Wednesday, May 29, 2024


LINK to online version (reference links added)

In my column of April 24, I wrote about parental alienation, a type of psychological child abuse.

PA usually occurs in the context of a divorce wherein one parent seeks to turn a child against the other parent and uses all manner of lies, exaggerations, and manipulation to do it.

Particularly confounding with PA is the phenomenon of the child allying with the alienating and usually abusive parent, an anomaly noted in a paper published by the American Bar Association:

“It is remarkable that abused children frequently remain attached to their abusive parents…a maltreated child may have ambivalent feelings toward the abusive parent; however, the alienated child almost always has highly negative attitudes toward a non-abusive parent.”

I ended the previous column saying that usually this situation breaks open a world of hurt and bewilderment for the targeted parent and that I would offer some advice on what to do if you find yourself in this terror. So here it is.

As hard as it is to do when your heart is breaking, the first thing you must do is educate yourself as to what is really going on. Get online, particularly YouTube, and search for “parental alienation.”

You need to hear, and hear immediately, from other parents who have gone through this (and usually still are), and also from adults who were alienated from a parent as children and who later reunited with the alienated parent.

There are good written resources as well, but you probably won’t be able to read through your tears, so best to just immerse yourself in listening to others for a while.

While it’s okay to seek support from family and friends, don’t expect answers. Parental alienation is so counter-intuitive, so illogical, that those who haven’t experienced it, including close family members, will wonder “what you did” to make your child hate you.

Second, learn to think of yourself as the “chosen parent.”The “chosen parent” is the parent who the child trusts to never abandon her (I’ll use a daughter for the example), even if she has to join the alienating parent in targeting you.

In short, the child is so assured of your unconditional love that she is willing to risk rejecting you to please the alienator. She knows you will always love her but she has no assurance that the alienator will. So she “chooses” you to hang in there for her. In other words, she is only rejecting you to please the abusive, unstable parent.

Third, work on yourself. Work on becoming strong, mentally, spiritually, and even physically. Understand that the alienating parent wants to break you, and break you in front of your child. Do not let that happen.

In the end, becoming a better you is the only way your child will come back. A child wants to be taken care of, wants to be secure, wants to be loved. She’s not going to get that from the unstable, needy parent. The child will eventually see, if she hasn’t already, that you are the rock in the family.

Fourth, whenever you do have time with your child, never bash the other parent. Remember, that is the kind of stuff the poor child has to deal with all day every day from the alienator. Just by not doing it, you set yourself apart as the mature, stable parent that the child needs and wants now more than ever.

Lastly, so long as your child is a minor, never give up the legal battle for as much time with your child as the law allows. I say “as the law allows” and not “as the court decides” because your rights to your child are a matter of law.

Guam law states: “It is legislative policy that children spend as much time with each of their parents as possible, when the parents are not living together.” 19 GCA §8404(8)

So even if you don’t have primary custody, you still have the lawful right to “as much time…as possible” with your child and you must fight for every minute of it, not just because it is your right, but because your child wants to be fought for.

In the words of my son: “Never give up, Dad. Never give up.” 

Tim Rohr has resided in Guam since 1987. He has raised a family of 11 children, owned several businesses, and most recently been active in local issues via his blog,, letters to local publications and occasional public appearances. He can be contacted at

Thursday, May 23, 2024


By Tim Rohr

Aside from his now much-maligned elevation of the role of "homemaker," Harrison Butker had much more to say about a couple of other things including the serious leadership problems in our Catholic Church and a reference to "a month."

A Catholic Response to Harrison Butker's Speech - an interview with Bishop Thomas Paprocki

Harrison Butker | Commencement Address 2024 | Benedictine College - May 12, 2024

And by the way, he slams NFP (at about 14:30 into his speech):

"Heterodox ideas abound even within Catholic circles. For let’s be honest. There is nothing good about playing God with having children, whether that be your ideal number or the perfect time to conceive. No matter how you spin it, there is nothing natural about Catholic birth control.”

Saturday, May 18, 2024


By Tim Rohr

On the same day, and unbeknownst to me, a post was published on the SCOTUS Blog which addresses the same issue (declaratory judgments by the Supreme Court of Guam) as I did in my most recent column in the Guam Daily Post: "Ghosts that slay." 

Under "Petitions of the Week," the following was posted:

Guam governor, attorney general face off over decades-old abortion ban

The title isn't quite right as the issue isn't actually the "decades-old abortion ban" (aka "Belle's Law"), but whether or not the Supreme Court of Guam not only committed error in taking on the Governor's request for a declaratory judgment regarding the validity of "Belle's Law," but whether:

"It committed structural errors that redefine the Supreme Court of Guam’s power and give that court virtually unlimited authority to make broad declarations about the other branches of government and about any federal or local law." (See Moylan v Guerrero at pg. 30)

I personally see the U.S. Supreme Court taking this case (accepting a writ of certiorari), given that the matter involves such an egregious affront to the constitutional guarantee of "separation of powers," and as such, goes well beyond a dispute over an old local abortion law.

In his amicus brief and at oral argument before the Supreme Court of Guam on July 25, 2023, Bob Klitzkie set out this very conflict. However, the Court functionally blew Klitzkie's argument off and proceeded to trample down the road to Kritarchy (rule by judges). 

Now, thanks to Attorney General Moylan, that road has led to the Supreme Court of the United States. (Read the full Petition here.)

Beyond invalidating the Supreme Court of Guam's "declaratory judgment" supporting Governor Lou Leon Guerrero's march to "abortions for all" (should SCOTUS take the case and rule in Moylan's favor), there is the larger matter and consequence of what this means for the credibility of our highest court in the full glare of a national slap down. 

BTW, since AG Moylan filed this Petition, the governor (the respondent) has filed extension after extension. 

Thursday, May 16, 2024


Link to online version (reference links added)

I have a couple of “to be continued” series going on: informed consent and parental alienation. We will get back to those soon. Meanwhile, in this column we are going to detour into the strange world of “declaratory judgment.”

On October 31, 2023, the Supreme Court of Guam issued a declaratory judgment on the validity and enforceability of Public Law 20-134, aka “Belle’s Law.” Their judgment: Unenforceable.

It is serendipitous that the Court issued its judgment on Halloween. Belle’s Law, after having a stake driven through its heart when it was only four days old (enjoined by the District Court), nevertheless - having never been repealed - silently remained, like a ghost, on the pages of the Guam Code for the next 32 years,

Note: "Belle's Law" outlawed abortion in Guam in 1990.

As we know, the darn thing recently sprang to life, stake through its heart and all, after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade, and Douglas Moylan, vowing to enforce the laws of Guam, was elected to the office of Attorney General.

To make the story even more “halloweeny,” the provision in the Guam Code allowing for this sort of Supreme Court judgment has its own ghostlike - now you see it now you don’t - history.

The law permitting the governor or the legislature to seek a declaratory judgment from the Supreme Court, came to life when the Supreme Court was organized in 1993.

13 years later, in 2006, the provision was repealed with a one sentence bill (“§4104 of Title 7GCA is hereby repealed”) authored by then-Senators Robert Klitzkie, Benjamin F. Cruz, and Mark Forbes. Then-Governor Camacho vetoed it, the veto was overridden, and the bill became P.L. 28-146, sending the provision to its grave.

Two years later, the law was resurrected by the late-Senator Ben Pangelinan via a bill that became Public Law 29-103.

Pangelinan’s rationale for bringing the law back from the dead was that “several states permit '' similar laws. “Several states” maybe, but not most states. As of 2023, only eleven states permit their governors and legislatures to seek declaratory judgments from their state supreme courts - and for good reason.

It’s not hard to see, especially given the usual tug-of-war between governors and legislatures, that bringing in the third branch of government to take sides in a battle between the other two branches endangers the doctrine of the separation of powers -  the thing that perhaps best preserves our system of government from sinking into tyranny.

Probably counting on such high-sounding words such as “Supreme Court” and “Declaratory Judgment,” as well as public ignorance of the matter, the governor functionally ran to “Daddy” for help to beat down “those mean people,” i.e. anyone opposed to her pro-abortion agenda.

For most of us little people, the word “judgment” coming from a court, and especially a court with the word “supreme” in front of it, carries the feel of “the court has spoken so shut up and sit down,” or in the governor’s fabled words regarding another matter: “basically, you have no say” - which of course is what the governor was looking for.

However, a declaratory judgment is not a judgment like most of us think since it requires “nobody to do nuthin’” - bad grammar intended. In other words, there is no order of “consequential relief.” So it’s really just an advisory opinion, which is really how it should be labeled in the Guam Code if we are to continue to endure the thing.

However, like Senators Klitzkie, Cruz, and Forbes believed in 2006, we should not endure the thing. We should get rid of it. The tug-of-war between the executive and legislative branches of government is exactly why these branches are co-equal in the first place and we don’t need the judicial branch taking sides.

By the way, for the same reason, I also oppose lawmakers running to the Attorney General for an opinion every time they are looking to shoot down legislation they don’t like.

Writing in the Harvard Law Review almost 100 years ago, Felix Frankfurter wrote:

“The judiciary, today, in dealing with the acts of their coordinate legislators, owe to the country no greater or clearer duty than that of keeping their hands off these acts… For that course - the true course of judicial duty always - will powerfully help to bring the people and their representatives to a sense of their own responsibility.”

And speaking of halloween and ghosts, Frankfurter concluded:

“It must be remembered that advisory opinions are not merely advisory opinions. They are ghosts that slay."

Tim Rohr has resided in Guam since 1987. He has raised a family of 11 children, owned several businesses, and most recently been active in local issues via his blog,, letters to local publications and occasional public appearances. He can be contacted at 

Friday, May 10, 2024


By Tim Rohr

Catholic News Agency reports:

Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has endorsed completely unrestricted abortion “even if it’s full term.”

Of course, Kennedy is Catholic, as is Biden, as is Pelosi, and as are many other "pro-abortionists" in our government. 

You'd think at some point our bishops would ask what went wrong. But they don't. They are willing to chastise the likes of Biden from time to time, but Biden is not just a "one off," as Kennedy's very public position shows. "Pro-abortionism," and extreme "pro-abortionism" is rampant in the highest halls of Catholicism, especially in the United States. 

How did this happen?

It's not hard to find out with a little digging. I call it the Hyannisport Prescription, and wrote a column about it in 2012 for the Umatuna (the newspaper for the Archdiocese of Agana, Guam) here.  


Well it looks like JW will surpass 11 Million all time views this month.

All Time: 10,997,212

This Month: 30,360

Last Month: 92,384

UPDATE 5/12/2024

Wednesday, May 8, 2024


By Tim Rohr

So Fr. Luis Camacho has returned to Guam after nine years. I hope things work out for him. However, the real problem at this point is not Luis Camacho, but Fr. Romeo Convocar, our Apostolic Administrator. And here’s why.

In the above press release, Fr. Convocar states the following:

According to archdiocesan records, Father Luis was arrested on March 17, 2015 on Guam for custodial interference. He resigned as Pastor of San Dimas, Malesso and San Dionisio, Umatac. He was prohibited from hearing confession and restricted from celebrating Mass publicly. He may celebrate Mass only privately. Those restrictions of his faculties have not been lifted. Former Archbishop Anthony Apuron sent the priest off-island to a priestly renewal program after the incident in 2015.

Other than the fact that Camacho was arrested on March 17, 2015, none of the rest is true. 

1. There was no restriction of Camacho’s faculties. Camacho was immediately hurried away the next day to Saipan where he stayed with then-Bishop Camacho who was said to be his uncle. 

2. There was no “off-island priestly renewal program.” After Saipan, Camacho was scurried away by the Neocat hierarchy to the Middle East where he surfaced at a parish in Qatar and was put in charge of youth ministry

3. Camacho was apparently incardinated by the bishop in Qatar, Camillo Ballin, in a diocese that was building up a large neocatechumenal presence.

And then there's this: 
Rome opened a canonical investigation on Father Luis following the incident in 2015. Though the Vatican has not been able to make a canonical ruling due to insufficient evidence, the case is not closed. The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith informed then Archbishop Michael Byrnes on Nov. 18, 2022 that the case is filed in the archives at this time as it is not possible to proceed with any canonical action.

This conflicts with a 2016 letter published in Qatar by Camacho's "new bishop" clearing Camacho:

Note: This letter appears to be the work of the Neocat cabal in Qatar and their using Ballin like they used Apuron: a rubber stamp. Nevertheless, Fr. Convocar needs to know the real history and needs to make it clear.

The Camacho incident was huge at the time because it occurred just as things were heating up for Apuron regarding his sex abuse of minors as well as the whole RMS scam. Had Camacho publicly confessed and said "I'm sorry," I am quite sure all of Guam would have forgiven and embraced him. 

Perhaps Camacho wanted to do that. But Apuron and his Neocat handlers got rid of Camacho as fast as they could, not to protect Camacho, but to protect their own back sides - given what was coming. 

JungleWatch followed the whole mess very closely. There are 62 posts on this blog about Luis Camacho and a whole page (Luis Camacho File) with links to all the news stories generated by his arrest. 

Fr. Convocar should spend a few days studying those posts and the file before he sends out any more press releases. We've been lied to and lied to. We don't need anymore. And neither does Fr. Luis Camacho. 

And one last thing. The press release has Tony Diaz' name at the bottom of it, not Fr. Convocar's. While Tony as Director of Communications can certainly write and distribute press releases, they should always be in the name of Fr. Convocar. We don't want to be guessing who is running this place all over again. 

By the way. The Camacho affair wasn't just local news. 

From Osservatorio sul Cammino Neocatechumenale secondo verità


the Neocatechumenal priest arrested on a secluded beach in Guam while having sex with a Neocatechumenal minor was sent to Qatar  probably to avoid extradition should a criminal trial begin against him in Guam. The Attorney General of Guam herself, moreover, had done everything to support the kikos  despite the law requiring her to continue the proceedings against the neocat "presbyter".

On the one hand, the mgr. Camillo Ballin , Apostolic Vicar of Northern Arabia, competent for Qatar, had stated that the arrested presbyter belongs to "his him" he clergy (as if he had formally incardinated him);  who knows, maybe he is convinced that at some point he will make a career and leave the hot potato to his successor... On the other hand, however, the Neocatechumenal chancellor of the Curia of Guam had said in a press release (Statement  published in the diocesan newspaper ) that the presbyter was still belonging to the clergy of Guam. The Neocatechumenal bishop of Guam, in fact, to protect the arrested man, had always avoided following his own provisions . Which of the two bishops will end up with a lit match in their hand?