People who struggle actively against the Shared Custody in France

hospital, she has 4 children -all doctors-. She is now grand-mother, around 73 years old. She has never

been divorced, but she created its association "l'enfant d'abord" in 2002, immediately after the French law

in 2002 allowing the Shared Custody. Why?

In fact, one of her 2 daughters has had a child whom the judge decided to share the location between the

father and the mother (She said it in a TV show). From this point in time, she decided to struggle Shared

Custody every minutes of her retired time.

Jacqueline Phelip lives in Grenoble. Jacqueline Phelip is connected to some feminist extremists such as

Helene Palma (in Grenoble too).

Jacqueline Phelip is also connected to some journalists (thru Arte-TV).

Jacqueline Phelip has all her family connected to doctors' world.

Jacqueline Phelip is connected/devoted to Maurice Berger. Her website is only about Maurice Berger, and

it is all about his theory compared with others given by some worldwide "famous" doctors ("des sommités

mondiales, in French")

Jacqueline Phelip doesn't speak English, old generation, and French people have never learned English in

school.

Last point, she uses a lot of Forum to send her comments. Aufeminin.com is completely over-posted by

her. Before her book was written, she used to use the pseudo lenfandabord. Now, because she doesn't

want to be associated with these vulgar comments of lenfantdabord, she prefers using other anonymous

pseudos such as Nouvelle45, Daccord3, ancienne4, Journal6, Nouvelle007, Moimonheomme... She is very

aggressive to other people, promoting always her book and always saying, it's a must, it's the number

one of the charts... In doing this, she has no problem in posting testimonies from mothers who are

complaining about the Residence Alternee.

Now Lenfantdabord is only a Website for the Dr Maurice Berger propaganda. Dr Maurice Berger is

described as the best, sharing the same idea with the most famous scientists in the world! Nothing less.

She's a feminist extremist. In her private life, she wanted and succeeded to live far from her father's

daughter. She participated to some feminist associations against male violence.

She lived some years in Canada, and worked closely with Martin Dufresne, Jean-Claude St Amant,

Pierrette Bouchard, all 'anti-patriarcat' people or anti male society.

She wrote some articles against the Residence Alternee. But moreover, she translated some English

feminist articles coming from US or English Canada (as a French English teacher).

She is of course connected to some feminist groups.

institution whom everybody can contact to claim his own rights against judgments, discriminations,

countries laws interoperability.

She is also completely devoted to Maurice Berger, Hana Rotmann, and J Jacqueline Phelip.

Now she was replaced (retired), but she helped Jacqueline Phelip to be known.

He started working in an elder service, and then worked to child service as psychiatric doctor.

Doctor Maurice Berger is now leading an hospital unit for children who have be separatied from their

the child, or father or mother or both. Doctor Maurice Berger keeps these children in his unit and then

interviews them when they are placed in some new families.

Maurice Berger has 3 goals (from his own writings)

1/ He wants the abolition of the 2002 law, which allows a Judge to order the Shared Custody. He wants

Doctors have more power than Judges in a trial.

2/ He wants to promote a new diploma for super-specialist psychiatric doctor (pedo psychiatric doctor

specialized in the family),

3/ He wants to drive a big national study in France on the Shared Custody in France, and of course get

the associated budget to do it.

Another thing, he does not speak English and has never written any article in English. All his articles are

only interviews or comments on the French law, and on his own administrive organization always

complaining about his conditions.

Dr Maurice Berger is also very close to Christian Vasseur who is the President of the "Association

Francaise de Psychiatrie". There are many Associations of psychiatric doctors, but this one is known

because they send a free monthly paper to their members.

Dr Maurice is also animating associations around Grenoble, about how a mother should deliver. It may

explain the relationship between Maurice Berger and Jacqueline Phélip (retired midwife).

The books or contributions of Dr Berger

Le livre noir de la garde alternée Dunod 2005

Dr Berger complains against fathers and

shared custody. No data.

Ces enfants qu'on sacrifie... au nom de la protection de

l'enfance Dunod 2005

Dr Berger complains against his

Administrative and medical hierarchy.

L’échec de la protection de l’enfance en danger, ou

l’impossible changement

Dr Berger complains against his Child

Protection Administration

Vivre avec des parents fous ou maltraitants Groupal, n°

9, p. 57-70 2001 a

"To live with fool parents"

[Dr Berger explains he works with (Psy

disordered) fool parents]

La loi et le bon développement psychique de l’enfant

sont-ils toujours compatibles ? Le Journal des

professionnels de l’enfance, n° 5, 63-66 2000

Laws and child developpement are compatible?

[Dr Berger complains about Laws which does

not give him all permission to do to children]

L’enfant instable. Approche clinique et thérapeutique

d'enfants qui souffrent d'instabilité psychomotrice, à

partir du suivi familial et individuel de 60 enfants

instables pris en charge sur une longue durée.

The unstable child. Dr Berger used the Ritaline

medication to drive behavior of 60 children.

[Dr Berger experimented the Ritaline medication to

control the children's behavior; this

experimentation was immediately criticized by

scientists]

Le placement familial. De la pratique à la théorie. Paris,

ESF. 1998 Mouhot F.

Placing a child in a sheltering family: reality to

theory

[Dr Berger is a professional for separating

children from their parents]

L'enfant et la souffrance de la séparation. Divorce,

adoption, placement Dunod 1997

"the child and his suffering caused by the

separation: divorce, adoption, placing"

[only 10 lines on divorce; but it is in the title]

Les séparations parents-enfant à but thérapeutique

(the split parents/children to medical therapy)

the split parents/children to be medically studied

[Dr Berger expressed the link between

Parents and Child is not important]

Les séparations à but thérapeutique Dunod - Privat

Dunod 1992

The parents/children separations in a therapic goal

[Dr Berger is the professional for separating

children from their parents]

La folie cachée des hommes de pouvoir Albin Michel

1993

"the hidden craziness of the power men"

[Incredible!]

Pratique des entretiens familiaux PUF 1987 "how to drive family interviews"

Now you understand how their profile fit incredibly well together.

children

struggle always against Male power

- The retired midwife ague against the Residence Alternée using scientist and feminist arguments

The Book: "Le livre noir de la garde alternée"

First the title of the book uses "garde alternée". This is the common usage in France says each parent

should take care of his child as Custody, but the real juridical term is "Résidence Alternée" says that the

Child has to alternate between 2 homes. Their authors have deliberately decided to use the commonly

used term in order to convince people in the street instead of using the appropriate term which is a

judicial decision between parent after a divorce.

Presentation given the author

I copy/paste the French introduction (official presentation from the author herself):

La loi du 4 mars 2002 relative à l’autorité parentale a octroyé aux JAF le pouvoir d'imposer une résidence

alternée, au nom de « l’intérêt supérieur de l’enfant ». Cet « intérêt supérieur » constitue une formule

théorique qui désigne essentiellement l’intérêt des parents. Ces enfants de 0 à 6 ans, mais parfois plus

âgés, sont très souvent traités comme des biens indivis qui relèveraient d’un droit de propriété. Ils sont

donc partagés, condamnés à mener une double vie, sans repère fixe affectif ni géographique, avec toutes

les conséquences qui s’ensuivent sur la construction de leur personnalité. Malgré les travaux des pays

anglo-saxons qui nous ont précédé dans la voie de la résidence alternée et en constatent les méfaits chez

nombre d’enfants, la loi définitive a durci sur certains points la proposition initiale. Le présent livre a pour

objet de briser cette quiétude, d’informer, d’interpeller les consciences, de provoquer si possible une

réaction politique pour modifier le texte de loi.

The law of March 4, 2002 relating to the parental authority granted the JAF the capacity to impose an

alternated residence, in the name of “the higher interest of the child”. This “higher interest” constitutes a

theoretical formula which indicates primarily the interest of the parents. These children from 0 to 6 years,

but sometimes older, are very often treated as of the undivided goods which would concern a right of

ownership. They thus are divided, condemned to carry out a double life, without emotional fixed reference

mark nor geographical, with all the consequences which follow on the construction of their personality. In

spite of work of the Anglo-Saxon countries which preceded us in the way by the alternate residence and

the misdeeds at a number of children note some, the final law hardened on certain points the original

proposal. This book has the aim of breaking this quietude, to inform, challenge the consciences, to cause

a political reaction if possible to modify the text of law.

Why this book

In 2005, 2006, a big "Mission Parlementaire sur la Famille" has conducted a session on the family

questions.

All kinds of people were listened by the deputies (all parties). So the attendees were: scientists, layers,

judges, association for children, anti garde alternée, and Fathers groups, and also same-sex associations.

Dr Maurice Berger was interviewed. He was ridiculous, not able to explain why he couldn't export his work

outside his own service.

J. Phelip for Lenfantdabord was complaining against the Residence Alternee, and presented some

testimonies without proof. Of course, she did not want to condemn mothers who do not respect custody

Judgment. At the opposite, she encourage mothers who do not respect custody Judgment.

The conclusion of this Mission was crystal clear (in 100 points), and just the opposite of Jacqueline Phelip

and Dr Maurice Berger wanted:

- to promote the Residence Alternee

- to promote the co-parenting

- to provide a guide to the judge to help them to take this decision (garde alternee)

So, in the book "Le livre noir de la garde alternée", she put all testimonies/interviews she got. They are

not "real" testimonies, no names, and no explanations from other parts. She made it as a revenge against

the fact she was completely wrong in face the French deputies. She wants to rewrite the reality.

What about the different authors who signed (or not) this book

This is the official presentation is given by the editor; I had one line to present the writer.

Le syndrome de Salomon (Dr Hana Rottman).

- She is psychiatric doctor for children, and worked closely to Maurice Berger (some writings together)

Résidence alternée : risque de maltraitance au nom de l’enfant (Dr Pierre Lévy-Soussan).

- He is anti the Shared Custody, anti same-sex, anti same sex adoption, he wrote: Grandir dans une

are the effect on the child's developpement")

Les besoins de base (Frédérique Vauthier-Marin).

- titre de psychologue à Grenoble (everyone in the street can get the Title of Psychologue); Most

important she lives in Grenoble (J. Phelip also)-

Problèmes psychologiques chez l’enfant de moins de six ans (Dr Maurice Berger).

- The Anti-Garde Alternée man!-

La résidence alternée : une loi pour les adultes (Marie-Élisabeth Breton).

- lawer defending women and poor women-

Résidence alternée : un concept judiciaire ? (Marie-Hélène Mathioudakis).

- lawer anti garde alternée, with Maurice Berger. She's a feminists for sex equality, but also for Same sex

parents, gay parents (just the opposit of Pierre Lévy-Soussan)

Et l’enfant alors ? (Maud Hayat-Soria).

- lawer, business specialit-

Also, on the last page, J. Phelip give a thank you to Helene Palma, for her documentation. Afterwards,

Helene Palma has confirmed thru a Forum she gave some documents to J. Phelip.

Also a thank you to Mariane Toletto, Journalist in Arte-TV, who directed a reportage on fathers, their

violence, compared to a wolf that wants only to eat, to rape girls, pedophile in front of the small Little Red

Riding Hood. It was an absolutely stupid TV show on Arte-TV and Web.

My comments on this book

You know better who the writers are. Only some people who give their own opinion. One lawyer is pro

lesbian, one doctor is against same sex parents for education, and the other lawyer is a business

specialist "Revenu Francais". So what?

How this 220 pages book is built

150 pages of testimonies/interviews in the second part of the book like this:

Mme B., Mme R., Mme B. beginning their small story. All are anonymous. It could come from calls that

Jacqueline Phelip receives or from other associations, or from mails, or from Forum Posts on Internet, or

from her directly (who know, how many times she lies? It already has been proved thru her Post into

Forums). But stupidly, many stories are located before 2002 (around 75%). So, how can it be used

against the 2002 law allowing Shared Custody? It is incredible to be so inaccurate.

In these 150 pages testimonies, nearly all are complaining about the father. How can you be so oldfashioned

in 2006?

So, what about the 70 other pages? Theories, scientist researches?

In this part, the different autors express themselves in their own chapter. Maurice Berger starts.

The book begins by Maurice Berger' chapter. If you seek any psychosomatic diseases, no problem, Dr.

Berger did the job for you. He put everything, every disease from trouble in the belly, eczema, while

passing by all the possible medical disorders. The cause is always the same: the Résidence Alternée, of

course!, or "Amen!".

Page after page, one was searching some data from researches, cause Doctor Maurice Berger is a

professor, and the readers (parents or not) should learn from him. He should expose some scientist

explanations, he should show how many children he has qualified. But no, nothing. Neither one number

nor one statistic thru its writing. This book is empty from any kind of statistic!

In fact, he is just making up his theory on some cases, always the same cases, those whom J.Phelip will

relate the story in the 2nd part. His link with Phelip's Association "LenfantdAbord" is very disturbing for a

scientist.

He has a very extremist language against his administration, also against the judges, disappointed he was

not receiving any funds for conducting a national survey on the Residence Alternée effects. There is

absolutely nothing scientifically new from Maurice Berger in this book.

He is completely out the world, cause in his mind, countries which have voted the Residence Alternée as

a new possibility between the 2 parents are just horrible countries (France, Belgium, Italy, Nordics, some

US States ), besides the other countries would be beautiful countries.

What is never said by Dr Maurice Berger is that he is relating child stories from his patients; but works

with children or parents who have huge psychiatric disorder, or drug problem, or mental problem, with

mistreatment, violence, rape. Where is the scientific research for "normal" population?

In fact, there is nothing new (scientifically) because he has no data. To be more precise, one time he

explained, while he was interviewed on French TV, that he received tens and tens of letter coming from

everywhere in France by mothers who were writing him because their child didn't want to see their father,

and was crying when he came from a father period (it was after he wrote another book against the

Residence Alternee, always promoted by the LenfantdAbord Website). The journalist asked him about

this: he answered that he and these women were just discovering new syndrome. Incredible, a scientist is

discovering a new syndrome during his own interview on TV!

a paragraph written by this Doctor. The Chapter explains a new symptom, and the title of the paragraph

is "l'enfant souhaite la mort de son pere" (child wants his father's death). So on some pages, it is

explained that a child living in Residence Alternee wants to solve his problem by wishing the death of his

father. That's an absolutely extremist idea given by Doctor Maurice Berger.

In the introduction of this book, he explains that he decided to work on this book with "L'enfant d'abord",

because in this Association the child is in the center of their concern. He forgets to tell us (but he has

explained if in all previous articles he wrote) that for him the concern is:

- to get a budget to make a national survey on the Résidence Alternée.

- to get the cancellation of the 2002 law, and force psychiatric doctor to be in a part of the justice

decision, to have the Doctor the same juridical power as the judge.

- to develop a new super psychiatric diploma for justice in Family court.

A last thing about Jacqueline Phelip & Maurice Berger

In their strategy, they are always complaining about Judges, about their bad decisions, about their

ignorance of the Judges. And I am not sure it is well seen by Law establishment in France, and the same

in Holland. This is our chance and this is why they stay alone in their complaints.

A quick situation in France and close countries around

In France

- 2002 law on Residence Alternée (law said the Judge can decided a Sole Custody or Share Custody even

against one of both parents)

- 2003: the fiscal administration has immediately allowed split declaration to allow Shared Custody

declarations

- In 2006, the French parliament mission on family has concluded: the 2002 law is not enough applied by

the family justice courts, so 3 points have to be done: 1/ to develop the Residence Alternée, 2/ to develop

the co-parenting, 3/ to give a guide to the judge explaining how to take this decision. Moreover, this

mission has rejected any limitation on the age of the child; rejecting also all input from Doctor Maurice

Berger and LenfantDabord (Jacqueline Phélip)

- In 2005: SOSpapa (main French father organization is admitted among the National Family Union:

UNAF:Union National des Associations Familliales), of course neither Lenfantdabord nor any feminist

group belongs to UNAF)

- In 2007: by law, the French Family Care has to give money to both parents in case the child is in

Residence Alternée

In Italy

- In 2006, law said the Residence Alternee is the preferred decision for Judge (this law is crystal clear for

parents)

In Belgium

- In 2006, law said the Residence Alternee have be studied first by the Judge (little ambiguous)

Suggestions for Netherlands, and answers to Professor Dr. K. Boele-Woelki

> The Dutch family law establishment is very much opposed to family law reform introducing a

presumption of Residence Alternee legislation (bilocation) in Dutch family law.

=> think about Netherlands and France or Italy.

I would understand that bi-location is a problem for a large country, but for Holland, it's a chance because

it is a small country. Think about Rotterdam-Amserdam-Utrech (many people are living/working in

Utrech), and now think about Lille-Paris, Paris-Bordeaux, Paris-Strasbourg, Paris-Nice, you have to

multiply the distance by 10 or 50! This argument is nonsense for Holland compared with France or Italy.

> The Professor Dr. K. Boele-Woelki in an Editorial-article based her conclusions solely on the book of J.

Phélip.

=> There is a misunderstanding. J. Phelip is retired, was midwife and has some relationship.

How a professor can trust a book like this? The alarm is raised only by 5 people in France, working as a

lobby, and no proves are brought in this book.

There is such no proof, that Phelip/Berger/Brisset have repeated many time the same idea about the

principle of precaution "principe de précaution" for the Résidence Alternée; this principle says not not to

try something if you don't know something (using the image of a medicine you should not take if you are

not sure). This principle was voted last year in the French Constitution.

The principle is already stupid in a common life but for a searcher it is worse.

> This book, she says, is not only against the best interests of the child, but also goes against the

International Treaty on Children's Rights.

=> The International child constitution says explicitly that a child should have access to his parents (with

an s as the plural). For the French situation after a divorce/separation, 75% of fathers see their children

less than 4 days a month, and 25% of fathers don't have any contact.

=> Moreover France was condemned several times for not respecting this agreement, and also not giving

the child's right to speech to a judge.

> She further suggests that because now a very strong movement prevails in France to reform the

existing French Residence Alternee family law legislation.

=> It was just wrong and false when she wrote that, in the end of 2006. How a "strong movement

prevailing in France" would stay so silencer? And this situation is true for pro and anti résidence alternée,

meaning exactly the opposite of what she claims. No Residence Alternée is gently, quietly entering in our

society. No riots in France!

=> May be you know, but to be clearer enough, on the left side the "Parti Socialiste" there is Segolene

Royal who promoted the 2002 law of residence Alternée when she was Family Minister, and on the right

side the 'UMP' leaded by Nicolas Sarkozy who has no expressed significant view on the Residence Alternée

(his parents were divorced when he was kid) excepted to be very equal with the homosexual rights, but 2

women are his voice speakers; Nadine Morano (Lorraine deputy) who is clearly for the Residence Alternée

from the beginning and Valérie Pécresse (Yvelines-Paris deputy) who was opposed at the beginning (she

was the writer of the famous Mission Parlementaire sur la Famille conducted in 2005 - 2006 which gave us

"good" conclusions), but recently stated (on TV, on her recent book) on her new position saying she is

completely opened to the Share Custody. No, French political world is not against the Residence Alternée,

even if politicians are not so pushy.

> She finally even goes that far to state - again based on Phélip's book - that even if both parents do

agree to Residence Alternée, it should not be awarded without thorough examination of the Residence

Alternéé situation by the Dutch child protection agencies as it might very well be against the best

interests of the child(ren) involved.

=> A French people could not state like that. It is impossible for any Administrations to take any law

against parents who agrees. It comes to their private life. It is such truth, that before this 2002 law,

when the Residence Alternée was not allowed by law it existed nevertheless by parents (80% of the

examples from the Phelip's book are before 2002).

> The Dutch pedagogue, equal parenting campaigner and father Joep Zander then wrote a Reaction and

Rebuttal defending Residence Alternee against the above "Anti-Residence-Alternee"-Editorial written by

published in the April 2007 edition of the same magazine.

=> That would be very interesting for us to see how it reacts. I fully agree on Zander explanation on the

statistics of Résidence Alternée in France (very few RA, very few against the mothers, very few when the

child is under 2 years old).

Conclusion

To finish, we have to take care that Jacqueline Phelip is taken as a proof by foreign scientists (or from law

establishment). Maurice Berger has been invited in French Canada (only French Canada, because he

speaks only French). Because of his trip in Canada, he could be more famous in France, because his

speech was published in another country. French people have a complex of inferiority and can approve

something more widely because it comes from abroad.

So to cope with this problem, we have created one Website for Scolare Calendar and Visits Rights

http://nicoseve.no-ip.org/web-calendrier for parents who are divorced. It was created to show firstly what

is a real calendar when your child is in a sole custody situation.

In France, more often, the "right to visit" your child is the 1rst, the 3rd, and the 5th WE of each; holiday

are equally divided. Many questions, many simple mistakes happen that could bring to a nightmare even

if the parents don't want to struggle.

Then this web-site explained the Feminist situation in France and Canada, Maurice Berger propaganda and

so on until the French politician's views.

Now it raised up to 400.000 connections form September 06, with 100.000 different people. It has been

looked by all French ministries, nearly all regional school academies.

We are French: We know who the extremists in our country are.

We are Fathers: We know how a child needs his father.