Diane Van Ness - Guadrdian Ad Litem Legal extortion unprofessional discriminatory lies to the court without evidence entered threatens and falsely accuses if she is not on the court record does it privately to intimidate Miami Florida

Dear All:

Did you see the following post by Parentsspeakoutmiami? It's listed as a separate report. Let's join forces and put an end to this white collar crime performed behind this straight-faced individual. Here is the post:

LATE-NIGHT EXTORTION, HOLDING CHILDREN HOSTAGE FOR MONEY
This is the most important email feed I have ever subscribed to! I've waited a long time to hear from other people, who are now coming forward.

Diane Van Ness engages in severe extortion tactics. She literally holds children for ransom as she awaits large payments to herself which the parents, often innocent and not abusive, cannot afford. And so, for years, these children and parents are never reunited, to the children's detriment and the parent's despair. She then points the finger at the parent's despair and says, 'You see, that parent is incompetent!' But she never divulges the source of the despair, the threats, the money, the late-night threats, the letters...

We parents have all records of her countless letters and emails that give detailed extortion demands, in writing. We do not know what would drive an attorney, who should know better, to put something like this in writing. But she did, and we have it. Our attorneys have it. And our attorneys are some of the most prominent in Miami.

The only ones who don't have the evidence are the judges. This is because, as the other writers here have stated, she files everything as non-evidentiary and blocks any and all due process toward any evidentiary hearing one might attempt.

We also have all the bank records.

While we do not have any proof of her physically pinning us toward the wall, outside the courtroom, demanding money or she will report what we 'might regret,' we do have thousands of pages of concrete, indisputable evidence.

While I do not see any record of the GAL award she claims to have won in her rebuttal on this site, I do know that any person that nominated her from her circle of friends at UM where she works, and from her circle of judge friends, never saw any of this extortion evidence.

It is our hope that now that people are brave enough to come forward, the evidence will speak for itself.

If anyone else has subscribed to this email feed, please feel comfortable to come forward. Your concerns will be taken seriously by not only us but the legal professionals who have experienced her bizarre wrath first-hand.

You are now in good hands. We look forward to hearing from you.

Parentsspeakoutmiami
Miami, Florida
U.S.A.

Yes, LovingMom18, you are very right. I, too, want to clarify my posting.

What I wrote is factual. When I wrote that Diane is "a fraud," I was expressing my personal opinion. I will re-word it as follows:

Diane Van Ness "commits fraudulent behaviors." For this, I have hundreds of pages of documents, bank records, letters, court docs, reports, and witnesses. I would be happy to come forward with all of it if ever asked to do so in an investigation.

It was also my personal opinion when I used terms such as "psychotic," "malignant narcissism," and "evil." I will re-word these and similar words by stating that her own behaviors mimic those of people like this, and that people have expressed grave concern over her ability to be an objective professional due to these behaviors, and that I hereby express grave concern.

I have everything in writing, and am happy to cooperate.

I hereby clarify the following:

Everything I stated is factual and has extensive documentation and witnesses as proof. However, my adjectives such as "bizarre, delusional, and paranoid," are adjectives that describe my personal opinion. In addition, it is only my personal opinion when I use the description"mentally ill" based on Diane Van Ness' behaviors, behaviors of which I and multiple witnesses also have in writing.

Diane Van Ness did this to me, too. I have all the documentation in the world.

She demanded money that I could not afford. So, she cut me off from my children. Even on Christmas, birthdays, holidays...

Then, she filed a non-evidentiary status report with the court that stated that I have cancelled all future visits with my children. That I've abandoned them. It was devastating.

I was shocked. Everyone was shocked. I had been BEGGING her to PLEASE let me see my children! I have it all in writing!

I tried to report her to the professionals on the case, but she just kept telling them that I must be mentally ill and that she'll have a psych eval done on me to find out why I'm "making this up."

Then she never had any psych eval done.

So I waited and waited for it. And I paid and paid and paid her. For years.

She sabotaged virtually every move my attorney made to get me in front of a judge with this information.

Diane writes here about these cases being high conflict and her job being thankless. As if that's why these writers are coming forward? NO! I for one am coming forward so that her smokescreen, as one writer put it, can be blown away and the real Diane, not the one who teaches at UM and not the one with a couple of powerful friends and colleagues, can be exposed for what she does... so that future families cannot be ruined by her.

How scary that she actually lectures on this topic. She must believe that lecturing on guardianship absolves her of her own actions. But, the writer was right, that is just a smokescreen.

Please do not be in a hurry to believe this woman. Please be careful. These are children she's dealing with... Ours!

Diane Van Ness did this to me, too. I have all the documentation in the world.

She demanded money that I could not afford. So, she cut me off from my children. Even on Christmas, birthdays, holidays...

Then, she filed a non-evidentiary status report with the court that stated that I have cancelled all future visits with my children. That I've abandoned them. It was devastating.

I was shocked. Everyone was shocked. I had been BEGGING her to PLEASE let me see my children! I have it all in writing!

I tried to report her to the professionals on the case, but she just kept telling them that I must be mentally ill and that she'll have a psych eval done on me to find out why I'm "making this up."

Then she never had any psych eval done.

So I waited and waited for it. And I paid and paid and paid her. For years.

She sabotaged virtually every move my attorney made to get me in front of a judge with this information.

Diane writes here about these cases being high conflict and her job being thankless. As if that's why these writers are coming forward? NO! I for one am coming forward so that her smokescreen, as one writer put it, can be blown away and the real Diane, not the one who teaches at UM and not the one with a couple of powerful friends and colleagues, can be exposed for what she does... so that future families cannot be ruined by her.

How scary that she actually lectures on this topic. She must believe that lecturing on guardianship absolves her of her own actions. But, the writer was right, that is just a smokescreen.

Please do not be in a hurry to believe this woman. Please be careful. These are children she's dealing with... Ours!

Diane Van Ness did this to me, too. I have all the documentation in the world.

She demanded money that I could not afford. So, she cut me off from my children. Even on Christmas, birthdays, holidays...

Then, she filed a non-evidentiary status report with the court that stated that I have cancelled all future visits with my children. That I've abandoned them. It was devastating.

I was shocked. Everyone was shocked. I had been BEGGING her to PLEASE let me see my children! I have it all in writing!

I tried to report her to the professionals on the case, but she just kept telling them that I must be mentally ill and that she'll have a psych eval done on me to find out why I'm "making this up."

Then she never had any psych eval done.

So I waited and waited for it. And I paid and paid and paid her. For years.

She sabotaged virtually every move my attorney made to get me in front of a judge with this information.

Diane writes here about these cases being high conflict and her job being thankless. As if that's why these writers are coming forward? NO! I for one am coming forward so that her smokescreen, as one writer put it, can be blown away and the real Diane, not the one who teaches at UM and not the one with a couple of powerful friends and colleagues, can be exposed for what she does... so that future families cannot be ruined by her.

How scary that she actually lectures on this topic. She must believe that lecturing on guardianship absolves her of her own actions. But, the writer was right, that is just a smokescreen.

Please do not be in a hurry to believe this woman. Please be careful. These are children she's dealing with... Ours!

Diane Van Ness did this to me, too. I have all the documentation in the world.

She demanded money that I could not afford. So, she cut me off from my children. Even on Christmas, birthdays, holidays...

Then, she filed a non-evidentiary status report with the court that stated that I have cancelled all future visits with my children. That I've abandoned them. It was devastating.

I was shocked. Everyone was shocked. I had been BEGGING her to PLEASE let me see my children! I have it all in writing!

I tried to report her to the professionals on the case, but she just kept telling them that I must be mentally ill and that she'll have a psych eval done on me to find out why I'm "making this up."

Then she never had any psych eval done.

So I waited and waited for it. And I paid and paid and paid her. For years.

She sabotaged virtually every move my attorney made to get me in front of a judge with this information.

Diane writes here about these cases being high conflict and her job being thankless. As if that's why these writers are coming forward? NO! I for one am coming forward so that her smokescreen, as one writer put it, can be blown away and the real Diane, not the one who teaches at UM and not the one with a couple of powerful friends and colleagues, can be exposed for what she does... so that future families cannot be ruined by her.

How scary that she actually lectures on this topic. She must believe that lecturing on guardianship absolves her of her own actions. But, the writer was right, that is just a smokescreen.

Please do not be in a hurry to believe this woman. Please be careful. These are children she's dealing with... Ours!

Yes, yes, yes, and yes! The above people are stating the truth.

Diane Van Ness violates every GAL Statute in Florida Chapter 61.401-405.

Here are the specific Statutes she willfully violated, multiple times:

61.401; 61.402; 61.403, Numbers 1-8; 61.404; 61.405.

Please note that regarding 61.405, a guardian ad litem's immunity is not absolute.

So, I encourage more people to come forward and not be afraid any longer. You have the truth and thousands of pages of concrete documentation on your side.

White collar criminality at the cost of families and children will not be tolerated any longer.

What a shame that this woman teaches at University of Miami School of Law. She places herself as an example in front of our finest young adults, then shuts the door at night and terrorizes families and professionals alike.

Nobody should be allowed to get away with this any longer.

The above writers are stating the truth, because Diane Van Ness is anything but pro bono! I read Diane's rebuttal, and am thrilled that people are finally speaking up!

Diane Van Ness charged my family $20,000 in ONE MONTH! To a family that earned less than $50,000 per year!

When I had to borrow money just to pay her retainer, and the retainer was already court-ordered by her BEFORE she billed us this amount... she reported to all the officers of the court and doctors on this case that this is 'proof' that I am an incompetent parent because I am 'getting other people to pay my bills.'

It was shocking and detrimental to my case. I had never in my life borrowed money to pay my bills. Did I have a choice after what she billed us right after she was court-ordered onto our case?

She did not qualify her statements to the officers of the court by saying that I had an extraordinary international career that had spanned at least 25 years. That I was highly successful and independent, and know how to earn a deeply meaningful and productive living to support my family. Instead, she chose for some reason to state that I was some welfare mom acting like a professional victim. It was sickening. It was the complete opposite of what I am.

It was never clear why she chose to report the very opposite when, in fact, she knew the truth... And when she was aware of the detrimental effect it had on my case.

A guardian ad litem is required by Florida Statute to prove that her fees are reasonable. Diane, however, continued these financial antics for years, taking every penny I earned. My attorney filed for relief, but Diane blocked every attempt at financial relief. I finally had to pay her to get off my case. Literally pay her.

Then, in her rebuttal here, she calmly states the manner in which guardian ad litemship should be handled?

Her rebuttal is eerie and surreal.

Dianne is a lying, cheating bit@!, she cannot be trusted at all, of course she is a lawyer so what do you expect! She will steal your money, lie about you behind your back

I signed up to receive any and all reports about Diane Van Ness over two years ago. Thank g-d, people are finally starting to come forward. It's been a long wait. This is a very powerful woman. People have been shut into silence by her incessant threats, including financial threats, and other vindictive ways she would harm them, including not being allowed to see their own children, and including threatening the professionals with their practices and their reputations.

It's fairly easy to have a good rating. Any and all complaints against Diane Van Ness get dismissed right away, largely through her own connections. She, herself, sits on some of these ethics committees, if that gives you any insight.

If a parent has to pay Diane Van Ness $40,000 per quarter in advance, or he is not allowed to see his children, does Diane Van Ness consider this ethical or legal behavior? How would she address this question in one of her very few lectures?

If a parent has to pay Diane Van Ness more than he or she earns, and then with whatever money is leftover, he or she can use it to pay for supervised visits with the children (and clearly there is nothing leftover), does Diane Van Ness consider this ethical or legal behavior? How would she address this in her lecture?

If a guardian files false reports, and refuses to file the real reports, including doctor's reports, does Diane consider this to be ethical or legal?

If a guardian doesn't let the parent see the children for months at a time while the guardian is awaiting her own payment, after making her payment fee higher than what can be earned, is this ethical or legal?

If a guardian blocks a court-ordered re-evaluation of a parent for 1 1/2 years - yes, you heard that right - for 1 1/2 years - while the children are literally begging to be with the parent, is that considered ethical or legal? Especially when the only reason to block the court order was purely because the guardian will be shown in re-evaluation that she was completely wrong about this parent?

If a guardian refuses to sign off of a case for years at a time, even though both parents have signed her off, until she gets an additional check for thousands of dollars, is that considered ethical or legal?

Is a guardian allowed to go into a courtroom and state that the parent is not paying her, has abandoned the children, and other horror stories... when in fact the guardian is completely making up these statements from scratch? Is that ethical or legal?

Does keeping up a straight face to these judges change the facts? Does writing the rebuttal Diane wrote here, which never addressed any of her own actions but addressed rhetorical law, change any of what she has done to destroy innocent families in Miami-Dade County?

We do need a change. We need an oversight committee for attorney guardians like this. I hope more of these parents speak up.

And, yes, I agree, there is something strange about her rebuttal being titled 'On Behalf of Guardians Ad Litem in High Conflict Cases,' as if she is their spokesperson. So g-d-like, isn't it?

I signed up to receive any and all reports about Diane Van Ness over two years ago. Thank g-d, people are finally starting to come forward. It's been a long wait. This is a very powerful woman. People have been shut into silence by her incessant threats, including financial threats, and other vindictive ways she would harm them, including not being allowed to see their own children, and including threatening the professionals with their practices and their reputations.

It's fairly easy to have a good rating. Any and all complaints against Diane Van Ness get dismissed right away, largely through her own connections. She, herself, sits on some of these ethics committees, if that gives you any insight.

If a parent has to pay Diane Van Ness $40,000 per quarter in advance, or he is not allowed to see his children, does Diane Van Ness consider this ethical or legal behavior? How would she address this question in one of her very few lectures?

If a parent has to pay Diane Van Ness more than he or she earns, and then with whatever money is leftover, he or she can use it to pay for supervised visits with the children (and clearly there is nothing leftover), does Diane Van Ness consider this ethical or legal behavior? How would she address this in her lecture?

If a guardian files false reports, and refuses to file the real reports, including doctor's reports, does Diane consider this to be ethical or legal?

If a guardian doesn't let the parent see the children for months at a time while the guardian is awaiting her own payment, after making her payment fee higher than what can be earned, is this ethical or legal?

If a guardian blocks a court-ordered re-evaluation of a parent for 1 1/2 years - yes, you heard that right - for 1 1/2 years - while the children are literally begging to be with the parent, is that considered ethical or legal? Especially when the only reason to block the court order was purely because the guardian will be shown in re-evaluation that she was completely wrong about this parent?

If a guardian refuses to sign off of a case for years at a time, even though both parents have signed her off, until she gets an additional check for thousands of dollars, is that considered ethical or legal?

Is a guardian allowed to go into a courtroom and state that the parent is not paying her, has abandoned the children, and other horror stories... when in fact the guardian is completely making up these statements from scratch? Is that ethical or legal?

Does keeping up a straight face to these judges change the facts? Does writing the rebuttal Diane wrote here, which never addressed any of her own actions but addressed rhetorical law, change any of what she has done to destroy innocent families in Miami-Dade County?

We do need a change. We need an oversight committee for attorney guardians like this. I hope more of these parents speak up.

And, yes, I agree, there is something strange about her rebuttal being titled 'On Behalf of Guardians Ad Litem in High Conflict Cases,' as if she is their spokesperson. So g-d-like, isn't it?

I signed up to receive any and all reports about Diane Van Ness over two years ago. Thank g-d, people are finally starting to come forward. It's been a long wait. This is a very powerful woman. People have been shut into silence by her incessant threats, including financial threats, and other vindictive ways she would harm them, including not being allowed to see their own children, and including threatening the professionals with their practices and their reputations.

It's fairly easy to have a good rating. Any and all complaints against Diane Van Ness get dismissed right away, largely through her own connections. She, herself, sits on some of these ethics committees, if that gives you any insight.

If a parent has to pay Diane Van Ness $40,000 per quarter in advance, or he is not allowed to see his children, does Diane Van Ness consider this ethical or legal behavior? How would she address this question in one of her very few lectures?

If a parent has to pay Diane Van Ness more than he or she earns, and then with whatever money is leftover, he or she can use it to pay for supervised visits with the children (and clearly there is nothing leftover), does Diane Van Ness consider this ethical or legal behavior? How would she address this in her lecture?

If a guardian files false reports, and refuses to file the real reports, including doctor's reports, does Diane consider this to be ethical or legal?

If a guardian doesn't let the parent see the children for months at a time while the guardian is awaiting her own payment, after making her payment fee higher than what can be earned, is this ethical or legal?

If a guardian blocks a court-ordered re-evaluation of a parent for 1 1/2 years - yes, you heard that right - for 1 1/2 years - while the children are literally begging to be with the parent, is that considered ethical or legal? Especially when the only reason to block the court order was purely because the guardian will be shown in re-evaluation that she was completely wrong about this parent?

If a guardian refuses to sign off of a case for years at a time, even though both parents have signed her off, until she gets an additional check for thousands of dollars, is that considered ethical or legal?

Is a guardian allowed to go into a courtroom and state that the parent is not paying her, has abandoned the children, and other horror stories... when in fact the guardian is completely making up these statements from scratch? Is that ethical or legal?

Does keeping up a straight face to these judges change the facts? Does writing the rebuttal Diane wrote here, which never addressed any of her own actions but addressed rhetorical law, change any of what she has done to destroy innocent families in Miami-Dade County?

We do need a change. We need an oversight committee for attorney guardians like this. I hope more of these parents speak up.

And, yes, I agree, there is something strange about her rebuttal being titled 'On Behalf of Guardians Ad Litem in High Conflict Cases,' as if she is their spokesperson. So g-d-like, isn't it?

Diane Van Ness' rebuttal is nothing short of shocking.

Diane Van Ness is NOT a pro bono guardian ad litem! She is yet again attempting to hide her endless extortion which leaves families homeless. Pay her over 100% of your salary or you don't see your children! That's extortion and against all Florida GAL statutes.

Diane does not state in her rebuttal that she has not practiced (commercial litigation) in many years. She was thrown out of that arena after destroying her own reputation. She works out of her home a few hours a week, for only half the year, and only on GAL cases.

Diane does not state in her rebuttal that the supposed 'Award' she 'won' was given by the very university where she teaches, so she was able to nominate herself via her friends and contacts in order to make herself look good. This was an objective award bestowed upon her by those who know her antics.

Diane does not state in her rebuttal that she refuses to leave a case for years at a time, refuses any and all contact with the parent, engages in late night screaming phone calls and nasty hand-written letters demanding money, and will not let a parent see his or her own children until she is paid in full, even when she is on vacation much of the year.

Diane does not state in her rebuttal that she fabricates her own quotes and paraphrases by professionals, filing in a court of law that these doctors stated claims against these parents, when in fact, they all insist they never said any such thing.

Diane does not state in her rebuttal that she files everything as non-evidentiary so that nobody can refute anything she does, and so that the judges never find out what she is doing financially.

Diane does not state in her rebuttal that if you dare file anything as an eivdentiary hearing so that the truth be known, she stops all parental contact with the children, which is so painful that the parent finally must give in. She simultaneously threatens the attorneys and doctors with their own practices and reputations so that they, too, decide to stay low key.

As with people with a particular clinical mindset, Diane presents here as the 'spokesperson' for how things should be done well, as if she is the patron saint of guardian ad litemship. She titles her response, '...On Behalf of All GAL's in High Conflict Cases...' Does that sainthood mindset ring a bell? This is yet another example of her modus.

Her mask should not be allowed to stay on forever. Thankfully, there is freedom of speech that allows websites like this to prevent further fraudulent activity.

I was unable to find any evidence that Diane Van Ness ever won this award, while prior winners are listed all over the Internet. I could be wrong but cannot find it.

The REAL winner of this award is Jacqueline Valdespino, Esq. She is arguably the greatest expert in the State of Florida on guardian ad litemship. She has won not one but numerous awards in guardian ad litemship, and, according to prominent Miami attorneys, basically "wrote the book" on the subject of guardians ad litem, and even wrote the Florida Statutes regarding the same!

The question becomes, then, what would Jacqueline Valdespino say about the tactics of Diane Van Ness? I am not referring to Diane's perfectly verbose rebuttal here, but rather her first-hand knowledge and experience with Diane Van Ness and her GAL cases, as well as her possible review of some of these other cases that parents are now speaking up about?

Let's leave the rhetoric aside, and get the professional information from the true expert. By "expert," we are not requesting that a close personal friend and colleague of Diane write to us. We already know she is political and does one thing and then closes the door and commits extortion. We want a genuine expert who is objective.

Sounds like the top person in the entire State of Florida would fit this bill.

Regarding Diane Van Ness' claim that she won this guardian ad litem award, I have searched and searched, even called the University of Miami Law School who gives this award, and have not found any evidence that Diane Van Ness ever won this award. Other annual winners are proudly and prominently displayed in a variety of venues on the Internet. Maybe she can document that she genuinely won this?

In addition, I would be curious to know the nomination process, in fact the entire process, for receiving this award. As we all know, Diane teaches at the university that gives out this award (not a tenured professor, just teaches a class or two for extra income since she no longer practices). Does it wreak of nepotism to be nominated for this award by the very friends and colleagues she hangs out with at the coffee machine for twenty years? Is that objective?

Further, who votes on the nomination? Every judge in the 11th circuit court, as she claims? She only appears in front of one or two of them! She is hand-fed these GAL cases by one or two of the same judges... only appears in front of Judge Muir or Karlan, for years at a time! She does not circulate judges!

So, these other judges who supposedly voted for her for this alleged award... Did they ever know her? Did she ever try one of her GAL cases in front of them? Did a parent even ONCE get any evidence in front of them at her 100% non-evidentiary hearings?

I believe the answer to all of the above is an astounding NO!

Diane Van Ness is Miami's best kept secret. Only those who have experienced her first-hand know her truth. The rest is a smoke-screen she puts up as the consummate professional and the god-like spokesperson for all GAL's out there. Call it politics or call it something more clinical... Just be very careful of this woman.

It is tragic that this supposed lawyer's rebuttal talks so dryly and logically about reasonable fees, contact with the family members, professional referrals, protection of confidentiality, and staying on a case for only a year. This woman is either protecting herself or is psychotic.

Diane Van Ness stayed on cases for several years, refusing any and all contact with the parent, the parent's attorney, and virtually everybody on the parent's contact list. Instead, she concocted her own bizarre stories and filed them in a court of law as if they were the truth. Virtually every professional she quoted and paraophrased in her reports insisted they never said any such thing and that she is perjuring via their name. Can they all be wrong?

Reasonable fees? She court-ordered over 100% of one family's income, including while she was on vacation four months out of the year, leaving one parent homeless. She then used the parent's homelessness against her, in spite of the fact that Diane, herself, rendered her that way, and in spite of the fact that the parent was working 7 days a week in her professional field, just to keep up with Diane's payment demands.

Diane then would not allow the parent to see her children for months at a time, claiming the mother could not "afford" it.

Protection of confidentiality? Diane Van Ness demanded psychiatric reports about parents and then filed them in court as public records. This was not as due process, but rather to spite the parent who was trying to report the extortion, claiming the parent is mentally ill and fabricating the extortion stories.

Contact with family? Diane refused any and all contact with the parent and her attorney. She also refused any and all contact with the children's psychologist and virtually everybody on the parent's contact list.

Staying on a case for one year? Diane would not leave this case for years, while she drained the family's money and traumatized the children. Even after both parents signed her off the case as peer statute, she would not sign off the case until a very large check was written out to her "within three hours."

Diane Van Ness is brilliant, for lack of a better word. She files everything as non-evidentiary. You can come to court with bank statements, doctor reports, even her own emails proving her financial demands and threats to cut off the children if not paid... But all for naught. She will scream "Non-Evidentiary" all over the place and not allow any of it to be brought before the judge.

Then she has the nerve to brag here about her guardian ad litem award voted on by the judges? She concocts and controls her own cases! She won't let the judges see the evidence of her extortion and fraud!

This woman is dangerous, keenly manipulative, and, in my opinion, outright psychotic. Her malignant narcissism is known in some circles as "evil."

She has to be joking!!! True to her macchavellian nature, Diane Van Ness has yet again attempted to act extraordinarily "professional" due to her own need to manipulate her own childhood issues. I, too, was destroyed by this woman, as have been many other innocent parents I have spoken with, and I back up everything this other parent reported here. Diane extorted money from me for at least 3 years, leaving me homeless, in spite of the fact that I was working 7 days a week, winning international awards in my field, ironically, working with children. Her bizarre, delusional, and paranoid stories about alleged abuse were a shock to the entire professional community, including my children's own psychologist, whom she REFUSED TO CONTACT for years, in spite of the fact that he was Chief of Psychology at Miami Children's Hospital. He has called her reports "sick and bizarre." In fact, she never contacted a single person on my contact list.. So much for objectivity. Instead, she had regular and highly paid contact with an FBI officer/cop who was posing as the children's alleged "stepmother." Let me and others reassure you that any and all attempts at remedial action were null for all those years, in spite of all guardian ad litem statutes. Diane continued to report to the Court that I wasn't paying her, wasn't paying child support, and the like, as if she had free reign to the "truth," simply because she was friends with the judge. I had, in fact, paid and, believe me, overpaid. She knew that I did not have a penny to my name to constantly fight in a court of law her bizarre reports about alleged child abuse, lack of payment, lack of showing up for visits, and all her other paranoid claims. I was earning a teacher's salary, for goodness sake. Virtually everybody on my case, including professionals, believed she was, in their constitutionally protected opinion, mentally ill. This included psychologists, psychiatrists, lawyers, principals, teachers, and the like, who incessantly complained that she was perjuring reports and quoting and paraphrasing them about THINGS THEY NEVER SAID. They were furious! But she blocked everybody's attempt at a hearing, filing emergency hearings and NON-EVIDENTIARY STATUS CONFERENCES instead, in which nobody except for her is allowed to present any evidence. This, mind you, was at the cost of innocent children. Diane talks about investigations and home visits... But let me reassure you... She never came to my loving, child-centered home once, while regularly visiting the home of some FBI cop who was posing as the alleged stepmother. This FBI cop wrote out large sums of checks to her on a regular basis. I, on the other hand, the innocent mother of a domestic violence abuser, was a teacher and could only pay her what I could out of sheer honesty. It didn't matter how much I begged, on hands and knees, to see my children, the children I never abused,... She would not let me see my children until I paid her literally more than 100% of my salary. Even then she would claim that I didn't pay her. She would even make me, AND OTHER PARENTS, pay her WHILE SHE WAS ON VACATION FOR FOUR MONTHS OUT OF THE YEAR. If we then did not have enough money left over to see our children, she would cancel all VISITS! tHIS IS EXTORTION AT ITS MOST EGREGIOUS, PARTICULARLY BECAUSE IT DEALS WITH CHILDREN. WE ALL HAVE DOCUMENTATION FOR SAME, INCLUDING HER OWN DEMANDS IN WRITING AS WELL AS BANK RECORDS. This childless woman is, in my constitutionally protected opinion, so severely mentally ill that she has no qualms about doing this at the cost of innocent children. She remains childless to this day. It should also be noted that she does not practice law and has not done so for many years. She is merely a GAL and debt collector but no longer has a practice, and merely works out of her home. Please be very careful as she will come across as very professional and wordy, as she did in her rebuttal. She is not at all the way she appears "professionally," and countless people, including professionals, including profesionals she refused to contact for financial reasons, which she put in writing, would attest to that.
Believe all of us parents; we have pages full of witnesses that would attest to what we are saying. But unfortunately, because Diane is "friends" with (a very few) judges, she may get high-powered people to "back" her. This is most unfortunate for the innocent children, and the judges have the checks but not the facts.

This 2006 "report" only recently came to my attention. I will respond on behalf of all attorneys who agree to act as Guardians Ad Litem in "high-conflict" family law cases, a thankless but very necessary task to protect children at risk.

I have practiced law in Miami-Dade County for 29 years, and I am AV rated by Martindale Hubble. This is the highest rating one can achieve from this peer review organization and I have held this AV rating since my seventh year of practice.

In addition to my commercial litigation practice, (which is not debt collection) I began practicing family law in 1993, and have handled over 100 family court matters both as an attorney and as a certified family and civil law mediator. Appointed by many different judges in the Court's Family and Juvenile Divisions, I have served as a pro bono (free) guardian ad litem for children since 1980.

In 2000, I began working the most difficult of these cases, referred to as high conflict, which occurs when one or both parents' dysfunction escalates their conflict to such a degree that their children are at risk of physical and/or emotional harm. Most of these time-consuming, troubling cases are fee paid, depending on the parents' ability to pay. In 2007, after working on many challenging high conflict cases, I was awarded the Ray Pearson Guardian Ad Litem Award by a vote of ALL of the Judges in the Miami-Dade County Circuit Court's Family Division. I continue to serve as a mentor to other Guardians Ad Litem and also lecture on the subject.

High Conflict Guardians Ad Litem are appointed by the Court at the request of either parent or when the Court determines that a Guardian is necessary to protect the interests of a child. Guardians Ad Litem are asked by the Court to investigate the family and the childrens' situation within that family and report back to the Court.
The Court uses these reports to make an informed decision concerning the physical, emotional, and educational needs of the child and which parent, if either, can successfully meet those needs.

Generally, a Guardian does not stay in a case for more than one year unless the conflict is continuing and/or so damaging to the children that the Court determines it is in the childrens' best interest to have the Guardian remain in the case to monitor the family and make reports. Even then, any parent or his/her attorney may petition the Court to discharge the Guardian at any time.

If a child is court-ordered into the care of a professional with specialized training to meet his or her specific needs, a good Guardian will try not to duplicate services to the child which only increase fees. Instead, the Guardian will check in with that professional and make periodic reports to the Court while protecting the confidentiality of any treatment relationship.

Finally, a high conflict Guardian will attempt to work with parents by visiting their respective homes, speaking to family members, family caregivers, physicians and teachers when necessary. This is generally accomplished in a confidential setting, with or without the assistance of mental health professionals, to help parents identify and resolve their conflict for the benefit of their children.

If it becomes apparent that even the Guardian can not reduce the continuing cycle of conflict, the Guardian may ask the Court for permission to withdraw so that other forms of conflict resolution can be considered and implemented where feasible.