She engages in lengthy and pointless debates, some spanning several months and addressing decades old vendettas and perceived slights.

One example is here.

Do not, however, be deceived. The fact that she can type fast does not substitute for actual experience. Neither Monica Pignotti nor her somewhat less prolific colleague, Jean Mercer, has the clinical background (seeing and treating patients) needed to make therapeutic evaluations.

If you consider what they have to say at all, please keep that in mind.

As the dozen deputy sheriffs and child welfare workers approached the tidy, three-story white house in Trenton, Tenn., intending to remove all the kids because of reports of abuse, they came upon a bizarre sight. A young girl, 14 years old, was sitting cross-legged on the ground with her nose pressed up against the house. When a social worker asked why she was there, the girl said she had gotten in trouble. Asked how long she had been there, the girl replied, “Before lunchtime.” It was 2:30 p.m. “It was pitiful,” says investigator Don Curry. “It was so hot that day it made me sick.” As Curry recalls, the girl was being disciplined that afternoon in June 2004 for getting a sibling’s shoes wet. “It was something silly,” he says, “something silly like that.”

But as investigators began to examine Debra and Thomas Schmitz, who lived at the house with their 18 children—16 of them adopted, foster children or unofficially transferred to their care—they say that that incident proved to be among the milder forms of punishment. On Jan. 30 the Schmitzes went on trial in Brownsville, Tenn., on 31 counts of child abuse and child trafficking. The case of the Schmitzes—most of whose kids suffered from physical or emotional problems—has also focused attention on a little-known gray-market network of families who take in children (often through word of mouth and the Internet) cast off by their own adoptive parents. The collectors of unwanted children say they do it to help kids, though some skeptics suggest that money, in the form of state subsidies, furnishes another motive. “People call and say, ‘I need your help; we can’t have these kids in our home,’” says Frances Matthews, a friend of the Schmitzes’ who has 10 adopted disabled kids at their home in nearby Kenton. “Sometimes you need a break.”

Matthews explains that it is not uncommon for families in this kind of adoption network to exchange for brief periods disruptive or challenging children among themselves as a means of lessening the stress. What’s more, many of the families practice “attachment therapy,” a method that includes some controversial forms of discipline (see box). In Internet chat rooms, the Schmitzes sold themselves as AT experts—which they insist is a legitimate form of child rearing—to parents looking to unload their kids. But in his opening statement, prosecutor Garry Brown said they took the idea of discipline to criminal extreme, painting a harrowing portrait of life in the Schmitz household. He accused Debra, 46, of forcing one child to eat his own vomit; holding another child’s head underwater as punishment; sitting on a girl and urinating on her; and hurling a wheelchair-bound girl into a swimming pool (the girl was pulled to safety). Tom, 48, who works for a portable-toilet company, is accused of placing a hose in a girl’s mouth and turning on the water, and lancing a boil on another child with a box cutter as she screamed in pain. The couple allegedly forced children to dig what they were told were their own graves. The witnesses: 10 of the kids the Schmitzes cared for. Natasha Bennet, 16, told the court how she had been adopted from Russia at age 5 by a single American mom but was so unruly that the woman drove her to the Schmitzes one day in 2003 and left her there. “[Debra] welcomed me to a house of living hell,” testified Natasha, who is now living in McKenzie, Tenn. “She told me I could call her ‘mom’ or ‘master.’” Her first day at the house, said Natasha, she was put in the storm cellar for 20 minutes: “[Debra] told me every time I misbehaved that’s where I’d go.”

In his opening statement, Debra’s attorney Barney Witherington tried to downplay the seriousness of the Schmitzes’ actions. “They say she threw a butter knife at one of their children,” he said. “It’s a butter knife; it’s not even a sharp knife.” Witherington continued, “Everybody loves children. These children are different. The things that the Schmitzes did were absolutely necessary. The rest didn’t happen.” But to authorities, it was abuse by any name. “If you put kids in a storm cellar or a bed that’s really a cage, that’s not right,” says Gibson County Sheriff Joe Shepard, who has led the investigation of the Schmitzes. “Psychologically it will affect them the rest of their days.”

Some of Debra Schmitz’s own kin, including her estranged mother, Shirley Hogan, 67, and daughter Melanie, 21, emphatically second that notion. (Debra was married twice and had three children, including Melanie, a student, prior to her marriage to Tom, with whom she has a son, Mackenzie, 16.) According to Shirley, in 1995 Debra and Tom began taking in kids from other families for brief stays, then moved on to taking foster children and finally to adopting their own in 1996. Their first adopted child was an African-American toddler named Marcus who fell prey to their abuse, says Melanie, who left home in 2001: “If Marcus dirtied his diaper, she’d make him wear it on his head.”

Before long, the Schmitzes had branched out to taking in children that other adoptive families no longer wanted. Melanie recalls seeing her mother spending hours trolling the Internet looking for candidates, some of them foreign-born adoptees with special needs whose new parents had underestimated the burden of caring for them. “She’d barely get off the couch,” says Melanie. “She’d be online all day looking at kids.” In one instance, Melanie says, she went with her family to a truck stop in the Midwest to pick up one child, an episode that Debra has said never happened. (At the time of their arrest, the Schmitzes had seven kids living in their house who had not been adopted through official channels, though their lawyer has maintained that the couple intended to get legal custody.)

Both Melanie and Shirley believe that Debra’s initial motive was to help kids but that financial gain soon became a factor. “After she found out how much money could be made, it never stopped,” says Shirley. Authorities say that thanks to the kids for whom they had legal custody, the Schmitzes received about $84,000 a year alone from Social Security and state and federal subsidies, which are higher for special-needs children. “They were living pretty good,” says Sheriff Shepard. “Beautiful home, beautiful antiques.” Not so, says Debra, who has claimed that she received no support for the last seven children she brought into her home. “I wore rags,” she told USA Today, “but my kids always looked wonderful.”

How could such alleged abuse continue unnoticed? Police found evidence that the couple had rigged up a warning system to alert them when anyone—including child welfare workers, who made visits to the house over the years and reported nothing amiss—came up the driveway. Authorities say they found the house to be im maculately kept but concluded that Debra had used the kids to do the vast bulk of the cleaning. The alleged abuses came to light when two home health care workers learned from some of the children about life in the house and notified a doctor, who called the police.

At least one expert, Ronald Federici, author of Help for the Hopeless Child, who evaluated the family last year at the invitation of the defense, voices sympathy for Debra and Tom. “They were adoption addicts,” says Federici. “They were well-intentioned people. They wanted to make the world better for kids who were abused. They got in way over their head because of their rescue fantasies. This was like a psychiatric facility without a medical director.” As for the investigation, which relied heavily on the word of the children themselves, Federici questions how much credence that testimony should be given. “Only four kids were competent under psychological standards,” he says. “The rest were retarded, autistic, brain damaged. They were so impaired. Yet all the statements went into gospel.”

To officials, the stories the children told rang true. Investigator Curry recalls interviewing Nora, then a 15-year-old who wore a leg brace because of polio, who had been adopted in China and then dumped at the Schmitz home by parents who didn’t want her. “She was telling us when she got in trouble Debbie made her sleep naked on the floor,” says Curry. “She’d take her brace and the little girl would have to crawl up the steps.” Even Schmitz friend Frances Matthews, who had a falling-out with her yet agrees that the accused couple wanted to do good and found themselves overwhelmed, recounts some disturbing practices. She acknowledges, for instance, that she was having such problems with her own adopted daughter Marianna, now 19, who has spina bifida, that she hit her in the face with a shoe (she was sentenced to 20 days in jail for that abuse) before sending her to live with the Schmitzes. But Debra, says Matthews, had no better luck with Marianna. “She said she had spanked her so hard that Marianna had an abscess on her behind,” says Matthews.

In the run-up to the trial, which was expected to last about five days, all but two of the Schmitz children had been put in foster homes. That, says Matthews, has distressed Debra more than anything. “She’s very depressed,” says Matthews. “She wants her kids. She misses them. When they take your kids, you come unglued.” Adds Matthews, with no intended irony: “She loved those children. Maybe she wasn’t the best, but she loved them.”

“Mom, I need help with math!!” “OK, honey, I’ll be right there.” Five minutes later the child is near tears and screaming, “You’re not helping me!!”You fume, “I’m not going to just give you the answers.” Does this sound familiar?Homework battles are an all too familiar family event.

What can you do?

How can you help your child so that each of you feels good about the experience?

The concept of “units-of-concern” is an effective way to resolving this problem. Every problem can be thought of as having ten units-of-concern that get distributed among those involved.The more units of concern a person carries, the more responsibility for the problem and the more worry the person carries. So, for example, if you are deeply worried about your child getting his or her homework done on time and about your child doing well, maybe you are carrying five or six units of concern.Your spouse may be involved a little bit and so carries three units of concern about getting homework done. That leaves only one unit of concern for your child.

So, what do you do to shift the units of concern onto the shoulders of the person who should be carrying them?

First, you have to determine who owns the problem.In this instance, it is your child’s homework, not yours, so the problem belongs to your child.

Second, you determine if there are natural consequences for the child that will occur is the problem is not solved. In this case, there are clear natural consequences for your child.If he does not do his homework, he will get a poor grade on it.“Wait a minute,” you say.“If she doesn’t do her homework, she’ll get a bad grade and then if that keeps happening, she may fail.”The bad news is that when you allow your child to make choices, he will make some poor choices that have negative consequences for the child.

However, that is how we learn, by making choices, some of which work and some of which don’t.If you try to teach your child to ride a bicycle and never let go, the child will never learn to balance. However, on the way to good bike riding, most children fall a few times.Even if the worst happens and the child fails, say fifth grade, the good news is that there is fifth grade every year.

Harsh as that may seem, better to learn these lessons while the cost of a bad decision is cheap, than have to learn the lesson when the child is older and the costs greater.Third, you are now ready to handle the problem with your child by distributing the units of concern onto the appropriate set of shoulders. In this example, you let your child know that you are willing to help with homework, when it is convenient for you. You may set a time when you are available, or have some other set of parameters.

When your child asks for help, you provide the assistance (not the answers) as long as the child is respectful and fun to be around. As soon as the child stops being respectful or fun to be around, you calmly get up and say as you are leaving, “I’m done for now, feel free to ask for my help again, when you (are more respectful) (can talk with me quietly) (are able to use good words and not nasty words).” The conversation and interaction are done. When you child comes in later and asks, “What am I going to do?If I can’t do my homework I’ll fail.”You can say something like, “Wow, that’s quite a problem you have there.What do you think is the solution?”If your child asks politely for your help again and demonstrates that he or she will work with you, then go ahead.I think you’ll be pleasantly surprised by how quickly this method will eliminate battles and make homework something you and your child can actually share as a positive experience.

Arthur Becker-Weidman, Ph.D. is Director of The Center For Family Development, an Attachment Center in Western New York that specializes in the treatment of adoptive families and their children. He can be reached at 716-810-0790.Art was adopted as a child.He and his spouse, Susan are the parents of three children, one adopted internationally.Dr. Becker-Weidman achieved Diplomate status from the American Board of Psychological Specialties in Child Psychology.He is a Diplomate of the American College of Forensic Examiners.Dr. Becker-Weidman is an associate clinical professor at the State University of New York at Buffalo.He has over 50 publications and presentations at local, regional, and national organizations about adoption and child treatment issues.

Dr. Arthur Becker-Weidman and his associates are dedicated to helping adoptive families achieve their potential. All members of the Center For Family Development are licensed, skilled, and highly trained professionals with at least twenty years experience helping families.  Arthur Becker-Weidman, CSW-R, PhD. DABPS received his doctorate in Human Development from the University of Maryland, Institute for Child Study. He achieved Diplomate status from the American Board of Psychological Specialties in Child Psychology and Forensic Psychology. He is a member of the American College of Forensic Examiners.  Dr. Becker-Weidman has received extensive training in Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy, an attachment-based therapy, including with Daniel Hughes, Ph.D., author of Building the Bonds of Attachment and Facilitating Developmental Attachment.

At the Center For Family Development we only begin working with families after completing a thorough assessment.  We carefully evaluate the child and the family.  Our success rate is now over 95%.  Success means that the child has developed the capacity to love and be loved and is functioning at least at about 80% of the level you’d expect for a child that age.  See our Research page for the results of our follow-up study.

Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy, an attachment-based therapy is an evidence-based treatment for children with Trauma-Attachment Disorders, Reactive Attachment Disorder, and other disorders of attachment that are complicated by severe trauma or histories of maltreatment.  Other forms of treatment such as play therapy are ineffective with children who have disorders of attachment and complex post-traumatic-stress-disorder because all these therapies require a trusting relationship between the therapist and child.  See our follow-up study in Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, a professional peer-reviewed journal.   This demonstrates that Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy is an evidence-based effective treatment for children with Reactive Attachment Disorder.  Please see our Informed Consent document for more information.

Parents of attachment disordered children experience a high level of stress and need support and understanding in order to help their children and survive as a family.  The Center for Family Development offers a support group which is intended as an opportunity for parents to share parenting strategies, learn about approaches that work, support others, find support, and develop cooperative respite arrangements.  This is not a treatment group or therapy.

http://centerforfamilydevelopment.wordpress.com

http://arthurbeckerweidman.wordpress.com/

He is best described as a “developmental neuropsychologist,” specializing in the treatment of “institutional autism” (which he also calls “post-traumatic autism,” or “post-institutional autistic syndrome”).

Dr. Federici is licensed by the Virginia Board, and is the holder of a Psy. D. degree.

Dr. Ronald Federici is the author of “Help for the Hopeless Child: A Guide for Families, With Special Discussion for Assessing and Treating the Post-Institutionalized Child” and is the founder of Neuropsychological and Family Practice Associates, in McLean, Virginia.

He has worked with adopted children from Russia, Romania, Ukraine and Belarus. He is also the father to seven adopted children of his own.

Federici is also an outspoken opponent of dangerous practices, such as those resulting in the death of Candace Newmaker. In addition, he has also sought to provide as much assistance as possible to children living in orphanages and other institutions with deplorable conditions.

More information about Dr. Federici and his work can be found at:

http://ronaldfederici.wordpress.com (Ronald Federici blog)

http://ronfederici.wordpress.com (Ron Federici blog)

http://childrenintherapy.wordpress.com (Children in Therapy)

http://advocatesforchildrenintherapy.wordpress.com (Advocates for Children in Therapy)

http://angelinajolieadoptions.wordpress.com (Angelina Jolie’s adoptions; Dr. Federici is Angelina Jolie’s adoption consultant)

I was born and raised in Vero Beach, Florida. I grew up with three older brothers and a fraternal twin sister. The best memories of my childhood are going to the beach, riding horses, and visiting with my grandparents.

Yet, apart from these good memories, memories of growing up with little emotional connection with two alcoholic parents and feelings of being “invisible” within a family system are even more prevalent. (And I share this with you because these difficult memories are an important part of who I am today and why I am so passionate about the work that I do). As a child, I found connection and validation through academics and graduated at the top of my class. Following high school, I attended the University of Florida and earned a bachelor’s degree in architecture and a master’s in construction management.

After working for ten years in the field of architecture, I woke up one morning with this pulling desire to be a parent. Due to numerous health issues and operations in my past (all a result of growing up in a stressful environment), adoption became the way to motherhood. Following countless phone calls and long nights working on paperwork, four months later I found myself in Russia meeting my son, an adorable 2 ½ year old little boy.

This was a major turning point in my life. Motherhood became the most difficult task I had ever undertaken. I had accomplished any goal I set my mind to in the past. Focus, self-discipline, and pure determination had been my tools to success. Yet, in the first six months of motherhood, nothing I had used in the past was working. Nothing-nothing was working. In fact, it was only getting worse.

Out of pure insanity or complete denial, I was in Russia a year and a half later, adopting again! This time I was meeting my daughter, a beautiful 4-year-old little girl. She was completely different, yet in the back of my mind, I kept hearing, “She’s too good…there is something very wrong here.”

As you can imagine, I had created quite a situation within a very short amount of time. After late nights of research, consultations with “experts,” and at least 200 books on attachment and bonding, I was still at a complete loss of how to bring peace into our home.

Late nights of research turned into late nights of curling up on the bathroom floor, crying in a complete state of helplessness. Yes, I’ve been there on the floor with you, feeling terrified of the future and feeling as if life was no longer worth living!

I decided that since I was doing all this research, I should return to school and change my career path. Looking back, I was simply returning to the environment that I knew in my early years that had sustained me through stress–academia. I earned a master of social work and sought training in the area of attachment and bonding.

After working to first change myself and the interpretation of my children’s behaviors, I was then able to parent in a whole new way. It also required intensive healing of my past childhood experiences in order to be able to become emotionally available to my children’s pain and fear. I came to realize that if you want to change something in your life, there’s only one place to look: inside you. And when you look to make this change, it takes doing it with love.

It took learning to love myself. First, though, it required a true understanding of the essence of love. We cannot give something we don’t understand or something we have not yet received. Loving yourself is the key to being able to love others unconditionally, without requirements. This is especially essential to parenting a child with a trauma history who simply does not have the capacity to receive love or reciprocate love due to the intensity of his/her internal pain and fear.

When unconditional love is put into action, it truly is the “cure” to creating peace in the home. It simply takes learning how to put it into action. Traditional parenting techniques are fraught with fear, disguised as love. Shifting your perspective to allow the light of love to overcome the darkness of fear is the only way.

My children are teenagers now and I have a wonderful relationship with both of them (How many parents do you know with teenagers who actually enjoy their company?). My children are more emotionally intelligent than most adults and they understand the dynamics of human interactions beyond their years. Their early experiences of abandonment, abuse, and neglect have been integrated into who they are and they are better individuals today because of their pasts. That’s the power of love!

If you are struggling with the effects of trauma in your home, I want this level of healing for you. I am passionate about providing the resources and understanding you need to make your family work for you. It is hard work. It is a journey of commitment and tenacity. Yet, it is what life is about – loving relationships. You aren’t living unless you are emotionally attuned to both yourself and to those around you.

I am committed to helping families and changing the false traditional interpretation of how to love and discipline children. There is a way to pull out of the depth of pain that resides in so many families (and perhaps your family). I hope you’ll join me on this journey to bring love back into a world that is living in too much fear and pain. Love never fails!

http://www.beyondconsequences.com/

http://www.heather-forbes.blogspot.com/