| Fatherhood advocates have publicly revealed extensive court findings, records
and testimony that indicate that Sadia Loeliger--portrayed as a heroic mom in a
recent, nationally-broadcast PBS documentary--abused children under her care. A
Tulare County Juvenile Court concluded in August of 1998 that Sadia Loeliger had
committed multiple acts of abuse, and adjudged both her daughters as dependents
of the Juvenile Court. Sadia Loeliger and her 16 year-old daughter Fatima
were key figures in PBS's Breaking the Silence: Children's Stories. The
film purports to detail an alleged crisis of fit mothers losing custody of their
children to violent husbands in divorce. In the film, Sadia is portrayed as the
victim of anti-mother bias in family courts.
The documents were revealed by Los Angeles-based
newspaper columnist Glenn Sacks, who has helped lead a protest of the show, and
Scott Loeliger, Fatima’s father who was divorced from Sadia in 1991. According
to Sacks:
"It’s amazing that PBS and the filmmakers
decided--despite repeated warnings--to nationally televise Sadia and her claims.
Not only were there clear Juvenile Court findings of her abuse of Fatima and
also of Fatima's cousin Sara, who lived with Sadia, but we have extensive
testimony from Sadia's babysitter, Sara, and several mental health professionals
about Sadia's violence. The filmmakers put a child [Fatima] in an extremely
difficult position."
Doris Nava Arellano, Sadia's babysitter for 18
months, testified
that "every child in the house is afraid" of Sadia and that “Sara actually
has scars on the back of her legs and on the left side of her head from Ms. Ali-Loeliger's
attacks on her.”
Sara, then aged 15, penned a desperate letter
detailing the
abuse she suffered at Sadia's hands, writing “she hits in front of anyone
anywhere with anything. I fear for my life sometimes. Just recently she hit me
in the head.”
In the documents--posted on Sacks' website at
www.glennsacks.com/pbs --Sadia is portrayed by numerous mental health,
judicial and investigative authorities as violent and abusive towards the
children under her care.
A child abuse investigator for Tehama County wrote
that Fatima, then age eight, "says
she is afraid to go home because she fears being hit again. She also
expressed concern for the two other female minors in her mother's residence."
A therapist who conducted investigations for Shasta
County Child Protective Services wrote that Fatima "told me she did not want to
go home
because she was afraid her mother was going to hit her."
Another therapist wrote "On two separate
occasions this child reported to me that she was burned 'with a match' by her
mother, Sadia Ali Loeliger....I am extremely concerned regarding this
child's welfare."
Among the documents revealed are a
series of letters, written to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and
Breaking the Silence co-producers Tatge-Lasseur Productions and Connecticut
Public Broadcasting, informing them of Sadia's history of child abuse. The
letters were written earlier this year by Scott Loeliger, a Northern California
physician, and his attorney Dennis Roberts. They asked that footage of Scott’s
daughter Fatima be excluded from the film. Despite this, PBS went forward with
the broadcast, including the sections featuring Sadia and Fatima.
Breaking the Silence is already the source of
considerable controversy. At the instigation of
Sacks,
Fathers and Families,
Help Stop PAS Inc., the
American Coalition for Fathers & Children, and others, PBS and its
affiliates have been flooded with over 10,000 calls and letters protesting the
show. Sacks calls the show a "direct assault on fatherhood" which "portrays
fathers as batterers and child molesters who steal children from their
mothers."
Holstein, President of
Fathers and Families, says:
"A few groups are concerned about the accelerating
trend towards joint custody of children, and are striking back by accusing most
fathers who seek custody of being batterers and child abusers. It's a shame PBS
has dispensed with objective reporting and chosen to air an extremist point of
view without looking at the political motives of the advocates it features.”
Sacks adds:
“It’s a shame they didn’t check the backgrounds of
the mothers they chose to lionize more carefully, too." |