The following is something I believe some people would wish Frank Report did not publish – a one-sided account from someone who supports Allan Kassenoff. Yet, Catherine Kassenoff’s Facebook posts, her selectively edited videos of Allan, and her choice of documents to share on Dropbox are also one-sided, as are some of the statements and articles of her supporters. There have been a dozen anti-Allan stories on this website and dozens more in other media, some of them mainstream media, as well as social media, some of them buying Catherine’s story based on her word alone and entirely without the normally required skepticism of journalism
By Hannah Friedman
Everyone portrays Allan Kassenoff as a bad husband and father while pushing a #JusticeforCatherine agenda.
But Catherine Kassenoff was a mentally unstable woman turned into a martyr for committing suicide.
True, Allan looked at Catherine’s texts and emails. The texts and emails showed Catherine cheated on Allan.
I enclose texts and emails showing Catherine’s affair with Dan Summers. Publish them if you wish.
These texts are extremely graphic, as you can see, and read like Literotica. They are from Catherine to her married lover, ‘Dan Summers’ – with most explicit and obscene descriptions – both are married.
I think you will agree Catherine wrote the better porn descriptions with [redacted].
Another text group sounds like they want to plan a vacation or getaway together.
Yes, she cheated on Allan with an old lover. Maybe she never got over Dan. Maybe she was unsatisfied in her marriage. But her affair with Dan started a lot of the marital problems.
(She first began dating Dan before she was married, but Dan was married, which she knew. She got pregnant with Dan and had an abortion before she was married. She later blamed her fertility issues on her abortion with Dan and blamed her cancer on taking fertility medication – though she blamed her cancer on 9/11 when she collected $330,000 of public money.)
Later, as court records show, Catherine wanted Allan to set her lover up so that Dan’s wife would find out and leave him.
Now ‘bad’ Allan yelled at Catherine, and ‘bad, bad’ Allan looked at her texts. But Catherine is given a pass for cheating on him?
She was unfaithful. She cheated first. But he yelled, so he’s the bad one?
The Boyfriend Video
In one video Catherine [and you] posted, the conversation is as follows:
Allan: Go move in with your boyfriend and leave me alone.
Catherine: [lying]: I don’t have a boyfriend.
Allan: Catherine, enough with your lies. Go with your boyfriend and leave me alone. Go with your boyfriend and leave me alone.
Catherine: You’re really upsetting these guys [the children]
Allan: Go with your boyfriend and leave me alone.
Catherine: Stop it, you’ve got kids in this room.
Allan: Go with your boyfriend and leave me alone.
Catherine: Stop it, you’ve got children in here.
Allan: Go with your boyfriend and leave me alone.
Catherine: I don’t have a boyfriend, Allan.
Allan: Oh, OK Catherine.
Catherine: So, I don’t know what you’re talking about.
Again, I refer you to the steamy emails I sent you. Catherine exchanged these with her boyfriend.
Catherine is a cheating spouse and lied about it. So, Allan looked at her emails and texts that showed up on their joint laptop?
How is this worse than a suspicious spouse hiring a private detective and finding the spouse is cheating?
Catherine loved to say how Allan threatened to have an open marriage, and how unmoral that was.
Then there was how she treated her adopted child – the eldest.
A Nanny’s View
One of their nannies signed an affidavit describing how Catherine would abuse the adopted daughter but treat her biological children differently.
The nanny wrote, she would “yell at [her] over minor things and told her things like ‘this is why you have no friends.'”
Yet, the daughter did not have friends because Catherine refused to allow her to have playdates with other kids.
The nanny wrote, “I was often asked by other moms to coordinate a playdate – I would always ask Catherine and she would make up excuses.”
Then Catherine would tell her own (adopted) daughter, “No one has asked for playdates because you have no friends.”
The nanny continued, “I witnessed Catherine punish [her] by removing toys and books from her room…. I also witnessed Catherine remove a fancy bed from her room and… only permit her to sleep on a mattress on the floor.”
The nanny included photographs of the mattress on the floor and the empty shelves in her room as exhibits to the court.
“Catherine would refuse to allow the children to play with the neighbors, even though they were wonderful people who had kids around [the same} age,” the nanny wrote.
She terrified [the oldest daughter], the nanny said. When [she] “would see her car pull up, she would stand up if she was relaxing and say, ‘Mommy, do you need me to do anything?’
“Catherine never allowed [the oldest daughter] to eat the same food as the other kids. [She] was never allowed to have chocolate or treats, or even milk.
“The other kids were regularly allowed to eat whatever they wanted.”
“Catherine consistently told me that [the oldest daughter] was a ‘liar’ and a ‘bad kid.’
“One afternoon when the three kids and I were watching TV when Catherine came home, [the oldest daughter] sprung up and sat at attention and asked her mother if she could help do something. The other two kids sat and continued to watch TV…”
“Allan worked long hours during the week and I would not see him regularly. When he was home, it was clear he was scared of Catherine and would do as she said.”
“Catherine would yell at [the children] aggressively at times. For instance, if C. did not complete [her] twenty minute a day violin practice…Catherine would often say ‘I’m just going to give these violins away…’ and ‘You just won’t play again.'”
Plans to Lie
About a year before Allan filed for divorce, Catherine and her friend Cynthia, a lawyer, planned the divorce. Catherine planned to use the eldest’s need for approval to get her to lie about Allan.
Because Allan and Catherine shared a laptop, Allan had access to her texts.
The Fingernail Audio
But long before that, Catherine was thinking about divorce, as the so-called “Fingernail Audio” proves.
16:33:
Catherine: I’m going to be gone. I’m giving up custody of the children.
Allan: No one is asking for that.
Catherine: It’s the only way they’ll be normal human beings.
Allan: No. We’ll get divorced, we’ll split custody, and they’ll be normal human beings. Do you think it’s going to help them when they find out that their mother is giving up them?
Catherine: They’re going to understand because I’m going to write a book about this.
Allan: I’m begging you to stop.
Catherine: I’m going to write a book.
Allan: Catherine, please.
Catherine: I’m going to write a book…
Allan: What will help you calm down now?
Catherine: I will sacrifice everything for them. I will sacrifice all for them.
Chocolate Bar Madness
Then there is the chocolate bar audio.
The oldest daughter is crying inconsolably throughout the audio:
Catherine: [to child] You ate the chocolate bar.
Allan: [to child] Don’t respond. Don’t respond.
Child: I did noooot! (Sobbing).
Catherine: [to Allan] Excuse me? What are you talking about, ‘don’t respond’?
Allan: Don’t be an animal!
Catherine: [To Allan] You are a ridiculous human being! You don’t know how to teach morals.
Allan: You terrorize these kids.
Catherine: Morals matter! Not in your book they don’t. Morals matter!
Allan: So does being a civilized human being.
Catherine: [To child] Go up to your room. We’re gonna discuss this chocolate bar. Go up to your room. Now!
Allan: Take a deep breath
Catherine: Morals matter! Lying matters!
Allan: I want you to calm down.
Catherine: [To child] You will go to jail if you keep this up. Go up to your room. We’re gonna go discuss this.
Allan: I want you to calm down.
Catherine: [to child] Now! Go up to your room NOW! NOW! Walk! Walk! [To Allan] See? Now she won’t listen to me anymore. [to child] Go to your room!
Allan: You treat her like a dog.
Catherine: [to Allan] She is! She’s a liar! [to child] Go to your room!
Allan: So what? You ever think it’s because of the way you treat her?
Catherine: [To Allan] Have you lost your mind? Have you lost your mind?
Allan: I’m so sick of the way you treat her.
Catherine: Have you lost your mind?
Allan: Everyone knows it!
Catherine: [to Allan] Look at you! You’re blaming me? Oh my god. You have done so much destruction!
Allan: When …
Catherine: You have done so much destruction. You’ve done so much destruction. [to child] He doesn’t care about morals. I don’t care if he does. You can hate me as much as you want. I will teach you morals. He, what he’s doing is wrong. [to Allan] Get out! I will discuss this with my daughter. Get out.
Allan: The one that you get out when you tell her that you want to give her back to Florida? [to child] Has she ever told you she wants to return you to your family in Florida?
Child: Yes
Catherine: Oh my god! Now we’re gonna start lying. Now we’re gonna start lying because I accuse her of stealing my chocolate. Now we’re gonna talk about Florida, which is a lie.
Allan: You’ve never said that to her?
Catherine: [To child ] Have I abused you? Have I abused you?
Child: You have said that y–
Catherine: OK, why don’t you go tomorrow? Go to the Bright Horizons people and tell them I’m abusing you. Then we can have a CPS investigation, OK?
Allan: Have you ever told her that? About Florida?
Catherine: [to child] Has he told you that he’s gonna kick you out of this house? Did he call you a fucking retard the other day? Did he call you a fucking retard?
Child: Yes.
Catherine: Yeah. A fucking retard is what you called her
Allan: You’re losing control.
Catherine I’m losing control. You called her a fucking retard. You! You called your daughter a fucking retard. Right, Ally. Is that what he called her – you?
Allan Ally, do you want to go downstairs or do you want…
Catherine Ally, did he call you a fucking retard?
Allan I’ve got to go do my work.
Catherine, I am entitled to parent. Get out of here!
Allan You are not acting like a civilized human being.
Catherine Oh, I’m so sorry.
Allan You’re screaming
Catherine It’s OK to call her a fucking retard.
Allan You know what? I lose my control with her one time–
Catherine Oooooh! OK, I’m sorry. So, you admit that you lost your control. I don’t lose control. I’m upset about my chocolate.
Allan This is you in control? I’m gonna go do my work. [To child] If you need me, I’m downstairs, OK?
Catherine [To child] Oooh is he your BFF?
Allan No, I’m her father.
Catherine No, you’re not.
Allan You don’t understand the difference.
Catherine You know what you’ve done. You are so wrong. It’s gonna turn into crying. You’re gonna turn into crying, it’s gonna turn into crying. Because she knows that you will believe her lie.
Allan: Relax
Catherine I won’t believe the lie, but you will. You’ll believe it. You believe the lie. Believe the lie. Believe the lie, Allan. Believe it.
Allan I’m not believing or not believing–
Catherine Believe the lie! Because it’s all my… I’m the reason you lie, right? It’s me, right?
Child No
Catherine Because that’s what he said. Is that what he said when he walked up the stairs?
Allan I said treat her civilly.
Catherine [to child] Didn’t he say I’m the reason?
Allan Treat her civilly.
Catherine Get the fuck out! You get the fuck out!
Allan Treat her civilly.
Catherine Get the fuck out!
Allan Don’t talk to me that way.
Catherine You get the fuck out. I’m so tired of you.
Allan I’m tired of you.
Catherine You don’t know how to teach morals. You’re a disloyal. You’re an un-moral person. Get out!
Allan [to child] Can I ask you a question? Do you think mommy treats you fairly?
Catherine Oh my god! We’re gonna have a discussion about fairness at 10:30 at night. All I want to do. Get out of her room! All I want to do is find out about what’s going on with the chocolate.
Allan OK, grill her. Grill her. Grill her.
Catherine But now, we got to have a discussion about morality, about fairness,
Allan Grill her
Catherine About CPS investigations, about abuse, about whatever else. [To child] I want to have a discussion with you. You come to me now. You get over here. Now!
Allan I’ll stay here.
Child [to Catherine] Nooo I don’t want tooooo! (Crying) Daddy!!!!
Allan [To child] I’m with you. [to Catherine] Stop pulling her.
Catherine You pulled her! Get up. Get up. Get up.
Allan Ally, I’m coming too, don’t worry.
Child (crying)
Allan I’m coming with you
Catherine [to child] You want to scream like a baby? You can scream like a baby, just like you did the other night. Get in there. Get in there with me here. Get away. I want to have a discussion with my daughter about what happened with my chocolate.
Allan Every time I asked to have a discussion with her privately, you throw a hissy fit. You can grill her with me here.
Catherine No! I don’t want you here.
Allan I’m not leaving you alone with her.
Catherine Oh, I’m sorry. You’re allowed to have discussions! I don’t care what you do. You’re a loser anyway.
Allan Good for you.
Catherine Listen. Here’s the deal. OK. I’m going to ask you one time. Do you understand me?
Child Yes.
Catherine [to child ] Put your hands down!
Child The chocolate wrapper…
Catherine Put your hands down!
Child The chocolate wrapper…
Catherine Put your hands down.
Child I am.
Catherine DON’T TALK BACK TO ME!
Allan Let her answer you.
Catherine Stop looking at him!
Allan Cathy, you’re acting like a lunatic.
Catherine She looked right at you.
Allan No, she- regardless. You’re acting like a crazy person.
Catherine You did not look at him?
Allan No, I just looked at the wall.
Catherine Oh, you didn’t look at him? Really?
Child Noooo (crying)
Catherine: Stop judging me.
French Nanny Calls Catherine a Psychopath
Another nanny, a French au-pair, Laura, posted on Facebook about Catherine. “I won’t advise you to work for the Kassenoff family. The mother is a psychopath who abuses her daughter. They have been kicked out of every agency except ours.”
Yes, Catherine knew she had abused her oldest adopted child and that the child craved for Catherine to love her.
Yes, Allan yelled at times. I would like to know a couple who never yelled.
The Plan to Use the Daughter
Text messages Catherine exchanged with her friend, Cynthia Monaco, demonstrate that she planned for divorce, and full custody of the children for a long time and planned to use the oldest daughter’s need for her approval, and her lying issues, as a weapon against Allan.
On May 24, 2019, Allan, having read the text messages, commenced a divorce action.
On June 5, 2019, Catherine and Allan entered into a joint stipulation regarding interim custody of the children, which required Catherine to be supervised when she was around the children.
At first, Catherine and Allan had joint custody, and divided the time. The one who had custody would live in the home, and the other would leave. They would alternate bi-weekly.
Catherine Removed from House for Good Cause
Judge David Everett
Judge David Everett removed Catherine from the home when Allan read a text between her and her friend, who was also an attorney, conspiring to have the oldest daughter lie about Allan abusing the children!
Catherine texted her friend that she could get her daughter to lie! That’s when Allan went for sole custody. She was going to turn the kids against him and use the one with the lying problem.
To ensure Catherine did not continue to alienate the children, Judge Everett required supervised visits for Catherine.
Due to her mental illness, Catherine abused the oldest daughter for years and manipulated all three children throughout the divorce, including telling them to lie about their father.
These actions led the Matrimonial Court to permit Catherine to see her children only for a few hours per week, always with a therapeutic supervisor present.
Mental Illness
Dr. Marc Abrams
Dr. Marc Abrams found that due to her mental disorders, Catherine could not blame herself for her current predicaments but blamed everyone around her.
Judge Everett, the first judge in the Matrimonial Action, stated Catherine could not be around the children without supervision, even “for a few minutes.”
Parental Alienation
Judge Everett
JUDGE EVERETT: All right. Since this record will be so-ordered, I just want to make it very clear that, Ms. Most, please be sure to communicate to each of the people on the risks of supervising visits that the children are not to be alone in the presence of Mrs. Kassenoff –
MS. MOST: OK.
JUDGE EVERETT: – during the period of time that they are supervising the visits.
MS. MOST: OK.
MR. DIMOPOULOS: Your Honor, if I –
JUDGE EVERETT: For any period of time whatsoever. Yes?
MR. DIMOPOULOS: If that concludes that part of our discussion, I’d like to just bring up one brief thing just for clarification. Do we need to say anything more –
MS. MOST: Dr. Ravitz.
MR. DIMOPOULOS: Yeah, so we’re transitioning, OK, so we can cut there for –
JUDGE EVERETT: Just so it’s clear, when I say any – at any time I mean even for a few minutes. It has to be –
MS. MOST: I get it.
JUDGE EVERETT: It has to be constant.
Judge Koba Finds Same Results
Judge Nancy Quinn Koba [above] explained, during a June 2, 2021 hearing:
This is the problem as I see it: I have an obligation to act in the best interest of the children. And while – the Court made findings a year ago after a ten-day hearing, and the Court believes, based upon the evidence deduced during that hearing, that Ms. Kassenoff does have a mental illness that’s impacting her interactions with the children, OK. And I understand the children are reacting to that.
Vengeance
Rather than addressing and dealing with her mental illness, Catherine’s “strategy” was to falsely claim she was a victim of domestic violence, and her children were victims of child abuse, all at the hands of Allan.
She filed documents detailing the “abuse” she claims to have suffered. However, none of her allegations were true.
Catherine tried peddling the lies to Judge Koba, who saw Catherine’s allegations for what they are – lies – and awarded Allan sole legal and physical custody of their three children.
Catherine also presented the same lies to all the professionals involved in the case – none of whom believed her – including Carol Most (the Attorney for the Children), Dr. Susan Adler (two of the Kassenoff children’s therapist), Dr. Carolyn McGuffog (the therapist for the third Kassenoff child), Dr. Marc Abrams, the first neutral custody evaluator, and Kathleen McKay, the second neutral custody evaluator.
All these professionals saw Catherine’s allegations for what they are – lies.
Allan could have easily refuted Catherine’s allegations by supplying videos of Catherine’s abuse of the children. While he did not post them on Facebook, he provided some of them to the court.
Judge Koba
Judge Koba conducted a two-week trial in July 2020 and afterward, limited Catherine to therapeutically supervised visits with the children twice per week. She prohibited Catherine from any non-therapeutically supervised access or communications with the children.
Catherine had one goal – to seek revenge on every person involved in the Matrimonial Action that she believed led to the loss of her children.
Catherine filed complaints against Carol Most with the Second Department’s Office of Attorneys for Children, and a complaint against Dr. McGuffog with the State Board of Education. She filed complaints against Dr. Abrams and sued Dr. Adler.
She filed grievances against her husband and his attorney, and a grievance against Judge Lewis Lubell and Judge Koba.
Visits Were Unpleasant
Catherine at a supervised visit.
The woman who initially supervised visits said she would no longer supervise Catherine in her home because she couldn’t control her behavior.
After that, Catherine decided not to see the children for 10 months until she found a supervisor she liked and was willing to pay, which required the children to drive a long way for these visits.
Allan forced the children to visit, even though they begged him not to!
As you heard on another tape, one of the children accuses Catherine of lying about emails. The child claims she never wrote the emails and later said she hated Catherine and their forced visits and that no one listens to her about her feelings.
On another occasion, she claimed no one was listening to her and putting words in her mouth, such as that she wanted to live with her mother when she really wanted to continue living with her father!
Just the opposite of Catherine, when Allan never discussed Catherine before the children or said a bad word about her to them!
No False Arrest
These girls were tired of Catherine stalking them in town or at their activities to scare them or cause drama.
As for the so-called false arrest, Catherine knew she had a one-mile “stay away” protective order and didn’t care. She knew she violated the protective order.
Catherine was served on the protective order – but not in person because she avoided service!
The police thought the order was in effect, not knowing she had fought it, claiming she wasn’t properly served!
When you wrote that the police handcuffed Catherine at the school, who called the police and why? One of the children called her father. She was afraid her mother was stalking them.
And Allan had nothing to do with Governor Hochul firing her because of the arrest. The Governor fired her for lack of competence. She was too busy suing everyone and posting the children’s private information on Facebook.
Double Standard
Why is it OK for Catherine to constantly violate orders and continue to post information about her children’s private medical records?
Why is it OK for her to release audio tapes of them without their consent?
Why is it OK for her to only post documents that make her look like she’s a victim?
She didn’t put in her Dropbox or Facebook how she wiped out her husband’s bank account.
There are many things she left out to manipulate people to fight the mess she left behind!
Mother’s Day Contrivance
As for her not seeing her kids on Mother’s Day because of Allan, that is wrong.
Judge Capeci ordered that she could see the children with her mother present to supervise.
Catherine’s mother, however, was not coming to Westchester for Mother’s Day. One of the kids called Catherine’s mother, asking if she would come to see them, and she said no. She didn’t feel comfortable flying because she had a heart condition.
Catherine had no intention of picking the girls up on Mother’s Day. I wonder if she was even in the country.
Some Points to Ponder
So, add it all up.
Catherine was diagnosed with a personality disorder and is a narcissist!
A good man lost his job because a bunch of herd mentality pathetic Facebook followers don’t know how to read the evidence. His family and others received death threats.
It’s OK to do a smear campaign on Allan and cause him to lose his livelihood, but everyone else gets a free pass!
Where’s Catherine’s family? They deserted her because they told her she needed help, and until she got that, they couldn’t continue to have her in their lives! She ignored them!
Allan’s Email Reinterpreted
Why don’t you point out that Allan’s email to her doesn’t say ‘You will never see your kids again’?
He wrote in part:
I feel sorry for you, and while at times I might become angry and frustrated, at the end of the day I pity you because your behavior has ruined your life and your relationship with the kids. Instead of focusing on getting help, you have focused your rage on destroying me. For that, I’m sad for you because you will never get a chance to have these years back.
He pleads with her to get the help she needs!
Suicide is Painful
By the way, Catherine’s suicide was selfish, and it traumatized her daughters. No wonder they called her Catherine instead of “Mother.”
As I said, Allan did not badmouth her in front of the girls. When the girls saw she was a manipulator, they wanted nothing to do with her.
They dealt each day with her endless manipulations!
You are turning a mentally unstable woman into a martyr and destroying a man’s ability to provide for his family.
Let’s pray that other women don’t follow her, seeking their moment to be in the limelight!
She abused the oldest adopted daughter so much that Allan couldn’t let it continue. She tortured those kids. They told her to stop, be normal, and stop posting on Facebook.
As a waitress at a restaurant where Catherine had supervised visits with the children wrote, “Catherine exposed her children to many things that children shouldn’t know by putting so much on Facebook, publicly embarrassing and upsetting them deeply.”
Allan’s Legacy
Allan will be remembered as the ranting guy from old videos his vengeful wife posted!
Yet, his legacy is this: It is truly amazing how well-grounded Allan has been these past three years and through this entire ordeal – and how his daughters are improving – though they are traumatized by this horrific public display Catherine subjected them to – and without telling them!
They learned about it from friends.
But I can tell you one thing – these girls love their father, and he loves them. That’s his legacy. And vice versa.
And her legacy?
No normal person kills themselves to become a martyr.
Oh holy hell! The comments on here! If people could invest this kind of time and energy in their OWN lives…damn, what an amazing world this just might be.
If only everyone would focus on the real villain here- the court system. Families go into these courts when they are broken and need help. Without exception primary caregiver/custodial apparent endure unequal and unbearable attacks, insults, defamation and abuse from non-primary caregiver/more monied spouses. Judges routinely order “forensic evaluations”– and when they appoint unethical cockroaches like Marc Abrams– the outcomes of those evaluations are predetermined. The point is to coerce parents stupid enough to become primary caregivers at loss to their own careers and earnings to give up the kids to monied parents. Why? Because court administrators are telling trial court judges they have to get “settlements”- and you can’t get a settlement if the monied party will demand a trial and appeal. Primary caregiver parents– overwhelmingly women– are being financially and emotionally tortured, verbally abused, socially humiliated and robbed of any dignity, parental authority or respect every single day in these courthouses. If the public could only see, they would burn these courthouses to the ground. When these women (typically, but sometimes men) react- as Catherine seems to have– they are labeled crazy and unfit.
It is time for judicial discretion on custody cases TO END. These courts aren’t fit to determine anything, and the judges, AFCs, “forensic evaluators,” “parent coordinators,” “parental supervisors” and the rest of the predatory racketeering enterprise belongs in prison. LEGISLATORS- DO YOUR DUTY. NY AND FEDERAL INVESTIGATORS AND OVERSIGHT AGENCIES– DO YOUR JOB!
It’s not about Catherine or Allan Kassenoff. It’s about the courts that take families that turn to them for help and deliberately apply maximum, unbearable force to destroy those families for the convenience and lack of accountability of court administrators and grotesque profit of the industry.
This will go on until people start recording EVERY SINGLE THING in these court rooms (and with their own attorneys and every single court appointee involved), post it publicly on social media and send it to legislators, media and federal authorities.
Put and end to what these courts do to families.
Thank you for sharing his side. I’m hope those girls find peace x
Why there is no Family Court Reform in #justiceforcatherine
July 23, 2023 at 1:56 am
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Having been in to Family Court (nor as a dependent or plaintiff) I witnessed many shocking rulings , statements from the Judge . But then I reminded myself I’m only viewing a piece of a larger picture. Same as in Criminal Court , & Civil Court : we only see part of what goes on. There’s a lot we are not privy to in family & criminal court . At times I left disgust thinking shit this needs to change , I get into my car, close the door, drive away leaving my thoughts behind . I have work to get to, kids to tend to & a million other things! I went online this morning to see what’s out there in Family reform & I was surprised to see new laws & procedures have been implemented (unfortunately too late for the Kassenoff family) . There’s listings of services to contact , join to join in the fight even how , where , & the proper way to file a grievance . It’s not full proof but definitely a start ! You wouldn’t know any of that based on what’s been posted on social media! We wouldn’t know that because all that people wanted to accomplish was character assignation of the involved parties . Family Court Reform was just an excuse, a cover up to dabble in such actions! Precious months have gone by & all I have seen are old videos, Dropbox , kids medical records … Robbie Harvey & his many misleading videos the only direction given for helping in Family Court Reform was to relentlessly attack the Kasenoof case , tell you to call the DA office which is a harrowing task since it’s automated , but I didn’t see any advice or lists of organizations to contact to help with change , & new laws to protect families & their children ! That wasn’t the true agenda ! Let’s rule people up & the more I show videos the greater my profit . JusticeforCatherine wasn’t about Family Court Reform it was a platform on a mission to carry out revenge & then slowly morphing into a platform to tell your own story to vent or maybe one of the media outlets will take on your plight ! Nothing , not from this group #justiceforcatherine will achieve any change , just a lot of noise!
that Ms. Kassenoff had exchanged with her friend Cynthia Monaco to demonstrate that Ms. Kassenoff “has planned for divorce, and her bid for full custody of the children for quite some time, and plans to use [the parties’ oldest child’s] need for her approval, and her lying issues, as a weapon against [Mr. Kassenoff].” (Ex. 6 at ¶ 15)). Mr. Kassenoff further explained that “[b]ecause Catherine’s Apple ID was associated with our laptop for years, [he] was able to see her text messages. . . . It turns out that since October 2018, and perhaps earlier, she and her friend Cynthia Monaco have been planning this divorce.” (Id. at ¶¶ 15-16). Before the Court ruled on Mr. Kassenoff’s June 5, 2019 motion, the parties entered into a joint stipulation regarding interim custody of the children, which required, inter alia, that Ms. Kassenoff would be supervised whenever she was around the children. (Ex. 7).4
Unhappy with how the text messages portrayed her, on
[…] Catherine’s friend analyzes the story: Shocking Revelations: Allan Kassenoff’s Supporter Alleges Catherine’s Dark Secrets. […]
The poor children. Whatever happens between the adults (adults? really?) you don’t weaponise them to fight your battles. You don’t act like the evil godmother/father to your adopted child and treat her as ‘substandard’ (particularly in comparison to your own children). How is threatening to ‘send her back to Florida’ any different to Keith Raniere threatening to ‘send (Camila?) back to Mexico without her papers? The Kassenoff adopted child was way younger, much more emotionally vulnerable because of her background, and nobody/nowhere to turn to. That makes it child cruelty (to my mind), and that fact alone has removed any vestige of sympathy for Catherine.
This is Depp v Heard with children involved. Neither of the so-called grown-ups come out of this ‘the innocent party’.
Next instalment in ‘celebrity’ divorces involving a narcissist? Meghan Markle and Harry Mountbatten Windsor? Now that would be worthy of a Netflix series that would surely win both an Oscar and an Emmy.
Hopefully the Kassenoff children have found stable, loving and nurturing relatives to help them. They are the real ‘victims’ of this sorry tale, not Catherine.
Don’t make me cry ! The comment of sending the child back to Florida ! Do you know how many posts said to try to find her real parents parents. Regardless of what transpired BOTH Catherine & Allan will ALWAYS be her parents ! Some said maybe the “real parents” could take the other two as well while others were so cavalier, yeah just send her back ! Their thinking the videos videos are current drew their own conclusion. Fast forward 7 plus years – do they know if the child is stable- happy? I’ve seen her, she’s beautiful, respectful , the younger girls no longer leave her out & they developed a strong sister bond ! In the posted picture the youngest is the spitting image of Catherine !
And yes they have always had stable nurturing loving support!
Impressive is how the school emotionally supports them & recently said they are amazed how far they’ve come ! It’s nice to read of someone genuinely concerned for them . I will let them know & I’m sure it will warm their hearts 🦋
Analysis:
1. The Boyfriend Video: Both partners cheated. It has no bearing on whether they can be good parents. Allan should not have aired this dirty laundry in front of the children. Adultery is not uncommon or a reason to take children from mothers.
2. A Nanny’s View: Although I will give some credit to the nanny’s account that Catherine treated the adopted daughter differently than the 2 other girls, she had well documented accounts of lying and stealing. Catherine was more of a disciplinarian while Allan was mainly an absentee parent. The bed frame was removed specifically because the oldest daughter liked to jump on the bed and Catherine didn’t want her to get hurt.
3. Plans to Lie: Although I haven’t read the emails, there was no reason to lie. Catherine had already documented Allan’s abusive behavior. Perhaps she tried to persuade the child to tell the truth.
4. The Fingernail Audio: During this audio recording Catherine mentions “feeding the baby” so likely Allan recorded it in 2013 – 14. She is clearly sleep deprived, likely postpartum, raising 3 children with little help from her spouse and also working full time. They had been arguing for many many hours and she sounds distraught. They discussed divorce throughout their entire relationship. This was never a peaceful union. Capricorn Gemini.
5. Chocolate Bar Madness: When a chocolate bar is symbolic of much more. Again the oldest child had a history of lying and stealing specifically with sweets. It was well known she would consume anything she could find containing sugar then lie about it. Catherine could have handled it better but she was at her wits end and being undermined by Allan in the video.
6. French Nanny Calls Catherine a Psychopath: The nanny’s are a mixed bag – some loyal to Allan some to Catherine. There’s a long bad history here.
7. The Plan to Use the Daughter: see #3. Allan filed for divorce after CPS and police reports were filed against him in 2019. The Boyfriend Video was filmed in 2017 – 18 so Allan had read the texts several years earlier.
8. Catherine Removed from House for Good Cause: Allan filed an ex-parte order and Catherine did not have the opportunity to defend herself at this time.
9. Mental Illness: Dr. Marc Abrams was disqualified from this case. His “opinion” which was not a diagnosis should have been stricken from the record.
10. Parental Alienation: see #9. Judge Everett based his ruling on Abrams biased report.
11. Judge Koba Finds Same Results: see #9. Judge Koba based her ruling on Abrams biased and later debunked report.
12. Vengeance: Everyone mentioned here was removed from the case for bias except for McKay. There was NEVER a diagnosis from a treating therapist or psychiatrist of mental illness. PTSD, extreme stress, some depression perhaps but an actual mental illness or personality disorder, no. Allan and Catherine had a toxic relationship and the abuse was clear not a lie. It’s called defending yourself not vengeance.
14. Visits Were Unpleasant: Who in their right mind would find a “supervised” visit fun? How horrible and unnatural for everyone involved to be watched like a zoo animal. Of course the kids hated going.
15. No False Arrest: There were several attempt made not just the one mentioned, all dismissed.
16. Double Standard: There is plenty of damning evidence against both of them in the DropBox – neither look great. No real double standard.
17. Mother’s Day Contrivance: Catherine addressed Mother’s day directly. She was hoping for a protective order that didn’t come through in time. Allan had attempted to have her falsely arrested just a few months prior.
18. Some Points to Ponder: see #12.
19. Allan’s Email Reinterpreted: There is no reinterpretation. Allan and the court had already ruined her relationship with the children. I’m sorry but Allan completely failed to own his part in creating this fiasco. He could have shared custody and saved himself a lot of money, time and heart ache. Catherine was in therapy the ENTIRE time. What other help should she have gotten?
20. Suicide is Painful: Yes, it is.
21. Allan’s Legacy: Maybe he is a better parent now that his behavior is subject to intense public scrutiny. The same could have been true of Catherine had she been given the opportunity.
I feel sorry for everyone involved in this mess – Allan, who was ultimately manipulated by the courts for his money, the girls who deserved 2 parents and Catherine who lost everything.
Do you get exhausted? I mean speaking for someone that spoke for themselves to what point? Yours? Opposing anyone that disagrees with you? Having to seek it out and get your emotions entailed for what? A marriage that is none of anyone’s business and statements that have your own agenda and nothing to do with the best interest of the children involved?
Aren’t you tired? She asked her story be told, her story was told. No one said for YOU to defend her story. SMH. If she wanted you to speak for her, don’t you think she would have listed that in her final post?
If you listen to the audio in its entirety, the daughter tells Allan she heard him yelling at mommy last night and this morning.
Allan turns on his recorder for when he’s the kind husband, assisting his wife.
Catherine is sleep deprived – Allan confirms that yet, he screamed at her the night before and again in the morning.
Then the abuser acts like her knight.
She was the victim of psychological abuse for years.
She became more isolated over time which is the game of these psychopaths.
It’s got nothing to do with their affairs. Symptoms of a bad marriage, but it’s a no-fault divorce so what does it matter.
Come on Frank, in order to really get court reform in NYS related to this case the internet is clearly going to need to see all of Allan’s porn searches, and examine all of Catherine’s gynecological records as well. I mean how else can there be justice.
What does any of this have to do with court reform ! Feed your dirty mind somewhere else ! This post was meant to besmirched
Can we see yours? I mean, hell if we want reform, I’d like to know about you and your history to assure your intentions are right as well. Can we see your internet history? Can we see your emails and have your life open to public scrutiny too and see how justice in the courts would be obtained by your internet history and your intents?
I’d like to know. Can Frank highlight you as the next story on how your life is the epiphany of reform that sets the standards for everyone in the US?
Hi Hannah,
Marc Abrams didn’t tell the court about the affair with the nanny in 2010?
Did Allen have an affair with the nanny?? Seriously?
Not enough gossip for you @747am? Get a life
Yep, he did early on in the marriage in 2010. She filed for divorce shortly after she found out about it but didn’t follow through because she was pregnant at the time. It led to a lot of trauma with the future nannies. Understandably, Catherine had some serious trust issues with child care going forward…
Bullshit. Catherine claimed he was having an affair with the nanny bc the nanny told Allan Catherine was abusing the daughter. Just like the 8 CPS reports filed against him by Catherine this too was unfounded.
WAKE UP PEOPLE SHES A LIAR
This happened early in their marriage. The oldest was an infant – no claims of abuse at that point. 2010. I know for a fact she was not lying.
The courts aren’t corrupt
Your mind is !!!
Way to go in trying to have Court Reform
Lol, what does your comment have on court reform? That your opinion holds greater merit than say…oh an entire jury of peers who may or may not agree with you?
I could see this was the way of it from the start. The Justice group bans anyone not parroting this agenda. I don’t need a group though
This once again lacks any real evidence. You say she’s crazy. But who diagnosed her and when? Was there a diagnosis BEFORE the divorce?!!Abram’s report was not only disregarded, he is no longer allowed to be a forensic evaluator.
Everyone knows how Apple ID works – everyone knows what Allen had to do to read his wife’s text messages, log on using her name and passwords – they don’t just show up as you suggest. He knew it was criminal and he did it anyway. Sharing stolen text messages is also a crime. I’d also liked to point out the slut shaming. Should she wear a scarlet letter ? Have you heard of Gloria Steinem? Perhaps Google her and learn a bit about women. We don’t slut shame each other anymore.
The only one wearing the scarlet letter is the children – a scarlet “D”
These poor children of vexatious litigation.
You are missing the whole point of this case.
If both parties were not sent to lawyers first – if both parties went to a pediatrician or child psychiatrist or even a teacher FIRST- this never would have happened.
If both parties had to sign a retainer agreement that included the following phrase, “ this divorce can and most likely will cause irreparable damage to your children, you will never be able to coparent successfully and you will be financially ruined for life.” I think they may have thought twice and not chosen such a vexatious path.
Allen should sue Gus for decimating his whole life – because I’m sure it wasn’t his own life he wanted to destroy. It was just collateral damage. This is what happens when you don’t have an amicable divorce.
Wake up ! No one cares about Allen! We just want to change the system.
I don’t think this say she is crazy, mentally unstable, character and moral defects, manipulation, hypocritical or a person that contributed and wasn’t the innocent angel and martyr that people paint her out to be without even knowing HER.
You made some valid points ! You lost me w/ women don’t shame other women which Catherine did casting the first stone @ Allan’s girlfriend who met Allan AFTER Catherine was out of the home & she honestly thought after many years the divorce was imminent! Catherine accused her of moving even though her girls told her that she didn’t . She has her own home & children! She accused her of wearing her clothes knowing that was false! She posted these comments on her Facebook page & like wildfire her followers were repeating her lies! I can’t imagine that Catherine didn’t think if she released harmful videos of Allan making people think that they were current , that she wasn’t going to be dragged through the mud like she did to Allan’s new girlfriend & Allan!
Allan did not have her password! And I don’t believe he ever thought he would find what he found & had he wanted to truly hurt her he would’ve used some of the text sooner ! It wasn’t to his advantage to hold on to them! The sexting was 3 years after they were married . Allan shared them with Wayne Baxter who ironically is her estate lawyer . He responded something like you’re a better man than I am ! She probably did this to hurt you ! Allan stayed in the marriage & let it go! Whether Allan should or shouldn’t have seen her text doesn’t absolve Catherine’s actions . Even though both Catherine & Allan wrongly publicly shared 7 year old videos doesn’t absolve them of the contents shared! And truthfully all this is none of our business & if Catherine’s goal was court reform she diluted the focus because people’s nature is to get caught up in the drama & the cause became 2nd .
When you say crazy I don’t recall in any evidence Catherine being referred to as crazy! I think they felt she was unstable ! The Judge makes it clear the concern was for the oldest child who everyone knows now was adopted , I have no clue which video (maybe we aren’t privy to it) was shown that the Judge gave Allan sole custody & her supervised visits which she agreed to before the Judge even handed down a ruling ! She wanted to settle that issue with Allan because she knew how damaging the video was !
I truly believe that both were taken advantage of by the court system because BOTH had financial means! I believe they think they made fair rulings , but they let everything schlep on without forcing mediation or to settle for the sake of the children! The judge agreeing to have the children be driven so far to the supervisor Catherine chose was ridiculous ! They spent more time in the car then their visit w/ their mother that never ended well . Maybe by the time they got there they were tired from the drive anxious & like every other kid on a Sunday wanted to be hanging out w/ their friends! These kids were always in a lose lose situation! As Allan is now & he smarter than all of us he’s taking care of his girls , trying to give them the best summer away from all this toxicity!
Like the stock market all courts are corrupt. Nothing makes sense – you never know what to expect –
I used to say pray the judge woke up on the right side of the bed or even got laid last night because nothing is worse than a grouchy Judge!
Just wondering if no one cares about Allan & just about court reform what did having him lose his job have to do with corruption or reform ? In the end what we need is Social Media Reform !!!
No one cares about Alan except for Gus and you – apparently! Gus is having another wonderful fully funded summer at the expense of this once beautiful and loving family. Gus is having a wonderful time sailing and you are blowing up social media. Get with it Regina George. Join the divorce reform groups and educate yourself.
Well loosing his job is better than his life. I sure hope he’s doing something for the girls. Cause the videos don’t look promising. The girlfriend is looking any better. She should have stayed out of the mess. He choose to go this way in court. He has to deal with the consequences. Your right the focus is on the courts. No one wants to hear Allan was a saint and a victim. We all now know better.
Neither one was a saint! The girlfriend has nothing to do w/,this mess. Allan & Catherine are two adults who made choices that they felt conviction to!
Once you invite CPS into your life repetitively you invited the devil to enter your home! They don’t stay out unless they feel the children are safe
Wasn’t RFK Jrs divorce and custody case also in Westchester? It was also decided there that the mother Mary was crazy and had substance abuse issues and RFK was given *sole* custody of their 3 children. She ended up committing suicide during the process. Was she also pushed to the brink by a toxic powerful ex and a court system who enabled him? I think we’ve all seen RFK isn’t so normal himself.
Yes , I believe you are right . Also he would not allow her family to have her body and bury her with her family members. he insisted she be buried with the kennedys. I thought he was awful -still do .
Yes, Mary Richardson killed herself in the late 2000’s, and yes RFK, Jr. had been awarded custody of children, but she had unsupervised visitation, she did not lose contact with her children. Richardson is quoted as begging her husband to stay with her, saying “I need you to take care of me.” She did have longstanding substance abuse issues, and he was a serial adulterer. They had wildly different parenting styles, he was unorthodox and forgiving, she was rigid. Not sure if court system was as heavily involved in their divorce as in our case here.
Marc Abrams was the forensic on this case too.
https://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-last-days-mary-kennedy-65169
“Mary’s best chance to get her children back was to do well with a psychological evaluation that would determine long-term custody. She was scheduled to see psychologist Marc T. Abrams in nearby Bedford Hills in early May, but twice broke the appointments and gave false excuses, which upset the psychologist, who notified everyone involved. She attended a session on May 10, and she had every reason to assume that when Abrams issued his report, he would recommend that Bobby be given full custody. And she feared living without her children.”
Excellent point.
The KvK situation is a good case-study in how family courts fail to achieve desired outcomes. Still, there’s a lot here which is troubling; which makes KvK convoluted and frustrating, and hard to draw simple conclusions from. In almost all divorces — I believe, anyhow — there should be some form of co-parenting so the kids retain connection to both parents. We endow family courts with authority to dictate many details of parents’ and families’ lives and with such authority comes a responsibility to try and ensure positive results to the fullest extent possible. Arguing over (for example) which parent had an affair first is just a distraction. The deeper question is how the triangular relationships between Allan, Catherine, and their children got so far off the rails.
Here’s one thing I find troubling: Catherine’s seemingly heartfelt avowals of how painful it was for her to lose custody — even in her final facebook post — imply that she had an intense emotional bond with her daughters. Of course, normal parents do have profound emotional connection to their offspring, which is why it is so traumatic to have those bonds artificially severed. Allan, too, wrote about his willingness to fight for the kids, no matter the cost or the time required. I’m not judging whether Allan was being reasonable in feeling a need to “protect” them from Catherine, but at least, on the surface, his words were an expression of deep paternal love.
So both parents wrote as if they had strong parental bonding and suffered from the possibility — or actuality — of losing their ability to continue to be part of the kids’ lives. But — and here’s what bothers me — I still can’t understand how someone with that intense emotional resonance could feel and express such anger toward the children in ways that clearly traumatized them. Both Allan and Catherine had pretty bad moments when all that intense love seemed overpowered by something much darker. Why?
I understand frustration at the courts, anger toward one another … but why anger toward the youngsters involved?
If Catherine was willing to fight the court bureaucracy on behalf of the daughters, and of her right to be part of their lives — like Wendy Titelman’s willingness to protect her girls from their sexually abusive father — that should be commemorated. If any of the courts’ decisions against Catherine were “retaliation” for her advocacy, then this should definitely be called out.
It’s unfortunate, however, that there is another side to the story of Catherine’s relationship to her daughters, which the current FR story outlines. If the whole focus of Catherine’s anger at the courts were their role in forcibly breaking the mother/children bond, it’s a shame that she acted sometimes as if the emotional intensity of that bond ebbed sometimes even in her own mind.
This is not just about the kids being “cared for,” about their schooling, clothes, violin lessons, and so on. The trauma of a parent losing a child cannot and should not be reduced to an adult losing the chance to perform what society deems the dutiful acts of parenting. Keeping kids fed, clothed, educated, etc. are necessary but not sufficiently for being a great parent — the kind of parent children want to bond with for their entire lives. Of course, the shame in Catherine’s case is that, due to her cancer, she didn’t have a chance to cultivate that long-lasting bind. That indeed is very sad. But I think if she had not suffered the recurrence, and instead had many more years to live, she would still need to repair relationships with the children and make it clear to them that she really was emotionally in sync with them — not just on a superficial level (money, clothes, and so forth) but that she psychically internalizes their own traumas; to restore the trust that might have been damaged by her expressing anger in trauma-inducing ways.
It’s also disturbing that family court professionals allowed this case to drag on for so many years. Probably the best and fairest outcome would have been a shared custody with both parents getting counseling and maybe even therapy to ensure that they could behave in a properly loving way with the children. The individuals whose primary responsibility was to engineer the best outcome for these kids were not able to make that happen.
Maybe failing to achieve a storybook ending is not a sign of corruption in and of itself, but we (i.e., the general public) certainly has reason to question whether or not the courts acted partly out of self-interest (benefiting financially from the case dragging on). At the very least they may have exercised poor judgment. I think other cases reveal even more dubious judgment than this one. Maybe Wendy Titelman’s case also profiled recently on FR is a good example.
It’s unfortunate that the public’s discussion of KvK seems to be preoccupied with friends/supporters of Allan and Catherine debating which one was the worst parent and spouse and who was more to blame for their marriage falling apart. That storyline takes focus away from the more disturbing details of how family court functioned in this case.
It looks as if both Allan and Catherine had anger management issues and this clouded their treatment of the daughters, at least on occasion. I’m not sure their abuse was so egregious that completely separating either parent from their kids’ lives was warranted. In those circumstances, the goal which the courts should have aimed for would be a functioning split custody with Allan and Catherine co-parenting all three children in a caring and nurturant manner. The custody evaluators and/or therapists for the children could have tried to understand what was causing both parents to develop irrational anger toward the children and work with the parents to overcome these issues.
Whether or not you believe the decision to deny Catherine all custody was reasonable, was horrendously unfair, or somewhere in between, I don’t think any normal person believes that this was the best outcome. In short, the courts raked in 7-figure sums and didn’t have a good result to show for it. Where is their accountability? Where is the apology? What is the rationale for their exorbitant salaries, compared to other people who also work with children — pediatricians, teachers, babysitters?
Many commenters to FR stories about KvK have talked about the Westchester family courts being insular and reminiscent of an “old boys club”, maybe in a way that singled out and excluded Catherine. If this was true, another dimension to insularity — another harm it can cause — is how that kind of social phenomenon translates into psychological affects which, in my opinion, can weaken the parent/child emotional bond. The more that a father or mother sees himself or herself well-established in a community outside the nuclear family, the more that children become an added detail to piece into a life rather than the focus of that life.
From the point of view of neurobiology, the parent/child relationship is the strongest of all (biochemically stronger than parents’ love for one another, for instance). But we do not always live in a culture which seeks to reinforce that bond to the maximal extent. We don’t seem to be a society which — in terms of government policy, income distribution, percentage of GDP allocated to different sectors of the economy, value placed on education, family leave standards, treatment of immigrant families, etc. — tries its hardest to realize the nuclear-family ideal in actuality, not just as an abstract idea.
There’s a difference between loving marriage and loving the person you’re married to. I guess something similar can happen with parenting. Loving the idea of being a mom or dad is different than loving your child.
Maybe a therapist working through anger issues with Allan and Catherine could have guided them in that direction. Your pride and excitement about being a parent is love for this actual child, this young person right here. It’s not an abstraction, and it’s not about heritage or culture or religion or whatever.
The trauma of losing your children is the trauma of losing this little girl right here. It’s not about not being a parent in the eyes of your community; it’s about your love for her and hers for you being broken. Of course your spouse or the courts should never break that bond! But don’t yourself break it by acting in angry or “trauma-inducing” ways, as the comment puts it. Parenting isn’t a theater to an audience of other adults. It’s more intimate than that.
After a divorce, a person’s status in society and in their peer group changes, which can be traumatic in itself. But we need to isolate the specific trauma of a mother or father losing the emotional connection with a child, which is the key issue when it comes to reforming family court to prevent parents losing custody for spurious reasons.
From the motion to dismiss the case of wiretapping: – public record
quoted from a few text messages that Ms. Kassenoff had exchanged with her friend Cynthia Monaco to demonstrate that Ms. Kassenoff “has planned for divorce, and her bid for full custody of the children for quite some time, and plans to use [the parties’ oldest child’s] need for her approval, and her lying issues, as a weapon against [Mr. Kassenoff].” (Ex. 6 at ¶ 15)).
——
It turns out that since October 2018, and perhaps earlier, she and her friend Cynthia Monaco have been planning this divorce.” (Id. at ¶¶ 15-16). Before the Court ruled on Mr. Kassenoff’s June 5, 2019 motion, the parties entered into a joint stipulation regarding interim custody of the children, which required, inter alia, that Ms. Kassenoff would be supervised whenever she was around the children. (Ex. 7).4
No to your technocratic vision, which is ultimately tyrannical, sterile. We parent in a historical/cultural context, children are not our sole concern, though they do come first. We are teaching them to care about/value/ take on their roles in culture, history, society. And nurturing is hard work, and parental anger is normal and should not be de-normalized, . Of course e didn’t see any of the parental warmth, positive emotion, in this broken family, which over time surely occurred in much greater abundance than the harsh moments. Parenting is judged on the whole, not from isolated moments. Trauma does not need to set in where there is abundant love, and anger has its role in parenting, children need to see what gets their parents mad, to shape their consciences. Why would you want to see the end of anger? Also the end of tears? When these are all humane, beautiful, and useful emotions, including in parenting. Something is dark and sterile about this technocratic vision.
Teachers may not see this, as they don’t have the same emotional investment in their students, and may in fact feel in competition with parents for the education of their children! (Parents are the first educators of their own children.) Emotions are not to be extracted from child rearing, no thank you. Culture and history are not to be sucked out of society, in the name of sterile technocratic living. No thank you.
I appreciate the dialog, but — why do you talk about “history” and “culture” in this context? Sure, at some point children (or young adults, by then) should start thinking about their place in “society”. But isn’t that also ultimately about nurturing and compassion? People in their professional lives take over empathic roles — the doctor heals, the engineer optimizes, and so on. Children can take guidance from their parents who model nurturance in the nuclear family and then young people, when they transition to academic and professional worlds, can figure out how to export the loving emotions of the family out into the larger world. Maybe history and culture play some role in terms of understanding the present moment, or learning from the past how best to build a society in a given geographic area (indigenous agriculture, architecture, etc.). But at some level caring transcends culture — most doctors are thrilled to save a life whether that person is the same race, religion, or language as them or not. Many people’s empathic instincts are if anything amplified by the fate of those unlike them — cf. how many people try to help out immigrant families, or those victims of war or natural disasters.
Your focus is not truly on the children, your parenting comments, your stated preference for the end of ethnic/political/faith community ties, is vision for a future denuded of histories, in which people are dominated by technology. You are not arguing for care over culture, you want a new culture, present cultures would not survive. The world’s majorities reject this way of being, and care is not an algorithm or a technology.
People will never give up their ways of family life rooted in faiths and histories. We, the majorities, we are the caring ones, we are the ones who feed, clothe, and house the poor, work which is best done (really only done, technocrats including most doctors are not nurturing and don’t have a heart for the poor, this is mostly the work of faithful people, from multiple faiths) in the context of faith and culture, in history.
We are the nurturing, empathetic ones. We care so much that we cry about over our families and sometimes we even yell at our kids. Maybe you don’t have a faith, and don’t draw from thousands of years of historical wisdom, but the majority of the world’s people are grounded that way and don’t share your hope of a sterile, tyrannical future. The majority will continue to raise our families in community, culture, emotion, in history.
Thanks again for an interesting dialog! I certainly agree that “care is not an algorithm or a technology.” I know that many people in Silicon Valley, for instance, peddle unrealistic notions about how technology can save humanity — but that’s a little self-serving. It’s more like PR for large for-profit companies. I don’t think many “thought leaders” in SV or elsewhere are devoting themselves to nonprofits or other work that could really have a social impact. In other words, if people truly believe in how technology can really improve the world they should actually try to make that happen, with organizations that are explicitly devoted to that goal, rather than merely asserting for-profit Big Tech enterprises (Facebook, Amazon and so on) will accomplish such things spontaneously.
Having said that, sometimes it really is true that algorithms and technology can save lives — consider how quickly scientists understood the Covid spike proteins and genetics (including how human antigens worked against it), infectivity, developed an effective mRNA vaccine, and so on. A lot of technology and algorithms worked behind the scenes to achieve all that and contain the pandemic. So many people died, but imagine how much worse Covid-19 would have been without the affordances of contemporary medicine (and medical technology). So too for other diseases (e.g., AIDS), recent advances in cancer treatment (personalized medicine/immuno-oncology), and so on.
As a society we should not put blind faith in science and technology, but we should recognize its potential benefits and encourage individuals to dedicate their lives to science and medicine for helping/saving lives. Why are we not able to produce more doctors and scientists through our academic system? Consider how difficult it has been for the Biden administration to implement student debt relief. If our country needs more doctors, why do we put many people in a situation where they cannot become doctors without going into debt? And likewise for scientists trying to mitigate climate change, improve crop yields to fight global hunger, etc.
Meanwhile, it is certainly true that religious communities often take the lead in helping the poor, immigrants, etc. It’s not either-or. Doctors, social workers, economists, and so forth can sustain “technocratic” solutions which are supplemented by faith-based volunteer groups (or vice-versa). I don’t perceive a conflict between “science” and “religion”. I think pretty much everyone in religious in some way. Some people may be atheists, for instance, buy their beliefs probably still align with (or be influenced by) religions outside the “Abrahamic” traditions (cf., Buddhism, Confucianism, Hinduism, etc.). A lot of “secular” Western philosophy probably owes some influence to “Eastern” faiths: the European academic system was inspired in part by the Cunfucian Imperial Exam, and thinkers like Kant — probably the starting point more than anyone else of modern Western ideas on mind, ethics, etc., at least in academic settings — revitalized post-Aristotelian Greek traditions that were inspired by Mahayana Buddhism (which in turn was really a syncretic faith emerging from the Central Asian Greek colonies, where scholars of the earlier Theravada Buddhist teachings shared ideas with Greek academics). I know experts who argue that Kant in substance is closer to Buddhism even though he expressed his religious/metaphysical ideas in the Judeo-Christian terms he was familiar with. If the “Critique of Pure Reason” had been titled the “Pure Reason Sutra” it could easily be read as a modern Yogacara text that happened to be written in German.
Long story short, people don’t have to actively attend church or synagogue to be “religious”, so I don’t think our society is becoming less faith-oriented even as it becomes ostensibly “secular”. Instead “Secular Humanism” is more like a religion of its own, a kind of Christian/Jewish/Buddhist/Confucian hybrid analogous to Mahayana Buddhism deriving from “East-West” contact after the Greeks established a nation near modern-day Afghanistan (after Alexander failed to conquer India proper). Kabul was a center of classical Hellenic civilization for almost as long as Athens. I could go even further and say that Secular Humanism is basically the modern descendant of Central Asian Graeco-Buddhist thought by analogy to how Christianity emerged as a synthesis of Judaism and “Western” (i.e., Plato/Aristotle) Greek thought. Centuries later the Western-Hellenic tradition evolved in Europe as Christian civilization, while the Eastern-Hellenic/Mahayana-Buddhist philosophy tunneled through time and morphed into (post-romantic and/or “secular”) Humanism.
My only caveat is that I don’t believe people “learn” nurturance or compassion from a religious or cultural tradition; instead faith (or any other) communities can simply help focus love and empathy that we already innately have. While the prior comment correctly notes how congregations often spearhead charities and aid groups, I don’t think the people involved are motivated to help the needy because they read instructions in the bible (notice many believers, like many secular types, don’t actually back their abstract ideas with actions). Instead they have an innate desire to help others which then translates, in the family context, to being instinctively a nurturant and rarely (or never) aggressive parent.
I.e., I believe, altruism is a matter of personality rather than some liturgical or philosophical theory. Religious groups — and secular ones, no less — undermine their mission when they cause people to experience and express anger related to status or group dynamics in ways that dilute other peoples’ sense of someone’s personality as being, instinctively, nurturant and self-effacing.
Of course, in some contexts — like political activism — it is proper to be vocal, decisive, passionate about ideals and values. Also I know that anger is driven by our subconscious in part so we can’t always maneuver around it like a mathematical proposition; especially in Catherine Kassenoff’s case if she was dealing with the fear of terminal illness. We should feed sadness at how things turned out for her. But I think it’s still the case that both parents’ inability to prevent themselves from acting out anger in combative ways toward their children. If we express spirituality through a kind of dissociative separation of the darker side of our emotions from outward behavior — i.e., if religion is a matter of refining compassionate personalities more than theological doctrine — then adversarial behavior patterns are at odds with religious traditions, whether one goes to church or synagogue the following weekend or not.
I can’t do another level of nesting so I’ll post a quick reply here, even though I’m addressing several different comments to this point.
I was reading a New York Times article today about the struggling British health care system. There’s a shortage of doctors and supplies.
Why is that? Is it because nationalized health care doesn’t work? Well, a lot of the problem seems to be under-staffed hospitals. Doctors work long hours, and complain about low salaries. But they’d probably feel less need to be paid more if they had easier schedules. 12 hour shifts add extra costs (baby sitters, cars and petrol instead of being able to take public transport …) add up.
And why are there too few doctors? Is it because the UK doesn’t have enough people who want to become doctors? Or are brits too dumb that they can’t get through medical school? Probably not. The Times said that UK spending per capita on health care is less than most Western European countries (NYT blamed Margaret Thatcher for that — but Brexit probably doesn’t help, because they can’t recruit doctors from the Eurezone as readily).
Look at the US too … “Keep the focus on children!” argued that Covid could have been much worse but for tech breakthroughs like mRNA vaccines, which is fair, but how many deaths and long-term (“brain fog”) disabilities could have been avoided with more doctors, more respirators, more of everything that actually saved lives?
Also, why did Operation Warp Speed succeed as well as it did? Because the US invested substantial federal funds into R&D. Private enterprise did the work, but for a while companies were acting more like non-profits — autonomous (this wasn’t some Trotskyite programme where everything was planned by the government) but acting in society’s best interest, with government support to enable that. In fact, Operation Warp Speed may be a good example of what “entrepreneurial socialism” could look like.
So, anyhow, the NHS situation in Britain and Covid everywhere are good case studies in the following simple premise: in order to truly realize the full potential of modern medicine to save lives, Health Care spending has to be a greater share of nations’ GDP then it is now.
What could rescue the NHS except more pounds sterling (as a percentage of total UK GDP) to pay more doctors’ salaries, afford doctors easier schedules, support tuition and instruction to educate more doctors, R&D for medical equipment … you get the idea? The NHS isn’t terribly inefficient as if reforms could streamline the bureaucracy to save enough money to address all its problems. More limited (more “American-style” coverage) might produce better options for some Britons but not for the people overall. It’s not even about money per se. It’s about Health Care spending as a percentage of GDP.
Besides, where does money in developed countries’ GDP go if not to something which is literally a matter of life and death, like medicine? Walk around my neighborhood and you’ll see dozens of extravagant houses which are probably far larger than the people living in them actually need. Plus a lot of labor seems to go into basically ornamental fluff, like trimming pine trees to look like corkscrews. If someone enjoys doing that work, fine, they should. But how many more doctors might we have if people spent less on architectural aesthetics and encouraged some landscapists or builders (or their children) to go to medical school (with less tuition — or no tuition)?
I also happened recently to look at Greta Thunberg’s newish “Climate Book”. Similar lessons, in my opinion. How to reverse climate change? Greater percentage of GDP for clean energy, renewables, conservation projects … whatever it takes.
I’m commenting about health care and the environment because I want to respond to suggestions that charities and religious groups can take on for themselves the burden of helping the poor, sick, homeless, and needy — yes, it’s great that people dedicate their time to such causes. It really is, and it shows how people internalize the ethics which are preached in our faith traditions. But it is also unrealistic to expect small groups of volunteers to address our most pressing global problems. Hope and prayers for someone who’s sick better be paired with respirators or affordable medication. Volunteers handing out tents to the homeless is a worse solution than prefab modular housing units that cost less than a used van (designed by 3D materials optimizers and industry virtualization — i.e., algorithms).
Why don’t charity groups and the religious organizations that sponsor them also devote efforts toward passing legislation which redirects percentages of GDP toward sectors like medicine and green tech? There’s a lot that could be done without government over-regulating or stymieing private enterprise. Support for non-profit startups (maybe via extensions to existing programs, like Obamacare exchanges and EBT cards). Scholarships for students pursuing careers in public service fields. Progressive immigration policy which employs people to help newcomers acclimate to American society rather than paying border patrol to police the Rio Grande like the Korean DMZ. Programs to divert nonviolent offenders away from prisons which end up spending dollars in communities rather than within jail walls (US average, apparently, about $45,000 per inmate per year).
The desire to help those in need is a mindset — it is the manifestation of a kind, empathic way of being. It is wonderful when religions (or “secular humanism”) help bring out those virtues in people. But this doesn’t mean that altruistic actions can only happen within the context of religious communities. Instead, our “nurturant” attitude can be systematized and amplified by becoming part of public policy and the rational allocation of economic resources and labor supply by sector — using education, non-profits, seed/venture capital to grow the workforce in industries and economic foci that most serve the collective interest.
10:51 am. You write a sentence in your last paragraph, I think key to your argument, which lacks a predicate, affirmation: “But I still think it the case that both parents’ inability to prevent themselves from acting out in anger in combative ways towards their children.” Where follows here, what were you trying to say?
Then you move to purport a gap between “adversarial behavior” (toward children) and adherence to morals or “religious traditions.” You don’t grasp that Catherine’s first faith tradition, the one she was trying to include in her home, Christianity, this faith covers this gap with “forgiveness”, “redemption” and “grace”, and that these are essential truths she wanted her children to possess. Not to lie or steal, and to confess when one has done so, in order to be held accountable but also to be forgiven, by your family, by God, and maybe, hopefully by the ones you’ve harmed, as well.
And when parents in this tradition yell in excess at kids (as our faith, most faiths in fact, practically require that parents yell some at our children, as spark to conscience, none of which your doggy style of parenting seems to have a need for, which is baffling by the way), parents confess their mistakes, vow to do better, ask children for forgiveness as well. The Law, and then Grace. People, including parents and children, need this give and take, need to see each other in grace and humility.
That is why C celebrated Christmas, and Easter with her kids, and why she told friends she wanted to share Christ, God’s love, with her children. Many in this world live by these tenets, this faith. With bridges to other faiths, including (in my family for example) Judaism, Islam, yogic practices and traditions, secular humanism.
The majority of parents would not understand parenting the your way you’ve sketched, it lacks so much richness and beauty of spirit and emotion. Dogs don’t understand truth and lies, don’t tell lies, so there aren’t any lessons to be taught when they do, no stories rooted in traditions they would understand, right? Dogs might be “altruistic” by your lights, ever eager to please their masters, but they have no context for goodness, relative to evil, which is a very important concept to my faith tradition. I am not going to argue with your genealogy of faith traditions, suffice to say, Christianity does proceed from syncretism of Neo-Platonism, Judaism, etc., but it adds up to so much more than that, all of which seems lost on you, in so far as it applies to good parenting. Once again, your vision seems so sterile, which is bad enough, who wants to live like that, but it would also lead to tyranny…..
Thanks to Anonymous at 12:30 am! I apologize for the poor syntax they noted. I was only saying that Allan and Catherine couldn’t seem to prevent themselves from acting out in anger toward the children.
I certainly agree that parents can help children realize when they are causing harm to others, but I really don’t understand how “yell[ing] some at our children” is a “spark to [their] conscience”. Why do you believe shouting at someone sparks their conscience while talking quietly does not? Doesn’t it seem more like Allan and Catherine simply lost their temper, and their screaming/tantrums weren’t some sort of well-thought-out lesson plan?
As a former teacher, I think from experience that harsh discipline for children with “behavioral problems” doesn’t actually solve those problems. Maybe for a while kids behave better, but you’re not addressing the underlying trauma which causes them to act out. It just stays bottled up, but only for a while — and I’d rather have a misbehaving 6-year-old than a misbehaving 15-year-old. It’s very difficult for a young child to do something really wrong. That changes around the teenage years.
In other words, intimidating a child into ceasing actions you don’t like doesn’t mean you’ve “sparked compassion”; more likely they are learning to resent you and biding their time until they could be more independent. In reality they’re tuning you out, even if on the surface they appear to be “obeying” your “instructions”.
Of course, parents can get angry, then ask for forgiveness and move on. Succumbing to anger and frustration doesn’t make you an evil person. But there’s no reason to pretend that such anger is something you *should* do as a good parent.
The idea that some kind of almost physical discipline will “teach” children morals just seems outdated. People don’t empathize with others because they’re afraid of being punished otherwise. Genuine compassion doesn’t emerge from fear, in my opinion. That’s why I said religious traditions can only refine and channel nurturant personalities people need to have (and do have) innately. Again, altruism isn’t some theological theory which you learn from a sermon, any more than it’s a socioeconomic doctrine you’d learn from a textbook.
But, sure, we as individuals can find the “better angels of our nature” personality mirrored in many different faiths. You have every right to find it in Christianity as I do, almost certainly in a more informal and speculative manner, in my amateurish reconstructions of Central Asian Greek antiquity (unfortunately an underappreciated period in history, I believe, which should strongly challenge our conventional notions of “East” and “West”).
Meanwhile, good example More doctors, please! vis-a-vis the UK NHS.
Let me also take *that* discussion back to focusing on children.
What about those large houses, and the “pine trees trimmed to look like corkscrews”? Is all that really for the benefit of the kids? Do parents dreaming of their family home say to themselves: yeah. I want a loving, nurturant space where our children will feel important, where we can spend lots of time together and engage them in activities that are educationally beneficial?
My experience as a teacher tended to be — based on closely observing parents and often seeing children in their home environments — that small apartments tend to be more nurturant than large houses. Something about the smaller scale is more child-sized, more intimate. Large houses seem more like a display for parents’ peers. I think children — mostly subconsciously, I guess — experience them as intimidating or a little foreign. It’s like day-to-day proof that their parents are conscious of the image they project to the world outside the family as much as they are focused on loving their sons or daughters.
That could easily be confirmation bias on my part. But it’s a pattern I *think* I’ve observed.
I had a chance to watch the videos in Catherine’s drop box. It was heart-warming to see those moments of a warm, loving relationship, much different than the videos which have been promoted on FR and the “Kassenoff Facts” site. But there was a part of me that also felt the videos look very … well, let me say, Suburban.
My fond memories of childhood life with my mother — if I only had videos of those times! — well, things like getting ice cream on the corner of 42nd and lex; playing games together while waiting to see which of the M101, 102, 103, or 104 came first; browsing books near Columbia University; shopping for cheese or seafood at the shops where my mother got the best deals, often scattered all around Manhattan (East Midtown, Stuyvesant, Upper East Side) — or taking the Q train all the way to Brighton Beach to a little shop where she got a whole goose which she brined for special occasions, or the F to between Briarwood and Kew Gardens for bagels, or the 7 to Jackson Heights for curry. Going to nighttime Buddhist meetings in East New York and the South Bronx where folks ask us (the only white dudes walking down a crowded street, i.e., we’re not the ones looking like we’re in our own hood) for directions. Or walking down past the Flatiron building to the Buddhist center where she meditated (she was one of those Jewish-heritage folks who became Buddhist, like profiled in the book “The Jew in the Lotus”. Or the Rabbi — I forget whose name; no, wait, Rami Shapiro — who decided to learn Tibetan mindfulness, and found a Zen teacher who pretended to have a Yiddish accent: “more Zazen for you!”)
We lived in a really small apartment (about half of which was taken up by my father’s antique collection, which he later turned into a sort-of business).
We also lived in typical big-city anonymity. Each parent had their group of close friends, of course, but my parents never seemed especially interested in putting on a show for other people, or to see their lives as a theater which outsiders observed and assessed.
Maybe it seems out of left field to cite these memories (TMI?) but I *can* say that as a teacher I found parents who, being honest, I really felt were a little different than that. Parents who were image-conscious, wondering about how their peers in the workplace, neighborhood, and/or church/synagogue perceived them. Sometimes that distracted them from their kids.
A nurturant household isn’t very impressive to visit. It’s usually messy. The floor smells like dog pee. Mom’s burning incense. Kids’ projects are scattered here and there, but instead of pressuring them to rid up (cf. Allan in that Robbie Harvey video) dad’s busy with his own project jerry-rigging some woodworking contraption which covers the walls in sawdust. The parents don’t invite people over often; dad sees his pals at the local Irish pub which holds Sinn Fein fundraisers and Black 47 played years ago and mom hosts board meetings for her non-profit at Au Bon Pain until the cafe closes at midnight.
That’s a lot different, I think, from places like Larchmont, NY. And maybe being self-conscious about what kind of house you live in, what kind of car you drive, and so forth, which diverts attention away from children, also siphons motivation away from the kind of progressive social policy “More doctors please” wrote about. You start to prefer a large house and small tax bill rather than the other way around.
Well, in a garden apartment in Jackson Heights is where our first child got started, eventual Columbia graduate, a lawyer working in refugee law, and her medical resident husband. But we moved out of the city! City life for children is usually not the place described in your romantic tale, most children in big cities in U.S. and Western Europe do not experience an urban oasis (or the goose for dinner!), and I’m sure you know there are fewer children than ever in many of these cities, Paris is rapidly losing families, for decades already birth rates have been below replacement in southern Europe.
You deride parents in “Larchmont” like the Kassenoffs, or other families with “image”issues. Yet most parents across the country are working class or mid level professionals, with no image issues at all. Both parents may work full or part time, there may or may not be a stay at home parent. A lot of the nurturing goes on in the kitchen, at bath time, before bedtime, in the car on the way to school or extracurriculars, to and from church, on the weekend at the park, walking the dog. Parents may have art/music/athletic practice they are passing on to their kids, and nurturing and sharing of culture happens there too, and they may be sharing their birth languages with their children, nurturing and education occur at those times. In the cracks of daily life, and yes, it can be messy. And houses may be bigger or smaller, and life with kids is busy and messy, both physically and emotionally, spiritually. And nothing, but nothing, like raising a dog!
Catherine K gave her kids the lifelong gifts of music and language. She was not trying to mold them into socioeconomic giants, on the contrary. She yearned for them to be kind and honest in their school communities. She yearned to share with them her most heartfelt spirituality. Yes, she yelled at her kids at times more than she should’ve, which is no surprise at all, given the complicated parenting she had to do (your account, comparing parenting to raising dogs!, keep the focus, is woefully unhelpful, and then some, when it comes to parenting complicated children) the undermining and somewhat amoral husband/father she had to work with, her awful and repeated health circumstances, etc. And yet she persisted!!!
“Most parents across the country are working class or mid level professionals, with no image issues at all”. Yes! Isn’t that the point? Why are so many people so interested in the Kassenoffs? It’s because this family seems very different than normal families (we hope).
Of course most families have “no image issues at all”. But we’re not talking about them. I question whether this one family — Allan and/or Catherine — did/does have image issues and whether that affected their parenting.
The recent FR “Catherine Supporter: Separating Fact from Fiction” story called Catherine a “disciplinarian”. My question is whether someone adopts that parenting style because they truly believe it benefits children or because it’s an instinctive, almost subconscious extension of their personality expressed in many facets of their lives: clothes, house, professional conduct, and so forth.
Look, I don’t know the family personally, so I might be totally off-base. I’m just responding to the competing narratives people who *do* know the family have presented. Allan’s friends say he’s really a decent person underneath and Catherine’s supporters say the same about her. So why did these two decent people have such a toxic marriage? I’m trying to make sense of what those closer to their inner circle have written — to find some characterization which sums it up. “Image conscious” is one word (two words, I guess) that comes to mind. Both parents have been called “narcissistic”. I think that’s pretty vacuous, however. It’s a meaningless word if all it says is that someone is conscious about how others see them, which is just about every normal human being. “Image-conscious” is more neutral but it’s trying to be more specific; it’s like someone believing *irrationally* that others are seeing them in an unflattering light because of where they live or their accent or their clothes — or indeed how their children behave!
That’s just a guess based on friends’ own descriptions. If it’s totally off-base well, then, everyone on FR seems to be trying to create a mental image of Allan and Catherine both, in the face of credible but competing storylines.
Cool to hear you once lived in Jackson Heights — I lived there too for a number of years! For sure I would trade the chance to live there for almost any address outside the 5 boroughs, maybe apart from bonafide outlying cities in their own right, like Jersey City or Yonkers or Hackensack (maybe). JH is still somewhat upscale, though — out towards Corona or Middle Village is probably an even better example of a sustainable, civic-friendly urban environment.
As for Paris, certainly it’s hard to compare the banlieus to American suburbs. I had the great fortune of spending a few summers in France (mostly Strasbourg) and visiting Paris several times, not just in the touristy areas, and it seems as if “inner-city” Paris is not that different from New York (or other US cities), even though the French terminology is different. Wouldn’t you say that a modern (maybe more politically correct) image of the “flâneur” would be drawn to places like — well, remembering my own travels, the district around the Cité Internationale campus in the 14th arrondissement, rather than to areas that have become cloyingly gentrified, cf. Montmartre, Marais, the Latin Quarter?
Europeans would probably use the word “suburbs” for outlying neighborhoods of NYC proper, like Brownsville, which is about as far from Manhattan as Nanterre (where Nahel M was shot) to the 4th arrondissement (I realize Nanterre isn’t a great example, apart from the headlines, with the famous university and socioeconomically mixed profile, but substitute Bagneux, Ivry, Clichy-sous-Bois, whatever; Far Rockaway is about the same distancewise as Les Ulis).
I know from experience that NYC neighborhoods which have a bad rep are much better places to live than people realize (e.g. East Flatbush, in my case) and I suspect that’s probably true in Europe also. People see occasional headlines and form a picture of communities that doesn’t match their reality. Even neighborhoods with drug dealing and the occasional gunfights can be more rewarding home-locales than wealthier areas because your neighbors tend to be very nice (people are grounded and sympathetic), there’s more diversity, quicker access to public transit, etc.
I mean, city life sort of *is* “idyllic”, going back to your comments. Viz., it’s not just about privileged, exclusive areas. The poorest district in NYC, probably around the Brownsville/East NY border, is arguably a better place to live than the wealthiest town in the metro area (reportedly Sands Point, Long Island). It’s just a lesson in how urban infrastructure produces a sustainable foundation which can offer a way forward in the face of climate change, global income disparity, etc. I know friends from Toronto (“the Six”, like people started calling it after some Drake song) who rave about TO’s embrace of medium-density development and cultural/linguistic pluralism make it a case-study in “world peace”. A bit of an exaggeration — Toronto’s wonderful but housing’s expensive — but the very idea that a city can symbolize peace and sustainability just via urban infrastructure is worth holding on to.
I remember Bernard-Henri Lévy writing in “American Vertigo: Traveling America in the Footsteps of Tocqueville” of the “Enigma of an America about which I feel, at this stage of my journey, that a certain sentiment (essential to Europe’s civility, consubstantial with Europe’s urbanity) is perhaps on the verge of vanishing: a love of cities.” That “love of cities” doesn’t just mean love of downtowns/centre-villes. Plus, the idea that urban areas are (or can be) particularly energy-efficient and thereby counter climate change gives it a more contemporary and scientific basis.
I love his language here, which I think is derived but not quoted from Roland Barthes, that “Just as there is a language of dreams, so there is a language of cities, more or less well articulated, more or less elegant or legible.” Of course, in the same passage he also critiques cities without a “center”, which sort of cuts against my previous point. But we also need to update our notions of urban planning for the Anthropocene era …
Great discussion, anyhow. Thanks so much for taking the time to respond thoughtfully to my long comments as “keep the focus …”!
According to studies I’ve seen, taking the US for example, the generation in their 50s, 60s, and 70s each have almost 20 times the net worth of the 20-30 age cohort. People under 40 own only 6% of US wealth, and that number is skewed by Silicon Valley unicorns — apparently Mark Zuckerberg alone is responsible for almost 2% of the entire under-40 number (which will change accordingly later this year, on his 40th birthday).
When I propose policies to increase the number of doctors, and other “positive social impact” professions, I’m not imaging that government should force people into one kind of work if they want to do something else — like trim pine tress to look like corkscrews. “Big government” should not intervene in people’s lives and force them to do things they don’t want. But the equally important flip side is that too LITTLE government should not force people to do things they don’t want either.
If someone envisions going to medical school they shouldn’t be forced to work at starbucks or an amazon fulfillment center instead. Is having packages sent to your home instead of, like, actually going to the store, or having one extra barista to make lattes quicker, really more valuable to society than more ER doctors?
Given the disparity in financial resources by age group, it’s hard to say that the existing distribution of labor by economic sector — percentage of the workforce doing retail, construction, financial services, science, health care, education, etc. — is an organic reflection of society’s needs and talents. It seems instead as if the age 50-75 cohort, more or less, architects labor demand via intragenerational concentration of wealth rather than college students and young parents shaping labor supply by choosing careers that benefit society.
In other words, inter-generational wealth gaps (or more precisely discrepancies between age-group cohorts, because statistics on “generational wealth” often refer to generations in terms of the years people were born, not their age at any moment) inhibits a rational distribution of labor. Which is why you get situations like perpetually underfunded health care systems.
That’s against the spirit of social democracy, but it’s also against the spirit of capitalism, because skewed labor distribution inhibits entrepreneurship. Prospects for business innovation become diluted when companies have to compete in a market where labor demand is skewed toward one sliver of the population (the 50-75 yr old disparity against their younger peers, and to some extent older, added to racial gaps, immigrant vs. native-born, education levels, etc.) — i.e., where entrepreneurs find it difficult to build sustainable enterprises unless they can fit their operations into a paradigm where labor’s productions are biased toward specific social/age groups.
The look what happens: when you’re in that cohort where the net worth gap really starts to become evident, or close to that age, maybe that wealth concentration makes people more group-conscious, self-conscious, peer-conscious, than they would be otherwise. It distracts from being a good parent, from endorsing progressive social policies, and even from group cohesion insofar as you have rivalries and factions for no good reason, even in circles where you aim for a more enlightened way of being, like religious communities.
I don’t think the issue is people being competitive, per se, in other words that everyone wants a larger house than their neighbor or something like that — I’m not being cynical — but I think the age/race/education-level wealth gap dynamics plays out in more subtle ways. Let’s say you’re 55; you might believe that your role in society dictates you’re having a certain income or net worth commensurate with your peers. Maybe you’re white, 55, and live in a mid-zone suburb: you might think that owning a home, a stable career, successful investments, and so forth, are the norms for your stratum and falling short on those standards adversely affects the groups you identify with. I don’t mean to stereotype, but just for a bit of concreteness I’ve known a couple fathers who described themselves as “black conservatives” and believed they needed to help elevate their racial peers by demonstrating having reached a financial plateau comparable to white men of the same age. I.e., groups tend to measure themselves against other groups as they age, so (e.g.) Jewish families believe it reflects well on their community to have attractive houses near suburban synagogues, immigrant families want to own homes in majority-white neighborhoods to show that people from their country can assimilate, etc. — and people are more likely to compared their progress through life against others of similar age for that reason in particular. You see yourself as a representative of an ethnic and/or religious group.
That kind of group self-consciousness can be detrimental to social policy and education both. I think parents get too harsh with children when they feel the kids have to be part of some theater where a family starts to take a performative attitude vis-a-vis their friends and neighbors.
No, que no. Catherine was misdiagnosed by court actors at the start, and so much evil flowed from that moment. Her psych, multiple psychs found she was NOT mentally ill, not a narcissist. Catherine was intense. And nervous. She was not abusive, and if Allan possessed videos demonstrating abuse, he surely would have disclosed them for public consumption, as he put out the video that shows Catherine at the end of her rope with her oldest child, over what was a very important theme for Catherine with this child: lying, stealing. It had been a big problem in school for the child, and her mother, an ethicist, knew it was important to deal with. She might have handled that moment better, perhaps not addressing it late at night, etc. But it was not “abuse.” Both parents yelled at the kids, parents yell, and especially when there is marital tension. But in the full context of their caring relationships with their kids, such moments do not add up to abuse.
As for Catherine cheating, the texts are redacted. But sending sex texts is not yet adultery, so not sure if there is proof she cheated in that way with anyone.
I have not seen any text from Catherine to a friend stating that she would get her oldest to lie about her father. Where is the proof that Catherine engaged in that?
As for Allan not bad mouthing his wife to his kids, the tapes speak for themselves, he sung to his kids that she was a “dead duck,” he told her she was “disgusting,” and so forth. After almost a year without seeing their mother (while she was looking for a supervising therapist who could understand her), the kids would have been good and brainwashed against their mother, by their father. This is not a rare occurrence, and mothers have done it to fathers as well.
The courts instigated and went along with all of this, raking in their fees. Psychology is less a science than something else.. (there is abundant proof of faulty research in this area), it is ripe with bias. People in charge didn’t enjoy C’s personality, she was intense, vehement, not inclined to follow their instructions, etc. This is not mental illness. And there is abundant proof to the contrary, of her love and devotion to her kids.
She took her life, she was tired, had been very sick more than once. Get out of Catherine’s business Hannah Friedman, many can see she was a loving mother, and your comments, tendentious, don’t change my mind. A mother lost her kids, kids lost their mother, it’s not good or wise of you to speak against her.
I’m getting tired of another post that uses their narrative & lack of information to heed their conclusions & decide it’s factual !
In fairness to both of them most of those videos are 7 years old , when the relationship was toxic! It was not either one’s best performance , but yes parents yell ! As I stated in a post the notion that Allan would not allow people to talk badly about Catherine in front of the children was in recent years & definitely during the past few years up until today ! You don’t even give Allan an inch while giving Catherine the whole 9 yards . Many comments posted on the internet complain that Allan doesn’t give his side of the story & why didn’t he come out immediately & defend himself ? Unlike Catherine who you claim her maternal bond was strong , Allan didn’t post videos of Catherine raging (which of course when she does there’s an acceptable reason)
In his eyes his daughter’s suffered enough humiliation & as a parent, a father , his job is to protect them at any cost even if meant losing his job. These videos audios text between her & her so called lover are in court documents & someone leaked them ! Those who say it was Allan are foolish ! We the yentas are arguing between one another which one was right or wrong or both , however. we forget Allan doesn’t owe anyone to join the haters , the trolls ,& heard mentality down the Rabbit Hole ! He only owes his daughters who he has vowed to protect , so people back off! Stop posting how you worry about these girls while you are turning the knife after you stabbed them by adding to the destruction (which you didn’t succeed at) of their family home!
Once again someone posts a piece of a comment Allan wrote to Catherine the part that suits their purpose leaving out where Allan begs her to get help so that she can rebuild her relationship w/ her daughter’s! Catherine wasn’t willing & didn’t see her actions as hurting her girls bec she was focused on one thing revenge! That usually does people in! The Judge had NO choice but to give sole custody to Allan based on tapes (prob not all have been leaked) showing Catherine abusing her adopted daughter ! Should the judge have waited so this child would live another day in fear! You, because it’s no one’s business we don’t know what was presented to the judge , what the child & her sister’s reported to their court appointed attorney ! And anyone who thinks Allan bribed the Nanny bec in your minds he had so much money . To most a million dollars is a lot of money to earn forget that he had to pay taxes on a home in Larchmont, living expenses, school, after school activities . In your minds he’s a money tree that can keep on giving! So let’s have a wild imagination & claim he bribed the Nannie’s ! Do you think he was happy the nanny posted to other Nannie’s not to work for this family! Stop stretching just bec someone has a different view who actually experienced living in the household , did you ?
On an important note just because Catherine said so, doesn’t always meen it’s true ! There has been NO proof that Catherine had terminal cancer !!!! So it is not a viable excuse for her actions ! She didn’t post proof of having cancer in her Dropbox, that is already is a red flag that it’s a false claim to pull on peoples heart strings ! She didn’t tell Allan , she didn’t tell the courts, not her mother , family & mostly not even her daughters! She didn’t even tell the dr whom I call the murderer who ok’d that she was wanting assisted suicide bec her cancer returned! She didn’t go off into the sunset wishing her girls well ! It is not normal for a mother who you claim is so maternal to leave her children w/ an abusive man if she really believed that & felt they were in danger ! A loving mother who you claim had a strong relationship w/ her girls doesn’t post her intentions publicly via a Facebook post ! Not even a personal letter was left to prepare them for what her plans were. Facebook would become her downfall again as she had this need to expose her life & gain followers at any costs! So in death she gets the ultimate revenge having old videos exposed & shown all over social media asking her followers & influencer’s to call his place of work & get him fired! So she’s gone & doesn’t care that the main provider for her children will be out of a job ! They will be publicly humiliated & left not even knowing if she passed bec that too they needed to find out via Facebook instead of privately so they as children who y’all claim to care about could take it all in & mourn their mother on their terms instead of the world of influencers !
You think this article is pseudo , but you didn’t think that when the Frank Report posted a scathing article against Allan . That was all truth’s in your eyes . Catherine was perfect , Allan was horrible ! Even though it was presented in court evidence of her affair & she didn’t hide it from Allan she asked him to help set up the guy so that his wife leaves him . Allan the big bad wolf married only 3 years , there was no contentious divorce going on should have seen the red flag then , but he forgave her & felt sorry for her bec he knew they shared a past even a pregnancy she had to end bec he was married! That too is none of our business but sorry people when Catherine released her Pandora Box she threw the first punch to what has bec a worldwide debate (even people in Australia New Zealand have an opinion on this matter! And yes Catherine’s motion that was denied of Allan wiretapping her & that text bet her & a lawyer friend were not protected under client lawyer privilege & his having access to her text bec her password was linked to the house & she forgot to disconnect it is NOT WIRETAPPING! So I will post separately the text between her & her friend Cathryn Monaco . Even after you read how she was willing to use her eldest daughter bec she knew she craved her love I’m sure you will consider that a strong mother daughter bond instead of calling her out on it ! Oh it’s not a bond rather manipulation !
Everyone needs to get over themselves leave their personal opinion out of it ! Yes the divorce took too long , let’s not forget Catherine went through 11 or 12 attorneys , tons of motions that needed to be answered ! New evaluators new supervisors . The last supervisor she chose! Listening to the audio regarding the emails that her daughter claims they didn’t write you hear the supervisor plugging for Catherine ! Catherine agreed to pay for the supervisor if she chooses her! If it were reverse you would say the supervisor plugged for Allan bec he was paying her, he was the wealthier parent , even though not all rulings went against her, Allan as the judge stated to keep the playing field level awarded her close to $500,000 in legal fees. No one expected the last ruling regarding visitation, after all the supervisor was always plugging for Catherine to the point the children state they felt they weren’t being heard! The last report given to the court I think was 145 pages! Something happened that this woman saw Catherine as a danger to her kids! Who are we to judge ? I know it’s hard to accept but some parents get so caught up in a divorce they lose sight of their children ! I
*Catherine did not pass away broke as her net worth presented to the courts SHE put down $2,000,000
*Catherine violated many court orders & was given at many times a get of jail free card ! Maybe bec she was an officer of the court or maybe the judges were corrupt in doing so oops there’s only corruption when something goes Allan’s way !!!
Allen won. Unfortunately she is gone. There is a price to pay. The children have no opportunity to even see mom again even at 18. This is sad but reality in America. Family court at it’s finest.
That was Catherine’s choice in the end ! She many opportunities to seek help – she either didn’t want to or didn’t know how to! I believe her suicide was about revenge & Allan losing his job . In that case I guess she won & now can be at peace
Catherine did seek help. She consistently saw psychiatrists and therapists throughout the 4 year ordeal. She was in weekly to bi-weekly therapy. Not one treating physician diagnosed her with any type of personality disorder requiring medication or hospitalization. What other type of help are you referring to?
Did Allan seek help? I’m betting he didn’t. Cause narrasist don’t seek help.
“The Worst Interests of the Child: The Trafficking of Children and Parents Through U.S. Family Courts”
“Nexnelsrent away!” said Old Baby as she took off in an old man run. “Truinderdashdubbadapresher, evildoers!”
President Joe Biden has reportedly apologized for transferring his powers by biting the young baby. “I regret it, folks,” he said solemnly. “Looks like I just created the only hero that can stand up to me. Not a joke!”
At publishing time, Old Baby had been seen on TV sniffing kids while calling for more troops to Ukraine.
https://babylonbee.com/news/baby-bitten-by-elderly-president-gains-powers-of-an-old-man
Let’s not lose focus here. The children under Catherine’s care were well nourished and properly care for. Has everyone forgotten that after Allan had sole custody of his children for three years that he, too, had so much trouble managing the eldest daughter that the well paid court approved experts recommended the child be removed from Allan’s house and sent to a therapeutic boarding school? So, why harp on the chocolate bar “meltdown” (no pun intended) of Catherine when Allan himself lost his patience with his daughter, calling her a “retard” (as per Catherine’s uncontroverted statement on the video), and later sought professional advice about sending her away to a boarding school. At the end of the day, the court experts, commanding prohibitive fees, asked for the annihilation of a mother from the lives of her three precious daughters because of perhaps a “misstep” she took in discussing litigation strategies with her lawyer, communications that were illegally obtained by Allan in the first place.
In short, this mother saw to it that her children received an excellent private school education and violin lessons as well as other extracurricular activities.
In fact, Allan was able to devote his time to Samsung raking in 1M a year because he had a wife that was attending to all the needs of his children. The reason for the supervised visitation was a fear that Allan might be prejudiced in the custody award if Catherine could influence the children. What kind of a man eviscerates the person who gave birth to his children??? Not a man at all, but a coward of all times!! And what kind of a court extorts such large sums of money from parents? Not a court at all, but a bastion of corruption that MUST be taken down at once. If not, they will pull themselves down and all the benefactors, such as the Orthodox organizations like Lubavitch, that are generously sponsoring secular, though tinged with Jewish overtones, conferences where the likes of Lubell is a featured speaker. Let’s get the poisonous corruption out of the courts so that Catherine’s death shall not be in vain!!!
Just curious (and please keep in mind that I’m not defending Alan by any stretch of the imagination) but you brought up the audio where Catherine points out that he had called her daughter a “%#&*in” re*ard. Let’s say that your spouse did that to your child, do you think that a loving and non toxic mother repeats that over and over to a hysterically crying child and goes so far to ask that child to confirm (while she’s crying) so she can get it on tape? Are those the actions of a mother who is legimitimately concerned for her child’s emotional health or one who is trying to win a PR battle between two parents at the expense thereof.
The nanny info is what’s most damning to me. Who cares about affairs. They’re on either side.
He hacked her emails which is a crime and he’s getting rewarded for it.
If you listen to only part of the recording she looks bad, but in its entirety it seems he’s manipulating the whole situation. She’s clearly sleep deprived abs a mess and he’s calm and collected recording it all. He silenced the child a few times and he’s an abuser.
He drives her to this point and then he’s “helping” make her better. Don’t buy it.
But the getting kid to lie that is bad. And the mistreatment of the oldest is horrifying. The mattress on the floor – unless there’s another explanation is sad. And the nanny’s description of how tense the kid was, and how she aimed to please seems on target.
Plus she’s saying her kids have no empathy. Even with a bad marriage kids have empathy. Idk why she’d say that of her own children. Very sad. Sent from my iPhone
But that is not the point. So they were both toxic, they both cheated, however that does not excuse Allan Kassenoff, the one with significantly more access to legal resources and abused his powers and network, used fraudulent, unethical experts, evaluators, to completely take custody away from Catherine Kassenoff, to obtain Ex Parte custody orders which are abusive in and of themselves, and to completely shut Catherine out of her children’s lives is pure evil, no their faults during marriage does not explain how only Allan Kassenoff got Sole Physical and Legal custody and Catherine Kassenoff being forced on Supervised Visitation for almost 4 years, that makes no sense. Furthermore the abuse alleged to her adopted daughter does not even come close to “abuse” not everyone is a perfect parent, but for these unpleasant acts to constitute a parent totally losing custody is outrageous, that a divorce and a custody battle can cost this much and last this long should be outlawed, ex parte orders should never be issued unless a kid is bleeding, none of this makes sense, People who commit violent crimes that have served lengthy prison sentences have more access to thier children than Catherine Kassenoff did, so no this article, along with others in support of Allan Kassenoff is not convincing and not excuse the fact that it was Allan Kassenoff who deliberately, knowingly, willingly shut Catherine Kassenoff out of her children’s lives that is evil, and whats happening to Allan Kassenoff is more than deserving, in fact its not even enough the people involved in this heinous child snatching scheme should be disbarred and inprisioned. Period
Let me understand Catherine worked for the Governor’s office & was a prosecutor! If anyone had more clout and access to the courts was her . Allan was a patent attorney
No, she was previous a prosecutor who became a stay at home mu, years ago, no it has nothing to do with your role as a lawyer it has to do with how prestigious of a lawyer you are and Allan was raking in 1 Million + a year,
Where do you pluck your information from ?
She worked full time and always had a nanny. She was fired from three jobs though. Luckily she already had a job lined up when she got fired the first time. After the second time, she decided not to work. She stayed home for about 9 months while still having a full time nanny and housekeeper, who came once per week. After 9 months or so, she took the government job (which she ultimately lost in 2022).
Allan lost plenty of motions that required him to keep paying out money , so I don’t get your point . Maybe because he made a nice salary the court used him instead of favoriting him as you say
Are you forgetting the email that Allan sent from his work account to ‘Erik’ at the law firm Catherine had instructed to act on her behalf, using his clout by saying “I am a bit confused. Does Mr Frisch actually practice divorce law? I am a bit surprised your law firm would take on…”.
Here here
A full investigation of all of the players involved
I have known Catherine since I was 7 although I would by lying if I said I knew her intimately but Wheeling was a relatively small town. We attended the same private schools but I was more familiar with her brothers than her personally. I remember Catherine as quiet, shy, nice and reserved. She was a super high achiever and I believe valedictorian of her high school class. Her brothers were also high achievers but also kind of star athletes that lots of girls would fawn over. Their family was always super reclusive. If there was some sort of family turmoil that her family was privy too you would never know it from appearances. Dad was super nice and a physician, mother was British and I think a housewife, also very sweet. As we grew up, I eventually became facebook friends with her as people from Wheeling who had attended the same schools were apt to do. From her Facebook it appeared that she had gotten married a little bit later than everyone else but other than that she was not a regular poster and she seemed to have a good life (or as much as you can derive from a fb profile). Then, all of the sudden, a couple of years ago, this stuff began. Someone who was known to be so reserved and reclusive started posting pictures of herself living out of her car. It was brought to my attention by other people from our home town and naturally people from my home town would IM me about her posts. My impression of her posts was that 1) yes her husband was an absolute jerk that treated her horribly but 2) I could not imagine that posting these videos publicly (she did not keep them private) was helping her case in any way shape or form. In fact I did make that argument to her while offering her sympathy and hoping that she got her kids back (as did others) and they would be met with an onslaught of her disgruntled fellow warriors who even would go so far as to look on your page and make disparaging comments about your pets (that I found almost amusing). . I was called a “miserable childless woman” and mind you I said that I hoped she would get her daughters back but had the audacity to suggest that maybe playing this out publicly and putting out videos of her children without their consent wasn’t the way to go. Some of her “warriors” were also Q’anon supporters and by that I mean losers. The whole thing felt entirely off and naturally did garner attention. Out of curiosity, I did check out her ex husband’s page and he did seem to be modeling himself as the stable doting father. Catherine would also publish posts where she would say defamatory things about his “mistress” and even would post on Allan’s page accusing her of wearing her clothes. (As a side note, the girlfriend thing was weird. She was clearly acting as his cheerleader yet she still had her ex husband’s last name and pictures with him as her profile photos? But I digress). What struck me as creepy about the whole thing was the fact that Cathy would announce like previews that she would be posting more videos in the following weeks, almost like she was wanting her “viewers” to be in anticipation. Yeah, that’s not normal. There was also a video of her accusing him of “stalking” and she is filming him from a distance during a soccer game and he…isn’t….doing…anything and at one point you can hear one of the parents asking her “Is there some sort of problem?” and then she cuts off the audio. What was also deafening was the silence of her family. You got the sense that perhaps they were laying low and waiting for this all to go away. The email from her brother to her makes perfect sense given the presence online. She never would mention anything about her family.
Having said all this what I find so disturbing is how black and white people are portraying this. Catherine from what I could tell CLEARLY had some mental health issues and I can only imagine 1 having an asshole for a husband, who thought it was okay to talk to his wife like that combined with 2) multiple fertility treatments etc. and then cancer would have done much for her emotional health. Neither of these individuals are blameless. Let’s all agree that non toxic parents don’t do the following 1) call their wives fat losers in front of their kids (even if they are angry with them or estranged) or speak to Catherine the way he did. He has no justification for that even if she was mentally ill. 2) play out the details of their divorce in front of their kids which they BOTH did (what was CLEARLY more important to both of these parties is “who looked better (or worse)” with zero thought or concern with how this might be affecting their children 3) heckle and or remind their kids of the horrible things that the other parent said about them. The audio of Catherine asking over and over “Did your father call you a $%*@in ret@rd?” is so god damn disturbing it made me want to cry. Seriously that poor little girl Ally and the amount of emotional terror she endured is beyond disturbing and lastly 4) commits assisted suicide without allowing her children or members of her family (who I can vouch did NOT know) the ability to process or say goodbye. NO ONE I repeat NO ONE makes someone commit suicide. That was her choice. She had other options. I do believe that Catherine loved her daughters and I do believe Allan probably does too. So what we can all hope is that if her suicide is fake, she gets herself together and gets some therapy and can have a life with her kids when they are older. I would also hope that Allan feels some sort of contrition for what he did as well, accepted responsibility that NO MAN should talk to the Mother of his children the way he did. That was abuse plain and simply. I hope he is at least contrite and is doing everything he can to ensure those girls’ emotional stability. I don’t wish any of these parties ill will particularly for the sake of those girls.
I have known Catherine since I was 7 although I would by lying if I said I knew her intimately but Wheeling was a relatively small town. We attended the same private schools but I was more familiar with her brothers than her personally. I remember Catherine as quiet, shy, nice and reserved. She was a super high achiever and I believe valedictorian of her high school class. Her brothers were also high achievers but also kind of star athletes that lots of girls would fawn over. Their family was always super reclusive. If there was some sort of family turmoil that her family was privy too you would never know it from appearances. Dad was super nice and a physician, mother was British and I think a housewife, also very sweet. As we grew up, I eventually became facebook friends with her as people from Wheeling who had attended the same schools were apt to do. From her Facebook it appeared that she had gotten married a little bit later than everyone else but other than that she was not a regular poster and she seemed to have a good life (or as much as you can derive from a fb profile). Then, all of the sudden, a couple of years ago, this stuff began. Someone who was known to be so reserved and reclusive started posting pictures of herself living out of her car. It was brought to my attention by other people from our home town and naturally people from my home town would IM me about her posts. My impression of her posts was that 1) yes her husband was an absolute jerk that treated her horribly but 2) I could not imagine that posting these videos publicly (she did not keep them private) was helping her case in any way shape or form. In fact I did make that argument to her while offering her sympathy and hoping that she got her kids back (as did others) and they would be met with an onslaught of her disgruntled fellow warriors who even would go so far as to look on your page and make disparaging comments about your pets (that I found almost amusing). . I was called a “miserable childless woman” and mind you I said that I hoped she would get her daughters back but had the audacity to suggest that maybe playing this out publicly and putting out videos of her children without their consent wasn’t the way to go. Some of her “warriors” were also Q’anon supporters and by that I mean losers. The whole thing felt entirely off and naturally did garner attention. Out of curiosity, I did check out her ex husband’s page and he did seem to be modeling himself as the stable doting father. Catherine would also publish posts where she would say defamatory things about his “mistress” and even would post on Allan’s page accusing her of wearing her clothes. (As a side note, the girlfriend thing was weird. She was clearly acting as his cheerleader yet she still had her ex husband’s last name and pictures with him as her profile photos? But I digress). What struck me as creepy about the whole thing was the fact that Cathy would announce like previews that she would be posting more videos in the following weeks, almost like she was wanting her “viewers” to be in anticipation. Yeah, that’s not normal. There was also a video of her accusing him of “stalking” and she is filming him from a distance during a soccer game and he…isn’t….doing…anything and at one point you can hear one of the parents asking her “Is there some sort of problem?” and then she cuts off the audio. What was also deafening was the silence of her family. You got the sense that perhaps they were laying low and waiting for this all to go away. The email from her brother to her makes perfect sense given the presence online. She never would mention anything about her family.
Having said all this what I find so disturbing is how black and white people are portraying this. Catherine from what I could tell CLEARLY had some mental health issues and I can only imagine 1 having an asshole for a husband, who thought it was okay to talk to his wife like that combined with 2) multiple fertility treatments etc. and then cancer would have done much for her emotional health. Neither of these individuals are blameless. Let’s all agree that non toxic parents don’t do the following 1) call their wives fat losers in front of their kids (even if they are angry with them or estranged) or speak to Catherine the way he did. He has no justification for that even if she was mentally ill. 2) play out the details of their divorce in front of their kids which they BOTH did (what was CLEARLY more important to both of these parties is “who looked better (or worse)” with zero thought or concern with how this might be affecting their children 3) heckle and or remind their kids of the horrible things that the other parent said about them. The audio of Catherine asking over and over “Did your father call you a $%*@in ret@rd?” is so god damn disturbing it made me want to cry. Seriously that poor little girl Ally and the amount of emotional terror she endured is beyond disturbing and lastly 4) commits assisted suicide without allowing her children or members of her family (who I can vouch did NOT know) the ability to process or say goodbye. NO ONE I repeat NO ONE makes someone commit suicide. That was her choice. She had other options. I do believe that Catherine loved her daughters and I do believe Allan probably does too. So what we can all hope is that if her suicide is fake, she gets herself together and gets some therapy and can have a life with her kids when they are older. I would also hope that Allan feels some sort of contrition for what he did as well, accepted responsibility that NO MAN should talk to the Mother of his children the way he did. That was abuse plain and simply. I hope he is at least contrite and is doing everything he can to ensure those girls’ emotional stability. I don’t wish any of these parties ill will particularly for the sake of those girls.
“ As I said, Allan did not badmouth her in front of the girls.”
Allen was screaming that Catherine had a boyfriend repeatedly in front of the girls. Catherine responded saying the kids are present and to stop.
Allen would not relent. I’d say that’s badmouthing. Adult matters in the presence of little ones.
You are referring to video’s from 7 years ago ! She was just as relentless as well . I think the Frank Report is talking about present time & the years the girls lived with him ! As the Nanny said the home became more peaceful
Sad that it had to get to that point
When all of this began in 2019, the videos were not old. Clearly Catherine could no longer record more videos after she was kicked out of the house in March 2020. The girls were still reporting Allan’s anger issues up until 2022. Most of us understand that after couples divorce things settle down. Both parents and the girls would have settled into a new, less toxic normal had they just shared custody. It’s pretty standard.
“Hannah Friedman“ is a pseudonym, right?
“ No wonder they called her Catherine instead of “Mother.”
They called her Catherine because it was modeled for her.
Oh please. My father called my mother by her first name. My mother called my dad by his first name. Yet despite that “modeling,” I still called them mom and dad.
Sorry I don’t get your point . My parents also called one another by their first names ! I wouldn’t have dared to then do the same –
“ Marc Abrams, the first neutral custody evaluator, and Kathleen McKay, the second neutral custody evaluator.”
It’s already been proven that Marc Abrams was NOT neutral nor was the judge.
Less us more.
“ Dr. Marc Abrams found that due to her mental disorders, Catherine could not blame herself for her current predicaments but blamed everyone around her.
Judge Everett, the first judge in the Matrimonial Action, stated Catherine could not be around the children without supervision, even “for a few minutes.”
Abrams is not qualified to make any diagnosis of a personality disorder.
He also came up with “unspecified” personality disorder which is NOT accepted as a stand alone diagnosis in the DSM-V.
If valid issues with Catherine, there would not be a need to bring in court appointed frauds with immunity clauses to steal her children.
No one called CPS. Not once.
Post the texts between the lovers!
Let’s focus on the legal system
This is smearing the reputation of a woman without cause.
Allen committed a crime by illegally accessing Catherine’s texts and emails. He gained advantage by having done so.
There’s no justification for his actions. If he suspected an affair, seek a divorce or hire and investigator to legally gain information.
Allen stalked Catherine. It’s abuse.
And to say “she cheated first” to justify his cheating is silly.
It sounds like both allowed the marriage to break down and both unfaithful. However affairs don’t make someone a “bad” parent. Maybe a crummy partner.
Allan did not intercept Catherine’s email . She put her iPhone password on the computer to use it to find her phone & never disconnected it! Her text emails were being synched ! Him attaining her text emails does not change or excuse her behavior ! And what she wrote to her friend about her oldest daughter & how she can get her to lie was heartbreaking ! She admits knowing this child craves her love & instead of showering her with more or any love she continues the abuse by conniving with her friend to instead use the child to lie & say Allan abuses them !
Please clarify – there would have been no reason to manipulate the oldest daughter into lying. The evidence is clear that Allan had some serious anger management issues that most would interpret as abusive with police and CPS reports to back it up.
Eeewww. Get a life.
Wouldn’t that be gossip
“ I feel sorry for you, and while at times I might become angry and frustrated, at the end of the day I pity you because your behavior has ruined your life and your relationship with the kids. Instead of focusing on getting help, you have focused your rage on destroying me. For that, I’m sad for you because you will never get a chance to have these years back”
This statement by Allan is a playbook in the parental alienation court scam to remove children from the targeted parent.
The true narcissist projects onto the targeted parent exactly what he is doing to her.
Accessing emails and texts is a crime. It’s stalking. Please stop minimizing the crime this is and the legal advantage this gave to Allen.
Did Allen provide Catherine access to all his emails and texts during that same time period?
I’m sure he laid out his courtroom strategy as well. The gal/custody eval by court criminals was Allen’s avenue for revenge.
Neither parent entered with clean hands but instead of the court helping this family in conflict, they exacerbated it and made it far worse than it needed to be.
You do not put no contact orders in with any parent.
Psychologists failed to contact CPS! If there was harm to children these psychologists need to report within 12 hours.
“ Catherine was diagnosed with a personality disorder and is a narcissist!”
Catherine was diagnosed by a court appointed psychologist who lacks the medical credentials required for any diagnosis. She was not diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder or any personality disorder by a licensed psychiatrist.
These false statements are a result of the family court playbook- where unfounded terms are thrown around to assassinate one parent – and justify the removal of children.
If the case against Catherine is strong (which it’s not) there is no need to pile on with the court corruption.
Catherine held her ground against court appointed experts and judges. She was accurate- the behaved badly and the outcome confirmed this.
The court actors in this case added to the demise of this family.
The strongest argument and most concerning for me is the report of the Nannies.
Catherine should have just released evidence that she saw as court corruption ! Instead , as the court stated she sought revenge against her ex instead of caring about her girls . From the grave she initiated all this mayhem . From the grave she will continue to lose the battle . As this article states Allan’s Legacy as opposed to Catherine’s Legacy . Allan has their girls their love admiration and respect , so even from the grave she failed at breaking their bond ! Money comes and go and gd willing come again but family, your relationship with your kids is priceless
In more than one I have seen nannies to be bribed in order to give a certain testimony.
The mattes or the empty shelves do not justify any of the disproportionate measures of the court. The court was complicit in vanishing the mother of the lives of her children.
What a patriarcal system. Ladies, if you want to become mother be aware of the judicial system of your country, you are not protected and your children can easily be removed from you. It is better to be a single mother.
“ On May 24, 2019, Allan, having read the text messages, commenced a divorce action.
On June 5, 2019, Catherine and Allan entered into a joint stipulation regarding interim custody of the children, which required Catherine to be supervised when she was around the children.”
What happened within days that Catherine agreed to supervised visitation? This is not my recollection of the facts. Frank- can you please clarify? I thought the supervised visitation was the result of the custody eval which did not occur within a month.
The supervised visits had nothing to do with the court evaluators that’s the big misconception because everyone adds their own narrative! Catherine agreed to the supervised visits after videos & text of her abusing the oldest daughter who was adopted were given in to the court ! Catherine agreed to these terms as a settlement because she knew how damaging the video was
“Hannah Friedman” wrote: “… On May 24, 2019, Allan, having read the text messages, commenced a divorce action. On June 5, 2019, Catherine and Allan entered into a joint stipulation regarding interim custody of the children, which required Catherine to be supervised when she was around the children …”
A stipulation is usually an agreement in a contract.
When did Catherine agree she should be supervised??
“Hannah Freedman” wrote: “At first, Catherine and Allan had joint custody, and divided the time. The one who had custody would live in the home, and the other would leave. They would alternate bi-weekly.”
So, they alternated bi-weekly … but Catherine was supervised??
Mr. Lubell ordered Catherine evicted from her home and gave Allan (and the girlfriend) custody of Catherine’s children on March 27, 2020.
By 2021 – 2022, Alan and his friends alienated the children from their mother
I called it. Catherine was humiliated by those personal sexts being shown to the court, igniting her rage. And in classic narcissist style, she couldn’t take responsibility and admit she was in the wrong for the affair and the texts, and instead she only focused on how Allan was in the wrong for seeing those texts. Even unsuccessfully suing him for wiretapping or some such. It’s narc 101. “I’m not wrong for cheating, YOU are wrong for not trusting me.”
I read the documents and Catherine was 100% aware that there was still a stayaway order in effect when she violated it. Thanks to her legal expertise, she was able to get it dismissed on a technicality.
She also obtain Canadian passports for her children without her husbands knowledge, and denied that she had the passports initially when she was questioned by the court. It appears she had a plan to kidnap the girls. That is another reason why she only had supervised visitation.
You’re pretty interested in that case. 🤔
Seems like you are pretty invested in this case as well as other’s ! Do you have an agenda ? An ax to grind ? Or your a conscious citizen preforming his Civil Duties by monitoring a story that also has nothing to do with any of us & bullying attacking other commentators ! Go back to the rock you crawled out from under
“You’re pretty interested in that case. 🤔” ?
Has Allan leaked highly confidential information to a ‘friend’ with instructions to leak it to public websites as he thinks Catherine is still alive and this will bring her out of hiding to respond? Smacks of coercive control and Ms Friedman has fallen for it.
Catherine wasn’t innocent in all of this but she had suffered from cancer with little compassion from her husband, he found her body disgusting and told her to only be seen fully clothed. The children are the victims and this is elongating their suffering – Hannah mentioned ridicule in the school playground from parents who let their children read social media messages, does she not think they will also now read Hannah’s own references to soft porn and snigger in front of the children?
Has Hannah the authority to request that private exchanges be published, including naming Catherine’s boyfriend from before her marriage, and potentially causing great upset for his family who are innocent and don’t deserve to be dragged into this out of what appears now to be Allan’s vindictiveness?
That ship has sailed. Catherine leaked all the reports, medical records, transcripts. Hannah doesn’t need authority to release anything, Catherine opened this whole can of worms.
I am sure Frank understands Federal and State wiretapping laws better than you do.
I think the 2 judges who dismissed the 2 motion against Allan for wiretapping know the law even better than Frank and yourself
Catherine didn’t “leak” anything. Public scrutiny of our court system is permitted.
The lack of scrutiny and lack of oversight is what has allowed out family and probate courts to turn into criminal enterprises by guardianships of court appointed thugs- Hiding in plain sight.
??? Did she upload her children’s private medical records (violating (HIPPA law/rights) to her Dropbox on Facebook for any peep to see ??? Did she not post in her Dropbox videos of her minor children without blurring their face & without their consent into her Facebook Dropbox In fact it’s illegal what she did!
??? So what exactly did Catherine not leak
Both Catherine & Allan have a right to scrutinize the courts I guess in some way we all do. However , she corrupted & muddied up the system by trying to get back at her ex throughout the case , never taking responsibility for her actions , not even in death … how unfortunate for her girls the circus she created
It’s ok to trash Allan all over social media , but Catherine’s lover should receive a free pass ! Now you’re worried about the children where were you when social media & herd mentality by posting Allan’s place of work & phone # & #’s of his clients demanding he be fired !
I’m so tired of people thinking that it’s Allan or someone posting as Allan! Please give this lady and others have minds of their own & seek the truth ! Everyone is hillier than thou !
The woman is dead and can’t defend herself and the husband has court ordered custody and will certainly not lose it now. Nor will any of this help his employment prospects. Seems like the only thing left for people to do is go back and forth for sheer voyeuristic entertainment regardless of the 3 children in the mix. Shameful
Yeah, still zero proof of her death sooo……
Hmmmm so the dead woman leaves a mess to clean up ! Has court documents , her minor kids medical records posted when they asked her not to , she left videos to be leaked to avenge her husband & now that people are starting to see the truth of what she did and didn’t disclose they aren’t being fair to the unfortunate dead woman ! Are you kidding me ! I hope a place of future employment will see the truth and realize this guy a distinguished attorney was falsely accused judged and unjustly becoming the poster guy of social media !
I thought she had terminal cancer. How come that is not in this post?
Maybe it’s not in the article because there is no proof that she had terminal cancer . The letter the Dr sent who ok’d her to have assisted suicide makes no mention of Catherine stating she was seeking this road because she had terminal cancer !
Her suicide was the act of a mentally ill woman. She needed help and all family court did was take the family’s money. Ugly.
Guessing you were never a mother of three children, trying to fight cancer while also fighting an evil family court attorney with evil connections in Westchester County family courts.
Has anyone ever taken your three children, your home, your job and millions of dollars from you while you tried to fight breast cancer? 🤔
Try experiencing all of that, then write to tell us about your response to all that stress. Tell us if your response to all that stress is “mental illness” or a totally normal response to year after year of unbearable stress.
Your argument presumes that the only rational and normal way to have dealt her situation was to commit suicide. Yes, this case is tragic but Catherine didn’t have a monopoly on suffering and or injustice. There are other mothers (and fathers) who have likely endured similar obstacles that did not in fact commit suicide. What she also didn’t do was notify and or attempt to prepare her children and or family (mother and two brothers) as to her health and that this was the recourse she was going to take to end her suffering. Nope, she thought posting a “Goodbye Cruel World” message about “her story” was far more important than that. By the way, I know for a fact her family did not know what was going on. Her brother was absolutely clueless.
Alan can command flying monkeys around his former wife even after her death. Some of us see you, Alan
WOW you are such a hater to the point that you give such POWERS to Allan to be able to command FLYING MONKEYS vs Catherine’s HERD MENTALITY
… All kinds of comments about the case will probably continue until the good federal authorities investigate each and every crime and fraud committed in the case. Once competent federal offices fully investigate the case, most of the public will feel that family — and more families in family courts in the future — will be protected from that point on.
This case is about the court officials involved. Court reform is what is wanted and most definitely long overdue.
The harm done to that family could have been prevented. Court reform is currently being pursued and has been pursued since the 1980s.
Political power is what must be marshalled — not voyeurism about what some would like to think of as “a closed case”.
Smart children know good parents discipline children.
Smart children know good parents under extreme stress, sometimes yell.
Smart children know good parents don’t let their children play with those who might be a bad influence.
Smart children know good parents don’t allow wrong behaviors.
Smart adults know children — especially pre-teens and teenagers — often push boundaries to test parents’ love. Most competent adults reading FR who know that probably noticed that kind of testing within the context of that impossibly stressful, purposely adversarial for-profit “parental alienation” set up. These cases are the same all over the nation.
“Hannah”, who mostly targets the children in her comments, seems blissfully unaware that there is such a thing as the parental alienation set-up in family courts. Whether or not she knows of that legal tactic, “Hannah” tries to convince the children of HER opinions of Catherine. Disparaging the other parent is what Catherine was accused of doing.
The Westchester County “family court” cabal removed Catherine from her own home for “alienating” Allan.
Meanwhile, Catherine was the parent who was alienated from her children.
After all those years of alienation, Allan, the girlfriend, the nannies, Allan’s friends, family and Gus’ group of thieves forced those three children to be separated from Catherine and yet … the oldest STILL wanted to live with Catherine for half the week this past spring. ❤️
The oldest child saw through the gaslighting. Older at the time and more able to see the truth than her younger sisters. Now that Catherine is in Heaven, I’m praying for the oldest girl the most. “Hannah” seems to target the oldest the most.
“Hannah” wrote:
“Allan forced the children to visit, even though they begged him not to!“
That’s a lie.
The video Catherine posted from Hommocks skating rink March 18, 2023 shows Allan skating up to stand about ten feet from Catherine. He clearly taunts Catherine saying, “Your children don’t want you here Catherine.”
See the document, “Cullen Rpt dated Mar 19, 2023”. March 19th was one day after March 18th.
The professionally trained provider wrote, “… A’s sessions with her mother have continued to go very well. She is very positive about their time together and asking/for looking for more time with her mother and less restrictions on contact (i.e. texting vs email, going to her mother’s home, longer visits) in each session. A. openly speaks about sleeping over at her mother’s home and actually has spoken about spending “half the week” at her mothers and “half the week” at her fathers. Ms. Kassenoff has visited with A weekly in the community, has met A’s friends, and attends A’s skating lessons. …”
Allan’s alienating behaviors and the nanny’s alienating behaviors (did Allan pay the nannies extra to side with him against Catherine?) showing up again failed to alienate those three wonderful children from their wonderful mother.
If “Hannah Friedman” is the girlfriend, it seems she might be paying the piper now. The children are older and the older the children are, the more they will want to know the truth of what Westchester County family court did to their mother. They are all smart children who will eventually understand what happened. When they are older, they will probably find other children who were victimized in “family courts” in the same ways.
May those three children file lawsuits against that cabal of judges, attorneys and “evaluators” in the Westchester County family court who committed all those many crimes against them. The sooner Ms. “Friedman” figures out what happened, the happier life will be for all involved.
I hope and pray those three girls know will always know how much Catherine loved them all, equally.
❤️ ❤️ ❤️
This makes more sense than the narrative thus far.
Regardless of who did what, it’s the kids who have suffered the most. By the way, I’d love to know the date of that post from the French Au Pair.
Great freaking article! I’m pondering the death of martyrs….and thinking how neat it would be to die upon one’s sword. Kids now a days (Cathy) vacation in the Swiss Alps and fall asleep by sedation. I wonder if there were chocolates by her bedside at the end.
Did you know Catherine?
If you’re a stranger to her, why attack her in so many of your comments? Does something about the case strike a sore nerve? No need to answer, it just seems sort of weird for a stranger to take the case so personally if you never met her. 🤔
I saw this comment on Facebook group Catherine Kassenoff-Factual Analysis & thought it had a lot of good points !
I replaced one word & switched it to – the influencer w/ has everything but will only disclose pieces that feed a false narrative: CK is/was a victim of a court system that’s biased against mothers & CK is/was a victim of DV by AK. If he released ALL of the information, the truth would be clear – this is not a case of a biased court system or typical male-to-female DV, it’s a case of a wife & mother w/a personality disorder that causes harm to her marriage & her family. When she was held accountable for the harm she caused, she acted predictably – she scapegoated others in an attempt to evade responsibility using abhorrent tactics. No one, including her own children, was safe from her vicious, hostile attempts to frame herself as a victim. The information re: the facts on this case is easily accessible, so those who chose to not do their homework & look into the full context are complicit in harming her children too.
FA- what you fail to understand is that there are many of us who have been similarly abused by the court system, and that’s why Catherines case has struck a nerve. The court system is evil. That is the point of all of this. Did Catherine have a PD? Maybe, maybe not. If she did, a truly neutral psychiatrist should have diagnosed it, not a court appointed hack like Abrams. It seems like Allan might have had a PD from what I can see, but I’m not an expert. But I’ll add that those of us with real experience in family court know that grossly unqualified and compromised psychologists roam through the court system, making hearsay based allegations about parents, resulting in atrocities like these, often with a cloak of gender bias (women are crazy and vindictive, mens abuse is washed away) . Look up the Tommy Valva case. The court players said the mom desperately trying to protect her autistic son seemed ‘mental’ and took custody away completely, giving sole custody to the father who later murdered him. If we dug through that mothers background, could we also find unflattering facts about her? Sure, we can of every human being. But it does not justify removing custody from an otherwise capable parent.
Abrams is a dirt bag. After his social media posts about women went public, he should be barred from serving as a court “expert”. If he talked about my wife or sister that way, I’d knock his bitch-made ass out. Abrams is toxic, just like Lubell. They should have zero supporters after this.
If we were the jury in the case, we’d expect the author of that post to identify him/herself and swear that all they write is the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Where’s the, “I saw …” and the “I heard …”?
Facts and evidence are relevant, opinions aren’t — especially when Catherine is no longer able to defend herself from those accusations.
Here’s an indisputable fact:
Westchester County family court took four years and millions of dollars from that family to destroy it.
“On May 24, 2019, Allan, having read the text messages, commenced a divorce action.
On June 5, 2019, Catherine and Allan entered into a joint stipulation regarding interim custody of the children, which required Catherine to be supervised when she was around the children.
At first, Catherine and Allan had joint custody, and divided the time. The one who had custody would live in the home, and the other would leave. They would alternate bi-weekly.”
Didn’t Allan go ballistic about cleaning up the bedroom? Maybe the oldest daughter’s room looked different because dad was insisting she keep it that way. It’s difficult to tell.
There are two sides to every story. No one sees Catherine as a hero for suicide. The fatherhood initiative often discusses father’s being suicidal. All the negative aspects of father’s who have lost custody. Many dangerous fathers have been engaged in the lives of their children. The negative aspects of mothers not in the lives of their children is never mentioned. When the situation is reversed and the court appointed psychologist sees that dad is mentally unstable they are granted access any way. The red carpet is rolled out. The focus is on the constant conflict of these court appointed psychologist. There is much focus on painting women as crazy. Often people who have been traumatized have difficulty with family members. They fail to understand the situation they are living in. This is just like a tennis match. Both sides back and forth. The focus is on the court player. Lack of focus on the children. If the children were speaking to the father like that in supervised visit it’s parental alienation. When it’s a mother it’s because she is crazy. The system is bias. Both parents had significant issues inflamed by the battle in family court. Hopefully the children are doing better now that the tug of war is over.
Exactly this. Many of us have disordered exes who we have seen family courts bend over backwards to accommodate to preserve their ‘parenting rights’. Why wasn’t Catherine given the same accommodations?
Finally! None of the social media mafia is talking about this side of the story. I keep saying it. The kids lose. Catherine is no hero. Families have problems. Divorce traumatizes children. Allan and Catherine are adults with the brain function to understand what’s going on. The kids do not. They deserve a father that can provide for them. They deserved a mother that would fight for them. If people really cared about this case, they would leave Allan and the girls alone and let them rebuild the destruction this has caused. Catherine is no Martyr, she is a coward that would rather have her children live without her than to continue to fight, regardless of whether she was terminally ill. As a mother of 3, I can’t imagine selfishly taking my own life in that way. All the best to Allan and the girls, no one deserves this. And may God have mercy on Catherine’s soul.
4:54am Very well said!! And will add that putting your business out on the internet was unbelievably damaging to those kids. Parents should always put the welfare of their children first and this was a very selfish move on her part.
4:54 am and “Hannah Friedman” said it well by putting someone else’s personal business on the internet?
How are 4:54 am and “Hannah Friedman” both not very selfish for posting their gossip about Catherine?
ALL discussion of the Kassenoff case must be about blatant crimes, corruption and collusion in that case.
Gossip about the family combined with “oh, isn’t it terrible to post family problems out on the internet” is getting old. Just stop, already.
The focus on adult agendas to spin the case at the expense of the children is despicable. It’s no wonder Catherine couldn’t tolerate four years of such toxicity. Living with that stress must have been pure torture. It would have destroyed anyone.
May Catherine rest in peace or help those investigating the case in the pursuit of justice and/or may she haunt the criminals who committed those crimes against her and her children — until justice is served.
So now that Catherine is being outed on the internet it’s called GOSSIP but when Catherine asks the herd mentality to call her husband’s law firm & post 7 year old videos of her ex in a bad light – I get it Pro Allan is gossip & Pro Catherine is Justice ! Catherine made it about Kassenoff vs Kassenoff instead of Kassenoff vs Corrupt Family Court ! Because Allan made a nice salary & they were a 2 family income the courts kept this case going, financially destroying BOTH of them !
Both are none of our business
2:00pm
One could say Catherine also had a nice salary and even had enough to purchase a home in Larchmont in cash shortly before her suicide. Just some things that make you say hmmmmm….
“ALL discussion of the Kassenoff case must be about blatant crimes, corruption and collusion in that case.”
Catherine would’ve lost custody even if Abrams didn’t allegedly perv on a past client. Even if Lubell never officiated any wedding. The court got it right by giving full custody to the dad in this case.
As a mother of 3 🤔, I can’t imagine selfishly taking my own life in that way. All the best to Allan and the girls, no one deserves this. I keep saying it. Catherine is no hero. Divorce traumatizes children. They deserve a father that can provide for them. If people really cared about this case, they would leave Allan and the girls alone and let them rebuild the destruction this has caused. Families have problems. The kids lose.
Allan and Catherine (and 4:54 am) are adults with the brain function to understand what’s going on. The kids do not. They deserved a mother that would fight for them. Catherine is no Martyr, she is a coward that would rather have her children live without her than to continue to fight, regardless of whether she was terminally ill. And may God have mercy on Catherine’s soul. Finally! None of the social media mafia is talking about this side of the story.
She was never going to be granted access to her children. This is the pattern. Next was the termination of her parental rights. She was no dummy. The same strategy used in these divorce cases. How do we know the bedroom didn’t look that way cause Allan got mad about a messy bedroom. Wasn’t there a video. Suicide is an act of desperation .
Come back when you’re facing stage 4 breast cancer as a single parent. Or even a married parent. Any kind of terminal cancer. Let us know how you’re feeling: how brave and strong and godly you are. Be detailed.
I’m sure your beloved children will enjoy cradling your bald little head as you puke bile into the bedclothes because someone wasn’t there with a basin. There’s so much laundry to do…because you’ll throw fevers and sweat through your sheets constantly. The part of your brain that regulates temperature stops working. Kids love doing laundry! They love rolling mommy over to change the fitted sheet. Or do you hire someone? Talk it over with the kids.
You’ll babble gibberish because your liver is failing and it can’t filter toxins from your blood. Look, mommy’s pee-yellow with jaundice! You’ll literally stew to death in your own poisons. Be brave though! You don’t get dialysis once you are terminal. Sorry. Boo hoo hoo!
Or maybe tumors on your diaphragm mean you can’t breathe, and mommy needs oxygen now. Even with oxygen, it hurts when your diaphragm moves. Uh oh! When you stop breathing, daddy has to call the ambulance. Or maybe your kids will do that. Fun family memories!
Or they can drug you with fentanyl (your kids can have the extra strips once you die) and then your trio of cherubs can stare at your comatose body in the hospital bed. You’ll be grotesquely bloated or emaciated. Sometimes both. So weird! They can swab your gaping mouth with glycerine swabs because they love you.
More commonly it’s the unremitting and un-druggable pain of bone metastases. No position is comfortable. Maybe you’ll snap a rib when little Jane tries to help you move. Oops! Sorry, mommy! Please don’t cry!
Before that point, your kids will cherish the times driving you to radiation and chemo…once they get their learner’s permits. They’ll learn to change your diapers, unless the opiates mean you can’t poop without an enema. I’m sure your teens will love helping though.
Your “she’s a coward” take is naive, spoiled garbage. You won’t feel bad, but you should.
@4:54 pm someone who has critical thinking