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

After reading some more today, and processing information I’ve had, I wish to post this link:

TITLE OF REPORT:

CALIFORNIA’S ACCESS TO VISITATION GRANT 

PROGRAM FOR ENHANCING RESPONSIBILITY AND 

OPPORTUNITY** FOR NONRESIDENTIAL PARENTS 

2001-2003

WHO THIS REPORT WAS ADDRESSED TO:

THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE

WHO SUBMITTED THIS REPORT ON THE ABOVE TOPICS TO THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE:

(The) Judicial Council of California 

Administrative Office of the Courts 

Center for Families, Children & the Courts 

This report has been prepared and submitted to the California Legislature

pursuant to Assembly Bill 673.  

Copyright © 2003 by Judicial Council of California/Administrative Office of the 

Courts.  All rights reserved. 

This report is also available on the California Courts Web site: 

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/programs/cfcc/resources/grants/a2v.htm 

I HAVE A QUESTION:

HOW COME DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

OR CHILD SUPPORT LITIGANTS ARE NOT DIRECTED TO THIS SITE

or INFORMED OF THIS PROGRAM

SO THEY KNOW WHY THEY ARE BEING

FORCED THROUGH MEDIATION PROCESS?

(FYI:  “mandatory mediation” is the one of many way to achieve the grant-mandated “required outcomes”attached to this particular program funding.  The “required outcome” is more hours, more time, more “accesss” going to the noncustodial parent.  While “parent” is said, “father” is basically meant.  Any legal process (with “due process”) that has a “required outcome” is by definition going to be, in some fashion, “rigged.”)

(It’s a rhetorical question.)

most of us are not checking up on the California Legislature while in an abusive relationship. . . . . 

MANY of us cannot afford attorneys, and have come to this place through nonprofits. . . . . not police. . . . 

Most of us are not rolling in extra time to do this research.

DURING THE YEARS IN QUESTION, I was dealing with transition from domestic violence.

It would’ve been helpful to know these processes and intents!

Brief Quote (I am running out of time to post today. . . . . )

Over the past five years, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has awarded 

a total of $50 million in block grants to states to promote access and visitation programs 

to increase noncustodial parents’ involvement in their children’s lives.  The federal 

allocation to each state is based on the number of single-parent households.  California 

has the largest number of single heads of households (1,127,062) in the United States.3  

California receives the maximum amount of possible federal funds (approximately 

$1 million per year), representing 10 percent of the national funding.  Federal regulations 

earmark grant funds for such activities as mediation (both voluntary and mandatory), 

counseling, education, development of parenting plans, visitation enforcement (including 

monitoring, supervision, and neutral drop-off and pickup), and development of guidelines 

for visitation and alternative custody arrangements.4   

Assembly Bill 673 expressed the Legislature’s intent that funding for the state of 

California be further limited to the following three types of programs:  

q Supervised visitation and exchange services; 

q Education about protecting children during family disruption; and  

q Group counseling services for parents and children

NOW, FRIENDS, FOES, AND VISITORS:  HERE’S YOUR ASSIGNMENT:

READ THIS DOCUMENT, AND OTHERS LIKE IT (FROM OTHER YEARS, FROM YOUR STATES — I’M SURE THERE’S SOMETHING SIMILAR). “RESPONSIBLE CITIZENHOOD.”

And take a GOOD look at the “Fathers Rights” languages it’s laced with, and references to publications in footnotes on these matters.

This is social sciences through the courts. . . . 

. . . 

A recent study by Amato and Booth (1997), who 

looked at several trends in family life and their effects on children, found divorce of all 

factors considered, to have the most negative effect on the well-being of children.7 

 

The trends of separation, divorce, and unmarried parents, have potentially adverse effects 

on the financial, social, emotional, and academic well-being of America’s children.  

Noncustodial parents, generally fathers, struggle to maintain healthy and meaningful 

relationships with their children.  A recent report by Arendell (1995) illustrates the 

gradual disengagement of noncustodial parents. Contact with separated dads is often 

minimal, with 30 percent of divorced fathers seeing their children less than once a year 

and only 25 percent having weekly contact.8

Or, on page 6, Footnote 17:

 K. Sylvester and K. Reich, Making Fathers Count, Assessing the Progress of Responsible Fatherhood 

Efforts, (Social Action Network, 2002), p. 2. 

In a nation where 23 million children do not live with their biological 

fathers and 20 million live in single-parent homes (most of them lacking fathers)

 

 

AMONG REASONS, POSSIBLY, WHY, MIGHT BE”

 (intake forms to screen and assess for safety risks; separate 

orientations and interviews with parents; written child abduction procedures; policies to 

respond to allegations or suspicions of abuse, intimidation, or inappropriate behavior; 

copies of protective orders, protocols for declining unsafe or high-risk cases). 

 

 

(POST TO BE CONTINUED)….