Guardianship Exploitation through the Family Courts Often Makes Them More Harmful than Helpful
I never knew I would say this as a psychiatrist. In psychiatric practice, one comes across quite a few individuals who cannot make decisions for themselves and require involuntary hospitalization, treatment over objection, and, in many cases, guardianship. However, when there is greater exploitation than fidelity to one’s fiduciary duties, and there is no regulation or oversight, then the system may no longer work. Guardianships are increasingly recognized to be rife with such exploitation, such that the harm may exceed the help they provide.
Elders are the most vulnerable, with the greatest assets and the least social connectedness. The fantasy desire for a loving relative thuggish enough to be a match for the elder’s predator, as in Jonathan Blakeson’s film, “I Care a Lot,” is understandable. Britney Spears’ plight drew the public’s sympathy, when her fourteen-year guardianship finally ended in 2021. Her example illustrated how easily an allegedly abusive, controlling father could weaponize profit-motivated Family Court to entrap a celebrated figure under his total control, using her money, in total secrecy of legal process. It took several documentaries and her speaking publicly for her to escape the clutches of the Court.
Children may be the next vulnerable group. Whereas the capacity to make one’s own decisions is presumed until proven otherwise in adults, the converse is true for children. Therefore, guardians are frequently appointed to speak for children in Family Court cases. The problem is, in a corrupt court system, they are just one more “tool” for committing human rights violations and crimes against children, which is why Keith Harmon Snow titled his book, The Worst Interests of the Child, for what he calls: “the trafficking of children and parents through U.S. family courts.” Guardians ad litem are an integral piece to this forced trafficking of children to their torture, rape, and murder.
Evelyn Nissirios, “guardian ad litem” for a case I have been describing, is no exception. This is the reason we are bringing criminal charges against her:
[Charges will be kept private until they clear at a probable cause hearing.]
Nominally taking the position as court-appointed guardian ad litem has allowed her to exploit public trust and to support and co-conspire with an abusive father’s predatory aims with impunity. We know from other accounts that she has an entrenched pattern of malfaesance, misfaesance, and apparent sadistic enjoyment of torturing the children to whom she has unique access.
The problem is, court-appointed guardians have immunity, and even with felony crimes, courts cover for one another, which is why we have come to have a crisis of the judicial system in the first place. When organized crime happens more easily and with greater brazenness through “courts of law” than elsewhere, then the system is collapsing, of which Family Courts are merely the most egregious epitome. Public accountability may be the only way to contain criminal behavior and to prevent institutional collapse, which is why there are several books being written and a documentary being made on this one case alone.