Kates Playground 2010?

destruction of files / Eveyln Pente lies the Court of Appeal Zurich to

destruction of files
early as the 1990s, I have tried to document all my children to come. At that time it was called by the various authorities that the documents were classified and therefore not accessible to me. Now I have tried in different places once the new laws to come to my files.
According to the latest statement has destroyed most of my files. In child psychiatry in Brüschhalde Männedorf there are now only a small pouch of originally more than one folder (these files I have not yet)! My children
files from children's home in Sonnenbühl Brütten today Elgg children's home were destroyed.
In Bassersdorf there is only a cover page of my files, nothing else! The new person with that authority itself was taken aback when she found this
Even my files from the time I was with my mother in Inselhofspital are no longer available. But those of my brother, who was born there still exist!

It's unbelievable, how to work with my document and avoided. At first I was denied this and then they will simply be destroyed!

my life because I always heard that I was descended from a rape, I was at the Children's Aid Society of Metropolitan Toronto, Canada asks whether they know anything about my father. This then wrote me the following Letters

There is nothing about a rape. And if according to the statement of regulators, in my half-sister, [See the description of the 6th Tape recording http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/12/wie-wenig-verstndnis-man-fr-ein-opfer.html and http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2006/12/wenn -man-the-name-a-pdophilen.html ] made my mother a criminal complaint, why then has the authority found nothing?
When I showed this letter to Swiss officials and social workers thought they only did I have the Canadian authorities, wrote this to calm me down. When Swiss officials work the way they have their own Behavior but not project to foreign authorities.
I'm proud to be a Canadian citizen when I think of it as I have been in Switzerland put obstacles in his way.


letter from Evelyn Pente to the High Court of Zurich
Following is the letter from Mrs. Evelyn Pente to the High Court of Zurich, because my children wanted a hearing before the court (the same views represented by Mrs Esther Zinn).

See also:
http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2008/02/nicht-eingehaltene-versprechen-von.html ,
http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/ 02/frau-pente-und-finanzen-frau-pente-die.html ,
http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/07/widersprche-von-frau-evelyne-pente-und.html .

The order of Pente Evelyn would have been to represent the interests of my children. As you can see but at this letter, she did nothing about it and even tried to achieve the opposite by not agreeing to the appeal. In the next sentence she wrote but then again, that they have a recourse against the achievement of the 16th Year of life supports.
Evelyne Pente does not see that this is not a situation that one can weigh up and down, but it is the law of my children! Furthermore, would not be a refusal on the right of hearing pursuant to UN Children's Convention lawful been, no matter what she knits together arguments for themselves. Such arguments have

sole purpose that children can not make any statements.
addition it has been lying to the Supreme Court with this letter by saying that "the processing of the past will not be forgotten." If we happened to the "past" responded, she said only that it has been "before their time" and it had nothing to do with it.

on what I will discuss in detail some other time is that my former foster mother to return me to my mother and Jürg Gritti as a new law called "family return ' justified. Only in the 1990s with the delivery of other documents I've noticed that they lied to me. Of course, I've faced it, but she denies that she ever made such a statement. She was very contradictory.

Kates Playground 2010?

destruction of files / Eveyln Pente lies the Court of Appeal Zurich to

destruction of files
early as the 1990s, I have tried to document all my children to come. At that time it was called by the various authorities that the documents were classified and therefore not accessible to me. Now I have tried in different places once the new laws to come to my files.
According to the latest statement has destroyed most of my files. In child psychiatry in Brüschhalde Männedorf there are now only a small pouch of originally more than one folder (these files I have not yet)! My children
files from children's home in Sonnenbühl Brütten today Elgg children's home were destroyed.
In Bassersdorf there is only a cover page of my files, nothing else! The new person with that authority itself was taken aback when she found this
Even my files from the time I was with my mother in Inselhofspital are no longer available. But those of my brother, who was born there still exist!

It's unbelievable, how to work with my document and avoided. At first I was denied this and then they will simply be destroyed!

my life because I always heard that I was descended from a rape, I was at the Children's Aid Society of Metropolitan Toronto, Canada asks whether they know anything about my father. This then wrote me the following Letters

There is nothing about a rape. And if according to the statement of regulators, in my half-sister, [See the description of the 6th Tape recording http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/12/wie-wenig-verstndnis-man-fr-ein-opfer.html and http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2006/12/wenn -man-the-name-a-pdophilen.html ] made my mother a criminal complaint, why then has the authority found nothing?
When I showed this letter to Swiss officials and social workers thought they only did I have the Canadian authorities, wrote this to calm me down. When Swiss officials work the way they have their own Behavior but not project to foreign authorities.
I'm proud to be a Canadian citizen when I think of it as I have been in Switzerland put obstacles in his way.


letter from Evelyn Pente to the High Court of Zurich
Following is the letter from Mrs. Evelyn Pente to the High Court of Zurich, because my children wanted a hearing before the court (the same views represented by Mrs Esther Zinn).

See also:
http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2008/02/nicht-eingehaltene-versprechen-von.html ,
http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/ 02/frau-pente-und-finanzen-frau-pente-die.html ,
http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/07/widersprche-von-frau-evelyne-pente-und.html .

The order of Pente Evelyn would have been to represent the interests of my children. As you can see but at this letter, she did nothing about it and even tried to achieve the opposite by not agreeing to the appeal. In the next sentence she wrote but then again, that they have a recourse against the achievement of the 16th Year of life supports.
Evelyne Pente does not see that this is not a situation that one can weigh up and down, but it is the law of my children! Furthermore, would not be a refusal on the right of hearing pursuant to UN Children's Convention lawful been, no matter what she knits together arguments for themselves. Such arguments have

sole purpose that children can not make any statements.
addition it has been lying to the Supreme Court with this letter by saying that "the processing of the past will not be forgotten." If we happened to the "past" responded, she said only that it has been "before their time" and it had nothing to do with it.

on what I will discuss in detail some other time is that my former foster mother to return me to my mother and Jürg Gritti as a new law called "family return ' justified. Only in the 1990s with the delivery of other documents I've noticed that they lied to me. Of course, I've faced it, but she denies that she ever made such a statement. She was very contradictory.

Fullmetalachemist V.s. Bleach Game

No case files of children in the orphanage Florhof

supplement to the last entry

I still have the right Medical Records after a few calls, I hang out these to get from the clinic Hard. It would mean first that it was only that of Medical Records (July 11, 2001), which I got with the advice and applied only to the guardianship authority Bülach. For this I I signed, I do not remember.
have signed but I was absolutely sure a confidentiality confinement, where all persons were given by me on it. Subsequently I have received it, signed by me on 23 July 2001. This was, among other things, the Supervisor of the Canton of Zurich, which could confirm how to handle my files. Also on the list there was one prosecutor who called my children and told them that they can not be forced to an opinion. In the report, it is but I would not have my children sent to child and youth mental health services for an opinion. See also the entries
http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2008/08/gutachten-ohne-kenntnis-darber.html and
http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/10/vortuschen-einer-namensnderung.html ( Letter dated 26 April 2001, the last scan).
has also helped the person during the scientific work of my older son, not interviewed, as well as my brother Andres Gasser, living in Schaffhausen.


Esther Zinn and record-keeping on children in the orphanage Florhof

See also http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2008/05/das-gutachden-der-klinik-hard-es-wurde . html. How to use the scans of my reports from the Hard Clinic (bottom scans of the aforementioned entry) see, I then get a part of my opinion. In this excerpt also a few statements by Mrs Esther Zinn were held, which was then the matron of the orphanage Florhof. This part I got in September 2002 and called on Mrs. Esther Zinn even then, so that they do their data could explain to my children, see

http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2008/09/akteneinsicht-und- namenschaos.html . Even then she did not give any information and is expressed only in an aggressive tone on children and the scientific work of my son.
The copy of the full report, I received recently (see last entry), I now get an insight on all the statements of Mrs. Esther Zinn, now superintendent of the children's castle Regensberg. I therefore called Esther Zinn last week to ask you whether to write the children's home Florhof no reports of the children, as I said before, the current national director of the orphanage Florhof (which surprised me very much). Click here to download tape receptacle 16.

Mrs Zinn confirmed to me that no files will be performed on children. Then I asked, that they can make serious statements (in report) and this evidence should not be. Your statement was that This case is already some years ago and they do not know after 900 children, which was characteristic of which child. They also have no desire to
people like me to discuss after all these years about such things. In the end they said I had done my sons massively broken and she hung up the phone easily. The whole conversation and thus the rest of the conversation can be downloaded as tape receptacle 17 . (My name and are "as valid" diagnosis of Mrs. Esther Zinn I have cut).
After this conversation, I called the District Council and Bulach asked if he could ask Mr. Dürsteler Mrs Zinn, how and where I said to my children 've made ready. Mrs Zinn has the District Council Bülach been no information as to how I should have made my children ready. She also said that no records of children in the passage home
Florhof be performed.
I think it's bad if people can do in positions such as Mrs Zinn serious statements, but must prove this in any way or documented. Their statements were taken but 1 to 1 of verifiers, and their recommendation that my children would have in a long-term home. This opinion of the Department is apparently so hard
property of the authority: the guardianship authority Bülach. These are based again on the advice, and consequently on the testimony Esther Zinn.

I can in my case in an emergency, the statements of Mrs. Esther Zinn refute various documents, but what about those parents and children who can not do?
As you can see even in my story, but can occur such files again.

How could read from the entry http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/07/widersprche-von-frau-evelyne-pente-und.html has, Mrs. Esther Zinn at the exit interview from the passage home Florhof against the teachers of my older son's behavior even more aggressive.

Fullmetalachemist V.s. Bleach Game

No case files of children in the orphanage Florhof

supplement to the last entry

I still have the right Medical Records after a few calls, I hang out these to get from the clinic Hard. It would mean first that it was only that of Medical Records (July 11, 2001), which I got with the advice and applied only to the guardianship authority Bülach. For this I I signed, I do not remember.
have signed but I was absolutely sure a confidentiality confinement, where all persons were given by me on it. Subsequently I have received it, signed by me on 23 July 2001. This was, among other things, the Supervisor of the Canton of Zurich, which could confirm how to handle my files. Also on the list there was one prosecutor who called my children and told them that they can not be forced to an opinion. In the report, it is but I would not have my children sent to child and youth mental health services for an opinion. See also the entries
http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2008/08/gutachten-ohne-kenntnis-darber.html and
http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/10/vortuschen-einer-namensnderung.html ( Letter dated 26 April 2001, the last scan).
has also helped the person during the scientific work of my older son, not interviewed, as well as my brother Andres Gasser, living in Schaffhausen.


Esther Zinn and record-keeping on children in the orphanage Florhof

See also http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2008/05/das-gutachden-der-klinik-hard-es-wurde . html. How to use the scans of my reports from the Hard Clinic (bottom scans of the aforementioned entry) see, I then get a part of my opinion. In this excerpt also a few statements by Mrs Esther Zinn were held, which was then the matron of the orphanage Florhof. This part I got in September 2002 and called on Mrs. Esther Zinn even then, so that they do their data could explain to my children, see

http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2008/09/akteneinsicht-und- namenschaos.html . Even then she did not give any information and is expressed only in an aggressive tone on children and the scientific work of my son.
The copy of the full report, I received recently (see last entry), I now get an insight on all the statements of Mrs. Esther Zinn, now superintendent of the children's castle Regensberg. I therefore called Esther Zinn last week to ask you whether to write the children's home Florhof no reports of the children, as I said before, the current national director of the orphanage Florhof (which surprised me very much). Click here to download tape receptacle 16.

Mrs Zinn confirmed to me that no files will be performed on children. Then I asked, that they can make serious statements (in report) and this evidence should not be. Your statement was that This case is already some years ago and they do not know after 900 children, which was characteristic of which child. They also have no desire to
people like me to discuss after all these years about such things. In the end they said I had done my sons massively broken and she hung up the phone easily. The whole conversation and thus the rest of the conversation can be downloaded as tape receptacle 17 . (My name and are "as valid" diagnosis of Mrs. Esther Zinn I have cut).
After this conversation, I called the District Council and Bulach asked if he could ask Mr. Dürsteler Mrs Zinn, how and where I said to my children 've made ready. Mrs Zinn has the District Council Bülach been no information as to how I should have made my children ready. She also said that no records of children in the passage home
Florhof be performed.
I think it's bad if people can do in positions such as Mrs Zinn serious statements, but must prove this in any way or documented. Their statements were taken but 1 to 1 of verifiers, and their recommendation that my children would have in a long-term home. This opinion of the Department is apparently so hard
property of the authority: the guardianship authority Bülach. These are based again on the advice, and consequently on the testimony Esther Zinn.

I can in my case in an emergency, the statements of Mrs. Esther Zinn refute various documents, but what about those parents and children who can not do?
As you can see even in my story, but can occur such files again.

How could read from the entry http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/07/widersprche-von-frau-evelyne-pente-und.html has, Mrs. Esther Zinn at the exit interview from the passage home Florhof against the teachers of my older son's behavior even more aggressive.

Fresh Blood After Cervical Biopsy

No direct release of the report of the clinic Hard

From the clinic I have requested my opinion hardware (see last Entry and

http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2008/05/das-gutachden-der-klinik-hard-es-wurde.html ). At the same time I became aware of the guardianship authority Bülach requested, my opinions and in two letters stated that a copy of my letters went to the county council Bülach. Of course I sent the letters to the clinic and hardware to the guardianship authority as written. Of the guardianship authority Bülach I got no response from the clinic and hardware following letter:

The hospital said hard, however, that the guardianship authority Bülach is the legal owner of my opinion. According to Dr. Marco Lanz then the report including confidentiality relieve Mr Dürsteler by the District Council served Bülach. A few days later I received a copy of Mr Dürsteler the opinion, but from the secrecy release only that, relating to the guardianship authority Bülach. The other side, on which I have given birth as mine person from maintaining confidentiality and Esther Zinn, I have not received.

Back when I signed the Confidentiality release, I already asked for a copy of this. There was Mr. Schawalder in the stress at that time, he told me that he would bring one next time. This he has not done so on the grounds that there are so many people the copier had. Again the next time the copier was broken and he would send me a copy. Of course, I got a copy.

After I let all the reports have before me, I noticed that none of these persons was asked of me.

The following is an excerpt from the report to detail that Mr. Huber made:
Here you can see that Mr Francis Xavier Huber of the guardianship authority Bülach normally found how to handle my medical Children Act: namely, that the district court simply Bülach was involved for a divorce.
In addition to Mr. Huber was the psychiatrist that he offered added that the name Gritti is deleted. By this statement it is clear that it even had a name change right never to be. In the letter to me (considering the 3 scans / letter of 26 October 1998 the entry http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2008/06/ergnzender-eintrag-zu-akte-153-und.html ) but Mr Francis Xavier Huber wrote of the guardianship authority Bülach that it performs a name change, and not simply the deletion of the name Gritti!
is mentioned in the covering letter is not even described a real change of name, but only the deletion of Gritti favor of Flück (then I had a name change sought only to completely Flück).

I also had in 1995 (1 scan / letter of 24 July 1995 in the entry http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/03/umgang-mit-medizinischen-kinderakten_20.html ) the deletion of "Gritti" in the guardianship authority Illnau-Effretikon applied locally. This was, however, by the Department of the Interior, but not this time accepted.
If it really is that simple but, I wonder, however: What did my lawyer? When I
regarding a telephone conversation with Mr Francis Xavier Huber of the VB Bülach addressed his application to the "name change" in dealing with my files said this, it was made no mistake and it was right, how to handle my file.


is the advice to "disease progression" that I was adopted.
I already have explained 100 times that my brother received an adoption, but I change the name. Access to the file said Dr. Schawalder simply that my file was partially granted. The fact is that I was basically given no access through the VB Bülach. Only after every legal action, I got files. For more content this part of the report see http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/05/die-medizinische-akte.html and http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/09/widerlegung-der-aussagen-von-werner.html .

In the same section:
to this section of the opinion, I do not go further here and refer you to a
http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/03/umgang-mit-medizinischen-kinderakten_20.html ).


It is interesting to read that writing assignable errors and misconduct of the guardianship authority Bülach be represented as delusional on my part. The 4th
last sentence: It should be appreciated that if his statements can not be confirmed by documents that are home are, it is applied thereby. In addition, psychiatrists were unwilling to address the other officials who were able to prove my statements. Only a few persons of the nursing staff were willing to listen properly.


From this excerpt you can see quite clearly that I am in the clinic Bülach not even have my advice to consult. Otherwise I would have
knew even then that the VB Bülach wanted to separate us again. This also explains why I did not get support in finding accommodation and the hearing before the court as long as my children was delayed until it was pointless.
also would have continued the therapy for as long until I had shown a degree of insight. I probably would have then continued to "Zyprexa" and "Temesta" take (see entry: http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2008/05/das-gutachden-der-klinik-hard-es-wurde.html ). To date, it is said that no mistakes were made.

Since I have other discrepancies are noticed in the report, I did law degree with the protocol of the district judge. A. Fischer, who made my hearing in the hospital compared Hard. It is amazing to me that Dr. Schawalder a term of the minutes of this hearing very different way, that it was a completely different meaning. Is now
what a judge says it like a psychiatrist or unformulated and this then gives an entirely different situation? In particular, I find it extreme that then the guardianship authority Bülach based on the opinion and not a copy of the protocol had
of the judge. Another time, I will discuss it in detail.


Here is a copy of the ticket from me than I of Canada on the Trans-Canada Airlines from Montreal to Zurich Kloten Airport

, BORDER. To show that I entered as a baby named Flück.

Fresh Blood After Cervical Biopsy

No direct release of the report of the clinic Hard

From the clinic I have requested my opinion hardware (see last Entry and

http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2008/05/das-gutachden-der-klinik-hard-es-wurde.html ). At the same time I became aware of the guardianship authority Bülach requested, my opinions and in two letters stated that a copy of my letters went to the county council Bülach. Of course I sent the letters to the clinic and hardware to the guardianship authority as written. Of the guardianship authority Bülach I got no response from the clinic and hardware following letter:

The hospital said hard, however, that the guardianship authority Bülach is the legal owner of my opinion. According to Dr. Marco Lanz then the report including confidentiality relieve Mr Dürsteler by the District Council served Bülach. A few days later I received a copy of Mr Dürsteler the opinion, but from the secrecy release only that, relating to the guardianship authority Bülach. The other side, on which I have given birth as mine person from maintaining confidentiality and Esther Zinn, I have not received.

Back when I signed the Confidentiality release, I already asked for a copy of this. There was Mr. Schawalder in the stress at that time, he told me that he would bring one next time. This he has not done so on the grounds that there are so many people the copier had. Again the next time the copier was broken and he would send me a copy. Of course, I got a copy.

After I let all the reports have before me, I noticed that none of these persons was asked of me.

The following is an excerpt from the report to detail that Mr. Huber made:
Here you can see that Mr Francis Xavier Huber of the guardianship authority Bülach normally found how to handle my medical Children Act: namely, that the district court simply Bülach was involved for a divorce.
In addition to Mr. Huber was the psychiatrist that he offered added that the name Gritti is deleted. By this statement it is clear that it even had a name change right never to be. In the letter to me (considering the 3 scans / letter of 26 October 1998 the entry http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2008/06/ergnzender-eintrag-zu-akte-153-und.html ) but Mr Francis Xavier Huber wrote of the guardianship authority Bülach that it performs a name change, and not simply the deletion of the name Gritti!
is mentioned in the covering letter is not even described a real change of name, but only the deletion of Gritti favor of Flück (then I had a name change sought only to completely Flück).

I also had in 1995 (1 scan / letter of 24 July 1995 in the entry http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/03/umgang-mit-medizinischen-kinderakten_20.html ) the deletion of "Gritti" in the guardianship authority Illnau-Effretikon applied locally. This was, however, by the Department of the Interior, but not this time accepted.
If it really is that simple but, I wonder, however: What did my lawyer? When I
regarding a telephone conversation with Mr Francis Xavier Huber of the VB Bülach addressed his application to the "name change" in dealing with my files said this, it was made no mistake and it was right, how to handle my file.


is the advice to "disease progression" that I was adopted.
I already have explained 100 times that my brother received an adoption, but I change the name. Access to the file said Dr. Schawalder simply that my file was partially granted. The fact is that I was basically given no access through the VB Bülach. Only after every legal action, I got files. For more content this part of the report see http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/05/die-medizinische-akte.html and http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/09/widerlegung-der-aussagen-von-werner.html .

In the same section:
to this section of the opinion, I do not go further here and refer you to a
http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/03/umgang-mit-medizinischen-kinderakten_20.html ).


It is interesting to read that writing assignable errors and misconduct of the guardianship authority Bülach be represented as delusional on my part. The 4th
last sentence: It should be appreciated that if his statements can not be confirmed by documents that are home are, it is applied thereby. In addition, psychiatrists were unwilling to address the other officials who were able to prove my statements. Only a few persons of the nursing staff were willing to listen properly.


From this excerpt you can see quite clearly that I am in the clinic Bülach not even have my advice to consult. Otherwise I would have
knew even then that the VB Bülach wanted to separate us again. This also explains why I did not get support in finding accommodation and the hearing before the court as long as my children was delayed until it was pointless.
also would have continued the therapy for as long until I had shown a degree of insight. I probably would have then continued to "Zyprexa" and "Temesta" take (see entry: http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2008/05/das-gutachden-der-klinik-hard-es-wurde.html ). To date, it is said that no mistakes were made.

Since I have other discrepancies are noticed in the report, I did law degree with the protocol of the district judge. A. Fischer, who made my hearing in the hospital compared Hard. It is amazing to me that Dr. Schawalder a term of the minutes of this hearing very different way, that it was a completely different meaning. Is now
what a judge says it like a psychiatrist or unformulated and this then gives an entirely different situation? In particular, I find it extreme that then the guardianship authority Bülach based on the opinion and not a copy of the protocol had
of the judge. Another time, I will discuss it in detail.


Here is a copy of the ticket from me than I of Canada on the Trans-Canada Airlines from Montreal to Zurich Kloten Airport

, BORDER. To show that I entered as a baby named Flück.

What Paper To Use For Waxing

access to the file name and chaos

This article from the 20 minutes of 11 September 2008 reconfirmed that one has the right to inspect records. Actually, would you as an individual the right to inspect and copy their files for years.

I Bülach the District Council, Mr Dürsteler addressed to this article. Now all that still have records of me and my children under lock and publish them, says Mr Dürsteler. The hospital must now give me the hard full opinion, and the remaining files.

I received the new social security card. There is added after the family name with a hyphen, the name Gritti.

When we moved to the new location had to make my children because Mr. Scherrer a clarification, because Mr. Scherrer had to do nothing better than such a process, not breakable to lead in track. As mentioned in previous entries of mine already, the woman has adhered to Pente no promise that everything is fine when we moved. I was thus quite into financial troubles. I have on the social services always tried to explain that my story, but they did not respond. I also got so until 2003 with great fight my files. My children could not even say what happened in Bülach something, because the Social Services said they were not responsible. To my name problem, I presented a lot of documents. But somehow this was simply ignored. When I was written on the letter referred Flück "I was pretty upset. I have said this also the social work that hurt me so. Without considering this, I was again in the next letter written by "called Flück. This was very hurtful that it could even read the letter carrier. One might then think that I provide as a false name.

When I complain to the competent Councillor complained, he said that this meet is even. It will someone explain to me what is it a concession if you have a birth name, this is not recognized as a valid name. Since when is a mockery of them meet one?

And even if this in the files of Bülach IT IS, why do you continue it, although I reported the bug several times? It has always been the word of Bülach of mine. Whether this is in the social sector of advance may be doubted.

on the registration certificate of the person reporting the Office I am in turn registered with the married name.

Then again, there are statements to which I am registered with "born Gritti. Even Mr Dürsteler of Bulach District Council has told me that this is also wrong.

Other offices then say that you are registered with them only with the married name and the name is thus not a problem. Then the next form is required but the birth name.

was on court documents, I even on 25 Born in December. On other documents, I was even born in November.

What I will discuss in detail is how to handle my kids. All those who testified positively about my children, were dismissed by Mrs Evelyn Pente, Mrs. Esther Zinn (former matron of the orphanage Florhof) as an instrument.

The psychiatrist in the clinic have never seen my kids hard. Nevertheless, they made a decision about them, and then only on the basis of the statements of the authorities. These statements were then taken even one to one. Other persons or documents I stated, were not consulted or honored.

Everyone can do but even the thought: Should not be asked all the people of "both" sides to create an objective opinion? The same is true for documents on it? I have tape recordings of what you hear, what, Mrs Esther Zinn of my children if they recommend it to other children, the UN Children's Convention. When asked about their negative information about my children to the psychiatrist, she has refused to explain to me the technical keywords, or why it has taken this "diagnosis" in this or that context. Even the scientific work of my Son she put out negative.

Would my children probably represent only the negative statements by Ms Ester Zinn, the guardianship authority Bülach and the psychiatrists would probably not have been such a photo.

I would be interested if others find it offensive when everything is pulled by their own children into the negative.

Speaking of laws: Sometimes when I read the laws, some of the enumeration of Article 9 of the Federal Constitution which apply to my case:

principle of good faith

Once an administration promise and / or covenant releases issued to support or be derived from the conduct of the Administration, can be expected, it is forced to abide by them or to the extent to be considered as possible (see Article 9 BV).

principle the prohibition of arbitrary

Article 9 BV: Every person has the right, without arbitrariness by the State authorities [...] to be treated. It is:

- if it senseless and useless, or contradictory,

- if they are not on factual grounds, refers

- if the same situations differently and that different situations the same way,

- if they violated clear law

- if in the more troubling way acting against the sense of justice and the sense of justice,
- their reasoning is contrary to the wording or purpose of a law.

What Paper To Use For Waxing

access to the file name and chaos

This article from the 20 minutes of 11 September 2008 reconfirmed that one has the right to inspect records. Actually, would you as an individual the right to inspect and copy their files for years.

I Bülach the District Council, Mr Dürsteler addressed to this article. Now all that still have records of me and my children under lock and publish them, says Mr Dürsteler. The hospital must now give me the hard full opinion, and the remaining files.

I received the new social security card. There is added after the family name with a hyphen, the name Gritti.

When we moved to the new location had to make my children because Mr. Scherrer a clarification, because Mr. Scherrer had to do nothing better than such a process, not breakable to lead in track. As mentioned in previous entries of mine already, the woman has adhered to Pente no promise that everything is fine when we moved. I was thus quite into financial troubles. I have on the social services always tried to explain that my story, but they did not respond. I also got so until 2003 with great fight my files. My children could not even say what happened in Bülach something, because the Social Services said they were not responsible. To my name problem, I presented a lot of documents. But somehow this was simply ignored. When I was written on the letter referred Flück "I was pretty upset. I have said this also the social work that hurt me so. Without considering this, I was again in the next letter written by "called Flück. This was very hurtful that it could even read the letter carrier. One might then think that I provide as a false name.

When I complain to the competent Councillor complained, he said that this meet is even. It will someone explain to me what is it a concession if you have a birth name, this is not recognized as a valid name. Since when is a mockery of them meet one?

And even if this in the files of Bülach IT IS, why do you continue it, although I reported the bug several times? It has always been the word of Bülach of mine. Whether this is in the social sector of advance may be doubted.

on the registration certificate of the person reporting the Office I am in turn registered with the married name.

Then again, there are statements to which I am registered with "born Gritti. Even Mr Dürsteler of Bulach District Council has told me that this is also wrong.

Other offices then say that you are registered with them only with the married name and the name is thus not a problem. Then the next form is required but the birth name.

was on court documents, I even on 25 Born in December. On other documents, I was even born in November.

What I will discuss in detail is how to handle my kids. All those who testified positively about my children, were dismissed by Mrs Evelyn Pente, Mrs. Esther Zinn (former matron of the orphanage Florhof) as an instrument.

The psychiatrist in the clinic have never seen my kids hard. Nevertheless, they made a decision about them, and then only on the basis of the statements of the authorities. These statements were then taken even one to one. Other persons or documents I stated, were not consulted or honored.

Everyone can do but even the thought: Should not be asked all the people of "both" sides to create an objective opinion? The same is true for documents on it? I have tape recordings of what you hear, what, Mrs Esther Zinn of my children if they recommend it to other children, the UN Children's Convention. When asked about their negative information about my children to the psychiatrist, she has refused to explain to me the technical keywords, or why it has taken this "diagnosis" in this or that context. Even the scientific work of my Son she put out negative.

Would my children probably represent only the negative statements by Ms Ester Zinn, the guardianship authority Bülach and the psychiatrists would probably not have been such a photo.

I would be interested if others find it offensive when everything is pulled by their own children into the negative.

Speaking of laws: Sometimes when I read the laws, some of the enumeration of Article 9 of the Federal Constitution which apply to my case:

principle of good faith

Once an administration promise and / or covenant releases issued to support or be derived from the conduct of the Administration, can be expected, it is forced to abide by them or to the extent to be considered as possible (see Article 9 BV).

principle the prohibition of arbitrary

Article 9 BV: Every person has the right, without arbitrariness by the State authorities [...] to be treated. It is:

- if it senseless and useless, or contradictory,

- if they are not on factual grounds, refers

- if the same situations differently and that different situations the same way,

- if they violated clear law

- if in the more troubling way acting against the sense of justice and the sense of justice,
- their reasoning is contrary to the wording or purpose of a law.

Gift Ideas For Strock Patients

advice without some knowledge of

This week I found on the Internet is still an interesting article of the K-tips, see here: http://www.ktipp.ch/themen/beitrag/1025697/Psychisch_krank_Darf_ich_die_Akten_einsehen

Unfortunately it so that it is done in practice different, as can be seen from my records. For example, one must know first of all, that was created over a one report. Only by chance, we learned that women had created Dr. Simon of the Child and Youth Mental Health Service of the Canton of Zurich on my children an opinion. We were given by Dr. Simon only a letter dated 3 November 2000, in which she confirmed that my children do not want to come to an opinion. In the letter was not why my kids did not go to that opinion, which they justified in detail. Moreover, a prosecutor told them that they can not be forced to an opinion.

We were not informed that a medical report is then made solely on the basis of the record. When we learned that there is such a medical document expertise, we insisted to get this. As you can see from the above link, this is the right conferred to my children. As we look to Francis Xavier Huber of the guardianship authority Bulach, who commissioned the report, argued that this meant that we only Dr. Simon in whose presence can inspect and the VB was not competent to hand us a copy. called

When my older son, Dr. Simon ( tape recording 15 downloads ) said this to him, that we may already have access to the report, but not easy just to her as a consultant, but the client and this is the guardianship authority Bülach.

In the following, a montage of a letter of the Supervisor of the Canton of Zurich, who writes that there are no overriding reasons in our case for restricting the right of access.

The following is the answer of the guardianship authority Bulach, 26 April 2001. (See last letter on http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/10/vortuschen-einer-namensnderung.html ). Although Huber and Werner Franz Xavier Scherrer still in the letter to us looking for reasons to refuse to copy the files, they have nonetheless settled as a copy of this letter to me. Not because we had the right to do so, but because the guardianship authority has proven Bülach than generous.

the time period of 6 months notice until we were given a copy. This was often the case and also regarding the clinic Hard, responsibility shifted back and forth.

What I want to mention here again: When none of the guardianship authority Bulach, Youth Secretariat Bulach, Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Service of Canton of Zurich or the children's home Florhof planned or conducted hearings or investigations could my children freely happened on the external. This happened with justification, that this was not the task, one not talking about people who are not present or is only talking to the future.

Gift Ideas For Strock Patients

advice without some knowledge of

This week I found on the Internet is still an interesting article of the K-tips, see here: http://www.ktipp.ch/themen/beitrag/1025697/Psychisch_krank_Darf_ich_die_Akten_einsehen

Unfortunately it so that it is done in practice different, as can be seen from my records. For example, one must know first of all, that was created over a one report. Only by chance, we learned that women had created Dr. Simon of the Child and Youth Mental Health Service of the Canton of Zurich on my children an opinion. We were given by Dr. Simon only a letter dated 3 November 2000, in which she confirmed that my children do not want to come to an opinion. In the letter was not why my kids did not go to that opinion, which they justified in detail. Moreover, a prosecutor told them that they can not be forced to an opinion.

We were not informed that a medical report is then made solely on the basis of the record. When we learned that there is such a medical document expertise, we insisted to get this. As you can see from the above link, this is the right conferred to my children. As we look to Francis Xavier Huber of the guardianship authority Bulach, who commissioned the report, argued that this meant that we only Dr. Simon in whose presence can inspect and the VB was not competent to hand us a copy. called

When my older son, Dr. Simon ( tape recording 15 downloads ) said this to him, that we may already have access to the report, but not easy just to her as a consultant, but the client and this is the guardianship authority Bülach.

In the following, a montage of a letter of the Supervisor of the Canton of Zurich, who writes that there are no overriding reasons in our case for restricting the right of access.

The following is the answer of the guardianship authority Bulach, 26 April 2001. (See last letter on http://namensaenderung.blogspot.com/2007/10/vortuschen-einer-namensnderung.html ). Although Huber and Werner Franz Xavier Scherrer still in the letter to us looking for reasons to refuse to copy the files, they have nonetheless settled as a copy of this letter to me. Not because we had the right to do so, but because the guardianship authority has proven Bülach than generous.

the time period of 6 months notice until we were given a copy. This was often the case and also regarding the clinic Hard, responsibility shifted back and forth.

What I want to mention here again: When none of the guardianship authority Bulach, Youth Secretariat Bulach, Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Service of Canton of Zurich or the children's home Florhof planned or conducted hearings or investigations could my children freely happened on the external. This happened with justification, that this was not the task, one not talking about people who are not present or is only talking to the future.