Whistleblowers expose the Orange County family court crisis

Two girls sitting in court. This is a depiction of family court produced with the help of AI.Photo byRobert J. Hansen

By Robert J. Hansen and Julie Anderson-Holburn

A year after Catherine Kassenoff, a former New York prosecutor, took her life in hopes to shed light on the family court crisis in America, nothing has changed.

Though Catherine’s troubles were in New York, those issues exist throughout the country.

Now, court professionals within Southern California's Family Court have come forward to reveal decades-long troubling practices by judges and court officers that contradict laws, and fundamental parenting rights that they say compromise the safety and best interests of children.

Whistleblowers said that family court judges “shoot from the hip” in cases without taking the time to fully understand the situation which causes them to make “irrational” decisions regarding custody arrangements.

These experts say they have frequently witnessed judges dismiss crucial monitored visitation reports, which document interactions between parents and children.

These reports, vital for understanding the parent-child relationship, are often overlooked and ignored.

“When making decisions on cases, not having read the case so they don’t fully understand a particular situation, they end up making bad custody orders,” one expert said.

Whistleblowers report the significant frequency of judges showing favor for or bias toward one of the parties in a case.

They also said that they have seen judges make illogical decisions based on the lies perpetrated by one parent, and not thoroughly investigate the allegations to determine their validity.

Prolonged and inconsistent visitation orders

These whistleblowers, who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of fear of retaliation, report that capable parents have been subjected to prolonged monitored visitation, sometimes lasting years, without substantiation claims.

Parents who do not have drug or alcohol problems, suffer from mental health issues, nor have committed domestic violence or abused their children are subjected to being put on supervised visits and have little to no custody of their children.

These experts emphasized that assessing parents’ competence and ensuring the children's well-being ideally would only take six to nine months.

Many parents have been put on supervised visits that last years with no plan to have them regain a normal custody share of their children.

Some parents face a mix of both monitored and unmonitored visitation, highlighting the inconsistency within court rulings.

California law mandates monitored visitation for parents deemed unfit, such as in cases of suspected abuse.

However, many protective parents report retaliation after disclosing abuse, resulting in their monitored visitation or placement in reunification therapy.

Reunification therapy, when it causes a reversal in custody, was outlawed in California last year.

It was recently reported that Orange County reunification therapist Jessica St. Clair has removed herself from all of her cases in OC family court.

Professional Misconduct and Perjury

Allegations have surfaced about misconduct by lawyers, minors' counsel, and therapists.

Reports indicate dishonesty in their reported credentials, testimonies and written statements, with perjury often going unaddressed by the court.

Some professionals have been asked, allegedly, to withhold critical information to favor one parent in abuse cases, the whistleblowers claim.

Therapists and custody evaluators also show bias on cases, violate court orders and have connections to certain attorneys for work.

Financial Exploitation and Credibility Issues

Court professionals accuse certain legal representatives of prolonging cases, “excessive delays for years costing families tens of thousands of dollars or more in attorney, therapy and monitoring fees” or increasing billable hours, exacerbating the financial and emotional strain on families.

Assessments by reputable, non-court-approved medical and therapy professionals are frequently discredited, raising concerns about the reliability of the system.

There is no accountability, oversight, or licensing body for the supervised monitoring profession in California, other than a family code and a judicial standard (administrative only) in terms of enforcement for accountability for inappropriate monitor behavior or ethics.

Calls for Transparency and Accountability

Whistleblowers claim that the OC family court system due to zero oversight, zero accountability for judges and a lack of checks and balances, only hurts children while making attorneys wealthy.

Because of this lack of oversight, family court has become a money-making system that leaves parents in financial debt and children emotionally harmed.

They said there needs to be some regulation and consistency in making sure professionals are properly credentialed while others may need to be put through more rigorous training and background checks.

Court insiders suggest the need for laws to be immediately created, and implemented and some type of oversight committee outside the court system that can review family law cases and make recommendations on how to facilitate cases in a healthier and expedited manner.

This article is made possible by donations from readers like you! Donations can be made here.