Does the judicial hearing officer possess the ability to view the complicated case from a non-biased perspective, without expressing his own misogyny and misandry in ruling

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED |. DOES THE JUDICIAL HEARING OFFICER POSSESS THE ABILITY TO VIEW THE COMPLICATED CASE FROM A NON BIASED PERSPECTIVE, WITHOUT EXPRESSING HIS OWN MISOGYNY AND MISANDRY IN RULING, (1) IN NOT HAVING THE ABILITY TO RULE ABOUT A HOUSEHOLD THAT DOES NOT ADHERE TO TRADITIONAL ROLES OR GENDER ROLES IN PARENTING (2) IN ASSUMING SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION WHERE THERE WAS NO ORDER OF REFERENCE FROM A FAMILY COURT JUDGE NOR THE CONSENT OF THE PARTIES, (3) BY CONFERRING ONGOING JURISDICTION ON ITSELF? IL DID THE COURT ERR iN DETERMINING THERE WAS A CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCE SUFFICIENT TO WARRANT A BEST INTEREST HEARING? WHILE IGNORING THE CONFESSIONS OF WITNESSES TO THE ABUSE AND MOLESTING OF A DISABLED PERSON. IW. DID THE COURT ERR IN NOT INVESTIGATING THE CHILD ABUSE AND ALLEGED SEXUAL ABUSE OF THE CHILDREN BY ROBERT HALPER (RICH HALPER, MR. ACE) (1) DID THE COURT ERR WHEN IT RULED THAT SUPERVISED THERAPEUTIC VISITATION WAS IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILDREN? WV. DID THE JUDICIAL HEARING OFFICER ADDRESS THAT ATTORNEY JAY KAPLAN ILLEGALLY REPRESENTED ALEXANDRA PEREZ HALPER FIKJA ALEXANDRA PEREZ CID WHILE REPRESENTING THE APPELLANT'S LONGTIME PARTNER KATE WETHERBY? DID THE JUDICIAL HEARING OFFICER ADDRESS THE APPELLANTS RECENT HEAD INJURY, OR HAVE IN PLACE A MECHANISM TO INCLUDE THE CHILD DISABLED PARENT RELATIONSHIP? | V. DID THE JUDICIAL HEARING OFFICER NEGLECT TO ADDRESS THE DISABILITY OF THE APPELLANT AND THE LACK OF ADVOCACY PROVIDED | FOR THE APPELLANT WHO SUFFERED NEUROLOGICAL DAMAGE? VI. DID THE JUDICIAL HEARING OFFICER REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE DISCREPANCIES IN TRANSCRIPTS, MISSING EVIDENCE, THE PERJURY AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE OF ALEXANDRA PEREZ HALPER F/K/A ALEXANDRA PEREZ CiD AND HER WITNESSES? : | | | |