS did no investigation of the mother and (2) her own cross examination of me revealed I would cooperate in any impartially administered mental health care treatment of Stephanie until she is emotionally stabilized and we get to the bottom of what caused her problems in the first place.

Ms. Mears further wrote that Stephanie is especially attached to the paternal family and readily admits she prefers to live with her father. However, Ms. Mears said Stephanie does not need contact with each family. Wherefore, the custody needs to be limited to one parent having primary custody and the other limited to every other weekend visits, at most . When my brother and I read Ms. Mears' recommendation and saw it was so deceptive, we knew Judge Carpenter was going to give Stephanie to Ms. Frederick.

On July 15th, I received an order from Judge Carpenter hand delivered via the Sheriff department that placed the custody of Stephanie with her mother. Judge Carpenter totally removed me from Stephanie's life with the exception of a one hour supervised visit with my daughter per week. Judge Carpenter noted that if I was suspected of causing my daughter any emotional difficulties during these visits, I would be taken from her life completely. In contradiction to what Judge Carpenter had said at the June 20th hearing, he incorporated unrelated testimony to the custody issue from this hearing into his custody ruling. Given the gun Judge Carpenter had put to my head and considering the damage his order had done to Stephanie, I painfully chose not to pursue that visitation scheme. I didn't want to cause Stephanie more damage than the order had already done. Judge Carpenter had also instructed Ms. Mears to make arrangements for this supervised visitation the very first week of his order. In making this vicious order, Judge

continued on Page Ten