Utah Courts and the Reunification Industry

There is an important hearing tomorrow in Utah: a motion to recuse Celia Ockey, a court appointed GAL. In this case, Ockey has allegedly ignored the pleas of the children and has informed them that she will be representing what she thinks they would want if they had “mature reasoning.”  The minors in this case are ages 16, 14, 12 and 10-years old - all are bright, articulate and thriving in all areas of life. Two of the children have been forced into a 50-50 custody split against their wishes and two of the children are refusing to see their father at all.

I was able to obtain transcripts which appear to be in line with everything we know about the reunification industry. This is a very lucrative industry where children's rights are trumped by parental rights, even when there are strong allegations or findings of abuse.

These three clips are from the recordings captured by the minors during their meetings with Celia Ockey:

Celia Ockey: We have a lot of literature that says children need to have a relationship with both parents. They thrive better when they have a relationship with both parents. 

Minor: Normally I would say that's true. But, um, when he, when he's abusive, I feel like that's a lot different.

Celia Ockey: So often, especially in juvenile court, where the children have been, there's been physical abuse, horrific abuse, the children and families work through it and try to establish a relationship. It might be supervised all the time, but the court is gonna be really careful that the children are safe, both physically and emotionally. 

Minor: If they really cared about that, then they would not ever have us go over there. 'cause they would see how bad it is for us. 

Later in that same conversation:

Minor: So you said we have, normally that we have to thrive, um, with both of our parents, but it seems like we're thriving like great with just my mom. So why are you still fighting so hard for me to go over there, even though that's not even what I want? 

Celia Ockey: Well, that's what the court wants. The court wants to see family, families, children, and parents altogether. They want to see children with each of the parents, and that's not happening. 

Minor: Yeah. Yeah. But…

Celia Ockey: (Interrupting) And I tell you, and I'll tell you why, and there's a lot of studies on this, but the studies show that there's a high risk when children don't have a healthy relationships with both parents. Um, that there's a risk of, of you not being able to form healthy relationships in your adult life. And, um, we want, we want you to launch off into adult life, having, being able to, to navigate this relationship with your dad and other relationships that are going to come along in your life. 

Minor: Yeah. But, but what if I don't wanna have relationship with abusive and, um, mean people?

Celia Ockey: Well, uh, that's <laugh> there, the court understands you don't want to have that relationship, but they’ll be involved. 

Minor: But that's not even in my interest at, in like the slightest, I am not interested in having any contact with, um, abusive people. 

Celia Ockey: Mm-Hmm. Well, we, we don't have actual evidence of abuse from your dad. Your dad sounds like maybe he lost his cool, but we don't have abuse like we see often in the court.

Minor: So you think so threatening, um, hitting, punching and, um, gaslighting and guilt trapping are not abuse?

Celia Ockey: Well, maybe it can be considered some emotional abuse, but we don't have any finding. 

Minor: Well, how is hitting emotional abuse? What, how is hitting someone emotional abuse and threatening? 

Celia Ockey: Well, threatening would be emotional abuse, hitting would be physical abuse. 

Minor: Well, yeah. And he's done that so well.

In a third session:

Celia Ockey: I also wanna apologize if I came across too strong on, we met, I got, um, an email from April saying that you felt bullied by me and I'm, I apologize if I came across too strong in any way. Um, I want to represent you as best I can. And, um, I, I had a sense this is what the court was wanting, um, to just have more contact. So I was, you know, maybe I was too forceful and probing what Yeah. What I like, feel comfortable with, but I kind of felt like I had to do that to, you know, try to get some somewhere with the court. Like she's, you know, what, what you might feel comfortable with if the court were to ask.

Minor: That makes sense. But also, like, I'm not saying this is true, but when you like, talk about the court like, wants this and wants this, it makes it sound like it's like you and the court versus me instead of you advocating for me.

For the past two years, these children have been forced into reunification therapy against their will by professionals in the Utah family court system. We have heard horror stories out of Utah such as the Turning Points reunification camp case, the case of Ty and Brynlee Larson and the preventable murder of 16-year old Om Gandhi.

A declaration from Om Gandhi’s mother, Leah Moses, has been submitted to the court in support of the motion to recuse Celia Ockley. Moses’ declaration cites Om’s Law and states:

Utah Code Sec. 3-30-10 amendments in effect as of May 1, 2024 are commonly named after my murdered son. It states that in cases involving domestic violence, the court shall consider evidence of domestic violence or abuse, and the child's physical and psychological safety. The role of guardian ad litem holds a specific responsibility to consider these aspects in addition to the child's needs and desires and most importantly, safety.

First, it is reckless and dangerous to recommend joint custody in cases demonstrating abuse, without thorough investigation of domestic violence and abuse by experts trained in these areas who also have experience working with survivors of abuse, including using an evidence based lethality assessment, supervised visitation only as appropriate, and trauma therapy. As documented, this case involves both historical and current domestic violence, abuse, child maltreatment and coercive control.

Second, it is unwarranted and dangerous to recommend reunification therapy in cases involving abuse. The guardian ad litem persists in her repeated recommendations, negating the children's clearly documented refusals. By definition, and according to Sec. 30-3-10, reunification therapy must be clinically safe and effective, of which no generally accepted evidence based therapy exists, nor would any forced child therapy with any feared adult be appropriate at any time.

Third, the guardian ad litem in this case has violated her fundamental duties to the children. She has recklessly dismissed the statutory guidelines of 30-3-10 and is no longer in a position to successfully represent her clients after numerous violations of trust where she has attempted to ignore and dismiss them as experts in their own experience, especially in their recounting abuse where neither she nor the respondent was present.

CALL TO ACTION:

On Monday, August 19, 2024, there will be a hearing in front of Commissioner Christina Wilson and we are asking for those in Utah to attend this hearing. We know that unscrupulous professionals tend to sit up a little straighter when all eyes are watching. We've seen cases turn around whenever we shine a spotlight and organize court watches - and we have also seen the negative affects of this such as sealed court orders or proceedings. When a judicial officer moves to seal a case or issues gag orders, it is confirmation of collusion and corruption. At this time, the case remains open to the public so it's important that we all come together and bring our collective lights. We want them to know that the whole world is watching - children should not be used as revenue streams for those in the reunification industry.

Information about this hearing:

Date: 08/19/2024

Time: 03:00 p.m. (Mountain Time)

SECOND DISTRICT COURT

Location: Courtroom 3

800 WEST STATE STREET

FARMINGTON, UT 84025