Or, how to demonize an important book and cover up a genocide of children and parents
Lena Hellblom Sjögren is a Swedish psychologist who made the mistake of writing a book about the damage done to children when they are alienated from their fathers by their mothers.
She didn’t say “fathers” and “mothers” to describe the process, of course; she referred to “parents”. But most Westerners are aware that the both the law and judges favor the mother, and usually rule against the father without evidence, or even in the face of countervailing evidence. This is especially true in Sweden, where feminism triumphed decades ago, and women generally write the rules.
In this case the deck was stacked against Dr. Sjögren. The psychology industry started working against her behind the scenes, her book was withdrawn from publication, and she essentially became a non-person.
Our Swedish correspondent Mårten Gantelius — who is also a regular reader and commenter at Gates of Vienna — says that what happened to Dr. Sjögren reminded him of the cordon sanitaire that was drawn around Diana West and her book American Betrayal. The ideological issue was different, but the methods used were the same. And, in the Swedish case, they were more successful.
Mårten has compiled a batch of material on what happened to Lena Hellblom Sjögren. It includes his email to the chief editor of Dagens Nyheter, Dr. Sjögren’s letter to her international colleagues in which she describes what she has been subjected to, his review of the book, and three short essays from his website (the last four translated into English by the British translator Russell Hammerton www.clearandconcise.se).
First, a brief introduction from Mårten Gantelius:
This post is partly about how an important book is taken down, and partly about the contents of the book.
Neither Lena Hellblom Sjögren nor I are trying to assign any guilt, but only to describe a reality that concerns us all, and where the victims are many. My background can best be seen on my website thecart.se.
Time after time we see how the MSM are covering up the truth. So it is this time. I never received any reply from Peter Wolodarski, the chief editor of Dagens Nyheter, the leading Swedish newspaper. And I wouldn’t have gotten any reply from anybody else either.
Next, Mårten’s emails to the editor of DN, translated into English*:
Subject: Principally important?_Reminder
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014
Hello again Peter,
Am I supposed to interpret your silence as that the things I’ve written to you are of no interest of yours nor DN?
Subject: Principally important?
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014
I noticed that you were a facebook-friend with my old “corridor resident” friend Hans Crona from our University time in Lund. But that’s not the reason for me to contact you, but rather your position as chief editor of DN.
In Sweden today, times are bad for freedom of speech. And the registration of people with “wrong” opinions gives me unpleasant associations.
One person who has been hit by this climate of the society is Lena Hellblom Sjögren, a licensed psychologist and Ph.D, the author of the book “A child’s right to a family life” which was published in 2012 at Studentlitteratur.
After a well-prepared attack from the Psychologists’ Association, Studentlitteratur chose to withdraw the book (LHS has a detailed documentation of the attack.). Now LHS has published the book on her own, but as you know that is not easy.
I have written a review of the book — 655 words — and my hope is that it will be published at DN, along with a description of the actions of the PA.
Who I am can be seen on my website thecart.se, especially under “Latest mischief”. One cannot live on old merits.
If this sounds interesting for you and DN, I’ll be glad to send you the review. Please, email me a reply so I know this email hasn’t ended up in the spam basket at DN.
Forwarded to Hans and Lena Hellblom Sjögren.
PS: You are the first one I’m contacting. Btw, I noticed the brawl the other week about a full-page advertisement in DN regarding a book that describes the consequences of immigration. It seems that DN in this case had the “wrong” opinions?
Below is the letter written last summer by Lena Hellblom Sjögren (original letter in English):
June 9th 2013
Dear colleagues !
This is to shortly inform you who demonstrated support when I had been criticized regarding two cases I had investigated, some of you by sending letters with references regarding parental alienation to the Swedish Psychological Association.
1. My resignation as a member of the Swedish Psychological Association dated the 11th of November 2011 was accepted in a letter dated the 17th of November 2011. I decided that I did not any longer want to me [sic — should be “be”] a member after having tried but been refused to have the statements I had done read by the members of the Ethical board in the Swedish Psychological Association.
2. After half a year, in the beginning of June 2012 I received a formal letter from the Swedish Psychological Association informing me shortly that
a) The board of the Swedish Psychological Association had the 31st of May 2012 decided that I was to be considered a member of the Swedish Psychological Association, and that b) The board had decided to exclude me as a member.
There was no information why.
3. After yet an another half year, on the 30th of January in 2013 a person in a parent’s organization called and asked if I had seen that the Swedish Psychological Association on its website had what this person called slander of me and my work. I didn’t know anything about that, I looked up the link I had been given and read what was called a statement from the Ethical board of the Swedish Psychological Association. It was 5 pages of unsubstantiated denigration and false information, with no mentioning of parental alienation, ending with a recommendation to exclude me as a member of the Swedish Psychological Association.
4. This document, that never had been sent to me, has been cited in four courts and in one verdict until now in both criminal and civil cases where I have done investigations. Those who have cited this web site published statement from the Swedish Psychological Association have argued that my work is worthless, that I am unethical, and my investigations ought not to be considered at all.
5. A judge, a layman judge in a lower court in Stockholm, published a statement on a blog, just after I had witnessed on the 30th of May 2013. This was a case investigated by me in 2008 after which two courts had given sole custody to the father to help the 4 children to keep contact with both parents, but the mother has since then kept the children. The layman judge, a witness for the mother, called the theory of parental alienation a pedophile theory and asked how the publishing house, Studentlitteratur, that in 2012 published my latest book “The child’s right to family life. 25 Swedish case studies of parental alienation” could have published such a book in defense for pedophile fathers by an author who gets well payed by pedophile fathers to help them.
6. I forwarded this text to the editor responsible for psychology, whom I have had a good cooperation with when producing my book, thinking that Studentlitteratur would take action against the slander against them. Instead I got an email explaining that the publishing house had, because of the controversies and that they didn’t want to take side, decided to withdraw my book.
7. I asked to have a formal decision and the arguments behind such a shocking decision. The one with legal responsibility in the publishing house wrote me an email saying that they had been concerned when taking part of the statement regarding ethical issues from the Swedish Psychological Association and therefore had made their decision to withdraw my book.
9-12 July 2013 the Swedish Psychological Association will host an international conference, the 13th European Congress of Psychology.
There will be no mentioning of children being damaged, often for life, when separated from a parent and influenced to reject that parent without any substantiated cause.
After I had managed in 2008, after years of efforts, to have an article published of the damaging effects of separating a child from a loved and loving parent and influencing the child to think that it is the child’s own will to reject that parent, in the magazine for the Swedish Psychological Association, the only reaction was from a child psychiatrist. He wrote: don’t believe a word of what Lena Hellblom Sjögren says.
I feel confident that sometimes in the future this kind of psychological abuse of children will be accepted also in Sweden.
Best and warm regards from Lena
A review of Lena Hellblom Sjögren’s book by Mårten Gantelius:
Title of the book: “Barnets rätt till familjeliv” (“The Child’s Right to a Family Life,” published by 3V-förlaget ). The author, Lena Hellblom Sjögren, a licensed psychologist and PhD, has since the beginning of the 1990s worked as an investigator in custody cases and in cases involving sexual crimes.
The book is 535 pages long. Lena Hellblom Sjögren has a confident style, writes calmly and focuses on the facts, with extensive footnotes and references to the literature. The book is by no means an easy read. If you do not already have knowledge regarding the field of family law, I suggest that you begin by reading the twenty-five case studies, which in my opinion are the “hard cash” of the book. Anyone who does not feel affected by these stories probably needs to take a course in compassion.
Lena Hellblom Sjögren has more than twenty years of experience “in the field”. There are many others who also have this, but Lena Hellblom Sjögren has consistently chosen to show solidarity with the children, the victims and the law. Such people are, unfortunately, rare.
The case studies include examples of how Lena Hellblom Sjögren has worked with the concept of PAS (Parental Alienation Syndrome —the alienation of parents — that is, what happens when a child is separated from a parent or from both parents). In this, she has carried out pioneering work. It is, for example, well-documented that innocent fathers have ended up in prison because of false accusations of incest. Naturally, the children involved have been harmed for life. To me, the mental injuries experienced by children due to parental alienation are as obvious as the Earth being round and not flat. However, it took a long time before this later became acknowledged and generally accepted. It will also most probably be a long time before the concept of PAS is fully accepted.
My main criticism concerns the use of the word “parent”, which gives the appearance of equality between the genders. With only a few exceptions, it is the mothers who alienate children and cause them these serious mental injuries. Something that, incidentally, is widely known. The weighting of the case studies does not agree at all with reality either. This criticism should, however, be seen as mild in relation to the rest of this excellent work.
The Child’s Right to a Family Life is a very important and groundbreaking book. The first step towards stopping violence is shining a light on it, and this is what Lena Hellblom Sjögren does, particularly in the case studies, which are not just a few incidents, but rather just the “tip of the iceberg”.
The issue dealt with in the book is relevant not only in Sweden, but throughout the whole of Europe, to a greater or lesser degree. In my opinion, a shortened version, with a focus on the case studies, would be very suitable for translation. It would be interesting reading for everyone who thinks and feels.
To quote the author’s foreword: “This book is intended for people who, in the social services, the legal system, healthcare, or schools, come into contact with children in custody or visitation disputes, such as social workers, judges, lawyers, prosecutors, police officers, psychologists, paediatricians, psychiatrists, mediators, teachers, and those who are training to enter any of these professions. The book is intended for parents and for maternal and paternal grandparents who are tormented by the involuntary loss of a child. It is also intended for children who have become adults and maybe begun to ask themselves what really happened to them, that is, children who were involuntarily separated from a parent, or both parents, and were encouraged to themselves keep their distance. And in this way lost half of their root system.”
I would like to add one more group: “Young men who have not yet had any children.” They might find this something to think about.
— Mårten Gantelius
Three translated essays by Mårten Gantelius from his website:
The family law industry
The description below might seem shocking to some. However, it is unfortunately true, and it has been so for several decades. This example from Sweden could apply, to a greater or lesser extent, to the whole of Europe.
The goal of this industry is to increase its turnover. In contrast to businesses like Volvo and Stora Enzo, the family law industry does not have to make a profit.
The departments that deal with family law in Sweden’s municipalities are the engine and heart of this industry. “In the best interests of the child” is in reality “the greatest amount of damage to children, adults and society”. This is what the goals of the industry actually amount to.
When you have understood this, the actions of the parties involved become completely logical. For example, that the legal system, with a few exceptions, favours those who break the law and punishes those who follow it.
Other participants in the industry: the Swedish Social Insurance Agency, the police (as a footnote, many honest police officers refuse to participate in the activities of the industry, such as the taking of children into care, though there are enough police officers who are willing to do so!), the Swedish Prosecution Authority, the legal system, the Swedish Tax Agency, the Swedish Enforcement Administration, lawyers, psychologists, psychiatrists, consultants, the National Board of Health and Welfare, the Ombudsman for Children, the Ombudsman for Justice, BRIS (Children’s Rights in Society) — and I have probably forgotten several others!
Organisations such as women’s refuges, men’s centres, organisations for the rights of the father and organisations for the rights of the mother increase the polarisation of the sexes. This is completely in the interests of the industry.
The industry gives the public the impression of acting “in the best interests of the child” and that Sweden is a nation governed by the rule of law. That this should be the case is the wish of all law-abiding citizens.
This industry develops and refines the language of violence. Law-abiding people and their children who come into contact with the industry do not have a chance and are completely crushed. Many — and in particular previously well-functioning fathers — end up as welfare recipients, and the children become, to different degrees, damaged for life. The worst-affected children suffer from PAS (Parental alienation syndrome). The damage that these PAS-affected children will cause society will also raise the industry’s turnover. And there are already several generations of PAS-affected children in Swedish society today! Fully in keeping with the goals of the industry.
A social worker who wants to help vulnerable people and follow the law should not bother looking for work with a Swedish social welfare service. Such a person would be working against the goal of the industry.
An anecdote from 1991: I sat in a café in a civic centre in Skåne and overheard a conversation between the ladies of a family law department. The family law secretary said: “We’ll just take a few more children into care and we’ll be able to have a new position!” On hearing this, all of the ladies around the table laughed heartily.
I do not have the same sort of humour, but they are truly worthy representatives of the industry.
This industry is strong, and it is not much affected by the state of the economy. In times of crisis, it is others who have to make savings. In contrast, the actors in the industry benefit from social crises. They have money when no one else has it and can buy at knock-down prices when the market is at its lowest (this happened in 1992). However, it is not the industry that creates these crises – it is the politicians and the banks that do so.
A woman’s speech to the man that she loves (Alternatively, with small changes: A mother’s speech to a loved son)
The moment that I become pregnant, I have total power over you — regardless of whether we are married or living together. This power increases exponentially with every child we have.
I can kidnap the children at any time and make sure that you never get to see them again. That you took the full responsibility for the children for many years will not help you, rather, the exact opposite. The entire community, with the social services in the lead, will support me. I can get the children to hate you and their paternal grandparents PAS — “Parental Alienation Syndrome” ** — so you can forget any hope of their mailing you or looking you up when they grow up or become adults. You will naturally receive a restraining order and will risk prison if you break it. Even if I seriously injure the children physically, and somebody reports me, you do not have a chance. If the children are taken from me, they will not be given to you, but rather placed in a foster home, which you — in your capacity as the non-custodial parent — will not receive information about from the social services.
I can, without risk, falsely accuse you of assault, ill treatment of the children, rape and incest. Furthermore, I can carry out a number of other crimes against you without being punished for them, such as serious theft. Because you are not a total abstainer, you will also be classed as an alcoholic. In Sweden, there is a considerable risk that you will go to prison as an innocent person. Even if you were to be acquitted, you will be marked for life. “No smoke without fire.”
But you will not get away with not making your payments! The Enforcement Authority will not show any mercy when it come to alimony. They will not hesitate for a second in taking whatever you own, your flat, your summer cabin, or your car, if you do not pay.
If you talk too much about these injustices at your workplace, you risk losing your job. And not receiving another one. In any event, not one that matches your qualifications. If you are self-employed, you will be punished by nobody buying from you — regardless of how good your products are or what value for money they are.
No one will help you — not even your closest “friends”. On the contrary, everyone will attack you like piranhas.
Your greatly weakened finances will make it hard for you to start a new relationship.
Around 10,000 Swedish mothers a year act in the way described above to a greater or lesser degree. Many of the affected fathers have become alcoholics or drug-takers, and ended up in the gutter for the remainder of their lives. Or committed suicide.
No guarantees apply. I can break agreements at any time. And if, for example, a postpartum psychosis — something that affects about one in every thousand women — were to change my mental state, the situation will probably turn out very badly for you and our children.
If you would still like to have children with me, at least you now know the risks, and I have not lied to you. It is your choice.
** Closely related to the so-called “Stockholm syndrome”.
Sunshine story in the middle of the misery
My absolute favourite client of 1992! He rode from Landskrona to Kävlinge on a delivery moped. With a snub nose, looks were not his strong point. Roger from Östergötland was a sober alcoholic, a Pentecostalist, and spoke like a machine gun. But he loved his 4-year-old daughter Emily more than anything else on Earth.
Roger rang me daily, and I was forced to bluntly stop his machine-gun speech. “You can either sign a power of attorney letting me be your legal representative and follow the rules of the game, or you can look for someone who will listen to your monologues.” To my surprise, Roger signed the power of attorney the next day.
The mother — who was also a Pentecostalist — had moved to Örebro with their daughter and refused to hand her over to Roger in accordance with the interim visitation rights that were awarded by Landskrona district court.
After the hearing in Örebro county administrative court concerning the enforcement of this decision, we took the train back again. Roger was certain that we had won, but I was not so sure. When I got off at Kävlinge, Roger jumped onto the platform and cried out loudly: “Hallelujah!! God bless you, Mårten!” Being a legal representative is worth something at times like that.
We won. But this did not mean much. I travelled with Roger to Örebro for the first visitation — 10 am to 4 pm. Without me, he would not have had a chance of getting his daughter out of the Pentecostal pre-school. And I can assure you, it was tough. We hired a car — it was pleasant summer weather and we had planned to go to a swimming area. A woman from the social welfare board had been appointed as a supervisor. We were cunning and put her in the front seat. Roger and Emily sat in the backseat and naturally Roger and nobody else was going to help the girl with her safety belt. I had brought a camera along and took pictures at the swimming area.
The next visitation was in Landskrona. By this time, the woman from the social welfare board had come to realise the extent to which the civil servants had lied to her. She went to Lund and met some friends, and let Roger and Emily have time together by themselves. Unfortunately, she later chose to leave the social welfare board. It was people like her who were needed there.
Naturally, Roger also wanted to have me as his representative in Landskrona district court, in the custody case itself. But here things came to a sudden stop. If anyone were to ask Roger, I am certain that he would state on oath the following remark by Stellan Fors, the district court judge: “Mårten will not receive a krona.”
* Original emails in Swedish:
Subject: Fwd: Principiellt viktigt?_Påminnelse
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 16:54:13 -0500
From: Mårten Gantelius
To: Peter Wolodarski
Hej igen Peter,
Ska jag tolka din tystnad som att det jag skrivit om inte är intressant för dig och DN?
Med vänlig hälsning
——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Principiellt viktigt?
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 00:03:02 +0100
From: Mårten Gantelius
To: Peter Wolodarski
Jag såg att du var Facebook-vän med min gamle korridorkompis Hans Crona. Men det är inte därför jag skriver till dig utan i din egenskap av chefredaktör.
Det står illa till med yttrandefriheten i Sverige idag. Och registreringen av personer med “felaktiga” åsikter ger mig mycket obehagliga associationer.
En person som drabbats av detta samhällsklimat är Lena Hellblom Sjögren, leg. psykolog och fil.dr., författare av boken “Barnets rätt till familjeliv” som gavs ut 2012 av Studentlitteratur.
Efter ett väl iscensatt angrepp av Sveriges Psykologförbund m.fl. valde Studentlitteratur att dra in boken (LHS har angreppet väl dokumenterat.). LHS har nu gett ut boken på eget förlag, men det är inte lätt som du vet.
Jag har skrivit en recension av boken på 523 ord, och min förhoppning är att den blir publicerad på DN – gärna tillsammans med en beskrivning av psykologförbundets agerande.
Vem jag är framgår av min hemsida thecart.se och särskilt fliken “Senaste hyss”. Det går inte att leva på gamla meriter.
Om detta verkar intressant för dig och DN mejlar jag recensionen till dig. Please svara på detta mejl så att jag vet att det inte hamnat i DN:s spamkorg.
VB till Hans och Lena Hellblom Sjögren.
PS: Du är den förste jag kontaktat. Jag noterade för övrigt bråket häromveckan om DN:s helsidesannons av en bok om immigrationens konsekvenser. Där hade DN visst “fel” åsikter, eller hur?