Family Disappeared

Advocating for Yourself, Avoiding Court Battles & Parental Alienation in the Legal System - Episode 111

• Lawrence Joss

Share episode

In this episode, Laurence Joss speaks with Daniel Ryan, a UK attorney, about the challenges and realities of the court system, particularly in family law. They discuss the need for a fundamental change in how disputes are handled, the complexities of parental alienation, and the often negative outcomes of court proceedings. Daniel emphasizes the importance of understanding the court's limitations and the need for better resources and support for parents navigating these difficult situations. They also explore the role of children in court proceedings and envision a more inclusive and supportive family court system.

Key Takeaways

  • There needs to be a fundamental change in the court system.
  • Nobody wins in court; everyone loses.
  • Parental alienation is often misunderstood and mishandled in court.
  • The court system is designed for conflict, not resolution.
  • Children should be involved in the court process to minimize their impact.
  • Judges often lack the psychological expertise needed for cases involving parental alienation.
  • The current approach to parental alienation is overly simplistic.
  • Mediation and counseling should be prioritized before court proceedings.
  • The backlog in the court system exacerbates the issues faced by families.
  • A more relaxed and inclusive court environment could benefit all parties involved.

Chapters

00:00 - The Need for Change in the Court System
05:02 - Understanding the Reality of Court Proceedings
09:41 - Parental Alienation: A Complex Issue
15:03 - The Role of Children in Court Proceedings
19:47 - Envisioning a Better Family Court System

For more detailed information, please click the link below:
https://www.mckenziepicave.com/

If you wish to connect with Lawrence Joss or any of the PA-A community members who have appeared as guests on the podcast:

Email - familydisappeared@gmail.com
Linktree: https://linktr.ee/lawrencejoss

(All links mentioned in the podcast are available in Linktree)

Please donate to support PAA programs:
https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=SDLTX8TBSZNXS

This podcast is made possible by the Family Disappeared Team:
Anna Johnson- Editor/Contributor/Activist/Co-host
Glaze Gonzales- Podcast Manager

Connect with Lawrence Joss:
Website: https://parentalalienationanonymous.com/
Email- familydisappeared@gmail.com

Speaker 1:

I think it is. I think there needs to be a fundamental change from the current way we do it, which we've done for hundreds of years. You know in the court system that when you've got a dispute, you go into a room and you knock the hell out of each other and eventually, some bloke you know wearing a wig, some gentleman that you do not know, who's incredibly intelligent, apparently makes a decision that neither of you may not like.

Speaker 2:

There was a time in my life when I was overwhelmed and underwater. Those days are the inspiration for this podcast. This is by far the ultimate healing journey for all of us. Healing ourselves emotionally, spiritually and physically is paramount to this journey. From this place of grounding we can all go out into the world and change all our interactions and relationships. We can engage people from an integrated and resourced place. This is a journey of coming home to ourselves.

Speaker 2:

In today's episode we'll start to explore some of these issues. Let's begin the healing journey today. Welcome to the Family Disappeared Podcast. Hi, my name is Lawrence Joss and welcome to the Family Disappeared Podcast. Today we have the second half of the episode with Daniel Ryan, who is a attorney in the UK, and a really fascinating conversation about the similarities between the court systems in the UK and the United States, what's challenging and over there and also what the realistic expectations are about going to court. I know so many of us get tied up in the court system and so many of us are, but I appreciate Daniel's candidness about what's actually going to happen, what the outcomes are, the predictability of what's going to happen and also the frustration of how broken the court system is. So really great conversation, a really nice nuance to it.

Speaker 2:

If you're new to the community, welcome Bunch of podcasts already done. If you go to YouTube you can see all different kinds of watch lists that we put together so you can see stuff on therapists or panels or whatever you want and love to hear your comments. Please share. Let as many people know about this as possible. It's a free service and we also have a free 12-step program. If you're interested in that parental alienation, anonymous, great, loving community, I suggest trying five or six meetings to decide if it's a fit for you. It can be a little bit different if you're not used to a community based meeting room, so it takes time for the nervous system to get used to it at least it did for me and a bunch of other great resources. In the show notes there's also a donation link for our non-profit and we'd love to bring more services and we need your help to do that.

Speaker 2:

And yeah it's a lot of talking for me today, so we're just going to get into the show Near the end for me, before we finalized my divorce and stuff with my ex-wife, I had this attorney, steve, and you know he was super realistic about the court system and what was going to happen and how long it was going to take and his preference was not good to go to court and I didn't really know anything about parental alienation.

Speaker 2:

I didn't know the term parental alienation. So I was just trying to move through the process as efficiently as possible and we put together something and came up with a financial settlement and parameters around the children and it felt really good at the time and it felt useful and I just wanted to get done with the court system and at the same time I didn't have enough experience to know enough about the dynamics of what were actually happening and I wish someone would have said hey, go educate yourself, go get resourced, Don't make these decisions until you know more stuff about that. And there wasn't a lot of information around parental alienation out there. So I share this story and that I got through this in an efficient way and I didn't feel as anxious right when I got through it, but the anxiety was 10 times worse because it wasn't super useful, because I wasn't super educated. Educate yourself, learn about the stuff, get support.

Speaker 2:

You know and maybe get support first and then educate yourself, because without the support and other people rowing in the same direction, it's really difficult. And by having more people in my community, I started to learn what not to do. I started to learn what to do and life got a little bit easier. And if I would have had access to that sooner, I think I would have done something different with my attorney, steve, even though what he was advocating for was in the best interest of efficiency and, in theory, for the kids, and it didn't land up being that way. So I don't know if that story really makes any sense, but I'm just saying that I wish there was resources out there. I wish I'd been working on myself in a different kind of way so I could have made some different decisions decisions even though they were presented by a professional in a really useful way. I couldn't fully advocate for myself because I wasn't fully understanding what was happening. So resource yourself, be able to advocate for yourself from a place of not wanting a pound of flesh, not wanting something to be fair, not wanting something to be perfect, but from a place of actually having agency and making a decision that's going to work out in the best interest for your children and as a best of an interest for you, because it's not going to be perfect and it's much better than the messier side of things, even in my case where I try to get through it super quickly, and other people's cases where they've been through it for five or 10 years, like what's the middle path and can we use the resources that are available today to find a middle path?

Speaker 2:

Yeah, we're going to jump now back. I always say we're going to jump. I don't know what that's about. We're going to now listen to the rest of the conversation with Daniel, I don't know. Anyway, here we go. When you get someone that's in the early stages, is there kind of like intervention before starting mediation, before starting court, like go get some counseling, do this. I suggest connecting with the children in a different way. Is there any kind of stuff that happens within your practice right in the beginning stages?

Speaker 1:

that's another yes, I mean at the very, very, very start of the process, I will say you know, once people have laid out their story for me, this is what happened, this, this is why, where I think it is, and he did this, and she did that Once we've done all that over the course of a couple of hours, I will then say to them well, look, you know, where do we want to go with this? Where do we want to go? And invariably, the first thing they will say is I want to destroy them, whoever they are, I want to destroy them. You know, they did this to me and they did that, and he did this, and she did that. Once they've vented all of that, we then say well, okay, that's great, but what about? All you actually want to do is get to the end of this, in order that you can feel happy again, in order that you don't feel hurt, and in order that your children have some comprehension of what their relationship with dad, some comprehension of what their relationship with dad looks like now, what their relationship with mum looks like now.

Speaker 1:

That's ultimately what we're trying to do, isn't it? And they go well, well, yeah, I said so. Is it necessary for us to scar each other on the way, or could we maybe sideline some of the need to beat the dickens out of somebody? Should we sideline that and say, well, maybe that's not necessary? And so I do have this very open conversation with my clients where I say, look, if you just want to fight, if you just want to beat each other up, well okay, all right, I get why.

Speaker 1:

But at the end of the day, in two years time you will have lost a lot of money which you could have spent on your children. You will absolutely despise each other and you will never close that gap. You will live with that hatred within you for the rest of your lives and you will taint the rest of your child's childhood and you will taint how it is that they conduct themselves as an adult. That's what you're going to do. If you want to do that, then off we go, let's do it. If you don't, if you see that some of those perhaps are not ideal, then let's just take a breath, take some time out and think of a slightly different approach.

Speaker 2:

I love how directly you communicate, because what you're saying is super real and actually what's going to happen in the process? There's no sugar coating, there's no like retainer, yeah, like. This is the reality. This sucks, the system sucks. If you're thinking it's gonna turn out fair, good for any party involved, it's not.

Speaker 1:

It doesn't matter how righteous you feel about anything yeah, a comment I make time and time and time and time again, and I will continue to make it until the day I die, is nobody wins In court. Nobody wins, everybody loses.

Speaker 2:

Yeah, and I would also say in court sometimes it's just arbitrary. Even though there is a court, a law and a law to follow, some of the judgments and some of the stuff that comes out is arbitrary at times that you can't necessarily track, at least in the United States.

Speaker 1:

It's true. Now we've got the same. We've got the same where decisions are made, directions are drawn in court. As I'm leaving the courtroom thinking how do you track that? How do you manage that? How is that monitored? You've just told these people that you want them to go and do this and you're going to close the court door and hopefully never see them again. Well, the reality is that's already a disaster. The ink's not even dry yet on the order, and it's a disaster.

Speaker 2:

That's funny and again in a morbid kind of way, but that you're actually getting the courts that are putting something in writing that's going to fail before it even starts. And it's happening over and over and over again and the backlog is getting further and further and further.

Speaker 1:

And we're they, we, we're all participating in creating this craziness it's uh, we are, you know you will. There are too many times where I leave court and I think this court has just spent two years training these two individuals to hate each other and the last thing it says to them is what I want you to do now is go off and co-parent and you think that's just never gonna work, ever that is funny.

Speaker 2:

It's dark, but it's good to be able to laugh about it because it's true and I'm curious about this, like this idea the parent comes in, they want to fight. They've been wrong, bad things have happened to them and you get, this was probably identical thing whether the parent has contact with their kids and, as the primary parent, or the parent doesn't have any contact. They're both feeling incredibly hurt that the other person's incredibly wronged them and they want to get their pound of flesh, no matter which side of the table they're sitting on.

Speaker 1:

Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's the primary carer who's got the children, saying I will keep these children, they are trophies, I am going to keep them. And the other side, who would be that mom or dad, whoever it might be the other side are getting nothing. That is the point, that is my objective. And again you get the obviously the other parent who comes in, who doesn't have contact and they're saying I just need my children back. I can't believe he, she, is doing this to me. They're withholding the children. They're doing it deliberately. I'm going to teach him or her a lesson.

Speaker 1:

So, yeah, they all come in with the same, very negative approach. Now, having said all that, I'd sort of caveat that by saying that obviously, the single biggest issue in court proceedings in mum and dad court proceedings, of course is domestic abuse, and we deal with a lot of domestic abuse and we deal with a lot of horrific domestic abuse and there is no excuse for it, absolutely no excuse for it. So there are occasions where, obviously, my circumstances that you know, the case that I'm dealing with, and there are too many of these is much more black and white, because there is a very clear line down the middle of the room where one side is a victim and one side is a perpetrator, and those are the ugliest proceedings, the most difficult proceedings, the most emotional proceedings, and the outcome of those can often be dreadful yeah, that is a super confusing part when there's actual proof of physical abuse and stuff going on and the person that's actually the abuser lands up with the child like it's such a distorted reality.

Speaker 1:

I don't even get how the court can make those decisions and by the sounds of it is you're seeing those decisions in some form like that over and over and over again yeah, we are say there are some bizarre decisions to get made and during this, obviously this conversation that you and I are having now, we are teetering on the edge of a subject of parental alienation, and that is a very difficult subject area here in the UK. We are behind, very far behind in terms of our attitude towards it, and it does mean that parents who have alienated their children against the other parent leave the room with them.

Speaker 2:

That's heartbreaking and talking about the actual word parental alienation. What does the court system in the UK think about the term? Is it a term you can use? Is it something that you just got to skirt around and prove your case in a different kind of way?

Speaker 1:

Yeah, for years and years and years, most judges wouldn't even entertain the phrase of parental alienation. It just didn't exist. It wasn't a thing, it was a pseudoscience. Don't bring it into this courtroom. That attitude has changed still not quickly enough from my point of view, but it has changed over the years and currently, sort of right now in court they're still very uncomfortable with the phrase parental alienation, but we accept it now. We have very recently had some new guidelines come into the family court exploring how it is we deal with parental alienation. But what happens is that the judges and me, in order to get the subject into the room, you know, we skirt around that phrase and we use alternative phrases like psychological damage, psychological harm, psychological abuse, intractable hostility, retractable hostility. So we use a series of other phrases that are a bit more palatable to the court. They really do not like the phrase parental alienation.

Speaker 2:

And like when you're in a court and there is some semblance of accepting or being curious about the word parental alienation. The court has now decided that parental alienation is a behavior issue.

Speaker 1:

So it is an issue of conduct, so parents who are misbehaving. It is not a psychological issue. And so where you walk into court and you might suggest well I think we should get a psychologist in here in order to evaluate what's going on here the family court in the UK says no, that's not what's going to happen. It is a judge's decision, and only a judge's decision, to test any evidence around parental alienation and decide if the behavior of one of these parents amounts to alienation. So it's a decision now sits with the judge. There is no expert witness acceptable at all.

Speaker 2:

That is bizarre, like they're bringing in some form of accepting parental alienation but yet they're not having a professional psychologist or something evaluated and leaving with a layperson which is a judge. It seems bizarre that there was actually inroads made with no real infrastructure.

Speaker 1:

It's a very difficult one For me. I'm kind of pleased, obviously, parental alienation is becoming more accepted in the court At least they accept that it exists in some formal fashion. But I still have huge concerns about somebody who is legally trained and with all due respect to the judges in this country. But somebody who is legally trained is not necessarily have any psychological input into what parental alienation, how it's been brought about, how it's been caused, what's driving it, what the you know, etc. I don't think they necessarily have all of that, because I think you do require some clinical for want of a better word some clinical input from an expert in order to assess somebody's personality as to whether they are an alienator. But we've reduced it to a much more simplistic in some respects, a much more view, which is parental alienation is just a parent behaving badly and it's down to a judge to decide if that parent is behaving badly.

Speaker 2:

That's so bizarre because the judges don't have capacity to manage all the cases they have or even understand which case they're working on sometimes, and yet they want to give them this extra chore to do to become the psychologist Also, it's like a crazy making movie or something. You're right.

Speaker 1:

And because obviously the shortage of time that judges have got. They arrive on a hearing. It could be the first time they've picked the matter up. They've got literally maybe, if they're lucky, a day, more realistically, a few hours, to read up on the matter, which can run to hundreds of pages, and suddenly they walk into the room and they're going to make a decision about whether one parent or the other is doing something psychologically incorrect. Realistically, that's not going to happen.

Speaker 2:

There's no way. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Yeah no, it's insane. I'm super curious about this new law, this new recognizing of parental alienation. Were people advocating to get new stuff in?

Speaker 1:

You know, legals have been banging the parental alienation door for years, but the court has refused to open it.

Speaker 1:

And so I think the court has really sort of buckled to pressure and said, well, look, we need to kind of accept this.

Speaker 1:

And what was happening was, where judges were amenable to the concept of parental alienation, they were letting experts into the room, so they were letting psychologists do evaluations, and the psychologists were obviously were coming back offering their expert opinions, and the president of the family law courts in this country sat with his counsellors, those who give him the good advice, and they said we're not sure we like putting the power to make this decision in the hands of an expert. We're not sure we like putting the power to make this decision in the hands of an expert. We're not sure that's appropriate. We believe this is an issue of behavior, this is an issue of conduct. And so they created, I'd say after a long time coming. In December of last year, the Family Justice Council, which is one of these sort of advisory bodies to the family court, created a set of guidelines that essentially operate around what we refer to as the three R's. So if a child is offering reluctance to seeing the other parent, resistance to seeing the other parent or refusal to seeing the other parent.

Speaker 2:

That is potentially an indicator of parental alienation, but we regard it as bad behavior and this council that kind of supports the new trajectory of the laws or how they're interpreted or the languaging are. They are like elected folks. Are they just random people that are on a board that are making these really important decisions? How does that work?

Speaker 2:

they're judges okay, they are senior judges wow, just it gets worse, it gets worse and worse. I'm like looking for something like a silver lining to understand the trajectory forward, but it doesn't sound like there really is a trajectory forward within the traditional court system, from what I'm hearing from you no, unfortunately it is getting.

Speaker 1:

you know, putting parental alienation aside, the family court system is getting worse, sadly, sadly, by the year. That's distressing. That's distressing. You know, I operate in this theatre and I've operated in that theatre for many years and I will continue for many years. But when clients sit with me, you know, and they're looking for some glimmer of hope from me or some indication that they're actually going to see justice, I can't offer them either of those.

Speaker 2:

That's fascinating. So, daniel, we've spoken a lot about the court system, about your practice. What else do you want to share with me that feels like relevant, or a topic that we haven't necessarily touched on, or anything else you think might be useful for the community?

Speaker 1:

Over here, the children. As I mentioned already, the children kind of get left out and I have a view it'd be interesting to get your view on this but I have a view that, in terms of court proceedings, be it divorce proceedings that you're going through or child proceedings, I have a view that it's relevant, that it's appropriate for the children to be taken along with the journey, rather than just sort of left on one side and told we'll pick you up in two years when it's over. I'm keen to that. Children should be involved. When I say involved, I don't expect them to be sat, you know, in the courtroom, but I expect them because you know children grow faster year by year. You know Children now mature far quicker than they have done ever before and I think there is an argument for involving them more actively in the proceedings in order to minimize the impact on them of those proceedings, because they're not kept in the dark and I don't know how that sits with what's happening in the US.

Speaker 2:

I think it's a fascinating question and a super nuanced, tricky question. But when you say that they are party in some aspects to what's going on, like in your mind, what would that look like? And like what ages? Is that appropriate? It's like I don't even know how you even delve into that question.

Speaker 1:

You know, as I say, this sort of dreamscape that I have about how family courts should work, because the problem we have is that the courtroom is designed for a fight. You have a guy who's sat in an elevated position and he's looking down on the parties, and on one side of the room you've got one party, on the other side of the room you've got the other. So it's set up for conflict, it's set up for confrontation. So I have a view about removing all of that and putting them into a much more relaxed space to say, well, yeah, we're still going to essentially conduct a hearing, but we're going to conduct it in a much more relaxed space where everybody feels less tense, everybody feels less anxious.

Speaker 1:

And guess what? Next door in the room, next door, are your children talking to them, because we've got a couple of experts, child psychologists, whatever they may be and we're talking to them about what's going on in here and we're getting their insight and we're getting them to say, well, what would you like in an ideal world? Well, I really like it when I do this with dad and I really like it when I do this with mom, and then, once we get all that input from what mom and dad want of each other and what the children would like. We then come into some sort of combined space and I don't have an age limit on this. I believe you can make this age appropriate, from sort of 8, 9, 10 years old. We then bring everybody into a combined space and we say right, let's sort this out, because parents are far less confrontational, in my experience, when their children are sat there.

Speaker 2:

And I love the streamscape that you're talking about and the kids are sitting with professionals with no parents around and talking about what's happening, what they would like, what their experience is. I think that sounds incredible, and bringing them into an environment where they're negotiating sounds super interesting. It's a wonderful thing to think about that. I haven't really thought about much because there's so much pressure on them and some performative aspects and defensive aspects. Would there be an environment that they feel comfortable enough to actually be authentically real as they are with the therapists or the professionals? It's a wonderful question. If there was some kind of framework, it sounds wonderfully healing.

Speaker 1:

I believe it would be, and I take your point that children have to be authentic and so they have to feel relaxed in a space with whoever it is that they're dealing with. But I think in time we have an agency over here who are dedicated to the court and they're essentially the court's social services department. So they're all trained child experts and they work directly with the children. So they go off and see the children and say how are you doing and what's mom doing, and what's mum doing and what's dad doing, and then they report back to the courts. That's kind of an indirect involvement of the children with the court.

Speaker 1:

Because of the amount of time some of those professionals spend with those children, they build up a fantastic relationship with those children. It's really just moving that on to the next logical stage, which is they should be set with those children and say, well, look, let's play with these bricks together, let's do this painting together, and while we're here, let's just sit and chat and kick a few things around, and maybe we'll bring mum in to join us for a bit and then mum will leave and then maybe dad will come in and join us for a bit. It's just much more interactive. It's much more family focused than I've got a good idea let's take two parents into a very auspicious looking room and encourage them, because everybody in that room is earning money Remember encourage them to fight.

Speaker 2:

I'm curious, like these social workers, is it mandatory in every case that the kids have time with the social workers and is it usual that they get to spend that amount of time and actually build some kind of continuity in a relationship with the kids? Is that common?

Speaker 1:

kind of continuity in a relationship with the kids. Is that common, unfortunately, purely because of the length of proceedings. In this country it is quite common for children to build quite a relationship with the social worker, as I say, purely because of the length of proceedings and it's disappointing that they have so much time with them that they build that relationship. But it can be useful. So yeah, and it happens in all child proceedings in the UK.

Speaker 2:

So yeah and it happens in all child proceedings in the UK have the social workers involved to acape the idea that this relationship's already formed and you're just building on something that's already there. You don't have to reinvent it and take in a little layer or two layers deeper. Seems like a natural progression and easy enough to do a case study on it. That seems like that might actually be tangible I think so.

Speaker 1:

I think it is. I think there needs to be a fundamental change. You know, there needs to be fundamental change from the current way we do it, which we've done for hundreds of years in the court system. When you've got a dispute, you go into a room and you knock the hell out of each other and eventually, some bloke wearing a wig although, as I say, we don't wear wigs in family court but some bloke, some gentleman that you do not know, who's incredibly intelligent, apparently makes a decision that neither of you may not like.

Speaker 2:

It's really funny when you say we've been doing the same thing for hundreds of years, you would think at a point someone would change something.

Speaker 1:

Well, yes, somewhere we'd modernize it, but no, we never did. We've never done that. We still use exactly the same ethos, which is, we'll just fight until we get a resolution.

Speaker 2:

Yeah, the court systems out in the United States were actually built at the start of the Jim Crow in the South. They weren't built to handle family court system, but they're built on this same archaic foundation that never worked and is never going to work for family court system, yet they expect it to do something. That's mind boggling, it is.

Speaker 1:

Yeah, it is, you know, as I say, obviously we start with a criminal system, and the criminal system, you know, is about cutting somebody up and eventually deciding whether they're guilty or not. And then from that we cascade down into the civil system, which is two parties fighting usually over money.

Speaker 2:

And then we just thought well, we'll just take those two models. We'll make the family court. That's really funny when you break it down like that. Well, daniel really enjoyed getting to know you and I'm glad that we got to connect after all the little pieces and hurdles that we had to jump through. And what a great interview. I love the perspective from the uk. I love hearing about your firm and how that it is heart-centered and child-centric and you are helping people in a way that not all law firms are helping people, and that you're also dreaming of what stuff can change, because we need more people that are attorneys and people in your kind of position that can help push the ball forwards. I really appreciate the work you're doing, taking the time to have a conversation with us, and are there any final words or anything you'd like to say before we wrap up?

Speaker 1:

I'll say what I always say to parents At some point you loved each other.

Speaker 2:

I like that. That's super simple and concise. At some point you loved each other. That is very useful. Thank you for your time and again thank you for the work you're doing and your openness to have a conversation.

Speaker 2:

I really appreciate it no, no, I appreciate the invitation, laurence. I've enjoyed it. It's been a delight. Huh, wow, a great show, super different and, you know, pretty black, like the black comedy of this whole thing and us chuckling in the end and just hearing the absurdity that these systems were put in place hundreds of years ago and we're still using the same mainframe. Can you imagine if we still had those giant computers from 40 years ago and no one had a laptop and we were still using that same technology? Because that's what's happening in the court system and the absurdity of it is beyond words. I'm chuckling about that and it's morbid and it's scrappy and I wish there was a different way to do stuff and there are some things coming online and some social justice. There was a different way to do stuff and there are some things coming online and some social justice, moderators and different ways to move through stuff. That seems super promising, but it's going to be a slow, arduous journey for so many of us and if you're in the middle of a court case and struggling with the legal system, you know our hearts are with you. And, yeah, take care of yourself, build community resource yourself. Yeah, I wish I could say more about that, but I can't Thanks for coming out to listen to the show today.

Speaker 2:

Great resources in the show notes Come check out the free 12-step meeting. Please share, like email me at familydisappearedatgmailcom If there's any other parts of the legal system maybe that we're not addressing, or other things you'd like us to talk about. We'd love to hear from you, and yeah have a beautiful day.

Speaker 2:

If no one's told you yet today, I love you. It's interesting after finishing an interview like I can feel that energetic resonance with Daniel from, even though he's in the UK and I'm in the United States, but that we're still rowing in this virtual boat trying to get somewhere and we're both wanting to see change and spending time talking about what's happening and what could possibly change, and sharing our experience, strength and hope just to you know, helping the boat keep going in a direction that seems useful at this moment. So, thank you, have a beautiful day and we'll see you around the neighborhood. Thanks for taking the time to join me on this episode of Family Disappeared Podcast. Do you know someone who can benefit from what we're discussing on today's episode? If so, please share this podcast with them and anyone else in your community that might be interested in changing their lives. Together we'll continue the exploring, growing and healing journey. I will see you on our next episode. Until then, happy days to all.