Dear PBS: To Break the Silence, You Must Tell the Whole Truth
November 6, 2005
People say they love the truth, but in reality they want to believe that which they love is true. - Robert J. Ringer
I am an instructor of criminal justice courses for Quincy College at Plymouth, MA. Central to each and every class is the concept of “critical thinking.”
Critical thinking is necessary to analyze controversial issues and is central to our ongoing understanding of society and ourselves. The process of critical thinking entails putting three questions to each proposition.
1. Bias. Why was it done, written, etc? Locate the author in the social or political structure. Consider what the author is trying to accomplish. What interests, material or ideology, does the author serve? Are other viewpoints omitted? Consider why they may have been omitted.
2. Common sense. Is the information reasonable? This approach also requires examining the proposition for internal contradictions. Do some of its assertions contradict others?
3. Analysis. Is the proposition validated up by other sources? Do other sources contradict it?
Often only a cursory study of data concerning a theory is enough to refute the “theory” as being factual The basic lessons of critical thinking are ignored by the producers of the documentary Breaking the Silence: Children’s Stories (BTS) being presented by the Public Broadcasting System ( PBS).
The Family Court Reform Coalition (FCRC) is a national organization composed of many professionals working in the fields of child custody, child abuse, psychology, and domestic violence.
The FCRC believes that Glenn Sacks and other Fathers Rights Organizations have reached false conclusions in their rush to attack BTS. I do not argue that specific claim. However, it appears that the FCRC and many Women’s Rights Organizations miss the point – and the point is ensuring the safety of our children - in their rush to defend BTS.
The FCRC claims that everyone should work towards ensuring that abused children are protected in the family courts. And I agree that “batterers” regardless of gender should not be awarded custody of their children. However, Sacks appears to be less guilty of hyperbole than the FCRC and the producers of BTS. The FCRC and BTS places all fathers seeking the custody of their children into the same sack then throws the fathers into the deepest section of the pond.
Both the BTS and the FCRC present the undocumented claim that the Parental Alienation Syndrome is being used nationwide by all or the majority of fathers as a courtroom tactic when fathers seek custody of their children. And through its implicit presentation, BTS attempts to paint all fathers with the bush of batterer.
Neither the BTS nor the FCRC provide any citation or evidence to document their claim that fathers seeking custody are “batterers.” There are no citations that document when there is a family conflict the male is the aggressive abuser and the female the passive victim.
The FCRC notes that, “No valid studies have ever been conducted to test or confirm the validity of PAS theory.” Again, something I do not dispute. The FCRC then claim there is an epidemic of “batterers” nationwide overloading the nations courts with false claims of the Parental Alienation Syndrome. FCRC lacks the evidence to document that claim.
The last census documents that in almost one of five homes the single parent is the father. More and more fathers are now seeking sole or joint custody of their children. There is no evidence that document the majority of fathers seeking custody of their children are “batterers.” There is no evidence that can document that fathers physically abuse and neglect their children more than mothers.
The producers, while claiming to be unbiased, use BTS to convince the public in general and court officials and legislators in particular that the small subgroup of fathers they present is actually a fair and honest representation of fathers in general. Most troubling is that PBS should have recognized that BTS, by showing only one side of what everyone understands is a complex issue, can not produce an accurate, balanced or objective presentation.
While the FOX television network claims it is fair and balanced, the viewing audience expects that PBS will be fair and balanced. BTS itselfis evidence that the producers do not present the full truth and rather they offers only half truths in the guise of the whole.
There is mounting evidence that the producers of BTS concealed evidence that documents one of their “victims” is actually the “abuser.” Apparently the producers accept the theory “there is an epidemic of batterers attempting to gain custody of their children” as a fact and this “theory” caused the producers to become unwilling or unable to realize that women are equally capable as men of physically abusing and neglecting children.
There is a growing number of people who were contacted by the producers who claim that they were ignored after their stories contradicted the BTS agenda.
The real danger is that those who view BTS, including judges and legislators, will believe the premise presented – fathers in most custody disputes are batterers and women their victims – before any evidence is presented in court. BTS paints all fathers in custody disputes as batterers and further paints fathers as batterers by association of gender.
It is painfully obvious the producers decided who is guilty before the facts were introduced. BTS itself clearly documents it is not impartial, it is not balanced, and its palpable bias willfully and wantonly provides a distorted presentation of the truth. Balanced presentations 101: Present both sides of an issue and then allow the wise and prudent public to decide. It appears that both BTS and PBS ignore that very basic admonition.