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

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

Let’s Get Honest about “Kids’ Turn” and Judges’ Profit.. [First Publ. Oct. 24, 2011, updated Mar. 25, 2017].

with 10 comments

~ ~ ~

Let’s Get Honest about “Kids’ Turn” and Judges’ Profit. [First Publ. Oct. 24, 2011, updated Mar. 25, 2017]. Short-link ends “-Ev”.  About 9,200 words and this post has several comments.  Title and shortlink notation added Sept. 29, 2019 as I’m intending to reference it in a new post.

First published Oct. 24, 2011, I would consider Let’s Get Honest about “Kids’ Turn” and Judges’ Profit.. among key posts early in the blog (from a 2017 perspective). In wishing to quote this (for one of its passing references to Kids’ Turn donor “Halsey Minor” (founder of CNET), and because a blog-upgrade has for some reason turned the base post color to a sort of sickly mixture of greenish-white, I’m adding also a font-change, border, and a few other things I didn’t know how to do in 2011. Kids’ Turn has since submerged itself into (if I remember it right) San Francisco Child Abuse Prevention Center (SF CAPC) which “CAPC” is something of a serial curriculum-peddler (through a series of nonprofits to run the curriculum). That’s a general recall, and anyone is free to do a more detailed check on the Secretary of State, or Attorney General (Charitable Trusts Registry) as I do throughout this blog in case I mis-remembered exactly WHERE Kids’ Turn decided to submerge its identity into another nonprofit with classes to sell.

This may have happened anyway in the organization’s process of growing up and not wishing to call attention to the conflicts of interest it would sure seem to represent for anyone with a divorce case and likely to be added into forced co-parenting education, when the entity routinely has family court connections, family court judges, attorneys, or administrators on its board, and as this post references, contracts with the City and County of SF regarding the court.

Or, I like to think this blog may have had SOMETHING to do with their decision to go further underground and (apparently) otherwise continue business as usual…//LGH 3-25-2017.

Per an Annual Report, 2010, on this organization which sheds light on how the courts work:

The following representative results definitely affirm the efficacy of Kids’ Turn’s 2010 services:

• 50% of Kids’ Turn families are Court ordered

HALF THE CLIENTELE OF KIDS’ TURN ARE ORDERED TO GO THERE BY THE COURTS.  Notably, this Nonprofit also was started by a family law judge, and by the end of this (LONG) blog, you should know much more about the interrelationship between the Profit in Non-Profits and how judges order litigants to attend services provided (fee-based) for organizations that MANY of them have sat on the board of.

Not just for US.  Nope, the UK is going to help out this “charity” (started by family law judge…)

Kids’ Turn will soon complete a partnership with two charities in the United Kingdom (Relate and National Family Mediation) leading to implementation of Kids’ Turn throughout Great Britain.

Amazing….they write:

The UK govt has pledged a new pot of funding to help families. Here is a link to an online article about it which we posted on the KT Facebook Fan Page:

• Our partner agencies will submit funding requests in three categories, one of which is to implement Kids’ Turn throughout the UK

• They will received the funding award notices by March, 2011 and when awarded, the funds will be in place for four years

• The two agencies have settled their partnership challenges and worked out their respective roles re. the implementation of Kids’ Turn

UNbelievable…  Some families stuck in the courts (beCAUSE they are stuck in the courts) can’t afford internet, and “Kids’ Turn” has its facebook page…

I am simply throwing out some greens here, about a gleam in a judge’s eye (1987-1990) that is going global.  Not exactly in the free market — it is subsidized as a sub-grantee THROUGH the California Judicial Council, under “Access Visitation Grants,” and as such, you probably can’t get out of some facet of indoctrination once you file a motion in any family law court, anywhere, for any reason.  You might, but it’s kind of like what I hear of slot machines, gambling, etc.  — the House always wins.

KIDS’ TURN,” INTERNATIONAL” — and is CLOSELY Associated with AFCC:

International Conference Presentations (cached article…)

Kids‘ Turn Executive Director, Claire Barnes, had the privilege to co-present this summer at the International Commission on Couples and Family Relations’ 2002 Conference held in Sydney, Australia.  She collaborated with Claire Missen, Teen Between (Dublin, Ireland) on the topic of Divorce and Teens.  The respective papers, where cultural commonalities and differences specific to gender differences were discussed, are available for review.

Additionally, Susanna Marshland, former Kids‘ Turn Program Director, participated in a panel presentation at this year’s AFCC Conference in Hawaii.  The topic of Best Practices was a perfect venue for Susanna’s information on the KidsTurn Early Years Program.  Susanna’s remarks are also included
for review.

1. Statistics: a presentation by Claire Missen, Teen Between (Dublin, Ireland)

2. Presentation by Claire Barnes, M.A to the 2002 International Commission on Couple and Family Relations: Distance Diversity Dislocation, June 2002, Sydney, Australia

3. Summary of Presentation for the ‘Best Practices’ workshop
Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Annual Conference, presented by Susanna Marshland, LCSW, June 7, 2002, Waikoloa, Hawaii

How nice to belong to more than one organization for which conferences can involve transcontinental and transoceanic travel to exotic locales to talk about “healing family relationships.”  OF note — this organization is funded in part as a sub-grantee from US Federal funds, including diversions from WELFARE to enhance CHILD SUPPORT collection for needy families.  ….

But what caught my interest — what is KIDS’ TURN doing on a notice of lien to the SFTC, which is the San Francisco Courts?  (Source:  CRIIS.com, recorded documents)

Record Date Document Number GrantoR GranteE Name Cross Reference Name Document Type

Someone should look into this — what’s THAT about? From what I understand, “SFTC” is the San Francisco Superior (or Trial) Courts — pls. submit comment correcting me if I’m wrong.  And its GRANTEE, i.e., Kids’ Turn is granting something to the courts, while receiving grants from the Cal. Judicial Council through the courts.

I could write on anything — of course — but have noticed this particular group (out of SF and San Diego, originally) going international, Hawaii, Illinois, you name it.  They say they are really successful — read it on the website here, a study done in 2009 (it began around 1988) “Our programs work….”

Our programs work. A long-term study published in 2009 showed that Kids’ Turn workshops effectively reduced parent conflict, alienation and internalization of negative behaviors by children.

You KNOW, I’m going to have to take a look at this, which describes Kids Turn as a program offered CONTINUOUSLY since 1988 :

The present paper reviews the literature described above and introduces Kids’ Turn, a divorcing family education program that has been offered in the San Francisco Bay Area continuously since 1988. This manuscript reports change over time within a sample of families who have participated in the Kids’ Turn program and observed reductions in conflict intensity and breadth, parent rejection of child behavior, and parent anxiety and depression. These results provide first-ever evidence of change within participants in a community-based divorcing family education program.

This 23-page review, cited on the Kidsturn.org site, reviewed a whopping 61 PARTICIPANTS…79% female, about half college-educated:


Participants were 61 parents for whom complete data were present before they entered the Kids’ Turn program (Wave 1) and after they had completed the program (Wave 2). Participants were eligible if they had children between the age of 4 and 17 and had (1) registered to complete the Kids’ Turn program, (2) agreed to participate in an independent evaluation of the program efficacy, and (3) had participated in the evaluation study both (a) before their first Kids’ Turn session and (b) after they had completed the program. The majority of participants were female (79%) and most had a college degree or more (53%).

Browsing the description of the Kids’ Turn curriculum (as described here), I see many familiar names known to be influential in the development of the family law system, AFCC members or key members, and of course marketing THEIR information also, and some also related to the organization CRC, on which another post should be written.  For example, Wallerstein, Kelly, Isolina Ricci, and Sanford Braver, e.g.:

Parental Alienation. Participants responded to three items from the Dads for Life project (Braver, Griffin, Cookston, Sandler, & Williams, 2005) that assessed the degree to which participants perceived the other parent was competing for the child’s affection.

The plenteous footnotes reference others (including some on the Board of Kids’ Turn San Diego, see below), such as Warshak, et. al ….

And for something with several pages of footnotes, and not a few tables, we get the comment:

The analyses on the parent-child relationship variables yielded no significant change over time results for the Kids’ Turn parents. These results did not support our theory of the program and failed to replicate results previously found in controlled, randomized trials of family education program for divorcing families which have been found to improve parent-child relationship and communication (Wolchik et al., 2005).

I personally suggest we stop running experiments and trying to “replicate” results on relationships.  People are not lab rats — stop treating them like it.  However, data like this is a LITTLE more fascinating, and one reason I decided to blog this (and not, say, the world is falling apart in the middle east, and earthquakes in New Zealand, etc.) ….  And this group is obviously a little hyper-focused on “parental alienation”:

Finally, for the parent relationship variables, the results indicate a significant decrease in reports of parental alienation. The decrease in parent alienation could be linked to the decrease in conflict breadth and parental conflict, but our analyses including the covariates suggest the changes are not better explained by parent gender, time since separation, or parent or child age. The notion of parental alienation is controversial in the psychological literature because it is more typically associated with the diagnosis of a parental alienation syndrome (see Warshak, 2001), however, there is no doubt that these behaviors present challenging pressures for children.

{{Someone up to translating that jargon into something REAL?}}

Overall, the decrease in these three parent relationship constructs– parent alienation, conflict breadth, and parental conflict – are to be expected from a divorce education program like Kids’ Turn, however, they are hard to attain (Goodman et al, 2005).

The problem is the conflict and not any behaviors causing it, obviously, like some of the ones most hotly contested in the courts, and sometimes precipitating the separations….

BUT I found THIS very interesting:

IT’S A MARKETING SYSTEM, WITH AFFILIATES (SOME INTERNATIONAL) SPONSORED BY US GOVERNMENT.  GO FIGURE.  THIS IS NOT A FREE-MARKET SYSTEM, BUT PARENTS ARE REFERRED THROUGH THE COURTS.  OF COURSE — of course — it’s just for the kids.  We all know that only bad parents divorce, and have high conflict, and therefore good judges, etc. (and Mr. Rogers) must help them out.  The parents’ previous behaviors, qualifications, professions (even if in education, pediatrics, child care, or health and human services) does not seem to be relevant — the word “parent” is fairly universal, I’d say.

The court view is that bad parents have high conflict and good authorities must teach parents — including BOTH parents, even if one has a prison record, is a deadbeat intentionally though personally wealthy — or has assaulted the other spouse — and/or child(ren), or even kidnapped them — MUST assume the position of being taught how to separate (while the courts virtually prevent this from every happening before someone is homeless, dead, or all children are now adults, if then).

The POSITIVE spin on Kids’ Turn:

Kids’ Turn


From 1987 to 1990, Judge Ina Levin Gyemant presided over the family law department of the domestic relations court, noting that while lawyers filed motions and parents sought orders regarding custody, visitation and other diputes, children and their needs were almost completely ignored. Mediation services were mandated for parents in California in 1980,** but no educational program was available for children, who are often the people most vulnerable and confused during separation or divorce.

[LGH 2019Sep29 update comment:  That link is “ChildrensHomeAndAid.org/page.aspx”]

**mandated mediation has been identified as one of three means, in California, to increase noncustodial parenting (i.e., fathers’) time with their children, the other two being parenting education and supervised visitation.  The program stating these three causes receives close to $1 million in federal grants per year, for California, at least — and has been receiving this funding stream since 1996.  Kids’ Turn is clearly listed as a sub-grantee in more than one county on this stream.  This creates an automatic conflict of interest for court-appointed “mediators” in custody cases involving criminal activity.  MORE ON THIS BELOW (and I’ve blogged it plenty on this blog).


[Blank image/broken link space deleted here, Sept. 2019.  It’s unclear to me this many years later, whether it’s a continued quote or from some other sources//LGH]

Gyemant and other professionals in law, education, social service, and mental health, felt strongly that early intervention would not only reduce litigation, but increase the well-being of children, improve their performance in school, and teach children and parents important skills in the midst of family reorganization.

In 1988, with the help of attorneys Ann Van Blen and Jennifer Jackson, Gyemant started Kids’ Turn as a nonprofit agency in order to offer direct educational services to children and their parents who are undergoing separation or divorce.

Feeling something strongly doesn’t mean it’s legitimate.  …

The current home office for Kids’ Turn is located in San Francisco. Out of that location, services are conducted for four Bay Area Counties. Those counties are: San Francisco, Marin, Alameda and Contra Costa. Due to the significant response to Kids’ Turn in the East Bay, the organization rents a small space in Oakland in order to accommodate East Bay staff.

In the early 90’s, the Kids’ Turn Board developed a framework for selling the curriculum and for licensing affiliates. Presently, seven organizations hold affiliate status; those organizations are located in California (Sonoma, Napa, San Diego, Shasta and Yolo Counties), Dayton, Ohio, Hillsboro, Oregon, and Bloomington, Illinois.

Illinois has also been a center of both the fatherhood movement, Children’s Rights Co-founder Jeffrey Leving, Esq. (active fathers’ rights attorney and blogger, and who I heard quickly received a white house appointment after Obama was elected) and a former location of the organization AFCC, which is the backbone of the family law system, along with CRC.  Maybe, though, that’s just all coincidence….

Although Kids’ Turn was developed as an early intervention and prevention model, it is highly effective for families who have been divorced or separated for some time.

Therapeutic Jurisprudence, AND recovery, too.  Wide target clientele….

The goal of Kids’ Turn is to provide a safe, accessible environment in which children learn to deal with the difficult situations they face as their family reorganizes. The purposes of the workshops are to: demystify and de-stigmatize the separation/divorce process; provide children and their parents with communication and problem-solving skills to help them with the divorce/separation; provide a place for children and their parents to discuss their thoughts and feelings about their experiences.

In the spring of 1995, Kids’ Turn was featured on the ABC-TV news program, “20/20,” and also recently on CNN, generating calls worldwide from people interested in starting the program in their area. A videotape entitled “For Kids’ Sake” features interviews with participating families and goes inside the sessions to show what takes place in a workshop. Both these videos are available locally.

From the KIDSTURN “purchase curriculum” link:

A four year, longitudinal study completed in 2009 by Dr. Jeffrey Cookston, San Francisco State University affirmed that Kids’ Turn services:

• • •

  • Reduce parent conflict
  • Reduce parent alienation*
  • Reduce internalization of negative behaviors by children

Wow– * THAT phrase is sure comforting for any parent dealing with serious safety issues, such as domestic violence or child molestation, the reporting of which just about guarantees a  “parental alienation” is the diagnosis and a form of reunification therapy (or switching custody to the parent who committed the crimes, or allegedly did).

Each curriculum module consists of six comprehensive and scripted lessons which may be modified to fit the unique needs of each participant group.

Cost: Leader Manuals, $150 (six lessons) Participant Workbooks: $15 each

For details on how to purchase The Kids’ Turn Way© contact: Kids’ Turn

55 New Montgomery, Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94105 phone: 415.777.9977 fax: 415.777.1577 email: kidsturn@earthlink.net http://www.kidsturn.org

Parental Alienation Canada “LOVES” this Richard-Gardner/Warren Farrell/Warshak-oriented curriculum :

Parental Alienation Canada (<~~that’s a blogspot.com post)


New Study Validates Positive Family Impact of Kids’ Turn Services

This is where every community should be heading. Where are our Provincial and Federal Government Agencies who have millions upon millions to dole out for single gender issues but not for families. This program is family focussed, particularly on the children, and can serve as a wake up call to recalcitrant parents. I am so pleased to see this as a positive step in an otherwise negative act called divorce. The Video is a little over 6 minutes long and worth a look. The link to the Kid’s Turn website and Facebook page is below. I was made aware of a Calgary based service offering a comprehensive list of counselling Services that should be in every city and when related to DV and marriage breakdown should be part of the tax supported inititiatives currently offered by all levels of government for a single gender only.
//MJM Calgary Counselling Centre

But apart from that, I have more problem with simple conflicts of interest.  The Courts can ORDER parenting education in order to use up grants, and some judges (etc.) have sat on the boards of the recipient organizations.

This and other Nonprofit’s Information is Available Free on the Internet:

  • KIDS TURN San Diego (EIN 33-0724932)

EXEMPT FUNCTION:  “To Teach and Counsel Children and Parents Going Through Divorce And to Promote Communication and Cooperation among all Family Members.”

(garnered from two different years Form 990s….)

FOURTEEN (count’em, 14) Officers  are listed — all unpaid volunteers — to run this moderate nonprofit who lists as its 2009 Revenue, $169,969 (gross), or, about what a single high-profile Nonprofit CEO might earn…

  • (rounded  to closest $50))
  • Contributions, gifts, grants and similar amounts received — $117,827
  • Program Service Revenue, including government fees and contracts $39, 258
  • Gross sales of inventory, less returns and allowances — NEGATIVE ($5,773)
  • TOTAL REVENUE  $151, 312
  • TOTAL EXPENSES  (lines 10 thru 16 on the form) $190,236

Wow, between that and being a 501(c)3 to start with, I gather not many taxes were paid.  Starting to sound like that AFCC organization (that also is continuing to promote Kids Turn at some of its conferences….

An Art and Wine Auction was held (revenue around $50K) from which about $36 was donated, leaving the remainder, $12,884 — of which the direct expenses NOT including rent, food & beverages, and entertainment (pushing $12,000) and “Other Direct” expenses $6,876.  I am glad that KidsTurn San Diego is so concerned about Kids, including ones that through programs from which IT benefits (although all 14 directors are of course volunteers), have their child support eradicated or abated, which brings me to the Access/Visitation Connection:

How can it take that many NonProfit officers when the organization is already on the federal sub-grantee stream to start with?  And this is only ONE Kids Turn office/organization:

OFFICERS — (link to website shows many are family law attorneys or attorneys, a mediator, a psychologist, etc. or retired from that profession…)

  • Sharon Kalemkiarian (Pres)
  • James Allen (VP)
  • Constance Ahrons
  • Kathryn Ashworth
  • Sheri Liebert
  • Tracy Blethen (Treasurer)
  • Linda Papst De Leon
  • Alexander Kwoka
  • Barbara Mercer
  • Brenda Bell
  • Andrian Martinez
  • Frank Nageotte
  • Heather Milligan
  • Robert A. Simon
  • (And all the others, Directors:  Executive Directors being a Jim Davis).

Another year (go check yourself), about $32,500 was raised through “tuition” and someone (none of the directors was paid a salary of $65,000.  Again, this will help everyone get along and reduce “parental alienation”….

  • KIDS’ TURN SF (EIN# 94-3112621)
The 2008 form (evid. Tax year July through June) shows about $350,000 in expenses and $482,500 meaning, about $135K in the hole….
The Executive Director earns $78K for a 40 hour week (very modest in the  nonprofit world, though a chunk of their revenue for sure), and the President, $21,000 for a5-hour week, plus 7 more officers, volunteers I gather.  I”m putting the names out here in case anyone has an open custody case (or has had one recently) with these individuals on it…and I do not know who they are, personally…
Claire Barnes, Steven Kinney, Leslie Dawson, Jeffrey Abadie, Gregory Abel, Raymond Jones, Gerard Corbett, Stacey Welsh, Halsey Minor.
I put the EIN numbers out so we can look up the A/V funding on the TAGGS database:
Well, actually Kids’ Turn is SUB-grantees:
WE can see that these “Access Visitation” grants (database goes back to 1998) have switched from one government recipient in the state to another, over the years — Social Services, Child Support, and Currently The California Judicial Council:
Recipient ZIP Code: 95814 

FY Award Number Budget Year
of Support
Agency Award Code Action
Issue Date
This Action
1998 9701CASAVP 1 ACF 2 05-31-1998 $1,113,750.00
1998 9801CASAVP 1 ACF 1 09-01-1998 $1,113,750.00
1999 9901CASAVP 1 ACF 2 08-16-1999 $987,501.00
2003 9801CASAVP 1 ACF 7 02-24-2003 ($250,805.00)
2003 9901CASAVP 1 ACF 5 02-25-2003 ($139,812.00)
2009 9901CASAVP 1 ACF 8 09-14-2009 ($38,917.00)
Award Subtotal: $2,785,467.00

Recipient ZIP Code: 95741

FY Award Number Budget Year
of Support
Agency Award Code Action
Issue Date
This Action
2000 0001CASAVP 1 ACF 3 08-24-2000 $987,501.00
2001 0001CASAVP 1 ACF 4 10-06-2000 ($987,501.00)
Award Subtotal: $0.00

Recipient ZIP Code: 94107

FY Award Number Budget Year
of Support
Agency Award Code Action
Issue Date
This Action
2001 0010CASAVP 1 ACF 5 10-10-2000 $987,501.00
2001 0110CASAVP 1 ACF 1 08-23-2001 $987,501.00
2002 0210CASAVP 1 ACF 2 08-06-2002 $970,431.00
2003 0310CASAVP 1 ACF 1 09-11-2003 $970,431.00
2004 0410CASAVP 1 ACF 1 09-15-2004 $988,710.00
2005 0510CASAVP 1 ACF 1 09-14-2005 $988,710.00
2006 0610CASAVP 1 ACF 1 09-19-2006 $987,973.00
2007 0710CASAVP 1 ACF 1 07-20-2007 $950,190.00
2008 0810CASAVP 1 ACF 1 01-30-2008 $957,600.00
2009 0010CASAVP 1 ACF 8 09-14-2009 ($48,827.00)
2009 0110CASAVP 1 ACF 4 09-14-2009 ($26,938.00)
2009 0210CASAVP 1 ACF 6 09-14-2009 ($46,392.00)
2009 0310CASAVP 1 ACF 2 09-14-2009 ($15,092.00)
2009 0910CASAVP 1 ACF 1 12-23-2008 $942,497.00
2010 1010CASAVP 1 ACF 1 11-25-2009 $946,820.00
2011 1110CASAVP 1 ACF 1 10-08-2010 $928,087.00
Award Subtotal: $11,469,202.00
Total of all awards: $14,254,669.00
$14 million in a state budget may not seem like major impact, but the purpose of these grants is directed to the divorcing or separating populace with children, and has spinoff effects.
This 10- year report to the California Legislature on this program (1997-2007) has a copyright requiring we acknowledge who wrote it.
A partial quote here shows that these funds, for example, in a Fresno County Court, were contracted to a group, CYS, “Comprehensive Youth Services,” and this CYS identified an “Unmet Need” for more fatherhood programs, acknowledges that this is an “INDUSTRY” that the purpose of the courts (as I mentioned in a recent post) is indeed more “therapeutic” than ‘Jurisprudence.”  Relationship counseling.  Designer Families.  etc.
The mothers, of course, are not told this going in — or the fathers, all the time.  However, when the fathers are then recruited, the mothers are STILL not told ….!!!  Imagine how frustrating it must be to approach a car which you believe is run on Gas (law) and realize it either is totally electric, or runs as some do, on used vegetable oil.  I’m talking about the Family Court Venue, where judges order parents to these marketing affiliates, and (once established) they seek to reach out to people NOT referred by the courts….

Superior Court of California, County of Fresno47

As part of California’s Access to Visitation Grant Program, the Superior Court of Fresno County has contracted with Comprehensive Youth Services (CYS) since 2003 to provide supervised visitation and parent education best practice models. The program complies with industry safety and service standards to meet the following programmatic goals: (a) improve or establish family relationships between noncustodial parents and their children while ensuring the health, safety, and welfare of the minors;

(1) California is a no-fault divorce state.  Stop treating it as a crime, or an “illness” requiring therapy!

(2)  Judging by the headlines, this program goal (a) is not consistently met — people are dying around the insistence that sometimes Dads who may not WANT access to their children, get it on a silver platter from the courts…

(b) improve children’s well- being through positive contact with their noncustodial parents {notice the dishonesty in using the word “parents” — read on…} ; and (c) improve custodial and noncustodial parenting skills.

What is a “custodial or noncustodial parenting skill”?  Is this of, by, and for the people???

Through its work in the community and on the Access to Visitation Grant, CYS identified an unmet need to offer intensive services focused on increasing the parenting skills and healthy behaviors of noncustodial fathers. The agency wanted to complement the program by providing adjunct services for noncustodial parents who would benefit from them but had not been ordered by the court to use them. Without financial assistance such as that provided by the Access Grant; however, many families in impoverished Fresno County could not afford parenting education or therapeutic services.

Where is the evidence of all those poor parents knocking down the doors for more therapy?  USUALLY poor parents want things like housing, transportation, health care, food, clothing and ACADEMIC education for their children… It IS possible to go through life (or used to be, at any rate) without hiring a therapist to cope with the hardships.

Therefore, a critical component of the project’s success would be to provide financial assistance to noncustodial parents participating in the program.

As a result, in 2007 CYS leveraged the success of the Access Grant to obtain grant funding from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families to establish the DADS Program. The program is designed to promote responsible fatherhood, improve the relationships of fathers with their children, and assist fathers in overcoming barriers that may {{that MAY!}} keep them from being effective and nurturing parents.

The program targets families with children and youth who have been exposed to child abuse, neglect, or domestic violence or who are at risk for attachment disorders.

Please note the language change from any INDIVIDUAL being held accountable for PERPETRATING domestic violence or child abuse (crimes) to “FAMILIES with children and youth who have been “exposed to…”    …  If this were a flasher, someone would’ve exposed himself.  Also, with domestic violence, it can be both parents, but often is one primary agressor.  This is gender coverup on the issue.  No wonder this is not publicized in the Family Law Self-Help facilities where BOTH men and women, fathers and mothers, come for assistance in filing when they don’t have an attorney representing them.

As in the Access to Visitation Program, one of the unique services offered by the DADS Program is therapeutic supervised visitation. This service offers a structured mental health therapy component run by a licensed clinician who uses instruction, modeling, and counseling to repair and strengthen the parent-child relationship. The DADS Program is an example of how funding and support of the Access to Visitation Grant has led to increased services that support relationships between parents and children.

The paragraphing (and comments) are mine, and the text from the above link, published March 2008 by California Judicial Council / Administrative Office of the Courts / Center for Families, Children & the Courts (CFCC).

SAN DIEGO COUNTY: The San Diego Kids’ Turn Program is a single-county program with multisite services seeking the continuation of parent education for families in San Diego County. The pro- gram aims to provide, at low cost on a sliding scale, prevention and interven- tion workshops to improve the commu- nication skills of both parents, reduce parental conflict, prevent harm to chil- dren, and reduce demands on the family court system.

And in San Francisco:

SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY: The Family Cohesion Collaborative Program of the Superior Court of San Francisco is part of a multisite comprehensive partnership (San Francisco and Alameda Counties), that will provide supervised visitation and exchange services for families in San Francisco and Alameda Counties through the Rally Visitation Program of the Saint Francis Memorial Hospital. The overall goals of the program are to provide high quality, affordable supervised visitation and monitored exchange services and to enhance parent education as a means of improving the well-being of children involved in court-ordered parent visitation arrangements.

And so on.  I ASKED for these services and was curtly told that there was “no money in the family” for it.  Therefore, we went on for another year of haraassment, and no restraining order, job losses, and finally on an UNsupervised visitation, and overnight, and despite my warnings and protests to several authorities that this was imminent (based on previous threats! and multiplce accumulating indicators), this finally happened.  The courts “coulda cared”** – more business for more professionals, including a custody evaluator (litigant paid for) and another children’s attorney (public-paid).

The one thing they would NOT help me with was simple enforcement or consequences for violations (ongoing) of existing court orders.  That wasn’t the purpose.  The purpose was directing business to THERAPEUTIC services provided by organizations that sometimes have personnel both as judges and attorneys AND on the nonprofits getting the services.

**”coulda cared” in case the sarcasm doesn’t translate here (or cross-culturally) means, “couldn’t have cared less”  They made it clear they just did not care.


[Missing images — no link, so DNR which ones — blank space removed]

Again, it goes like this:


The Judicial Council is charged with administering and distributing California’s share of the federal Child Access and Visitation Grant funds from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Child Support Enforcement. These grants, established under section 391 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (Pub.L. 104–193, 110 Stat. 2258)—title III, section 469B of the Social Security Act—enable states to establish and administer programs that support and facilitate noncustodial parents’ access to and visitation with their children.

The congressional goal of the Child Access and Visitation Grant Program is to “remove barriers and increase opportunities for biological parents who are not living in the same household as their children to become more involved in their children lives.” Under the federal statute, Child Access and Visitation Grant funds may be used to support and facilitate noncustodial parents’ access to and visitation [with] their children by means of activities including mediation (both voluntary and mandatory), counseling, education, development of parenting plans, visitation enforcement (including monitoring, supervision and neutral drop-off and pick-up), and development of guidelines for visitation and alternative custody arrangements.

The use of the funds in California, however, is limited by state statute to three types of programs:

  • Supervised visitation and exchange services;

  • Education about protecting children during family disruption; and

  • Group counseling services for parents and children.

The GRANT APPLICATION PROCESS wants ONE lead court and other sub-contracting courts.  The CONTRACT is only with the lead court:

Under state funding [From the JUDICIAL COUNCIL….], California Access to Visitation Grants are awarded to the family law division of the superior courts through a request-for-proposals (RFP) grant application process. Applicants are strongly encouraged to involve multiple courts and/or multiple agencies in their proposed programs with one court designated as the lead or administering court. While superior courts may contract with local community-based justice partners (i.e., subcontractor agencies) to provide the direct services on behalf of the court, AOC contract agreements are made only with the designated superior court. Grant recipient courts subsequently enter into a contract agreement or Memorandum of Understanding with their designated local subcontractor.

(All emphases added in the quotes above)
You can imagine how well the evaluation goes, with those many layers of accountability.  The local subcontractor simply has a MOU (Memo of Understanding)….
In 2006, per the HHS/OCSE site, Kids Turn FRESNO was a recipient, along with the CYS mentioned above.  In various years, it also gets grants directly from various foundations:  Here’s a $20K from the San Diego Foundation in 2010:

Kids’ Turn San Diego, Expansion of Kids’ Turn Workshops into Carlsbad      $20,000

Kids’ Turn San Diego plans to bring no less than four, 4-week psycho-educational workshops into Carlsbad, serving 100-120 families who are divorcing or fighting over custody of their children. The workshops will show families how their conflict is negatively impacting their children and teach them to communicate more effectively, manage their anger, focus on their children and create a healthy two household environment for all involved. Furthermore, Kids’ Turn San Diego will help children make a successful adjustment to challenging family changes.

And from the Jewish Community Foundation of San Diego {search for it — simple listing…)

The Foundation is the largest grant maker in San Diego County. In 2009-10, the Foundation awarded and facilitated $67 million in 4,900 grants to 1,200 Jewish and general organizations in San Diego, Israel and around the world.

Partial list of 2010 grant recipients:”

And $5,000 from the California Bar Foundation in 2008-2009 year:

Kids’ Turn San Diego Workshops for Court-Ordered Families Engaged in High-Conflict (sic)  Divorces (San Diego County)

No conflict of interest, “for sure,” there, either…

A Christian group called the Fieldstone Foundation, in 2010 The Kids’ Turn San Diego part of this comes under “Humanitarian,” at least, of these categories:

We are pleased to share our 2010 grant recipients with you. We have enclosed a list of organizations under each of the general granting categories, please scroll down or simply click on the category of your choice:


[Large “Kids Turn Logo” now broken link/blank space removed]
It is assumed that parents divorcing don’t know what’s up with their kids….

Each year in San Diego County, more than 25,000 children are involved in their parents’ legal actions. Parents too often become focused on their conflict with the other parent, ignoring or minimizing the needs of their children. Most adults have no idea how children suffer when parents become adversaries. If they are drawn into the process, the children become entangled in loyalty conflicts posing a serious mental health risk. The harmful effects of these childhood experiences persist well into adulthood.

The suffering of these children can be greatly minimized or avoided altogether when  parents learn new coping skills that facilitate a cooperative co-parenting relationship.

How does one co-parent with a spouse who has previously assaulted you, in frint of the children, threatened to kill you and/or himself (in front of the children, often enough), who sabotaged work during marriage and AFTER marriage?  I would have a few words to say to any professionals that want to criticize my “co-parenting” skills before the children were gone, of for attempting to assert that the standard we go by (not knowing of this group or the therapeutic jurisprudence forces in the courts yet) was the Court Orders — and not my ex’s orders.  Or that it would be good for the father to seek work….even though he had lost an external doormat and punching bag to “work out” is personal issues on ….
[Photo of Dad and child…):
This group (San Diego, alone) has VERY high foundational support, according to their page, AND federal funding (or part of the A/V grants) (I do not have current figures).  In addition, they are MARKETING curricula, one year earned $32K in tuition, and charging Group Leaders to be trained to lead groups, for which they then get $100/session.  EACH parent pays $250 for four sessions…

So where is all that money going?  and to whom?

AFCC seems to be often raising money for this particular group, as well….

Another person, an acquaitance, asks what is a Superior Court Judge doing on the Executive Board of this group:


Kids’Turn is a San Francisco RFI funded CRC/AFCC affiliated nonprofit which provides the court’s court ordered parenting classes and counseling services.  Kids’Turn was founded by SF family court officers, and it is directly affiliated with the CRC AND AFCC.

The SF Superior Court has a lien on Kids’Turn, yet Judge Patrick Mahoney is on the executive board.  In fact, all the SF judicial officials in the SF family court have been on the board at one time or another, and they all help with the fundraising efforts. How can this be? Liens compel payment of debts. Where is this money going???

Kids Turn is highly affiliated with the Family Law Profession 
and people pushing mediation, counseling, & "collaboration" to resolve family "conflict." 
For Example:  Jennifer Jackson (I don't know her, particularly).  Along with other credits, and associations, this family law specialist (certified by the state bar) and Fellow of  American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers:

KIDS’ TURN: Program for Children of Separating Families Founder: 1988 President of the Board: 1988-1990 Executive Board: 1998-1996; 1999-2005

Webmaster: through 2003

(1998-1996 being a reverse date, but it was around 1996 I believe that the Federal A/V grants were starting, of which Kids’ Turn has been a recipient).



Judge Pro Tem 1990-present

Director, Friend in Court: 1990s

If this nonprofit has financial dealings with the court, as an entity, this would seem to be a conflict of interest.
Here’s another SF Law Firm, “Kaye-Moser-Hierbaum” and this is “Moser”s blurb from laywers.com: Among several stellar qualifications, see if you can pick these out.  The partners are all women (one from Harvard) and two also AFCC presenters, “Coaching Clients through Mediation.”
Barbara W. Moser (Partner) born New York, N.Y., 1958; admitted to bar, 1990, California. Education: University of California at Berkeley (B.A., with distinction, 1980); California State University (M.S.W., 1982); University of San Francisco (J.D., magna cum laude, 1990). Phi Beta Kappa, Lifetime Member. Recipient: University of San Francisco School of Law 2006 Alumni Fellow Award. Contributing Editor: “Approaching a Marital Dissolution.” Consultant: Action Guide, “Planning and Conducting Family Law Discovery,” published by the California Continuing Education of the Bar. Former Consultant, Family Law Subcommittee of the CEB Joint Advisory Committee. Lecturer, CEB: “How to Handle a Marital Dissolution” and “Estate Planning in the Context of Divorce.” Presenter: Breckenridge, Colorado, Association of Family and Conciliation Courts: “Coaching Clients Through Mediation.” Lecturer: Contra Costa County Bar Association: “Crossover Issues in Family Law and Estate Planning.” Lecturer, Marin Estate Planning Council: “Crossover Issues in Estate Planning and Family Law.” Lecturer, Queen’s Bench: “How to Launch a Successful Independent Law Practice.” Judge ProTem, Family Law Bench Bar Program, Marin County Superior Court. Settlement Judge Pro Tem, San Francisco Superior Court.
Former Secretary, Board of Directors, Kids’ TurnMember: Bar Association of San Francisco (Member, Family Law Section); State Bar of California (Member, Family Law Section); National Association of Women Business Owners; Association of Family and Conciliation Courts; National Association of Female Executives.
Languages: American Sign. Practice Areas: Family Law; Domestic Relations; Divorce; Premarital Agreements; Cohabitation Agreements; Postnuptial Agreements; Separation Agreements; Spousal Support; Child Support; Child Custody; Visitation Rights; Stock Option Analysis; Palimony; Paternity.Email: Barbara W. Moser
It seems almost taken for granted that part of one’s associations as a family attorney will include a turn with Kids’ Turn, including some Northern California Super Lawyers, as Ms. Moser certainly is, and even “Best Lawyer of the Year,” per the firm’s site:  The positions include judgeships and domestic violence committees.  One partner served:
on the Committee to Revise the Local Rules for the San Francisco County Superior Court Unified Family Court.”
The words “high-conflict” are frequent in the personnel’s description here…
Here’s yet another attorney with ties to Kids’ Turn:
Andrea Leigh Palash San Francisco Start
AAML Previous Positions: President, Northern California Chapter, 1990-91, Co-Chair Northern California Annual Symposium. Member: State Bar of California; San Francisco Bar Association. Previous Positions: State Bar of California: Member, Family Law Section Executive Comm., 1981-87; Law Practice Management Section Executive Comm., 1988-92, Committee on Sexual Orientation Discrimination, 1994-97; San Francisco Bar Assn: Member, Family Law Section, Co-Chair, Comm. on Law Office Economics, 1989-91, Board of Directors, 1993-95. Certified Specialist, Family Law, SBC. Co-Founder, Rally Family Visitation Project, a supervised visitation and exchange program; Board Member, Kids’ Turn, an educational program for children of divorce, 1982-2000. Member, St. Francis Memorial Hospital, Community Advisory Committee. CLE Participation: Lecturing and writing on numerous and various family law topics
From 1982-2000, then if practicing family law, this might be a conflict of interest???
It is just part of the landscape, then?  Because we see, above, that “parental alienation” is a crime (or close to it), in Kids’ Turn language.

This man, Steve Kinney, is not an attorney or judge, but has worked with a former  Presiding Judge of Juvenile Court (in SF) — Donna Hitchens — and Kids’ Turn to design non-violent program material.  Oh yeah, incidentally, he was also President of Kids’ Turn.  Seems like a decent guy, and activities, but here it is:Steve KinneyDirector, Pacific West Region


Steven Kinney is currently the Director of the National Consortium for Academics and Sports-Pacific West Region, Inc. (NCAS). The NCAS was born out of the Center for the Study of Sport in Society at Northeastern University. The NCAS works to create a better society by focusing on educational attainment and using the power and appeal of sport to positively affect social change…

Mr. Kinney has worked with Kids’ Turn and Judge Donna Hitchens, the former presiding Juvenile Court Judge in the City of San Francisco to design, develop, and implement the Nonviolent Family {{FAMILY, not personal}} Skills Program for at-risk youth in San Francisco.

Steven Kinney earned his B.A. and M.A. degrees in English Literature from Notre Dame de Namur University. In his personal life, Mr. Kinney is active in numerous charities and community organizations including the Northern California chapter of the National Football League Alumni Association, where he serves as Secretary of the Executive Committee, and the 100 Black Men of America-Silicon Valley Chapter. Mr. Kinney serves as the President of the Board of Directors for Kid’s Turn an organization that provides workshops and other transitional tools for children and their divorcing parents.



I mentioned, above, how KIDS’ TURN is international.  Sitting on the board of the group above is Claire Barnes, who we know from (as I recall), San Francisco Kids’ Turn.  This includes many sociologists, and psychologists, etc., as we might expect from any such group.  Here she is:

Claire Barnes (USA) has been the Executive Director of Kids’ Turn, San Francisco, for the past seven years. That organisation helps children made vulnerable by family breakdown.

She is also Chair of the Volunteer Council of the San Francisco Symphony. Claire and husband Alan have participated in ICCFR conferences for some years and she joined the Board in 2005, taking on the position of Treasurer in June 2008.

Claire Barnes (Treasurer)


While I’m at it, let me speculate on another individual invited to speak (above) in Hawaii (see top of my post), Claire Missen:

Claire Missen (Vice- Chair)

Claire Missen (Ireland) has worked as a marriage counsellor for more than twenty two years, initially with the Marriage and Relationship Counselling Service, Dublin, and latterly in private practice and as a supervisor. Claire was first involved with ICCFR during its Stockholm conference (2001), subsequently joined the Board and was invited to serve as Vice-Chair in 2006.

I was beginning to wonder what the “Ireland Connection” was in Kids’ Turn, and elsewhere — it’s been popping up.  Now, notice who (besides AFCC) this august group gives thanks to, at least from the US component:

Home > Introduction to ICCFR/CIRCF > History > List of organisations

The ONLY contribution from the USA (as opposed to significant international groups from other countries) reads:  ”

  Association of Family and Conciliation Courts
Schapiro Thorn Inc

Which just might be explained in financial terms, THUS:

Suzie Thorn

Suzie S Thorn (USA) is a prominent matrimonial lawyer in San Francisco. She is President  of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers Foundation, of the Suzie S Thorn Family Foundation, and of Schapiro-Thorn Inc.

(IN other words, we can presume she’s probably a wealthy woman — which of course helps with the “Prominence” in many circles.  Wealth and being the heads of foundations, and corporations (AND being a matrimonial lawyer) are  a “great” standpoint from which to understand court programs targeted at low-income noncustodial fathers, which many of the fatherhood, and certainly the ones benefitting Kids’ Turn, are).  Also, the (1994ff) changes relating to VAWA, women’s rights, and protections from violence which were not previously so available….

Her initial contact with ICCFR resulted from liaison between the Commission and Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) in 1993. She became a Board member in 1995. She was the innovative founder of the ICCFR Trust of which she is now a trustee.

SO, from this position of founder of the ICCFR Trust, the ICCFR thanks — from the United States– AFCC and Thorn-Schapiro, Inc.  That seems appropriate.

SOMETIMES we forget how proper positioning in society allows one to plan, internationally, others’ welfare and what conditions of life should be available during and after divorce. …1993 is even before the National Fatherhood Initiative was founded (though obviously not MUCH before).

The TRUST partners with the Commissions (helps put on conferences?) and is registered as a charity in England:
The ICCFR Trust – sister body to the International Commission on Couple and Family Relations – became a registered charity in England in July 2003. Collaboration between the Commission and the Trust offers access to a full range of working relationships with other organisations and guarantees public accountability for the use of funds given to the Trust for its use.
The Objects of the Trustare: 

  1. To advance the education of the public in the social sciences and in particular in matters concerning family and interpersonal relationships. And
  2. To achieve such other objects which are charitable within the laws of England and Wales as may be determined by the Trustees.(“the Objects”)

The Trustees must use the income and may use the capital of the trust in promoting the Objects.

Registered Charity No. 1098678


I keep trying to alert my friends — “law” is out and “Sociology” has taken its place.  Many of the people/entitites selling this to the public are, naturally, themselves employed by the family law courts, are sociologists, psychologists, family relationship specialists, and/or people who sit atop foundations which can start movements like this, while others wonder where their job history went…

This is a HARD sell for women with children hoping to gain protection under the US laws against (certain crimes), still….  We still wish that the Bill of Rights meant us, too…. and thinking that someone else not female CARES.


{The San Francisco Superior Court has 52 judges and 12 commissioners. The Court currently has one judicial vacancy and one commissioner vacancy.}}


New Assignments Take Effect January 11

SAN FRANCISCO — Presiding Judge James J. McBride today announced the new San Francisco Superior Court judicial assignments for 2010.

Judge McBride has made the following changes to judicial assignments:  I’M PICKING OUT ONES RELATING TO FAMILY OR DEPENDENCY….


. . .Lillian K. Sing — Family Law

Donna Hitchens — Dependency (note, above, working on Kids’ Turn curriculum….)

Judge Hitchens founded the Family Law Self-Help Center, and received “Access to Justice” award for this and other activities.  Please note:

Judge Hitchens has been instrumental in creating three projects that have given a voice to those in the juvenile courts who traditionally may have felt disenfranchised by the system.

The first of these programs is the Dependency Mediation Program, where parents who have been involved in dependency proceedings are trained to act as mediators. Second, Judge Hitchens was instrumental in securing federal grants that helped San Francisco County be selected as a demonstration site for the SafeStart Initiative and the Greenbook Project.

{{Greenbook Project — another topic — is where Domestic Violence and Fatherhood initiatives met, and multiple HHS players as well, to — well, as I said — another topic.  I am less impressed than I should be about the process.  Womens till losing their kids to batterers in the family law venue…}}

Finally, she created the Multi-Agency Juvenile Justice Improvement Committee (MAJJIC), whose goal is to overcome system barriers and coordinate services for youth.

Judge Hitchens was elected to San Francisco Superior Court in 1990.  In 1997, she helped to consolidate the county’s juvenile and family courts and became presiding judge of the Unified Family Court.

KIDS TURN started around 1987 — when was her involvement?


Ellen Chaitin — Family Law/Juvenile/ Dependency

{{Link describes The Judge in 2001 visiting a residential hotel; another one shows she has witnessed gunfire resulting in a slaying,

Patrick J. Mahoney, Supervising Judge/Unified Family Court



Patrick Mahoney — Trials

Julie Tang — Delinquency

(Now, I am getting more curious about the SF Courts.  t):

Is Presiding Judge Katherine Feinstein the daughter of the famous Senator?  etc.


Judge Lillian K, Sing**
400 McAllister – Department 210
Court Clerk (415) 551-3709

**2004 candidacy for County Supervisor, besides showing a VERY active resume, lists Occupation as “Mediator, Advanced Dispute Resolutions” Co-Chair, Mediation Advisory Committee and Superior Court ADR Committee.”and 22 years on the bench. plus undergraduate degree, ”

  • M.S.W., Social Work, Columbia University, New York.
  • B.S., Psychology, Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA.

Judge Monica F. Wiley/Commissioner Marjorie Slabach**
400 McAllister – Department 403
Court Clerk (415) 551-3741

** has been on Kids’ Turn Board, around 2004-2005, per one of their “Gazettes” (publications).

Judge Monica F. Wiley is younger (by about a generation) and the youngest of the appointees, but experienced:

Wiley, 39, of Oakland, has served as a senior associate for Carlson Calladine and Peterson since 2007. Previously, she served as a deputy city attorney for the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office from 1996 to 2007. She also worked as a legal research attorney for the San Francisco County Superior Court in 1996. Wiley earned a Juris Doctorate degree from the Howard University School of Law and a Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of California, Berkeley. She fills the vacancy created by the elevation of Judge Robert Dondero to the District Court of Appeal. Wiley is a Democrat.


Judge Ronald E. Albers/Commissioner Marjorie Slabach
400 McAllister – Department 404
Court Clerk (415) 551-3744

(see link);

In 2009, Ron Albers, 60, was first openly gay judge appointed by a Republican Governor. The article is a good read — very activist Judge. I am wondering how this will intersect with the pro-father, pro-family agenda running through the courts as well…

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s appointment of Ronald E. Albers to a judgeship on the San Francisco County Superior Court last week is believed to be the first time the Republican governor has selected an openly gay person for a judge seat.

Albers, 60, of San Francisco, has served as a commissioner for the Superior Court since 2002. He will earn $178,789 in his new post, to which he was sworn into Monday, June 15. The ceremony coincided with his wedding anniversary; he is married to Colin Alexander, his partner of 34 years.

ANOTHER 8000 word post — I am researching (searching, at least!) and just blogging my notes.

To get another concept of the extent of this organization — browse some of their “gazettes.”  I was shocked when I read a few.  Heres’ a link to a 2008 one, celebrating the 20th year anniversary.  Read EVERY page (scroll down) and California litigants may want to read the fine print listing the various board member s– maybe one of your judges was on there.

(I just looked — and the one that wiped out the child support arrears after custody-switch, to all intents and purposes — was on the board THIS year.  To understsand the (Narcissistic) SCOPE of the intended project — basically ALL divoricing or separating couples with children in the civilized (?) world that — and the “target” clientele appears to be both parents and children to attend (Pay for) these workshops, or get scholarships to attend them.  Again, HALF are court-ordered, and Parental Alienation is a key theme.  So we can expect a lot more courts ordering that parents get “edummicated” on how to NOT have conflict with their ex, child molestation, domestic violence notwithstanding….

2008 Kids’ Turn Gazette

(That link is to a pdf from their website, not my blog, DNK if still current. /LGH Sept. 29, 2019)

It seems to be training for judges, attorneys and lawyers as well here’s a list of people thanked for their contributions:

Kids’ Turn recognizes the following volunteer Board members who have offered their time, energy and resources to our mission since the founding in 1988. Any errors or omissions are strictly unintentional.

Jeff Abadie Jeanne Ames Comm. Josanna Berkow Nordin Blacker, Esq. Janet Bollier Katie Budge Torrance Bynum Dianne Chan Golton Kathy Clausen Susan Coats, Esq. Joe Crawford, Esq. Tom Cvikota Garrett Daily Leslie Dawson

Ann Diamond Robin Donoghoe, Esq. Geoff Dugan The Hon. Roderic Duncan

(ret.) Ellen Efros Chris Emley Greg Engel, Esq. Pam Engel Lionel Engelman Sandra Finney Myrna Frankel Tom Friesch Christina Gabriel,

Joan Gann Frank Glassner Gil Gugielmi The Hon. Ina Gyemant Ana Horta The Hon. Isabella Horton Grant (ret.) Dorothy Huntington (dec.) Jennifer Jackson, Esq. The Hon. Maria Elena James Raymond Jones, Ph.D. Nancy Kahn Maureen Kammer Tricia Kennedy Svetlana Kim Nikki King Comm. Susan King (ret.) Steven Kinney Lou Kohler The Hon. Newton Lam Margo Leahy Esther Lerner, Esq. Linda Levi Carole Levine Brenda MacLean John Mangini Bunny Martin Kim Martinez John McWeeny Lynn Mieger, DDS Halsey Minor

Lida Morgenstein Barbara Moser, Esq. Dvora Parker Pam Pierson, Esq. Susan Romer

Andy Ross, Esq. Linda Schwarz J. Gary Shansby John Sikorski, MD

Comm. Marge Slabach Dick Starratt Millicent Susens Charles ‘Kip’ Thieriot Suzie S. Thorn, Esq. Valerie Toler Cia Townsend Nancy Unobskey Ann Van Balen Bobbi Welling Stacey Welsh Donna Wickham Furth, Esq. Anthony Zanze (dec.) Steve Zemmelman

(Some of these are also board members).  That’s quite an assemblage of attorneys and judges, wouldn’t you say?  )

Representative data reflects that 40% of Kids’ Turn families’ annual income is less than $30,000, and 73% is less than $50,000. Due in part to diminished economic circumstances caused by the separation or divorce, the average family served by Kids’ Turn can only afford to pay a fraction of a Program that costs $400 to offer.

I don’t suppose it might occur to any of the above that the family court system ITSELF contributes to that poverty, and work loss — because the cases last up to 10 and 15 eyars at a time under this wealth-transfer system.  ONE solution might be to SKIP the “Kids’ Turn” requirement and the thousand-dollar custody evaluations and instead run classes on how to form profitable nonprofits, so at least they might (like THESE people) keep more of their earned income….

2008 AFCC Conference — KIds Turn Presenters: in context of Domestic Violence!



Albuquerque, New Mexico ($122/night)

1. ParentEducation as Part of a Thriving Practice

Jurisdictions vary in their requirements for co-parenting education and in how they make classes available. Some districts fund their own services, but others rely on local professionals to develop effective programs. This workshop will illustrate how a creative individual trained first in psy-chotherapy can build a gratifying practice by adding divorce education as one specialty service. Even when a court selects or certifies multiple providers, a diligent professional can achieve a successful practice by offering parent education as well as psychotherapy, evaluation, mediation and other services.

Shirley Thomas, Ph.D., Longmont, CO

2. From Lecture to Life

Empowerment, self-awareness, resilience, optimism and hope are not words usually associated with Divorce Education. Kids’ Turn now teaches life skills that participants can take with them into their reorganized families and lives. Kids’Turn, together with consultants 6 Seconds Emotional Intelligence International Trainers, have created a curriculum that focuses on families undergoing reorganization, for a better future. From didactic to interactive teaching, they have added humor based on current educational research on how participants learn and retain information.

Steve Kinney, M.A., President, Kids’ Turn,San Jose, CA

Elyse Jacobs, MFA, Program Director, Kids’ Turn, San Francisco, CA

DO YOU “GET IT” YET?  AFCC-CRC-CFCC-AAML-KIDS’ TURN-FAMILY LAW PRACTICE AND ENDLESS EDUCATION.  These people are never going to stop?  It is assumed that parents separatng, with children, cannot simply LEARN on their own how to do this, but no — the world — and I DO mean “the world” — regardless how broke any country or state is, or how bad the schools or how high the debt load — the WORLD really “needs”  all this — more than food, housing, transportation, vaccinations, cures for cancer, or any of that.

The truth of the matter is, these people need a livelihood, and decades upon decades ago, a VERY few people came up with the idea, in California, of starting the Family Law Codes…and a Judges Slush Fund.  The slush pockets were in the training qualifications for mediators to start with! (read my blog!).

JUST AN IDEA . . . .

Feedback solicited — if some aspect of this post struck you, please comment!

Any sitting judge who is simultaneously on (or previously has been on?) the board of this — or any other organization receiving court-ordered services and that’s quite a few of them — and orders YOU or YOUR KIDS into this program — has a conflict of interest.

When the family law case begins — demand the conflict of interest form.

Meanwhile, let’s find out why Kids’ Turn is has a lien on the SF Courts, or vice versa.  This is ridiculous, even as ridiculous as this long (though ya gotta admit, informative — right?) post!

10 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. ERRATA:

    In reciting some of the SF Kids’ Turn data (from its 990), it’s obvious some + and – terms are missing from this:

    “KIDS’ TURN SF (EIN# 94-3112621)
    The 2008 form (evid. Tax year July through June) shows about $350,000 in expenses and $482,500 meaning, about $135K in the hole….”

    Always best to look at source materials yourself (which, again, is free) — but it should read, “about $350,000 in REVENUES, $482,500 in EXPENSES meaning, about $135K in the hole…”

    For a group specializing in teaching parents and children how not to be alienated, or alienate, I think that the more appropriate lesson might be in balancing income to expense ratio to keep a profitable organization going. Granted, being in “grants” means spend more and have less left over (the reverse mentality/motive for being a FOR-Profit, which means reduce expenses and increase revenues) (although anyone can be tempted to pad expenses and fail to report income — that is a matter of integrity, honesty, and the IRS…. groups proclaiming in essence, they wish to reform the world, and teach it a lesson, ought to have integrity.. or be forced to show they do…)

    Going on:

    The Executive Director earns $78K for a 40 hour week (very modest in the nonprofit world, though a chunk of their revenue for sure), and the President, $21,000 for a5-hour week, plus 7 more officers, volunteers I gather. I”m putting the names out here in case anyone has an open custody case (or has had one recently) with these individuals on it…and I do not know who they are, personally…

    Claire Barnes, Steven Kinney, Leslie Dawson, Jeffrey Abadie, Gregory Abel, Raymond Jones, Gerard Corbett, Stacey Welsh, Halsey Minor.”

    I have a little question, in general. If a California Judge (salary around $178K, let’s say roughly) ALSO sits on the Exec. Board of a nonprofit and is paid for this (theory here, not necessarily case in point) and is paid $78 for that — multiply it by how many boards they sit on — and has, say other investments, often likely to be also properties that have rents, i.e., they might also be landlords — how realistically can any such judge, or Exec. Dir. identify with the poor slobs who can barely pay rent (and litigate in family law courts)??

    What a system, eh?

    Anyhow, we are also noticed several California Counties and a few other states (Ohio, Illinois, and Oregon) where Kids’ Turn has licensing affiliates. Check your organization Boards of Directors to court appointees in open cases ratio there, also.

    Apologies for the formatting of this post, I am working to start a better one, but no apologies for slapping up this information — consider it a SIGNPOST situation. I am the signpost. What you do with the alerts is your business.


    March 2, 2011 at 12:17 pm

  2. If we are going to keep requiring our tax money be spent on this group of judges, we should also require them to preface their curriculum on something that is real and defined.

    The fact of the matter is that perhaps the reason Parental Alienation Syndrome “symptoms” have dissipated after a visit to Kids’turn is because:

    (a) PAS is not real, it just masks real problems, which is why the National Association of District Attorneys deemed it a real danger to our kids; and

    (b) Custody switched with inside info? Is that possible?

    Frankly, I have never seen anything like this. I would like to know WHY the FTC and the Commission on Judicial Performance allows this. It is disgusting that Judge Mahoney and Commissioner Slabach would be such avid proponents of a pro-pedophile manufactured condition like PAS.

    All PAS does is refocus the attention on dad and off the kids. It allows any molester to get custody.

    The fact is that one look at their tax returns demonstrates we do NOT know where their money is going. Does the Judicial COuncil? really, it seems that if we are going to forego programs which provide families with things like food and shelter, we should require KT to be responsible for their government funds too.

    How many times have women appeared in Commissioner Slabach’s court and had to account for every nickel of their paycheck???

    I think you know

    April 16, 2011 at 9:04 pm

    • (URL — another site to check out, obviously, this is me, blog-owner, replying…)

      Will reply to this separately — my “clipboard” is full of a quote for first post in weeks, it seems.

      Sounds like you have particular Judges in our sights, however I do know that some women at Poormagazine.com told horror stories about Slabach, and as far as I cam concerned, most family law courts (or “domestic relations” courts are nightmares posing as places of justice.

      It took me a while to understand, It really IS about the taxes, and if I had another generation (say, 20 yrs) extra, I’d address how FEMINISTS can actually take some stand against taxation without representation, and should. And we may not have to join a Tea Party, but there is indeed some “product” that needs to be tossed into the harbors — which pretend to be safe harbors — and those who wish to regain freedom, or what little of it is left — must learn not to consume such pre-processed pureed doctrine as this digital age (combined with “Technical Assistance” grants to set up websites, etc.) is dishing out.

      Psychological warfare IS warfare, and it has been waged against the public, in part through the groups that seem to operate just like little baby AFCC’s and CRC’s — don’t pay taxes, don’t account for expenditures, and produce not tangible results except income lass for you, and income gain for them.

      (the kids are also just “product” which magnetically draws funding — also being moved through the system.

      Well, more on that later….


      April 19, 2011 at 5:58 pm

  3. I attended Kid’s turn, and it was very pricy, the class was very disorganized, and the quality of the curriculum was not as I expected, I took other classes with Family Path (Positive parenting) and Parallel Parenting, High Conflict Diversion Program with Life-Point (Carter-Kelly Consulting); and I learn much more there.


    June 5, 2011 at 7:12 pm

    • Were you court-ordered to attend? was it in southern or northern CA (there are two nonprofits at least one in SF the other in S.D.)

      I am curious (need not say on-line) if court-ordered, who signed the order. Because if this judge was (or formerly was) also on the KT Board — and many have been — then that’s a conflict of interest.

      Thanks for the information, RSVP if you can, pls.


      June 8, 2011 at 12:27 pm

  4. […] Visit Page:  familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2011/02/27/lets-get-honest-about-kids-turn-and-judges-profit/ […]

    • Thank you for posting this article. I found it very interesting. I know so many families that are going through struggles especially with divorce. My uncle is actually is one of the divorce lawyers in calgary He says that it just keeps growing and growing. For him that is okay because it gives him work but it is pretty sad how many people are getting divorced. What do you feel the main reason is of why this is happening?


      October 29, 2012 at 10:32 am

      • Hey Jordan —

        I’m not sure why you want my opinion on why more people are getting divorced, and it’s not my place to make comments about your uncle’s practice. I know what I got divorced — my ex had serious issues he wouldn’t get help for, one of which resulted in my teeth being knocked loose (a front tooth later fell out) and I was trying to raise children while dealing with weapons, job sabotage, and comments about he was going to kill me, which apparently was true. He was also religious. It just took me a while to figure out how to — and trust me, in such situations, it’s not easy.

        Your uncle has work and income to comfort him in his sadness that people are getting divorced. However, if divorce usually impoverishes one or both sides of the family, the divorce industry in my opinion makes it worse, needlessly. See blog.

        Anyhow, thanks for the intro to the family (literally in your case, if it’s your uncle) law firm. I see Mr. Barauskas is a parent coordinator (it should be clear from this blog how i feel about this, being a mother), and there’s a collaborative law link, etc., promotion of mediation, alternate dispute resolution, typical family law (AFCC model) stuff.

        While AFCC is an international association, the United States has its own thing going on with the HHS funding and the welfare system. We are (at least on paper) a different type of government than Canada, and I don’t think it appropriate that trade associations, such as the ones most family lawyers are influenced by (if not members in) to take it upon themselves, given how much influence they already hold over people in distress – to try to standardize internationally how very serious matters, which abuse of women is, are managed.

        By looking up Mr. Barkauskas (after a quick glance at all attorneys profiles) I got to read a pretty darned humorous account of a law enforcement couple that kept breaking off engagement, then re-instating it (with rings) and eventually marrying — but he took off with the engagement ring while she was in the shower, resulting in a chase, a court case, and a news article. It looks like she had (probably a minor) a daughter in the home, and they were both multiple-marriers. This was almost funny, thank you for the comic relief.

        But more than that, I see that the same attorney in your uncle’s firm (whether that’s him or not) functioning as a parent coordinator is also president (being also a man and a family law attorney) of a nonprofit “Peer Support Services for Abused Women” [PSSAW] which also gets support from the FCSS

        It is associated or collaborating with a Coalition against Domestic Violence
        “Who we collaborate with:
        “We work with a variety of agencies providing direct services to women to deliver our programs and services to their client populations. We sit on the representative council of the Calgary Coalition of Family Violence, a group that promotes cultural competence. We are also involved in a variety of other community development projects.”

        And selling (someone is paying for it, if not the women themselves) a number of programs around the theme of “Circles”). I also notice that with the Pie Chart listing it has a high emphasis on LGBT type (same-sex) violence, which presents very different issues than the family courts do, although certainly some overlap. A lot of violence against women starts, if they’ve married inappropriately, when they’re pregnant.

        Finding our Voices
        Moving On with Mentors
        Growing Circles

        I then found a review of Growth Circles with Women (listing PSSAW) at Univ. of Calgary:


        “The current report evaluates the peer support model by looking at a number of Peer Support Services for Abused Women’s programs including Growth Circles, FindingOur Voices and Moving on with Mentors. Peer Support Services for Abused Women(PSSAW) opened in 1988 as the Calgary Society for Women Plus. Growth Circles wereoriginally conceived because of concerns that women leaving shelters often ultimatelyreturned to abusive partners. When women initially left the shelter, they were usually optimistic about their future and had housing, social assistance, and formal counselling supports in place. So what happened? When asked by shelter staff, many of the womensaid that they were isolated and lonely. When their abusive partner called and offered support, they went back”

        “The Growth Circles continue to be a mainstay of PSSAW’s programming. Fiveyears ago, the curriculum was redesigned and the Growth Circles were expanded from a10-week format to their present 15 weeks. The groups continue to provide women whohave left or are in the process of leaving an abusive partner an opportunity to share theirexperiences and receive support from other women. Trained volunteers facilitate thegroups. Some of the facilitators have also experienced abuse from a partner. Topicsaddressed in the Growth Circles include the dynamics of violence, anger, parenting andfamily of origin.Self-esteem workshops called Finding Our Voices were developed several yearsago by a psychologist who volunteered to facilitate the workshops. Due to theirpopularity, the workshops are now offered monthly by a contracted facilitator. FindingOur Voices is a one-day introductory workshop for all women interested in enhancingtheir self-esteem. Follow-up mini sessions are offered three times per month on specifictopics related to self-esteem. Through the Moving on With Mentors program, trainedvolunteers provide individual support to women who have left or are attempting to leavean abusive partner”

        The support groups I attended (primarily before separation)helped me, and one major help was finding ONE friend who’d been through similar experiences, and over the years we literally did, physically and materially, help each other — in critical points after filling for separation. This included retrieval of children, food, storage, transportation (both ways) and sharing information.

        As to the group itself, what it (thank you very much) is completely and utterly failed to tell any of the women about the things I now blog on, which were learned the hard way. . . .. The knowledge we really needed to know, was about the operational infrastructure (plus origins and purpose) of the family law system itself — and how it interacts and behaves when faced with what I call domestic violence. Basically, they have successfully turned the matter into a great franchise, while continuing to express concern and pathos (in public) over criminal matters which are derailed into these custody courts, where they don’t belong. But as long as these courts continue to prosper and expand (which is what institutions seek to do) — they are going to mean that women like me are going to be stuck in abusive relationships with first the parents of any children, and thereafter with the system itself.

        It looks to me like PSSAW exists primarily to run four programs:
        ervice(s) Provided
        • Finding Our Voices
        • Growth Circles
        • Moving On With Mentors
        • Same Sex Domestic Violence Workshop

        (whatever). Also please tell Ms. Scheible of the same office, who I notice is Director/Treasurer of a nonprofit to stop child-trafficking and abuse in foreign countries (a noble cause) that if she wants to stop it in North America, she needs to seriously reconsider her position as a family lawyer. The family law system in both countries (Canada too, no doubt) is trafficking children into the foster care and adoption systems (often needlessly) and sometimes into child prostitution rings — I’m talking in North America. They are used to help blackmail politicians at times, to run drugs, and apparently a foster kids is a “mark” for testing drugs on, which is the story behind the Maryanne Godboldo case in Detroit Michigan.

        “Ms. Scheible acts in the capacity of both a Director and legal advisor for The Future Group. This international charity focuses its efforts on eradicating child trafficking and has done work in Cambodia, Romania and Cameroon.”

        its side reads:

        The Future Group is a Canadian-based non-governmental organization dedicated to combating human trafficking and the child sex trade….

        What about Calgary and the neighboring, large, diverse, and powerful contiguous country to the south? We are (and specifically, in large part, California, Los Angeles, San Diego & San Francisco in particular) areas where some of these seriously bad ideas, including Collaborative Law and the AFCC, started…..

        Here’s what The Future Group describes its activities, or at least goals, as. The Activities are usually what it’s really doing, which a look at the tax returns (do you have a resource to do that?) will tell more of the truth about:

        Since 2000, The Future Group’s principal work has centered on confronting human trafficking and the child sex trade in Southeast Asia. Given the trans-national nature of this crisis, there is increasingly a focus on North America and Europe as well.

        The Future Group works to:

        1. Prevent human trafficking by working with source countries to address root causes including deterring the demand side of the industry;

        2. Protect trafficking victims including rescue, rehabilitation and, when appropriate, repatriation and reintegration efforts; and,

        3. Prosecute traffickers and commercial sex-users in criminal proceedings

        The objectives of The Future Group are:

      • To provide assistance and education to persons in need including small business training, life management skills, counselling, and other support services to assist victims of abuse to become more independent in the community.
      • To relieve poverty in developing nations by providing medical and other basic supplies to persons in need.
      • To educate the public, professionals, and local businesses about prevention of and responses to abuse by offering courses, seminars, literature, conferences, and meetings and by collecting and disseminating information on that topic.
      • To provide support for those affected by debilitating diseases, illness, and conditions by offering education and counselling and by establishing mutual support groups
      • Objectives 1, 3 & 4 above show that what this group really wants to do is run educational programs and teach, teach teach. As to objective 2, which sounds great — a wonderful philanthropic cause that might attract dollars to causes 1,3 & 4 also — If I were local (to The Future Group), I’d be saying, “show me the goods.” Delivered, that is — there are plenty of organizations that do exactly this. What’s unique about this one?

        My children, and children all over this country like mine, were trafficked to abusers and batterers (often their own biological parents, and associates of those parents) through the family law system, which exists in part to make sure that certain behaviors are NEVER prosecuted as crimes, but rather characterized as disputes. (See Nicholas Bala, Parental Alienation, etc. etc.). It is the off-ramp.

        I personally (not talking the “holly collins” case making the rounds through film and conferencing in this country, although why would anyone need to flee her home country?) know at least three women (no men) who have felt it necessary to flee the country (US) AFTER their children were taken, all contact removed, and these women reported and protested the abuse and specifically, the family court personnel involved. This whole system has become what I would call a clear and present danger to the social fabric — not the abuse itself (which also is) but its coverup, and trying to force a “family” paradigm onto existing criminal behavior.

        Understand, if you can, that you are an unknown to me, and the question doesn’t sound genuine. Moreover, it’s an overwhelming situation with no end in sight for those in this system. The pain (or danger), I’ve been seeing, including danger of homelessness, doesn’t end when the children become adults. I also (FYI) had contact with a woman sent homeless, having her wages garnished to the point she couldn’t afford rent — and was living in her truck and working FT at what others would understand clearly to be a middle-class job she was well-qualified for (i.e. had professional training for). this was in a cold climate. I stood by and listened, offered moral support and eventually met my friend, but have since lost contact. we get calls at times from women who are being stalked by their exes that got out of prison (including exes that have been in law enforcement). This entire system is unbelievable in the scope and extent of its damages.

        I know that I didn’t deserve to be beaten, to have child support never enforced strictly when he began skipping it unannounced (in the US, and probably also in Canada, though I don’t know, a complex system of incentives to compromise this arrears exists –some men are forced into it) and my protection removed, meaning that the children were not getting what they would’ve with a just system, from either biological parent. There was one willing to (me) and one not willing to if he couldn’t have us all in the home without restriction on his battering, neglect, and basically terroristic behaviors — combined with at will, my paycheck when I was able to work, and my begging for necessities when I was prevented from working (it kept see-sawing).

        I also didn’t deserve and did nothing to merit becoming a person without a family connection of any sort, and with repeatedly disrupted work life. For me to fail to turn and face this, and talk about it with the intent to disrupt and change that system which disrupted my life (and trashed my kids’ childhoods, while compromising and stealing from financial support I’d otherwise have been able to give them) — would be negligent.

        Parent Coordination should be shut down. I have four posts on it, and know it was a lobbied for profession and that it’s hostile towards mothers. It’s a vehicle to introduce the cry of parental alienation into a custody situation, and its practitioners, at least one dynamic duo I’ve run across (both female) are not operating above-board as far as their contracts and tax filings (incorporations) last I heard. THeir work spans several states and like Ms. Scheible, they love to TRAIN others, which is apparently where the money is…

        I cannot speak for the rest of the Future Group, but I do not like hypocrisy. For someone to be a family law professional in this environment, and then present a public face about stopping child abuse, sex trade and the child trafficking in other countries far away — is simply hypocritical. Why not put an end to it in the United States and Canada, quit the widespread destruction of honest and able to handle their own kids parents (specifically mothers, who are losing their kids unbelievably without cause and for MONEY), and just imagine how much caring power and resource might be available worldwide to handle the other countries!


        So what has the three-year-old Future Group accomplished so far? Trips to Cambodia in 2001 and 2002 have had an impact.

        To date solutions include “activity books” for kids – modeled after a Calgary Police Service program – to help educate them about keeping safe from abuse and abductions. The Future Group also launched a peer education program. Perrin says they reached 10,000 children in 2001 and 70,000 last year.

        Guess that response was out of proportion to the comment, but are these matters relevant?
        (also, I am under some serious personal pressure these days, so hopefully it wasn’t too offensive if you are just a genuine nephew wondering what’s up.). Read the ColdHardFacts blog on The Franklin Coverup.

        (The question on the comment to me didn’t sound genuine. My opinion on that matter wouldn’t be of interest to a stranger, it seems — it’s not my sphere of influence to determine others’ divorces. My business is to do what I can as a resident here to protect and report injustice in what ought to be a justice system, and warn others if possible in advance. Prior to this I had an extremely SIMPLE and happy task to fulfil, called working, raising my kids (without getting their father out of their lives, never my intent) and getting them to colleges on scholarship.

        Without this networked enterprise, that would’ve been done. Piece of cake; there are clear roads to do this.

        Instead, I had to spend many years dealing with the same issues (only expanded), in and out of courts, in and out of police stations (FYI, police lie sometimes on their write-ups, and they refuse to enforce court orders at will; they can also be and were at times to me, very abusive, derogatory and hurtful). I tried to prevent a parental kidnapping — but that takes help, and I was unable to. Subsequent to them being stolen IN-state, and contact with me illegally cut off, suddenly and without real recourse (recourse means someone enforces) they were flown and driven out of state and at least twice to Mexico — at times they were supposed to be visiting me.

        If I had to do it over again, I would advocate for zero contact with the abusing parent once abuse was documented. Let him (or her) go find another life and another person to mess with (and take any consequences), and let the nonabusive parent move on. But setting policy that prevents this is leading to homicides, and wasted lives– and has to be stopped.

        In all these years, I periodically had a family lawyer. However, I never had a family lawyer after which the situation wasn’t suddenly, and radically, worse. A Lot worse. I don’t expect to ever hire one again — it’s a very small (minds, meaning stable of ideas and leaders), narcissistic, and powerfully networked club they inhabit.

        Better sign off this comment….Have a decent day, and perhaps think about the above when you’re ready to.

        Let's Get Honest

        October 29, 2012 at 3:14 pm

  5. […] near the top was the older — but still relevant — “Let’s Get Honest About Kids’ Turn and Judges’ Profits.” Which primarily began listing the board of directors for this nonprofit (which is now a […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: