Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?' (See March 23 & 5, 2014). More Than 745 posts and 45 pages of Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

“DISCONNECTED!” — More on ConnectEd (2006ff nonprofit) and WestEd (1995ff JPA claiming to be since 1966). Can YOU Follow the Connections, Find and Correlate the Financial Statements, and Name the EndGame(s)? [Publ. May 11, 2017, updated twice since].

with one comment

 “DISCONNECTED!” — More on ConnectEd (2006ff nonprofit) and WestEd (1995ff JPA claiming to be since 1966). Can YOU Follow the Connections, Find and Correlate the Financial Statements, and Name the EndGame(s)? (case-sensitive shortlink ends “-6k7”)(First published 5/11/2017)

SEPT. 29, 2017 Update ( in fine print, maroon borders before “Post Foreword,”  also in fine print but with light-blue background):

This post was just made “Sticky” Sep. 29, 2017. It will display with others above all normal posts, which show up in chronological order (most recent on top) in main blog area. I may not get back to revising the “sticky posts” list (itself such a post) to reflect the two, so far, I’ve added while updating the 2017 Table of Contents Page (Posted Jan. 9, 2017 and also, you guessed it, a “sticky” post on this blog).

Readers are encouraged to work through this material if it’s contents and concepts are not already familiar. We are talking regional, joint powers authorities, influential and networked educational authorities here working with a nonprofit sponsored by an influential California billionaire real estate developer, or I should say, by the related tax-exempt foundation associated with the company owned by that ONE PERSON (as of writing original publication date here).  

If these concepts and this material already is familiar, especially how to distinguish private from government entities, even when major attempts to blur that boundary are made by the powerful in each claiming heartfelt concern for the disenfranchised (vulnerable, low-income, oppressed, hurting, poor — etc.) and especially expressing major concern for (re-)setting the values and schooling for the next generation of THEIR POTENTIAL EMPLOYEES, please make efforts to explain to other people, especially including people outside your normal social or academic sphere as somehow you obtained this knowledge within yours.  Try “an elevator speech,” a casual conversation with a stranger in public who might not be en route to an important appointment.  I suggest not starting with people sporting PhDs and solid employment within academia; they may lack interest (or incentive — if the system’s working just fine for them…) or fail to see its relevance to the rest of us, unless they are unusually honest with a dose of humility.  Curiosity about the world we live in can be catching…. Apologies (sort of…) in advance for the jaundiced tone and sarcasm in this Sept. 2017 update to what I consider one of my more important posts and personally shocking discoveries. //LGH

Also, as it shows below, I am looking for a missing financial statement for a certain government entity listed in this title.  If you work for this entity other than in a decision-making capacity (if you do, consider this “notice” that the MIA information been noticed and is being publicized…) — please try to persuade the leadership to do the honorable thing (for a change) and as a governmental entity, post the financial statements (NOT just the latest one, but an archive of them) on the otherwise well-heeled, publication- and links-filled website! If they won’t, and one exists SOMEWHERE, I have a comments field…it can accept links! I’m considering an “APB” for this one…

And —-
Read the rest of this entry »

Vital Info: “Sticky” Posts Now Listed Here [Publ. 2/9/2017, rev. 5/26, 6/19, and 10/1/2017]

with 3 comments

Adjusted Title of this post with its WordPress-generated, case-sensitive short-link ending “-5MQ” is: Vital Info: “Sticky” Posts (Now Listed Here)   [Publ. 2/9/2017, rev. 5/26, 6/19, and 10/1/2017]** {{INCLUDING THAT SHORT-LINK HELPS ME, THE BLOG ADMINISTRATOR (AND THE ONLY ONE POSTING HERE) KEEP LINKS ACCURATE AS I AM WRITING POSTS CLOSELY RELATED IN  SUBJECT MATTER SERIES, WHEN POSTS ARE REFERENCED, SPLIT, OR EXPANDED}}

**The Oct. 1, 2017 adjustment notes that (now my Jan. 9, 2017 Table of Contents Page*** is updated through Sept. 21, and better explained and displayed for prior years back to Sept. 24, 2012) I’ve added two more “sticky posts” relevant to current blogging and principles I continue to emphasize.  This table format matches their look on the Table of Contents 2017 page (yellow-background), with the second one including an annotated screenprint on the title row.

***Table of Contents Page, updated: 2017 Table of Contents Continues Themes From 2016. See TOC for: (1) 2017 now thru March Sept. 21; (2) 2016 All; (3) Sept. 2012 – June 2014, Reverse Chrono, and (4) See Also More Info Below. (case-sensitive, WordPress-generated shortlink-ends 5qZ, first published Jan. 9, 2017, second half of post title and substantial updates added in late September, 2017).

I’ll list the two additional Sticky posts again below without all the highlighting but with the links and their dates.  The other sticky posts presented earlier are on a specific format to feature them.  These being more recent may have much more explicit financial detail with annotated images throughout.  Both feature major movements in place for many years designed to affect future generations.  These two posts express the continuing problems posed by missing financial statements of major, influential government entities and (the second post) document a supposed expert that failed to even demonstrate the ability to read financial statements (as opposed to notes to the same) and get the labels, let alone categories, straight, about such a major category as “fiduciary funds” and where “CalPERS” (for the State of California) falls within that category.  The author who fails to read straight (actually, more than one) has published books on debt and is pushing for “State-Run Banks” as the solution to it.

Moral of the story?  We need to learn the basics ourselves to understand when those claiming to present them, aren’t, which quite often, they just aren’t!
Read the rest of this entry »

2017 Table of Contents Continues Themes From 2016. See TOC for: (1) 2017 now thru Sept. 21; (2) 2016 All; and (3) Sept. 2012 – June 2014, Reverse Chrono, and (4) See Also More Info Below. [First published Jan. 9 2017, last updated 9/30/2017]

with one comment

(Rev. 09/24/2017 (format/appearance changes, adding TOC entries since March 2017)

For 2017 Link to this post for this year2017 Table of Contents Continues Themes From 2016. See TOC for: (1) 2017 now thru March Sept. 21; (2) 2016 All; (3) Sept. 2012 – June 2014, Reverse Chrono, and (4) See Also More Info Below. (case-sensitive, WordPress-generated shortlink-ends 5qZ, first published Jan. 9, 2017, second half of post title and substantial updates added in late September, 2017).

The Table for 2017 (with the last three of 2016 for continuity of a certain theme) is near the bottom of this page. It is current through September, October 8, 2017. You will see the header to 2016 with 3 rows, the header for 2017 and 53 54 rows followed by some more blanks.  That’s one of several ways to access posts for 2017. It looks like this  (notice the last entry pictured represents the post you’re looking at, “Row 3” for 2017):

Click to enlarge. Excerpt from Jan. 9, 2017 post explaining TOC navigation. If you don’t want to mess with uploaded pdfs or anything complex, find this part of the post and browse at least last three posts of 2016 and all of 2017’s posts. Other years (and links to them) are also discussed below.

Meanwhile, the “10 most recent posts” section on right sidebar is helpful for 2017, or if you’re handy with scroll or page-down functions (but not recommended on cell phone) go to the top of this blog (just: “FamilyCourtMatters.org“), scroll down below the several sticky posts with their abbreviated lead-ins  (i.e.,with “Read More….” links) realizing that the lower down = earlier posts.

As the title indicates, the Tables (plural) of Contents (“TOC”) are in three sections:  <> 2017 through March, <> 2016 (all of it), and <>Sept., 2012 – June, 2014.  Post title also signals that besides the tables of contents, this post has <> more info below.  

The next three links pull up those three TOC for better browsing in a form whereby any post displayed on that table can be reached by clicking on its name after clicking on the link to bring up the pdf.  The next inset box is just in case a little vocabulary might further help navigate what follows.
Read the rest of this entry »

Do You Know Your EDC (EIN#04-2241718 in Massachusetts)? Or Why It Became a Greenbook Initiative ~Evaluation Partner~ Alongside ICF International and the NCSC? If Not, Pls. Look Now! [Orig. 11/15/2016, Rev. & made “Sticky” 6/24/2017]

with one comment

Post title: Do You Know Your EDC (EIN#04-2241718 in Massachusetts)? Or Why It Became a Greenbook Initiative ~Evaluation Partner~ Alongside ICF International and the NCSC? If Not, Pls. Look Now!*

*(with case-sensitive shortlink ending “-4TG”).  Published 11/15/2016, made sticky (and some images added near top, and missing ones replaced in middle) 6/25/2017 for its place in other topics I’m currently featuring.  Post is about 13,000 words including no doubt captions to its many images..


Massachusetts Corporation/Business Entity Search (although EDC is a Delaware legal domicile entity with a MA address).  What’s a bit odd about the master page is that EDC is NOT labeled “nonprofit” although it seems to be one:

edcein042241718-43-foundry-ave-waltham-ma-annotated-ext-master-page-topscrshot-2016-12-14 <==Click to read image to left: edcEin042241718-43-foundry-ave-waltham-ma-annotated-ext-master-page-topscrshot-2016-12-14-png


if needed, click here to read officer list full-sized.

Click on “All Filings” on the “master page” which comes up (after click on organization name) to view some older listings of officers showing their affiliations.

[See next fine-print, light-blue “lost the reference” paragraph.  I found it again, reprinted, annotated here.

Gail T.P. Wickes @EDC (since 1973) made some serious ripples as Gail Thain Parker, 1st woman President of Bennington College, VT. Part of issue behind her resignation dealt with her “futures” plan to rescue it financially; she said, too many tenured professors. I can see why, if there is a connection, Ted Sizer at CES and/or Brown U. might want her. See published books.

Click image to enlarge the annotated image; but click HERE for the associated EDC registration in MA (1970s) listing first officers and Board as shown above.

I looked up  the almost-NO women-on-the-board (@1972) articles of incorporation and put some urls on the image.

Among them, Gail Thain Parker (now “Gail T.P. Wickes” as Harvard BA & PhD but was -briefly – the youngest women college president in the US, and first one of Bennington College, VT, with her (then-husband).  It didn’t go well.  She was only 29!  EDC still lists her, says, on its board since 1973 (before her time at Bennington), and now is a stockbroker].

For example, here’s for year 2010:[June2017 Update note: that link is a generic, not a saved search, and no longer valid. Despite looking again through some of the key personnel (other MA corporations they ran) and earlier (and revealing) EDC returns, I DNR what I was looking at, this time.  I did see William DeJong listed as just 1 of 5 contractors (paid bout $59,000) in FY2001 or 2002; I’ve blogged DeJong’s since on FamilyCourtMatters). I would like to know what the reference was, but for now, do not. Tax Years Fiscal Years 2002 + 2001 from 990Finder (FoundationCenter) have financial statements attached; 2001 has a schedule of contracts and pass-through federal agencies.  Neither particularly explains what they do on the Form 990 “Program Service Accomplishments” page in those years, and Highest Paid Subcontractors” omit contact addresses, or even state/country info). EDC’s Gov’t grants (see Scheds A) escalated by millions, yearly 1998-2003 at least. I AM ADDING 5 IMAGES from EARLIER EDC IRS RETURNS, 2 show its highest paid contractor, all show avoidance tactics (disrespectful to the public) in filling out Forms 990. The first image is as wide as the post, others are smaller. (But FS were attached, also) //LGH]

#1 of 5 Images, EDC (EIN#042240218) FY2002 Shows ca. ¾ of funding is govt grants)(Image added post-publicatn 6/2017)

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

November 15, 2016 at 8:07 pm

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011)

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

About the Language and Length (Notes on Writing Style from TOC 2014 post) with Work Sample: The Calif Endowment (Publ. 10-13-2016, “Sticky”)

with one comment

Some Notes on Length and Writing Style,

and Work Sample (Preview/Postlude)

(Exploring one nonprofit & one of its backing foundations  with financial and filing details sheds light on the organizations’ mutual and relative sizes, revenue sources, and overall purposes, as a counterpoint and “backdrop” to organization’s public-profiles, i.e., their websites)  

Full Post Title & ShortLink:  About the Language and Length (Notes on Writing Style from TOC 2014 post) with Work Sample: The Calif Endowment (Publ. 10-13-2016, “Sticky”)

Including evidence from “The California Endowment” (“TCE”)’s Fiscal year 2004 Form 990PF return; it shows supplemental Statements detailing Direct Charitable Activities (expenses $16M),  and afterwards, showing dollar amounts in expenses, investments, liabilities, etc. as shown on the main IRS form.

The “charitable activities” performed that year were in part in conjunction with The California Healthcare Foundation to develop an Internet “app” to streamline people’s applications for as many social services and healthcare (welfare-type, public-funded) services as possible:

In conjunction with third-party vendor, The California Endowment supervised the development and implementation of the One-e-App technology solution. One-e-App is a Web-based system that is designed to screen and enroll all eligible individuals in California in multiple publicly funded health and social service programs, such as Medi- Cal and Healthy Families…

While paying that same year $11M in investment managers’ fees and holding a variety of investments as the “evidence” link above shows.  Here’s TCE more recently and right underneath it, “The California Healthcare Foundation (also more recent return):

California Endowment CA 2015 990PF 188 $3,768,442,347.00 95-4523232

Check out the close similarity in EIN#s — interesting, huh? 954523232 and 945423231

We are looking at $3.7 billion assets vs. $0.78 billion (or $780M) in total gross assets…

California HealthCare Foundation CA 2015 990O 237 $780,974,997.00 95-4523231

The California Healthcare Foundation (assets a mere “pipsqueak” by TCE standards) with its (2015) $781M of assets, spent also a lot on its 7 independent contractors, i.e., investment managers, including over $2.6M on “Makena Capital Management, LLC.”…
Read the rest of this entry »

Get Real(itybloger)! — Call In, Read the Links on CAFRs, Review Regularly. (First posted Jan. 24, 2014)

with 3 comments

The “CAFR” topic is a governmental accounting and reporting practice which affects all people (and particularly in this situation, all US Citizens) because of its impact on the economy and our understanding of the size and scope of government operations. It is an over-arching and underlying issue, but it has been a hidden issue.

For example, as Carl Herman (Harvard Economics grad) put this in 2012, a very good question in my opinion.  Once certain evidence IS posted, it requires an review of reasoning built on “the big picture” (not including that evidence), and that “big picture” includes the hot topic of “DEFICIT.”

This is a “README” article! // Let’s Get Honest

CAFR summary: if $600B ‘fund’ can’t fund $27B pension, $16B budget deficit, why have it?(Posted on June 18, 2012 by Carl Herman in ‘Washington’s Blog”),

. . . Governor Brown is silent about the $600 billion in surplus cash and investments, claiming the $16 billion budget deficit can only be addressed by austerity – massive funding cuts to our essential infrastructure. A 2.8% divestment of the fund would cover the $16 billion deficit.
Read the rest of this entry »

ORPHANS: Where The Great Commission meets the Military-Industrial Complex [First Published May 18, 2013]

with one comment

NOTE: Intro. section in this background color added [free of charge] Jan. 2016, some years after original publication May 2013. “Nightlight Christian Adoptions” was mentioned in the original post, I’ve just been looking more closely at tax return contents, in the interim. The original post may have been more “inspired,” however…. //LGH….It deals with this topic:

NOTE: this 3,000 word (you’re welcome!) post is out of sequence — belongs back with the “On the Road to Emmaeus” and “”Christian Social Services: Replenishing the Ranks of the Faithful (Bethany Christian Services posts, ca. Eastertime, 2013.

  • 6723 Whittier, McLean, VA (Always Look Up Street Addresses!!!)**

…at one time or another these organizations (at a minimum) shared a street address:


File under, if you notice the details, What’s wrong with this picture?

Read the rest of this entry »

While We’re There — the Northern California Mediation Center . . . and ITS corporate records, history, people, etc. (publ. 9/22/2012)

with 4 comments

While We’re There — the Northern California Mediation Center . . . and ITS corporate records, history, people, etc. (publ. 9/22/2012) <==Full Post Title + shortlink.

[ca. 8,000 words.    Significant additions after publishing.NCMC   introduced as to corporate filings, some personnel. Post concludes  showing how “parental alienation” indoctrination happens,is self-perpetuating, and is hostile towards mothers, generally, and is definitely a marketable scheme [yes, scheme] as well. See “train-the-trainers” @ public cost mentality.In midstream, I’m taking (to another post) a basic explanation of what “Corporation” means, FYI]

We might as well talk about the Northern California Mediation Center alongside  The Judith Wallerstein Center for the Family in Transition, and right alongside respective corporate and nonprofit filings, fundings, tax returns affiliations and actions.{{The introduction is a little passionate, but it’s about a dozen paragraphs.  Scroll down if you want to skip them!  I added numbers to make it easier!}}
Read the rest of this entry »

Another POV, Point Of View, on “The Center for the Family in Transition” (and its funders) (Publ. 9/22/2012)

with 3 comments

Another POV on “The Center for the Family in Transition” (and its funders) (Publ. 9/22/2012) (WordPress- generated shortlink ends in “-190” which is all numbers, no alpha character for the “0” which otherwise would look like this:  “O”).

Excerpt from this post pulled to top, in the form of a screenprint (image) in 2016.  This sticky post originally published 9/22/2012.  It should be put in bold print, large letters and stuck on a refrigerator IF one is stuck in divorce drama at this time, as a reminder of the resonance of the rooms it will be taking place in!


This image is simply a quote in image form from my own post, Another POV on “The Center for the Family in Transition” (and its funders) (Publ. 9/22/2012) (shortlink ends in “-190,” all numbers)

(The text in the image is repeated below in the post.  Link from the image/quote):  For more, see March 5, 2014 post “Suppose I’m Right Here ….What Would You Do When the Lights go on?”   Read the rest of this entry »

Jumping through Hoops and Chasing One’s Tail, that is, if Conceptual Clarity on “CACs” ~~>And Navigating The Money Mazes Set up By Them~~> is the Goal. (This Example: Calico Center (San Leandro, CA) payees).

leave a comment »

Post title with shortlink;   Jumping through Hoops and Chasing One’s Tail, that is, if Conceptual Clarity on “CACs” ~>And Navigating The Money Mazes Set up By Them~> is the Goal. (This Example: Calico Center (San Leandro, CA) payees).  (Shortlink ending “-8ln” where the middle digit is not a number “1” or an upper-case “I” but apparently a lower-case “L” as in “l.”).  About 12,600 words (with all images and their captions). Tags will be added soon.

Started Jan. 4, 2018, right after publishing a “Part 2” “Chasing Down Corporations”*** post, for which this is follow-up

The connection to this topic comes through Kid’s Turn (San Francisco)’s aborption (merger, non-surviving entity) into a CAC (Child Advocacy Center) in San Francisco. I’d noticed this YEARS (about six to seven years!) ago and realized that the essence of the CAC network was running certain curricula and providing “co-located” interview centers similar to the concept behind the “Family Justice Centers” model.  I also found it interesting that KT San Francisco decided to go “underground” in this manner AFTER some of us were blogging its strange financial contracts with the SF City and County (i.e., Superior Court) and of course noting its obvious AFCC connections. It was clearly into psycho-educationally innocculating children against “parental alienation” and parents from spreading that “disease” to them by virtue of living in the same household…

WaPost Cara Tabachnik article 2017May11, Reunificatn Camps named, anecdotal

I keep hoping to get back to “Reunification Camps as I started” to narrate, with mentor/mentee clinicians and cross-country-border (and cross-continental) connections among some of the AFCC-featured ones modeled after, say Richard Warshak’s Family Bridges or Robin Deutsch et al.’s “Overcoming Barriers.”  Or the Canadian “Families Moving Forward” modeled on Warshak’s “Family Bridges” but with acknowledged board member (Barbara Jo Fidler) in common with “Overcoming Barriers.”  (Which I learned in an article by Cara Tabachnik (nearby images and quote) and others in the Detroit Free Press — see my earlier posts.).

from the Detroit Free Press, previously quoted on this blog.

Search results show the “Detroit Free Press” article referencing Rebecca Bailey and “Transitioning Families” (previously quoted on this blog)

The Washington Post (Tabachnik) article mentioned Family Bridges & Families Moving Forward, and it’s likely that the account of children being flown from Virginia to California(!!) N. of San Francisco was referring to “Transitioning Families” associated with Rebecca Bailey.  Many professionals and their jurisdictions (incl. judge, at least one attorney, and the court-appointed therapist) are mentioned, but fully 40 years after Richard Gardner (and over a dozen since his 2003 death by suicide), and the establishment of more than one “CFCC” at a university (not to mention the one at the California Judicial Council/AOC — Administrative Office of the Courts) — somehow reporters are STILL not screening the named professionals for possible AFCC connections before submitting stories for publication?

Washington Post Cara Tabachnik article 2017May11, Reunificat’n Camps named, anecdotal

WaPo Cara Tabachnik article 2017May11, Reunificatn Camps named, anecdotal

In the fall of 2011, Raphael [[estranged father of  3 boys and a girl who were resisting visitation.  The article also noted his friend from “The Church of the Holy Spirit”]] came up with a potential solution that made the weary judge think there was a possibility of a breakthrough: a program called Family Bridges, which Raphael had learned about from his therapist. Its premise — and that of similar services — is that if children and the alienated parent can spend uninterrupted time together without interference from the other parent, they can mend their relationship. To encourage this outcome, however, it and other programs require two controversial legal measures: The judge must award full custody to the alienated parent and must order the children to have no contact with the favored parent for 90 days after completion of the workshop.

A Robert  (E.) Emery of the University of Virginia “Center for Families, Children and the Law” was quoted.  I looked it up.  This center was started only in 1996, (“PRWORA” passed then) is run by two older men and a younger woman (grad. 2005, blond) and taking funding through (Doris) “Buffett Fellowships” —

Doris being the famous Warren Bufett’s sister, and on a related website, her child hood of maternal abuse (no father referenced) is described, including how Warren was encouraged to go to college while she was constantly told she was dumb.  School records later proved her IQ was within two points of Warren’s, and at 150 points, “enough to qualify for Mensa.”

(Referenced in 2010 article on her “Sunshine Lady Foundation” created in 1996 by inheritance when her (abusive) mother died. Referenced again in a 10/27/2017 article; I noticed the header color theme matches the CCF&L Univ. of Virginia website but is labeled “Sunshine Lady Foundation. Hover cursor over that second link for excerpt.

The CCF&L website is nowhere near current (see footer, “speaker” and “conference” links), references him getting a Myer (sic — it’s “Meyer”) Elkin award  from AFCC in 2002, and at the bottom in passing mentions he’s the father of five children (and no mention of their having a mother, or his marital status (the C.V. says he’s “married.”  May or may not be to the mother of the five children…). Still, somehow, the association with this “Center” enough to get him a quote in the 2017 Washington Post/Cara Tabachnik article above… [Click any image to enlarge, should be able to cursor among the other ones with ease].

Emery’s C.V.:  Apart from the life-long focus on these topics from the psychological, psychiatric, and behavioral therapy points of view, acknowledged membership in AFCC (and several other associations), he’s also listed editorial boards (several) including, since 2002, “Family Court Review — which is an AFCC publication and (I show in this post) to be at least editor in chief, one must be a member of the organization. The CV also shows some principal founders over time, including, repeatedly, the William T. Grant Foundation, Buffet Fellowships (for this center), sometimes NIMH sometimes the Commonwealth of Virginia, and other private donors.  I’m already posting CV excerpts from another professor on this post, so will skip the process here…You have the link…

The purpose of “REUNIFICATION” is to overcome “PARENTAL ALIENATION” and Reconnect families… While sold in part for NONFamilial abductions (such as Jaycee Dugard and her mother Teri Probyn, whom Rebecca Bailey helped), the main interest at least these three or four camps seem to exhibit is in providing family-court-ordered therapy which may involve either family abductions and/or under-age but teenage children running away, or otherwise resisting contact with one parent.  Terms like “targeted” parent vs. “preferred parent” seem to substitute for other previously identified, in the individual case’s, realities, including perpetrators of some form of abuse vs, protective parents, or, generally, “mothers…”  [[I wonder whether any records are kept by gender, i.e., of how many mothers vs. fathers are accused of “parental alienation” resulting in forcible reunification camp sessions…]]

I published two posts on the theme in December, 2017, the first itself revisiting and earlier one (from 2011!):

Let’s just take a quick look at a “Family Court Review” journal (and make no question — this is an AFCC publication, though put out by Wiley) January 2010 issue and find how many occurrences of personnel, programs, and procedures to overcome parental alienation you can count in JUST ONE special issue on “alienated children” and what to do about them. Two of those camps are mentioned.  I’ll mark them, too (including four images covers all listed articles and sections shown):

AFCC’s “Family Court Review” Jan. 2010 (Vol. 48 Issue #1), 245pp, as viewed on “onlineWiley.com” #1 of 4 images

AFCC’s “Family Court Review” Jan. 2010 (Vol. 48 Issue #1), 245pp, as viewed on “onlineWiley.com” #2 of 4 images

AFCC’s “Family Court Review” Jan. 2010 (Vol. 48 Issue #1), 245pp, as viewed on “onlineWiley.com” #3 of 4 images

AFCC’s “Family Court Review” Jan. 2010 (Vol. 48 Issue #1), 245pp, as viewed on “onlineWiley.com” #4 of 4 images

So, those four images came from an issue published eight years ago this month.  Now, about the Family Court Review’s significance as a journal — I found an ad for new editor (in chief) dated 2015, to start in 2016.  I see they have since hired Barbara Babb of UBaltimore (Sayra and Neil Meyerhoff Center for Families and Children in the Courts) as editor in chief.

I’d like to point out that while this may be THE major journal of the family courts, and as such it should be highly professional, it still acknowledges itself to be the mouthpiece, organ, and essentially under the control of this association “Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.” (I notice the website at Hofstra University (School of Law) hasn’t corrected the miss-spelling of the word “Conciliation”  as “Conciltion” for several years now, while updating the current list of editors…). The next three images show some of the job requirements as described on “Editor Job Description and Interview Process” (Original is black and white.  Any color represents my annotations, including one “call-out” on Image #2 of 3.)

#1 of 3 images: AFCC’s FCR seeking a new Editor (ca 2015) stating loyalty req’mts and other interesting info

#2 of 3 images: AFCC’s FCR seeking a new Editor (ca 2015) stating loyalty req’mts and other interesting info

#3 of 3 images: AFCC’s FCR seeking a new Editor (ca 2015) stating loyalty req’mts and other interesting info

AFCC representing a privately controlled association with its own acknowledged “mission” (agenda) and its members being a minority of the professionals involved in the nation’s (let alone other nations’) family courts — having active chapters in LESS THAN A THIRD of the Fifty (50) United States! —  but having achieved serious respectability in terms of the Wiley Blackwell status publication, and subscribing institutions (which I’m sure the publisher also appreciates) and references as it says on the first page, in WestLaw and Lexis Nexis — none of this eradicates the fact that the journal “FCR” represents the association — and NOT necessarily American citizens at large, or individually by state.

The insistence also on “Multi-disciplinary” and “Multinational” also creates an ongoing tension with the concept of representative government WITHIN this country.  I have no question the membership realizes this and having obtained a presence in “developing countries” institutions — when some US citizens, individuals who financially support the courts, public institutions with civil servants on the public payroll, by virtue of living and working in this country (i.e., through taxation and other fees charged) that AFCC wishes to, and apparently does dominate as a real “oligarchy” — cannot afford professional subscriptions and remain less than “up” on the nature and scope of its influence and the characteristics of AFCC as a 501©3.  And it (see red underline, image #1 of 3 above!) does claim to have influenced both legislation AND administrative rules of the family courts from the “Family Court Review” platform.

These issues cannot be swept under the rug decade after decade, or only be sporadically reported in association with some disastrous, headline-making custody situation, or not-headline making, but personally still disastrous for those involved, and affecting family lines and inter-generational wealth — or drainage of that wealth.  I have for NINE years almost, now, on this blog called attention to this situation, and (by the grace of God…) in 2018 will continue doing so.  Perhaps 2018 may be a tipping point for toleration of a private society with loyalty to things other than the U.S. Constitution and state constitutions (except as it suits their purposes) taking over public institutions and calling that “service.”  


Referring to those just mentioned above… I’ll start with Richard A. Warshak, “Psychologist and Author” — but not the camp.  I chose instead to feature his auto-bio on the website, and some of background on his acknowledged mentor.  This also features just how deeply entrenched in Richard Gardner (as a now-deceased influence and mentor comes out in the auto-bio).

After the “Warshak” section are images from some of the others, reminders of allegiance to each other (and to “AFCC”), and shared rhetoric.

Below all that, and I’ll mark it with a centered title, I get into the two nonprofits, “CACC, Inc.” (short-form name) and Calico Center, Inc.. — both at 524 Estudillo in San Leandro, California (a suburb of Oakland and like it in Alameda County, outside San Francisco and part of the nine-county “Greater Bay Area,” i.e., Northern California regional metropolitan area). Neither is particularly large — but size isn’t everything in some circles.  Sometimes leverage and positioning is, and for that, it’s doing well.

This post originally was inspired when I looked at the tax returns, and realized the information couldn’t fit onto “Chasing down Corporations, …. Part 2.”  (Or in full with link as provided also earlier in this post):


This section on “Warshak” is in place of any description (for now) of his “Family Bridges” workshop and after I’d already, below, decided to juxtapose information on the others mentioned above, with the main topic of this post, further details on how the “CACC” system seems to work, as witnessed by its California program center (so it says) “the Calico Center.” Who gets those Calico Center grants are relevant, and how small they are, relatively.

As with my new page (1/2/2018) on “For example, the National Children’s Alliance” (of which “Child Advocacy centers and organizing their establishments by State into “CACCs named after the state are part),

it takes about half a post (or more) to actually get to the images of the grants — mostly because I’m juxtaposing the information on Reunification Camps and people who define “child abuse” as promulgating parental alienation syndrome (that exact phrase, courtesy Warshak, although the word “promulgating” has a completely different meaning and usage). (in context, it was “falsely accused of promulgating [PAS]). You don’t “promulgate” syndromes — but you can promulgate doctrine, creeds, or officially declare and teach a philosophy in public, which this author — not the parents — are in fact doing, about alienation.  Possible root word underlying “promulgate” (to cause to emerge) may come from the word to “milk” as in squeeze milk out of an udder.  It does seem in this situation that certain situations are being “milked,” however that conflicts with the concept behind “syndrome,” which refers to a number of symptoms running together (“drome” is the root word representing running; see image below “promulgate.”  Notice it says from MEDICAL Latin 1560s, with “psychological’ sense only from 1955.

The image is the link. Click image to access this time (but not for most images on this post).

“syndrome” from OED (that’s not “Oxford English Dictionary” — click image for the link, this time.

Apparently a desire to blame a parent and claim a pathological condition results because of the parent got mixed up in the description.  And this was in a manual intended for “expert witnesses” aimed at judges and lawyers, regarding PAS (being sold as a monograph by Warshak on his website!). But hey, getting language exact or even using words according to their normal senses and context is obviously not a priority.  Getting the terms out there, repeatedly seems to be… Reptition, repetition, repetition…

AGAIN: Promulgate is to cause to come forth, to publicize or make official.  Here’s “Black’s Law” definition. “To publish; to announce officially; to make public as important or obligatory. See Wooden v. Western New York & P. R. Co. (Super. Ct.) 18 N. Y. Supp. 769.”

By contrast, “syndrome” is a word representing the “running together” of a variety of symptoms, with the key sense (apart from “syn-” or “together”) to RUN (as in “hippodrome” for horse or chariot racing, where the horses (hippo) run!) The symptoms are observed running (sic) on their own accord.  Syndromes have nothing to do with “promulgation” and have in effect, the opposite meaning, implying the name for some natural occurrence (or, I should say, “concurrence” of effects / symptoms, which is simply observed.  The roots of “symptom” come in part from the word “to fall” and often refer to indicators of a disease).

ANYHOW, for this post, the top half or more lays out some basic definitions to accompany the usual rhetoric — and to present a backdrop, or contrast, to the “CACC” system as it’s set up, I’m juxtaposing the section on reunification camps and Dr. Warshak’s career path, self-described…

I feel this is appropriate as BOTH scenarios — seem to have their origins in the 1970s, and gained momentum in the 1990s.  For example, Warshak’s first solo book came out, he says, in 1992, just before 1996 welfare reform but his career path was set in the early 70s.  The National Children’s Alliance (to prevent child abuse) didn’t incorporate until 1992 (or, its website says it started in 1988) but some of its local nonprofits date back to the 1970s (see that website’s timeline or my recent page for more). Kid’s Turn (San Francisco) dates to 1989 and “Kid’s Turn San Diego, 1996. Prevent Child Abuse America (my 1/2/2018 page contrasts this, up top, with the National Children’s Alliance, lower down on the page) DID start in the 1970s…

Both groups (NCA and PCAA) formed their own networks over time.  Both seek to influence public policy, but they handle their relationship to government financing differently (PCAA doesn’t take the government grants…).  Now some of these are collaborating on a campaign called “Enough Abuse Greater Bay Area” — but that’s a separate situation, and possible post too.

And so forth. Keeping some of these decades and organization start-dates in mind will be helpful when thinking about what we might reasonably expect (or NOT expect, in light of the present stable of “zealots” and missionary-minded crusaders i positions of power and with organized publication platforms and major mutual loyalty to each other) as to any fairness or neutrality towards women or mothers within these fields OR within the family courts.

Warshak’s mentor and co-publisher “John Santrock” has been focused on fathers, fatherhood, father-absence (etc.) from the 1960s.  He also, ensconced at a Texas University (UT-Dallas), has authored many editions of psychology textbooks — about 100 and translated into many languages.  The textbook industry (see “public schools”) is huge — and Texas and California are acknowledged leaders through sheer size. Warshak has somewhat a more respectable academic background (Cornell, CCNY for his masters), but I realized on reviewing his website and bio recently, apart from how narcissistic it sounds, he too has had a university position in Texas from which to build his business enterprises and from which to publish for many years.

Warshak also was not only ensconced early on at a university, but was also “mentored” and decided to become a child psychologist in the early 1970s after reading Richard Gardner (see “parental alienation” philosophy originator), and meeting his wife at a conference run by Gardner.  He went to UTexas Health Sciences for his doctorate in part because it allowed him to enroll in the doctoral program before he’d completed his thesis.

Warshak was also mentored by a man STILL full professor at UTexas-Dallas whose work AND academic life barely shows anything “north of the Mason Dixon Line** (except UMinnesota long enough to get a PhD, then head down to Texas) and who from HIS doctoral thesis in 1973 forward, shows an obsession with mothers vs. fathers in custody situations, and has made a career publishing those textbooks.  **Another way to put it, I’d say, “South of the Bible Belt…” with ramifications towards opinions on the proper role women in the family and in society…

(See credits). Dark tan area — Canada; this basically North-east section of map of the USA. In case the term “Mason-Dixon” line was unfamiliar.

Mason and Dixon Line, also called Mason-Dixon Line, originally the boundary between Maryland and Pennsylvania in the United States. In the pre-Civil War period it was regarded, together with the Ohio River, as the dividing line between slave states south of it and free-soil states north of it. The term Mason and Dixon Line was first used in congressional debates leading to the Missouri Compromise (1820). Today the Mason and Dixon Line still serves figuratively as the political and social dividing line between the North and the South, although it does not extend west of the Ohio River

Santrock’s resumes co-authored with Warshak as far back as 1982 and at times edited by others well-known for their own obsession with the field of “fatherhood” and in general stigmatizing maternal custody and women who don’t keep their men close by or co-parent sufficient to please these professionals, at least one editor was part of a husband/wife pair from UC Berkeley teamed with a husband/wife pair from Yale/Smith, respectively proudly declaring their point of view — as consistent with the National Fatherhood Initiative and the California OCAP (Office of Child Abuse Prevention). These PhDs can’t use “down-and-dirty” namecalling to get the job done — it’s social science/psychological negativity towards, essentially, half the human race (women) to the extent they aren’t submissive enough….

I believe that the “Warshak” background should be posted separately.  Many protective or “custody-challenged” mothers and women survivors of abuse know the name, but I wonder how many have actually read and considered Warshak’s own self-description on his “bio” page and followed up some?  Luckily, he loves to talk about himself** and there’s plenty to go on.  {**By contrast almost nothing about his own wife!!, who apparently also has a PhD, except to note where he met her}.

To further explain, I’ll put a few images here, and more, probably, at the bottom of this post. I’d intended to do a post on this sole topic over the holidays, but was sick (“out-for-the -count”) for about a week… Meanwhile, know that quite likely a “Reunification Camp” run by or modeled after Warshak means a father-obsession in action — with a life’s work and central career premise that’s at stake (must be constantly validated, one way or another), and that Warshak’s personal “moving media machine” is endorsed and supported philosophically by plenty more like him (and many of them women, too), “professionals” (of which we will be constantly reminded each time they provide a bio blurb or publish or promote some programming on a website) equally committed to “equalizing” the gender balance by tipping it towards men, regardless of character, and away from women/mothers (also “regardless of character”) and who have figured out how to make money at it

Next, four images with yellow-background CAPTIONS from Warshak’s web page on himself and his story are below along the left border while narrative for this post continues with other “reunification camp” information on the right side.  Supplementing this, I’m “foot-noting” several images from Professor John Santrock’s faculty page at UTexas-Dallas (marked with green headings) and annotated images from his lengthy resume which I see was dated 2017.  [The four images are actually several inches further below on the post…]

Both these websites should be required background reading for anyone concerned about  the use of “parental alienationto rationalize family court judges ordering (i.e., forcing) entire families into therapy, mothers (in particular) to be thrown out of their children’s lives and sometimes their own homes on 24 hours or less notice (or even with longer notice, for that reason), or holding the “stick” of expensive therapy as a conduit to the “carrot” of MAYBE getting “off” supervised visitation (essentially, a high “exit toll” to getting the courts out of one’s personal economic, work, family, household, housing, etc. LIFE), and/or anyone concerned about the United States of America’s, in effect, promotion of “fatherhood” (“responsible fatherhood only, of course…) as an UNofficial national religion, or those concerned about the undue, and under-reported, extraordinary negative influence of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts on children’s lives and AFCC members’ overall demonstrated ability and intent to help each other and help documented abusive, “perpetrating”  parents & organized rings of aligned professionals financially exploit and traffick them while claiming to be against trafficking and sexual abuse of children.

Three (3) “reunification camps,” including Warshak’s “Family Bridges” have been making news recently and Family Bridges is still being actively promoted by parallel “multi-day psycho-educational workshops” (a.k.a. reunification camps).  That’s how AFCC works…(group loyalty to refer to teach other wherever possible, while not advertising that the commonality is, actually,  that membership organization).  {{More proof of this behavior shows up in the other images provided below, for three — make that four with “Transitioning Families reference incorporated into “Stable Paths”—  other reunification camps providing/advertising websites}}

The least any concerned parent or concerned member of the public should do is read up a bit — read (1) Warshak’s bio pages and (2) Warshak’s UT-Dallas mentor John Santrock’s faculty profile & resume.

And admit that the psychology textbook publishing industry (college level), whether or not one is personally aware of or consuming the texts, already packs a powerful punch, and accept who and what you are dealing with in this man zealous for the cause, and hardly modest about it, either…:

[from Warshak/bio page, another early and lifelong mentor — this one’s just not still alive in 2018…]

My work on the psychology of alienated children established my reputation as one of the world’s leading authorities on this problem. I was invited to write the chapter on Parental Alienation Syndrome{{<==that’s  plug for his store; notice lack of exact citation in this context: year, publisher, context.. see quote below this one}} for the Expert Witness Manual, a guide for attorneys and judges dealing with expert testimony. During the preparation of this chapter, I contacted Dr. Gardner, the most well-known authority on the problem of alienated children at the time. He graciously extended an invitation to meet with him to discuss his work on the subject. Subsequently, Dr. Gardner and I delivered keynote speeches at a conference in Frankfurt, Germany. The man whose work contributed to my development as a child psychologist, and whose conference in Dallas brought Sandra and me together, had now become a colleague. Sadly, in 2003, Dr. Gardner passed away.## His staff and his family referred his practice to me, hoping that I would carry on the work of educating the public about the suffering of alienated children< back to top (the autobio is so long, it has section guides!…)

## “passed away” appears to be a euphemism for suicide. New York Times: “Richard Gardner, 72, Dies: Cast Doubt on Abuse Claims.” (6/9/2003, summarizes basic issues.  Conclusion notes he was divorced and is survived by two daughters, a son (his mother), eight grandchildren, and in addition to his ex-wife, his partner Natalie Weiss.”  And it was ruled a suicide.)

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

January 8, 2018 at 6:09 pm

Chasing Down … Court-Connected Nonprofits and Their Donors, Part 2 (Kid’s Turn San Diego gets Development Help from Taproot Foundation, Inc.(see ‘Gen3 Draper-Richards Venture Philanthropy’) and SVN, the Supervised Visitation Network.

leave a comment »

This post’s title and shortlink: Chasing Down … Court-Connected Nonprofits and Their Donors, Part 2 (Kid’s Turn San Diego gets Development Help from Taproot Foundation, Inc.(see ‘Gen3 Draper-Richards Venture Philanthropy’) and SVN, the Supervised Visitation Network (with short-link ending “-8it,” started (post split) New Year’s Day, 2018.

If I explain the title and context much more, I’ll need to split the post again.  See part 1, or update to the original published Aug. 31, 2011, for the background! Here’s “Part 1” which contains link to the earlier post.

Chasing Down Corporate & Charitable Registrations for Court-Connected Nonprofits” (Such as Kids’ Turn SD, SVN, and others) and Their Donors) [Revisiting-viewing-formatting my Aug. 31, 2011 post @ Jan. 2018]. [with case-sensitive shortlink ending: “-7Ia”] [where the middle digit is a capital “i” not number “1” or lower-case “L”].

For this section, apart from format cleanup (mostly of the quotes) the only real “update” I’m doing is some more insight into who is the “TapRoot Foundation” as shown through its financials.. Coming up first in the text below….

Moving on…

Other factoids (again, this is the SF, not the San Diego, group):


Kids’ Turn Development activities have been shaped and modified in order to accommodate the recent recession while simultaneously continuing projects that will help improve and develop our trade mark.

1. Kids’ Turn launched its new logo in January, 2010. Development of the logo was the result of a grant** from the Taproot Foundation and we are very satisfied with the universal image which emphasizes the protective role of parents for the children in their families.

**2018 update comment:The word “grant” there needs to be taken with a grain of salt.  Taproot Foundation (which is a dba for “Tapfound, Inc.” formed only in 2002 in California — more details below) doesn’t do normal “grants” but exists to facilitate “nonprofits which improve society” through “service grants,” i.e., encouraging professional pro bono service.  These are claimed “grants” but are NOT identified AS grants to specific nonprofits, or anyone else, in its Forms 990 — which seems to be the key purpose of the organization, evading that accountability while claiming major benefits to all (and functioning tax-exempt…).

(Header info from Tapfound, Inc. omitted for size; this is Page 1, Summary, of a FY2014 Form 990). Notice Line 13, “grants to others” (which can be expressed as cash or non-cash on corresponding Schedule I) is “0.” Despite its own self-descriptions, this is NOT a “grantmaking” organization in IRS terms. Avoiding naming the grantees thus dodges accountability while it claims to want “transparency” for the pro bono market…. But notice there IS (Line 9 here) “program service revenue” reported. But on Page 2, (next image) NO such revenues are reported where they should be and by IRS Form 990 definition and Part III instructions, must be.

Although it’s quite likely that many people come to Kids’ Turn after violence- or abuse-related separation, followed by family court involvement, court orders for child support, access/visitation grant diversion for fatherhood promotion, and voila — a parent education project….

2. Kids’ Turn launched its new website in December, 2010. This project was also the result of a partnership with the Taproot Foundation. The new website is cleaner and consistent with the unstated emphasis offered by the logo.

Tapfound NYS Charitable Regi for 2004-05 (signed 08, filed 2009?), fiscal year change, shows they got $10K from Oakland Unified School District (!) and $1M contributions. Service? Says

The above link is to a New York State filing (it’s multi-page) and contains a FY2004 (fiscal year change) tax return followed by a brief independent audited financial statement — something not even provided at the State of California Level (although perhaps that roadblock is that State OAG, not TapFound, Inc.). Two images from this are a bit puzzling — why is a public school district (often complaining about being “strapped for cash” granting this organization a $10,000 GIFT?  We also can see that by its third year of operation, this nonprofit is already attracting $1M of grants…  You can also see among the details that its President Aaron Hurst is claiming payment of  bout $65,000 (later that’ll become closer to $150K, increasing rapidly over time…) while in another place, leaving “compensation for Officers Directors, and Trustees” on the tax return blank — i.e., “0.”  I guess a President isn’t an Officer then?

For 2017 update — using the EIN# provided in the next (older) table, search here

TapFound Inc CA 2016 990 40 $2,105,125.00 91-2162645
TapFound, Inc.- New York Office CA 2015 990 32 $2,927,318.00 91-2162645
TapFound, Inc. CA 2014 990 28 $3,575,943.00 91-2162645

TapFound, Inc (dba Taproot Fndtn EIN#912162645 CalEntity (since 2002) 2374009 OAG CHar Details (4pp) -Nothing before FY2007 uploaded ~>FYchanges from and back to calendar yr  (<==this annotated pdf shows a “schedule” of filings and is a good graphic showing growth of the entity over time.  Also that it’s consistently (without exception) filing its RRFs late, and changed its fiscal year twice within a dozen years.  And that the State OAG has failed to upload the earlier year’s documents…)

Database Providers Change over time, too.

Database URL changes: While this earlier table came from the same nonprofit’s database (the Foundation Center) I see that the url “prefix,” domain name, and suffix specs (format specifying search results, such as the EIN# and Year/FYmonth-end, etc.)  have changed since 2011.  Compare:Earlier search results, when individual returns were clicked, would show urls in this format::

  • http://dynamodata.fdncenter.org/990s/990search/990.php?ein=912162645&yr=200312&rt=990A&t9=A

[that “php? followed by specs for EIN# and Year (YYYYMM format) connected by “&” is similar format to the wordpress url “protocol” I use for editing (although WordPress tries to “helpful” use a different one leading to a streamlined editor which I don’t find as flexible…).

Using same colors (blue, red, green), here’s how the same nonprofit displays its data in tables now:

  • http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/912/912162645/912162645_201409_990.pdf

The search results in the newer format contain less surrounding detail and the color scheme was also changed, although I artificially copy the older colors into it on this blog, to better distinguish IRS Form 990 tables from other tables (for example, from Charitable Registry Search Results) and maintain consistency over time within this blog.

Another notable functional change is that the newer version at “990finder” produced only 3 results per EIN#.  As you can see from the table I printed in 2011, it used to display more.

………Miscellaneous Info to keep in mind from time to time.

Earlier (click on Any “Org Name” below to view) ( I didn’t color it in this time obviously): [[This was available in 2011, but no longer is active in 2018 — the Foundation Center, as I said just above, changed its database platform…]]








Tapfound Inc. Dba Taproot Foundation CA 2003 $436,604 990A 13 91-2162645
Tapfound Industry Dba Taproot Foundation CA 2004 $350,319 990 15 91-2162645
Taproot Foundation CA 2003 $187,547 990 13 91-2162645
Taproot Foundation CA 2002 $56,366 990EZ 7 91-2162645
Taproot Foundation CA 2002 $56,366 990ER 6 91-2162645
Taproot Foundation, Inc. CA 2009 $2,156,525 990 24 91-2162645

2018 update (information available at California Secretary of State website which, in its 2011 format (some is reflected in the post below) would not have been available in 2011 (i.e., that database changed).  Confirms 2002 incorporation date for TapFound, Inc. and, what’s more, names Aaron Hurst as registered agent and a “Lawrence McSwiggan” as “Sole incorporator” (Oct. 29, 2001).

Looking up that somewhat unusual (i.e., searchable) name, I was surprised to find McSwiggan as UConnecticut and “St. Johns School of Law” having passed the (California) bar in 2001 and by 2005 already become ineligible, and again later.  There’s also a “public reprimand” in Massachusetts  — again I do not KNOW this is the same person as TapFound incorporator, but it’s possible — for failing to pay dues, being noticed of this, and continuing to practice law anyhow.  Here are those screenprints:

Cal Entity C2374009 (Tapfound, inc.) Sec of State face sheet for its registration (new format with three available pdfs; I looked at the Registration one — only 2 pages).

Notice it’s organized specifically as a “Benefit Corporation.” I omitted Aaron Hurst address; another page states “The Corporation shall have no members.” Also see Article II, “specific purposeto provide internet and related technology services to nonprofit organizations.

Click to enlarge — notice sole incorporator Lawrence McSwiggan is from Menlo Park (cf. “Silicon Valley”) CA.

Refers to a specific Lawrence Joseph McSwiggan, CalBar# 214415 which may or may not be the sole incorporator of TapFound in 2002.

Refers to a specific Lawrence Joseph McSwiggan, CalBar# 14415 which may or may not be the sole incorporator of TapFound in 2002.

Refers to a specific Lawrence Joseph McSwiggan, CalBar# 14415 which may or may not be the sole incorporator of TapFound in 2002.


(Wow.  The earliest 2002 is missing page 1; the other, parts are handwritten (on forms), parts typewritten (on blank sheets, for example, the listing of Board Members).

The last board member listed is Jenny Shilling, who works for The Draper Richards Foundation, which apparently started Tapfound, Inc. (dba The TapRoot foundation) with $50,000.  The group started with $79,000 assets, not including -$32,000 of “undeposited assets,” for a net assets of $48K.  Its “Liabilities & Equity” just about cancelled each other out, and program service accomplishments for this year were “Service Grant Program awarded 18 nonprofits (not shown) with volunteer teams” — $23K.

An “updated July 6, 2003” board of directors is attached. The 2003 filing (at least the one above I clicked on) shows the act is rather more together, and service program accomplishments reads:

Service Grants were awarded to 63 nonprofit organizations with a total estimated value of $2.5 million (I’ll tell the IRS my return was “close enough for jazz also….”) 582 volunteers were recruited to deliver these services.  (at a cost of $148,872 Program Service Expense).


Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

January 4, 2018 at 6:33 pm

“Chasing Down Corporate and Charitable Registrations for Court-Connected Nonprofits” (Such as Kids’ Turn SD, SVN, and others) and Their Donors). Part 1. [Revisiting-viewing-formatting my Aug. 31, 2011 post @ Jan. 2018].

leave a comment »

Did you catch my new, short “Page”  published Jan. 2, 2018?  It was written in part to explain some of the detail unearthed in this post, regarding Child Abuse Prevention gone National… Title and link to it further down on this post (yellow-background), and it will be on the Vital Links/Alpha Chrono blog sidebar menu (right side).  In addition to outlining the basics, I posted ALL the images of a single year’s Schedule I grantees of the National Children’s Alliance at the bottom in gallery format.

I find it odd that two completely different nonprofits organized to stop child abuse and provide intervention, treatment, and of course public education and advocacy, both developed in the 1970s (although one incorporated only in 1992) and both took it national, with chapters of all sorts.

The new page despite its title mentioning only one of these two, deals with both (National Children’s Alliance and Prevent Child Abuse America).  You may not realize how deeply entrenched both are in local (county, state) government operations.

Anyhow, when (specifically, in late Sept. 2017) a “parental alienation prevention and treatment” nonprofit called “Kid’s Turn” — founded by AFCC- and Family Court professionals (a lawyer and a judge) in 1989 and taking court-ordered business, for the (Greater Bay Area) San Francisco Area — submerged itself into a chapter of the sponsored-by-National-Children’s-Alliance – “SFCAPC” (“SF Child Abuse Prevention Center”) which recently changed its name to “Safe & Sound” it got rather “interesting.”

Meanwhile, the San Diego version of Kid’s Turn remains separate and under its own identity.

So, those two national child abuse prevention nonprofits are:

Total results: 3Search Again. EIN# 631044781  Formed only in 1992 (per IRS forms) or 1988 (per its website).

National Childrens Alliance DC 2016 990 77 $5,583,437.00 63-1044781
National Childrens Alliance DC 2015 990 82 $5,790,038.00 63-1044781
National Childrens Alliance DC 2014 990 154 $4,712,656.00 63-1044781


Total results: 3Search Again.   Prevent Child Abuse America, EIN# 237235671, formed 1972, Domicile IL, Fiscal Year = Calendar Year. Website:  “preventchildabuse.org”

Prevent Child Abuse America IL 2016 990 39 $6,243,040.00 23-7235671
Prevent Child Abuse America IL 2015 990 38 $5,039,476.00 23-7235671
Prevent Child Abuse America IL 2014 990 39 $4,656,308.00 23-7235671

Followers of this blog and people familiar with a situation in Connecticut about six years ago (involving the confirmation of a Judge Maureen Murphy over the protests of testimony — including from Harvard-based Dr. Eli Newberger citing to medical evidence of child sexual abuse of a young boy — and its coverup.  Hon. Murphy was then the involved GAL. I’d posted (a number of times, but also) June 6, 2013 on “Finding Ground Zero in Connecticut — the Underground Economy in an AFCC Courthouse.” A link to the related story and financial drill-down at the bottom of that post (it was in Washington Times communities” has expired, but it’s now posted elsewhere (by title search) at — get this — “CGA.ct.gov”:

Immunity for GAL Destroys Connecticut Family (read the closing paragraphs).

(See nearby link from “Cta.CT.gov” Immunity for GAL destroys Connecticut Family)

I mention this because, as to the Max Liberti (9 yr old boy) case, Newberger had testified in his case. This journalism was unique in that it told the story in large part, from the point of view of billings and invoices by the involved professionals. Not shown there, but FYI, Newberger was an early President of a “Prevent Child Abuse” local nonprofit in Massachusetts. I show this on my new (related) page.

A passing reference to Newberger’s involvement published in the Connecticut Mirror, 2/22/2012, “A judicial confirmation goes off-script.” I blogged along these lines at the time, knew (electronically or by phone) some of the involved protesters), and remember reading his testimony.  It may be on this blog. Note: The parent whose relationship with a young son was being destroyed, this time, “happened to be” (sic) the mother. It is graphic reading.

And I found this (reported back in 2011) announcement that Kid’s Turn Curriculum will be run by some UK charities, and an admission that our system is based on the British system anyhow.  Guess that’s the beauty of having “government by and for the 501©3s” in America:


Dateline:  San Francisco, California Kids’ Turn formally announces its partnership with Relate and National Family Mediation — two charities in Great Britain scheduled to pilot Kids’ Turn’s curriculum in Fall, 2011. This collaboration is the result of creative international colleagues who let go of ‘attachment to the facts’ believing in the value of shared ideas. We acknowledge the centuries’ old British social service system as the model for social work in the United States. The fact Relate and NFM are willing to implement innovations developed in San Francisco speaks to their commitment to offer evidence-based services to improve the lives of British children negatively impacted by parental separation.

{Commentary stemming from the “Relate” and “Family Mediation” references above added post-publication.  I don’t look further into either of those nonprofits within this post, however… Commentary/reminders in fine print, light-blue background, next section. There are corollaries to the Jesuit “change-agent, transform society” mentality which impact how to handle criminal matters, and which do relate to the establishment and intent to spread the authority (subject matter jurisdiction) of the family court system — and to label “dissidents” as “sick” and in need of treatment (re-indoctrination). These should not be overlooked.}

Exemplifying the tradition of using (a) the nonprofit sector and especially (b) the social services/mental health sector to strategically align the family courts of nations with different constitutions, positions towards a national (patriarchal) religion — with corresponding tough viewpoints on divorce and varying views of the role of women in society (and their individual rights as human beings) via nonprofits, including but not limited to the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.  Again, just a simple reminder, the UK has a national religion and centuries-old tradition of it (as to Anglican) and religious wars along with the rest of Europe and the Reformation, to demonstrate that commitment.

The U.S. Episcopal sector, which had to separate itself to accommodate, well, the formation of this country (i.e., allegiance to the Crown was inappropriate for a US-based religion), didn’t allow women to be ordained until the 1970s and has split in recent years, among other things, over the ordination of homosexuals. In 2001, after “thirty years of dialogue” (do the math! — starting about 1970s, corresponding to feminist movement, and beginning of admission of women undergraduates to some of the nation’s top Ivy League colleges, finally) the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and the Episcopals entered into ‘full communion” via a “Concordat agreement allowing “clergy and laity to move freely between the two churches”

Meanwhile, the U.S. Government continues to grant funds directly to the Episcopal Church under the (dis)guise — which it is — of “Episcopal Migration Ministries,” as one among several “VolAgs” (Voluntary Agencies) helping with immigration and refugee resettlement. I went looking for ‘EMM” a year or two ago, which is one reason I know that it’s a mis-nomer.  There is no such entity….

AFCC, meanwhile, continues to draw upon its relationships with Jesuit universities in urban centers for more “dispute resolution services” (Werner Institute, establ. 2005 at Creighton University in Omaha; University of Santa Clara, and “USF” in the San Francisco Bay Area;  Marquette University School of Law in Milwaukee [Wiki says one of only two law schools in the state, the only private one. Wisconsin is also unique in allowing lawyers “diploma privilege” to practice without passing the state bar…], etc.)

The Dispute Resolution Institute at Marquette (Law School) even admits to partnering with AFCC in 2011, and a Certificate in the field is offered. At all points, “the more dispute resolution, the better” is the constant push:

… In  Fall, 2011, the Dispute Resolution Program partnered with the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts and the Resolution Systems Institute to host The Future of Court ADR: Mediation and Beyond.

In addition, Marquette hosted the first ever Dispute Resolution Works in Progress conference in 2007, and the International Media and Conflict Resolution Conference took place at Marquette University Law School in 2009. The Marquette Law Review Symposium Issue from the IMC conference is available here.  The Marquette Law Review also hosted a special symposium on the Uniform Mediation Act in 2001. The first symposium on the emerging interdisciplinary negotiation canon was held in Fall 2003.

….and to continue pushing mediation over litigation, a very “Christian” point of view, supposedly, and one which also has served to cover spousal abuse “within the faith”  — and child abuse — for generations of women, including my generation, and recommend “treatment” for women angry about their own degrading and dangerous treatment by violent partners, or concerned about abuse of their own children.

And yes it relates to the family courts topic.  The “CAC” model was used as a basis for Family Justice Center model (which came out later — around 2003) — if a “one-stop-shop” model works for child abuse (DOES it?), why not try it for domestic violence survivors too?  Meanwhile, I found that “CACC” (Children’s Advocacy Centers of California, representing a 2014 name-change from “California Network of Child Advocacy Centers,” cannot decide whether it’s a program of (the) “Calico Center” or a chapter.  It claims to be both simultaneously, while causing some grief, apparently, at the charitable registry of trusts level through it’s “filing-resistance.”

Last, but not least, I went looking for a mysterious, 2007 formed “Carlsbad Charitable Foundation” which granted Kids’ Turn funds in 2010, but the website keeps redirecting to the ($666M assets) San Diego Foundation, and no financials are found, that I could find.  Cute….

I’m posting this “Part 1 of 2” now and will add some tags later. //LGH Jan. 3, 2018.

This post’s title and shortlink:

Chasing Down Corporate & Charitable Registrations for Court-Connected Nonprofits” (Such as Kids’ Turn SD, SVN, and others) and Their Donors) Part 1. [Revisiting-viewing-formatting my Aug. 31, 2011 post @ Jan. 2018]. [with case-sensitive shortlink ending: “-7Ia”] [where the middle digit is a capital “i” not number “1” or lower-case “L”].  Currently about 13,000 words (and there is a “Part 2”).

This is a “makeover” of a previous post, which reflects how early in my blog (if not two years earlier, ca. 2009) I was focused on and sounding the alarm to emphasize “looking it up” meaning, at a minimum corporate registrations.

Link to the 2011 version of this same post (after my intro here, and with potentially some cleanups/updates as the title indicates) is:

Chasing Down Charitable and Corporate Registrations for (more) Court-Connected Nonprofits… [publ. Aug 31, 2011; re-formatted re-post expected in late Dec. 2017] (with WordPress-generated, case-sensitive short-link ending “-Qp.”) (With updated title and a preview there to explain the re-post.  Readers might want to start by reading that update...)

Any 2017 updates lengthen the long original post; so this one will be split. Splits mean that points of internal reference within either part may refer to the other part.  While working on it, I see no clear dividing point, so an arbitrary one, by word count, may be necessary….

{Split by size created a Part 2.  Part 2 title/link– repeated at the bottom — is now:  Chasing Down … Court-Connected Nonprofits and Their Donors, Part 2 (Kid’s Turn San Diego gets Development Help from Taproot Foundation, Inc.(see ‘Gen3 Draper-Richards Venture Philanthropy’) and SVN, the Supervised Visitation Network (with short-link ending “-8it,” started (post split) New Year’s Day, 2018).}


This is a “makeover” of a previous post, which reflects how early in my blog (if not two years earlier, ca. 2009) I was focused on and sounding the alarm to emphasize “looking it up” meaning, at a minimum corporate registrations.

(1) To be honest, I’d hoped re-posting this relevant, and already complete, 2011 post might buy me some time with a quick clean-up and repost, while I continued working on more current, but related, themes around “Reunification Camps,” especially the trend of involving horses (equine therapy).  On closer look, it didn’t, but I’m still following through to re-post….

(2) Previous behaviors by AFCC-spinoff nonprofits such as Kid’s Turn (and replicas, like “Kids First,”) and ongoing associations (SVN – Supervised Visitation Network) reveal their founders and founder-associations character and habits. For example, on KT (San Francisco) I posted on the organization, it merged out of existence into “SFCAPC”, which I then reported, and now SFCAPC changed its name and brand again to “Safe & Sound.” (next image):

Note. 2015 entry — KT merges into it. (But KT San Diego, separately, remains outside). For “children undergoing the trauma of parental separation and divorce.”

Viewed 2018. Sec. of State records says name change was only last September.







SFCAPC (before “Center” it was “Council”), was started in the 1970s by a UCSF/SF General Hospital Chief of Piediatrics, Dr.  Moses Grossman, says the website (and other sources support) as “part of a national movement” (See image).

From Safe & Sound website “About us” timeline.

That national organization is in DC, but its legal domicile isn’t.  ALWAYS look for the Form 990 where one may exist for more information!

Total results: 3Search Again. EIN# 631044781  Formed only in 1992

National Childrens Alliance DC 2016 990 77 $5,583,437.00 63-1044781
National Childrens Alliance DC 2015 990 82 $5,790,038.00 63-1044781
National Childrens Alliance DC 2014 990 154 $4,712,656.00 63-1044781

This is both interesting and revealing (not my first time looking):  NCA is legal domicile Alabama, was formed just a few years before passage of the Violence Against Women Act (1994), in a U.S. Presidential Election Year (Clinton’s first win), and four years before passage of welfare reform (1996), a time when as I continue to point out, fathers’ rights groups calling themselves children’s rights groups were flourishing (the National Fatherhood Initiative, Inc. formed in 1994).

Total assets are typically less than revenues moving through a group, so remember to take a look…

NCA is following standard “nationalize, set up chapters, get gov’t grants, redistribute to private chapters to standardize (w (and privatize) handling of core identified cause  — here, child abuse prevention and treatment models.  It’s mostly government supported.

Example:  FYE2014 (YESep 30 2015, middle row) $11M out of $12M grants were “govt” and nearly $2M in Program Service Revenues. Gross Receipts (pg.1 header) were $14M.  Redistribution:  $9M granted out to Child Advocacy Centers (or state coalitions of the same).  Basic redistribution of wealth (federal funding), and anyone wishing to track it can painstakingly go look up each individual grantee***…  Meanwhile only a few NCA employees (23) and Part VIIA employees show Teresa Huizar being paid a nice $266K salary.(Look for yourself!).

  • ***I believe this is worth a separate page to illustrate.  FY2014 (middle row above) grants were reported only 3/page.  The year before, I see it was ONE per page only(!). Alpha by grantee, with any grantee whose name begins with “The” all listed alpha under “T”… This is the link.At the bottom of the new page, I imaged ALL grantees and posted them.  The new page also, for comparison, looks at a similar-purpose, but different-tactics nonprofit, Prevent Child Abuse America:..
  • For example, National Children’s Alliance, Alabama-based (legal domicile) and its network of CACs and Statewide CAC Coalitions (FY2014 Grantees) (Published New Year’s Day +1, 2018; case-sensitive shortlink ends “-8iP”).  Page is under 4,000 words.
  • Page 2, as well as where the money is being spent primarily, makes it clear that this umbrella group’s primary activity is grantmaking to their own members or centers, year after year.

NAMI and some other mental health organizations follow the same pattern.  So do groups like Focus on the Family and its “Family Councils” with the exception, not taking primarily government grants.  Instead, with “Focus” private contributions sponsored multiple look-alike and often “named-alike” entities at the state level, geared to initiate state-wide healthy marriage initiatives, typically also in nonprofit form, which nonprofits were then encouraged to go after the HMRF funding.  Eventually Focus on the Family then spun off the “related entity” which coordinated the family councils nationally.

So did some of the education transformation nonprofits I’ve posted on:  there’s a central umbrella entity, and chapters named after it at the state,or sometimes even regional level (Coalition of Essential Schools, “Communities in Schools,” etc.)

So, the National Children’s Alliance showing the same organization tactics is not new.  However, all of these forms of nationwide “saturation” of causes + curricula + Technical Training & Consultation support (logos, branding, etc.) still leverage public media and represent the ideas of the few, through that leverage, being imposed upon the many, for profit and for control. It’s a “rapid mobilization” tactic reaching into the government arena where possible to add momentum and power.  Once a brand, curricula, infrastructure, and network is established, any “to the contrary” or dissident voices, however, legitimate, face an uphill PR campaign of their own to even be heard. This includes “to-the-contrary” voices which might be the voices of experience and from the street level.

Read the rest of this entry »

Parent Coordination Central (.com) isn’t. Unless Coordinating a Sequence of Adm. Dissolutions was part of the plan? Neither “is” (as a Georgia nonprofit) either The Cooperative Parenting Institute, Inc. or Nat’l Parent Coordination Association, Inc. (Susan Boyan, Anne Marie Termini joint websites and “flash-in-the-pan” Georgia nonprofits, revisited, Dec. 2017)

leave a comment »

I was looking at Massachusetts AFCC filings and website again recently, in the context of reunification camp “Overcoming Barriers” being advertised on the site; a topic I’m posting on currently, and very concerned about; the practice seems so aggressive towards minor children and can involve and has involved hauling them (transporting, including by airplane) cross-country for group therapy and re-indoctrination, “deprogramming parental alienation” camps.

MA AFCC “Resources for Families” page, featuring, among other offerings, the 501©3 “Overcoming Barriers.” Parental Alienation-antidote,a.k.a. reunification therapy (or camps)….

(Overcoming Barriers website detail: Our Approach) viewed 12/19/2017

MA AFCC web page featuring Parent Coordination (see website for active links)

Anyhow, I noticed that the MAAFCC.org website, which is pretty basic, not overly populated with information, does take time to advertise and talk about Parent Coordination, and its certification (i.e., get trained to be listed as a provider).  It also shows this to have been, it seems, a very recent (2017) administrative ruling to make it, or some new element of it, happen.

Home page of AFCC chapter in MA. Fairly straightforward.

MA AFCC Articles of Incorp (partial, from state business entities search site)

So… on the topic and title of “Parent Coordinator,” like others AFCC members (under its name or under other significant organizations or center they may have been involved with) helped sponsor as professions, such a dispute resolution, or mediator, or the concept of “collaborative divorce,” etc.,  just because this may not be making headlines on “outraged parent news” journalism, including about parents periodically suing over it in protest, doesn’t mean the court-ordered practice or judicial involvement in certifying or training people for it (to get referral business from the courts) has ceased operations.

Click to enlarge. Self-explanatory. Found on MAAFCC.org website on a page dedicated to  “Parenting Coordination” news.

Some apparently have, though, it seems ceased staying legally registered at the state level.  The ones in Georgia here, I DNR whether I ever found related tax returns.  There may have been Forms 990-N filed (or, maybe not), but it’s not on my priority list to check the IRS individually for these.

Post title:

To be honest, I wanted to refer to this, check back because I referred to it, but not clutter up the original post.  Parent post (this will probably be published right after it, and before Christmas Day, 2017) is “Incentivizing Reunification Camps while Family Policy already sets the stage for Familial Abductions.” (short-link ending “-8fE”).  The post you’re reading now IS short; consider it a footnote only (not a major expose!)…

The lead-in text from parent post, I was thinking aloud about the ‘flash-in-the-pan” business formations, or on-line advertising which doesn’t connect (at least not obviously or readily — Overcoming Barriers 501©3 above, excepted) to the corporate filings or how to locate any Form 990, if it’s operating nonprofit.  I was remarking on the astonishing, almost proprietary (“it’s our turf”) level of influence for what, “on the books” at least is a relatively small private association (AFCC “mother ship”) without even chapters in the majority of US States, and most of those chapters not being much to look at, and some of them, not lasting long, either….

Members in some places have helped get administrative judicial rulings establishing even a Family Court Division passed in the first place (speaking of Baltimore, Maryland example; I posted on it with evidence in late 2014). Not to mention an innate tendency to seek even more specialized diversionary courts, i.e., the High-Conflict Court Docket in Connecticut.

In an upcoming AFCC conference, whose agenda and brochure are already posted on the website, I noticed one workshop recommending, to better help “pro se” people (“called “SRLs” – Self-Represented Litigants) and unrepresented people in the family courts, the lawyers and/or mediators should be allowed as “neutrals” to actually draft and file orders, although it seems from the workshop description that outside Wisconsin, (by law,?) they can’t — yet. [sentence update 12/25/2017 to avoid possible mis-statement].

Here’s the workshop, and another (nearby) in how to expand the “IDVD” model, another diversionary court:

Lawyer-mediator can draft AND file “on behalf of both parties..” One of which may, and the other may not, be well-informed of the agenda towards women and mothers, or categorization/labeling of abuse or criminal behavior, held by the very association convening this conference. Maybe neither know. I sure didn’t before entering the family courts, or family court facilitators office, at the time of first “mediation” (compromise and dilution of our existing, just-issued restraining order, reducing its geographic zone and basically facilitating any-day-of-the-week entry to the property he’d just been forcibly vacated from, through proper legal notice and service of the TRO, and with a civil standby which I made sure not to be nearby for).

Another “Integrated” DV court — pilot-tested in a rural area, hey, before meeting at an international conference and suggesting to judicial officers they might want it in THEIR area too. NOT on this agenda, how the same “traditional courts” referred to are in fact, family courts (which that abstract of the workshop fails to mention), and the conferencing association coming up with the bright idea to create family AND conciliation courts as additional diversionary courts (mandating mediation and divorce counseling wherever possible, for its membership to provide, whether court-appointed or privately) themselves (family courts) began as a diversion, and led by the same association (and subsequently over time continued to critique their own creation as if someone else was responsible, so as to introduce a “new” model variation on the original basic principles that retained control over the families and especially the kids…The old “perspective switcheroo” or schizoid characterization of the courts themselves…


What they lack in size, they seem to overcompensate for in: coordinated/synchronized specialty language; the tendency to multiply nonprofits using specialty language names, and once started, diversify applications (i.e., into institutes, academies, trainings, certifications, etc. named after the original idea;  High-Conflict, Parent Coordination, Collaborative Practice, etc.); programming; and last but not least, group loyalty for mutual promotion of, and control over access to and the standards for the specialized fields their members have helped create.

It’s no surprise that the Center for Court Innovation (Fund for the City of New York, Inc. + NYS Unified Court System joint project dating back to the mid-1990s? although the Ford-initiative “Fund” was started in 1968) can be found evaluating the second such court.  Read about it here.

The list of stakeholders for this 2nd IDVD in Vermont (Bennington County was first, This was for Windham County, in Brattleboro) include service providers (BIP for no doubt “Batterers Intervention Program”) and “SA” probably “Sexual Assault.”) (six images, two annotated, you have the pdf link above). This is “gallery style” – click any image to enlarge, and once started can be viewed in sequence  (forward or backward) by clicking on <   > arrows which appear.

[See “What they lack in size, they seem to overcompensate for in: coordinated/synchronized specialty language…group loyalty for control…” paragraph above] … Like any good, international cult. Or “gang.” (Lack or presence of quotations around the last two nouns there is deliberate).

If you think about it, “language and group behavior synchronicity” is efficient, maximizes effect, and creates a sense of authority coming as if from multiple sources, sources typically in our culture associated with power and authority on their own, and that therefore the cause must be just, or if not, that opposition may be futile.  Forming societies historically has been good for meeting privately, in select company, and  apart from the public to obtain agreement.

But societies become associations become corporations (tax-exempt) whose primary purpose is to redirect and re-purpose public institutions, and whose members are targeted to civil servants in positions to move assets and revenues, write rules with a goal of eventually re-writing legislation, and creating more public-funded institutions — now that is a problem.

The history of family court seems to be a history of a number of such societies. In the last half of the 20th century, particularly when combined with the impacts of major restructuring of a large part of the US government (federal) budget, i.e., Social Security Act, to get involved with the same issues driven by also by the various societies (associations) — that’s major impact.  And that’s not the Constitutional form of government, it’s in essence in basic conflict with the concept of “representative” government, and it’s exploitation of tax-exempt status in pursuit of this purpose.

And in the latter half of the 20th century, in part because of its shape-shifting and organization website About/History accounts do NOT match Secretary of State (state-level) or IRS accounts, when it comes to the family courts, the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, in combination with its journal (Family Court Review) co-published with Hofstra University, where AFCC founder-members were long on the editorial board or running the journal of this created profession, has established major leverage upon major sectors of the US (and international) populations through this venue.  It’s the few ruling the many without direct representation, in private association, and without adequate fiscal or other accountability.  Their membership (as I said, this operates essentially, in my opinion, like a cult) then routinely creating more named networks of nonprofits promoting similar language (semantics), practices ,and policies, and when publishing frequently citing to group members’ work (and less so, non-group-members’ publication).

Now indications continue that Oxford University Press has been picking up (under “social sciences” at least) publication of many of AFCC or collaborationists with the organization as well, giving it an aura of credibility in a whole other level.  Apart from the ongoing “international” aspect having been in place from the start, the ability to cross international borders to hawk ones’ wares AS IF representing to people abroad the situation in America (meaning, the USA) makes it tougher for people affected by this within the country to track, address, and counter the publicity with some hard facts as to the networked entities involved.

This is a major problem.  Footnote “Personal” added below (gray, narrative to underscore the point. [I added post-publication and may delete again later.]  The collective influence is generationally, economically destructive while purporting to be beneficial.  The business appears to be moving children, and through the power to do this, family and business relationships around at will, which is disruptive to local economies also, when a parent is driven homeless (it happens), jailed (it happens) or extorted to pay supervised visitation fees to see a custody-switched child (documented — it happens), or the children are carted cross-country for “reunification therapy.”   If new categories of “relationship” crime can be defined, created, implemented, and punished — then the act of forming relationships at any point could become dangerous. This works and drives the herds overall (the population) towards a disruptive, dissociative society.

Do I need to remind anyone still of what comes from allowing people to be hauled off piecemeal (as opposed to in cattlecars “en masse” as previously, and yes I’m referring to World War II) by night to places unknown for purposes not truly legitimate except by the “new words” of behavioral science professionals and for their mutual, ongoing profits, for which they cannot and frequently DO not give proper business registration records, consistently or hold the groups accountable to do either.

To what “problems” is this type of activity the “solution”?  No one would dare (or be stupid enough, promoting it) to call this “The Final Solution” but there’s no problem with setting up systems of “problem-solving courts…”  But what’s the significant difference, except it’s incremental — “culling the flocks” of articulate and independent-thinking individuals who protest abuse? And it’s not, at least on the surface, targeting specific ethnicities or religions…

Or in the case of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki, a truly odd situation, she was hauled from FLORIDA by the US Marshals back to Minnesota, and treated abominably en rte. (see RedHerringAlert blog for an account).  See that Cara Tabachnik article in the Washington Post (5/11/2017) I quoted in “Incentivizing” post, published as I recall, 12/21/2017 or shortly after.  She interviewed people to whom this happened, including children who had reached the age of majority. (Viewable also on “CaraTabachnik.com“– she’s a professional journalist and freelance? writer.)

What’s funny, that in submersion of group member’s own intellectual independence (i.e., limiting, through self-regulating their own use of language = limiting the discussion of ideas which might have been expressed in other terms, which in essence is limiting debate, criticism, or challenges to that framework, a.k.a. “thinking.”) throughout at least the primary association,*** while operating themselves under group identity claiming collectively to be innovators and leaders.  [*** The related footnote is now several inches below, with images inbetween, not right after this paragraph]

One thing they are about is getting into, or recruiting members already in, positions of power and influence, and maintaining hierarchy within and without. Older members mentor and support (co-author with, run nonprofits with, cite to, etc.) younger ones, including younger ones with PhDs, who, left on their own, might stray further afield and run into some “hard reality” scenarios and feedback from men, women and children who have been harmed by the divorce process, and otherwise encounter this without proper “derailment” techniques unique to this field, i.e., new names for chronic life situations.
Read the rest of this entry »

Incentivizing Reunification Camps While Existing (Family) Policy Already Sets The Stage for FAMILIAL Abductions. [Publ. Dec. 23, 2017]

leave a comment »

This post is: Incentivizing Reunification Camps While Existing (Family) Policy Already Sets The Stage for FAMILIAL Abductions (Case-sensitive short-link ends “-8fE” started Dec. 21, 2017).  

On a Saturday night after working more on this and a related post, including processing new information, and Monday Dec. 25, 2017, being a well-known major holiday (for which I have no particularly different plans — there are no family members, at all, to contact with whom I have any ongoing communications or that I have seen face to face since, oh, about 2011..  Which isn’t to say they aren’t missed!!), I’m going to publish it, although there is obviously more subject matter to cover.  I know it’s interesting and has some good links, and images too, within.  

This post might be a wake-up call, and I hope it will wake some up to what is, literally, being set in streamlined infrastructure, to use the fields of mental health, particularly psychology, to justify taking children by force and separating them from one parent, driving and/or flying them out of state (or country!) to be deprogrammed on the premise that failure to bond with both parents is evidence of having been brainwashed (Regardless of bad behavior including chronic abuse, by the one they don’t want to see, which these courts are pre-set to tune out unless it qualifies under their unique definition of abuse: reporting it by one or the other.

In the process, both children AND the caretaking parent (often a mother) can also be threatened with jail OR jailed, be ordered to lie to the children, leaving them subject to additional stress and trauma, not to mention the caretaking parent, and in general raise hell via the family courts in almost any neighborhood.

Now that enough people are being constantly traumatized through these means, and on the advice of the group(s) which repeated, like a mantra, the real intent was to reduce the adversarial nature of divorce and destigmatize it,** then it’s time to hold conferences (one shown below, coming up this next summer) on compassionate and trauma-informed courts. This is fun and obviously profitable for those involved.

**(I expect to move this next spontaneously-added, post-publication section stemming from my intent to explain how “reducing adversarial nature of divorce” translates into practice…//LGH 12/24/2017)

Google search results for “reducing adversarial nature of divorce” (run on “Christmas Eve” 2017)

**Search results (phrase added after publication) will bring up ads for mediators and collaborative divorce organizations or providers.  It will at times also bring up nonprofits whose chairman of the board, president (etc.) or founder has direct connections to court-mandated mediation services.  Without getting into too many details (on this post…), the “Collaborative Divorce Solutions of Orange County (CDSOC, in “SoCal,” Southern California) (see nearby image and caption) mentioned a nonprofit which website (oddly) gave its own EIN#.

I looked it up, and some past returns and see what appears to be ONE professional (and says “1” employee currently), showing only the (also) collaborative coach.  Earlier returns (FY2002) attachments mention taking referrals from: social services, child support services, court facilitators, and training the local DAs.  And that was just “United Fathers of America.”  To me, it has the appearance of simply facilitating reduction of taxable income through being a nonprofit, and writing off a variety of expenses, while (for someone this long in practice, and this area, the salary is nowhere near typical) showing the sole Board member or officer listed, taking a salary of, then, about $32K, and currently, only $42K. Basically, about the same amount is being taken as “non-government contributions” and (currently) split down the middle, writing half off as “salary” and half as “Expenses.” (IRS forms from 2002 differ from those now), leaving a steady end of year “assets” of next to nothing.

AFCC is the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts – the premier interdisciplinary and international association of professionals dedicated to the resolution of family conflict. AFCC members are the leading practitioners, researchers, teachers and policymakers in the family court arena“…(and, in opening, Para. 2…) “convenes members of multiple disciplines in the public, private and nonprofit sectors, from all over the world. AFCC is unique as a professional association because members do not all share a common profession.  Rather, AFCC members share a strong commitment to education, innovation and collaboration in order to benefit communities, empower families and promote a healthy future for children.

It’s also understandable how such tactics (replicated) might well appeal to anyone potentially under a child support order as minimizing income on the record, which is not to say that the president of UFA is in that situation. Once the associations for “collaborative divorce” started, they began multiplying (by region) with, looks like, often shared logos, and common origins in AFCC professionals. As with any created profession, one can then have academies, training institutes, membership lists (helps with advertising and credibility no doubt) and of course conferences.  (International Academy of Divorce Professionals).  (“CollaborativeDivorce.com” in San Francisco). Emphasizing the word “professional” without specifying which one (i.e., you don’t need to do this with lawyers, or accountants, or when licensed, psychologists, psychiatrists, etc. — emphasize that they are “professionals” because it’s generally understood) is also typical of the concept behind AFCC’s motto as well (see extended yellow-background caption, taken from top “About” phrase on the website, to nearby logo).  The association is very much into the prestige and uniqueness of its membership, yet speaks truly vaguely of all non-members not even as identifiable individuals (or even individuals) but according to broad-based, generic labels:  “communities, families, children…”  Without actual exposure to reality, one might think there are no other professions in the world (that really count) outside of the ones involved in this association.

Again, last post I showed AFCC’s IRS returns are consistently under $4M a year total assets, and its chapters do not represent all states (or even half the states) in one of the most powerful countries in the world, the USA. They also notably don’t represent, really, all regions of the world or even all continents.  Numerically, the organization is not showing up as (in any way) representative of the people whose lives it wishes to “improve” for the sake of the kids.  (Older newsletter banner read “Kids Count on Us.”)  If anything, for the word “collaborate” I would add, “collaborate to dominate…” including dominate the lives of children by re-aligning, re-assigning, having helped create and, as it says, claiming to lead, an entire court system where this actually, literally, can be done. It seems to be a public/private version of the Harvard/Bain/Bridgespan consulting model, a sort of “LBO” but involving the courts, not just corporations and their employees…  Those first in the new field get to define the field and set the rules. And focus on consulting to (subcontracting with, operating from within) the nonprofit sector of business and commerce (Bridgespan in effect copied for the nonprofits what Bain had done so successfully in for-profit with help from Harvard Business School along the way, or professors at it).  Beefed up nonprofits (AFCC isn’t one as far as assets, obviously, but it’s pretty adept at facilitating how assets get moved from family member to family member, or extracted for use in consultations) tend to hold investments — and those investments still help whatever sector they land in.  Or, if sold off cheaply, for next to no profit, or for a loss declared on a Form 990PF or Form 990 (something I’m also noticing in NCMEC, returns below), then they help whoever got them cheap.  (On a Form 990 (not 990PF) tax return, look for any major differential between “Total gross receipts” on the header info. and Line 12? Total “revenues”).  When the difference is large, why may show up on Part VIII, statement of revenues, under “Sale of assets other than inventory / securities” which shows Gross, Cost of Sale, and Net figures).

And then there has been the habit of operating as I understand it illegally, that is without registering openly as an association or corporation, then when being confronted on this, pulling a “chameleon” or skipping the state, or shutting down.  Just look at the track record of various chapters from the IRS and (Secretary of State) annual report filing levels (for example, Connecticut, Massachusetts, or Arizona.  Or, originally, California).  Consistent avoidance of fiscal accountability AND tax on what might otherwise be taxable income (to the members) naturally facilitates an underground economy.  Now, we are finding out through “reunification camps” there is also something of an “underground railroad” of “alienated” or “contact-resistant” children — but not to freedom, but to being like caught slaves, or ripped from their families in the middle of the night to go with strangers, being punished for ‘rebellion,’ and in intensive treatment scenarios, observed, supervised, and coached into re-acquainting themselves with who REALLY is in control… and their proper duty as minors, which is to accept both parents, no matter what.. … …unless the court decides that a parent has also been bad, and should be put on a long “time-out.”

Personnel are attorneys and ‘Divorce Coaches’ (which tend to be psychotherapists). The first one listed running “United Fathers of America” (since 1975), and on that website (not this one) also references under professional associations “Association of Family and Conciliation Courts” (and “CRC,” or Children’s Rights Council, another well-known and politically influential (dating to the mid-1980s) fatherhood organization, with founders in common, it’s believed, with AFCC (Jessica Pearson, perhaps others).

I’m NOT done reporting, but this is a start. If you currently think these court-connected “ATM machine” corporations, cloning themselves (so to speak) year after year represent manageable systems, or will somehow self-correct, or that the mutually congregating, (word choice intentional) linguistically-aligned professionals will hold to a high standard of ethics when it comes to things OUTside the jargon… keep reading and think again!  //LGH.

This post comes from my Dec. 21, 2017, post, Revisiting Reunification Camps: The Nice Clinical Psychologists involved Just Want to Help Traumatized Kids and “Families in Transition” (or “Transitioning Families”), in “protected spaces” (away from naysayers, critics, and potential negative witnesses) … It’s the Good Ole, Time-Tested, Court-Ordered and of course (™)’d Way [Publ. Dec. 21, 2017].. (Case-sensitive shortlink ends “-8cC,” written Dec. 16-21, 2017, publ. 21st, updated/expanded some 22nd.)

I’ve been looking again more closely at certain networks who have been replicating the equine-assisted (or otherwise) reunification therapy “camps” or “outpatient treatments” in California, Massachusetts and Florida (referring to legal domiciles; the activities apparently also happen in other states, such as New Hampshire or Vermont).  If you haven’t read that post yet, start there.

This follow-up post was inspired in part by discovering more details, some filling in missing puzzle pieces from that last time I encountered or heard about the reunification camp in Northern California (Transitioning Families) and its psychologist leadership, Rebecca Bailey, also associated with a high-profile rescue case in the general area.  Earlier I had wondered how the rescued family somehow connected with this particular professional. This time, I found an answer, although only from one source, a news article.

Doing just a few extra, a bit more, name-searches led to discovery of a recent (October, 2017) article in a nearby (to me) Northern-California county showing how the entity and situations I was researching were hooked up with a high-profile, major-media-coverage non-family abduction rescue whose victims (two, born in their mother’s generation-long captivity) that received a multi-million-dollar settlement from the State of California (where they were held captive and where rescued from in 2009).

What this answer looks like, in tax return form:

Total results: 3Search Again.  NCMEC, $36.1M @ FY2015(=calendar year), EIN# 52-1328557

National Center for Missing and Exploited Children VA 2015 990 46 $36,116,345 52-1328557
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children VA 2014 990 39 $37,494,271 52-1328557
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children VA 2013 990 44 $41,238,140 52-132855

[Tax Return for FY2002, the earliest I could get to].

I have no problem with the settlement — that abductee and her children deserve it — but unfortunately (from understanding and my perspective on the family courts’ involvement in such camps)* her/their post-captivity connections for family therapy to a psychologist “wheeling-and-dealing with” the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts** which is — and I doubt this abductee or her mother and relatives would at the time have had any way of knowing this — in the business of breaking up intact households and effectively and dramatically (as in, at times overnight or on even less warning) cancelling non-abusive parent-child (often mother-child) relationships while (in part, thereby) intentionally blurring the line between criminal and non-criminal behaviors by individuals who happen to also have children, I felt when I first heard of it was puzzling, and is I still feel regrettable.*** (I feel that the Dugard/Probyn family, so horribly traumatized, have been exploited to further legitimize such services)  …
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

December 23, 2017 at 8:30 am

Revisiting Reunification Camps: The Nice Clinical Psychologists involved Just Want to Help Traumatized Kids and “Families in Transition” (or “Transitioning Families”), in “protected spaces” (away from naysayers, critics, and potential negative witnesses) … It’s the Good Ole, Time-Tested, Court-Ordered and of course (™)’d Way [Publ. Dec. 21, 2017].

leave a comment »

I started this on and as a post update to one I wanted to cite to (first published June 15, 2011, already with a 2016 update; apparently the topic retains its relevance…), but from slightly different angle of approach, as it explains in the first few paragraphs.


This post title: Revisiting Reunification Camps: The Nice Clinical Psychologists involved Just Want to Help Traumatized Kids and “Families in Transition” (or “Transitioning Families”), in “protected spaces” (away from naysayers, critics, and potential negative witnesses) … It’s the Good Ole, Time-Tested, Court-Ordered and of course (™)’d Way [Publ. Dec. 21, 2017].. Case-sensitive shortlink ends “-8cC,” written Dec. 16-21, 2017.

While I think this should be a fairly straightforward post, once the framework and concept was set, I did let it “go where it flows” which you can see by reading….there are two “read more” links (click them to read more of the post) below.  In all, it’s about 14,000 16,300 words (@12/21 pm), which I believe includes word-count for the captions to its many images.  Some extra length comes from extra findings during the write-up, my discussion (including a footnote) about the “transformative grammar” involved in the phrase “Transitioning Families,” preliminary information discovering that an LLC of that name formed to hold the trademark Nov. 30, 2016 only lasted (was voluntarily cancelled before even one full year) until July 19, 2017. Although there were documented major fires in the area (Northern California, Sonoma County), California Fire report (and news) showed them as occurring after the LLC shut itself down voluntarily the previous summer. (The fire, burned over 56,000 acres, reported in Oct. 2017). The cancellation remains unexplained — I note that the existence of the LLC wasn’t exactly made public on the website anyhow.

Regarding the “(™)’d” comment in the post title, here’s some proof, for the phrase referenced. I looked it up at USPTO.gov, “TESS” (Trademark Electronic Search System) by individual name (after not finding the longer phrase, “Transitioning Families Therapeutic Reunification Model” (or “TFTRM”)  trademarked) and, it was registered — just recently and just  a month before an article citing to it came out in the April, 2016 Family Court Review (Patience!, I show that below) — and as I suspected, owned by a single individual, giving that individual the appearance of an actual business where none is recorded:

USPTO.gov/TESS search results (nearby images = details from this one)

(Click image to enlarge. A partial screenprint (magnified) of this same page is nearby. Full page shows dates, that it’s a single owner (and who) with a PO Box in Glen Ellyn, CA, attorney of record, etc.).

Proof from the US Government what this logo and word mark stands for (see Goods & Services), a rather expansive definition under “Mental health services,” when claimed as first used in commerce (2010) when request for trademark was filed (May 11, 2015) published for opposition (Dec. 29, 2015) and made official (March, 2016 — see nearby image or TESS for the full detail).

After that, I get into looking at what isn’t apparently a large operation, or possibly while an “operation” still not even a legitimate (separate) business entity of its own  (website and trademarked logo read “Transitioning Families”), but where at least one of the leaders evidently has connections in more than one state to the family court system. Then again, this type of personnel tend to operate in networks … word travels fast about potential high-profile cases that might help the cause.

I did find a cancelled LLC registration for “Transitioning Families” in Glen Ellen, California (the USPTO trademark registration, was at a PO Box in the same, small town. The website seems to contain no contact mailing address at all).  Its registered agent in 2016 (Charles Holmes), then a 2017 filing added Rebecca Bailey’s name to it and confirmed it was the same (“Type of Business:  “Hold Trademark, Treatment Programs”) and later the same month voluntarily dissolved, or as I guess SOS search results call it, “cancelled.”

Apart from using the name in commerce for five years before seeking to trademark it, then suddenly cancelling a VERY short-lived LLC, while keeping the website up, this would seem odd.  However, I’m glad I looked, because the “Trulia” view of the address: 1. classifies it as farm/ranch; and 2. the (satellite view) showed it looking dark and burnt-out.  Did the fires have anything to do with the cancellation? And if the LLC was cancelled but programs continue, to whom are payments made, whether by a parent or possibly by some insurance provider?

(On looking closer, I see two “fire updates” (October 14, 2017 and November 29, 2017) They did have to evacuate, have temporary place, and are rebuilding.  Nothing on the site references any business status, however, or that an LLC ever existed, or was cancelled because of the fire (presumably to be re-registered later??)

The middle filing of only three (7/7/2017) shows Rebecca Bailey’s name and Type of Business: “Hold Trademark, Treatment Programs.” (USPTO.gov shows Bailey as trademark owner, not this LLC) (@ Dec. 2017 and no previous change shown, which USPTO.gov does include if there’ve been renewals)

7/19/2007 Dissolution (resulting in “Cancelled” status under Sec. of State search results for this LLC, under name Charles Holmes).

11/30/2016, first registration of Transitioning Families, LLC “One manager” and registered agent, Charles Holmes .

11/30/2016 LLC registered with CA Sec. of State (7 months after publication of Family Court Review article featuring the trademarked phrase “Transitioning Families” and Therapeutic Reunification Model (for nonFamilial Abductions), 7/7/2016 annual rept (? SI-Complete) adds Rebecca Bailey’s name and references holding the trademark and Treatmt program under business purpose 7/19/2017 (same month!) it’s suddenly Cancelled” by reg. agent Charles Holmes (Bailey’s name gone from the form). Why?

Street address search brings up a Trulia with satellite photo; it looks burnt-out and is registered as a (two acre) Ranch/Farm (click to enlarge).Viewed Dec. 2017. Calif. has been having a nasty fire season this year, both northern and southern regions, including with forced evacuations.

Oct. 2017 report of fires in Glen Ellen as well as evacuations ordered. Is this why the LLC was cancelled? But if so, then why is the website still in place?

Glen Ellen, CA IS in Sonoma County (“wine country”) in Northern California, and there were major fires in this area this past fall; parts of it were under evacuation orders.  I shudder to think what this might have meant if there were treatment programs involving alienated children or “recalcitrant adults” there at the time (maybe there weren’t) but, til further notice, that would seem to provide a possible explanation of why the LLC “Transitioning Families” might be cancelled — although why Rebecca’s name first appeared, then disappeared, from the registration (at California SOS Business-entity / LLC-search level) is still puzzling, or why if the LLC wasn’t shut down, the website wasn’t also, acknowledging the emergency situation created by California’s fires. Note:  Trademarks as I understand it are for “goods and services” but business names (when it comes to LLCs or corporations) are for the business itself.


Anyone involved in this particular operation / outfit / program / so-called treatment model or promoting it should not estimate that my choice to report here indicates my estimate of its importance in the larger field, other than as a symptom.

The family court, and “court-connected-corporations” (and career professionals) field deals with copycats and cult-like groups adopting common jargon and attempting to position themselves as the “go-to” people for family courts, domestic violence, child abuse and when there’s apparently not enough of that type of court-connected, psycho-educational attitude adjustment work to go around, also for post-abduction scenarios.  The ones I feature are often chosen because they are so typical, in a series of similar but slightly differentiated, named (and sometimes trademarked) programs, and because looking at them other than by engaging with the rhetoric involved (although I also do that when it’s so symptomatic of the originating association), but by doing more searches for registrations, and commonalities between the groups and individuals sponsoring them tends to bring up such fascinating information.**

This book comes up again in the post, when it’s cited to on “TransitioningFamilies.com” page. I found it for sale at $46, but I see at a 6X9 paperback (under 400pp), OUP here is charging $59.95 or about 33% more.  Wonder what the royalties are, and if it’s selling.

**Like the ability to make a pun on the word “Stable” (steady, as in  paths out of alienation, and also, here involving real stables, as in housing for horses…) in such a fixed-point-of-view group of professionals with what appears to be, judging by the websites and articles — which I’ve been reading in general for about nine years, a seriously limited vocabulary outside professional names, associations, and jargon of the field, usually liberally sprinkled with what’s not exactly jargon, but seeks to feature expert status (clinical, clinician, forensic, treatment models, etc.) In one of the images below, annotating this, I included a “Jargon-O-Meter” in case my description here isn’t clear enough.

**Or how deft was the switching of a treatment model featured for NONfamily abductions for application to the FAMILY abductions (and high-conflict divorce, alienated children..) field, not to mention an increasing tendency to get published by Oxford University Press. (Notice, its categories include “Social Sciences” after the others — see nearby image, top banner with links).

**While, in the same context just about, repeatedly using a phrase, and choose a “goods & services” name (Transitioning Families), where “transition” is mostly a noun, but if used as a verb, with the root (underlying) meaning “to go across” (Trans + ire <==Latin for “to go”) would normally — except for business usage tending to ignore meaningful language, or its guidelines — be INtransitive, meaning, not taking a direct object.  Quick illustration (Grammar Bytes!) of Transitive versus Intransitive verbs.  Transitive verbs have direct objects.   Better but still straightforward definition at Oxforddictionaries.com

Oxford Dictionaries on Transitive v Intransitive verbs (Or click to enlarge only portion shown. Website has two charts with examples below)

Online Etymology Dictionary doesn’t even have a reference to it as a verb, just as a noun:  mid-15c., from Latin transitionem (nominative transitio) “a going across or over,” noun of action from past participle stem of transire “go or cross over” (see transient).

The verb “go” isn’t used with a direct object is it?  “I was going the boxes from the old house to the new”  No– the word is “moving.”   So why use the word “transitioning” whose root word means “go across” with a direct object?   (Similar situations in common use:  “she graduated high school” for “she graduated FROM high school..” — the high school didn’t move from one state to another by virtue of someone completing it, unless she was a real hell-raiser, and it graduated from one state to another by virtue of her presence as the actor).

The school graduates the person, who moves, who “steps forward or up” FROM the school — and not vice versa!  (Etymology again — the root word is “step”).  A school, for example, could be said to have graduated (using it as a transitive verb) 1,000 (or any other number of) students, because it did.  The students are the direct object in that sensible use of the verb, thus becoming so-called graduates (noun) OF the school or that level of schooling.

link: from Online Etymology Dict. The school graduates the students, and not vice versa!

Here’s even a conjugation (possibly for English-language learners) of the “irregular” verb “transition” in “I, you, he/she, we, and they” forms — not one of which used reasonably in a sentence would take a direct object. (Conjugator.reverso.net for the verb transition)

Reverso Conjugation of the verb “Transition” (Or click to enlarge only portion shown… “I transition ~You transition~ He/She/It transitions…” do any of the above (or “we transition, they transition…plurals) make ANY sense if you added a direct object right afterwards? But  “TRANSITIONING FAMILIES” as a trademark avoids showing this “anomaly” (strangeness) by omitting any subject nouns (for example: “Parents Helping Parents” is a phrase, also network of organizations, which does supply the subject noun, transitive verb, and direct objects, without stretching grammar into the meaningless or so vague as to be open to varied interpretations, sphere…

And yet here’s the two-word, trademarked phrase, “Transitioning Families,” which if you think about it, is unclear whether “transitioning” means “transitioning THE (alienated, disconnected, formerly separated by abduction, etc.) families” and is from a verb usage (making “Families” the direct object), or whether it’s meant to be an adjective, a “descriptor,” taken from the noun to describe such families, indicating a “from the sidelines” stance from those using the phrases  — i.e., we observe that the families are just undergoing a “transition” — and we’re here to help them, and better facilitate it (through family-court-ordered reunification therapy…after which they should have “transitioned” to a more connected state.

In which interpretation, it would seem that the trademark is saying — they’re already “in transition,” but we are just the midwives and facilitators of a natural process (which in the actual context, is a less than honest description).

See more at FOOTNOTE “TRANSITIONING LANGUAGE” on the bottom of this post. I just thought it relevant to mention in light of the people using the phrase getting published by the esoteric and highly-regarded, premiere university-associated, “Oxford University Press.”
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

December 21, 2017 at 12:54 pm

If Dog-Fighting, Cock-Fighting, and Exploiting Prisoners as Gladiators (resulting in shooting deaths for some, and “hundreds of shootings,” not to mention fight-related injuries for others) is “BAD,” then why isn’t also Federal (PRWORA-based) and State (Family Courts) Policy with similarly staged, high-stakes conflicts — rigged for intended outcomes, and obviously potentially lethal for the combatants and, periodically, bystanders — on a far larger stage (national, and in some high-profile cases, international), also involving known criminally violent** fathers and their children’s mothers, AND young children of all ages?  [Published Dec. 17, 2017]

leave a comment »

The “parent post” also dealt in part with guns and groups seeking to reduce death by gun violence. I guess they just weren’t thinking in terms of, “of prisoners, by prison guards…” Its title:

The Money Maze: Following Multi-State, Multi-Candidate PACs + Super-PACs through Rapid Formation and NameChanges. (Giffords, ARS PAC + Lawyer Steve ‘Hurricane’ Mostyn (1971-Nov. 2017). (Case-sensitive, WordPress-generated shortlink ends “-87w”)  (Started Dec. 4, 2017 as a follow-up to my Dec. 3 “NRA (not) on the Record”**  preface to upcoming “Robin Hood Foundation” (or “RHF”) *** posts)

This is a short (ca. 6,700 words or so) aside to that post, and a link to return to the parent post above is provided again at the bottom. There may be some repetition as I added documentation and examples to the text before publishing.

[Post-publication: An extended footnote adds about 4,000 words referencing BWJP, the Wellstone promotion of supervised visitation (both quotes and news articles, as is well-known this progressive Senator, his wife, his daughter, three staff and two pilots were killed suddenly — about 15 years ago — during a small plane crash.  He’d been on the way to debate his opponent for an anticipated competitive fight for his third term.  However, an identifiable incorporation of acceptance for continued, but modified (i.e. “supervised”) exchanges in passive acceptance (and silent assent to AFCC policies while presenting at their 2000 conference on alienation, access and attachment with special emphasis on the first issues) effectively “headed off at the pass: any open, informed discussion on another possibility which better preserved safety — NO forced contact where abuse has been identified. By separating dangerous from not-dangerous parenting situations, this also would clear the path for fairer handling of non-abusive fathers’ issues.]

It originates in making references of these topics as analogies for the situation I am most deeply concerned about, the macro-economic, system-wide practice of the same power blocs setting up artificial, high-stakes and sometimes life-and-death conflicts especially between men and women overall, and between individual men and women who are mothers and fathers of children in common, while demanding the public fund both sides (the public as taxpayers and through other service consumption of governmental business enterprises, including accessing the courts, registering vehicles yearly, marriage licenses even, continues to pay “up front”)

Many men and women can handle themselves without hurting or destroying each other economically or physically, and not all men and women, on divorcing, use their children as pawns or take them as hostages.  But WHEN some do, it seems to be “game time” for others. It’s “show time.”  All can be manipulated, and the longer the conflict goes on, the bills are higher,  more civil and legal rights concessions are demanded of them (and the larger public) the stakes are higher, and the risks of those personally involved, greater; these concessions are often described as intended to change the outcome.

But doing so directly is contrary to our self-impressions of the country and view that we have a possibly functional system of laws and courts.  The influences are from the sidelines, from outside specific jurisdiction of family courts involved, and these influences come from Congress and the White House (which expends funding allocated to it by Congress, i.e., that budget) and are applied through, as the title above says, a real “money maze” — sometimes direct to the states, sometimes direct to nonprofits within the state but involved in the courts, and sometimes otherwise.

That’s why I say the game is “rigged.”  It’s not a level playing field, and its rules can be altered year to year, and situation to situation — and that’s the way some people like it.  Rather than SETTLING the standards by the law, with a preference throughout of NOT prioritizing privilege for violators of penal codes when there are two parents and one is a violator and the other, not.  Rather than just having fair laws and enforcing them fairly.

We (so to speak) also already exploit at least federal prisoners for slave labor, through FPI (Federal Prison Industries) a.k.a.  Unicor (and have since the 1930s), which is also referenced here near the bottom, but not in this post’s title, which reads:

QUESTION:  What’s bad when found to have occurred in secret, in confined and closed quarters from which combatants cannot escape, and involving animals (whether dogs or roosters with spurs) or when it happens in prisons with caged men, and in ALL of the above resulting in serious injury and sometimes death, not to mention being “exploitation, defined,” ….

LA times 4/24/2000, by Staff writer Max Arax, “Guards on Trial in Corcoran Shootings blame Prisoners

…Pointing the finger at a vast group of prisoners with no faces or voices in the federal courtroom, the defense is using the government’s own witnesses to put Corcoran’s violent culture on trial. Sounding at times like prosecutors themselves, attorneys for the eight guards are also blaming official state policy handed down from Sacramento for the thousands of fights between inmates and the hundreds of shootings by guards during a six-year reign of terror at the San Joaquin Valley prison.

Beginning in 1989, defense attorneys contend, the state’s integrated yard and shooting policies required guards to mix rival inmates from different street gangs and then to fire at them with deadly force if they refused to stop fighting.

…why is the same basic routine under  “family-friendly policy,” and when the forced interaction with known dangerous persons frequently happens WITHOUT armed guards or trained personnel nearby but WITH women and children, boys or girls nearby — in fact sometimes without even any authority supervising the exchange — but the exchange is still court-ordered, forced after reasons for separation or requested protection are on record as domestic violence or child abuse  — why is this somehow justified as moral, ethical, and as “American” as (well, what should we say, truthfully — as American as slavery? or as indentured servitude based, this season, meaning, this past half-century minimum, on parent gender?).

“The gender wars” do include age-old issues, with or without citing to any religious basis for them, but in 20th century (as in 19th and 18th, and now the 21st century) USA there are still social-services and public policy staged, rigged battles, and especially with federal government through state governments as participators, since the 1980s and 1990s.

The appearance of genuine concern by funding one side (as expressed in VAWA, the Violence Against Women Act) is effectively countered by an even larger funding (as it’s under TWO titles of the Social Security Act (Both IV-A, TANF and IV-D, OCSE (Child Support Enforcement) largest grant-making agency, and blended into programming under others). I’m referring to “HMRF” and “Access/Visitation” funding only (for pt. of reference only, see next two images).
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

December 17, 2017 at 8:09 pm


Journalist specialising in the Horn of Africa and Southern Africa

Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?' (See March 23 & 5, 2014). More Than 745 posts and 45 pages of Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Red Herring Alert

There's something fishy going on!

The American Spring Network

News. by the people, for the people. The #1 source for independent investigative journalism in the Show-Me State, serving Missouri since 2011.

Family Court Injustice

It Takes "Just Us" to Fight Family Court Injustice

The Espresso Stalinist

Wake Up to the Smell of Class Struggle ☭

Spiritual Side of Domestic Violence

Finally! The Truth About Domestic Violence and The Church

%d bloggers like this: