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

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

Archive for June 15th, 2011

Evaluate, Coordinate, call “Alienator!” Pt. 4– Three AFCC Ph.D.’s on ONE case & “PAS” = 2011 NH Supreme Court custody reversal. And what’s Warshak got to do with it? [First publ. June 15, 2011, not on blog TOC yet].

with 9 comments

This post title with a “shortlink” attached is:

Evaluate, Coordinate, call “Alienator!” Pt. 4– Three AFCC Ph.D.’s on ONE case & “PAS” = 2011 NH Supreme Court custody reversal. And what’s Warshak got to do with it? [First publ. June 15, 2011, not on blog TOC yet]. (WordPress-generated, case-sensitive shortlink ends “-JR”. Note: for normal URLs (web addresses), upper or lower case alpha doesn’t seem to matter, but I’ve learned that within this domain (WordPress) and in such short-links, it does.

LGH UPDATE NOTE:  My current table of contents only goes back to Sept., 2012; this is a June 15, 2011 post (early on in this blogger’s learning curve!) so would only be found by search, some other link reference to it, or by Year/Month/Date through the “Archives” (by month) on this blog.  

I added some quick (not thorough) updates on Overcoming Barriers at the bottom in response to a comment submitted March, 2016…including tax returns, California corporate registration (Massachusetts could also be searched). 

For a December 2017 Update (which at first I thought might fit in here), see:

Revisiting Reunification Camps and Treatments, The good Clinical Psychologist Just Want to Help Traumatized People and “Families in Transition” (or “Transitioning Families”), the Good, Ole Court-Ordered (and of course (™)’d Service Model) Way. Case-sensitive shortlink ends “-8cC” and this was written Dec. 16, 2017, starting as a post update to [another] one for which I wanted to cite to this older post on reunification camps for “estranged” families, but from different angle of approach, as that one explains in the first few paragraphs.  After that, on “Revisiting Reunification Camps,” above, I get into looking at what isn’t apparently a large operation, but one with connections in more than one state to the family court system.  It’s in draft, but will be a short post and out Dec. 16 or 17, 2017. [Published Dec. 21 + (additions/clarifications) 22nd] //LGH.
I expect to publish (shortly) a follow-up to the Reunification Camps post above, some information I came across recently which connects the AFCC-drenched providers of at least three camps (Two mentioned here, one featured in my recent post above], the new one trademarked only 2016 (described in the above post) whose lead psychologist apparently was on-call from the NCMEC (National Center for Missing and Exploited Children) who shortly after Jaycee Dugard (and the two children born to her 18-year-long kidnapper rapist and herself) were rescued, was put in touch with Dugard who then (2009/2010) got a $20M settlement from the State of California and set up the JayC Foundation (of very modest size, but it seems in part supporting the reunification camps used ALSO to force-feed alienated children back in to the parent’s life, particularly in cases where the alienation is connected to litigation around the issues of abuse/domestic violence by the “targeted” parent (the one the kids don’t want to see).
(TRANSITIONING FAMILIES, STABLE PATHS (Abigail M. Judge (“clinician”) Boston, S.Florida, with involvement from Transitioning Families clinician R. Bailey. who has a recent book out co-authored with one of the co-founders (mentioned below in THIS older post) of “Overcoming Barriers.”  In addition, in the context of a recent case (2015) of Judge Gorcya and 3 children aged 9-14 ordered into “juvie detention” for refusing to have lunch with their father then, at last check, attempts to get them for aftercare into some Reunification camp — the Detroit Free Press (now part of USA Today franchise) reporting said the Judge was hoping to get them into Warshak’s “Family Bridges” or one modeled on it — in Toronto, Canada!!, while Dr. Bailey was quoted in the context).  I’m taking bets (just kidding) on how long Gorcya has been (if she is) an AFCC member and how much of that county’s system the association controls. Michigan is also long home, at least by organization name, to a batterers’ intervention coalition (BISC-MI).  //LGH 12/22/2017.


I was just going to add a very short update (that comment, it seems, in March 2016), but instead added a section on renewed Parental Alienation discussions, and the socialist “re-education camps” in Viet Nam after South fell to the North, in 1975.  Similar in other countries.   Major quality and scope difference — but force is force, and at some levels, it’s also a form of psychological, personal violence. In my opinion.  So, the original (written/published in 2011) post begins in maroon font and below a double-line after the following paragraphs and a few quotes:

Speaking of how to continue keeping “Parental Alienation” conversation going — and ordering services to undo it through the family courts — I recently noticed that a “Dr. Craig Childress” (Craig A. Childress, Psy.D.) is resurrecting parental alienation under a different theory; I have some comments on it over at Red Herring Alert (a wordpress blog).  “Same old, same old” with new window dressing and tactics (Childress recommends pressuring providers who do NOT recommend IMMEDIATE, safety-for-the-child total separation from the alienating parent (i.e., “mom” typically) through their licensing board, if this could be categorized under some existing DSM-defined disorder.  

You cannot really argue with self-referencing, self-congratulating circles of experts on this matter which is why I recommend a more interesting angle of approach:  If they incorporate, find tax returns and corporate records; if they get contracts with the courts, or government grants to run “reunification camps” and similar therapy for parental alienation (in its old or new classifications), pay attention to the details!

The technique and ability to re-indoctrinate people in groups, as well as children, was also in common use in socialist countries; I believe the term used was “re-education camps,” referring to those in South Viet Nam after the fall of Saigon in 1975:   Search “Vietnamese Re-Education Camps: A Brief History” (that’s supplemental reading, from a man’s father’s oral history — he lived through such camps — from “Choices” program at Brown; see website) or  “Vietnamese Re-Education Camps” from “VietNamWar.info.”

The second link introduces and describes the various levels.  I wonder, in the USA, why the country is so heavily invested in a class of professionals whose purpose seems to be behavioral change and keeping up-to-date with tactics and strategies for re-indoctrinating children, women and men into their proper social relationships with each other and particularly after one or more of the same has spoken out about some prior injustice, or sought to escape being subjected to abuse by a family member.  These camps apparently went on from 1975 – 1986 until people still being held were allowed to emigrate to the US.

 “Vietnamese Re-Education Camps” from “VietNamWar.info.” Posted 4/17/2014 by “kubia”

Following the fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975, Vietnamese Communist government began to open hundreds of “re-education” camps throughout the country. Those camps, as Hanoi officially claimed, were places where individuals could “learn about the ways of the new government” through education and socially constructive labor.

In 1975, it was estimated that around 1 to 2.5 million people1, including former officers, religious leaders, intellectuals, merchants, employees of the old regime, and even some Communists, entered the camps in the hope that they could quickly reconcile with the new government and continued their peaceful life. However, their time in those camps did not last for ten days or two weeks as the government had claimed.

Re-education Camps Levels

The re-education camps were organized into five levels. The level-one camps which were called as study camps or day-study centers located mainly in major urban centers, often in public parks, and allowed attendees to return home each night. In those camps, some 500,000 people2 were instructed about socialism, new government policy in order to unlearn their old ways of thinking. The level-two camps had a similar purpose as the level-one, but attendees were not allowed to return home for three to six months. During the 1970s, at least 200,000 inmates entered more than three hundred level–two camps2.

The level-three re-education camps, known as the socialist-reform camps, could be found in almost every Southern Vietnam province containing at least 50,000 inmates2. Most of them were educated people and thus less susceptible to manipulation than most South Vietnamese in the level-one and two camps. Therefore, the inmates (or prisoners) in these camps had to suffer poorer living conditions, forced labor and daily communist indoctrination.

The last two types of camps were used to incarcerate more “dangerous” southern individuals – including writers, legislator teachers, supreme court judges, province chiefs – until the South was stable to permit their release. By separating members of certain social classes of the old regime, Hanoi wanted to prevent them from conducting joint resistances and forced them to conform to the new social norms. In 1987, at least 15,000 “dangerous” persons were still incarcerated level-four and level-five camps2.

Camp Conditions and Deaths

In most of the re-education camps, living conditions were inhumane. Prisoners were treated with little food, poor sanitation, and no medical care3. They were also assigned to do hard and risky work such as clearing the jungle, constructing barracks, digging wells, cutting trees and even mine field sweeping without necessary working equipments.

Although those hard work required a lot of energy, their provided food portions were extremely small. As a prisoner recall, the experience of hunger dominated every man in his camp. Food was the only thing they talked about. Even when they were quiet, food still haunted their thoughts, their sleep and their dreams. Worse still, various diseases such as malaria, beriberi and dysentery were widespread in some of the camps. As many prisoners were weakened by the lack of food, those diseases could now easily take away their lives.

Starvation diet, overwork, diseases and harshly punishment resulted in a high death rate of the prisoners. According to academic studies of American researchers, a total of 165,000 Vietnamese people died in those camps4.

The End of “Re-education” Period

Most of the re-education camps were operated until 1986 when Nguyen Van Linh became the General Secretary of the Communist Party. He began to close the harsher camps and reformed the others5. Two year later, Washington and Hanoi reached an agreement that Vietnam would free all former soldiers and officials of the old regime who were still held in re-education camps across the country and allowed them to emigrate to the United States under the Orderly Departure Program (ODP). As of August 1995, around 405,000 Vietnamese prisoners and their families were resettled in the U.S6.

– See more at: thevietnamwar.info/vietnamese-re-education-camps/..

The forced “Reunification Camps” (far less harsh, but still forced, and still designed to produce an attitude change) have their professionals willing to engage in these practices.

I think it must take a certain kind of mentality, if not personality aberrancy, to believe in this and what’s more preach about it and take in business to engage in it.

For some reason, those “Re-education camps” remind me of, though lesser in degree, the same idea as, for example, “overcoming barriers.”  It’s still based on force — and who knows how many similar programs are operating around the country.  As I write this, the Grazzini-Rucki runaway teens were reported (in 2016) to being re-indoctrinated to like their father (who they’d run away from as young teens), while the mother, until recently, was incarcerated for parental interference.  See my more recent 2016 posts).

Here’s a sample.  I see he’s from Pasadena, California (Los Angeles area).  To see it in better formatting (the “copy” function sometimes removes all spaces between words!) click on link:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/165394444/Dr-Craig-Childress-DSM-5-Diagnosis-of-Parental-Alienation-Processes#scribd.

C. A. CHILDRESS, Psy.D.LICENSED CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST, PSY 18857

 547 S. MARENGO DR., STE 105 • PASADENA, CA 91101 • (909) 821-5398
Page 1 of 10
DSM-5 Diagnosis of “ParentalAlienation”

Read the rest of this entry »

Evaluate, Coordinate and Call Mom “Alienator!” — Pt. 3, in which 3 AFCC Ph.D.’s (Benjamin Garber, Peggie Ward & David Medoff) in a NH PAS case get a PAS-based reversal, plus some Warshak Talk

leave a comment »

PARENTING COORDINATION:  This post is going to show how the people crying that Moms are Coaching their kids actually coach each other to say this in reports to the courts.  This is the AFCC-sponsored, engendered, promoted, and if they have their way, exclusively controlled field of “Parenting Coordination.”

(I’m also going to split this post — some of the people mentioned above may not show up til the next one….)

Another place to find wording like (see end of last post) is in your basic “parenting coordination” manual.  It’s AFCC.    And it’s sick — which is probably why it isn’t posted in public at the “self-help” “Family Center” resource centers:  You are going to face a “HAPC” (hostile-aggressive-parenting coordinator) talking about your hostility in protesting or even reporting, aggression.

Why also are we not informed of how AFCC practitioners and their “ilk” are genuinely attempting to change family law into Therapy — and are brazen about it.  This is essentially what the “Center for Families & Children in the Courts” are.  They are venues where parents can be discussed, in third person as a foreign population, and how the far wiser and more noble practicing professionals can plot and plan to deal with their flawed, parental selves.

Might as well show it right now:

NEW HAMPSHIRE  PARENTING COORDINATOR ASSOCIATION LIST — AT LEAST THE AFCC-TRAINED ONES:

Footnote 1, Footnote 2 (and the entire list, this one at least, all have a footnote, or some, 2) stands for:

1Practicing parenting coordinator.

2Completed Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) prescribed training program.

A quick look (the list is only 2 pages) shows that these are either attorney, psychologist, or therapists.  If I were in New Hampshire with an open custody case, I’d memorize the list and be prepared….

Now for that training, a sample page from a sample report, on the association home page:

Notice (on home page) the “high-conflict” phrase, all over the place:

Welcome to Parenting Coordinators Association

The Parenting Coordinators Association of New Hampshire (PCANH) is a non-profit interdisciplinary organization dedicated to fostering the understanding and use of parenting coordination and to supporting professionals who serve as parenting coordinators. Our membership includes attorneys, mental health providers, and other professionals committed to improving the process of family transition in New Hampshire by managing and reducing inter-parental conflict and creating healthier outcomes for children of divorce and separation. The purposes of PCANH are to promote the highest level of practice by parenting coordinators through networking and continuing education, and to educate the judicial branch, legal community, and the general public about the use of this dispute resolution process in high conflict parenting cases.

Their membership includes (most likely, just is) the same fields of practice that AFCC membership covers, with possible exception of the judges themselves.  They are going to educate EVERYone (see last sentence) and of course promote it to the general public as well.   They are excellence-minded, and are going to promote the HIGHEST level of (unbiased?) practice, etc.  They will teach the judges (the judges in AFCC already know this stuff — they attend conferences!  So is this going to trade some training funds around, or go proselytize to the non-AFCC judges?)

This is a very basic (not links- heavy) site, but one of the links is to AFCC.

I can’t drag the picture of a pretty little (Caucasian) girl, with a ribbon in her hair, and a yellow butterfly on her shoulder.  Oh how gentle and sensitive.

Now, (by contrast) for the SAMPLE from the Handbook, and what they really think about ADULT women with children, separating:

I notice, up front, the comment the Indiana Parenting Coordinators group (INDIANA just also happens to be a state in which Family Justice Center has been established; it also on its child support page contains a direct link to Fathers and Families soliciting (from Fathers & Families) grant applications.  They are unbelievably networked…..

The Parenting Coordinators Association of New Hampshire deeply appreciates Families Moving Forward, Inc. of Indiana for granting permission to the Association to incorporate material from the Indiana Parenting Coordination Guide in preparing this document.1

…..

Furthermore, parenting coordination can help heal damaged family relationships and establish the communication, cooperation, conflict resolution, and general coping skills necessary for effective co-parenting so as to enable children to remain psychologically healthy following the divorce or separation of their parents.

John D. Cameron, Esq. Benjamin D. Garber, Ph.D. Co-Chairpersons, Parenting Coordinators Association of New Hampshire April 2008

….

As the manager of the treatment team, the parenting coordinator coordinates the needed services and has the authority to select different services and different service providers, and to replace service providers when necessary, to ensure that the needs of the family are met for the sake of the children. ***  This role would typically be applied in cases where the parents are deadlocked about treatment options for their children, and in cases where mental health problems, parental alienation tactics, or other problematic family dynamics may threaten the parenting coordination process, the safety of the children, or the relationships of the children with one or both parents.

**This basically is putting in place permission for a parenting coordinator to replace a NON-AFCC provider who might be a little more neutral with one more friendly to their particular philosophy, as demonstrated, below in the sample report (p. 28 of handbook).  Notice, “mental health problems, parental alienation tactics,” and of course an assumption that there ar elikely to be “treatment” for children.  Moreover, the material shows parenting coordinators are going to seek to have access to what would be otherwise very privileged information about the parents and children in a particular case:

5. Access to Information.

In carrying out responsibilities the parenting coordinator will have access to non- parties and privileged information as may be required, including school officials, physicians, mental health providers, guardians ad litem, and other professionals involved with the family. The parenting coordinator will also have access to related court records.

Judges have to file with the secretary of state or . . . . . officially, a DIsclosure form, so litigants know there is no “conflict of interest” and can require (or attempt to) a judge to recuse him/herself if there IS one, and the judge hasn’t done so voluntarily up front.  Do Parenting Coordinators have to reveal which AFCC (etc.) conferences they have attended, or which nonprofits they run, with each other, J.D. & Ph.D.?  This is NOT good…..

Of course, parenting coordination is hard work and takes time (so does fighting frivolous causes of action in a family law scenario– are the parents paid for this?), so about FEES:

Fees:

Fees of the parenting coordinator are set by the particular professional and would typically, but not necessarily, depend on the qualifications of the parenting coordinator. {{Hence, run more trainings}} Fees can be expected to apply to all parenting coordination services, including but not necessarily limited to: interview time, meeting time, investigation time (of court, school, or other records), collateral time (conferring with attorneys and other professionals), home visits, travel expenses and travel time, preparation of reports or agreements, and court appearances.

Can they set a minimum level of parental wealth before engaging a parent coordinator?  Oh — I forgot, usually who has the money is sought close to the beginning of any divorce/separation case, so the court knows whether to high-track it, or to low-ball it through mediation (20 minute hearing following 45 minute medication, goodbye children..)

WHO GETS parenting coordination.  In a set of amazingly “clear” reasoning, they say, not parents with high conflict or a history of disobeying court orders.  (well, if not, then what is a coordinator needed for?  Because parents DO keep court orders and can figure out their own business?)

Parenting coordination works best when both parents are willing to accept the parenting coordination process. That is why parenting coordination in New Hampshire typically requires the agreement of both parents for the appointment of a parenting coordinator.** Parenting coordination may be least effective in cases where one or both parents have never accepted the court’s authority and repeatedly violated court orders. Such parents will likely dispute or defy the parenting coordinator’s decisions as well.

**Just wait.  Sooner or later this will be flagged and mandated up front. Probably Indiana will get to this before NH….

After another section establishing their retainer and billing procedures in some detail, we get the assurance that the parenting coordinators are VERY, very, very concerned about impartiality

9. Impartiality.

The parents understand that parenting coordination will be furnished on an impartial basis and that the parenting coordinator will not provide psychological counseling or legal advice to either parent.

. . . . i.e., “just trust us.”  You are in a high-stakes struggle for your civil rights and sometimes safety for children, there is a lot of money at stake, and you are going to pay a parenting coordinator, even if child support is in arrears and you are transitioning from stay at home status as a parent.   So, as with all legal proceedings, be encouraged to take the professionals impartiatlity at face value, although you will of course have to pay a retainer to get their impartial services.  Now, about that lack of gender bias in this profession, which has a gender-neutral title, “Parent” coordination:  SAMPLE REPORT: (in diff’t format in original, see pdf)

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

ROCKINGHAM, SS FAMILY DIVISION AT

In the Matter of Father and Mother Case #2008-M-0000

PARENTING COORDINATOR REPORT

NOW COMES the Parenting Coordinator and submits the following report for the information and assistance of the Court and the parents:

Parenting coordination was ordered by the court in Month 20XX. The role of the parenting coordinator has been helping both parents manage and resolve conflicts and attend to the needs of their children within the scope of the Final Custody and Parenting Schedule Agreement. Every effort was made to encourage them to resolve disputes themselves; however, information was obtained from third parties when necessary to understand the issues, i.e., children’s pediatrician, teachers, and pastors of the respective churches.


(Guess no Jews or Muslims, or atheists, are likely to cross the PC’s paths…  Guess Christian pastors are likely to be gender-neutral, too:  Use of the word “pastor” indicates Protestant, but FYI, here’s the Catholic version of gender-equality, from a random search on “church, fatherhood”)

MISSING FATHERS OF THE CHURCH

The Feminization of the Church & the Need for Christian Fatherhood

byLeon J. Podles

You may have noticed that, in general, men are not as interested in religion as women are. There are usually more women than men at Sunday mass, and there are far more women than men at devotions, retreats, and prayer groups. The men who do come are often there because wives or girlfriends have put pressure on them to attend. . . . . “In my book,The Church Impotent: The Feminization of Christianity,I examine the lack of men in the Western churches, which only the unobservant doubt, and I look at the possible causes and results of the lack of men. My thought has continued to develop, and I have slightly revised my thesis. In what follows I will first summarize my thesis that men stay away from the Church because they regard it as a threat to their hard-won masculinity. Second, I will explore how the Church has become identified with femininity. Third, I will consider how this feminization has undermined fatherhood, and how the Church can reach men and help them to be Christians and Christian fathers.

(Unbelievably, this is copyright 2011).  Is it better with the non-Catholics, this panick about feminizing or rendering men impotent through church involvement?

Here’s an attorney’s writing:  ”

Tips for Restoring the Biblical Role of Fatherhood in the Church  Scott Brown. (note:first quote is from an attorney);

“To know the true state of a nation, look at the state of the Church. To know the true state of the Church, look at the families who populate her pews. To know the state of her families, look to the fathers who lead them. Destroy the vision of the father, and you render impotent the family, thus creating a chain reaction that spreads throughout civilization” Douglas W. Phillips, Esq.

If a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God? -I Timothy 3:5

How does a church begin to restore the role of fathers to the pattern prescribed in scripture? First of all, she must deal with PMS (Passive Male Syndrome). This is accomplished by focusing the energies of the church toward men and challenging them to carry out their Biblically defined roles.

Well, here’s someone else’s “Public Notice Calling for the Repentance of Douglas W. Phillips” (probably the same guy, judging by content):

2. As a self-appointed, unordained, sole elder of Boerne Christian Assembly, Mr. Phillips pronounced an “excommunication” on a member family of his church in 2005. 2 The “excommunication” was vindictive and appears to have been motivated over a difference in political views. 3 The “trial” was conducted without any due process in what can only be described as a Kangaroo Court. The accused were tried in absentia. No witnesses were called. No defense was afforded the accused. No specific, detailed list of charges was made. No evidence was provided. Any actual valid excommunicable sins had already been repented from, including a pre-conversion sin that had been repented of fifteen years prior. 4 A prominent Pastor has since described the excommunication as “the Salem Witch Trials.” The family has attempted ever since to be reconciled with Mr. Phillips, but he has refused all offers to meet with them, thus confirming his vindictiveness.

3. After being “excommunicated,” the entire family was shunned, including the family’s children. The children were never charged with any sins. Yet they, too, were punished. One of the daughters had received an award as a runner-up in a Vision Forum writing contest, but Mr. Phillips ordered her name be removed from the Vision Forum web site.

4. Doug Phillips is known as a leader in what is known as the “Patriarchy” movement. However, his conduct as a pastor makes it apparent that he is more of a misogynist than a Patriarch. “Let the women keep silent” (1 Cor. 13:34) is taken to such an extreme at BCA that women cannot make prayer requests or even introduce their guests. Women aren’t even permitted to get the elements of the Lord’s Supper for themselves. If their husbands aren’t present, they must be served by another man, or one of her sons, even if that son is too young to take the Lord’s supper himself.Mr. Phillips’ treatment of women is degrading and demeaning, and he does not treat them as fellow heirs of Christ Jesus. 5

Be assured the people who tend to talk like this can meanwhile be treating their women (and/or, previously, slaves) like second-class animals. This same person expounding on evolutionary versus revelation concepts of law, starting with Oliver Wendell Holmes..

A millennium of Christian legal tradition came to an end in 1870. In that year, Christopher Columbus Langdell, newly appointed Dean of Harvard Law School, began a revolutionary approach to legal education which specifically discarded the Genesis foundation of law in favor of a philosophy rooted in Darwinism.

Langdell abandoned the historic method of teaching Christian principles of the common law in favor of the new “case-book method” which directed the student to discover law through the constantly evolving opinion of judges. Langdell described the relationship between science, law, and uniformitarianism in the preface to the first “case-book” ever published, his Cases on Contracts:

While it’s clear AFCC is in favor of evolutionary legal language (in fact, moving towards therapy and away from law, just USING the courts to dispense the therapeutic assignments to court cronies, if I may be so sarcastic (and accurate) – – – Be assured that among the people coming before the courts will be women attempting to exit the dominate-the-woman lifestyle of one, or more, religions, and that sometimes they are risking their lives for doing so.

One more — since the Parenting Coordinators of New Hampshire feel it appropriate to consult “Pastors” for “information” on the children and parents.  Pastors are mandated reporters of child abuse (and have been caught as perpetrators, also, or covering up for perpetrators).

For this reason (or at least so He stated), former US President Jimmy Carter LEFT the Southern Baptist Convention, stating as a reason its treatment of women:

Via Feministing, the former president called the decision “unavoidable” after church leaders prohibited women from being ordained and insisted women be “subservient to their husbands.” Said Carter in an essay in The Age:

At its most repugnant, the belief that women must be subjugated to the wishes of men excuses slavery, violence, forced prostitution, genital mutilation and national laws that omit rape as a crime. But it also costs many millions of girls and women control over their own bodies and lives, and continues to deny them fair access to education, health, employment and influence within their own communities.

And, later:

The truth is that male religious leaders have had — and still have — an option to interpret holy teachings either to exalt or subjugate women. They have, for their own selfish ends, overwhelmingly chosen the latter. Their continuing choice provides the foundation or justification for much of the pervasive persecution and abuse of women throughout the world.

The article here is July, 2009. Contrast with the position of former U.S. President Bush, in 2001 (OFCBI), or in 2003 (heart of the Family Justice Center Alliance — see my post — cites an interest in keeping the “faith” component involved in helping people escape violence, abuse including sexual abuse of children, human trafficking and wife-beating.   And in 2008, the PCANH, in a casual reference, figures that they’ll go get some more data from the pastors…. Yeah, right.. Meanwhile, to clean up its racist act the conservatives targeted urban innercity black MEN to sell them on Fatherhood initiatives, when they were already en route to civil rights….

There’s still over?compensation and a church attempt to solicit men (women are expected to show up and serve, what else have they got to do?) in the form of (date:  2010) a “MANLY MEN conference” which appears to have a Responsible Fatherhood/Marriage Connection:

Celebrate Being a Man!No singing. No crying. No holding of hands.

Take some time to explore the website to learn more about each part of this life-changing weekend. Space is limited and the event is expected to sell out, so take advantage of early bird pricing and get registered today! Bring a friend, bring your sons, but make sure you join us in celebrating MEN!

What beats hanging out with 1,000 men for a weekend?Roasting our own pigs.

Pig Roast

This summer, The Manly Man Conference returns to Green Bay with an all new event, Manly Man III: Time to Man Up. MMIII is a weekend for men, by men. From the food to the speakers and the music, everything is planned with YOU in mind.

This year we’re going hog wild with the pig roast. We’ve purchased a few pigs to raise at a farm in Wisconsin and are forming plans to roast them ourselves. Why? Because we’re men!

Yes, this has a religious and “Focus on the Family” theme.  Do I sense a fear of the feminine somewhere? The key speaker is a pastor, and probably on the CFDA 93.086 circuit too, as he is marketing marriage seminars…

As such, I find the parenting coordinator comment  a bit of a “red flag” (or just ignorant of the influence of religion here…..).

But, after they have assembled all the relevant information (and obtained retainers) then it’s time to write a report.  Benjamin D. Garber, Ph.D. (mental health leadership of PCANH.org) and John D. Cameron, Esq. (legal leadership of PCANH.org) suggest a report as follows:

(After very brief info, this is the first substantive paragraph, attacking Mother.  Again, this is a standard, or sample report.  No contrasting one is suggested to validate any concerns a mother might have about a father.  Catch the tone — this is a PC association coaching PCs how to Coach the Judge to say the Mom Coached the Children.  And you wondered where that idea came from, eh?

There was evidence in the meetings with the children that they were caught in a loyalty bind by mother (i.e., feeling pressure to choose their mother as right or good and their father as wrong or bad). The children shared that their mother asked many questions about their father and his household. They acknowledged that they did not always tell their mother the truth. Sometimes they lied to stop their mother from questioning them intensively after visits with their father. Other times they lied in an effort to please their mother, or because their mother had confused them.

Often, the children complained about their father or his household. For example, “I don’t feel I’m safe at Daddy’s” or “I’m scared of Daddy.” However, when these issues were explored, it was learned that in some cases they were totally without foundation and in other cases they were related only to an incident two years earlier when their father grabbed an arm and directed one of the children to time-out in the garage.

a.k.a., how to discredit any assaults…..

The children also brought up issues and requests which parroted their mother….

“Mom says our clothes don’t fit” and “I want to talk with Mommy more than just the Sunday ” With discussion it was revealed that their mother raised the issues and then directed the children to discuss them in the meetings. In addition, it appears that the mother has made statements that have caused the children to doubt the parenting coordinator. For example, the children said to the parenting coordinator: “Mom told us that you took Daddy’s side and didn’t stay neutral and on the kids’ side.”

a.k.a. how to counter with allegations Mommy is coaching, AND she doesn’t trust the PC authority, either!  (As it seems, with good reason, if this is typical of the bias!)

Father showed improvement in raising only important issues instead of trivial concerns in the joint meetings.

a.k.a. how to win points for Daddy’s patience and forbearance with hysterical mother.

Subsequent paragraphs are no better, and continue to castigate bad Mommy and patient Daddy, and then psychoanalyze the Mother:

Mother displayed a distorted view of the father, seeing him as without redeeming qualities and specifically as abusive to the children. She constantly scanned the world for evidence of his harm to them. She viewed trivial events as having great significance; she interpreted inconsequential remarks by the children as indicative of major problems; and she exaggerated the anxious remarks of the children and accepted their complaints about the father as facts. For example, when the children complained about normal disciplinary (end p. 29) consequences from their father, the mother concluded the father was being abusive.

Similarly, despite evidence to the contrary, the mother alleged that the father’s church did not adhere at all to the Scriptures, and she believed that the father never dressed the children properly.

The mother exhibited rigid or black-white thinking. She had difficulty taking in information, considering it and viewing it objectively. Instead, she integrated it into her unrealistically negative belief system about father She rejected evidence, explanations and interpretations that were inconsistent with her beliefs.

The mother seems to use the children as a narcissistic extension of herself. She is unable to separate her own needs and emotions from those of the children. She attempts to undermine the children’s relationships with their father. The effect on the children is confusion and anxiety. The children vigilantly look for information to fit their mother’s perception of their father. As a result, the children are not learning to trust their own observations and judgments, and they are at great risk of becoming alienated from their father.

Mother’s distorted view and lack of trust in the father does not lend itself to building an effective co-parenting relationship and is destructive to the children. She lacks introspection and sees herself as virtuous and without fault. Mother viewed the parenting coordinator’s attempts to point out these dynamics as persecution and evidence of bias against her.

Actually, it is the parenting coordinator profession that perceives itself as virtuous and without fault, therefore deserving of this authority over — apparently, the mothers in a high-conflict parenting couple.    Is there any indication there that PERHAPS a woman’s instinct, or a mothers’ might notice something the paid PC might not?   The last statement there, to me, indicates that this handbook has anticipated resistance from an alert mother and how to counter it by labeling her.  Ain’t NOTHING new under the son in this field, except the name of the new niche assigned to do the same job!

In summary, a degree of stability has been established in the family system with accountability offered by parenting coordination.

(Actually, there is precious little accountability with this system!  Again, they are looking at “family system” and have a particular spin on events in an individual family.  There is no mention in this whether or not there has been previous severe violence, threats, including to kill or kidnap.  While it says no parenting coordination to be assigned unless parents both “consent” (what would the options be?) — only a very desperate mother, for example, would submit to a process that indicates this much bias going out the gate.

(Continuing….)

Father’s improvement in non-reactivity and being issue-focused has been beneficial. The parenting coordinator is concerned about the mother’s unresolved emotional issues** and the adverse impact these may have on co- parenting and on the children’s psychological health. It is strongly recommended that the mother seek individual counseling with a Ph.D. level mental health professional. Without intervention, co-parenting will be eleven more years of accusations and mistrust, necessitating ongoing parenting coordination. Furthermore, there is reason to be concerned that the mother may further confuse and alienate the children this summer.

In other words, parenting coordination the first step, intervention, the next step, and here is the “alienation” buzz word.

As a school nurse, she has the summer off and will be with the children all day on her parenting time. Finally, it is recommended that parenting coordination continue for 6 more months in order to facilitate effective co-parenting, monitor the dynamics in the family system, and determine whether the mother’s individual counseling has a positive impact.

Good grief, the woman is a school nurse, which is a profession where one is trained to notice details and work with kids.  Now, she may want to have some private down time with her own, perhaps?  Not with this parenting coordinator around.

Did I mention, who is paying child support to whom about this time?   oh, I forgot — this absolutely has nothing to do with $$ and the parenting coordinators are certainly neutral (at least by AFCC standards). ….

Respectfully submitted, Parenting Coordinator

**Cobblers see shoes and mental health service providers see mental health problems.  Does anyone actually see potential CAUSES of the responses?

So there you have it – HOW to call “ALIENATOR!” — blow by blow.  A sample report.  So, isn’t it nice to know that IF you actually agree to a parenting coordinator voluntarily, this is about the level of impartiality to expect.  Don’t agree unless there is no other option, if you’re female, wouldn’t you think?  Or at least, don’t grasp at stray straws of hope….

Now that how to write an antagonistic report about a paranoid mother who needs more therapy (or else), it’s time to get down to the issue of who gets to be a parenting coordinator.  For some reason, reading this, I feel like we are back in grade school again, picking the winning team — who is “in” and who is “out.”  Of course the Non-AFCC are going to be “out” but this is expressed in the following manner:

Mental health and legal professionals who are interested in developing parenting coordinator skills should, in addition to pursuing training in the above areas, consider joining the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts or AFCC (website: http://www.afccnet.org). Furthermore, they should obtain supervision from a professional who is recognized as a skilled parenting coordinator. That supervision should continue throughout at least six parenting coordination cases

(Thus ensuring no “high-conflict” struggles within the Parenting Coordination Community — all will be properly groomed and screened.  With as many judges as AFCC has on its board and in its ranks, this shouldn’t be too hard.  Sounds like they don’t deal too well in this organization with challenges to their authority…..).

Suppose there are real violence or child abuse cases a parenting coordinator is handling?  would such a person then actually consult an expert in the field?  Like a medical expert, or criminal investigator who specializes in this?  Well — no, how about another AFCC parenting coordinator who knows how to put the mental illness spin on anyone who reports.  Notice the order:

Any parenting coordinator cases involving (1) parents with  severe personality disorders or mental illness and (2) cases with allegations of physical or sexual abuse should be conducted only by a licensed mental health professional with more extensive experience as a parenting coordinator and substantial continuing education in parenting coordination, such as parenting coordinator workshops provided through AFCC.

Excuse me, when there are allegations of physical or sexual abuse, let’s not settle where or not this actually took place, but call in the psychiatrists?   I wonder how that will work out.  Notice it’s PARENTS (probably mothers) who have the severe personality disorders, and CASES not with physcial or sexual abuse, but allegations of it.  Just to get the priorities straight. . . . . .

(Are we AFCC enough yet?  in this field).

Again — read it.  It’s an eyeopener.  http://www.pcanh.org/NEW%20HAMPSHIRE%20PARENTING%20COORDINATION%20HANDBOOK.pdf 

Of course, because I am questioning the authority of this profession, I just might be a female with a severe personality disorder…called reading .

How I found out about this:  I read in a case which had been turned around through Alienation charges, and it just so happened to be in NH and involve not one, not two, but THREE mental health professionals stroking each other’s egos and deferentially quoting each other.  The couple involved hadn’t even lived together that long, but they managed to get the kids back to the father away from the mother.

(material on the personnel mentioned in title, on the next post; I am splitting off  one long post by word-count)….

To be continued….

Evaluate, Coordinate, Prepare to Call “Alienator!” — Pt. 2: CFCC and AFCC people Nunn, Depner, Ricci, Stahl, Pruett(s), and others DV groups fail to talk about

leave a comment »

And how this dovetails with purpose of  Access Visitation Grants grants…

The last post (or so) discussed practices in Pennsylvania and Indiana, with side-trips to Kentucky and California, where they originated from anyhow.

(If you read it, I meanwhile confirmed that KidsFirstOrange County Gerald L. Klein & Sara Doudna-Klein, yes,are married.  I forgot to include how much they charge for services ($300 per parent, $120 per kid) in teaching about parental alienation and conflict…..  I wonder who was the first Mrs. Gerald L. Klein… and whether these two have children together or not.

In context, Kids Turn, or Kids’ First, or steering cases to certain mediators, certain GALs, etc. — is the habit.  And then, to top it off, extorting parents into participation through the child support system (Kentucky), or changing the civil code of procedure AND even the Custody Complaint form to name ONE provider of ONE parenting education course (Libassi Mediation Services) which is already being marketed elsewhere — outrageous.

This was tried in California, to standardize judge& attorney-originated nonprofits through the California Judicial Council, but our then-governor vetoed it (though both houses of the legislature passed it).

Now pending — Probably still — is another one that is legitimizing a practice already established, the Family Justice Center Alliance out of San Diego, like Kids’ Turn and financial fraud at the City Attorney’s office level, and so forth.   Why stop while you’re ahead?

This has currently flown through House & Senate and as of June 9th was referred to  Location: Assembly Committee Public Safety Committee  and I think, Judiciary.  Here’s some analysis from the Senate Appropriations Committee.  Senator Christine Kehoe (who sponsored the bill) just so happens to be chair of the appropriations committee and from one of the cities involved in expanding the Justice Center concept (actually the city that started it:  San Diego).

SENATE BILL 557

(link gives the bill’s history; the following is accessible through it)

Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary

Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair

Hearing Date: 05/26/2011

BILL SUMMARY: SB 557 would authorize the cities of San Diego and Anaheim, and the counties of Alameda and Sonoma, until January 1, 2014, to establish family justice centers (FJCs) to assist victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, elder abuse, human trafficking, and other victims of abuse and crime. This bill would require each FJC to maintain an informed consent policy in compliance with all state and federal laws protecting the confidentiality of the information of victims seeking services. This bill would require the Office of Privacy Protection (OPP), in conjunction with the four pilot centers and relevant stakeholders, to develop best practices to ensure the privacy of all FJC clients and shall submit a report to the Legislature no later than January 1, 2013.

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 (thereafter, the FJCs are to be locally funded)
_____________________________________________________________________

Fiscal Impact (in thousands)   Establishment of FJCs Unknown; potentially major local costs for operation and services
Major Provisions  
 Report to Legislature $17 to OPP (Office of Privacy Protection) in advisory role General

_________

…This bill would require the Office of Privacy Protection (OPP), in conjunction with the four pilot centers and relevant stakeholders, to develop best practices to ensure the privacy of all FJC clients and shall submit a report to the Legislature no later than January 1, 2013.

…Should the specified cities and counties opt to establish a FJC, there will be unknown, but major local costs for operation and the provision of services to FJC clients.  Costs would be dependent on the number of clients, FJC procedures, staffing, and the availability and cost of local treatment and service providers.

…The OPP has indicated a cost of $62,000 as the lead agency to develop best practice privacy recommendations and coordination of the report to the Legislature.

To reduce the costs of the bill, staff recommends an amendment to have the four pilot centers reduce the OPP to an advisory role over the development of best practices. The OPP has indicated reducing their involvement to oversight and review of the report would result in costs of approximately $17,000.    (WELL, the OPP is slated for elimination anyhow, this report notes).

I’m posting the SB 557 updates for California residents.   Information from:

TotalCapitol home

RECENT POSTS:

Recently, I posted on:

  • Kids Turn (Parent education curriculum, nonprofit started & staffed by family court personnel, with wealthy patrons AND gov’t sponsorship through federal Access/Visitation Funding)
  • Family Justice Centers (origin in San Diego; Casey Gwinn, Gael Strack) and their background.  INcluding a boost by Bush’s OFCBI initiative in 2003 — adding the faith factor to violence prevention.  Sure, yeah..
  • Family Justice Center #2, Alameda County — see “Dubious Doings by District Attorneys” post.
  • Also, remember the Justicewomen.org article on the importance of District Attorneys in safety (or lack of it) towards women.  A D.A. decides whether to, or NOT, to prosecute individual cases.  It’s a huge responsibility.
  • What’s Duluth (MN) got to do with it?
  • What’s Domestic Violence Prevention got to do with this California-based racket?  I questioned what a Duluth-based group spokesperson (Ellen Pence) is doing hobnobbing with a Family Justice Center founder (Casey Gwinn).
  • I have more unpublished (on this blog) draft material on this.
  • The elusive EIN of  “Minnesota Program Development, Inc.” which gets millions of grants (around $29 million, I found) but from what I can tell doesn’t even have an EIN registered in MN, although its address is 202 E. Superior Street, Duluth, MN, and it definitely has a staff.
  •  I have more unpublished (on this blog) draft material on this.  
  • Toronto Integrated Domestic Violence Courts
  • This was intended to be a “break” on SB 557 and Family Justice Centers, but thanks to the internet and international judges’ associations, and downloadable curricula, this is simply (it seems) another AFCC-style project.  (Kids Turn knockoffs, talk of high-conflict & parental alienation, and modeled after several US states).  The intended “global” reach (UK, Ireland, Canada, Australia, etc.) is happening, and makes it hard to “take a break” from California basic corrupt practices by looking at another country’s handling of the same issues. The world is flattening — Internet, I guess.
  • Last post, I addressed some partner-type organizations:  AFCC/CRC, or CPR/PSI (in Denver), and personnel they have in common.

REMINDER — in CALIFORNIA — Three accepted purposes of the A/V funds system remain:


Supervised Visitation is an idea from that became an industry spawned and sprouted by some of the above groups, and watered by the US federal funds to the states. The link cites the supporting 1996 legislation…    For a reminder

California’s Access to Visitation Grant Program (Fiscal Year 2009–2010)

REPORT TO THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE MARCH 2010

Federal and State Program Goals

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.”3 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.4

The use of the funds in California, however, is limited by state statute to three types of programs:5

  • Supervised visitation and exchange services;
  • Education about protecting children during family disruption; and
  • Group counseling services for parents and children.

(This report has been prepared and submitted to the California Legislature under Family Code section 3204(d).Copyright © 2010 by Judicial Council of California/Administrative Office of the Courts. All rights reserved.)

**isn’t it interesting — if a court order exists, but is not being complied with, wouldn’t “visitation enforcement” be the simplest solution?  Dad, Mom — obey your visitation court order.  But somehow California wasn’t interested in that aspect, but wants the A, B, C, of Supervised Visitation & Exchange Services; of “Educating Parents about “protecting children during family disruptions” {the Kids Turn component) and getting people into group counseling, parents and children both.
If the whole concept sounds like AFCC, it is.   In 2000, I see a report planning how to use “court-based mediation” for child custody.  (California Judicial Council, Administrative Office of the Courts, “CFCC” (Center for Families & Children in the Courts).   This shows Isolini Ricci, Ph.D. under this CFCC:

Report 12 Executive Summary (Sept 2000)

Preparing Court-Based Child Custody Mediation Services for the Future

KEY PERSONNEL POSITIONED TO SET POLICY are AFCC.   
As of 2010, the top two personnel (Director, Assistant Director) of this Center for Families & Children in the Courts are AFCC, I’m pretty sure (Nunn/Depner).
I notice Diane Nunn (attorney), Isolini Ricci (Ph.D., and AFCC leader, author, etc.), and here, Charlene Depner was “Supervising Research Analyst,” but by 2010 (above) was Assistant Director of the entire CFCC.  Depner is an AFCC member.  AFCC members are coached to, or at least always seem to, talk about “Parental Alienation” and ‘High-conflict” parents, or divorces, usually in the same breath, for example:
     -by Mindy F. Mitnick, EdM/MA  {search my blog, she’s AFCC.  Note degrees — a professional educator….}

DIANE NUNN


with emphasis on Criminal Justice
“The Many Faces of California’s Courts”
Diane Nunn, Director, Center for Families, Children & the Courts,
California Administrative Office of the Courts, “She supervises projects related to family, juvenile, child support, custody, visitation, and domestic violence law and procedure. Ongoing projects include training, education, research and statistical analysis.”  (Note, presenting alongside Bill Lockyer, then California Attorney General, whose wife Nadia ran (til recently) the Alameda County Family Justice Center).
Diane Nunn listed as not just “AFCC” but “AFCC Advisory Council” in an inset column — alongside some well-known names, such as Janet Johnston, Joan Kelly, Philip Stahl (all Ph.Ds), and — please note — Jessica Pearson.  (See yesterday’s post, or search my blog).  Plus a passel of judges, including from other countries. I count ten (10) Judges, just a few J.D.s and Ph.D.’s (I’ll bet, several in psychology or psychiatry), some unlabeled, some educators (M.Ed.D.) and social workers, I presume.
About this Newsletter, let’s notice the “Thanks!” list:

AFCC wishes to thank Symposium sponsors and exhibitors for their support:

Children’s Rights Council, Hawaii (that’s CRC)

Christine Coates, JD, Dispute Resolution Training Complete Equity Markets, Inc.

Dr. Philip M. Stahl, ParentingAfterDivorce.com (alienation promoter)

Family Law Software, Inc. J.M.Craig Press, Inc. LifeBridge

The LOGO for the newsletters shows children and has the subtitle “KIDS COUNT ON US.”
It’s an eyeopener to start seeing the AFCC conference and newsletter material.  For example, among the Parent Educators, in fine print it lists “Kids First, Chet Mukliewicz, Dunmore, PA”  (more on him, in this post if I get to it.  Kids First is a Kids Turn knockoff, it sells publications by AFCC personnel, including Isolini Ricci, Philip Stahl, Richard Warshak, and of course himself.  In addition, it takes referral business from at least one other state court besides the one where he lives, and he holds a contract with Lackawanna County, PA, which court is being compared (in print) to the Luzerne County, PA “Kids for Cash” scandal. ….       This is product positioning and marketing, basically.      Janet Johnston, Ph.D. (in this 2004 letter) is welcomed as Associated Editor of the “Family Court Review” (which AFCC puts out) and is revealed as to having previously worked as executive director of “Protecting Children from Conflict,” itself an affiliate of Judith WallersteinCenter for the Family in Transition in California .
3 Pruetts — one on Board of Directors (C. Eileen) , 2 (Kyle & Marsha Kline) as main presenters.    Is Eileen related to the other Pruetts from California?  (I don’t know — it’s not an usual name.  But I’d like to know!).
That’s handy….   C. Eileen Pruett lists on Jigsaw as “Dispute Resolution Program Coordinator” under the Hon. Francis Sweeney (Columbus, Ohio).  AFCC pushesmediation as a solution for custody disputes, even though most custody disputes are acknowledged to have elements of violence and/or abuse, including child abuse.
A 1999 Supreme Court of Ohio Task Force Report called “Family Law Reform:  Minimizing Conflict, Maximizing Families” on Reforming the Courts from Ohio lists her as:

Eileen Pruett and the Supreme Court of Ohio Office of Dispute Resolution Special Committee on Parent Education for the material on parent education, which is replicated in Appendix D.

In Ohio, “To achieve this goal, the Task Force recommend(ed, in 1999): 1) All parties in proceedings that involve the allocation of parental functions and responsibilities should attend parenting education seminars……Sixty-seven Ohio counties currently mandate parent education seminars for all divorcing parents;
Note on this Task Force:  The Executive Director of it (Kathleen Clark), was AFCC Board of Directors at least in 2004 (see newsletter) and acknowledges AFCC allegiance. In fact, a search of both “AFCC” and (AFCC written out) totals 11 references to this task force report — which also details how (besides lifting the parent education segment from an AFCC board of directors) also relates how as part of OHIO’s task force, they flew to Arizona and attended what appears to be presentations at AFCC, including by some members on the task force who were AFCC presenters.
In fact, in its own (1999) words:

More than two dozen experts from around the state and across the country presented testimony to the Task Force over a six-month period. Representatives from a variety of parents’ organizations, as well as a panel of teens who had experienced their parents’ divorces, brought their unique concerns to the Task Force. Staff members obtained research articles and statutes from around the nation and the globe to find the latest policies and practices. Members of the Task Force traveled to Phoenix, Arizona, to meet with staff at the Maricopa County Court system, a nationally recognized leader in court services and pro se programs, and to conferences sponsored by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, an internationally acclaimed organization which provides research and programs for professionals dealing with families in conflict.

Given who was on the task force, and what it did, this kind of conclusion is a little predictable:

The following report and recommendations are the result of this extensive research effort and debate and have been unanimously approved, without any abstentions or dissents, by official action of the 17 members of the Task Force present at the final meeting on June 1, 2001.

That’s OHIO flying to Arizona (which has its own chapter of AFCC, and where Philip Stahl happens to live, now that he’s left Northern California) to meet with a Court Administrator to coach themselves how to be GOOD AFCC members and make sure not to swerve from the policy of talking about “conflict” more than criminal issues or domestic violence issues.
Here’s another (undated) AZ supreme court, what looks like Domestic Relations training committee (of some sort) which is heavily AFCC laced, Just click on it and search for “Association of Family and….” and see…  Arizona also happens to be where Sanford Braver, Ph.D. practices.   Philip Knox, that they went to visit (from Ohio Task force)  also worked (it says) with the California AOC (on which Nunn & Depner sit, under CFCC) on promoting a Unified Family Court.

The OTHER Pruetts (I’m still on that 2004 AFCC flyer which mentions Diane Nunn as AFCC “Advisory Task Force”) include Dr. Kyle (child psychiatrist from Yale) and his wife Marsha Kline (also a Ph.D.).  They have three daughters and one son and have naturally dedicated themselves to promoting fatherhood, as a search on “Marsha Kline Pruett, Kyle Pruett Fatherhood” will readily show, at a glance.  Dr. Marsha Kline even got an award for “Fatherhood  Initiative Community Recognition Award, State of Connecticut (2002), and   Stanley Cohen Distinguished Research Award, Awarded by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.   She is definitely (with I gather her husband, Dr. Kyle) on the Grants stream for investigation:  “University of California, Berkeley: Supporting Father Involvement 7/1/09-6/30/12: Total (T) $176,924 Marsha Kline Pruett, Ph.D., Co-InvestigatorUniversity of California, Berkeley: Supporting Father Involvement 7/1/04-6/30/09: Total (T) $353,849 Marsha Kline Pruett, Ph.D., Co-Investigator

The Pruetts, being a double-Ph.D. married family with academic connections to Yale, Berkeley, Tufts, Smith, etc. and on the conference AND grants circuit would of course have first-hand experience and understanding what it’s like to be on welfare, and forced to litigate for years in the family law system, whether a father (to chose between child support issues, or litigate, allowing more business to be driven to the professionals) or a mother (struggling to retain custody, or for survival, or (foolishly, given the state of the field nowadays) for child support enforcement.  AND, they are AFCC.   One psychologist & MSL, and one Psychiatrist.
Basically, if you browse family law reading lists, literature, or establishments, you will run across AFCC members referencing each others’ publications.  These publications may say “domestic violence” but will juxtapose it with “Parental alienation” and then talk about “conflict” which in the case of DV, is a euphemism.  Many of the lists still reference Richard Gardner.  “Reading Materials for Parents and Children Going Through A Divorce

CHARLENE DEPNER, Ph.D., AFCC, etc.

Now (just for the heck of it), more on “Charlene Depner, Ph.D.”  First of all, Ph.D. in what?  the answer — per LinkedIn, is Social Psychology at U Michigan

Assistant Division Director,  Cntr for Families, Children & Courts, CA Administrative Office of the Courts Govt. Admin. Industry  1988 – Present (23 years)/ Education:  U Michigan,   PhD, Social Psychology 1972 – 1978

So it appears, about 10 years, if any, in private practice or employment of some sort?

Yesterday, I ran across a comment (I believe I know who its author is) on an “AngryDadBlogspot” which related some more (Nepotism?) in San Diego between a supervised visitation provider (already found to be practicing without a license) and the family justice center — which started there, apparently, in San Diego.  That’s not today’s topic — but here it is:
2006 NCJRS study of families at supervision centers in NY reads:

A. Does the history of violence in the relationship predict whether the visits are supervised or unsupervised?

We found no statistically significant relationships between the history of physical and psychological abuse or injuries and court orders to a supervised visitation center, family supervised visits or unsupervised visitation. More than three quarters of the participants had experienced severe forms of physical and psychological abuse from the father of their children. One can surmise that these pervasive experiences provided no useful information to the court to determine which fathers might pose a current and ongoing danger.

The one exception was severe injuries, which had been experienced by less than half the participants (46%). Nevertheless, fathers who had severely injured their former partners were no more likely to be ordered to supervised visitation than unsupervised visitation.

A 1996 report (issued by this CA Judicial Council AOC)  on “Future Directions for Mandatory Child-Custody Mediation Services:….”

” notes:

Court-based child custody mediations affect the fate of nearly 100,000 California children each year. Many of them are already at risk when parents come to court. Currently, one- third of all mediations address concerns about a child’s emotional well-being. Child Protective Services has investigated a report about children in 33 percent of all families seen in mediation. Children in half of all mediating families have witnessed domestic violence. Today’s Family Court faces the serious challenge of protecting the best interests of the next generation.

Well, pushing mediation does not appear to be the solution!

Joan Meier, of DV Leap writes on this, and most any battered women’s advocate without AFCC collaboration in the bloodstream, might say the same thing — it’s counter-indicated!  Whatsamatta here?  Joan Meier, of “George Washington University Law School” (and ‘DVLEAP.org”) as posted in a noncustodial mother’s blog. NOTE:  She quotes both Janet Johnston, Ph.D. (AFCC leadership) and Depner, who both acknowledge that MOST of the the high-conflict cases entail child abuse or domestic violence.  This has been known since the 1990s….

Most Cases Going To Court As High Conflict Contested Custody Cases Have History Of Domestic Violence  


By JOAN S. MEIER, George Washington University Law School

Janet Johnston’s publications

Janet Johnston is best known as a researcher of high conflict divorce and parental alienation. {{NOTE how AFCC often pairs those terms– that’s an AFCC language habit}}.   Not a particular friend of domestic violence advocates or perspectives, she has been one of the first to note that domestic violence issues should be seen as the norm, not the exception, in custody litigation.

Johnston has noted that approximately 80% of divorce cases are settled, either up front, or as the case moves through the process. Studies have found that only approximately 20% of divorcing or separating families take the case to court. Only approximately 4-5% ultimately go to trial, with most cases settling at some point earlier in the process.

– Janet R. Johnston et al, “Allegations and Substantiations of Abuse in Custody-Disputing Families,” Family Court Review, Vol. 43, No. 2, April 2005, 284-294, p. 284;
– Janet R. Johnston, “High-Conflict Divorce,” The Future of Children, Vol. 4, No. 1, Spring 1994, 165-182, p. 167 both citing large study by Maccoby and Mnookin, DIVIDING THE CHILD: SOCIAL AND LEGAL DILEMMAS OF CUSTODY. Cambridge, MA: Harvard U. Press (1992).

Johnston cites another study done in California by Depner and colleagues, which found that, among custody litigants referred to mediation, “[p]hysical aggression had occurred between 75% and 70% of the parents . . . even though the couples had been separated… [for an average of 30-42 months]”. Furthermore, [i]n 35% of the first sample and 48% of the second, [the violence] was denoted as severe and involved battering and threatening to use or using a weapon.”

Mediation is an easy way to increase noncustodial parenting time without the protections that facts & evidence, without the disclosure of conflicts of interests a judge has to abide by, without the attorney-client work product relationship, and much more — in short, without the PROTECTIONS — that a regular trial might afford, and finish.   Mandated mediation is bad enough.  Some counties (in Calif) also have what’s called “recommending” status to the court-appointed mediators, meaning, their reports are taken more seriously by judges.  I have seen how this works year after year (from being in the courtroom) — the mediator’s report is often delivered IN the courtroom, and NOT prior to the hearing, if then.  It is typically a shocker, and this really violates due process, but it’s accepted practice.  Mediation is the poor-person’s “supervised visitation  / custody evaluation.”  If no private family member can be made to pay for the latter two, or then the quick & dirty custody hearing is going to involve mediation.

Guess which organization is heavily composed of mediators, and ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution services) and emphasizes this to unclog the courts?  You betcha — AFCC.

· Attempts to leave a violent partner with children, is one of the most significant factors associated with severe domestic violence and death. 
– Websdale, N. (1999). Understanding Domestic Homicide. Boston, MA: University Press.

· A majority of separating parents are able to develop a post-separation parenting plan for their children with minimal intervention of the family court system. However, in 20% of the cases greater intervention was required by lawyers, court-related personnel (such as mediators and evaluators) and judges. In the majority of these cases, which are commonly referred to as “high-conflict,” domestic violence is a significant issue.
– Johnston, J.R. (1994). “High-conflict divorce.” Future of Children, 4, 165-182.

What “DVLEAP” does in its own words:

A STRONGER VOICE FOR JUSTICE

Despite the reforms of recent decades, battered women and children continue to face unfair treatment and troubling results in court. Appeals can overturn unjust trial court outcomes – but they require special expertise and are often prohibitively expensive.

We empower victims and their advocates by providing expert representation for appeals; educating pro bono counsel through in-depth consultation and mentoring; training lawyers, judges, and others on cutting-edge issues; and spearheading the DV community’s advocacy in Supreme Court cases

(photo also from this site):

They even have a “Custody and Abuse” program, and have taken on the “PAS” theme.  These are specific cases that have been taken to the Appeals or even Supreme Court (state) level.    Here (found on-line) is an Arkansas Case where they took on “PAS” alongside:  Arkansas Coalition Against Domestic Violence, Justice for Children and The Leadership Council on Child Abuse and Interpersonal Violence (on which I believe Ms. Meier is a board or advisory member), the NCADV, and National Association of Women Lawyers.   It is an Amicus Brief and will likely go to discredit PAS.

The Leadership Council’s:

Mission Statement

The Leadership Council is a nonprofit independent scientific organization composed of respected scientists, clinicians, educators, legal scholars, journalists, and public policy analysts.

Our mission is to promote the ethical application of psychological science to human welfare. We are committed to providing professionals and laypersons with accurate, research-based information about a variety of mental health issues and to preserving society’s commitment to protect its most vulnerable members.

Goals

  • To develop a coalition among professionals within the scientific community, the legal system, the political system and the media to provide professionals and laypersons with accurate information about mental health practice and research which helps insure access to the highest quality of care.  (and several others are listed. . . . . .. )

In the bottom line, the Leadership Council is still talking psychology, acknowledging trauma, and opposing “PAS” — but, who they are and what they do is clear — “Apply Psychological Science Ethically.”  So, if you put this psychological group together with some domestic violence lawyers, or lawyers who recognize that batterers (etc.) are getting custody — you just the opposite of the AFCC   “J.D. & Ph.D.” combo of attorney & mental health practitioners

The problem is — the AFCC, being around longer, and having strategized better — have the judges, too.   

As I look at The Leadership Council’s page on “Child Custody & PAS” and associated “resources” below, I notice that they have said NOTHING about the things I blog on, and some others, individuals, who have simply observed.   There is a striking omission of the organizations promoting “alienation” theory — no mention of AFCC, CRC, or the influence of the Child Support System & Grants Stream on how cases are decided.  While NAFCJ (and a similar Illinois group) are listed — for a change — they are one in a dozen-plus links that a mother in a crisis system could not sort through or wade through in time to help her case — if indeed that information even would.

I appreciate the work these organizations do to “out” that violence does indeed happen in the home.  Of course most people experiencing it know this already….

But how much better might it have been to give TIMELY information on the operational structure of the courts, and who is paying whom.  How in the world can one enter a contest being ignorant of the habits and devices of the opposite side?  What’s up with that?

So, I talk about these things.  And so do a FEW others.

Domestic Violence Nonprofit DVLEAP gets a “Sunshine Peace” award:

“This award is so meaningful to me,” said Professor Meier, “because I have so much respect for others who have received it in the past.    I am also grateful to the Sunshine Lady Foundation for the financial contribution to DV LEAP  associated with the award which will make a significant difference to our small organization that manages to accomplish so much with so few resources.”

According to the Sunshine Lady Foundation (which was founded by Doris Buffett), the Sunshine Peace Award program “recognizes extraordinary individuals who make a difference; those who help to build communities that are intolerant of domestic violence and through whose work peoples’ lives are changed for the better.”
Since Professor Meier founded DV LEAP in 2003, the organization has worked on cutting-edge issues in the domestic violence field, submitting 6 friend of court briefs in the Supreme Court.  In the past year, in addition to lecturing and consulting with survivors, DV LEAP staff have worked on 10 appeals, a remarkable output for an organization of its size

Well,this is all very nice — and certainly I”m sure professional work.  But is it the most important task?  I say:  NO!  Neither DVLEAP nor the State Coaliations (why, I hope to show soon enough), nor the related Leadership Council mention the operational systems of the courts — which is their related professional associations and nonprofits — as well as the grants stream and the child support system.  How hard is that to comprehend?  There are different systems working within to promote more and more work for the marriage counseling and therapy industry, PERIOD.

For example:

They did not mention that in 1999, in Ohio, an AFCC-laced Task Force lifted some AFCC_designed policies for custody, then flew to Arizona to attend an AFCC conference as part of their transformations of the courts.  These groups do not mention, typically, fatherhood funding, or the history of Family Law as an offshoot of a brainstorm between “Roger & Meyer”  (Judge Pfaff and Counselor Meyer Elkin) long ago, or anything at all about the Marv Byer discoveries in the late 1990s.  They don’t mention that around the US, “fatherhood commissions” building of the National Fatherhood Initiative have been formed to legalize some of the policies these very groups say they oppose.   Nor, FYI, do they (for example) broadcast to women that the NCADV and associated alliances are actually collaborating with the father’s groups at the national and financing level, and talking policy with them.

They certainly don’t mention when a local legislator slips in some bill to legalize steering court business to court professionals, as Senator Christine Kehoe (San Diego area) did when an Assemblyperson in 2002 (proposing a bill naming Kids’ Turn in its first draft; see my  “kicking salesmanship up a notch” post), or as She (sponsoring?) did again in SB 557 (with her chief of staff then and now Assemblyperson, Atkins) in legalizing the “Family Justice Center Model with an alliance run out of the San Diego City’s original brainchild.

Nor do they mention how the money keeps flowing in after conferences, for example, as in this 2008 AFCC conference:

Not only does the material itself show (coach) professionals how to be prejudiced against mothers — but it also probably more than breaks even (though aren’t judges paid enough in our states?) by selling the stuff!

READ THIS!  Read every sentence and simply think about it.  This is the pre-game and post-game plan for a custody hearing.  And it’s only one of how many?

These are existing people who decided WHERE kids live (or don’t), whether they see their own parents’ income go to professionals and evaluators, or to the children’s future college funds, or simply survival funds.   This is AFCC conference material:

Your Price: $25.00
Item Number: AFCC-08-011-M
Quantity:
Email this page to a friend

This panel will demonstrate how the judge, evaluator, psychologist performing psychological testing and the childrens therapist work together to complete the evaluation process. The panel will present an actual case in which a family comes to the court with allegations that mother is alienating the children and is clinically depressed. Father is asking for full custody. Mother is making counter allegations that father and his live-in girlfriend are verbally and emotionally abusing the three children. The parents have a history of high conflict and the police have been called many times to keep the peace. The family is referred for a child custody evaluation. The panel will demonstrate how the evaluator relies on the childrens therapist and the psychologist performing psychological testing on the parents, fathers girlfriend, and the child experiencing emotional distress, for information and case consultation in order to give the judge the most complete history and assessment possible. The panel will describe how and why the recommendations were made for this family.

The police were probably called because someone (not both) was being assaulted.  However, a single evaluation of a police call might obtain the cause of the call.  To “keep the peace” is an evasion.  911, or non-emergency police calls have causes.  We all know this.  If the police were called many times to “keep the peace” was no referral made?  Was no restraining order solicited?  Why not get to the bottom FIRST of whether or not a crime was committed.  THEN, if the answer is conclusively, NO, it might go to the next level.

Why do that, however, when a custody evaluation can be instead ordered.

I might just get this product and find out how they frame the situation.

To be continued .  . . .

@@@

Evaluate, Coordinate, Sow the Seeds of Mother-Hate (a.k.a. How to Accuse a Mom of Alienation)

leave a comment »

Quick review:  The purpose of the Family Law system is to engage Marriage Counselors (etc.) into the legal process, and produce ongoing business for mental health therapists, and retirement plans for court-associated personnel.    

If you don’t believe that (yet), pls. review this 1966 TIME article, narrating the relationship between Judge Roger Alton Pfaff (who was childless) and Meyer Elkin (counselor) in the experimental “Conciliation” courts whose intent was to prevent divorce by forcing people into counseling who were headed for it:

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,842452,00.html#ixzz1P1f1mSR1

I am starting to get genuinely angry about the deceitfulness and arrogance of the material put forth in conferences which is designed for application in a custody case.  Just because a group of people believe that Psychological Services = Salvation.  Rather than, say, “divination” (and with the profits to match).

It’s not just the brazen marketing, and using federal monies to run social science demonstration projects on unsuspecting parents for the amusement (and profit) of the . . . . social scientists and nonprofit corporations that do their biddings.  It’s not just the elitist, arrogant mentality behind the therapists (etc.) which scent is caught when one reads the conference jargon with a real-life perspective.  And it’s not just the dishonesty throughout the system — although those certainly all figure in.

But yesterday, chasing down the yet another Warshak/Ricci/Stahl/Gardner Kids’ Turn copycat, I found that the Lackawanna County, Pennsylvani  AFCC-curricula peddler Dr. Mukliewicz along with Mr. Libassi, M.S., C.R.C., now have (with the help of the Presiding Judge? Wm. E. Baldwin) have gotten Pennsylvania Civil Code of Procedure altered to specify their product as THE mandated parental education curriculum (at least in Schuykill County) whenever a custody or visitation order even THINKs about being filed.  This appears to be in addition to some contracts they already have with the County to provide other services.

http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol40/40-50/2355.html

Title 255—LOCAL
COURT RULES  SCHUYLKILL COUNTY

Amended/Adopted Civil Rules of Procedure

[40 Pa.B. 7041]
[Saturday, December 11, 2010]

Order of Court

And Now, this 23rd day of November, 2010 at 11:00 a.m., Schuylkill County Civil Rules of Procedure No. 1915.1(b), 1915.3, 1915.15 are amended and Civil Rule of Procedure No. 1915.3a is adopted for use in the Court of Common Pleas of Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania, Twenty-First Judicial District, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, effective thirty days after publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.

and…..

WILLIAM E. BALDWIN,
President Judge

Proposed Revisions to Schuylkill County

Rules of Civil Procedure

Rule 1915.1(b). Definitions.

Kids First.” A four hour orientation and education program established to help parents and other parties in child custody actions to understand the effects of separation, divorce, and family conflicts in their lives and in the lives of their children.

Rule 1915.3. Commencement of Action. Complaint. Order.

(c) In addition to the information required by Pa.R.C.P. 1915.15, every complaint for custody, partial custody or visitation, and every petition for modification of an existing custody order, shall contain the following language:

(1) ”Plaintiff has been advised of the requirements to attend the Kids First program.”

(2) ”Defendant has been advised of the requirements to attend the Kids First program.”

(d) A completed order shall be attached to the complaint or petition which includes a provision that all parties attend the Kids First program and the Custody Conciliation Conference which shall be in substantially the form set forth in Sch.R.C.P. 1915.15. All parties named in the pleadings must register for and attend the Kids First program as ordered.

Rule 1915.3a. Kids First Program.

(a) The Court Administrator shall determine the dates, times, and location of the Kids First program.

(b) The name, address, and contact information for the presenter of the Kids First program are: Anthony J. Libassi, 200 Adams Avenue, Scranton, PA 18503, (570) 558-1002, (toll free) 888-215-7445, and www.libassimediation.com.

(c) Brochures and registration forms for the Kids First program will be available at the Custody Office, Schuylkill County Law Library, and the Prothonotary’s Office.

And, in these jurisdictions, whenever your estranged spouse, ex, or the mother (or father) of your child wants to officially modify anything regarding custody, the first step is now to pay up (or else) and sit through this class.  I’d bet (if I were a betting woman) that this class is ALSO subsidized by at least one federal grant, and that paying up would represent a double-billing.  Which brings me to the wisdom that the word “County” is a derivative of the word “Count’ as in “royalty” as in “fiefdom,” basically.  You can take the U.S. out of Great Britain (centuries ago), but I guess you can’t take the royalty mentality/patronage, etc. out of the United States, not entirely.  Read on:

Rule 1915.15. Form of Complaint.

(a) In addition to the information required by Pa.R.C.P. 1915.15(a) and (b), each complaint for custody, partial custody, or visitation, or a petition to modify an existing custody order, shall have attached to its front an order in substantially the following form:

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR SCHUYLKILL COUNTY
CIVIL ACTION – LAW

_________________ , :
:
  Plaintiff, :
: No.: S-
VS. :
:
_________________ , :
:
  Defendant. :

ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this __ day of _____ , 200__ . at __.m., you are hereby ORDERED as follows:

You have been sued in Court to obtain Custody, Partial Custody or Visitation of the child(ren) named in the Complaint.

I. PARENT EDUCATION PROGRAM

1. ALL PARTIES NAMED ABOVE SHALL ATTEND AND COMPLETE THE ”KIDS FIRST” PROGRAM. THE PROGRAM IS REQUIRED FOR ALL PARTIES PARTICIPATING IN A CUSTODY ACTION. PARTICIPATION IS REQUIRED WHETHER OR NOT AN AGREEMENT IS SUBMITTED.

2. EACH OF YOU SHALL CONTACT ”KIDS FIRSTWITHIN TEN (10) DAYS OF RECEIVING THIS ORDER TO SCHEDULE AND REGISTER FOR THE NEXT AVAILABLE PROGRAM IF YOU FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THIS PROVISION OF THIS ORDER, CONTEMPT CHARGES AGAINST YOU SHALL BE FILED WITH THE COURT.

TO SCHEDULE AND REGISTER FOR THE ”KIDS FIRST” PROGRAM CONTACT ANTHONY LIBASSI BY ONE OF THE FOLLOWING:

(a) internet: WWW.LIBASSIMEDIATION.COM

(b) telephone: 570-558-1002
888-215-7445 (toll free)

(c) mail:    ANTHONY LIBASSI
200 Adams Avenue, First Floor
Scranton, PA 18503

YOU ARE EACH REQUIRED TO PAY A FEE OF FORTY DOLLARS ($40.00) DIRECTLY TO THE ”KIDS FIRST” PROGRAM AT THE TIME OF REGISTRATION.

3. LOCATION OF ”KID[s] FIRST” PROGRAMS:

SCHUYLKILL COUNTY COURTHOUSE
401 N. 2nd STREET
POTTSVILLE, PA
PHONE: 570-341-2007

FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE TERMS OF THIS ORDER MAY RESULT IN FINES, IMPRISONMENT OR OTHER SANCTIONS.

{{First things first.  FIRST — go consume our product, not even based, probably, on original ideas.  It’s a “Kids Turn” knockoff, I”ll bet…. based on whose other books are advertised at “Kidsfirst.cc” in Dunmore, PA:}}

II. CUSTODY CONCILIATION CONFERENCE

You are ordered to appear in person at the Custody Conciliation Office, of the Schuylkill County Courthouse on ______ , for a Custody Conciliation Conference.

You are further ordered to bring with you the fully completed conciliation questionnaire provided by the Court.

If you fail to appear as provided by the Order, and Order of Custody, Partial Custody or Visitation may be entered against you or the Court may issue a Warrant for your arrest.

A little more found on these two individuals (and their services) here:

– – – – – – – – – – –

Welcome!
The Pennsylvania Council of Children, Youth & Family Services is a statewide organization of private agencies. Our members are the service providers who provide the direct “hands-on” programs and supports needed to achieve and maintain permanency and safety for children and youth and stability for families. The safety and well-being of Pennsylvania’s children and their families have long been held as priorities by private agencies who share a deep commitment to keeping children safe, families strong, and communities involved.

 

Our Mission Statement
To improve the quality of life for Pennsylvania’s children, youth, and families who are at risk by supporting and promoting an accessible service delivery system within our communities.

It’s all about service delivery, of course…  This is becoming common, to have affiliated groups coordinated by website and networking:  An organization (or nonprofit) can become a Member, a Friends Member, or an Affiliate Member. This appears to focus on:  foster care, adoptions, and behavioral health, placements, etc.   So that’s who put out this:

A “Needs based plan and narrative template” (FY2011-2012) for “OFFICE OF YOUTH & FAMILIES” (Pennsylvania) tells more about these two Kids First marketers

Chet Muklewicz (AFCC) & Andrew Libassi (probably) are between them among the 4 largest CCYA or JYO service providers for Lackawanna County.  It is a “budget narrative” for the county to request monies for the service providers & contractors, i.e. “

“The following pages provide a template for counties to use to complete the narrative piece of the 2011-2012 Needs Based Plan and Budget.”

THis also focuses on dependency hearings, although as we see Libassi is quite “in” on the custody hearings, with or without abuse allegations already.

The clinical unit also supports the county Family Court practice of returning to court within 45 days of the initial dependency to adopt a family service plan. All initial plans presented at dependency are related to completion of diagnostic assessments to better formulate a meaningful plan. This process is designed to both engage the family in the development of the plan and avoid plans of meaningless generalization.

They are the two largest providers of in-home services in Lackawanna County:

Review the Schedule of Existing Purchased Services and identify the four largest providers (regardless of whether it is a CCYA or JPO provider) as follows:

Two largest providers of In-Home Services. Include contact information.  (displays better on the pdf, search for the name):

1: Libassi Mediation Service  Children served:   168   $$ amount of services:  $197,712

2: Chet Muklewicz, Ed.D   Children served:  49   $$ amount of services:   $120,000

Briefly summarize the services provided by these entities, the expected outcomes of those services, and how provider performance is monitored.

  • Libassi Mediation Services coordinates all dependency and non dependency mediation. In addition, the service provides the service planning coordination for all three Intensive Reunification Courts.
  • Chet Muklewicz, Ed. D provides the Family Peace Program for the Status Offence Court. This is a Parent Education program that teaches or restores parental hierarchy in the family. It has been largely successful in reducing the number and duration of placement for ungovernable, and/or truant youth.
  • Dr. Muklewicz must file statistics showing youth in instruction, time in Status Offence Court, days of out of home placement if any.

The Kids First program relates to custody — not dependency– hearings.  However, it’s also being marketed in Kentucky, through the Kentucky courts:

Kentucky Court of Justice (Banner Imagery) - click to go to homepage.

Kids First program is designed for parents to help their children cope with separation, divorce, and family conflict.

Parents are presented with information about how parental relationships have a direct effect on the children and how children might respond at different ages. Parents learn that parental conflict hurts children and, more importantly, learn what they can do to help their children to adjust to the changes in their family.

For additional information, contact Kids First, 1527 Adams Avenue, Dunmore, PA 18509 or 570-341-2007

I’ve seen a lot of court-mandated programs around, but Kentucky seems to have the full panorama, including extorting Dads in arrears to participate in “Turning it around” classes where they can learn “to be a man,” and other useful information, such as sexual responsibility and co-parenting.  I’m sure a 12-week class is likely to change a person’s sexual habits.   ….   But they are extorted into it (or, go back to jail) like the separating parents in PA:

“Turning It Around” is a collaborative effort, which works in conjunction with the Home Incarceration Program, with most of the attendees coming from contempt proceedings in Family Court in non-support cases.

The purpose of the program is to increase the collection of child support payments, reduce recidivism in contempt cases, and encourage and increase cooperative parenting.   Turning It Around may be offered as part of a plea agreement for those facing sentencing.

(It too, probably has some acess-visitation type funding behind it, and a nonprofit by Lord knows whom involved.  This Kentucky state site has links eleven (11) Divorce Education classes, probably with coordinators (county-paid or state-paid) for each.  I wonder for which nonprofits….)

How are people in Kentucky going to take a class run out of Pennsylvania — a cross-the-border commute?  Or is it a pre-packaged curricula that Dr. Muckliewicz and/or Mr. Libassi can profit from separately, while running their own dependency service programs and functioning as faculty at the local college? Or is a royalty pulled each time it’s run — what’s up?

Here’s a local writer talking about a (different) local “Kids 4 Kash” scheme involving a single guardian ad litem (Danielle Ross) getting cases — $600 from parents upfront — and how, somehow, this county, almost 100% of the kids get a GAL:  http://scrantonpoliticaltimes.activeboard.com/t42441326/kids-4-kash-danielle-ross-guardian-atty-nancy-barresse-and-c/

I’m going to print that commentary here:

Typically, a Guardian Ad Litem is appointed in Family Court matters where a child is at risk due to a crisis within the family structure.  In most counties across the state, about 5 – 8 percent of all family court cases has a Guardian appointed to make sure that at-risk child(ren) have access to legal representation of their own. It’s a good idea and it often saves children from abuse. In all other counties, there is a list of attorneys to select from.

However, in Lackawanna County, the appointment rate of a Guardian is nearly 100% of all family court cases. And, there is no list from which to select.  There’s one Guardian that gets all the cases.  It’s been that way since Harhut took over Family Court.

For years now, Family Court judges have appointed Atty. Danielle Ross as the Guardian in practically every single case.  About a dozen cases a week are handed to Ross on a silver platter.  The parents have to immediately cough up $600 as her fee, plus she tacks on heavy fees once she’s on board if she’s called upon for a recommendation in a custody proceeding. Ross picks up about $7200.00 a week, every week of the year, and it’s been going on like that for years, which why she drives a bevy of exotic cars and takes non-stop vacations.

{{more than one income stream, county-mandated services, county-paid salary, plus what else?}}

90% of the families have no crisis situation that requires her presence. Some families have kids under five years-old who are not at risk of any abuse, yet they are ordered to pay Ross $600.00 anyway. Ross gets a salary from the county, plus a free county office, free phone and utilities and a free county secretary, even though she’s easily good for half-a-mil a year, year after year.

Then, there’s the quality of her work.  Having so many cases, she’s often very difficult to access when problems arise.  Once appointed, it takes her weeks to make contact with the family.  In fact, she’s required to inspect every house, which she can’t possibly do, so she sends her county-paid secretary, Sue, with no qualifications, to inspect these houses and the family pays her an additonal $100.00, which, by the way, is required to be paid to Sue only in cash.

Ross has a history of making custody recommendations to the court that are extremely politically motivated.  She meets with children as little as 5 – 6 years old and interrogates and manipulates them to get them to agree to certain custody conditions that certain “political” litigants want.  She’s personally serviced many county employees or cronies to get them a customized custody order, because the judge of the day follows her recommendations. I have some of those outrageous orders in my possession. There are many very angry parents who want Ross’ head on a stake, to say nothing of lawyers on the business end of her biased and unjust recommendations.

Claire Czaykowski is the Court Administrator for Family Court. She’s Harhut’s former tipstaff. He appointed her upon his appointment as President Judge. Claire gets certain cases scheduled before certain judges to make sure the “right” judge hears the “right” cases. If you call Family Court, in fact, it’s Danielle Ross’ voice that welcomes you to Family Court.

{{Case-steering, in other words.  it’s a network of interlinked associations…}}

If anyone has a Family Court case involving Danielle Ross, wherein they are unhappy with Ross’ recommendations and the Court’s Custody Order that was issued as the result of it, I’d like to hear from you. I’m in possession of quite a few now, but the more the better.

This Kids for Kash Scheme needs to come to a halt.  It’s time to end Ross’ Cash Cow days.  Rumors of her paying kickback are out there, but I can’t prove anything, yet.  That’s yet.  If a Guarian Ad Litem is needed, that’s all well and fine, but in most cases kids are not at risk and the family does not need Ross’ interference or expensive fees for nothing.

And the link contains the feedback, including that this woman drives a $145K Mercedes, and doesn’t even do her own work, but hires others out to do so.  AMong the comments:

Ourtraged parents have had to be dragged out of the courtroom over complaints about recommendation made by Ross.  On top of the $300 each parent has to pay, Ross then bills at $200 an hour for talking with the family.  She likes being alone with the kids and asks them very compromising questions to help steer her findings to assist who she likes in a custody case.  The woman knows nothing about what’s best for kids, only what’s best for who’s best friends with the court system.

Different venue, sounds like the same behaviors….

This isn’t about “Kids First,” or Kids, at all; it’s about Purchase Immediately My Products (a.k.a. PIMPs in Govt, Inc.).  Public Service?   This is the public serving the self-appointed parenting preachers under guise of “it’s good for you,” i.e., public benefit.

It goes on:

Counsel and litigants without counsel are ORDERED to immediately consult their schedules for conflicts and to promptly request a continuance where necessary because of a prior attachment or emergency situation. ALL requests for a continuance of a Custody Conciliation conference must be made on the APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE form available from the offices of the Court Administrator, Custody Conciliator or Prothonotary in the Schuylkill County Courthouse. The application must be filed in the Custody Conciliation Office. A continuance will be granted only upon good cause shown.

The moving party shall immediately serve on all interested parties a copy of the original pleading, this order, ”Kids First” registration and information, and a custody conciliation questionnaire; and shall further file an affidavit verifying service.

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990: The Court of Common Pleas of Schuylkill County is required by law to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. For information about accessible facilities and reasonable accommodations available to disabled individuals having business before the court, please contact our office. All arrangements must be made at least 72 hours prior to any program, hearing or business before the court. You must attend the scheduled conference or hearing.

[Pa.B. Doc. No. 10-2355. Filed for public inspection December 10, 2010, 9:00 a.m.]


No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.

This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Bulletin full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.

This concept didn’t just appear fully-formed in the brain of this judge, this county, or these mediators; it was circulated among professionals with decades of experience requiring others to consume their product, get business referred to their nonprofits, and doing this at public AND private expense, and through the courts.

why do I think this is probably a Kids Turn knockoff?  Call it feminine intuition, or that I happen to live in California where a man running for judge, who started a Kids First of Orange County (aka Orange County Welfare Coalition, a nonprofit) simply said he modeled it after Kids Turn:

http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2010/gerald-l-klein-for-judge/

Among his accomplishments, he founded Kid’s First in 1996. It is a program for separated or divorced parents and their children.  Both parents attend this 8 week course together with their children to help the kids cope with changes in the family.

Klein has been practicing law for 33 years and has sat as a temporary volunteer judge in Orange and Los Angeles counties since 1981.  He is active in the community and he also teaches Family Law and Community Property as a part-time professor at a local law school.  Although I only witnessed his expertise in family law, he is familiar with many types of law as he had a general practice in his early years.

The Story of “Kids First”

The History

The “Kids First” program is a project of the Orange County Welfare Coalition, Inc., a nonprofit corporation started by Attorney Gerald L. Klein and Attorney Ruth Shapin, MFT, in 1975. Through 1990, the coalition assisted individuals in obtaining governmental entitlements including social security and supplemental security disability benefits.

kids First Staff
Left to right: Robert Schuler, Gerald Klein, Sara Doudna and Ruth Shapin, along with Kids First Staff members

Recognizing the need for a program focusing on the needs of children whose parents are separated, in 1995 Attorney Klein began looking for such a program. In 1995, he learned of the “Kids Turn” program in San Francisco which dealt with families going through divorce. The coalition adopted their idea and curriculum. Sara Doudna, MFT, became the Clinical Director, expanded upon it, and “Kids First” was born.

In 1996, “Kids First” became operational.”

Ms. Doudna-Klein (she married him??):

 have worked extensively for twenty years with addiction problems and with individuals, couples and families in recovery. I am familiar with all forms of addiction but am most experienced with alcoholism. Ten years ago I co-founded a non-profit program for families in divorce. I am familiar with the issues that affect all members of a family during the divorce process. I am also experienced in the assessment and treatment of “Parental Alienation”.

Mrs. Sara Doudna-Klein, LMFT, Marriage & Family Therapist in Huntington Beach
Situations
involving divorce
Check out Kids First
A Program Helping Family in Divorce
  • Positive co-parenting
  • Single Parenting
  • Parental Alienation  
  • Parent-Child Reunification 
  • Blended Families   
Or on another site:   ” I am clinical director and co-founder of this nonprofit program called “Kids First”.  Gerald L. Klein, Family Law Specialist founded the program in 1997.  Since that time, we have served the community of Orange County and surrounding areas to make a difference in the lives of the parents and kids in the process of divorce.”

These behaviors and products are prime-time AFCC.

and overall would be Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO), and perhaps may be with, however, the habit of actually legalizing this behavior may compromise it from being prosecuted under RICO.  Also, if it were fully explored and prosecuted, as I may just about to show, it would possibly not clean up, but also completely empty out the family law system Justice = Therapy-dispensing monopoly of judges, mediators, certified family law specialist, and all kinds of psychologist, from J.D.-endowed Psy.D.s to the lowly man or woman who paid up the latest AFCC-approved parenting coordinator, or mediator, or supervised visitation center training course.

Cleaning up the racketeering element of AFCC might end up shutting down the system, because it is probably (at this point) not possible to separate the private nonprofit association, “Association of Family & Conciliation Courts” from the concept (and practice) of family law, at all.  this is such a fixture of our society that people forget it had an origin, and at one time, did not exist.  This origin was NOT by public, grassroots demand, but it was (like most oppressive systems) from top-down; by highly placed legislators, judges, and/or others who got a law passed, started practicing, and then expanded.

On the other hand, passive inaction will just send the US economy downhill faster –a situation for which those who’ve been marketing these things will be in a better position to handle than those they force to consume their products.  At least they know how to operate  businesses, reduce taxes, and even in some cases do it under the radar, avoiding taxes and dumping the real social needs of society (housing, food, water, the ability to defend onesself and one’s property — or to own property or assets of any sort) on those already hardest hit.

The RICO link, above, explains how the law began in the 1970s to stop the Mafia, in 1980s was applied to more individual situations, and in the 1990s the federal government sought to restrict this use:

During the 1990’s, the federal courts, guided by the United States Supreme Court, engaged in a concerted effort to limit the scope of RICO in the civil context. As a result of this effort, civil litigants must jump many hurdles and avoid many pitfalls before they can expect the financial windfall available under RICO, and RICO has become one of the most complicated and unpredictable areas of the law.

Today, RICO is almost never applied to the Mafia. Instead, it is applied to individuals, businesses, political protest groups, and terrorist organizations.”

That said, let’s note that two judges in PA were convicted of this, recently — in Luzerne County; “Kids for Cash” scheme.  And I cannot think of a better descriptive word, given the powerfully-connected (judges are members) and internet-connected, conference-churning, international, and training-oriented private “nonprofit” organization called “the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts” — particularly when the associated network of nonprofits working with it are considered.  Talk about undue influence!   People who are subjected to this treatment routinely call it “Mafia” or refer to extortion, which I believe overall, the practices are. Doesn’t that last one sound like extortion (though only for $40, do the math X how many divorces and custody modifications…..)?  Why, for example, shouldn’t someone besides Libassi Mediation be able to run a simple Kids First class?  And what happened to Dr. Chet?  Has he got his own line of business with the county now?

HOW I”M GOING TO SPLIT UP THE 17,000-WORD POST:

I AM GOING TO JUST “CUT & PASTE” INTO DIFFERENT POSTS.  THIS IS NOT CALLED EDITING, IT’S CALLED, I GUESS, MACHETE CopyEditing.

ONCE THE BASIC INFORMATION IS OUT, I DO NOT FEEL RESPONSIBLE TO KEEP PUBLISHING AND BLOGGING IT — CAVEAT EMPTOR CUSTODY COURTS.  THEY ARE BASICALLY (ANYMORE) PRIVATE, NONPROFIT ENTERPRISES WITH A VENEER OF PUBLIC LEGITIMACY.  THOSE WHO DON’T TAKE TIME TO LOOK ARE PASSING THE BUCK TO THOSE WHO HAVE HAD TO, BECAUSE THEY WEREN’T SO FORTUNATE IN LIFE (OR COURT) TO HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DODGE THIS RACKET.

Jesus Christ said, long ago, “the poor you have always with you…”   It’s obviously that the leadership of the US has figured this out, and made plans with how to control them through a variety of institutions, lest they riot, or there be another civil war.   Also, to keep a substantial enough portion of people desperate and competing for jobs they are underqualified for, while promising them more help through reforming the public education system, run as a monoply anyhow, etc.   Bread & Circuses..

Yesterday, I compiled, but didn’t publish, a triple-sized post, explaining the relationship between AFCC, Parental Alienation, High-Conflict (talk) and Parenting Coordination.  And the absolute mother-hatred in a certain parenting coordination handbook, which is standard.  I also show (and it’s obvious to those who look) that state borders (and at a certain level, state laws) are becomign meaningless when, for example, an Ohio Supreme Court Task Force (date:  1999), heavily AFCC-stacked, and lifting portions of its “tasks” wholesale from AFCC leaders — decides, in studying how to reform child custody — to simply fly its personnel out to Arizona and attend and AFCC conference.  Again, this was about 12 years ago and NOT blogged by domestic violence advocates.

If I am able to complete the series on the Ellen Pence/Casey Gwinn (I.e., DV advocate / Family Justice Center) connections, I believe this will show an educated (researched) “guess” as to why NONE of the Domestic violence coalitions and primary ‘battered women’s” advocate generally blog, report, publish, or scrutinize the AFCC, OR the fatherhood grants system, (and its religious connections).  One of them (Center for Judicial Excellence) has made a habit of not doing this (though they are informed of it, as are many others) until very recently, I heard.  And probably because a few bloggers continued to “out” them for failling to address it.

Mainstream, professionalized groups have their rhetoric set in stone, pretty much — and simply do not follow the money, or report to the general public on the conference circuits.  These posts are “Public Service Announcements.”  I am one (networked) person reporting certain themes.  I do not have an editorial staff and am not paid for my time here, as a whistleblower.   I write what I see, and I see a lot.  The alarm is definitely appropriate.

INDIANA & AFCC

Indiana has lots of Justice.  In fact, it has TWO Justice Centers from the Casey Gwinn/Gael Strack/GWBush Initiatives Alliance.

But this is about its AFCC-State Government connections (which, FYI, the Kids First & Kids Turn concept is).

Indianapolis, on the other hand, did it differently, and rather than going through the expense of flying its judges OUT, simply decided to invite AFCC to hold their fall conference locally.   This is from the Domestic Relations Committee, June 2009 meeting:

Domestic Relations Committee / Judicial Conference of Indiana / Minutes June 12, 2009

1. Members present. Craig J. Bobay, Francis G. Hill, Karen M. Love, Sheryl L. Lynch, Nanette K. Raduenz, Deborah J. Shook, Dean A. Young and William C. Fee, Chair, were present.

2. Staff present. Jeffrey Bercovitz and Anne Jordan provided the committee with staff assistance.

3. Guests present. Amber Njau, Project Analyst; Cynthia Longest, Deputy Director, Child Support Bureau; Karla Mantia, Prosecuting Attorney’s Council, were also present.

4. Minutes approved. The minutes for the May 15, 2009 meeting were approved.

5. Draft child support guidelines. Committee members reviewed comments submitted by topic area:

a. The Health Insurance Premium Worksheet (HIPW) and the Child Support Obligation Worksheet was reviewed. The committee made changes to ease the preparation of the HIPW.  b. Members of the committee agreed all commentary should be italicized in the child support guidelines. c. The “Child Multipliers” commentary was revised in the Support Guidelines and the Child Support Obligation Worksheet was revised to encompass eight (8), not just five (5) children in accordance with the amounts from Dr. Venohr.***

[[Dr. Jane Venohr  runs nonprofit Center for Policy Research, along with Jessica Pearson et. al, and I believe also works for PSI, its nonprofit arm.  These two organizations are all over the HHS grants circuit, and found publishing and promoting access visitation policies.  She is active in child support matters…See my last post.]]

6. Domestic Relations Conference.

a. Anne Jordan reported the two-day domestic relations conference in the areas of child development, family dynamics, custody and visitation is scheduled for November 19-20, 2009 in Indianapolis. Committee members suggested the following topics:

(1) The economy’s effect on the family, e.g. mortgage foreclosure, high layoff rate, and the court’s ability to respond to a crisis if its staff is reduced.

(2) Professor Marcia Klien-Pruitt, Connecticutt, to speak on family dynamics.**

[[**Mis-spelled, Marcia Kline-Pruett is AFCC presenter, with her husband Kyle, and discussed later]]

(3) Child-Informed Mediation, where a psychologist interviews a child and brings this input this into mediation.

(4) Court ordered investigations in custody disputes. Some courts use a guardian ad litem for this purpose, to investigate mental health issues, substance abuse issues, and criminality.

b.  Committee members discussed having the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts  (AFCC) hold their fall symposium in Indianapolis in November 2011 and the Judicial Center using the monies they would otherwise have spent on the two-day domestic relations conference on having Indiana judges attend the AFCC fall symposium in Indianapolis. Magistrate Bobay moved to have the Judicial Center contact AFCC about holding their fall symposium in November 2011 in lieu of the two-day domestic relations conference, with the Judicial Center using the monies they would otherwise have spent to have Indiana judges attend. Magistrate Raduenz seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously.

As I see from the Feb 18, 2011 minutes (thanks for publishing them, guys….) the networking with AFCC is going to continue:

This time there was a different set of guests:

“3. Guests present. Stuart Showalter,** Indiana Custodial Rights Advocates, and Craig Scarberry were also present.”

{{The links are relevant:  both are fathers’ rights advocates;

  • Showalter characterized as former “Neo Nazi Skinhead” and in some trouble with the law (as a youth) for it.  Later, he is found blaming a woman for her own stabbing death — because she sought a restraining order.  She was stabbed to death in front of her two daughters, 8 & 12  Here’s the quote, just so we have a grasp on who was a Guest at the Indiana Judicial Conference this past February:

The wife was found stabbed in her bed at home on Sunday night. Investigators say the couple was going through a divorce and she had a protective order requiring him to stay away from her and their daughters. The killing came two days after the wife obtained a two-year extension on the order.

Angela Warnock’s use of the Indiana Civil Protection Order Act for leverage in the divorce proceedings with the father *of their two daughters failed her this past weekend. On Friday she had obtained an order that would keep the father from having any further contact with his daughters for two years. In addition she had the daughters, age 8 and 12, sleeping with her. These are both signs of Parental Alienation.

(Showalter’s comment was June 2009. Note: obtaining a restraining order is sign of parental alienation.  wonder where that concept came from.  It has nothing to do with protection, obviously — just using for an advantage in divorce.  (the concept that perhaps her desire for divorce may have had to do with violence to start with doesn’t seem to have occurred to him…..)

  •  Craig Scarberry (unfamiliar to me) had custody reduced because he became agnostic, after being formerly Christian. Plans for fathers’ rights rally in Marion County…   Another article from “the democratic underground” asks whether(I DNK….)  this was the same Scarberry who sued the City of Chicago (etc.) on the same grounds, for interfering with the distribution of gospel tracts with “Repent America”:  link shows the pleading: including the Statement of Facts, which begins  ”

    STATEMENT OF FACTS 7. Plaintiffs are Christians who regard the Bible as God’s literal authority. In keeping with this sincerely held religious belief, Plaintiffs believe that they are obligated to tell as many other people as they can about what they believe is their individual need to be “born again,” that is, to be reconciled to God. This comes only by believing that Jesus Christ is God,{{i.e., Trinitarian, which founding fathers primarily weren’t}} and that Jesus suffered and died on the cross (and was resurrected from the dead subsequently) to pay the penalty for the sins of humanity, particularly those individuals who will believe in him; and who seek healing and forgiveness for and deliverance from their past, present, and future personal sins—“sins” being defined as transgressions of the binding commands of the Bible.)

Just including to show the mindset of someone who would attempt to “witness” in a legal pleading.   Probably the same Scarberry, although, who knows?  If so, he first proselytized FOR  his beliefs God and then, disgruntled, for how his agnosticism shouldn’t be held against him.  While it indeed shouldn’t, either line of thinking wouldn’t affect his position regarding father supremacy, most likely..or that it’s appropriate that his current beliefs be inflicted on others….  These two are not the major concern, they are two guys with a cause who sat in on a judicial conference.   It’s the conference we should be most concerned about, and this style of decision-making within government.

This 2011 Judicial Conference meeting  concluded peacefully:

10. Future meeting dates. Committee members agreed to meet again on Friday, March 18, May 20, July 15, August 19, and November 18, 2011 from 10:30 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. at the Judicial Center. They also agreed to meet in conjunction with the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Regional Meeting in Indianapolis on Oct. 27-29, 2011 in Indianapolis.

Respectfully submitted,

Jeffrey Bercovitz, Director Juvenile and Family Law

= INBRED with AFCC.  So who ARE they, anyhow?  What do they DO?  (well, since you asked, I’ll keep posting….)

I don’t know how comfortable the average reader feels with abandoning due process, law, etc. and giving leaders a huge leash (or taking them “off-leash”) by simply ignoring what’s going on with the primary institutions that rule people’s lives, such as — say, the courts?

??

And behind the courts is the power to incarcerate, or transfer wealth, and offspring; to spare life or to waste life . . . ..

While an Indiana conference, or a Schuykill County parenting education mandate may not seem to relate to you — it does.  We are a networked country, and the networks are to be watched.  When not “nipped in the bud” these things only expand — and they are inappropriate tolls on the highways of life.

Would you trust this kind of back-door dealings with your life, or your children’s future?  Do you want others — judges, psychologists, economists, and mental health practitioners (working together) to do the heavy thinking for you, so long as they leave you alone for a while?  Even after they’ve been proven corrupt several times already?

(California’s illegal benefits to judges — legalized.  Luzerne County, PA judges — sending adolescents to camps in which they had a vested interests, violating their rights and disrupting their and their parents lives . . . and here’s another post on some Pennsylvania court-based toll-gating with another individual:

To be continued …


%d bloggers like this: