April 30, 2007 08:31 PM UTC

Colo $ Multimillion Divorce Industry Driven by Special Interest Groups: The Perfect Business Model

•  
• by: tiltawhirl

  As, perhaps, everyone knows, divorce in our society is a particularly unpleasant affair –not only for the parties and their children– but also for the courts and attorneys involved.  Our legislators have established reasonable laws and procedures, but they have also created substantial ambiguities that have fostered a thriving divorce industry populated by attorneys, accountants, psychologists and other “experts” who often charge two to three times the hourly rates of their peers. As a direct and proximate consequence, unnecessary pain and suffering is created by a divorce industry, which profits by promoting conflict.
  A serious, albeit low-profile, problem in Colorado, which has been in the making for many years, has brought irreparable harm to children and parents of divorce in Colorado and has unjustly enriched a select few.  Colorado Special Interest groups have managed, not only to influence legislation that grants them immunity and enhances revenue generation (see here) but, also to staff the court rule-making committees and, perhaps even, to have lawsuits against them intercepted in the federal court (see here).
  To take one example –“child and family investigators” (CFIs), appointed pursuant to C.R.S. §14-10-116.5–  are a relatively short list of psychologists who hold themselves out as experts in high confict divorce. ¹ They are among the only group of practitioners that is both exempt from licensing board oversight and from civil liability because, according to the Division of Regulatory Agencies, there would be no one willing to do their dirty jobs without such exemptions and immunity. (see here at pp. 46-48 (of 97)).  Judges, who are overwhelmed with busy dockets, frequently delegate the fact-finding portion of their duties to CFIs and almost always adopt (read: rubber-stamp) their recommendations. This expedience comes at a high cost: monitoring professional practice standards and code of ethics of CFIs is left to the appointing judges.  Independent research has revealed that this model has resulted in improper alliances between individual CFIs and individual judges and, which has resulted in appointments, reappointments and free reign without oversight or accountability of any kind.  (see, e.g., here).  Indeed, CFIs are given extraordinary power over parents concurrent with immunity from any civil or criminal liability to the maximum extent permitted by law, and this provides fertile soil for corruption.  Although the courts that appoint child and family investigators are charged with ensuring compliance with the standards, our district judges are disinclined to remedy injuries or even address complaints regarding these experts. There are very, very few instances, where a judge in Colorado has exercised oversight or discipline of a CFI.  On the other hand, many of the complaints filed against CFIs are quite disturbing.(see, e.g, various complaints  filed with Colorado’s Psychologists Examiners Board and allegations re: “Dr. Bill Fyfe” or allegations re: Alvin Brodbeck and Elode Brodbeck (“the Brodbecks”)). The industry is well-organized, well-heeled and underwritten by malpractice insurance carriers, such as the Fireman’s Fund Specialty Insurance.  And no wonder.  A CFI can earn as much  as $43K in just ONE case. (see, e.g., In re Marriage of Yates).
  At the center of this thriving industry is the Metropolitan Denver Interdisciplinary Committee (MDIC), the de facto lobbying arm for the Colorado Bar Association’s Family Law Section.  The MDIC jointly sponsors monthly symposiums for judges at the Four Points Sheraton in Denver and at lavish hotels in Keystone, Vail, Breckenridge and other resorts.  They purportedly congregate to share information and provide presentations about high-conflict divorce when, in fact, the discussions often focus on how to enforce fee collection; how to strengthen civil immunity, and how to generate more revenue. 

  ²  Ironically, they and the divorce attorneys with whom they work are the primary beneficiaries of the high conflict that they promote.keywords = Colorado Psychologists Board of Examiners, Grievance Board, Division of Regulatory Agencies, Amos Martninez, Gayle Fidler, MDIC, Metropolitan Denver Interdisciplianry Committee, Interdisciplinary Committee, Susan Elkins, Robert Smith, David Littman, Bill Fyfe, Bill J. Fyfe, William J. Fyfe, William Fyfe, Ed Budd, Edward Budd, Bob LaCrosse, Robert LaCrosse, Dee Brodbeck, Elode Brodbeck, Tom Olbrich, Thomas Olbrich, Bill Strong, Mark Wilmot, Carol Reinert, Jefferson Center for Mental Health, JeffCo Center for Mental Health, Alan Levy, Tom Meehan, Thomas Meehan, Carol Reinert, David Kieffer, Jane Wells, Shelly Bresnick, Loretta Hansen-Higa, Judith Silver, Charles Hazelhurst, social worker, social workers, counselor, counselors, psychologist, psychologists, therapist, therapists, special advocate, special advocates, child and family investigator, child and family investigators, parenting coordinator, parenting coordinators, custody evaluator, custody evaluators, Colorado, complaint, complaints, grievance, grievances, discipline, licensing, license, licensed, Marian Camden, Beth Henson, Elizabeth Henson, Robert Smith, Bob Smith, Albert Bonin, Albert M. Bonin, Lesleigh Monahan, Barbara Salomon, Gina Weitzenkorn, Debbie Mills, Les Katz, Angela R. Arkin, Angela Arkin, Joan H. McWilliams, Russel Murray, Doris B. Truhlar, Marie Moses, Terri Harrington, Brenda Storey, Frank McGuane, Helen Shreves, Stan Lipkin, Stanley G. Lipkin, Jaqueline St. Joan, Robert Malman, Bob Malman, Steve Lass, Dave Johnson, David Johnson, Kathryn Beck, Jackie St. Joan, Ellen Squires