I am deeply appreciative of your support of the Anatomy of a Disaster Series.
Not only is this the most popular and widely-commented upon work I’ve done so far, it has convinced me that this particular style of writing is something I should do more of: the narrative true story with a personal touch and a healthy dose of laughter too.
In the time since the last post, I’ve had many people asking me (bugging the shit out of me, to tell you the truth) when the next post will be coming.
Here’s your answer:
What’s Going On?
When I began the series, I was something I then called “optimistic,” but which in hindsight is better described as “naive” or “stupid.”
I thought the case was over.
I thought I had my ending.
I thought people would do the right thing, mend themselves, move on, and forge new paths of cooperation, compromise, patience, and understanding.
I was, for only the twelfth time in my life, wrong.
(Mr. Patience and Understanding is reading these words and calling the Oregonian so they can report on this newsworthy admission by me)
As you may recall from an earlier part in the series, new litigation has been initiated by Samantha. That litigation was begun after I started writing the series.
I suppose I should have seen it coming.
Regardless, now that the parties are to return to court yet again, I must take this series offline for now.
Given the response to the work this pains me, but I care about the family and I do not believe justice will be served if this series continues during the pendency of the latest motion.
What Do You Mean, Robin?
My explanation takes us further in the series than we were in the last installment so I’ll summarize quickly:
I was present in the courtroom on the first day of what turned out to be a three-day fee petition hearing so I could continue to report on Samantha’s attorney’s disciplinary issues.
Those issues are illustrated (but not in full – that comes later, my pretties!) by this document:
After Samantha’s lawyer turned the majority of the hearing into a 3-day rant about your favorite blogger, I have decided:
I will not allow that to happen again.
What happens next in this case is too god-damned important to let the DICKs turn the proceedings into yet another circus replete with flying monkeys, smoke screens, and ridiculous distractions that take attention away from the real issues in this case and focus all the attention on me.
Yes, I love to joke that “It’s all about me!” but it isn’t. This isn’t, anyway – most everything else is.
This is about a family in crisis and a party who has somehow seen fit to blame me for years’ worth of trouble in her family because I wrote these (with pseudonyms, mind you):
ANATOMY OF A DISASTER
I don’t blame her as much as I blame her lawyers, for they will do anything to win and to silence critics.
For me to continue writing about this case now, as it continues in what appears to be a never-ending litigation cycle, is giving Samantha’s lawyers fuel to claim somehow Sarah is working against reunification, poisoning her children, and that we are both out to get her.
For me to continue writing about this case now is to allow the DICKs to use me as a tool to further alienate the children from Samantha, because it will drag this mess out even longer. Why would they do that?
Because if Samantha and Sarah find peace and work together toward reunification, there go tens of thousands of billable hours out the door.
The Bar Complaint
The bar complaint recently filed against me by Samantha (and in my opinion heavily ghost-written by her lawyers because she is very smart but the complaint was nonsensical, rambling, illogical, paranoid, and devoid of reason) alleges that I am using Sarah to promote my “agenda” and that she is using me to alienate her kids even further from their dad.
The bar complaint also alleges that Sarah’s former attorney was using me to “ruin” Samantha and keep her from her kids. Lots of using going on!
I ask you all to go back, read what was written, and tell me: are those the words of someone who wants this family to remain fractured?
While you are in reading Robin re-runs mode, take a look at everything I’ve ever written on the subject of divorce.
- Do I not constantly and consistently advocate for amicable divorce and post-dissolution relationships?
- Do I not constantly and consistently advocate for equal parenting time, unless there is a very good reason not to award it?
- Do I not constantly and consistently admonish people who can’t get along and give them very specific advice on how to rectify and rebuild broken relationships for the sake of the children and the parents themselves?
I have developed a reputation as an advocate for divorcing parties and their families. I have written a book (coming soon, I promise!) that will teach people how they can divorce without losing their mind, their money, or their kids.
That firm? The opposite is true.
The bar complaint also alleges I am a bigot against the LGBTQ community, which was extremely annoying to me because the opposite is true.
If you don’t believe me, read these:
Robin on LGBTQ issues:
- Disturbed by Co-Workers Blog
- Not Welcome Home for the Holidays
- Dad Won’t Come to My Big Gay Wedding
- I Don’t Want a Big Gay Wedding
- Gay Marriage and Gay Divorce
I have been labeled a lot of different things in my life but nobody has ever accused me of being a fan or tool of parental alienation or of being a homophobic bigot.
Those charges are patently and objectively untrue, as is Samantha’s allegation in her bar complaint that I committed the very serious crime of extortion.
You will read all about it after I complete what is now about 20 pages of my response, sure to swell to at least 50.
Dotson v. DesCamp was good.
Complainant v. DesCamp is better.
Note my use of “Complainant” rather than Samantha’s name. I will not be using it anywhere in my response to honor my commitment to keep this family anonymous.
Of course, her filing of this complaint doesn’t exactly encourage anonymity, nor does her claim in an email to the Oregon State Bar that once her post-divorce litigation is over, she plans to sue me.
Nothing says, “I want my privacy!” like filing a bogus but public lawsuit, immediately dismissible on its face, because someone called you and your lawyers on your shit and let your ex-wife tell her version of this story.
Ask for the Day: This is Important:
I am asking all of you to be straight (ha!) with me:
Have I given you the impression I am a bigot or a person who wants family members to be alienated from one another?
PLEASE, I’m begging you, leave a comment with your opinion.
I can take it if your thoughts on my work run contrary to mine, but I really need some feedback today, because honestly: