Seattle psychologist Stuart Greenberg committed suicide - ""expert witness"" on sexual abuse was a pervert

[Greegor]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/325267_psychologist27.html

Seattle psychologist suspected of voyeurism takes his own life
Friday, July 27, 2007 Last updated 2:01 p.m. PT By CLAUDIA ROWE

A career that spanned more than 25 years and brought Stuart Greenberg
national renown as a forensic psychologist ended abruptly Wednesday
when the Seattle therapist, recently under criminal investigation for
voyeurism, committed suicide in a Renton motel.

Investigators have yet to confirm reports that Greenberg, who left two
notes, overdosed on pills -- though friends and colleagues believe the
true cause was shame.

"There was nobody whose professional reputation was more important to
them than Stu -- it was everything to him," said Marsha Hedrick, a
colleague. "So to have such stature in the field and then to lose
that, it was horrifying to him."

A clinical affiliate at the University of Washington, former
consultant to the Seattle Archdiocese and past president of the
American Board of Forensic Psychology, Greenberg, 59, had recently
admitted to Seattle police that he surreptitiously videotaped several
women using the restroom in his Montlake office. Afterward, he
masturbated to the images, police say.

"Stu was an incredibly intelligent man and a stellar contributor to
the field of forensic psychology," Hedrick said.

"But psychologists are not immune to neglecting their own demons, and
Stu lost control of his, with tragic results. I'll miss him terribly."

A spokesman for the King County Prosecutor's Office said a decision on
whether to charge the therapist had been pending, and last week state
regulators suspended his license.

Several days before that, speaking in a shaken, weary voice, Greenberg
called the UW psychology department to tender his resignation.

"When he called and left that message, I felt such pain in his voice,"
department secretary Beth Rutherford said. "He apologized for any
embarrassment he'd caused, and to know that his whole life and career
ended like that, it's just so sad."

On Monday, Greenberg checked into the Clarion Hotel in Renton for a
two-day stay, according to desk manager Debbie Prakash, and early
Wednesday morning he came down to return his key, informing the staff
that he was preparing check out.

" 'I'm gone. I'm done. I'm leaving' -- those were his exact words,"
she said.

Several hours later, when housekeepers attempted to clean his room,
they found the door latched from the inside, but managed to push it
open and through a crack spied a note that Greenberg had affixed to
the closet door. Call my wife, it said.

"We are overwhelmed by loss and with grief that we could not convince
Stu life was worth living," the family said in a prepared statement.
"Stu had great gifts and flaws, but to us he was a much loved husband,
father, brother and son. We miss him terribly."

Doug Mooney, a friend and attorney, said the therapist had penned one
suicide note to his family and another for those hurt by his
transgressions.

"I wish I could offer you some adequate explanation," it said. "[But]
I just don't know. I deeply and profoundly apologize."

News of his crime, first reported early this month, had spread quickly
over the Internet. The more word got out, friends said, the more he
grew to understand the wider ramifications of his acts. Bloggers
sniped that the entire field of forensic psychology -- on which
Greenberg had built his entire professional life -- was nothing more
than a haven for paid voyeurs.

"What happened to him, what darkness in his life and circumstances
drove him to the events that led to his suicide, I don't know," said
David Nichols, a friend and colleague in Oregon. "I doubt that he did,
either.

"But I do know that the cause of his death was shame -- the shame of a
decent man whose video invasions of another's privacy were as
puzzling, alien and offensive to him as they were known to be out of
character by those who knew him to be a much better man."

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/soundoff/comment.asp?articleID= 325267

Seattle psychologist suspected of voyeurism takes his own life
A prominent Seattle psychologist who had been under investigation for
voyeurism committed suicide in a Renton motel Wednesday evening, his
attorney said.
What do you think?
#219252Posted by El Gallo at 7/26/07 1:39 p.m.

"A prominent Seattle psychologist who had been under investigation for
voyeurism has committed suicide in a Renton motel, a family friend
said Thursday.

Stuart Greenberg, 59, who'd made a lucrative career advising the
courts in child-custody disputes, in addition to working with the
Seattle Archdiocese on priest sexual abuse cases, was found Wednesday
afternoon at a Kent motel, according to Douglas Mooney, the family
friend."

So, are Renton and Kent actually the same place?

#219272Posted by WBHole at 7/26/07 2:05 p.m.

Good. Wish more of these creeps would off themselves.

#219279Posted by J.P. Patches Pal at 7/26/07 2:12 p.m.

He did the honorable thing.

#219281Posted by I Tell The Truth at 7/26/07 2:13 p.m.

His guilt of championing a justice system that believes it can rehab
these molestors, and all the while he was an alleged SICKO, must have
eaten him up. Sad that our legislators, etc., listen to such people.
It is too bad he killed himself; prison would have been a nice place
for him - he may have actualy enjoyed himself.

#219293Posted by Davemult at 7/26/07 2:23 p.m.

I knew Stuart Greenberg as a colleague and friend over most of the
last 20 years of his life, and I knew him to be smart, careful,
generous, loyal, and deeply caring of his friends and loved ones.

What happened to him, what darkness in his life and circumstances
drove him to the events that led to his suicide, I don't know, and I
doubt that he did either. But I do know that the cause of his death
was shame, the shame of a decent man whose video invasions of
another's privacy were as puzzling, alien, and offensive to him as
they were known to be out of character by those who knew him to be a
much better man than these violations would lead others to believe.

My heart goes out to his family and his friends.

#219299Posted by imatard2 at 7/26/07 2:29 p.m.

I don't know what bothers me more, the ones that need help , or the
ones making excuses for them, in medical terms they are called,
enablers. He ended up where he is, through choices he made.

#219300Posted by Cowboy Logic at 7/26/07 2:29 p.m.

Davemult says: "the shame of a decent man"...

and so it goes.

#219305Posted by sporty at 7/26/07 2:33 p.m.

Darwin strikes again..........

#219312Posted by Ted Fleming at 7/26/07 2:36 p.m.

He took the easy way out, obviously he did not have the fortitude to
face his punishment.

At least he saved us the cost of trying and incarcerating him.

#219338Posted by WSP at 7/26/07 3:07 p.m.

Dave Mult has stated "I knew him to be smart, careful, generous,
loyal, and deeply caring of his friends and loved ones." His treatment
of patients is what has been called into question.

He ended his life rather than be judged as he had judged others. The
real losers here are those patients that were damaged and will
struggle to get closure, and his family, that can only struggle
through the mess he has left and question why.

The saddest part of it all is the exposure his trial could have
brought to a corrupt family court system that will now go ignored
until the next falling star crashed.

#219339Posted by Jack Straw at 7/26/07 3:09 p.m.

Greenberg ruined many lives with his lies. Hiding his sexual
perversion was just another lie. At least he finally got caught.

He had ruined my GF's relationship with her son by his lies and bought
evaluations. When he did have something favorable to say on paper, he
waivered in backing his own report on the stand. Once again, the ex
paid his fee as a trial witness.

Apparently one of Greenbergs loved ones is money. He certainly did not
care for the poor. He loved the parent with most money.

As for being a better man than the charges showed....BS. He just got
caught.

He made millions by pointing a finger at good parents and accusing
them of being bad, all the while he was breaking legal, moral, and
religious laws- while invading the privacy of clients and co-workers.

Shame on him. Shame on his profession.

He got what he deserves.

#219341Posted by nonstopjoe at 7/26/07 3:10 p.m.

He saved the taxpayers a bundle, so that's something to be thankful
for. In retrospect, who was crazier - the psychologist or his
patients?

#219350Posted by bite-me at 7/26/07 3:30 p.m.

Bye Stuart!

#219357Posted by AksalaSeawolf at 7/26/07 3:46 p.m.

The fellow saved taxpayers many dollars. And, he will not be doing
anything as such again...or more crimes. Well flushed. He took the
easy way out and showed his true colors. Shameful man.

#219358Posted by sirvic42 at 7/26/07 3:48 p.m.

This reminds me a bit of that saying about police officers. Something
to the effect of "Never trust anyone who really wants the power that
comes with the job." Also a good rule of thumb for con artists and
shifty "financial advisors". If they seem very anxious to get their
hands on your money, it's probably because they want to steal it.
So... beware of a psychologist or therapist that really likes to work
with kids and/or women from troubled families. They may just be
predators who have found easy targets.

#219416Posted by seattle4ever at 7/26/07 5:26 p.m.

all those of you are happy to hear this man killed himself are
probably consevative god loving republicans.you should be real proud
of youselves!

#219421Posted by US at 7/26/07 5:40 p.m.

Maybe Tom Cruise had something to think about, after all. The mental
health system has a lot of skeletons in it's closet.

#219433Posted by thedman at 7/26/07 6:07 p.m.

Sad but his criminal actions were sadder, sounds like he left a lot of
hurt in the world abusing his position. He certainly could get into
the mind of a sexual abuser huh?

#219440Posted by catie.w at 7/26/07 6:22 p.m.

As one of Greenburg's child clients (aged 15) I do know for a fact
that he was an awful psychologist. He completely messed up my family,
but he did NOT deserve death. Nobody really does, and anyone who says
that he deserved to die has something wrong with them.

#219442Posted by mobeter3 at 7/26/07 6:24 p.m.

I can't believe what I'm reading. Where is the compassion? Where are
Seattle's diplomatic comments?

People have faults. People get scared. People make mistakes - the same
ones over and over.

It's natural for anyone to want to avoid judgment and face others who
are upset with us. Yes, this is a sad end to an unrespectable period
in someone's life. But that's it - it's just a period. It's not the
entire life. I'm sure he has given the world many, many wonderful
moments.

And that is something each one of us would want from the other: to
have the entire context of our life looked at, not just the moments.

#219448Posted by grrl7 at 7/26/07 6:36 p.m.

He took the easy way out--or did he advise his patients who had
problems to kill themselves? Why not face the music and help figure
out why people like him do these things. What else did he do that we
don't know about? An overdose is not that bad a way to go.

#219458Posted by craig a mason at 7/26/07 6:51 p.m.

Psychology and Psychiatry are deeply problematic disciplines.

Having spent 40 years industriously studying in the social sciences, I
know that social sciences are NOT "Sciences" in 90% of what is written
for two reasons:

1) They remain "priestlike" in that the social pseudosciences are used
to "stabilize meaning" and to solve existential problems, and they are
used to "define deviance" in a way that "stabilizes morality." This
"priestly" anti-critical function of the "paid social
scientists" ("counselors," "psychologists," "psychiatrists" etc.) is
simply a priest-like "meaning game." (There are some exceptions in
psychiatry, of course.)

2) A stupid "scientism" infects the rest of social "science." Humans
are not a gas. Humans are not a liquid. Humans are "animals," but they
are not cows, not lions, and not even chimps. They are humans. Humans
make choices.
A ridiculous scientism asserts there is "no free will," and an equally
ridiculous anti-scientism asserts there is "free will." Humans have
WILL (choice).
Human choice is highly constrained by evolutionary tendencies,
biography, and social influence, but it is its own thing.

The flight from existential freedom, and the needs of power structures
to "naturalize deviance" (pretend good and bad are "obvious") keeps
the priestly side of social pseudoscience alive, and "scientism/
humanism" ("determinism"/"free will") pseudodebate is the academic
side of the same deliberate ignorance.

What is the greatest shame is that the vast majority of humans, even
the vast majority of social "scientists" will die in the manner of Dr.
Greenburg, whose last note read:

"I wish I could offer you some adequate explanation ... (but) I just
don't know."

We have centuries of deliberate not knowing impeding the advance of a
genuine social science.

#219468Posted by bigmomma at 7/26/07 7:06 p.m.

I anticipated he would do that a week ago. He is in peace. I am not.
Greenberg has put me through a lot of pain. His intrusive
investigations...all for self gratification. He enjoyed his 59
years...with lots of money and lots of 'gratification' for what he
did.

He labeled me of several mental illness. He testified at trial that I
had 'traits' of this or that.

He slandered me and endorsed my ex who paid him nearly $30k. Greenberg
talked trash about me with CPS workers who were investigating the
false allegations. ( never one was found). Greenberg talked with Dr.
Dunne of how 'trashy' of a mother I was.

Greenberg endorsed domestic abuse. It did not stop. When I learned of
his arrest. I relive the nightmare. I had to go seek counseling. The
pain was so big to know that a pervert could have removed my children
from me, because I didn't speak English to make myself understood, or
because my cultural back ground clashed with his 'pervert' mind of
what 'women' should be.

Now he is dead. I am to live with his legacy. He can never undo the
disgrace he caused to my children, specially my son.

Greenberg now is GONE! His damage stays and we have to learn to live
with or bind together to help make a change.

He was a pervert and a coward!

His children will have money to deal with their pain. I was robbed of
my children by a pervert. I don't even have money to pay a lawyer to
deal with the legacy of Greenberg, which I have to live every day that
I am not allowed to see my son, who I love so much.

I am angry at him. He put me through so much shame. It is taking me
many years to show the courts that I am not the 'horrible' person that
Greenberg painted to the courts.

He could not live with his shame. A real Coward!

#219476Posted by Ted Fleming at 7/26/07 7:24 p.m.

His lasting legacy will be Voyeurism suspect kills self .

Appropriate.

#219501Posted by imatard2 at 7/26/07 8:44 p.m.

Nothing to do with global warming, nothing to do with politics, He
jacked over more liberals than conservatives by a very large margin.

Cool way to get the monkey off the Doc's back though, Besides the
money he saved taxpayers, do you think for one second he would be
found guilty by a system he was immersed in. I think everyone is twice
lucky, money saved, and his own guilty verdict, I just hope the
effected woman/ladies, can sue his estate, that would be 3 times
lucky. Even though you can't change the past, it would sure help the
future.

#219521Posted by MommyC at 7/26/07 9:42 p.m.

Wow. I didn't know this guy. Find his crimes disgusting and my heart
goes out to his victims -- this has to just add to the trauma of the
violation they have experienced.

That said, I find the tenor of many of these comments disturbing.
Nobody is all good or all bad. I'm sure he had his good points. I'm
also sure his family loved him and will miss him terribly. There is
nothing honorable in his committing suicide and nothing dishonorable
in people who knew and admired him speaking well of his better side.
To treat anyone's death and obvious anguish so cavalierly is frankly
sick. This is, start to finish, a profoundly sad story and for anyone
to gloat over another's death is disgusting.

#219524Posted by WA5thGeneration at 7/26/07 9:53 p.m.

I am truly disgusted at the posts that are thrilled at this man's
suicide.

He obviously had some demons in his life - and victimized some people
along the way, but who are all these people who feel so entitled to
cast judgement? No doubt, many think of themselves as Christians.
Perhaps they should think twice.

#219529Posted by Jack Straw at 7/26/07 10:00 p.m.

MommyC.
If you had lost your children to a Domestic Abusive ex-husband because
of someone's (Greenberg's) bought and paid for report and witness
testimony, you also would not have any sympathy for his behavior in
both life and death.

His behavior in life was discusting and in death, cowardly.

Families, mothers and children mostly, that he destroyed did not want
him dead. They wanted him to face and dance to the music he himself
payed the band to play. But I guess the music stopped and he didn't
even bother looking for a chair.

Now the families that HE abused will never get justice.

#219532Posted by MommyC at 7/26/07 10:09 p.m.

Jack Straw:

You are right. If I were personally touched, I'd have all sorts of raw
emotions and feelings. I'm not talking about those people. I'm talking
about the casual readers who somehow feel the need to weigh in like
this is some sort of positive outcome. It's not. It's not for the
victims, for this man's friends and family or anyone. It's a sad, sad
thing for everyone. And anyone who simply reads the story and feels
the need to express their satisfaction in his death has lost some of
their humanity.

I'm not also expressing any support of his behaviors in life or death.
I'm just acknowledging that he must have had some redeeming qualities
and been loved by someone. And that, obviously, he suffered great
anguish. I simply can't take any satisfaction from anyone's suffering
-- his, his family's or his victims.

#219537Posted by George Tirebiter at 7/26/07 10:22 p.m.

I am in perhaps the unique position of being both a colleague and a
victim of Dr. Greenberg. As is the case with some of you, he was hired
by my ex-wife during a nasty divorce. He pretended that he was going
to be objective until he got paid. He then wrote a hatchet job on me
that would have been laughable had the implications for my life and
career not been so dire. His report was so obviously biased,
clinically wrong and internally inconsistent that an intern would have
been chastised for it, let alone an alleged paragon of our profession.
Because he was the Great Stuart Greenberg, it was accepted as gospel.
Complaint after complaint was made against him to the Dept. of Health.
I had a colleague who was a member of the Psychology Board tell me
over 15 years ago that they had clear evidence of his bias. They tried
to discipline him, but he had plenty of money and influence and got it
overturned. Greenberg told me himself in the smug, sactimonious tone
that was so characteristic of him that the AAG who represented the
state against him died in a one-car accident. After this, the Board
ignored compliant after complaint about his professional misconduct.
Meanwhile, Greenberg was publishing and giving professional
presentations on, of all things, ethics.

As I expected, the Scientologists and other know-nothings are are
using this as an excuse to bash the entire profession. If the tables
were turned, they would complain that they should not be judged by the
worst example among them. Psychiatrists and Psychologists are, for the
most part, highly trained, compassionate, hardworking and well-meaning
people who could all have made more money in another line of work.

Those who request compassion should understand that they are asking
for it on behalf of a man who had none. He told with impunity lies
that he knew would ruin lives. This is essence of a psychopath. One of
the saddest aspects of this are his friends and family members who
eulogize him. They are apparently oblivious to the suffering he
caused. No one should be fooled that this was an act of atonement. It
was a deed of narcissistic rage by someone who couldn't stand the idea
of being knocked down from his lofty perch and held accountable for
misdeeds.

#219565Posted by bigmomma at 7/26/07 11:25 p.m.

Thank you all for the comments. Helps me to read them and to know that
I was not the only victim. I do not feel so lonely anymore. For seven
years, I really thought I was the only one hurt by this man, because
of race, my bad English or accent. I have been fighting this pervert's
rotten reports and the impact of his LIES for many years. It is
difficult to un-do the wrong done... I guess taking own's life is a
way to 'un-do'. I was not willing to do that. So I fought back-
learning how the legal system operates.

When in 2000, my ex and his lawyer got Judge Barnett to order me to
quit college, which I had started with support and help of New
Beginnings to help me exit the abusive marriage, I plunged in major
depression.

The X's lawyer was threatening me with contempt of court if I didn't
quit college... all because the X claimed that I could make more money
then him... and to set child support for a amount of $71,00.(seventy
one dollars per month)( no joke, he could pay Greenberg nearly $30k, a
lawyer for seven years non stop, but could only pay $71).

I was terrified. The X threatening me to remove my children, to deport
me, to throw me in jail, his brother offering me money to leave the
country "to get out of the picture"... it was awful. I had no idea how
I could I support my children on a $71 per month and ordered to quit
college. I was a home mom for many years ...I remember having a
conversation with Greenberg about the injustice that was taken place.
I remember his looks, his smirk, his laughter while I was crying in
despair... I landed on welfare, lost my Pell grant, lost the SCC
'child-care' assistance and threats of contempt was "fun" for this
pervert... He made sure the final order said "Greenberg will review
the case in a year"... (many reports of Greenberg has the same
language- he was a whore of the system exploiting families and
extorting from the children. I am still in debt for borrowing money to
pay him per court orders, even though I never agreed to have him in
the case. It was all the X's lawyer's whim. She knew what Greenberg
did for money. She pushed the court to order Greenberg. She hauled me
to Court 3 times to 'pay Greenberg'.

I never give up my children because I love my children and I am not
willing to believe in lies. I survived ... Thank goodness for New
Beginnings and my DV counselor. I learned how to represent myself in
court, I made my way back to college and I just graduated from CWU. I
was able to move the court to make my daughter be allowed to see my
graduation ceremony, only for the week after, Valerie Bell, to come to
court seeking a Warrant for my Arrest for 'sending my son a
'valentine's card'. (I quashed it in less then 24 hours)

That is the trail legacy left by Greenberg, that I have to live with.
Ongoing litigation. My children awarded to the X. The X is not
satisfied with the 'custody'... he wants to terminate my rights all
together.

Although he convinced Greenberg to do that, Judge McBroom gave me a
four hour visit per week with my son . Since Greenberg's involvement,
my X has not allowed me to see my son (now going on four years). After
he deprived me to see my son all this time, he dare to file yet
another action in court alleging that "I have voluntarily abandoned my
son", seeking to terminate my contact with my son completely.
Commissioner Ponomarchuck allowed the case to proceed, and our trial
starts next Tuesday in King County Court.

I wonder how many would have the tenacity that I do. Now I see, we
were in numbers... Yes, Greenberg intimidated me, hurt me. I can get
over. I am a bigmomma!

However my children are hurt forever. I would never be able to undo
the damage Greenberg has caused them. I don't think Greenberg had any
love for his own children. Had he known what love is, he would not
have hurt so many children.

I really wish that his death is not in vain.
That his horrific actions will help bring a real CHANGE to the legal
system, specially in family courts where so many children are hurt and
abused.

What can we done now?

#219570Posted by bigmomma at 7/26/07 11:39 p.m.

Sorry about my typos. last line should read:

What can be done now?

#219573Posted by H Moul at 7/26/07 11:42 p.m.

He did the honorable thing

Actually, that would have involved a long knife and a purification
ritual first, but only someone that has honor to begin with can use
suicide as an honorable exit, and certainly not in these
circumstances. All he really did was spare himself further
embarrassment and the taxpayers a lot of money - selfish reasons for a
selfish person. No honor involved here.

Per various people in the profession I know, he was an egotistical a**
that loved to lord his reputation over others. One called him an
"disgusting, unethical hypocrite" and a pervert, and sincerely hoped
for his lengthy incarceration.

#220190Posted by caring mother at 7/27/07 10:21 p.m.

My family was involved with Stu Greenberg for over 2 1/2 years
spending in excess of $65,000. The process was a nightmare. His death
was no different then his practice--the easy way out(like his court
appointed income which he enjoyed). He divided families and pitted
them against one another for his own personal gain, during a time when
the families were at their most venerable moment and their children's
future rested in the balance of his decision. HE KNEW he had this
power a grossly abused it. He used his degree to intimidate. He had
the judges in his back pocket and continued to abuse the system; he
made fools of the legal system. I'm sure he caused many suicides, what
is worse were the families whom lost their love ones because of his
sole decision making power, they did not have a voice. The families
which were hurt by his court appointed immunity were left to struggle
with their loss alone. I'm sure all of his victims had thoughts of
suicide. Losing your children because of his twisted recommendations
was a nightmare. He took his own life because he didn't have the
decency to take the public humility, the type of humility he put his
victims through. His was a court appointed colleague and a referral of
Marsha Hedrick. Marsha writes of a man that was her equal and speaks
of him from her "professional" point of view, Marsha is threatened,
her own court appointed income may be in jeopardy and rightly so. She
was a traveling professional colleague of Stu's attending conventions
with him. If you ever had to seat on the opposite side of Stuart
Greenberg and watch him smirk at you while he asked probing
unprofessional questions you could feel him relish in his self
importance. The questions he would ask were unrelated to a family
evaluation, they were lascivious and awkward, they made you cry and
feel emotionally threatened he loved making people feel small and
unimportant.

#220197Posted by Racer_C at 7/27/07 10:38 p.m.

You people are way beyond over the top. I guess you are just out to
prove Hobbs was right. Yuck! You ought to learn to be nicer. Good luck
your lives.

#220229Posted by Lowell1 at 7/28/07 12:34 a.m.

The offensive act(s) of hidden videos by Dr. Greenberg speaks for
itself. Each assessment he did also speaks for themselves. To infer or
suggest that his work is inaccurate based upon his improper act is not
based upon any facts. The only way to determine this would be to look
at each case. I am sure that a number of individuals will attempt to
slam him in death to pursue legal goals.

The fact is that his forensic work was at the request of parties or
courts dealing with parties who in some way or form misbehaved or
allegedly misbehaved themselves (such as clergy misconduct), or found
themselves in court over matters such as child custody, such as one
side or the other slamming the parenting abilities of the other. Had
these people chosen better mates, or learned to get along in divorce,
Dr. Greenberg would not have been requested to assist these warring
parties. His task was unfortunately to assist in determining which of
two parents ought to have custody of their kids, and in such a case it
is guaranteed that one of the two was not going to be happy with the
outcome. Before you trash his work, look first at yourself and the
many mistakes of a human nature that took place on your watch before
you ended up in his office. You can make mistakes, but he is not
allowed to? When you pass on, will there be such vitriol hurled at you
by those who you have encountered and perhaps upset in life? The power
he exercised was given to him by all of us because we as a society
can't seem to solve certain problems without the courts, and we as a
society have many people among us who do some very stupid things,
including having children with people we can't or shouldn't parent
with.

In many ways, Dr. Greenberg was a man of courage, unafraid to take a
stance after analyzing some very complex and contentious situations.
He reportedly took some dirty pictures with a hidden camera. He should
never have done this but his self-inflicted punishment does not fit
the crime, nor does his recent self-destructive actions absolve the
parties who he assessed, or render his assessments invalid.

Rest in peace Stuart, and may your family and friends know that the
comments above are from one small subset of people who he encountered
and that this group includes many who respected his legacy and the
work that he did, while recognizing the human tragedy of his death.

#220263Posted by craig a mason at 7/28/07 7:41 a.m.

George Tirebiter: I am not a scientologist, but in the study of human
behavior, I am a scientist.

I do not deny that some psychologists do "good," but what I deny is
that the disciplines are yet sciences. The "need" to replace priests
with something similar rooted in a "secular" ("scientific") jargon led
psychologists and psychiatrists to PRE-MATURELY (before the
disciplines have become sciences) offer themselves out to the public
as scientific substitutes for priests.

The point is simply to understand that any "good" you do is not based
in science (very far, at least). Then courts would be more critical
and thoughtful in evaluating your reports.

I have seen the family law commissioners "automatically" accept the
most obviously primitive, stupid and wrong counselor reports as
"gospel," just as happened to you. These judges need to be educated in
how psychology remains mainly a rhetoric of conformity (talking people
into happy conformity) and is not yet a science.

#220268Posted by craig a mason at 7/28/07 7:48 a.m.

Big Momma and Caring Mother: Sorry that you suffered, and Lowell is
right that each case needs to be reviewed on its facts, but family law
commissioners, especially those involved with CPS again and again
suspend critical thought.

The guardians ad litem are usually "in house" in one way or another
(if only toadying to CPS to get repeat business), and the
commissioners are part of the "team." Many, many poor parents suffer
needless reomovals of children.

Outside of CPS, the judges and commissioners defer to stupid ideas,
rotten facts, especially when from a "big name" psychologist. The
legislature needs to act quickly and dramatically to establish
mandatory protocols of critical thought.

There IS a REAL SCIENCE of human behavior: Social Psychology. It does
not have all the answers, but it has accumulated a huge base of
experimental knowledge. Mandatory critical thought protocols adopted
from the known bias tendencies discovered in social psychological
experiments would deflate much of the dangerous pomposity discussed in
these postings.

I am sorry for all of the suffering revealed in these postings. My
hopes for better days are with you.

#220290Posted by SRM at 7/28/07 9:05 a.m.

I hope to God, yes God, that the people making excuses for Stuart
Greenberg's behavior, and singing his praises, are not also in a
Parenting Evaluating and/or therapy field!!! If you are, please get
out. You cannot make clear choices about other people. And you
certainly should not make choices about other people's lives.

#220464Posted by bigmomma at 7/28/07 2:13 p.m.

Craig a Mason,
Thanks for your kind words. I believe this tragedy of family courts
with 'help/influence' of Greenberg will have to follow a different
route - for those who have money to continue feeding the industry. As
for most of us, we cannot afford justice. We need HELP!

Did you know that Family Court Services conduct one side parenting
evaluations (similar to Greenberg's) without even a court order
authorizing them to do? But, if you go to FCS and tell them you do not
have a lawyer they help you fill out forms (advocates). Then, they
turn around and help the opposing side who has paid the lawyer for
seven years by writing bought out bias reports. But, if you challenge
the FCS "unbalanced", per Debra Hunter's own words, report,King County
assigns a public funded lawyer ( a prosecutor) to sit with them in
deposition. I am not kidding. It just happend before my own eyes.

But, isn't the role of the prosecutor to prosecute crimes? Why would a
prosecutor sit and protect a FCS's employee from her 'unbalanced
report'?

The public in general must know of this... Greenberg is gone, but the
there are too many others out there doing the same damage and
perpetuating the damage.

All of you can help make a change. Contact your legislators. Inquire
why is public funds being used to pay a prosecutor to sit in a
deposition by FCS for 'private parties'.

I am fighting Greenberg alone for seven years.

Please help spread the word against bias, injustice for the sake of
our children, your children and our children's children.

#220504Posted by 1234reader1234 at 7/28/07 4:42 p.m.

Does anyone know of a way that people that are currently in a court
case using Dr. Stuart Greenberg can contact each other privately?
Does anyone know of anyone intending on filing a motion having his
reports deemed inadmissible?
Has anyone taken action to obtain reimbursement of his fees?

#220525Posted by SRM at 7/28/07 7:00 p.m.

Maybe the people that want to contact each other privately could start
a post on craig's List. Any idea's out there? Does anyone know if this
is possible?

#220531Posted by to turn to turn at 7/28/07 7:12 p.m.

Just catching up with this interesting discussion, I want to offer a
(slightly belated) take on Lowell1's comments:

The reasons "catie.w," "Jack Straw," "bigmomma," "George Tirebiter"
and "caring mother" sought unbiased evaluations from a reputable
professional are irrelevant. The point is that they all consulted with
Dr. Greenberg in good faith. For their part, they were shocked,
demoralized and damaged by the unexpected response they received.

I had a personal experience with Greenberg's predecessor, a different
Ph.D psychologist who was employed by the Catholic Archdiocese of
Seattle in the 1990's. I brought a complaint, and the psychologist was
paid to discredit me.

As "bigmomma" has illustrated, until you have experienced what it
feels like to have a covertly biased "expert" accuse you of doing harm
to the very person who has offended against you and then lie about you
to other professionals, you can't know the intense pain and sense of
helplessness it causes. "As caring mother" implies, if you have shared
intimate details and delicate emotions, as people tend to do with
psychologists, the devastation resulting from the betrayal of trust is
enormous.

Regardless of the flaws of society, the legal system, or the people on
either side of a custody battle, what is at issue is that the powerful
practitioner never has the right to lie, much less to accept money for
lying.

#220535Posted by A_FLYBOY at 7/28/07 7:20 p.m.

wow
I am amazed at how many people posted here!
thats good.
Good that this slimy piece of s**t is gone.
see, my family is one of the families that probably got filmed. me,
12-13 at the time, my sis 10ish my bro younger and my 2 parents (the
reason we were going there).

I guess i should introduce myself:
I am an inventors son who enjoys modifying computer games in his spare
time. I am almost 16 now. back when it happened several things
happened at once all confusing to a kid the age i was.

my mom still has the same pos (piece of s**t not parent over shoulder
to those dumb enough to listen to that psa) boyfriend who has a bad
(real not legal) record with underaged girls and is a perv. Greenburg
refused to do anything about him at all. I currently go to a s**tty
high school where i AM the best computer person there by far (online I
am kindof a newbie... sad). I constantly worry about my siblings, and
get to watch inventions my dad and I were working on SOME OF WHICH I
CAME UP WITH pop up all over from a computer one of the many s**tbags
in the situation got ahold of. an example being digital fridge
callenders among many things.

Anyone who praises this s**mbag is either a "jimmy" (name i came up
with for peo- no, rats (even that is to nice)) like my mom's
boyfriend, a fellow parenting eval, or someone makeing money off of
what he does. all of you who praise him after reading this should
seriously consider trying rat poison.

In conclusion:
Steward Greenburg was a sick f [_] ( k who enabled perverts and
destroyed the lives of everyone in my family. anyone like him needs to
die a painfull death. I am religeous so that is not someting i say
lightly. by the way, I have three bolts in my f**king kneecap because
he put me with my mother who still just shelves me unless forced to
give a s**t.

[)ammi7! why do I have to edit my swear words? that detracts from the
overall emotion of the story.

and i do know what the checks at the bottom mean and I would love to
have these stories published.

In my proffesional opinion, this death is good for washington, the us,
the world, and any intelligent being in existence.

#220536Posted by A_FLYBOY at 7/28/07 7:23 p.m.

BTW, All the above i said i forgot to mention that he was driven by:
politics, greed, and lust. not just money.

#220539Posted by irishmomnwa at 7/28/07 7:38 p.m.

Not just Greenberg's reports but all other reports are nothing but
hearsay. Margaret Dore has some very instructive materials in her
website about admission of evaluator's reports.

Stuart Greenberg report or recommendations were tainted by his ill
intent.

It is biased garbage! Even the Judges are talking that they will deal
with the issue "sooner or later, rather sooner".

Watch out! Lawyers, will enter in agreement, make you bound by it, and
the court will endorse them. It happened to my family and it happened
to a good friend's family too.

Although we didn't agree, but our lawyers did. Lawyer's agreement are
binding to the parties.
Do not agree to have this garbage foundation for your children's
future.

Any decent lawyer should know how to file a motion to vacate. Without
Greenberg's live testimony the report is what it is: GARBAGE.

How could any parent look into their children's eyes and tell them: I
had a pervert who cut and killed himself decide what is good for you...

I cannot believe there would be any Judge out there who would allow
Greenberg's recommendation stand for the best interest of the child.

#220540Posted by A_FLYBOY at 7/28/07 7:47 p.m.

even greenburgs papers userped the courts.

The best thing to do for your childrens' sake is this:
Resolve peacefully in a 50 50 custody where the kids live in one house
and the parents switch houses instead of the kids.

my dads friend did it and it works great for them.

the only problem is you have to specify before hand that 'jimmy's are
not allowed.

#220554Posted by Poppy44 at 7/28/07 8:50 p.m.

As a former employee of Greenberg's, I am both saddened and sickened
by these events. I understand that his decision to end his life was
primarily driven by shame and embarrassment, but what cannot be
overlooked is the shame and embarassment that must be felt by the
victims of his voyeuristic act. Stu held a tremendous amount of power
that tricked down into the lives of so many people and it is
unfortunate that his victims will never see Stu brought to justice.

#220561Posted by WSP at 7/28/07 9:00 p.m.

Someone asked about a way for victims to discuss these events in
private. There is a forum discussion at
washingtonsharedparenting.com's forum under the general discussion
area for discussing this subject. As a forum, public postings will be
public, but private messages is enabled for private discussions.

Hi death opens up a whole new level of hurt for everyone that knew the
man. There is no lack of hurt on all sides. It will take a lot of time
to heal, and I'm sure much more will be learned about his actions over
the next few years.

To those of you that are huring out there, I wish you peace, and
happiness. To those of you supporting his efforts in the past, I hope
you step forward and help to explain how he was able to operate in the
courts the way he did, causing so much destruction to families without
being held accountable. I suspect if we follow the money it will
provide many answers.

#220583Posted by Lowell1 at 7/28/07 10:43 p.m.

I need to comment on the following response to my posting:

Just catching up with this interesting discussion, I want to offer a
(slightly belated) take on Lowell1's comments:

"The reasons "catie.w," "Jack Straw," "bigmomma," "George Tirebiter"
and "caring mother" sought unbiased evaluations from a reputable
professional are irrelevant. The point is that they all consulted with
Dr. Greenberg in good faith. For their part, they were shocked,
demoralized and damaged by the unexpected response they received."

I can't accept the notion that those evaluated by Greenberg were
incorrectly assessed just because they say they were. What about the
person on the other side of the matter? Would they agree that
Greenberg was wrong? What if it had gone the other way? The only way I
or anyone else could reasonably judge the issue would be to have all
the information from both sides that was available, including history
of both sides, a discussion with both sides, copies of records,
interviews with the children if it was a custody matter and so on. It
is a shame that Greenberg left himself open to such attacks on his
integrity by engaging in the improper behavior that preceeded this
matter. But each case needs to be judged by the facts and the merits.
It is nonsense to accept the statement of a party who did not like the
outcome at face value. These are serious issues and deserve less than
a flip response. I will watch with interest to see how recent
circumstances will be used to perhaps challenge prior findings, but
hopefully cooler heads will prevail than those who would accept at
face value the statements that have been made in this string. Perhaps
a reasonable person would agree with them if they reviewed the data,
or not. I just don't know and nobody else does either. Remember it is
a rare situation that ends up in a litigated situation requiring the
sort of assessments that Greenberg did. Greenberg did not create the
initial problem. He may have helped one side, the other or both - or
hurt. But siding with his 'victims' because of Greenberg's actions are
nonsense absent a whole lot more information than their diatribes.

#220600Posted by bigmomma at 7/28/07 11:09 p.m.

Lowell, I can only speak for myself and I am glad to share the crappy
perverted reports with you or anyone else. They are public records, as
you know. The "other side" actually discredited Greenberg before Judge
McBroom (Valerie Bell not only discredited Greenberg for his 'flip-
flopping' but also swayed Judge McBroom to look at the two old reports
instead of looking at the current environment at the time of the
trial). The other side is also "ill" as was SG.
"Stu" can no longer intimidate me.

#220601Posted by Jack Straw at 7/28/07 11:17 p.m.

to turn to turn and Lowell1:

To let you know. I am involved for my GF. I did meet Greenberg during
an evaluation as I was involved in the relationship.

My GF DID NOT want Greenberg as an evaluator. Her and her then
attorney fought vigoriously in court to NOT have Greenberg. Her
attorney KNEW the perv was biased and sold his reports to the highest
bidder.

The court did not care.

In the end, the court awarded her children to her DOCUMENTED DOMESTIC
ABUSER ex-husband. After suffering 15 years of abuse at the hands of
the man, she the courts inflicted further abuse on her and her
children by ignoring his abuse and going with Greenbergs report.

As with OJ and many, many examples in our society, the person with the
most money, purchaces the greatest "justice".

The courts should not allow evaluators to be paid by any private
party. Attorney's should not be allowed to EVER contact an evaluator
for ANY reason in ANY manor.

IF evaluators continue to be used (and I don't think this will put an
end to the biased reports and crooked evaluators), the only money
exchange and contact should ONLY be though the courts. Evaluators
should be forced to go with the families and see them in their "real"
environment, not in some sterile office setting. Evaluations should
take place over months if not years, not in one or two simple hour-
long meetings.

But that is if evaluators should even be used EVER AGAIN.

The real problem is----money. Money breeds power, influence, and
ergo---more money.

If evaluators truly care about the children, and isn't this what it is
SUPOSSED to be all about, then they should consider working for $20 or
$30 an hour, not the ungodly fee of $300-$500.

Everybody just try to understand this:
Most likely everybody posting here that was wronged by Greenberg are
the poorer of the two parents that was evaluated.

Think about that.

#220609Posted by A_FLYBOY at 7/28/07 11:58 p.m.

Everybody just try to understand this:
Most likely everybody posting here that was wronged by Greenberg are
the poorer of the two parents that was evaluated

uuuuuuuuhhhh....
Jacka$s?
did you even read a word of what we have said?

I am not old enough to be a parent.

I AM one of the kids whose lives he f[_]cked up.

#220610Posted by A_FLYBOY at 7/29/07

also, Poorer?

my father got a politically and greed biased report and that makes him
a poor parent?

I hate these blind sheep people!

#220615Posted by to turn to turn at 7/29/07 12:28 a.m.

Jack Straw meant that the parent who had the least money was the one
most likely to be wronged by a biased evaluation.

Also, Lowell1, it is common, not rare, to pay a professional for an
assessment that supports your side of a court case. It's not just
psychologists. I know of a professional engineer who was nicknamed
"The Whore of __________ Real Estate," because he would give passing
inspections to unsafe houses if the real estate agents paid him to do
so.

#220617Posted by SRM at 7/29/07 12:33 a.m.

Understand when I write what I am writing below that marriage was
around long before the USA was a country. It was a religious cerimony
from a religious book. You fill in the blank of the religion.

Maybe the problem is that marriage starts in the church, most of the
time, and ends in the courts. Maybe, church and state should separate
again and we should go back to annulments of marriages by churches.
The state (courts) are obviously not capable of handeling or stemming
the tide of the break up of USA families and their marriages.

Or, maybe before the marriage we choose a state marriage which follows
state rules or a church marriage with church rules.

I would have chosen the church marriage, as my marriage was a
religious cerimony. This separation of church and state would have
solved my Greenperv problem as he would not have been a part of my
marriage or my kids lives.

#220644Posted by Justiceforall2 at 7/29/07 6:33 a.m.

I would like to express my sympathy to all of you who suffered from
your experiences with Stu Greenberg. I know that words cannot do
justice to the harm that is done in situations like those described,
and these were far greater crimes than the one for which he was
caught. I hope that you are all able to recover from the emotional
trauma.

Please understand, however, that there are many psychologists who care
about children and families and work with honesty and integrity to
help others. Unfortunately, there don't seem to be many of the latter
type who do custody evaluations, because it's emotionally painful work
if you really care about others. The court system is patriarchal and
often corrupt; I have seen numerous children and families get hurt.

My advice to anyone is avoid going to court, having custody
evaluations, or getting guardian ad litems if at all possible. If you
can't avoid it, learn about what you're getting into from people
who've been through it and get a savvy attorney.

The reason that the wealthiest parents got the most favorable results
was probably because they got the sleasiest (usually most
expensive)lawyers who knew who to go to in order to get what they
wanted. If you have an attorney who plays fair, it is far harder to
win. It's a sad statement, but one I've found to be true for the most
part.

With regard to Stu Greenberg, he was acting unethically when I was in
graduate school 27 years ago. He was inappropriate and he hurt
innocent people. No one wanted to deal with it, so they let it go. I'm
sorry that so many people continued to be hurt. But once again, this
does not represent the majority of psychologists.

#220677Posted by bigmomma at 7/29/07 8:50 a.m.

Justice for all2:
Your words are comforting. I want to believe there are honest and
ethical people psychologists out there.

Now try this link and see how many psychologists are licensed to harm:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/news/local/licensetoharm/

and this one, who is still allowed to practice with children because a
King County Judge put a stop to his license suspension.

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/licensetoharm/files/PY00002316_1_CHG_KUBACKI.pdf

After Kubacki submitted several statements to the court in my case, I
did a throughout research on him. The pleadings can be seen at the
docket Kubacki # 05-2-3502-1 and Kubacki 05-2-4157-7 of the King
County court. The pleadings reveal that he just settled for $150,000
for having sex with a client...Hope the other two identified victims
come foward also get him for his preying on the vulnerable! These
files describe a pretty naughty/intruding way to practice psychology,
at both Argosy,Bastyr University, and private practice, naming several
women who he preyed upon. The odd practice of having sex on the job,
teaching hands-on-therapy includes another psychology who is a raising
star in the parent evaluation business, E. M.

In fact, my lawyer was pushing for E.M. to be the evaluator in my case
last October. E. M agreed to meet on a Sunday and it was going to be a
"dunk" for merely $7,000. I had borrowed funds and given to the lawyer
to pass to E.M. I was that desperate, because my X managed to move the
case to trial to terminate me from my son, based on Kubacki's hearsay
"that I was harmful"... I then found about parent evaluator E.M and
her sexual affair with Kubacki. I put an end to the circus. I fired
the less then 2 month lawyer, who threatened me I would not go
anywhere without a lawyer because I dislike Greenberg,and what Kubacki
had to say and did not agree to pay E.M. for her report.

I am been violated by Greenberg and Kubacki and the affiliates of the
"x and his lawyer". I just attended a deposition of Kubacki last
Friday. He, like Greenberg, is a bought out witness and a LIAR. He
violated my son's privacy requests, he was blabbing away. (the
deposition was called by opposing lawyer, way past discovery cut off,
and in the Friday before the trial to start on Monday because I
objected to the one side evaluation report of FCS. (the clerk posponed
the trial to Tuesday- confirming what you described about expensive
lawyers)(and this seven year opposing lawyer was also a partner with
my immigration lawyer prior to representing the X)

Kubacki and FCS bought out witness. The reports they write is about
themselves, their greedy and their need to fuel conflict, because
nothing in it is true. It was a one-side-evaluation without ANY input
from me. Never met Kubacki until last Friday.

I agree with your adjective "they got the sleaziest (usually most
expensive)lawyers".

Do you have any ideas of how to end this manipulative machinery, when
the bar association doesn't care about complaints, the judicial
commission does not care about complaints of judicial officers who are
biased and the board of psychology ignores all the complaints? when
they do, the judge of Superior Court reversed license suspension.

What has come to this world? How much more do the authorities need to
stop these sexual deviants and unethical officers from this ongoing
abuse?

Kubacki also testified in other cases about terminating the mother's
rights. These two are for sure two rotten apple for the board of
psychology. These two share hatred for women and families. Kubacki is
a married man. Why is he fooling around with psych students and
clients? I guess he never looked at the how mirror or see that his
name is listed as one with a licensed to harm.

God help us all!

#220772Posted by 2kids at 7/29/07 1:24 p.m.

Dr. Greenberg did the world a service committing suicide. Is there a
way to see if he had cameras installed at his other office locations?

My ex moved out of state then refused my attempts at visitation. I was
willing to travel to where my 2 boys lived so that I could continue my
2 weekends a month and one additional night a week visitations. I went
to an attorney to file contempt of order charges. She talked me out of
that. After we sent a revised parenting plan to my ex and got his
response she said the easiest way on the kids would be to agree to the
parenting evaluation my ex demanded.

Dr. Greenberg was one of 2 evaluators that my ex's attorney would
agree to. Because of convenience and because my attorney said that she
had worked with Greenberg before, I agreed.

I have 2 kids. I now can't see them because Dr. Greenberg said I was
too angry at my ex-husband, although in the same report he said that
both of my kids told him they wanted to see me. I have paid every
penny of child support. I paid about 1/3 of the evaluation, my
proportional share of income.

When I told friends about my experience with Greenberg they would
respond, he had to have been paid off. Greenberg was very obsessed
with being paid but only sent the bill to my ex's attorney and then
complained that I was not paying him.

The day of my first "interview" I overheard him complaining to his
staff that I was actually reading the contract that he required me to
sign. I had to agree to be a participant in his research study in
order to have this evaluation.

I was emotionally harassed at the "interviews", the term he uses in
the court papers. Greenberg did not "interview" me. I was expected to
know what he wanted and tell him. He didn't have a set of questions
that he asked me. I could tell from what he would say to me that he
had believed everything that my ex had told him, unfortunately I
didn't know what was said so couldn't defend myself. I was very blunt
with Greenberg and told him I would do whatever I had to do to see my
kids. I said I would agree to supervised visits, anything. I would
finish the "interview" and then find the closest phone and in tears
call my attorney. He had interviewed my ex, his girlfriend and my 2
kids at their house. He told me that he could tell that my name was
not allowed to be spoken in the kid's house. He then said in his
report that there is no evidence of parental alienation. Greenberg
told me at one session that my ex and his girlfriend lived in what
would be at least a $400,000 house in Seattle (this was 10 years ago
and my ex was not living in the Puget Sound area.)

At one "interview" he was taking cold medicine (the box of medicine
and glass of water were on the table and he took a break during the
"interview" to medicate himself. At several other "interviews" he
spent the whole time rubbing lotion into his face where he had had
laser abrasion treatment.

My attorney said there was nothing I could do about Dr. Greenberg, he
could do whatever he wanted and the court would agree. I was told that
filing a complaint with the state licensing board would hurt any
future court appearances so I did not do that. After several attempts
I found a psychologist that was willing to do another evaluation. He
talked with Greenberg. Greenberg's only concern was that I was
contemplating suing him. Although my parenting plan said I could have
another parenting evaluation done at any time, the court would not
allow the new evaluation because I had done it with out court
approval. How I wish I had sued Greenberg.

#220784Posted by Jack Straw at 7/29/07 2:03 p.m.

A_Flyboy:

to turn to turn is correct.

When I stated "poorer", I meant the "least financially wealthy." It
was in NO WAY a reflection upon parenting skills, or whether the
parent actually cared about the children.

Many (and by all means, not all, or possibly even most) of the
wealthier parents do not see the damage they cause their kids as they
are so focused on "destroying" the other parent.

As I also stated, my GF's ex is a Domestic Abuser. She and her
children are the victims of his abuse. She is an incredibly wonderful
mother. And you WILL hear about her, trust me; she is the Cindy
Sheehan of the corrupt Family Court System. She is not going away; she
is resisting the corrupt bias of the Divorce INDUSTRY.

The problem chose her, she did not choose it, but as a cat that is
cornered, she is coming out fighting with everything she has. All she
ever wanted is to be mom and help raise her children, but, when
something this big hits you in the head with such corrupt force, you
have to pick-up the bat, march forward, and start hitting them back in
the head with their own bat.

At the moment, she is facing financial ruin, losing her children, and
even jail time for her efforts and determination.

Her ex has a millionaire brother who is also an ambulance chasing
lawyer. Power and money influenced and biased the reports Greenberg
delivered.

When a follow-up report actually had something bad to say against the
ex (after all- how long can even a perverted, biased, greedy scum like
Greenberg ignore the obvious evidence in front of them), the ex's
equally scummy lawyer discredited him on the stand. And after that,
Judge McBroom ignored the follow-up report and awarded the children to
the abusive parent based upon the first report that showed the father
as "perfect".

Because of my personal experience with this pervert, I believe that
the better parent is the parent that his reports were usually biased
against. Otherwise, why would the wealthier parent use all their
financial power to influence the process with someone known to all the
attorney's to abuse the process and sell his reports?

Why is it that the "joke" about lawyers, busses, and cliffs isn't
really a joke?

Maybe Greenberg was driving.

#220792Posted by WSP at 7/29/07 2:35 p.m.

If shared parenting laws were passed in Washington State, so that one
parent doesn't become the "owner" of the children of divorce, many of
these issues would go away.

Realistically, can you expect a decent and loving parent who is
stripped of their ability to be a parent with substantial time with
their kids to just walk away and not fight for their children.

Reach your hand into a box of new born puppies and see how many
stitches you need for trying to mess with a dogs pups. It's an
animalistic instinct to fight for your young, whether a man or a
woman.

Our courts know the type of issues this creates, and they must do it
intentially, knowing the members of the bar will benefit, along with
the courts who have signed contracts with the State of Washington
Division of Child Support and benefit financially from the support
amounts they dole out. Copies of the contracts can be seen at
www.WashingtonSharedParenting.com/web.

Until we remove the power of the courts from deciding who gets custody
of children, but passing laws that ensure custody of children is
shared in a divorce, people like Greenberg will be hired to sway the
opinions of the court each day.

Removing the power of money from divorce will eliminate the issues we
continue to see today. When we stop Family abuse, we will stop the
abuse of all members of the family, and we will eliminate the money
train to the abusers of the family.

#220860Posted by Lowell1 at 7/29/07 6:53 p.m.

I agree with WSP. I am not a religious guy, but one particular bible
story from my youth is frequently on my mind. It is the story of King
Solomon when he is faced with two women both claiming to be the mother
of a baby. The good king pulls out his sword and states that he will
solve the matter by cutting the baby in half and giving a piece to
each. One of the two women stop the process and concede the child to
the other. The King awards the baby to the woman who was willing to
save the child by giving it up, surmising that this is how a true
mother would behave.

The correlary is that in matters of divorce, I believe that shared
custody should be the default position, and a parent who wants
otherwise or wishes to leave town with the child, should lose custody
in favor of the parent who would engage in joint custody and is
staying put. Unless in the course of the marriage the child was
removed due to danger, to suggest that upon divorce one or the other
is unfit to have regular access to their child is absurd.

I speak from personal knowledge. One of my children, now an adult, was
the produce of joint custody from preschool, spending roughly half the
time at each parent's home. It was a wonderful situation for all,
sharing the raising of this child, while otherwise having separate
lives. The outcome could not have been better. A high achieving and
high functioning adult, now married and giving back to society. Shame
on all divorcing parents who fight their spouses absent criminal level
abuse on the part of the spouse they are fighting, which I assume is a
relatively rare occurrence.

I must admit, I am sobered by some of the accounts of Greenberg. If
true, some of the allegations are most unfortunate and have no place
in the profession or in the work he was asked to do. Good luck to all.
I have posted my last contribution to this string.

#220877Posted by bigmomma at 7/29/07 7:47 p.m.

2 kids mom.

We need to unite. We are going to get justice some time, as Judge
Doerty stated, they will deal with sooner then later.

Try to go to this site: There is a forum discussion at
washingtonsharedparenting.com's "forum under the general discussion
area for discussing this subject. As a forum, public postings will be
public, but private messages is enabled for private discussions".

There I can tell you how to connect with me and the others who are
moving together on different actions.

You have to believe in yourself and your power. Greenperv was so weak,
he punished his own children forever for his stupid action. What
parent would punish their children for their own mistakes. I feel bad
for his children. His children do not deserve the pain he has caused
our children. Lets unite our power for a change for our children.

#220942Posted by DedicatedDad at 7/29/07 10:31 p.m.

Like many of those posting, my family and I were "clients" of Dr.
Greenberg. Now, it's confirmed we are victims as we all suspected.

Everyone involved in my family's case would agree that Greenberg's
supported me over the desires of my ex-spouse...so maybe I should
leave well enough alone, but if I don't speak up who will? Despite the
fact that I benefited from his recommendations, Greenberg used and
abused the power and trust that the judge placed in his hands during
his interactions with my family. His smug, condescending attitude and
inappropriate questions during interviews with all the members of my
family were hurtful and scary. With a strange smirk, Greenberg enjoyed
asking outrageous questions and then watching his "victim" twist and
squirm to answer. He got even more aggressive and hard hearted when
the tears started flow.

I had a last conversation with Greenberg just a couple of months ago.
After paying him an $8,500 retainer to conduct the "one-year review"
he suggested to the judge (apparently a tactic he used to drive up
billings with others), he told me that I would have to pay an
additional $2,500. I responded, "Dr. Greenberg, over the past two
years I have paid you over $45,000. There has to be an end to this. I
going bankrupt." Greenberg responded with the same strange smirk, "Are
you telling me you are refusing to follow the court's order? I'm going
to go hard on you if that's what you are saying." Greenberg saw my
family as a target rich environment and he sucked out every dollar
possible. Along with excessive billings, he scared my children and
cause a lot of grief for me and my ex-spouse.

How are we expected to explain to our children that the person charged
with deciding how our family would live and interact post-divorce
turned out to be sexual deviant that abused his power...especially
when his colleagues laud his virtues in the press. When news of
Greenberg's voyeurism hit the papers, my 16 year-old daughter said,
"that's no surprise, that guy is scary."

I take no pleasure in Greenberg's death and I'm sorry for his family's
suffering and shame. But, all those that benefited from his excessive
billings and abuse of power should look at themselves in the mirror
and ask if their role in the "divorce industry" is ethical, proper and
supportive of the best interests of children. It is the responsibility
of lawyers, judges and mental health professionals to shine a light on
Greenberg's abuse or other families will be hurt by the "next
Greenberg."

Greenberg was not a good man. Greenberg was not an ethical man.
Greenberg was not a compassionate man. He was a greedy hypocrite who
took advantage of adults and children at the most vulnerable time in
their lives. Let's just hope the product of his voyeurism did not
extend past the incident that caused his arrest.

#220961Posted by bigmomma at 7/29/07 11:31 p.m.

to:
dedicated dad, I am proud of you.
That is exactly my question: how can we tell our children, we allowed
this pervert to ruin, exploit, take our money, create and and fuel
conflict, manipulate lawyers, judges, justices, doctors, counselors,
CPS, Family Court and on... with a righteousness that was flawed?

I know I would not be able to live with myself if I did not do
anything... so I have created several enemies as I woudl not shut up.
I will not shut up. I will continue naming those who corroborated with
this trail of destruction, violating my most inner right. My right to
parent my children.

I hope you found some comfort to your anguish... I
I wish all parents would have the courage you did.

#220970Posted by SRM at 7/30/07 12:33 a.m.

If you think about how they are handled, how we are interigated
through out the process, and how intrusive the questions are in
people's lives, I think that all parenting evaluations are a form of
voyeurism. Or voyeuristic in how they intrude into peoples' core
emotional centers of their lives. This is a demeaning process that
should be stopped immediately.

#220971Posted by Justiceforall2 at 7/30/07 12:51 a.m.

With regard to the "license to harm" website, note that they write:
"The state licenses 17,000 'registered counselors.' This category
accounts for the largest number of sex offenders in health care."
Registered counselors are not psychologists and have much less
training. Licensed psychologists are not even in the top five
categories of offenders. However, there are some bad apples like Stu
Greenberg and I'm not trying to defend them, only those of us who work
hard to be honest and caring.

I think part of the problem with Family Court is that the judges never
see the kids or the problems the system causes for them. The idea
behind that is that it would be too traumatic for the kids to talk to
the judges, but they don't see how traumatized kids are when they
aren't given the opportunity to voice their own opinions (I've seen a
lot of that). There is no research that I know of to support the idea
that kids are traumatized by talking to judges, but the myth is quite
strong. Similarly, attorneys rarely see the children so they don't see
the damage either. Instead they rely on evaluators (who often seem
oblivious to the harm they're doing), and I know that some of these
evaluators take advantage of their positions of power. Some also enact
their own emotional problems.

In short, if the judges met privately with the kids, I think they
would get a far better picture of things. I've frequently heard that
"kids will just want to go with the parent who gives them the most
stuff," but I've never seen that happen. Kids want to go where they
feel safest. People way underestimate children.

None of this is likely to happen, though, because I don't think the
judges want to see what really happens. I think they want to stay in
their comfort zones. Also, there was a time when shared custody was
the default option, but it didn't work very well because it's hard on
most kids to live in 2 homes on a half time basis, though some do
adjust well to it.

The trumped up issue known as "parental alienation" (coined by
Gardner) is also often used successfully by abusers to get custody of
the kids. The abused parent is fearful of the children getting hurt by
the abuser, and so is trying to protect them. The abuser, on the other
hand, calmly says, "I don't mind sharing the kids." Many judges are
then convinced that the abuser is the better parent and gives custody
to that parent (sometimes revoking visitation to the "alienating"
parent because of the "poison" that parent is supposedly spreading).
The result is devastated children who don't trust adults any longer.
The judges, of course, never see the outcome of their decisions.

There is no research to support the idea of "parental alienation."
Although some parents do put down the other parent, children don't
usually get swayed by that. If children don't want to see a parent,
there is usually a very good reason.

Children are also prohibited from having their own attorneys to
represent their interests. That is supposedly the job of the guardian
ad litem, but that person usually ends up siding with one of the
parents. It's obviously a problem that most children can't afford an
attorney in the first place.

What can be done to change this? That's a good question. The legal
system seems inordinately resistant to change. Part of the problem is
that decisions generally aren't based on research of what is really
best for kids, but is based on people's opinions of what they want.
Some people (e.g., Margaret Dore) have worked hard to try to change
the system, but no one seems to get very far. In the meantime, I know
that the system hurts a lot of people, and once again, my sympathy to
those of you who have been victimized by it.

One more thing: It is unethical for any psychologist to force someone
to participate in research. If Stu Greenberg said that signing up for
the research was necessary to do the evaluation, that was a breach of
ethics and is reportable to the licensing board.

#220974Posted by SRM at 7/30/07 1:12 a.m.

"A career that spanned more than 25 years and brought Stuart Greenberg
national renown as a forensic psychologist ended abruptly Wednesday
when the Seattle therapist, recently under criminal investigation for
voyeurism, committed suicide in a Renton motel."

Stuart Greenberg was surrounded by psychologist, likely psychiatrist
and other mental health professionals. No one in 25 years was able to
discover he was a "bad apple". No one stepped up to stop him from
being a therapist or a parenting evaluator.

This logically leaves us with the conclusion that if you, the mental
health community, could not, given 25 years, come up with the
conclusion that Greenberg was the bad guy, then you can no way use
your profession to decide who is the bad guy, or good guy in a
parenting evaluation.

Only facts should be used in court, not this BS, or should I say PhD.

#220977Posted by to turn to turn at 7/30/07 1:41 a.m.

I must agree. We have to wonder how many of the lawyers, judges,
doctors, counselors, CPS and Family Court employees Greenberg
manipulated cooperated with him in these charades. If they did so
unwittingly, where was their training? If they did so willingly, where
were their ethics?

I met Stu Greenberg when I consulted him for a second opinion on
something. I had no stake in his assessment and he didn't harm me, so
I don't count myself among those with a right to express their dismay.
My perceptions of him, however, match the descriptions I have read in
these postings. The people who have written here don't seem to know
each other, but there are many commonalities in their experiences of
Greenberg. If I and they could all see something was amiss, why
couldn't the careerists?

As craig a. mason wrote earlier, "family law commissioners, especially
those involved with CPS, again and again suspend critical thought."
Let me add to his list the psychologists on the state's Psychology
Examining Board who, despite their prestigious qualifications,
couldn't analyze their way out of a paper bag.

Greenberg may have had money and allies, but if they had really wanted
to bust him for previous complaints against him, they could have. If
some of you are planning to sue for damages, sue the Department of
Health, too, because they didn't protect you, as they should have.

#221040Posted by uvas at 7/30/07 7:40 a.m.

speaking of the Department of Health Psychology Board, they just
published regulations about standards for psychologists conducting
parenting evaluations. What a joke of a process... they refused to
include minimum requirements that psychologists actually have training
on issues such as chemical dependency, domestic violence or sexual
abuse if they are appointed in cases that have those issues, saying
that psychologists are already required to act within the scope of
their expertise. Again, the level of arrogance is astounding!
Obviously, as can be seen from the above posts, a psychologist who
after the cash wouldn't have the humility to admit he didn't know
about a subject...

#221135Posted by bigmomma at 7/30/07 9:52 a.m.

Justice for all 2:
You touched an interesting point PAS. I had to learn about this
because in Dec-03, my son's psychiatrist, Dr. Dunne educated me, gave
me reading materials and told me learn what to do not to make it
worse. He diagnosed my son with modertate PAS. On the following months
I met Dr. Dunne and again he gave me the same BS... He also told me to
'avoid' going to my son's schools, etc, He also wrote emails to my ex
and to his lawyer about what to, how to deal with my son's PAS.
Why would a dr. who wants to help stop PAS tells the mother not to go
to the child school?
But it is not all. When I learned enough I ask the court to help, and
whoola!. Dr. Dunne 'retracted everything he told me, and says instead
"don't know what caused the child to reject one parent".
Curiously, PAS is not a DMV disorder, why would Dr. Dunne say my son
had and then not, and "don't know"?

The fact is, Dr. Dunne was one of the founders collaborators of the
parenting act of 87. Dr. Dunne also made a lot of money testifying in
Court 'fueling the conflict" that damage children...as the children
act out- the child is mentally ill, lets drug them...but if this drug
doesn't do the job, try this, this dose? Geodon, celexa, praxil, and
many others..

Of Course Dr. Dunne is no longer an asset for my x, so, he dropped Dr.
of the witness list at the last min.

FYI: Dr. gardner who coined PAS also committed suicide in his 70s
using a kitchen knife is his own neck

Greenberg and Gardner were both evil individuals. Those who anchor any
decision, medical, social, educational are equally evil.

I am very frustrated with all of this. Dr. Dunne and Greenberg were
working together, calling cps at simultaneously and talking with one
another ( says so in the reports)Legally: PAS has not passed the Frye
test and it is inadimissible. it does not exist...it is a 'game' for
Drs to help the abusers, pushing one parent away, so their medical
profit cames with it.

#221273Posted by caring mother at 7/30/07 1:20 p.m.

I have so many issues regarding Stuart Greenberg's conduct--which I
will not reveal until the time is appropriate. Suffice to say he was
very sly in the way in which he dealt with the courts and his
"victims". The mere fact he used his court appointed immunity to
threaten you in private is emotionally abusive and devasting. When the
opposing party continues to use Greenberg's half-baked report, full of
lies and gross misrepresentations as hammer by which to beat you and
keep you from your children--his legacy of distruction is allowed to
continue. The amount of information I could share about his procedures
would make any loving parent sick. Judges please take note this man
ruined lives and alienated families for personal gain--the scars will
not heal until justice is done.

#221415Posted by Missourigirl at 7/30/07 4:15 p.m.

As a victim/survivor of sexual abuse suffered by our family the-rapist
this story is sorry to say sad but oh so real in my world . I have
wondered what if the the-rapist would commit suiside ,how would I
feel ??? I still am not sure . Part of me does wish and the other part
wants him to relize the pain and damage he has done to me and my
family and to live with it on his shoulders for a long while . But
then I have to realize that he did not care what pain he was caused
back in 2004-2005 .Even through today I we still suffer as a result of
him .
Anyway someone ask where these victims can go for help and to know how
to try to deal with it all . I know of the perfect place that has
helped me and brought me threw these last couple of years without
killing myself over the pain and embarrassmant,shame ,guilt, all that
comes with being raped . The place is www.advocateweb.com this is a
place that is dedicated just for this type of assault .
Good luck in your healing ..... My thoughts are with all of this perps
victims and his family because you know they are victims as well in
this sorted hell this perp made for many . Prayer to all

#221512Posted by twodeux at 7/30/07 8:16 p.m.

The number of postings and the angst expressed says a lot about the
system, the posters, and Dr. Greenberg.

It appears Dr. Greenberg was a troubled man dealing with troubled
families at a troubled time. Certainly for the posters expressing
their anger and hurt the "system", as represented by Dr. Greenberg,
did not resolve their situations with a positive outcome.

The poster who noted his amazement that professionals working with Dr.
Greenberg all those years missed the signs of disfunction speaks
loudly and dead on about how psychology is art as much as science, and
the practice is way less than perfect.

As one who was helped by Dr. Greenberg, (there was no opposing party)
I am not ready to damn his entire career because many damaged lives
were not repaired. I am convinced by the time the system intervenes in
many cases there is no positive outcome for all parties no matter what
course is pursued. Don't misunderstand me; I am all for locking up
abusers, disarming them(think about what that means) or whatever it
takes to protect victims from violence. But I also realize from some
of the postings the situations could have been more complex than
stated.

To rejoice in a death repairs nobody, and I say that while apologizing
for never seeing a perp I know rot in jail. I wish I had taken that
step. I dream of violence against him to comfort myself rather
frequently, and have come to realize that is a functional path for me.

Perhaps this tragedy will prompt better care for all affected by
family court actions, but there is obvious truth in the statements
that the party with money recieves better breaks than the party
without. Those of us who advocate for "the underdog" will always work
with that burden.

Best wishes to all

#221560Posted by Lawrence2001 at 7/30/07 10:18 p.m.

The comments have primarily been submitted by people who saw Greenberg
due to divorce/custody issues. The observations and experiences of
those harmed by him are the same experiences a friend conveyed to me
after being sent to him for an interview as a clergy abuse victim. The
interview no longer seemed unbiased or exploratory after Greenberg
interjected the comment that Jessie Dye from the Seattle Archdiocese
sent him a lot of work. My friend told me that the surprise created by
the snide off hand comment and the uneasy feeling that Greenberg would
not "bite the goose which laid the golden egg", made the entire
interview process seem like a sham. I am glad to read Jack Straw's
comments about his girlfriend.
Maybe justice will be served, at least vicariously, for all his
victims.

#221567Posted by Lawrence2001 at 7/30/07 10:30 p.m.

-kill the goose that lays the golden egg, bite the hand that feeds
it.... seems to be a theme in people realizing his bias during their
involvement with him.

#221683Posted by reader186 at 7/31/07 2:37 a.m.

Hmmmm, Greenberg and the notorious Jessie Dye, formerly of the
Archdiocese of Seattle -- a match made in...........? The Jesuits at
Seattle University used Greenberg for clergy assessments, too. Draw
your own conclusions.

#221835Posted by SRM at 7/31/07 9:02 a.m.

Did anyone else think the title of this article was vague? That it
could have been more specific?

For example, the main SeattlePI topic does not read, Prominent
Politician thought to be Impeachable . . . It reads "Its time to
Impeach Bush, Cheney, and the public knows it" thus even drawing the
conclusion for us lesser thens.

Or that maybe the article title could have included words about
Parenting Evaluator, courts, etc?

#223119Posted by 1234reader1234 at 8/1/07 9:53 p.m.

My sympathies to the people that have been hurt by Greenberg.
However, for those who are still fighting in court regarding his
evaluations - there has been very little factual information on this
blog. Nor can I find any significant information regardign his
transgressions anywhere. I'd love to hear it if someone would like to
help.
Also, does anyone know any specifics about Greenberg's associate Dr.
Jennifer Wheeler?

#224616Posted by Justiceforall2 at 8/4/07 8:20 a.m.

Dear Big Momma,

I have heard horrow stories about Dr. Dunne where families have been
badly hurt (including court documents I've read). I'm glad you don't
have to interact with him any longer. It's not a matter of not having
good clinical skills in seeing the unethical practices of these
people, which many have accused. It's another example of someone in
this field that many of us "know" is doing bad things, but we are
helpless to stop (I am not a member of the Licensing Board).

As you point out, it seems that those who promote PAS are projecting
their own issues onto others, as they are the ones who end up
"alienating" one parent by keeping the child away from her (it's
almost always the mother who is targeted). Projection is an
interesting phenomenon and one that people often get away with.

Speaking of people who know what's going on, here is a link you might
find informative:

http://www.margaretdore.com/publications.cfm

I hope things work out well for you.

#224767Posted by caring mother at 8/4/07 11:54 a.m.

I have spent the last several days-ruminating over the aftermath of
Greenberg. I just logged on to see if there were additional postings.
In the process of checking in, I read a few I had missed earlier.
There is one in particular which I read posting # 220942-from
DedicatedDad. Everything he has written in that posting is EXACTLY
what I experienced-my bill was substantially higher than his however
by over $20,000. Because of Greenberg's clever maneuvering (writing
directly to the judge) he had my monies diverted to my ex's attorney's
account. My bill exceeding over $65,000-not including the attorney's
fees he churned and churned-- more than tripled the total billings.
What is most astonishing, Greenberg accused our family of
"triangulation"! This was his favorite word-I had never been exposed
to the word and felt as though I was really out-of-it when I didn't
catch his professional jargon.

As it turns out Greenberg was the MASTER of triangulation. This is how
he accomplished his scheme--he went about using his triangulation to
separate families, the court, attorneys and any additional family
therapist on the case-- keeping every one compartmentalized so they
wouldn't have a chance to catch him in his lies. Unfortunately he
tried to engage the parties in his practices by using my teenagers in
his skillful triangulations, because of their ages at the time they
were extremely venerable.

Greenberg had a revolving door of young gals working in his office. I
never met the same one twice accept the gal he called "L"--which I
gather from the articles was the one that finally caught him. Having
this revolving door of help kept his employees from catching him too.
The hell I live with everyday because of this man is heartbreaking. My
children have not had an opportunity to speak with me in over a year.
I have no doubt Greenberg took many of his dirty little secrets to his
grave.

#225014Posted by bigmomma at 8/5/07 8:08 a.m.

Caring Mother:
I wish I could give you a big hug... I know exactly what you pain is.
Further it is not just about a pervert profiting from his
'triangulation', but the lawyers who anticipate the 'result of the
corrupt counselor, doctors, arbitrators, and specifically as here with
parent evaluators.

The lawyes who engage in this triangulation to remeove the financial
resources from the children should be prosecuted. I am going after
this corrupt lawyer. Now this pervert is gone, she is using another
one and another...The woman cannot let go of the case, she creates
conflict... the children are harmed. Then, she points the finger at me
for the harm, when I have not being able to see my son for nearly 4
years.

I encourage you to go to sharedparenting.com, because that web site
offers a secure way for us to communicate with one another. I can tell
you that we are a large group of parents who were harmed by Greenberg
who are moving forward with legal actions to repair the damages,
please join us.

http://blog.ussharedparenting.com/?p=55

Suicide by Seattle Psychiatrist hangs cloud over entire Family Court
System
When Seattle Psychiatrist Stuart Greenberg was arrested for allegedly
having hidden camera's in his office bathroom to video record
patients, it sent ripples through the the Seattle Community. Highly
regarded within his profession for his forensics capabilities in
family court, many in his profession were shocked to hear someone of
his stature was involved in such a sickly crime of voyeurism.

Little did anyone know that these shock waves would create a Tsunami
that would wash away the hidden agenda's of Seattles Family Court
system. Since his arrest, the buzz, or should we say loud deafening
discussion, has been about the injustice that many felt at the hands
of Greenberg in thier individual family cases.

Last week, Stuart Greenberg decided to end his life, rather than face
those that he had hurt. Gone was the bold opinions that one parent or
the other was undeserving to have a meaningful relationship with their
child, and replacing it was a deafening display of cowardice from this
man who held reign supreme of the King County Superior Court cases
that came before him. Gone was the strong word of a man that was
tortured inside, and torturing others on the outside, as he forever
changed the face of many a family in King County.

This Tsunami is now rushing out to sea, most likely taking along with
it many a case that was decided by the twisted decsions of a man that
turned out to be a menace to his patients, and much more. The only
question that remains is how will King County deal with the results of
this storm. Will they batten down their hatches and pretend
everything is alright, or will they do the responsible thing and hire
an independent investigator to look into how this man was tied into
the judicial community of King County, to understand the motives that
drove his decisions, and how those motives undoubtedly benefited
others within the local government, from King County Family Court
Services, Court Commissioners, Judges, local attorneys and parents
that could pay the money needed to render the decision they required
for custody of their children.

As more parents come out to expose what has been know for a great long
time, King County family court system's immense flaws will show how
money and greed for custody, child support, and power of families
drives a court system that has lost its sight of providing justice to
the citizens of the county, and instead provides security and special
interest to its members, staff and attorneys.

Will King County correct its family court system, or ignore what has
happened and continue to ignore the abuse that occurs to families each
and every day in its courts. Isn't it time to stop family abuse?

The next few months will show if the judiciary of the King County
Courthouse truly is a respectable group, or if they ignore what they
have sworn to provide to the citizens of King County - honest,
unbiased, and trustworthy courts of law.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, July 31st, 2007 at 12:30 am and is
filed under In the news, In the courts, Family Life, Judicial. You can
follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can
leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

7 Responses to "Suicide by Seattle Psychiatrist hangs cloud over
entire Family Court System"
SRM Says:
July 31st, 2007 at 10:35 am
This article discussed king county. Stuart was used against me in
Snohomish County Court system. Many times when I was supposed to set
up interview with Stuart, myself and my 3 children, he was out because
he was teaching seminars about has craft. Also, the Catholic church
was using Stuart as a consultant in abuse cases. His influence reached
people far beyond King County and I think we are only seeing the very
tip of the iceberg of the problems caused by this man.

Name Withheld Says:
July 31st, 2007 at 1:16 pm
My children and myselfs are victims of Dr. Greenberg. I was assigned
to Greenberg by my family court judge to do a custody evaluation. My
ex wife was going through drug, alcohol, and sex addiction problems
which lead her to file for divorce when I ask her to get help. I
thought since my ex was busted several times for doing drugs in front
of the children and having sex in front of them. I was told I would
get custody and Dr. Greenberg who the judge appointed would put me as
the most fit person in the children's best interest.

I was very mistaken. This Dr. Greenberg after an extensive evaluation
and $20,000 later still sided with my ex and recommended that I was
the problem. I was in shock and in disbelief. Dr. Greenberg's are
respected by all judges in Seatle. He had every judge telling people
that they had to see him.

I feel at such a disadvantaged not having a vagina for the family
court and their minnions to give me respect. My children are older now
and it has caused harm to them. They have been busted several times
for underage drinking and my ex enables them to do so by keeping
alcohol in the house. I am no power to help my own children. I don't
want them to be screwed up like my ex, but the court is to blame
because they have a for profit system of making you pay for every
service in order that you can have more access to your children. The
court system is destroying America and is immoral. How can we raise
are children right when judge and professional like Dr. Greenberg are
running the show!

Victoria Says:
August 1st, 2007 at 6:25 pm
For those of you seeking some ideas on what to do and how to deal with
the issue of the abuse by Dr. Stuart Greenberg,

We want to extend the network of parents willing to move together in
an action to seek reimbursements of the fees and damages for what
Greenberg did to many of us, specially our children.

Should you be serious please contact the administrator for the email
contact of the coordinator of the movement for justice.

SRM Says:
August 4th, 2007 at 9:37 am
How do you contact the administrator for email contact?

Admin Says:
August 4th, 2007 at 9:47 am
You can go to www.USSharedParenting.com and click on Contact on the
main menu. There is a form mail there. Or, you can email to
in...@USSharedParenting.com

Mary Johnson Says:
August 9th, 2007 at 7:24 pm
Release July 31, 2007

Dear NJCCR Member Mothers, Fathers, Steparents, Grandparents,
Friends, Family Advocates and Faith based Community

The New Jersey State Attorney Generals office has officially charged
Psychologist Marsha Kleinmen of Middlesex County NJ, with multiple
counts of malpractice after many tormenting years of investigation
with the cooperation of one of our members .

Ms. Marsha Kleinmen is a court appointed Psychologist who has
routinely been awarded custody/evaluation cases throughout NJ. She
has been involved with the removal of children from their parents by
utilizing methods that are considered highly unethical and abusive
toward children.

Ms Kleinmen was charged with multiple counts of gross and / or
repeated malpractice on behalf of a child of one of our members.
Additionally, misleading the family court through not reporting all
the facts that were reasonably available.

NJCCR is calling for the immediate suspension and permanent
revocation of her license to practice. Additionally, to limit Ms.
Kleinmen's ability to be around children unsupervised indefinitely.

This kind of abuse should not be taken lightly because this is the
most severe kind of abuse when an apparent person of trust is given
the power and control over a child's future and that person exploits
the child's trust and dependency to substantiate her own bias
conclusions.

Mental health explotation of a child will damage that child for life.

We expect criminal charges should follow this complaint and question
why they have not already been filed.

This kind of behavior is not acceptable toward any child or parent
and certainly our NJ child protection services should not risk any
other child being exposed to Ms. Kleinmen until this case is
adjudicated.

Unfortunately, during the years of investigation Ms, Kleinmen was
allowed to continue practicing unmonitored and therefore, there is
no way at this point, to determine how many other children and
families she has adversely effected or potentially abused.

It is the New Jersey Council for Children's Rights position that Ms.
Kleinmen be immediately suspended from seeing any child until this
case is adjudicated.

NJCCR views that zero tolerance policy for child abuse and actual
domestic violence applies to court appointed professionals as well.

For the safety and well being of all children and families, NJCCR
urges careful discretion to be used by parents when choosing to
expose your children to a mental health professionals.

If any members in NJ know of any person who currently or in the past
has been victim to unsubstantiated accusations of child abuse or
the like through child evaluation treatments contact the New Jersey
Council for Children's Rights immediately at NJ...@yahoo.com or
NJCCR-...@yahoogroups.com

The New Jersey Council for Children's Rights believes that children
have the right to both parents regardless of their parents' marital
status and as such advocates for shared parenting and the protection
of children from predatory professionals that surround the divorce
industry.

This case is not about a child being sexually abused by a parent, it
is about the misuse of psychological "experts" during divorce
litigation and their ability to mislead the courts and effectually
destroy the families potential for a positive post divorce
environment with both parents involved in the childs life.

Unmonitored, court appointed custody "experts" have tremendous
leverage when it comes to custody matters. The unbias view of court
appointed Psychologist is essential to the proper workings of our
current family court system. Left unmonitored and loosely regulated
only puts our children at further risk of abuse.

The real question here is how many other cases has Ms. Kleinman
performed in this fashion and what can we as citizens do to protect
our children today and make sure that this does not happen again.
Every one of Ms. Kleinmen's past evaluations must now be
investigated and the cases opened for findings of potential fowl
play.

New Jersey Council for Children's Rights is calling for our New
Jersey.
State legislatures to establish a "Family safety Act" for the
protection of children from the predatory practice of child
psychology and oversight for psychologists that are used in family
court by independent family centric organizations such as NJCCR.

NJCCR is committed to working with our legislatures in establishing
these safeguards to protect NJ families and children.

NJCCR is calling for funding so this problem can be fully
investigated and documented across the family court system
throughout the State with all court appointed professionals.

Sincerely,

Michael Argen
President, NJCCR
NJCCR.org

JoJo Says:
August 9th, 2007 at 9:43 pm
Mary Johnson - thank you for forwarding this well articulated story to
USSHaredParenting.com.

It would be great if the process that was used and honed by this
organization cold be document, the finding documented, and results
publish so that it could be used in other States.

If you send any information of this type to In...@USSharedParenting.com
we will be sure to publish it accordingly and make it available to
other shared parenting organizations in the United States.