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

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

An Abundance of Profitable-to-Practitioners Family Law Terms, collated…

leave a comment »

Preparatory to writing up an informal post:

Court Litigants Toolkit:  Secretary of States Business Entity Search, Charitable Registry Search, Comptrollers, Assessors & Nationwide Clues to “Whassup” in your area.

(Disclaimer:  I’m an amateur and this is not practicing law; it’s practicing Lookups, or more specifically, “Look-ats.”)

I’m more of a traffic signal person when there have been accidents on the road, which I think we have to acknowledge in the family law system, there are.  At least from the perspective of the families who lost members they are; from the perspective of “the system” they were justifiable attribution, I guess — because there has hardly been a major redirection since the whole train started, in the mid 1900s.

If you want professional advice, get a professional:  one for each problem you have, i.e., lawyer, a private or retired judge (who’s likely also now a:)  a mediator, or a reputable psychologist, if that’s not an oxymoron.  By then you should also need a financial expert.   Someone has anticipated your needs, because all 3 (excluding the judges) in one place in your local collaborative law group, and be assured when it comes to YOUR best interests, they will function as independent and self-regulating individuals because that’s what professionals in any field do (right?).

Take my advice at your own risk; I’m doing this for my impression of a civic duty, and in retaliation for having been scammed in the family law system for years because I trusted the local professionals to tell me the relevant truths for our family moreso than for their continued operations, which wasn’t thinking like a businessperson, obviously.


  1. IACP: Collaborative law,collaborative practice,collaborative divorce.

    www.collaborativepractice.com/ – Cached

    The International Academy of Collaborative Professionals provides a collaborative law alternative to the typical divorce experience. Locate a collaborative 

  2. Collaborative Practice Groups Around the World

    www.collaborativepractice.com/_t.asp?M=7&T=PracticeGroups – Cached

    iacp,collaborative law,collaborative practice,collaborative divorce 

  3. Collaborative practice – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaborative_practice – Cached

    Overview and History. Collaborative Family Law (also called Collaborative Practice, Collaborative Divorce, and Collaborative Law) was originally a family law 

  4. Collaborative Practice California

Collaborative Practice is a new way to resolve conflicts in a respectful and mutually agreed upon process. Rather than turning the decision-making power over to 


  1. Alternative dispute resolution – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_dispute_resolution – Cached

    Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) (also known as external dispute resolution in some countries, such as Australia) includes dispute resolution processes and 

  2. RSI – Resolution Systems Institute (formerly CAADRS)

    Sep 8, 2011 – The premier provider of resources and services in court alternative dispute resolution, Resolution Systems Institute maintains an online Court 

    You’ve visited this page 2 times. Last visit: 7/7/11
  3. Alternative Dispute Resolution Law – Guide to Alternative Dispute 

    Guide to Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): Arbitrators and mediators have an important role in resolving disputes.

  4. AAA – Arbitration, Mediation and other forms of Alternative Dispute 

    www.adr.org/ – Cached

    Find all the ADR information you need at aaauonline.org ». aaauonline.  More. Muscular Arbitration Conference Dispute Resolution Conference, Dallas, Texas 

  5. Alternative Dispute Resolution

    Alternative Dispute Resolution (“ADR“) processes are alternative methods of helping people resolve legal problems before going to court. ADR involves an 

Jan 8, 2010 – The NYS Unified Court System is committed to promoting the appropriate use of mediation and other forms of alternative dispute resolution 


  1. Parenting Coordination Central – The Premier Resource on 

    www.parentingcoordinationcentral.com/ – Cached

    The Premier Resource on Parenting Coordination. What is parenting coordination? how did it begin? how is it different from other services ordered by the court?

    You’ve visited this page 2 times. Last visit: 8/21/11

  2. Cooperative Parenting Institute | Home

    http://www.cooperativeparenting.com/ – Cached

    Parenting Coordination Training. Click Here to register for the first and only comprehensiveparenting coordination training program! 

    You’ve visited this page 2 times. Last visit: 8/21/11
  3. Cooperative Parenting Institute | Parenting Coordination Training

    http://www.cooperativeparenting.com/pctraining.html – Cached

    The Cooperative Parenting Institute (CPI) is an internationally recognized 


    http://www.thelizlibrary.org/parentingcoordination/parentingcoordinatio – Cached

    parenting coordinatorparenting coordination, domestic violence, risk assessment, child custody research and studies, child custody evaluations, joint custody.

  5. Matthew Sullivan, PhD (Clinical Psychologist): Parent Coordination 

    http://www.californiaparentingcoordinator.com/ – Cached

    He is a pioneer in the field of Parenting Coordination, which he helped develop in Santa Clara County more than 15 years ago, and has led the development of 

  6. [PDF]

    Guidelines for Parenting Coordination Developed by The AFCC 

    File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
    The Guidelines for Parenting Coordination (“Guidelines”) are the product of the  standards of practice for parenting coordination for North America and named 

  7. Parenting coordinator – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parenting_coordinator – Cached

    Parenting coordinator (PC) is a relatively new practice that is used, in some US states, to manage on-going issues in child custody and visitation cases by 

  8. Parenting coordination basics

    Most jurisdictions have no laws or regulations that outline a parent coordinator’s role, so their use and ethical obligations often vary, say experts. Even the names 


  1. ProblemSolving Justice | Center for Court Innovation

    www.courtinnovation.org/topic/problemsolving-justice – Cached

    Thousands of problemsolving courts are testing new approaches to difficult cases where social, human and legal problems intersect. In recent years, many in 

  2. ProblemSolving Courts

    Problemsolving court strategies include extended probation, frequent appearances before a judge, frequent meetings with probation officers, staggered 

  3. Problem  – Office of Justice Programs – U.S. Department of Justice

    Problemsolving courts began in the 1990s to accommodate offenders with Problemsolving courts seek to promote outcomes that will benefit not only the 

  4. Problem Solving Courts

    http://www.nycourts.gov/courts/problem_solving/ – Cached

    Welcome to the ProblemSolving Courts website. With the third largest population in the nation, the New York State Unified Court System serves the needs of 

  5. [PDF]

    Challenges and Solutions to Implementing Problem Solving Courts 


    File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
    ecent years have seen the exponential growth of “problem solving courts,” also  concept of problem solving courts also has expanded to address societal 

  6. Problem Solving Courts – Home

    Problem solving courts represent a shift in the way the justice system traditionally handles offenders with issues involving substance abuse, mental health or 

  7. Indiana Problem Solving Courts

    This page contains information pertaining to the drug courts of Indiana.

  8. In ProblemSolving Court – New York Times

    Apr 26, 2005 – New York is creating new courts where judges are cheerleaders and social workers as much as jurists.

  9. NCSC: Research: ProblemSolving Courts Resource Center

    Dec 7, 2007 – tracked the growth of problemsolving courts; studied the theoretical foundation on which problemsolving courts are based; provided technical 

    ProblemSolving Courts Task Force Page

    Sep 29, 2009 – NACDL’s Task Force on Problem Solving Courts  To fully understand the ramifications of Problem Solving Courts, the Task Force conducted 7 

And of course, the UNIFIED FAMILY COURTS in which problems are solved:

  1. Family Courts – Court Programs

    http://www.flcourts.org/gen_public/family/familycourts.shtml – Cached

    Unified Family Court is a fully integrated, comprehensive approach to handling all cases involving children and families, while at the same time resolving family 

  2. [PDF]

    Unified Family Court Brochure – Florida State Courts


    File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
    UnifiedFamily Court . . . Families don’t think of their problems in terms 

  3. Unified Family Court

    http://www.kingcounty.gov/courts/familycourt/ufc.aspx – Cached

    Sep 1, 2011 – Search Terms: Family Court. Family Court Department of the King County Superior Court. You’re in: Family Court » Unified Family Court. Share 

  4. [PDF]

    An Evaluation of Unified Family Court Pilot Sites in Washington State


    File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat
    In brief, the evaluation found several benefits from Unified Family Court Unified Family Court is an important tool in improving Washington’s response to 

  5. Unified Family Court

    sfsuperiorcourt.org/index.aspx?page=195 – Cached

    Jun 3, 2011 – Unified Family Court. larger font size; smaller font size; font size; text only; text. Patrick J. Mahoney, Supervising Judge 400 McAllister Street 

  6. Unified Family Court – Clerk & Comptroller, Palm Beach County

    Unified Family Court information from the Clerk & Comptroller, Palm Beach County.

  7. Thurston County Family & Juvenile Court

    Unified Family Court Project to Better Serve Families and Children. Thurston County was the first county in Washington State to co-locate all family and 

  8. The Unified Family Court – National Center for Preventive Law

    It is my view that by thinking about and sharpening these concepts, then applying them to aunified family court system, we will help save lives, reduce injury, and 

  9. University of Baltimore School of Law » Unified Family Courts

    law.ubalt.edu › … › CFCC and Unified Family Courts – Cached

    The Unified Family Courts, part of the Center for Families, Children and the Courts website.

  10. [PDF]

    Unified Family Court Evaluation Literature Review


    File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
    by A Hirst – 2002 – Related articles
    A. General Goals of Unified or Coordinated Family Court Programs .  B. Indicators/measurements used in other unified family court program evaluations that 

  11. News for unified family courts


 All these concepts keep the court business booming.  Accordingly, like churches in San Leandro, California — they can hardly be expected to operate in all different kinds of, old, buildings within a geographic area, which brings us to the topic of the real estate boom in courthouse construction and/or leasing.  Who’s paying for it?  While the USPO is laying off workers, and potentially (recent news), the Department of Defense, also, needs to cut $500 billion from its budget, which could send unemployment up by a full percentage point?


Now that the state has already taken over the distribution of child support, or rather, the states have, it’s time for California (largest court system around) to take over the courthouse buildings also:

Fees Fund Courthouse Construction Program

By Paul Shigley on 5 January 2009 – 11:31am

Although gigantic state budget deficits are threatening to stall thousands of public works projects in California, one major effort appears to remain on track: Courthouse construction. The $5 billion program for replacing, rehabilitating or expanding 41 courthouses has its own funding source in the form of civil filing fees and criminal penalties.

Four projects – new courthouses in Los Angeles County, Chico, Red Bluff and Woodland – have been approved and authorized, and eight others have been approved by the state Judicial Council and await final Department of Finance authorization.

“California’s courthouses are in a spiraling state of crisis,” the state Judicial Council reported last year. “Many buildings which house California courts are in a critical state of disrepair and antiquated design. Inadequate security has created dangerous conditions that place children, jurors, witnesses, litigants, visitors and court employees at risk.”

Legislation approved last year (SB 1407, Perata) authorized the issuance of $5 billion in lease-revenue bonds to be retired by new civil and criminal fees. The legislation increased numerous civil filing fees by $20 to $25, raised fees for motor vehicle license, registration or mechanical violations by $15, boosted traffic violator school fees $25, and imposed an assessment of $30 on each felony or misdemeanor conviction, and $35 on each infraction, including traffic offenses.

Like Jack Welch (see “courthousenews.com”) was saying, in filing a class action on this supreme conflict of interest:  “CONVICTIONS = COURTHOUSES.”

The construction program is a follow-up to the ongoing transfer of court facilities from counties to the state government. State lawmakers authorized the transfer in 2002, and court officials have been inspecting, reviewing and ranking the facilities for repair or replacement ever since, said Philip Carrizosa, a spokesman for the Administrative Office of the Courts.

“The counties are more than glad to get this off their budgets. As the counties had gotten more strapped financially, they had pretty much stopped taking care of the courthouses,” Carrizosa said.

Although the state has taken possession of many of the 451 court facilities, it continues to negotiate with counties over some seismically questionable buildings. Essentially, the state is requiring the counties to accept liability should a future earthquake damage these facilities, Carrizosa explained. The state’s negotiating position has eased, as several years ago it insisted counties bring facilities up to seismic safety standards before the state would accept the properties.

Remember that decades ago, the term was “CONCILIATION.”

“CONCILIATION got the courts JURISDICTION” and from then it was a matter of chutes and ladders game, basically:

Cindy Ross (California) summarized this beautifully many years ago, referring to the Washington DC-area “NAFCJ.net,” on how this works:

2/19/2003, Newsmakingnews:

Enacting Conciliation Court Law gives the family court jurisdiction over domestic violence cases, in violation of appropriate family codes and “child’s best interests” laws. For example, in California, while Family Code §3044 establishes a presumption that sole or joint custody for a parent convicted of domestic violence is not in the best interests of children,  Conciliation Court codes are used not only to assist abusive men get custody, but to help them avoid criminal prosecution. [16] Because blame is shifted to mothers by concealing evidence of paternal crimes against women and children, in the Conciliation Court, victims of abuse (not perpetrators) get convicted in accordance with PAS “threat therapy”. [17]

PAS court-ordered threats include jail terms for mothers and institutionalization of children to convince them that the abuse never occurred, but their mothers are crazy. [18] PAS threats have been linked to the death of at least one child. When forced to “choose” between visiting his violent father in a positive frame of mind, or having his mother jailed for his refusal, Nathan Grieco chose suicide instead. [19]

The Conciliation Court uses PAS methodology to give abusive men the legal upper hand. However, “shared parenting” has become the rallying cry of the fathers’ rights movement, primarily because joint custody also means no child support obligations. When AFCC affiliates assist fathers get custody and get out of paying child support, they instigate frivolous litigation for their own financial gain. They take kickbacks and other improper payments to rig the outcomes of the cases.

Judicial slush funds, such as the “hearts and flowers” fund exposed in Los Angeles Superior Court, are established using fees charged for child custody “training” seminars. [20] Because Conciliation Court codes specify how funding is dispersed to the court itself, huge sums of money are diverted out of federal and state block grants by AFCC affiliates, in the guise of “amicable settlement of domestic and family controversies”. [15] (See Codes 1800-1852).

The National Fatherhood Initiative (NFI) was founded in 1994, to “lead a society-wide movement to confront the problem of father absence”, i.e., to embed the fathers’ rights agenda into government policies and programs. [21] In 1995, former President Clinton issued executive orders that directed federal agencies to review and “modify” all family programs and initiatives serving primarily mothers and children, to include fathers and “strengthen their involvement” with children. [22]

President George W. Bush, has appointed NFI founding officials to high level positions in the present Administration; Wade Horn is Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services and Don Eberly is in the White House Office of  Faith Based Initiatives. Under the control of these and other fathers’ rights allies — especially former OCSE Commissioner David Gray Ross (a frequent presenter for CRC) — the federal Department of Health and Human Services Office of Child Support Enforcement has been turned into a men’s custody agency. While publicly touted as “responsible fatherhood programs” official federal documents say the purpose of their programs is to provide noncustodial fathers with free attorneys to litigate for custody. [4]

AFCC affiliated experts who have established federal “model custody” programs using PAS methodology, include Joan Kelly, a founding official of CRC, and Judith Wallerstein of the Center for the Family in Transition. Richard Gardner originally based his PAS theory on Wallerstein’s and Kelly’s research. [23]

Joan Kelly sets up family court services programs and trains judges and “special masters” (mediators with quasi-judicial authority), using Access to Visitation grant funding. She is also connected — primarily through CRC — to Michael Lamb, of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Kelly and Lamb promote materials developed by Richard Gardner (and other pedophiliac experts), in conferences and seminars regarding “parenting time” and “alienation”. [8]

Judith Wallerstein, is an advisor to NFI. According to CA NOW’s “Family Court Report 2002”, in 1986, Wallerstein provided testimony — along with David Levy of CRC — to the House committee on Children, Youth and Families. regarding the “problems of single female parent families”. [24]

Members of Wallerstein’s Center for the Family in Transition and Kelly’s  Northern CA Mediation Center, have “reformulated” PAS as “alienated children”, possibly to distance themselves from Richard Gardner. However, in addition to being connected to some of the most egregious local (Marin County, CA) PAS cases, as the “Northern CA Task Force on the Alienated Child”, their group promotes PAS custody switching methods and “threat therapy” at AFCC conferences around the country and the world. [25]

Wallerstein, Horn, Eberly and others connected to NFI, CRC and AFCC have expanded the Conciliation Court agenda to include not only divorce prevention, but marriage promotion. By merging conciliation court and fathers’ rights agendas with a “faith based” marriage “movement”, they call for even more federal programs promoting “two-parent” families, through “marriage initiatives” funded by TANF/Welfare grants. [26]

In the guise of reducing poverty and promoting child welfare, women are forced to stay married and mothers are punished for seeking divorces. In the guise of amicable custody resolution, federal programs enforce the systematic abuse of women and children. The pretense is that government programs produce responsible fathers and healthy families. The reality is that federally funded misogyny and pedophile protection programs are lining the pockets of corrupted court officials and appointees.

For further information, visit the website of the National Alliance for  Family Court Justice at http://nafcj.org/#_Favorite_Links”>nafcj.org/.

There are other factors, of course, but I don’t believe you could get a much more concise summary almost anywhere.  For a summary of the costs of this program, see FY 2012 budget, HHS/ACF/OCSE (etc.)

These truths haven’t basically changed, and because the people reporting them didn’t have multiple new terms to market, like the latest thing on the scene (BootCamp for New Dads, “neofathering” or “Parents Inside Out” cognitive restructuring programs, etc. . . . . ) it was primarily ignored, including by desperate mothers who listened instead to anyone who would report on their trauma.  The thing to report on, however, is what’s causing that trauma.  Which is systems — not personalities!  (except perhaps for those who designed it to start with, for which if you can grasp “Narcissism” that’s the basic concept.   Already at the top of the society in many ways (Wade Horn, HHS, etc.) why not fix or adjust it a little more?  Status quo is boring, right?)

Now I’m going to start another post, possibly more helpful.

By the way, anyone who can locate the PARENTING COORDINATION CENTRAL’s most current state of incorporation (if any) and whether it’s “nonprofit” — consider this an APB.  I haven’t found it in the states they appear to be doing business in:  Georgia, Texas, Pennsylvania, and Illinois (Chicago).  Perhaps there’s a registered tradename I’m missing somewhere, but last I looked the Parent Coordination Institute (or whatever it was called) with Ms. Termini and Ms/Mrs. Boyan, got shut down as a corporation.


Parenting Coordination Central








Parenting Coordination Central is an all inclusive site offering valuable up-to-date information to parents and professionals on parenting coordination.  It is a central location designed for professionals to share their experiences and expertise.  The goal is to increase awareness and provide educational material on the process of parenting coordination. 

More than one million children each year are affected by divorce and family separation. Half of these children will be raised in families where parents remain in conflict. Many of these parents engage in ongoing litigation over their children for years.** Children raised in an atmosphere of unrelenting conflict are four to five times as likely to grow-up with serious emotional and behavioral difficulties. Not only are high-conflict cases damaging to innocent children, they require an inordinate amount of court time and mental health services.** Consequently, high-conflict divorces pose grave concerns for mental health and legal professionals. In order to minimize the adverse effects of divorce on children and families, many parents are encour-aged or court ordered to work with a parenting coordinator.


**Notice the professional is unable to distinguish whether one side in the litigation is consistently filing actions; they are lumped together, although in ANY court proceeding, someone filed a complaint (or an OSC) and someone has to respond to it.  Also note:  the concept that a biological parent might actually be acting in the best interest of the child is not even considered.  The concept that court orders or penal codes have been violated, and another parent wishes to address this is also “off the table.”  The class divide here is basically “Bad parents / Good professionals,” and something around the level of elementary school paradigm, adapted for an adult culture.    That’s clear displacement of blame through vagueness.

**’require an inordinate amount of court time and mental health services.”  — this ongoing conflict justifies the need for mental health services, and contributes to the crisis at times requiring them.   By switching custody to an unsafe parent, of course there is going to be more litigation!

Parenting Coordination is a non-confidential, child centered process for conflicted divorced and divorcing parents. It is a form of dispute resolution for parents in which mediation would be inappropriate or ineffective due to high levels of conflict. “

I did a 4-part series on who is pushing parenting coordination (i.e., AFCC professionals), and published parts of its handbook, which is hostile to mothers and a roadmap to how to “justify” getting kids away from the moms.   Calling it child-centered is a misnomer — it’s professional-centered.  Calling it NON-CONFIDENTIAl is true, and that’s another drawback, and reduction of appropriate due process for these life-changing situations.


But the best indicator I have is for how few years people can keep their own corporations legally registered.  These people are charging for their trainings.  So what state are they registered in, and if as a nonprofit, where are the last several 990s?  I’d like to see if the income has been reported honestly.


ALSO NOTE:  The pairing of a nonprofit with a for-profit in government networking circles (plus being an advanced degree psychologist or judge) is GRRReat for income.  Also good for the profession — form multiple nonprofits, similar but identical (make sure to have SLIGHTLY different personnel on the boards of the directors, to keep people like myself on their toes) and cite them as if they were independent professionals who suddently decided do to do business with you on the basis of merits of the program, lending it more credibility.

For example:  Ohio Network of Practitioners for Fathers and Families, Center for Families and Children, and  “Community Endeavors Foundation” (formerly, at least for part of its history, Killpack Foundation”) basically consisting of some college classmates who had some brilliant ideas and at least some of who also had some government (Fatherhood Commission of Ohio) connections.

(those names are approximate, see the post for more detailed accuracy on ONPFF, CFC and etc.)

By the time we have tracked down corporations for one of these, there will be more.  However, I hope to gain some momentum on the fields of practice enabled by the access/visitation funding, including “Compromise of Arrears” after raising it too high, or setting it too low, to start with.  The whole OCSE seriously needs some light to be shined on its operations.  Perhaps I will contact California Protective Parents Association, as shining the light on problems is their “thing,” after which I think the appeal to the higher nature of whatever (crooks) have been in the neighborhood will be abashed and reform themselves under the clear light of a judgmental public, and someone else will fix the problem.  Like, for example, “Center for Judicial Excellence” with all its wonderful contacts (the OVW?, Dr. Phil, Oprah, California legislator Mark Leno, etc.)

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

September 16, 2011 at 9:01 am

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

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

%d bloggers like this: