Dads Against the Divorce Industry

DA*DI is devoted to reinstating the societal valuation of Marriage and the traditional, nuclear American Family, with particular emphasis on the essential role of FATHERS.

DA*DI offers contemporary reports and commentary on culture; its aberrations and its heroes.

Colorado killers:
narcissists with guns?

The "Stand for Children March", Washington, D.C., June, 1996.

The Hebrew word for "rod" as used in proverbs 13:24 ("He who spares his rod, hates his son, / but he who loves him, disciplines him dilligently") is also used in Isaiah 28:27 to suggest a relatively flimsy instrument used to thresh caraway, thus separating the useful part of the grain from that part that is of no use, while insuring that the useful part will not be damaged in the process.

Kids don't rule, they require rules, and discipline. The primary function of being a parent is that of distinguishing between what children truly need and what they simply want, because to a child, a state of need and of want feel exactly the same.
The Youth Violence Trilogy:

  • I Why are Kids Killing Kids?
  • II Who are the Kids Killing Kids?
  • III Teens in America: A Tribe Apart!

  • WHY ARE KIDS KILLING KIDS?

    "There Is A Time Bomb Ticking in the Heart of America" - John Rosemond

    by GERALD L. ROWLES, Ph.D.

    Boys are killing classmates, and girls are killing their babies. Rates of violence for both sexes are increasing, and girls are outpacing boys in those increases.

    My friend Dan Boddicker and I maintain an ongoing discussion of kids and violence. One of Dan's thoughtful theories is that kids are being medicated at unprecedented rates, with Prozac prominently featured as a medication of choice. From this, he extrapolates that given the reported side effects of this antidepressant - psychotic episodes of violence - kids are being medicated into violence. Not a bad theory, containing some elements of truth, but the scientific evidence is not there to fully support it. First, violent side effects from Prozac (fluoxetine) are rare. We can't say the same thing for the observation of escalating violence in kids:

    "The bruises, black eyes, and bloody noses of playground clashes a generation or so ago now prompt nostalgia. In the 1997-1998 school year, children as young as 11 years old have gunned down classmates and teachers in mass shootings at schools in Pearl, Miss, West Paducah, Ky, Jonesboro, Ark, Edinburgh, Pa, and Springfield, Ore (JAMA. 1998;279:1853), leaving 13 dead and 45 wounded, according to Ronald Stephens, EdD, executive director of the National School Safety Center, a nonprofit organization based in Westlake Village, Calif." - JAMA (link expired)
    Second, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) recently reported that Prozac is an effective medication for reducing aggressive behavior in violence prone children.(link expired)

    But Dan is on track with the notion that children are being alarmingly "overmedicated." According to the APA Monitor (link expired), in December, 1997:
    "In 1996, for instance, physicians wrote a whopping 735,000 prescriptions for Prozac and other selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for children ages 6 to 18-an 80 percent increase in just two years. Physicians also wrote many prescriptions for Ritalin and other psychiatric medications."

    According to JAMA (link expired) this pattern has been exhibited for a ten-year period between 1985 and 1994:
    The researchers noted a five-fold increase in stimulant drug visits during the period, from 1.5 percent to 5.1 percent of all psychotropic drug visits: "This increase is the result of the significant rise in the number and proportion of stimulant visits by children and adolescents (from 0.31 million to 2.41 million visits)." These visits are associated with the diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

    Visits by children and adolescents for all types of psychotropic medications increased significantly, from 1.10 million in 1985 to 3.73 million visits in 1993 and 1994.

    If these kids were truly benefitting from this excessive use of medication, that's one thing, but in a very recent article in The Washington Times, a prominent medical director, Dr. Donald Rosenblitt states, "The enormous weight of evidence, so far, is that anti-depressants do not help childhood depression". And it is worth noting that although Prozac has not been associated with violent outcomes, it has had some deleterious effects in children. Dr. Rosenblitt says agitation and nervousness are common side effects in children and others who use Prozac. But he stresses that complications can be far more severe in seriously troubled youngsters.

    "I've seen some disturbed children who've become psychotic," or deranged, after taking Prozac, he said. He added that the drug "precipitated psychotic panic" in those children.

    But here's the problem; so some children are being overmedicated to an alarming degree - giving rise to a vision of a bunch of drug-numbed zomboids on school campuses, then why the violence?

    For years, the nouveau-pop-psychologists (the children/disciples of that spare-the-rod messiah, Dr. Benjamin Spock) have told us that the answer to "the epidemic rise of depression, suicide, violence, and drug and alcohol use among America's teens has been poor self-esteem." And so the Self-Esteem Movement was born. Surprisingly, "rates of teen depression, drug and alcohol use (a form of withdrawal), and violence began picking up steam. [1]" Can you say "Projection?" This self-esteem movement is a theory born of the unconscious recognition of our own adult generation's narcissism - a fragile and ever needy sense of self-esteem and fragility.

    Several recent studies, going against the grain of political correctness, have also brought us back to the salience of family variables, and negative cultural influences on our families and selves.

    In July of 1998,the APA (American Psychological Association) released this stunning finding:
    "Psychologists Brad J. Bushman, Ph.D., of Iowa State University and Roy F. Baumeister, Ph.D., of Case Western Reserve University conducted two studies in which they explored the connection between narcissism, negative interpersonal feedback, and aggression in 540 undergraduate students. Narcissists, according to the authors, are emotionally invested in establishing their superiority, yet while they care passionately about being superior to others, they are not convinced that they have achieved this superiority. While high self-esteem entails thinking well of oneself, narcissism involves passionately wanting to think well of oneself. In both studies, narcissism and self-esteem were measured, and participants were given an opportunity to act aggressively toward a neutral third party, toward someone who had insulted them, or toward someone who had praised them.

    The psychologists found that the most aggressive respondents in both studies were narcissists who were attacking someone who had given them a bad evaluation. Narcissists were exceptionally aggressive toward anyone who attacked or offended them, yet when they received praise, their level of aggression was not out of the ordinary. In both studies, self-esteem was not related to aggression, suggesting that the relationship between (genuine) self-esteem and aggressive behavior is small at best.

    Regarding the recent spate of school shootings throughout the country, Dr. Bushman, lead author of the study, notes that many schools are attempting to increase their students' self-esteem, which will probably have no effect on violent behavior. But excessive self-love, or narcissism, could actually increase violence in schools. ...

    The authors suggest that aggression by narcissists is an interpersonally meaningful and specific response to an ego threat. 'Narcissists mainly want to punish or defeat someone who has threatened their highly favorable views of themselves,' the authors note. 'People who are preoccupied with validating a grandiose self-image apparently find criticism highly upsetting and lash out against the source of it.' ''
    Narcissism Isn't Necessarily "Just Vanity."

    In sum, artificially induced self-esteem, through the well-meaning efforts of the self-esteem movement's self-appointed gurus may be substantively responsible for the escalation of violence in our children.

    To the degree that our contemporary school / culture systems are invested in this self-esteem movement, we need to be concerned that this type of meddling - in what should largely be the parental arena of influence - is likely grossly inappropriate, and potentially dangerous.

    In association with the dangers of artificially inflated self-esteem, another recent study in the APA Journal of Abnormal Psychology found that young people experiencing low self-esteem or depression may actually seek out negative appraisals of themselves. When "participants were given what they thought were summaries of the graduate students' assessments of them ... Sixty-four percent of the low self-esteem group chose the negative assessment. In contrast, 82 percent of the depressed participants chose the unfavorable assessment over the favorable one." For those who wonder why children would engage in behaviors that would bring them tremendously negative public exposure, the answer may lie in these findings.

    That brings us back to family variables. Duncan Clark, PhD, MD, of the University of Pittsburgh Medical School, looked at parental histories and their effects on children in those familes. "Clark and his colleagues studied children and their parents, looking for a relationship between parental history of psychopathology and psychopathology in the child. He found that children of parents with a history of substance use had higher rates of anxiety disorders and disruptive behavior disorders (DBD), particularly conduct disorders.

    Specifically, he found that a child's DBD was most strongly linked to his or her father's childhood DBD. A mother's substance-dependence disorder also predicted the child's DBD. And a mother's childhood anxiety disorder best predicted her child's anxiety disorder.

    'We're finding that the parental childhood characteristics are the best predictors of the child's characteristics,' said Clark. "

    The salience of this study lies in the fact that substance abuse was a virtual staple of the children / adolescents of the 60's. No one can say for certain how many of these nouveau adults - today's boomer parents - continue to abuse subtances (whether legal, prescribed, or illegal). What we do know is that these parents may be generally characterized as having rather lax attitudes toward substance abuse in their children as evidenced in numerous popular media articles. And we also see the alarming reliance on drugs that is implicit in the explosion of mood-altering drugs reported by both the APA and JAMA. Disquieting notions, but important indicators.

    This problem was summed up by Dr. Lawrence Diller, author of ``Running On Ritalin'': ``Settling for Ritalin says we prefer to locate our children's problems in their brains rather than in their lives.'' Diller described three candidates for ADD diagnosis: 4-year-old Stevie, and his two younger sisters, all of whom get dropped off for preschool at 7 a.m. by their dad and are picked up at 5:30 p.m. by their mom ``if she isn't running late.'' Stevie is overly aggressive, and his parents, whose own marriage is troubled, are desperate, demanding a fix: prescription drugs.

    In most cases, parents get the short-term relief they're looking for from prescription drugs, but as Breggin put it: ``Behaviors are signals that should be interpreted and understood, not suppressed.'' See "U.S. Attention Deficit On Legal Drug Risks"


    Although generalizations are generally dismissed in today's politically-correct zeitgeist as unwarranted value judgements, it seems appropriate to generalize, in some areas, to the baby-boom generation. One such generalization might address the notion that the sixties crowd was overwhelmingly involved in the use, abuse, and addiction-to illegal, mind-altering substances. Perhaps mind-numbing, and mind-substituting are better descriptors for the effects of the drug culture, despite the O'Learian claims of mind expansion. I have yet to see a single, lasting, productive instance of invention that could be attributed to an acid trip.

    So what were drug-indulging baby-boomers self-medicating themselves against? In conversations with my friend and colleague Doug Heckman, we have resolved that the unequivocal answer is Anxiety. How do we know that anxiety was the crux of the boomers' attraction to drugs? In large part because we know, from decades of research into effective drug treatment, that anxiety is a central precursor of addiction and a hallmark of withdrawal. But boomer anxiety was not just a case of adolescent jitters, because we can see that it has generalized and broadened, rather than diminished and narrowed as the boomers have aged.

    One ubiquitous indication of this growing if not constant anxiety is the enormous, addictive explosion in hugely expensive government bureaucracies and special interest groups, created to service and in most cases, "protect" us in every micro-aspect of our collective lives. This is not the traditional kind of protection, however, that involved making us safe against foreign or outside enemies, such as was once the role of the military. We are now protected from products that might harm us, industries that might harm us, professionals that might harm us, agents that might harm non-human species, unknown assailants that might harm our children, toxic agents that might harm us, food that might harm us, spouses that might harm spouses, words that might harm our self-esteem, bigots that might harm ethnics, words that might harm our sensitivities, movies that might harm our children, and harmful harm agents that we have yet to imagine. In one area, however, we are secure. We are certainly no longer fearful that our sexual promiscuity will harm us.

    Nevertheless we are addicted-to and dependent-upon federal and state agencies whose ostensive purpose is to prevent us from experiencing our fears; our anxieties.

    I would suggest that the source of boomer anxiety is paradoxically, freedom. I am not referring to the traditional freedoms of a country that was founded on the principles of freedom of speech, freedom to worship, freedom to pursue life, liberty and happiness, and freedom from government oppression. The freedom issue here is a kind of unbounded, narcissistic, self-indulgent freedom to pursue one's own hedonistic needs - the freedom to always feel good, absolved of personal responsibility. But just as Freud suggested, anxiety is a knock at the door, alerting us to the fact that something is awry. Too much freedom and self-indulgence was, in the past, followed by an appropriate sense of guilt. But in an age when God is dead, guilt is a politically incorrect notion that remains unexpressed in its essence, and experienced only in its vagueness as anxiety.

    The seeds of this ungodly freedom were planted by the good Dr. Benjamin Spock, who, in his 1946 epoch "Common Sense Book of Baby and Child Care" admonished a post-war parent boom that it was in the best interests of their offspring to spare the rod and spoil the child - to raise their children in a more liberal environment. This program of child-demand nursing schedules, delayed and patient toilet training, and freedom from punishment, placed the parent in the indulgent role of benefactor, while precluding the role of disciplinarian. No more were children to hear, "wait till your father gets home." In the intervening years, however, responsible behavioral scientists have found that an indulged child, a child without clear limits and immediate, appropriate, and sometimes corporal punishment, is much more likely to become an anxious, dependent, and/or neurotic adult - if not a sociopath; one who is completely lacking in internally-based self-control.

    And so the baby boomers have been doubly cursed by a Freudian legacy of sexual freedom and self-indulgence that has bred an over-representative generation of anxiously dependent and addiction-prone individuals that are still looking for a limiting parent. Sadly, it appears that the governmental parent to whom they look is ever more a disciple of Dr. Spock than of traditional parenting.

    In recent studies, we also find an indication of the tremendous importance of parent-child bonding in the first three years of life. In June, 1997 the APA Monitor reported on therapists who were working with attachment-disordered children. In younger children, this is seen as oppositional-defiant or conduct disorder, but according to one member of this group, Joan Luby, M.D., "children with reactive attachment disorder now have major social and moral development problems that result in antisocial behaviors." Many children exhibiting poor attachment are found in the foster-care system. "Studies in England and the United States estimate that 60 percent to 80 percent of felons emerged from that foster-care system."

    So what's the bottom line here? Our children are becoming more violent. In part, that escalation in violence mirrors the massive exposure to television and movies and music that treat casual, grotesque violence as a common and "cool" phenomenon. The Roe phenomenon has made the wholesale carnage of abortion simply commonplace; an entitlement of self-willing that simply supercedes the sanctity of life. (Explain to me, in a way that I can use successfully to make that explanation to my child, how a boy taking a life by shooting classmates is different from a girl taking a life by abortion or post-birth trauma.) And insidiously, we are learning that violence likely comes from the fact that more and more children are being cast aside shortly after birth, long before the critical three-year period of attachment and independence are resolved, so that one or both parents may indulge their own wants. That indulgence remains rooted in the hedonistic drug-culture of the 60's that has now become legitimized through modern medicine.

    Finally, after forty years of the Spock revolution in child-rearing that brought our parents the notion that the rearing of children is an intellectual challenge, rather than a relatively simple matter of common sense, we have bred the most narcissistic, drugged, and violence absorbed society since Greco-Roman times. In extending our Spockian legacy to our own children, we have invented the vaunted "self-esteem movement" as a feature of that misguided indulgence, and we now have the horror of our kids killing our kids at monstrously high rates, against a background of dramatic increases in illicit substance abuse by our children. I would suggest that any mind-altering drug use of any kind in any child, whether from the playground or the doctor's office, potentiates abuse. As the following JAMA (link expired) article concludes: "... drug use in adolescence is one of the strongest predictors of lifetime development of drug dependence."

    Plano, a small Texas community (population, 180,000; median family income, $54,000) just north of Dallas, has been shocked by the deaths of more than 12 adolescents from heroin overdoses in the past 18 months.[1] In Fairfax County, Virginia (population, 900,000; median household income, $70,000), drug-related arrests of adolescents have increased more than 10-fold in 10 years.[2] Across the country parents wonder, "How could it happen to our children?" Lifetime prevalence rates of adolescent drug use have been rising since 1992[3] (Figure), and the percentage of teens saying they would never try illegal drugs is decreasing: 86% in 1995, 51% in 1996, and 46% in 1997.[4,5]

    Adolescent substance abuse is an overwhelming public health problem in the United States. In 1997, the lifetime prevalence of any illicit drug use by 12th graders was 54.3%, and approximately one fourth of 10th and 12th graders reported using an illicit substance in the past month.[3] About 76% of high school students and 46% of middle school students say that drugs are kept, used, or sold on school grounds. With 56% of 12- to 17-year-olds reporting that they know a friend or classmate who uses cocaine, heroin, or LSD, it is not surprising that 35% of adolescents cite drugs as the most important problem they face.[5]

    Drug use, especially in early adolescence, interferes with normal cognitive, emotional, and social development and is closely linked with both psychiatric disorders and delinquency.[6] Drug use in adolescence has been associated with many other risk-taking behaviors (sexual activity, truancy, violence, or weapon carrying) entailing significant morbidity and mortality (sexually transmitted diseases and human immunodeficiency virus [HIV] infection; pregnancy; school failure, dropout, or both; injury; suicide and homicide; and motor vehicle crashes).[7] Finally, drug use in adolescence is one of the strongest predictors of lifetime development of drug dependence.[8]



    Just as in educating, we are ripe for a return to basics in parenting.

    The most important lesson of childhood is discipline: disciplined behavior, disciplined thought, and discipline based in the morality of right and wrong, good and bad, and clear rules for human interaction. If we are looking for the fount of self-esteem, we would do well to begin at the early rewards of self-discipline, and achievement through demonstrated competence in basic skills.

    "For the most part, today's parents are nice, well-intentioned folks, and that's the problem. They let their children walk all over them, not because they believe children should be allowed to do so, but because they do not feel they have the right to assertively disallow it. ... They know, in their hearts, they shouldn't give their children so much freedom and are truly afraid of the consequences of doing so. Unfortunately, they're even more afraid of (or unaccustomed to) the consequences of saying 'no.' In short, today's parents are wimps (and in some cases self-indulgent). The good news is, it's never too late to take charge. (emphasis and parenthetical comments added) [2]"

    Why are our kids killing our kids? Because we are their parents, and we have listened to the voice of our own corrupted generation for too long. It's time to learn to say no, consistently and effectively, both to ourselves and to our children. What part of "no" don't you understand?

  • In large part, this column supports the notion that the reason we have kids killing kids is because we have narcissistic parents raising narcissistic children, the second generation of the Spockian, post WWII revolution in child care - and they can't seem to see where their permissiveness and indulgence is leading.

    Two days after her son committed an atrocity at Columbine High School, we found the (www.insidedenver.com) mother of 17-y.o. Dylan Klebold at her hairdresser expressing shock and numbness at what her son had done.

    At the hairdresser! This has an aura similar to that of the prom teen who stopped dancing only long enough to deliver and dispose of her child - and then returned to the dance.

    Indeed! I'm stunned. Even from the vantage point of my own, perhaps biased, perspective I am dumbfounded by the apparent lack of shame, transparent irresponsibility, and venal superficiality of this parent.

    "Susan Klebold said she didn't understand what happened to her son."

    "As if!" is a popular phrase among adolescents and young adults. Ironically it is also a term in philosophy and psychology that describes individuals who are living a counterfeit lifestyle - living "as if" they were who they seem to be. As if is, in fact, the basis of the narcissistic personality - and the me generation.

    Gerald L. Rowles, Ph.D.

    [1] "Because I Said So!," John Rosemond, p. 257. [2] p. 251.

    Partial Listing of Recent School Assaults:

    School Shooting List

    By The Associated Press with DA*DI update:

    Mar. 22, 2001 EL CAJON, Calif. (Reuters) - A teenager with a shaved head got out of a car, assumed a sniper position and began shooting at students outside a high school in this San Diego suburb on Thursday, hitting at least one person before police shot and injured him, witnesses said.
      The incident at the 2,900-pupil Granite Hills High School took place less than three weeks after another student killed two students and injured 13 others in a gun rampage at Santana High School, just 6 miles away.
    Mar. 05, 2001 15-year-old Charles Andrew Williams went on a 10-minute shooting rampage at his Santee, Calif., high school, killing 14-year-old Bryan Zuckor and 17-year-old Randy Gordon, and wounding 13 other boys and girls. Within 48-hours, 23 American school children had been arrested or detained for threatening various acts of violence including a bomb plot at a middle school. Among the suspects were three students from the California School for the Deaf, a 15-year-old Catholic schoolboy from Davenport, Iowa, and a 15-year-old honor student from Camden said to have threatened to kill-off a high school clique during wood shop.
    Mar. 07, 2001 A teenage girl opened fire in the cafeteria of a Catholic high school in central Pennsylvania, in the second U.S. school shooting in a week.
    Mar. 05, 2001 15-year-old Charles Andrew Williams went on a 10-minute shooting rampage at his Santee, Calif., high school, killing 14-year-old Bryan Zuckor and 17-year-old Randy Gordon, and wounding 13 other boys and girls. Within 48-hours, 23 American school children had been arrested or detained for threatening various acts of violence including a bomb plot at a middle school. Among the suspects were three students from the California School for the Deaf, a 15-year-old Catholic schoolboy from Davenport, Iowa, and a 15-year-old honor student from Camden said to have threatened to kill-off a high school clique during wood shop.
    Jan. 10, 2001 17-year-old gunman fired shots at Hueneme High School, about 60 miles north of Los Angeles, before taking a student hostage. The teen-ager apparently wasn't a student at the school and did not know the girl. He was later shot and killed by police. No one else was injured.
    May 26, 2000 13-year-old honor student allegedly killed his teacher, Barry Grunow, on last day of classes in Lake Worth, Fla. Nathaniel Brazill is charged with first-degree murder.
    Feb. 29, 2000 6-year-old boy shot and killed 6-year-old classmate at Buell Elementary School in Mount Morris Township, Mich. Because of his age, the boy was not charged. A 19-year-old man was sentenced to two to 15 years in prison for allowing the boy access to the gun. The boy's uncle has pleaded guilty to possessing the stolen gun used in the shooting.
    Feb. 20, 2000 16-year-old girl, Kayla Rolland, fatally wounded at Buell Elementary School near Flint, Mich. Assailant identified as a 6-year-old boy who lived in a crack house. A 19-year-old man was charged with involuntary manslaughter for allowing the boy easy access to the .32 caliber handgun used in the shooting
    Dec. 6, 1999 13-year-old student fired at least 15 rounds at Fort Gibson Middle School in Fort Gibson, Okla., wounding four classmates. Seth Trickey was convicted on seven assault charges, but will not remain jail past age 19.
    Nov. 19, 1999 13-year-old girl shot in the head in school at Deming, N.M., and died the next day. A 12-year-old boy later pleaded guilty and was sentenced to at least two years in juvenile prison.
    Oct. 4, 1999 In southwest Philadelphia's John Bartram High School, assistant principal William Burke was shot in the thigh while confronting a 17-year-old student suspected of carrying a gun. Burke, 61, was hospitalized but was not badly hurt
    May 20, 1999 15-year-old boy opened fire at Heritage High School in Conyers, Ga., with a .357-caliber Magnum and a rifle, wounding six students. T.J. Solomon later pleaded guilty but mentally ill and was sentenced to 40 years in prison and 65 years of probation.
    April 20, 1999 Two students at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo., killed 12 students and a teacher and wounded 23 before killing themselves.
    April 16, 1999 A high school sophomore fired two shotgun blasts in a school hallway in Notus, Idaho. No one injured
    May 21, 1998 Two teen-agers were killed and more than 20 people hurt when a teen-age boy opened fire at a high school in Springfield, Ore., after killing his parents. Kip Kinkel, 17, was later sentenced to nearly 112 years in prison.
    May 19, 1998 Three days before his graduation, Jacob Davis, an 18-year-old honor student, opened fire at a high school in Fayetteville, Tenn., killing a classmate who was dating his ex-girlfriend. Davis was later sentenced to life in prison.
    April 24, 1998 Andrew Wurst, 15, opened fire at an eighth-grade dance in Edinboro, Pa., killing a science teacher. The boy pleaded guilty to third-degree murder and other charges and is serving 30 to 60 years in prison.
    March 24, 1998 Two boys, 11 and 13, fired on their Jonesboro, Ark., middle school from nearby woods, killing four girls and a teacher and wounding 10 others. Both boys were later convicted of murder and can be held until age 21.
    Dec. 1, 1997 Three students were killed and five wounded at Heath High School in West Paducah, Ky. Michael Carneal, 14-year-old, later pleaded guilty but mentally ill to murder and is serving life in prison.
    Oct. 1, 1997 Sixteen-year-old Luke Woodham of Pearl, Miss., shot two students to death and wounded seven others after stabbing his mother to death. He was sentenced the following year to three life sentences plus 140 years.
    Feb. 19, 1997 A 16-year-old boy took a shotgun and a bag of shells to school in Bethel, Alaska, and killed the principal and a student and injured two others. Evan Ramsey is serving a 210-year sentence.
    Feb. 2, 1996 A 14-year-old boy walked into school in a trenchcoat and allegedly opened fire with a hunting rifle, killing a teacher and two students. A third student was injured during the shooting at Frontier Junior High School in Moses Lake, Wash. Prosecutors said the boy was inspired by the plot of a Stephen King novel and by the movie Natural Born Killers


    Back to DA*DI's Home
  • Dads Against the Divorce Industry Dads Against the Divorce Industry