Keeping the Silence

Mother Jones likes the new PBS documentary "breaking the silence" (sorry, no link, I'm too sickened):

"studies have shown that in cases where the father chooses to seek some form of custody over the mother's objections, there is a high probability that he has either battered the mother, abused the children or both. However, if the mother accuses the father of child abuse in court, the judge could suspect she is motivated by revenge and to reject the accusation as false."

First of all, er, what "studies"? The article goes on to claim that judges are biased in favour of the father (now there's a novelty), here's a counter argument with ACTUAL NUMBERS. But we're well used to unsubstantiated and biased claims in this context, aren't we?

But moreover, does anyone see the consequences of this line of argument: any father who seeks custody of the children over the mother's wishes is automatically a suspected abuser.

And they go on:

"Parental alienation ... theory states that women will concoct stories of physical and sexual child abuse out of vindictiveness toward their former partners .... has been denounced as junk science.."

Debunked? It has? By whom? Again, what studies?

Also, do they imagine that this could never happen? That no woman would ever be vindictive towards their former partners, would ever concoct stories of abuse, and never attempt to manipulate the children to take her side in such a thing? No, that could never happen. Could it?

The intent, from this article, is obvious, to further dissuade fathers from ever even attempting to gain custody of his children if his partner walks out with them.

Jeez, even the title of this "documentary" is a purile cliche.