2004 may 26-- dr william albott psych report cop a renting violence agaisnt mom by dad so mom should...

8/8/2019 2004 May 26-- Dr William Albott Psych Report Cop a Renting Violence Agaisnt Mom by Dad So Mom Should Be Sup…

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2004-may-26-dr-william-albott-psych-report-cop-a-renting-violence-agaisnt 1/3



Judge David E. Bruns

RE: RICHARDSON v. DOMBROWSKI

Case No. 96 D 217

May 26.2004

~ocations :vhere the daughter was scheduled for some activity and acting v~ry . ___,~, - x ) . ~mappropnately. ~.$.lGOD {\,ol ~

In March, 2004, Ms. Dombrowski and Mr. Richardson following orders of thecourt, began a process directed at facilitating co-parenting time and cooperation to this

end between the parties. I would note that also involved in the matter was a Case

(Manager, Mr. Lloyd Schwartz. In this process I met with the parties on two conjoint

) ses.sions and one indoivid,ual s.e.,s,s.iO.n.w,ith M,.s. Dom.,b..r.owski. ~...thtl~~_S.essl.... .onsour ..focusI ~~gJ2~.~!.!.9Jlg.rr~I.!gi~.&yi~~~~_~~!.\Y£~l!M.s.;J) .QmpJ:Q\YskiarulheL.daught~. Ms.

Dombrowski was unwilling to arrange the visit at "safe visit"-after my office had

arranged for such a visit. My approach then was to attempt to arrange a session with Dr.

Rodeheffer, individual therapist for the daughter, and then also a joint session with Dr.

Rodeheffer, Ms. Dombrowski and the daughter. This conjoint visit was scheduled for

3/23/04 but Ms. Dombrowski did not appear for the session and later indicated that she

had made a mistake in writing down the time. A conjoint session was scheduled then for~ 4/13/04. On 3/21/04, Mr., RJ~h!!r,gs.Ql2calledmyoffice indicating that a protective order

had heen filedinPlatt-~ountyMissourLirid that he want~d to discontinue visits, he

ir;cticated th~the ipplication" fora protectIVe-order"incl~dedapp~r~~t'ly~~-i~cident which

occurred in my office's parking lot on 3/8/04. Following this call I contacted Lloyd

Schwartz and yourself seeking advice as to how to proceed. During this period I also

spoke with Mr. Hoffman (attorney for Mr. Richardson). Dr. Rodeheffer and I then

", r~"'. consulted and again it was my decision that until we knew more about the protective

'... , order that such a conjoint visit not take place given the limitations inherent in our offices

<) . to provide supervision of the daughter in the absence of one of the parents while waiting

\.~~~) " ) for the other parent. On the 29th

of March my office received a copy of the Protective

.;;--'.)! Order via Fax from Mr. Donald Hoffman. In reading the Protective Order it specifically \ h'b'" pro I ItS:

" (1) "Abuse, threaten to abuse, stalk, molest, or disturb the peace of the

Petitioner wherever Petitioner may be found; and

(2) Communicate with Petitioner in any manner or through any medium"

[emphasis added]

Further in support of her request for this protective order Ms. Dombrowski indicated that

"March 8, 2004--in Parking lot threatened tofind me et kill me ...that I

could not hide forever ... "

In that on this date, March 8, 2004 I had met with Ms. Dombrowski and Mr. Richardson

and thus I concluded that the parking lot was my office parking, I thought this to risk the

potential for violation of number1

above if I were to ask Mr. Richardson to bring hisdaughter to the office for her and Ms. Dombrowski to have a joint session. I would note

that if Ms. Dombrowski is in fact making reference to some interaction which took place

in my office parking, she did not report this to me or to my office staff at the time and

further, it was my recall that Mr. Richardson had left the parking area in advance of Ms.

Dombrowski and have no recall of their having interacted in that area.

Given the protective order issued out of Platt County Missouri, it was my

conclusion that any joint session would represent a violation of the second point noted

above and further should I meet with the parties individually and then attempt to share



Judge David E. Bmns

RE: RICHARDSON v. DOMBROWSKI

Case No. 96 D 217

May 26, 2004

any communication from Mr. Richardson to Ms. Dombrowski this would also violate

both provisions. I also concluded that my office has no resources which could be used to

provide child care/supervision of the daughter should Mr. Richardson bring her to the

office and leave before arrival of Ms. Dombrowski, I shared this conclusion with Dr.Rodeheffer (who shares office resources with me) and he agreed that we could not either

provide such supervision nor could we be able to insure that there would be no contact

between the parties.

I shared with you verbally that in light of the above, it was my recommendation

that any supervised visits between Ms. Dombrowski and her daughter be at Safe Visit as

they were prepared for such conditions as imposed by the protective order. I also shared

with you that I could not think of any way which I could effectively work with these

adults in addressing the parenting issues and thus I was asking that this provision of your

order be terminated pending receipt of this formal communication.

Although there are no formal allegations of Ms. Dombrowski having physically

abused her daughter, the presence of the Protective Order, in my professional opinion

leaves me in the position of having no alternatives to Safe Visit to recommend to the

court for supervised visits between Ms. Dombrowski and her daughter.

I am providing you sufficient copies of this letter so that you may distribute them

to the attorney's and the case manager. I am also attaching a copy of the Protective

Order. Should you have any questions or need clarification of any point, please contact

me.

Respectfully yours,

0..QL, ~;J,-< .~.William L. Alb~t-;;:.;:! .

Licensed Psychologist - KS

[Dombro\vski v Richardson letr I

2004 may 26-- dr william albott psych report cop a renting violence agaisnt mom by dad so mom should...

Documents