FOREWORD (?) March, 2019: Other, more recent posts (Oct. 2017) tell more about similar topics; however the existence of this post in August 2011 shows how long (not very!) it took me, a formerly battered mother NOT coached into “problem-solving behavioral modification theory” regarding men who beat their wives in front of their children, to figure out the blind spots (and mutual vested interests) of the federally-funded, nonprofit-organization-run, centralized, “Coordinated Community Response” to domestic violence movement in the USA.

Mainstream media reporting on problems with the problem-solving programs (like “reunification camps,” recently in the news) and “children going into the custody of batterers” (featured in a 2011 article also well before this, and an ongoing theme) are still, basically, ignoring this infrastructure.

When “DomesticViolenceSpeak” becomes irrelevant, almost… Let’s talk, in Duluth, then Denver… (Publ. Aug. 5, 2011)  Shortlink ends “-OL” (capital letter “O”/ not zero,”0”).  Post length: about 15,500 words.  As of early 2019, my table of contents (there are several) do not go back to 2011.

Post title & shortlink, now my practices, added 2019 along with these comments (and a few images to go with them) on why I’m back on this post nearly eight years later.. (light-blue background, orange borders).

(This post came up in a search of my own for “enhanced judicial training for cases involving domestic violence” after realizing how impressed by it was our current Director of the Office on Violence Against Women (Katharine Sullivan), which office is under the Associate Deputy Attorney of the United States of America (i.e., Federal Government), also head of the Justice Department — of the Executive Branch of federal government.

…Ms. Sullivan joined OVW in January 2018. Ms. Sullivan is passionate about OVW’s coordinated community response and multidisciplinary team focus on combatting domestic violence, sexual assault, dating violence and stalking. …

…Ms. Sullivan presided over 45,000 criminal and civil cases in Eagle County, Colorado during her 11 years as a state trial court judge. {{no mention of whether this means, in family courts or not…although I believe they’d be under “civil”}}…Ms. Sullivan also implemented and presided over two problem solving courts.  In 2016 she was awarded 5th Judicial District Judge of the Year. 

…Ms. Sullivan also implemented and presided over two problem solving courts.  In 2016 she was awarded 5th Judicial District Judge of the Year.

 

Katherine Sullivan of OVAW at NCJFCJ Annual Conference July 24, 2008 (Remarks as prepared; image taken 3-14-2019 from USDOJ website)

Katherine Sullivan of OVAW at NCJFCJ Annual Conference July 24, 2008 (Remarks as prepared; image taken 3-14-2019 from USDOJ website). See windowframe urls for context.

Significance:  That enhanced judicial training is provided by “NCJFCJ” ((National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Justice) in association with “Futures without Violence” (formerly Family Violence Prevention Fund,”) both occupying special positions in HHS-funded under “Family Violence Prevention and Services Act” (of 1984, itself an Amendment to the earlier “CAPTA” (Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act).  And both also no doubt receiving USDOJ grants under the later 1994 VAWA (Violence Against Women Act) under which office Ms. Sullivan (now Director, not just Acting Director) of the Justice Department’s OVW now holds.  See two images from July, 2018 (Denver, Colorado training)  “remarks as prepared”

One difficulty (from the consumer’s point of view)** with this arrangement for handling domestic violence (i.e., centrally controlled through funding by the US Executive Branch, through statewide coalitions, but dedicated extra-special “resource centers”), especially with the NCJFCJ being one is that the NCJFCJ is composed of family and juvenile court judges, with significant overlap and alignment with the smaller “AFCC” (Association for Family and Conciliation Courts) with specific characteristics most likely to endanger abused women, non-abusive fathers, and children while extracting assets from households (sometimes along with children), ensuring such conflict that sooner or later, people will be driven to utilize (or, at times court-ordered) to partake of professional services of AFCC members, featuring the behavioral sciences.  (**from the providers point of view, it’s the opposite; which I believe is the real “conflict” being resolved)…

 

---

A blog upgrade since then has altered the appearances of earlier posts, making some of them harder to read (as do any expired image links). Still, this post names key players and features an essay or presentation from Jack Straton, then of NOMAS, on Supervised Visitation. While it’s content still make ssense, in later years (although it shows up here too,) I am much more focused on the organizations networking for certain policies and what they mutually decide NOT to talk about, when it comes to family law and domestic violence issues…//LGH March 2019)

2011 text begins next paragraph (below horizontal line).  On March 25, 2019, I removed some of the TAGGS ( US Dept of HHS Grants) tables, a good chunk of the vertical space on the post, to a new post (will be in draft for a while because formats were an issue). Link inserted below where tables removed, will be activate when those are published. That link and temporary title are: Duluth and Denver in DomesticViolenceSpeak (Giant TAGGS.HHS.Gov Tables from Aug 5, 2011 post. TAGGS format has changed since.) (This post — moved material, link ends “-9A5”).

This post is dedicated to any parent who’s lost custody of her children to a batterer* through the United States system of Family Courts.  As did I.  My message is, we can change this — but it will take making a choice of who to listen to.  Possibly a hard choice.

*When I say “to a batterer” I don’t mean, that’s the only personal characteristic of the father of her kids, but that that their children did, indeed, witness violence against their mother by their father and thereafter, getting out of the situation, eventually (or immediately) had the courts switch the custody to the father.

ANYONE would like to believe that reporting domestic violence, having laws to prevent it, and even having a restraining order on, would protect you, and surely enable an escape — and that all the agencies and nonprofits talking and writing about this will hold sway and save your family & kids.

Maybe, times was — they did — but that time is LONG since gone.   Judge for yourself what to do in a climate where Washington, D.C. has strong policymakers that have believed (since at least the early 1990s) that it’s GOOD policy to fund research that declares the real solution to child abuse by fathers is a father in the home.  And, as to domestic violence, the real solution to that, too, is to use the children as bait (and your tax dollars) to fund hopeful social change projects that end up — asserting (according to who pays the most) — that the REAL way to stop men’s abuse of women — is to promote fatherhood.  In fact, WHATEVER the social problem is, more training of family members who can’t get OUT of that training, is the solution.

It’s a sad day in my book when the National Organization of Men Against Sexism (“NOMAS”) which historically partners with the NCADV — has really gone down the same road.  Indeed they have, as I saw today from their site.

Someone made a wisecrack on my post Who Is Evan Stark?  Both these authors deal with domestic violence, in fact, an Orange County Therapist with a clear AFCC and Parental Alienation tendency (which being AFCC generally entails) felt free to include both these authors in her DV section — although one has to scroll down pretty far to get to that section:

Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women in Personal Life (Interpersonal Violence)
By Evan Stark

Domestic Violence, Abuse, and Child Custody:  Legal Strategies and Policy Issues
By Mo Therese Hannah, Ph.D. and Barry Goldstein, J.D.

Handbook of Domestic Violence Intervention Strategies: Policies, Programs, and Legal Remedies
By Albert R. Roberts, Ph.D. and Marjory D. Fields, J.D.

Family Interventions in Domestic Violence: A Handbook of Gender-Inclusive Theory and Treatment
By John Hamel, LCSW

Those links, and a few more indicating (one would think) some sensitivity to DV issues, are right alongside the left column of the website, which includes:

Parent

Co-Parent Couseling & Education

Divorce Education

Parenting Plan Coordination (Special Mastering)

I believe I have demonstrated pretty much what “Parent Coordination” is about.   This website is pretty clear where its allegiances lie, yet have no problem posting both these books.  i wonder why:

PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

Association of Family and Conciliation Courts
Mission Statement of AFCC:
AFCC is an interdisciplinary, international association of professionals dedicated to improving the lives of children and families through the resolution of family conflict.

AFCC is a tremendous resource for professionals, including Standards of Practice for: Parenting Plan Coordination, Brief Focused Assessment

ANYHOW, in answering the comment on my Evan Stark post…

I ran across yet another analysis of this system by Mr. Barry Goldstein, who is on the National Leadership Council of “NOMAS” — has been from that platform {and several others….) promoting the book I love (anymore) to make fun of, not because it didn’t take work to assemble — but for what it doesn’t talk about.    (Graphic and link below….)

Don’t know who NOMAS is?  You should:  [Image links expired //LGH 2019]]

Very positive group.  Until some more reflection, today, I thought they were right-on.  As a survivor of a relationship which defined me by my gender and function, ONLY, and then a court system which did pretty much the same thing, it’s refreshing to be around people who are not obsessed with their masculinity, or afraid to let a woman speak.  Who’s not against sexism, right?

Also, every mother who has ever been put improperly on supervised visitation after reporting DV should at least remember the contribution of Jack Straton, Ph.D. who is still NOMAS National Leadership, to this topic — although his sound advice has in practice been completely ignored; as “Supervised Visitation” is now an established part of the family law landscape.  This is good to review, so we can understand WHY sound advice got drowned out with reform-the-world theory, and a good deal of infrastructure report for it, too….

• Jack Straton Assistant Professor at Portland State University. Founder, Men Against Rape groups in Eugene, Oregon, Washington, D.C., and Manhattan, Kansas. He has published extensively in professional journals from his research in Quantum Scattering Theory, Gender Equity, and Diversity Training Methods. He has served as co-chair of the National Organization for Men Against Sexism (NOMAS) and, as co-chair of the NOMAS Task Group on Child Custody Issues, is recognized as one of the leading writers and speakers in the country with expertise on ethical and public policy issues related to the overlap between child custody, child abuse, and woman abuse.

I could almost kiss the guy {gay or straight) for writing “What’s Fair to Children of Abusive Men?” I carried it around for quite a while, throughout the family law case in fact.  I copied it to close, er, people in my life who knew about the abuse —  who didn’t “get” the concern I had when my ex sued for sole physical and legal custody before my restraining order had expired.

Not that it made a bit of difference.  But it’s at least logical — providing a reference point that the courts AREN’T.  This dates back to 1992, 1993:

Too late to “get back to Jack’s advice?”

originally presented at What About the Kids? Custody and Visitation Decisions in Families with a History of Violence National Training Project of the Duluth Domestic Abuse Project – Thursday, October 8, 1992, Duluth, Minnesota

from the Journal of the Task Group on Child Custody Issues* of the National Organization for Men Against Sexism Volume 5, Number 1, Spring1993 (Fourth Edition, 2001) c/o University Studies, Portland State University, Portland, OR, 97207-0751 503-725-5844, 503-725-5977 (FAX) , straton@pdx.edu

---

What is Fair for Children of Abusive Men?
by Jack C. Straton, Ph.D.

---

INTRODUCTION

I want to express my deep gratitude to Ellen Pence, Madeline Dupre, Jim Soderberg and the others from the Duluth Domestic Abuse Intervention Project for giving me this opportunity to speak with you. The State of Minnesota should be proud that, quite literally, the world looks to this program for guidance on understanding and ending domestic violence. I also want to acknowledge how much I continually learn from Barbara Hart, of the Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence.

I will first critically examine the criterion at the base of all custody laws today, “What is in the best interests of the children?” I will the talk about children’s choice in these matters. Then I will examine the actual effects of wife-battering on children, and develop an alternative paradigm for custody based on those effects. From this I will examine the question, “Is it ever appropriate to ever give a batterer custody of a child?”

In the process, I am going to talk today about the effects of male power and control over children, not about parental power and control. I know that it is popular these days to de-gender family conflict, to talk about “spouse abuse” and “family violence” rather than “wife beating” and “rape.” I know that we want a society in which men nurture children to the same extent that women do.

I know that fathers and mothers should both be capable parents. But if you ask “What about the kids?” I want to give you a serious answer. I cannot seriously entertain the myth that our society really is gender neutral, so to consider “What about the kids?” while pretending such neutrality is to engage in denial and cognitive dissonance. I cannot hope to arrive at an answer that will positively affect reality if my underlying assumptions are based on fantasy.

So I am going to talk today about the effects of male power and control over children, not about parental power and control.

YEP — that’s a good talk.  But — and after enough years of realizing who didn’t give a crap about logic, or truth (or the kids being able to heal from a very violent relationship by maintaining a solid relationship with their NONbattering parent) — I finally realized where it was originally presented — and once I realized this I realized that it was just talk, anyhow, as far as that project was concerned.    Look at the heading…

WHY?  Because — well, because they chose a different direction, called CONCILIATION with the fatherhood extremists, with the obvious result of catapulting to the top of the domestic violence advocacy heap, when it comes to funding:

National Training Project of the Duluth Domestic Abuse Project – Thursday, October 8, 1992, Duluth, Minnesota
(actually this should be “Duluth Abuse Intervention Project” it seems, “DAIP” — because “DAP” (also of Duluth) is a different group.

SO, LET’S TALK DULUTH, again:

In fact, DAP began in 1979, and here comes DAIP in 1980.  DAIP got much larger because? it learned how to tap into federal funding, and kept up pretty well with the marketing component as well, which we can see HERE, in their updated website which is even more upfront about We Want to TRAIN you, and here’s how to get an OVW grant so you can afford it.  Alternately, you can also Donate, or purchase some of our products for this great cause:

These are color-coded, I notice:  GREEN for trainings (GO get some trainings, that’s “growth” i suppose)

TRAININGS

Be more effective. Learn new skills!

There are many options for getting the training you want and need:

 (click on this one…..)

…And RED for STOPPING VIOLENCE, which supposedly some of these programs will — starting with “SAFE VISITS” i.e., SUPERVISED VISITATION.

Red is the far-right link, called “CHANGE HAPPENS, HERE’S HOW“

SAFE FAMILY VISITS

DAIP’s Duluth Family Visitation Center (DFVC) works to restore safety and repair harm in the lives of women and children after abuse. The DFVC supervises visits and exchanges with the child and the parent responsible for the abuse. Our focus is building safe and positive relationships.

“My child witnessed fighting and abuse for three years before we started coming here. Using the center has made a huge impact on my child in that way. If we didn’t use these services he would have continued to abuse me, mess with me, etc. If exchanges were elsewhere I know he would still pressure and manipulate me. I’d be vulnerable and he would use that to his benefit. Now he has to re-learn how to deal with our relationship appropriately. Since he can’t see me or talk to me he has no choice but to focus his energy on our child.” –Parent using the Center for monitored visits and exchanges over the last six months

Give to the families at the Duluth Family Visitation Center and give them a ticket to safe communications and exchanges of their children for years to come.

On all four of the top rows of tabs at DAIP, on the left, there is a nice and simple column with only two choices:  “DONATE NOW” (preferable?) and TRAININGS (which can be purchased — including at government grant costs).  Just in case we missed the point, on the top ALSO, the first word is “DONATE NOW” followed by “TRAININGS.”  Apparently the reader is being trained by repetition to Donate and go get some Training, even if this also getting a nice OVW grant to do so.

Great website design.  Completely puts mine to shame.  But then again — they have great FUNDING.  I put the FEDERAL (two streams), STATE (MN) and COUNTY (St. Louis County — where Duluth is) in bold; and besides this, plenty of foundations also.  Success likes success and surely any group that could get THIS amount of federal HHS funding must be the good guys (besides which, contributions are tax-deductible):

FUNDERS

We are very grateful to the following federal, state and local funders whose support enables DAIP to bring DAIP strategies to end violence to communities throughout the US and around the world:

• Ben and Jeanne Overman Charitable Trust
• Beverly Foundation
• Department of Health and Human Services
• Department of Justice Office on Violence Against Women
• Duluth Superior Area Community Foundation
• Junior League of Duluth
• Lloyd K. Johnson Foundation
• Mardag Foundation
• Miller Dwan Foundation
• Minnesota Department of Public Safety – Office of Justice Programs
• Northland Foundation
• Ordean Foundation
• St. Louis County
• United Way of Greater Duluth

The many individual donors and local businesses that make financial contributions and donations of goods and services.

I’ve blogged the Minnesota Program Development Inc. (which is this group) before — I guess they are REALLy into developing programs, especially trainings  Just for fun, although at that time, MPDI had $18 million of HHS awards, let’s look and see what’s up to today’s date:

  (Yep over $800K higher than last time, from HHS that is):  Categories:  “FOUR SPECIAL ISSUE RESOURCE CENTERS FOR INFORMATION & TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE  (5 yrs, so far — this probably helped spiff up the websites) and  “FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION & SERVICES ” (5 years) and FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION & SERVICES – SPECIAL ISSUE RESOURCE CENTER  (5th year of THAT series being 2000); and VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN MULTIFACETED COMMUNITY-BASED DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM (began 1995, which is as far back as that database goes).  Heres’ from USASpending.gov, which will pick up any contracts, and other sources, such as DOJ:

Looking (Same DUNS#) at USASPENDING.gov — this shows 17 grants totaling $64,000 (roughly) which turn out to be training materials and video, plus some psychiatric services — often for Homeland Security or military related. If I don’t stipulate to contracts only the figure is closer to $12 million – plus.  So obviously something to lost in translation between the two databases.  But a typical grant is going to be over $1 million.  The last one listed on this databse was in 2008 and for close to $2 million for “comprehensive technical system.”  It’s definitely a going concern:

Transaction Number # 1

Federal Award ID: 2004WTAXK073: 02 (Grants)

Recipient: DOMESTIC ABUSE INTERVENTION PROGRAMS 202 E Superior Street , East End, MINNESOTA Reason for Modification: Program Source: 15-0409:Violence against Women Prevention and Prosecution Programs Agency: Department of Justice : Office of Justice Programs CFDA Program : 16.008 : VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN OFFICE TECH. ASSISTANCE PROGRAM Description: Comprehensive Technical Assistance

SUPERVISED VISITATION IS VERY PROBLEMATIC, BUT THE SYSTEM IS HERE AND FUNDED.

IT’S ALSO STATED in federal law (Title IV) AS A WAY TO INCREASE NONCUSTODIAL PARENTING TIME, SO I THINK WE SHOULD PROBABLY DROP THE CONCEPT OF DESIGNATING IT AS HELPING MOTHERS AND CHILDREN IN VIOLENT SITUATION.  IT HAS ALSO SHOWED UP A NUMBER OF TIMES AS BEING ABUSED BY DOUBLE-BILLING, OVER BILLING, USING FOR NON-GRANT-PURPOSES (I.E., WHEN THE PERSON WHO’S VISITATION IS BEING SUPERVISED HAS NO HISTORY OF ABUSE, I.E.. A MOTHER IN A CUSTODY SWITCH) AND IN GENERAL, SOMETHING OF A “RACKET.”   Fathers don’t like being supervised — no one does, and it’s quite artificial situation for the children — they ALL know an act is going on, and moreover, it’s a grants-bait situation.  I do not (in case you haven’t guessed) appreciate Dr. Pence’s early work in this regard, and also don’t appreciate the flexing of $$ might to the detriment of protective mothers and the children they are attempting to protect.

Supervised Visitation is billed in Access/Visitation grants as a means to increase noncustodial parenting time.  Look it up, I’ve certainly also written it up often enough.  The theory behind this is that involved parents will be better at paying their child support and so help reduce the welfare load.

What does this have to do with NON-Welfare families?  Well, powerful forces in Congress and around the country ALSO maintain that promoting Fatherhood (which “noncustodial parent’ basically means in policy-speak) will reduce the children’s risk of growing up to be drug-users, prostitutes, victims of violence, and teen pregnancy.  Yep, even around the Dugard/Garrido case and around multiple indicators that men do, indeed, molest and rape their own children, this line is still sold — and bought.

Also buying into this theory is great for business if you are in the training business or the fatherhood business.  Formerly being in the business of helping battered women, or dealing with them in their shelters, you would know better, but those days are gone.

BUT WHAT ABOUT VISITATION?You will note that my remarks imply that demonstrable harm to children has as its rational consequence not just termination of custody, not just requiring supervised visitation, but termination of visitation. I want to acknowledge that this is really what I mean to say.[If a child wishes to visit with the father, an affirmative attitude toward children’s rights would lead one to allow this contact, even knowing the harm it may cause, and even knowing that further contact on the part of a male child might increase his indoctrination into abusive behavior himself. However, knowing of abuser’s abilities to manipulate children’s attitudes it would be prudent to enforce a cooling-off period of 6 months or so, after which time the child might find that he or she is happier without visitation 

Karen Oehme, J.D. 
Institute Director , Clearinghouse on Supervised Visitation

One way to intervene with an ongoing violent situation, where this involves criminal behavior, is to treat it as criminal behavior, and jail the perp, and then help get the mother and children the hell out of there; they will survive somehow, if this means briefly TANF, then let it be TANF without calling in the Fatherhood Promotion Dogs to give her opponent free legal help to switch custody back!.    We already KNOW the likelihood exists that a pissed-off perp may come back, not abashed and ashamed, but angry and ready to get revenge.  The climate is indeed ripe for this, also…..

SOON ENOUGH, when the grants and technical assistance operations are enough collaborated and entrenched in the grants stream, it eventually boiils down to the Administration’s collective solution to domestic violence is to put the father BACK in the home.  AFter all, fatherlessness leads to increased risk of domestic violence.  The language changes from taking care of violence which HAS happened with a serious deterrent that sends a message to WHOEVER tries it next — but to “FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION resulting in hybrids like THIS.  Again, if you read this blog, this is review for me — only the last time I posted on this (Like about January 2011) “ENDABUSE.ORG” had a different website, nonprofit name, and physical street address.  Nice to have federal help fro shape-shifting and purpose-expansion:

Working With Abusive Men & Fathers

Fatherhood can be a strong motivator for some abusive fathers to renounce their violence. Some men choose to change their violent behavior when they realize the damage they are doing to their children.

As a national leader in engaging men to end violence against women, Futures Without Violence, formerly Family Violence Prevention Fund, believes that it is critical to develop new strategies to motivate abusive men to renounce their violence and help heal their families. To that effect, we have developed several projects to support practitioners from different fields that engage abusive men and fathers.

Fathering After Violence

Fathering After Violence is a national initiative developed by Futures Without Violence and its partners to enhance the safety and well-being of women and children by motivating men to renounce their violence and become better fathers and more supportive parenting partners. This groundbreaking project is based on the premise that men who use violence can be held accountable for their behavior and, at the same time, be encouraged to change it by using fatherhood as a leading approach.

National Institute on Fatherhood and Domestic Violence

Futures Without Violence developed the National Institute on Fatherhood and Domestic Violence (NIFDV) to train and provide technical assistance to professionals who work with abusive fathers in different fields, using the Fathering After Violence framework. In partnership with the Office on Violence Against Women, we have trained practitioners from over 40 communities across the US, including: DV advocates, supervised visitation, batterers intervention and fatherhood programs, judges and other law enforcement, and child protection workers.

{{Endquote}}

Of course they, too, believe that supervised visitation is a good thing, and perhaps may help train violence out of the (male) human nature by appealing to the father instinct wherever possible.  They are marketing to the PROFESSIONALS — not the fathers.  Because this is where the funding goes….

Fathering After Violence: Working with Abusive Fathers in Supervised Visitation (PDF)

This bears the old organization name (FVPF) — by the way, FVPF was, like MPDI, I gather, one of those “FOUR SPECIAL RESOURCE” centers above, along with the NCJFCJ in Nevada, and the Domestic Violence National hotline (in Texas) and another one up in South Dakota, though it was less influential. I think — don’t quote me on that too hard.

“This project is supported by grant #2004-WT-AX-K046 awarded by the Office on Violence Against Women, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

© 2007 by Family Violence Prevention Fund. All Rights Reserved.

Acknowledgements go to certain visitation centers, including one in Minnesota:

The Family Violence Prevention Fund (FVPF) is extremely grateful to the many people who made this publication possible. In particular, we extend our deepest gratitude to the Safe Havens Supervised Visitation Program Fathering After Violence “Learning Communities,” who took a chance and partnered with us to explore new paths of engagement and service delivery with men who have used violence in their families. Staff from the Advocates for Family Peace *** in Grand Rapids, Minnesota, the City of Kent Supervised Visitation Center in Washington State, the San Mateo County Family Visitation Center in California, the Walnut Avenue Women’s Center in Santa Cruz, California, and the YWCA Visitation Centers in Springfield and Northampton, Massachusetts, made great contributions to this emerging field of work.

FYI, here’s “ADvocates for Family Peace” in Grand Rapids Minnesota.  First of all, the URL reads stopabuse, not stop domestic violence, which is one indicator — it’s no longer violence, it’s “abuse” which is a much softer term.  Here: {{Blank Space for Missing Image Removed/2019}}

1611 NW Fourth Street

Grand Rapids, MN  55744

(218) 326-0388

 1-800-909-8336

Fax (218) 327-4052

{{Blank Space for Missing Image Removed/2019}}

NOW AVAILABLE

Addressing Fatherhood with Men who Batter – 1st edition

Written by: Melissa Scaia, MPA, Laura Connelly, and John Downing

Forward by: Ellen Pence, PHD

Consultants: Ellen Pence, PhD, & Sylvia Olney, MA, LMFT

To order the curriculum and/or DVD click here ** Non Profits must also complete and submit a ST3 form with their order to avoid being charged sales tax click here

To preview the DVD click here

To sign-up for the September 2010 training offered in Duluth by the Domestic Abuse Intervention Project click here

 SOUND FAMILIAR?  Men Who Batter don’t forfeit being fathers — they just get a lot of resources dedicated to reforming them.  This is a win/win for the trainers and for male supremacists  (I’m not quite sure whether for the fathers, but if a man thinks he can go beat on women — I don’t care so much about how well things work for him!)  Notice they lead with MARKETING, just like (probably) Melissa Scaia learned at  or with the Duluth people.

I RECOMMEND STOP THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SPEAK WHEN CHILDREN ARE INVOLVED AND YOUR EX MIGHT GO FOR CUSTODY — which if he’s an abuser, he has a motive to do and the pathway is paved for him, too…  this includes if y0u’ve had to go to a shelter.

I am not personally responsible for you, Dear Reader (?), nor an attorney, so take it with a grain of salt, and maybe just be forewarned; is there another option?

SO — IF YOU SPEAK “DOMESTIC VIOLENCE” IN A COURT OR LEGAL SITUATION, WHAT YOU WILL GET — EVENTUALLY — IS A WELL-INTENTIONED (?) FATHERHOOD PROGRAM, whatever other name it may have on the label, AND NOT LONG-TERM CONSEQUENCES FOR HIM AND SAFETY FOR YOU.  AND, YOU MAY UNINTENTIONALLY FLAG YOUR CASE FOR CHILD REMOVAL ALSO, OR FOR PROTRACTED CUSTODY LITIGATION, WHICH IS A FORM OF VIOLENCE AGAINST YOUR KIDS AND YOUR HOUSEHOLD EMOTIONALLY AND FINANCIALLY, AND PSYCHOLOGICALLY, BEING BASED ON FALSEHOODS….

We have fully evolved, 10 years after Access and Visitation (from the HHS angle) and “Safe Havens” (from the DOJ angle) into an apparent professional belief — or at least so they say — that the REAL way to stop violence against women is to pay people to promote fatherhood and hope it takes.

This publication is 4 years old; I wonder what’s next – tell women to get down on their knees again and try harder to please their abusers?  Because the courts are already in their own way telling women that protest or have resistance to whichever program is up next, that they are problematic, high-conflict and just perhaps ought to be punished by watching the ex-batterer or molester walk away triumphant with SOLE custody, and bill her for it, not including the public expense that went up to creating the situation to start with.

Here’s how they worded it, in that pdf.  I’ll “green it up” since FUTURES WITHouT VIOLENCE now has a green theme::

This publication takes as a point of departure the minimum practice standards outlined in the Guiding Principles of the Supervised Visitation Program (Guiding Principles or GP)1 and builds upon that document to propose a continuum of more advanced interventions for the engagement of abusive fathers in visitation centers. These interventions are based on the learnings from the Fathering After Violence Initiative,2 developed by the Family Violence Prevention Fund (FVPF) and five current and past SVP grantees with funding from the Office of Violence Against Women (OVW).

Fathering After Violence is a national initiative that aims to help end violence against women by motivating men to renounce their abuse and become better fathers (or father figures) and more supportive parenting partners using fatherhood as a leading approach.

Too bad they aren’t still taking adequate feedback from women who might’ve spoken about how well trying to “motivate” an abuser to change works. Moreover, if an individual is somehow motivated and has a spiritual epiphany that it’s better to be nice to your wife and kids — what do they expect might just happen to that “epiphany” if said father goes back to his local church, which believes, for example, that “Men are from Dirt” and “Women are from Men” and should be silent in the congregation?  And because the churches, too, are re-arranging their cultures to attract more men and push marriage (who do we actually think was behind the healthy marriage/fatherhood movement to start with?) they tend to have a fresh stock of marriageable (trained to submit) divorcees, sometimes with ready-made families, or they can help get the kids from woman#1. . . . . I mean, this talk is RIDICULOUS — but it’s funded!

No doubt, explored a little further, these too would have federal funding behind them.

Here’s what Mr. Goldstein had to say, at whatever date this was written (pre-publication of his book, though): {{Blank Space for Missing Image Removed/2019}}

Here’s the article, at least part of it.  Intro and Part 1:

10 Ways Anti-sexist Men Can Help Reform the Broken Custody Court System

By Barry Goldstein,

NOMAS Child Custody Task Group

Research has now established that the custody court system’s response to domestic violence cases is deeply flawed.  Courts’ use of outdated practices, unqualified professionals, inadequate training, gender bias and other mistakes has resulted in thousands of children being sent to live with abusers.  This article explores the role anti-sexist men can play in reforming the custody court system.

Extremists who control “fathers’ rights” groups have developed powerful tactics to help abusers maintain what they believe is men’s privilege to control their partners and make the major decisions in the relationship.  Abusive fathers with little involvement with their children during the relationship are seeking custody as a way to pressure his partner to return, punish her for leaving or obtain a favorable settlement of economic issues.  Judges and other professionals, happy to see a father interested in his children have been slow to recognize abusers’ legal tactics.  The male supremacist activists have created an illusion that they speak for most fathers.  This is why it is particularly important that good men speak out for the safety of protective mothers and their children.

Garland Waller is an award winning producer of documentaries and professor of communications at Boston University.  In her chapter for the forthcoming book DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ABUSE and CHILD CUSTODY, she describes the failure of the media and particularly the national media to expose the crisis in the custody court system.  Professor Waller suggests that there is a “tipping point” for this issue and once enough of the public is aware of the problem, the media will cover the issue and the public will no longer tolerate the outdated practices that have ruined so many children’s lives.

9th Circuit Court Chief Judge Kozinski’s Porn Site and Legal Justice

Tim King Salem-News.comCivil Rights Attorney asks Reno Bishop Asked To Head Up Kozinski Porn Review Committee.

Kozinski didn’t act fast enough to prevent Internet users from recording the images on his public porn site.

The suggestions in this article are designed to help society reach this tipping point.

1.  Learn about the subject:  In order for men to play a role in ending these avoidable tragedies, they have to first make themselves knowledgeable about the subject.  Fortunately there is much up-to-date research and information available to refute the myths and stereotypes commonly used by those unfamiliar with this research.  On the web, good information and links can be found at web sites for the Battered Mothers Custody Conference (Batteredmotherscustodyconference.org), National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV.org), Leadership Council (Leadershipcouncil.org), Stop Family Violence (Stopfamilyviolence.org), Liz Library (thelizlibrary.org) and my web site (Barrygoldstein.net).     This is not a complete list and many other good sites will be found in the links available on these sites.

Many good books and articles containing up-to-date research and information are also available.  Men who wish to read about this topic should consider work by Lundy Bancroft, Dr. Jay Silverman, Peter Jaffe, {{URL — CLICK ME!}}, Claire Crooks, Nicholas Bala,***  Joan Zorza, Evan Stark, Michael Lesher, Dr. Amy Neustein, Dr. Maureen Hannah and Barry Goldstein.  These writers in turn cite research from other good sources.  Men should avoid articles based on flawed and biased research such as those cited by male supremacist organizations or Parental Alienation Syndrome propagandists.  

 

Another good source of accurate information about the crisis in the custody court system is domestic violence advocates and protective mothers.

Domestic violence advocates are the only professionals that work full time on domestic violence issues. 

Their information is often minimized based on the belief that they are partisan.  The advocates have the expertise to recognize domestic violence and understand the best approaches to preventing it.  Domestic violence advocates always oppose domestic violence just as firefighters are always against arson and doctors against disease.  No one considers them partisans because it is society’s policy to prevent arson and disease just as it is our policy to prevent domestic violence.  Anti-sexist men can learn from the advocates in their community and support their work.