This post sounds more state-specific than it is.  When pilot programs and model courts are being coordinated with help from outside the state to within any state, there’s little state-specific about the courts taking place these days.  Remember also the influence of federal funding, and the speed of change facilitated by our lovely internet technology (think, approximately 1980s becoming more popularly accessible — but governments (especially military, who of course need great communications and data processing), academia, and lawyers will generally be further ahead than most of the public).

Original Post Published 12/21/2011.  I had occasion to refer to it, and began updating 9/8/2015, in part because the Kentucky State Court had re-arranged its website, creating broken-link-syndrome.   On noticing they, too, unified the court system, and by “Judicial Article” in 1976 created an “AOC” with a Chief Justice (i.e., centralized operations), I immediately remembered the NYS Unified Court System and its “Public/private partnership” with the under-reported “Fund for the City of New York,” (first funded 1968) which was labeled at some point, possibly post-1993, the Center for Court Innovation.

The Center for Court Innovation being often mischaracterized in print, I decided it was time to talk about how the system is set for privatization, and of course, global alignment internationally.  This would be hard to achieve directly and get past most voters — but it’s already been arranged to do it INdirectly, under the lable just improving systems, and helping families, communities, and in the public interest.

Tax-exempt, tax (and privately) funded, and WHERE did your famous legal rights go??  Perhaps a better question to ask is where did the money go, which might help answer the former questions.

I added a substantial section (light-green background) to my 2011 commentary and word-battles (at a few points) with a now-defunct forum in Scranton, PA.  It will become a separate post soon, I hope.  If so, this one will be shortened, with a referral link.  Maybe.  (Catch it while you can…)

🙂

Righteous Indignation, Determination to do something, and a Healthy Sarcasm  — admirable, I love it.

Also one has to love anyone who can file enough Right To Knows, get information sufficient to file a CIVIL suit against a FAMILY court racket(eering set of individuals), have (I believe as a result of that and related) suit, the FBI come charging in to haul off evidence (for what purpose, remains to be seen)  and post it for all to see.  And keep posting.  Again, I came here from Kentucky — after I found some dude from this area (Dunmore, PA) getting his product marketed through the Kentucky Family Court System, which has a ridiculous number dof “Divorce Education” programs and one that clearly uses extortion to get Dads in arrears into fatherhood program probably aimed at about 6th grade (maybe tops, 8th) level of intellect.  And that is called a “Court of Justice”!

[**Original Post was 12/21/2011; Updates, Link Correction (different background color)  @ 9/8/2015]:

The Courts.ky.gov web pages have changed since this post, and no longer so clearly display the 11 divorce education programs below. More info at.  Notice the AOC was put in place in 1976 by “the Judicial Article.”  Their summary provides no link to that article, or description of who issued it, was there a referendum, did the judges come together in decide, or what.

 Kentucky Administrative Office of the Courts

The Administrative Office of the Courts is the operational arm of the Judicial Branch. The AOC supports court facilities and programs in all 120 counties, with its main campus in Frankfort.

The AOC was established in 1976 as a result of the Judicial Article. The Judicial Article created Kentucky’s unified court system and made the chief justice head of the state court system, also known as the Kentucky Court of Justice.

---

 

Notice “Unified Court System.”  New York State also has a Unified Court System, and this NYS Unified Court System decided, long ago to collaborate with a Ford-funded “FUND FOR THE CITY OF NEW YORK, INC“##to set up a “Center for Court Innovation, [“Research.  Development. Justice. Reform.”] which all Americans should look up and read about, as its own website calls itself an ongoing engine of justice reform which “emerged” from a single pilot project around Times Square in 1993.

With NYC is a major financial center of the Western Hemisphere (see “Wall Street”) and the entire state is under a Unified Court System, then a collaboration between its court system (unified under one Chief Administrative Judge) engaging with powerhouses — and financially with the City and State of New York — from the private sector to run pilot projects intended for worldwide dissemination to guide systems change, it deserves a closer look.

I recently found a felony domestic violence court in Stearns County, MN, citing this Center and connecting with it.  See colorful, two-page pdf describing the model project.  NO reference made to the Center for Court Innovation, however, it does show which Bureau of Justice Assistance Grant support the project — dated 2007.  The “Stearns County Domestic Violence Partnership” claims to have only been formed in 2008, and as a result of observing circumstances, rather than having, perhaps, been contacted or solicited somehow by the CCI (or someone connected with them) as a possible demo site for this court. Brochure (pdf) heading:  “Ending the cycle of domestic violence through a timely, focused, collaborative response.”

This project was supported by Grant No. 2007-DJ-BX- 0057 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime. Points of view or opinions in this document are those of the author and do not represent the official position or policies of the United States Department of Justice.

The Same project, described at the CCI site:

The Center for Court Innovation [“CCI”] website describes how the Stearns County project was modeled on a Brooklyn DV court.  The four elements outlined as  Dedicated Judge, Ongoing Monitoring, Resource (i.e., referrals) Coordinator, and “Coordinated Community Response.” [“CCR”]  At least that last element, “CCR” includes specific model derived from a recently-deceased (2012) lesbian, well-known domestic violence leader, Ellen Pence, who has acknowledged deriving her model in part from a Brazilian Socialist reformer Paolo Friere, aimed in part at pre-literate or less than literate communities, and in other part, from a “social theorist” from Toronto.  Sorry if it offends some people to mention that Ms. Pence was apparently a lesbian — however she is dealing with matters affecting ALL kinds of mothers, and if indeed she has never given birth, or been subjected herself to the experiences that we go through in the family courts, in the post-1996, fatherhood, faith-based, and marriage-promotion era, it’s a lack of perspective and experiential awareness showing through.

The model implies the more community services the better, when in fact, it bills the public for services presumed to be stopping or reducing DV, when some of them (supervised visitation) have actually facilitated familicides, murders, homicides, and suicides which would not have been possible WITHOUT that model.  In addition, it sets in place a number of federally-assisted professions which, once set up, simply tend to expand.

This “CCR” response dovetailing with top-down system reform cuts out the grassroots voices (people not on the elite “roundtables” who run out-of-state conferences to determine “what works” for a nation, or a world, as to stopping domestic violence).  This phrasing is also inbred to the VAWA grants themselves, I found recently:

Coordinated Community Response: A coordinated community response involves increased information sharing, communication and coordination among criminal justice agencies and community-based social services; a consistent and collaborative response to domestic violence; and more opportunities for continued education and training on domestic violence and the courts.

The Minnesota material referencing the Center for Court Innovation mischaracterized (in at least one place, it could be said, lied) and minimized who it was.  For example, a 9/2012 press release from the Minnesota county website , announcing this  Stearns County DV Partnership, formed it says in 2009,  now had a website, the court had been started, and it  calls the Center for Court Innovation (in fine print, at the bottom, and with no link to it)

 Minnesota’s first Domestic Violence Court (DVC) opened in April 2009.  The Center for Court Innovation (CCI), a VAWA-funded New York agency specializing in domestic violence court establishment and research, reports that the Stearns County DVC is the only repeat felony domestic violence court program in the United States. [[If so, where’s the link to that statement on the website?]]

It is certainly not the only domestic violence court program, the key words here may be “repeat felony DV court program.”  Among the mischaracterizations in just that one phrase (bold, maroon font) above, are:

• “a New York agency”:  “agency,” though often used loosely, still implies part of government.  Sometimes nonprofits are (wrongfully) called “Agencies.”  However CCI is NEITHER  a New York “agency”(even if functioning as an “agency” while being a nonprofit were considered) NOR EVEN a NY business or legal entity, BUT INSTEAD a public/private partnership between government (the courts) and a privately owned and controlled, significant, and wealthy tax-exempt foundation.  However the Fund for the City of New York, under its own EIN#, does do business with the state and city of New York, as many foundations do.
• “VAWA-funded”: Although it takes VAWA funds (see page 46 on “Consolidated Statements” link to this Fund, link right below this bulleted list), the Fund (not “CCI”), it takes funds from multiple federal and state agencies, and besides was originally funded by the Ford Foundation, before there was any VAWA (VAWA only passed in 1994, and the Office of Violence Against Women under the USDOJ, to administer grants under VAWA, only in 1995.  The Fund dates to 1968!!  And has been active since at least 1979 (probably earlier).
• “specializing in domestic violence court establishment and research”:The CCI does, among many other things, DV Court Establishment and research, but by no means is any honest characterization of what it does — as anyone can tell by visiting and reading the site.

Viewed 9/8/2015, I dare you to characterize  CCI’s list of “Projects” showing the specialization described on the Stearns County website!

Project List

Bronx Community Solutions

Bronx Community Solutions is an initiative that seeks to apply a problem-solving approach to non-violent cases in the Bronx.

Bronx Infant Court

Bronx Infant Court seeks to address trauma among young children involved in Family Court cases in the Bronx.

Brooklyn Domestic Violence Court

The Brooklyn Felony Domestic Violence Court adjudicates all indicted domestic violence felonies in the borough of Brooklyn.

Brooklyn Justice Initiatives

Brooklyn Justice Initiatives seeks to forge a new response to misdemeanor defendants in Kings County, New York.

Brooklyn Mental Health Court

The Brooklyn Mental Health Court seeks to craft a meaningful response to the problems posed by defendants with mental illness.

Brooklyn Treatment Court

The Brooklyn Treatment Court is New York City’s first drug treatment court.

Brownsville Community Justice Center

Brownsville Community Justice Center seeks to provide young people in Brownsville opportunities to avoid incarceration, unemployment, and poverty.

Centre for Justice Innovation

Centre for Justice Innovation seeks to promote criminal justice reform in England and Wales.

Child Witness Support Program

The Child and Adolescent Witness Support Program provides mental health support and referrals to children and adolescents exposed to violent crime.

Crown Heights Community Mediation Center

The Mediation Center is a unique neighborhood institution that works to improve community problem-solving, collaboration, and inter-group relations.

Domestic Violence Court

New York’s criminal domestic violence courts build on a court model first established with the Brooklyn Felony Domestic Violence Court in 1996.

Harlem Community Justice Center

The Harlem Community Justice Center seeks to solve neighborhood problems—including youth crime, landlord-tenant disputes.

Integrated Domestic Violence Court

Integrated Domestic Violence Courts seek to concentrate responsibility for defendant oversight in the hands of a single judge.

Manhattan Family Treatment Court

The Manhattan Family Treatment Court addresses the problems of children neglected by substance-abusing parents or guardians.

Midtown Community Court

Launched in 1993, the award-winning Midtown Community Court is the country’s first “problem-solving” court. It has been replicated across the world.

Newark Community Solutions

Newark Community Solutions is an innovative justice project that applies a problem-solving approach to non-violent cases in Newark’s Municipal Court.

Parent Support Programs

Parent Support Program is helping non-custodial parents meet their child support obligations and build stronger relationships with their children.

Parole Reentry Court

The Parole Reentry Court helps parolees returning from incarceration make the transition from life in prison to responsible citizenship.

Peacemaking Program

Peacemaking is a traditional Native American approach to justice that focuses on healing and restoration rather than punishment.

Poverty Justice Solutions

Poverty Justice Solutions seeks to close the justice gap by expanding the pool of attorneys available to represent New Yorkers in Housing Court.

Queens Youth Justice Center

Queens Engagement Strategies for Teens is a community-based program that provides an alternative to youth detention.

Red Hook Community Justice Center

The Red Hook Community Justice Center in Brooklyn is the nation’s first multi-jurisdictional community court.

Staten Island Youth Justice Center

The Staten Island Youth Justice Center consists of several programs focused on positive engagement of local and justice-involved youth.

Syracuse Office

The Center for Court Innovation’s Syracuse office supports innovative justice reform projects throughout upstate New York.

UPNEXT

UPNEXT is a workforce development and fatherhood engagement initiative of the Midtown Community Court.

Westchester Court Education Initiative

The Westchester Court Education Initiative promotes educational stability and academic success for students involved in the Westchester Family Court.

Youth Court

Youth courts train teenagers to serve as jurors, judges and advocates, handling real-life cases involving their peers.

Youth Domestic Violence Court

Brooklyn’s Youthful Offender Domestic Violence Court is the first court to address exclusively misdemeanor domestic violence cases among teenagers.

Youth Justice Board

The Youth Justice Board is an after-school program that brings together young people to study and propose solutions to the public safety challenges.

 

 

If it is the engine, I have to say the courts are the vehicle, and the Fund for the City of New York (and taxpayers) are putting the gas in the tank. And that fund certainly has some gas to put there.  See Consolidated Financial Statements, Tax Year 2012 (most recent showing, and includes “Affiliated” Organizations, who would shown on a tax return “Schedule R” as “Related” organizations:
Fund for City of NY 2012/2013 Consolidated Financial Statemts (103pp) See Gov’t Grants (p46) & Note F (from CharitiesNYS.com)
## (Click to see NYS corporate registration of a domestic nonprofit established 6/19/1968.  Or click to search its NYS Charitable Registration; it didn’t register as a charity for 11 to 12 years.  Why?  Summary cites 1/23/1979, but Reg. Form (not viewable from website) reads Received 4/1/1980,  one-and-a-quarter years later).  EIN# 132612524)

 

 

The question to ask, who is in the driver’s seat?

Notice how often the word “Reformers” and “Justice Reformers” is mentioned.  That’s who it seeks to help:

The Center for Court Innovation seeks to help create a more effective and humane justice system [[according to …..???]] by designing and implementing operating programs, performing original research, and providing reformers around the world with the tools they need to launch new strategies.  

Founded as a public/private partnership between the New York State Unified Court System and the Fund for the City of New York, the Center creates operating programs to test new ideas and solve problems. The Center’s projects include community-based violence prevention projects, alternatives to incarceration, reentry initiatives, court-based programs that seek to promote positive individual and family change, and many others..

The Center disseminates the lessons learned from innovative programs, helping justice reformers around the world launch new initiatives. The Center also performs originalresearch evaluating innovative programs to determine what works (and what doesn’t).

The Center for Court Innovation grew out of a single experiment; the Midtown Community Court was created in 1993 to address low-level offending around Times Square. The project’s success in reducing both crime and incarceration led the court’s planners, with the support of New York State’s chief judge, to establish the Center for Court Innovation to serve as an ongoing engine for justice reform in New York.

[Funny, neither the NYState Chief Judge nor “the court’s planners” are named.  What entity plans the courts is not named either.]

Including the right to be forced into more Parenting Classes . . . . .  I wonder, is a “Judicial Center” like a one-stop county-based Family Justice Center, like California has? ….

Here are those ELEVEN DIVORCE EDUCATION COURSES (one of which leads us to Dunmore, PA and Lackawanna County problems…..).  This presumes that everyone divorcing is ignorant about divorce (probably never heard or saw anyone else experience divorce with kids) and needs to be taught a lesson.  And someone has to pay the teachers, obviously, and buy their coursework.

Here they are:

“Turning It Around” is the one that extorts noncustodial (fathers) behind on arrears.  Take our course = get out of jail free card.  Of course, someone pays for that, and probably a fatherhood program, i.e., coming from funds that would otherwise go to feed a child.  All of this comes under what is called on the label — and to the public a COURT OF JUSTICE (does that sound “just” — that everyone needs a parenting class, and fathers need to learn how to stand up and be real men?).

But in private sessions and collaborations, these are actually holistic ways of solving family’s problems for them, against their will, and at their expense — a well as society’s problems for itself, at ITS expense.  See seventy (count’em, 70) new buildings and outsourced parenting classes.

What is divorce education? and why is there a need? [1] As the number of family-related court filings has risen over the years, families have increasingly relied on the courts to resolve family law issues and problems including child custody, visitation, child support, paternity, emergency protective orders, and restraining orders. . .

In an effort to help family members cope with divorce, judges [2] are increasingly requiring parents to attend programs to make them more aware of the impact of divorce on children.[2b]  These programs give families exposure to information and skills [3] that may ultimately lead to a reduction in the number of disputes that require a court’s intervention.[4]  Most importantly, by requiring divorcing parents to attend these programs, the courts are making a statement to the community that “children matter” [5]! Divorce education programs are being treated as a “first line of defense”[6] . It is estimated that up to a million children a year across the country will experience the impact of divorce.[see 2]

That’s prime-time baloney, and just “how it goes” in Unified Family Courts these days.  There’s a reason they’re unified too — probably to make more central control of required parent education (etc.) easier to do a “AFCC judicial coup” on. Underlined, numbered phrases are better translated:  

[1]   What the hell, and whose idea, is divorce education — and IS there a need?  No.  In fact, judging by these courses, hell no!

[2]   . . . help family members . . . judges” in the same phrase is an oxymoron.  We are talking JUDGES.

The insistence that a non-family (it just split!) is actually a family is just the beginning of the built-in cognitive dissonance of this venue.  Any families that are actually working it out for their own kids are excluded — they just settled their differences without court intervention.  Ergo, what remains is former families (if that) that are clearly demonstrating, they are NOT about to function as families, or interested in doing so, either.

Many of these are victims of crime by their exes, or the other parent.

So a more honest word would be litigants.  They are in court — someone filed a complaint or motion – so the term that applies uniformly is “litigating.”   But if a FAMILY court site said  “litigants,” then someone might drift mentally back to thinking that rights, such as to due process, etc. actually still apply, which is not the desired effect of Family Law.   Getting rid of the concept of individual rights is at the heart of it.  Hence — when discussed, there is not one litigating/moving parent v. another, by definition, litigating/responding parent, but there is ONE entity, “family” which has members.  That entity, again, is at this point already a fiction.

The purpose of requiring divorce education is a captive consumer audience of programs that wouldn’t sell-themselves without court intervention.

A more accurate translation of [2] is:  “In an effort to supplement their state-payrolls, although being a judge is one of the highest per-hour professions around, with no potential lack of customers in sight, and to further fund their pensions & retirement lifestyle, including in the very far outside chance, despite judicial immunity and a hugely wide ‘discretion’ available to family law judges in particular, if they get thrown off the bench or caught & punished for doing something really bad or illegal,  Judges are increasingly REQUIRING parents to attend programs run by them and their colleagues, some of which also require textbooks they, or their colleagues, have written, as pre-planned in tax-deductible conferences that strategize how to convince parents and the public that this is helping – the parents, or the public.

[2b] this is code for a Kids’ Turn program, or something like it — which Kentucky, as I’ve said before and will again, has here in its offerings.  By dating and comparing these various programs, across whichever state they cropped up in (and looking at their contents), one can deduce which was the grandpappy of the parent education courses, and which were offspring, or simply cousins.  Right now, the earliest I can see is 1987 Kids’ Turn as direct to the courts.  However, there are some based in Kentucky which pre-date, I think.  (NIRME/IDEALS — but these are not court-ordered yet, I think, they are marketed with support from HHS, though as many parent education programs are).

[3] . . . again, people going to court have a fight on their hands, and are seeking justice — not therapy, or more life skills.  For some partners, true justice would be having  a judge or someone else validate their thesis that their ex is nuts — and hence not competent to handle custody, ergo, who gets child support if they aren’t? As such, the other partner will be FIGHTING this.  But in the context of divorce, the most helpful skills would be how to get and keep their case out of the courts sooner, nor later.   Even if they were needed,  the theory that the courts are crowded because parents (some of them bearing Ph.D.s and masters in various professions) lack “information and skills,” ignores the extent to which courts get crowded when even one really poor custody decision is likely to bring the other parent (often the nonabusive one) back into court seeking (ignorantly) to correct it.

In fact, who has measured yet whether there are more — not less -divorces because of the billion-dollar-a year child support enforcement and distribution industry placing undue financial pressure on the individual households across the country?  Or because of the inane (assuming the motive is what it claims to be) practice of assigning criminal matters to mediation, and then having the county pay the mediator, plus federal grants subsidize the mediator, which in turn then encourages more and more mediation, simply to help support the courthouses and those in them?

[4] . . . “disputes that require a court’s intervention.”

If it’s just a “dispute,” then it doesn’t require major intervention.

If it’s an assault, it does require intervention — to deter further assaults.  Hence jail, or prosecution would be in an order.  Whoever puts up these websites is getting sloppy – the word “dispute” is AFCC code for domestic violence or child molestation, just like the word “estranged wife” is clue that there’s been a “dispute” that involved a crime scene cleanup.  These disputes do not REQUIRE a court’s intervention, but by setting up systems to claim jurisdiction wherever their IS a custody “dispute” the court system itself has been trawling for cases that otherwise would be settled somewhere else.    The statement is a lie and reveals the “Court’s” public posture that in almost any case whatsoever, the fact that parents are in court indicates that BOTH (not just one)of them are incompetent and hence deserve forcible mental health treatment, or to acquire some “conflict resolution” skills.

[5] . . . ‘by requiring divorcing parents to attend these programs, the courts are making a statement to the community that “children matter” ‘.

This appears to be a typo.  It should read thus:

. . . ‘by requiring divorcing parents to attend these programs, the courts are making a statement to the community that “children don’t matter” ‘

If the courts were so concerned about single parent household and the children, they’d wish to preserve — not drain – parent finances and time.  By their own admission, the legislatures and family codes usually say that it’s in the best interests of the child to have frequent and ongoing contact with both parents.  Forcing them to sit through inane classes, and pay for it, shows just how selfish the judges are, not to mention narcissistic.

[6] . . .Divorce education programs are being treated as a “first line of defense”

Have you heard of the “royal plural,” as in (spoken with dignity), “We are not amused.”  Or the royal third person, i.e, when speaking of onesself, or one’s own creations, using third person absent any possessive pronouns.  [[actually — on looking it up, see link, it turns out this wasn’t the royal plural.  Queen Victoria actually was speaking for more than one person.]]  Anyhow, I think enough people understand this as a single entity speaking in plural for  majesty and to add extra weight to the statement, which otherwise would just be a personal statement of belief or feeling.  “The royal plural” has what I’ll call the pseudo-scientific passive.  In this, the speaker is declaring he/she/it (which is whoever wrote that website for the Kentucky State Court of Justice?) is not an agent of the situation; nay they were a passive bystander, a simple observer of the situation, a qualified researcher narrating how the world is.

“Divorce education programs are being treated as a “first line of defense” is better translated, as posted on the state court website:

[[Shh.  Confidential — do not leak this!]] “WE are selling OUR programs as a “first line of defense.”  

Pretty smart, don’t you think, considering WE are already government employees!

Divorce and parental flaws are the enemy.  That “divorce = enemy” line is quite the coup, considering it’s now no-fault divorce era in many states.  If that doesn’t drive them nuts soon enough, we’ll come up with another insulting phrase, like “parent coordination.”  There is no FAULT to be assigned in divorce to one partner or the other, therefore divorce itself will become the enemy.  Yahoo, ka-ching!

= = = = =

YEP — that’s the Kentucky State Court of Justice and God only knows (I haven’t counted yet) how many others across the country.

Constitutional Amendment establishes the “AOC” in KY — 1975-76

Further history of the Unified Court System  (primarily Bar Association promoting this and educating the public about it..sounds like…)

Proud Overview of the Kentucky Court of Justice – Admin. Office of the Courts, from http://courts.ky.gov/aoc/

. . .

The AOC carries out duties that are mandated by the Kentucky Constitution, including administering the Judicial Branch budget, building and maintaining court facilities, maintaining court statistics through a statewide case management database, administering personnel policies and payroll for court personnel, and providing educational programs for judges, circuit court clerks and support staff.

So, who in the AOC put those 11 Divorce Education links on there? and were these selected by administrative order, or something involving the citizens/ general public?

The Kentucky Court of Justice is one of the commonwealth’s finest achievements and has earned a national reputation for many of its initiatives, including Family Court, Drug Court, judicial center facilities, judicial education, pretrial services, court interpreting services, and diversity awareness. Its statewide case management system has put Kentucky on the cutting edge of court technology.

The Kentucky court system is committed to providing fair and equal treatment to its personnel and to the citizens who come before its courts, regardless of race, gender, religion, ethnicity or sexual orientation.

The head of the AOC helps draft legislation for it:

Laurie K. Dudgeon

As director of the Kentucky Administrative Office of the Courts, Laurie K. Dudgeon oversees nearly 3,300 employees, including 403 elected justices, judges and circuit court clerks. She administers the $300 million Judicial Branch budget, drafts and promotes passage of legislation affecting the courts, and works with officials at the county, state and national levels.

Since being named director in 2009, she has commissioned the National Center for State Courts to audit the AOC in an effort to achieve a leaner, more efficient organizational structure. . . .

Ms. Dudgeon currently serves on the Governor’s Recovery Kentucky Task Force and has been actively involved with Hospice of the Bluegrass, the American Cancer Society and New Horizons Child Development Center. She resides in Frankfort with her two children, Kathleen, 10, and Tate, 7.  ((She’s a single Mom?)) ((appears to be a Disciples of Christ church-related child care))

FROM KENTUCKY, still:  Divorce Education link — here’s the menu of offerings to help parents and kids experiencing the impact of divorce, with our friendly kid-educator from Pennsylvania in red:  “Kids First: Children Coping with Divorce and Family Conflict“

Divorce Education Programs
	Cooperative Parenting and Divorce** Divorce Care Divorced and Divorcing Parents Families in Transition Kids First: Children Coping with Divorce and Family Conflict Kid’s Time PACT (Parents Achieving with Collaborative Teams) – Jefferson County project Parents Are For Good Parents Education Clinic (PEC) Turning It Around (TIA) Tween Time

**by coincidence (?) to take these classes, parents must contact a publisher in Georgia who lists Ann Marie Termini (of PA) and Susan Boyan (of GA, I think still) to find out how to enroll. . . . .

That’s odd, because Kentucky seems to be full of parent educators and relationship educators, in fact some of the older ones in the field hail from Kentucky.  I guess the grass is always greener out of state (either that, or parents are going to be slower to recognize what hit them, or hear about parental complaints on custody outrages from other states?). . . ..

Is this registered in Kentucky at all?   Let’s see:  Corporations search on only “Kids First” term shows none by the full name, and out of the (only) 7 active corporations with the name “Kids First,” some are academies, two are dental clinics, leaving — well, do you see any which might relate to the one being sold through the state court site?  And of the 16, only 7 are active leading me to think that groups focused on “Kids” are not too good at staying in business.

I also just searched “Muklewicz” “Libassi” and (for fun) “Termini” under founding officer and registered agent name, coming up zero.  You can look yourself — is the state of Kentucky forcing Kentucky residents to do business illegally in Kentucky with a foreign corporation not registered in their state?  Because I’ll bet I could find at least three California corporations that apparently fit that qualification.

Here’s the link to search by name, page has by organization name also. https://app.sos.ky.gov/ftsearch/default.aspx?path=nameavail

Now, Back in PENNSYLVANIA:

I was working on this post for several days, in part because I hesitated to “out” that one of the founders of the Doherty Deceit Forum (it seems there are two — Joe Pilchesky, and wife Joanne).  As his “stop the fraud” is very “in your face” he’s also very “in your face” when challenged (according to facts), especially by a woman. I am complying with the terms of the forum (which means you don’t get the backstory that I hear from three — count’em — sides on the particular relationships between (now that it’s out in the open),

• Joe,
• His “paramour” (his words), a Dr. Stephanie Tarapchak, whose custody case it seems he’s territorially defending in public and in the courtroom.  This is one of two custody cases, primarily, that are posted and avidly discussed on-line, and
• Joanne, his wife.

ABOUT THE LOCAL SOAP OPERA — 

Apparently I’m not the only one that took some heat for fact-checking, or countering some statements; in one of the comments, Joanne (who was a moderator of the forum, although much more subdued in tone, and posting less often) she contradicted him, and he told her to “take a long walk off a short pier.”

So few WOMEN (mothers) will go do this Right To Know process, it’s fine with me if some guy does it instead, even if it’s to protect a woman he’s having an affair with, in addition to helping the public.  Up to a point.

Anyhow here’s a recent exchange, which brings up one point:  No more hero worship.  Bake your own cookies, do your own lookups, and scramble your own eggs, in this field!   Pennsylvania has a serious, problem, obviously (see Luzerne County, see Penn State, see FBI raiding this county’s courthouse AFTER the finances of it were starting to get laid bare).  But the concerned public didn’t have any trouble with the sexist comments, the cheating on one’s wife and degrading her on-line, etc.

So, Joanne (who apparently moved out a long time ago) gave Joe a “Happy Christmas”  — and a Protection Order with Kickout.  Apparently (actually, I checked the Recorder of Deeds), the house is in her name, as of December 2001.*****

@@@@@

Well, that’s a male point of view on the kickout, and the female point of view is on the face of the order, no doubt, as well as the declaration to go with it.  Obviously this is a civil order (I don’t see any arrest record mentioned).  He says he’s going to post the order, too, and I’m sure will.  I doubt any of the judges (who in this case are being scrutinized by the same person) were highly upset at having the order signed, and I hope he has a good place to live.   From the looks of the forum, he has lots of supporters, so if it’s not possible to just up and rent somewhere, maybe they’ll be kind and hospitable.

I just wish the focus would remain on duplicating that effort.  Not everyone can file a civil suit (particularly depending on what’s at stake — like one’s job, or contact with/safety of one’s child) but this literally identified the presence of all kinds of financial fraud — and intent to commit, plus a step by step “how” — in a family courthouse.  And I believe it was that action — and not the picketing or the posting of particular custody nightmare cases — that got the FBI to swoop down on the Lackawanna County, PA’s family courthouse.

I’ve blogged close on one month (about 100 posts) on this forum, and provided link after link, plus exhortations to look at the nonprofits in the courts, particularly the membership organizations.  I also posted direct grants to the county in question, and identified how, where, and with whom the problem personnel are hooking up with each other and calling in the cronies.  In the process of this, obviously, all sorts get involved, particularly in such a large forum with both men and women involved.

In the three threads dealing with mothers (two in particular who have opened their cases for posting on-line) problems with custody loss, or trauma,  there are a number of gravatars which involve (animated) bouncing boobs, lingerie, your basic “T&A,” some pissing, some violence, and a rather odd one which shows a naked baby, in motion, with just a napkin (not a diaper) over it, called “All Tease No Please.”  (?? one of the cases reported is about custody having gone to a former sex abuser of a child).

I figure, well, that’s just part of the deal, and not too big a deal, with an open forum, and not the main point, let’s get to the financial matters that have allowed a dictatorial, allegedly overcharging, leaseless contractless GAL (Danielle Ross)/Judge (Harhut, who by court order brought her on board to run business from county property, apparently for free) combo to funnel business to a parent coordinatior, and other cases    I reason, it’s an open forum (after moderator who screens/approves signups) and a whole variety of creative expression avatars.  The primary offence which would prompt being thrown off the forum seems to be outing private identities or posting contents of private messages.  And as the forum already underwent a court challenge backed by the ACLU after someone unfavorably portrayed ON the forum (and politically connected to the Pennsylvania State Police) got it shut down improperly, without notice to the owners.  AND — get this — the company isn’t even a US Company, it’s based in Canada!  (the paperwork is under “cases” at DohertyDeceit.com  (Doherty, FYI, is the mayor).

There was another poster who got his “wings clipped” after an ethnic slur.  In a forum that has gotten, it says, 19 million hits to date (open since 2005), it’s pretty tolerant.  But, as they don’t tolerate ethnic slurs, not even one, that opens the door for me to bring up slurs based on gender — not just good-humored, or part of the general talk, but pretty aggressive ones.  And the verbal ones are coming mostly from Joe.  Some are below, and I sure don’t feel like rehearsing all of them.  Assertions that all women are all manipulative (using pregnancy to land a man), or other matters.  These came from the moderator, who is also functioning as a hero and leader to some of the mothers involved.  There were two moderators — Mr. and Mrs. (Joe and Joane) Pilchevsky, but he is more active submitting posts, at least on these threads.  I began to wonder what it’s like working alongside and living with someone who holds this view of all women, and is upfront about expressing it, too.  Not to mention, who it seems has been having an affair with someone else who’s on the topic of the forum (which is evident from it).

(Well — she wasn’t living with him, it turns out).

So recently — after weeks on-line,  while respecting the rules myself, and understanding all this, I commented on a particularly objectionable photo (gravatar) of a full-frontal naked woman (at least from waist up) half-submerged in a pool,  plus another one with the theme “under the thumb” which repeatedly showed a close up (drawn, not photo) of a thumb being completely pierced by a nail, over and over.   Many of the cases that end up in the family courts come from people who’ve been assaulted in the home and exposed to violence already.  We don’t need more.

So I commented on these, and took, from the moderator, a full-frontal “shut your feminist face” type retort.   Potentially jeopardizing men’s right to entertain themselves visually (to hold their attention) while reforming the courts and being the hero of distressed mothers oppressed by them — has to be handled promptly, and firmly.  I was told first, I am just jealous of the (avatar’s) boobs, then that I “need to get laid” and have a man tell me to “shut the fvck up” with all my “feminist drivel.”   Go search if you’re really curious, to learn what society should really be like.  Women are to be seen (looked at), fvcked, and definitely not heard, except for the applause and approval part.  What has this world come to, that some are speaking for themselves no!

Can’t say for sure, but possibly this “proud-of-it” misogyny may have had some say in the moderator’s previous marital experiences?

I returned a few comments “in kind.”   At the bottom of the question, I asked, if you’re so smart how come in the six years this forum has been up, no one figured out that several of your key players were AFCC leaders, or that there’s a statewide effort out to “Change the Culture of Custody“?

Moderator’s reply then cut off the bottom of the post, reframed the question (again) to make himself look like the ethical and rational person in the conversation, ignored the part where I said, look I understand free speech, and let the “parade of gravatars” (challenging my comment that some were offensive) begin; just wanted to make the point.  I replied, again quoting the part cut off, and as you can tell, at some point in time, FORUM participation becomes a waste of time.  Really, what concerned me was driving others away from valid information, either because (as women), they don’t take to wading through the visuals and put-downs, or because as the forum is pretty much a Joe P. fan club (with some exceptions), speaking up might jeopardize membership.  Sometimes I wonder whether / how many / if any of the posters are emotional extensions of this hero, or literally — like the visuals — electronic creations with the same IP (or street) address, but different user names.   And if so, how sick is that?

I cannot give the full picture of this without breaking the forum rules, i.e., documenting a private-messaging exchange which was of quite different character than the public.  However, apparently my presence on there was ruffling some feathers (cock’s, not hen’s), particularly by challenging false statements overtly.  I replied another time, and threw in a sarcastic (and likewise crude) reference back at Joe, which is from what I understand by policy and example, a form of protected speech on the forum, and was told I am busting his nuts:

Joe Pilchesky Status: Offline Posts: 10588 Date: Dec 12 4:25 PM, 2011

(ME) Joe, these are matters of life and death, and about whether or not children are safe in their homes or on visitation with others –and in such cases, despite all the BS folklore around, there’s no room for it. (JOE, italics) Look, I’m in the information gathering and dispensing business. I don’t pay attention to avatars other than how amusing some are, while other match up nicely to a poster’s username.  I like that my posters use avatars to express their artistic/creative side. It’s a non-issue unless you want to make it one for yourself.  Let it go. (etc.) You missed your calling as an attorney — derailing others, going into attack mode in hopes to shut down the topic, sarcasm, and a desire to control the conversation when challenged; you need to win, and at some level it’s just a game.  (I just got my analysis, so there’s yours).   Yeah, and all that: I’ve not controlled one conversation here since I opened for business in 2005, other than keeping abusive posters in line and editing content that was either threatening to another person or the basis for a libel action against that poster and me. Other than that I let it fly as it flies.  My other objective is to keep the place open 24/7 for nice people like you to cut my nuts off once in a while, which I appreciate.   __________________ “Justice doesn’t have to be fair, equitable or honorable – it just has to be justice”

Bold added for both comments, above.  My phrase “control the conversation” (in the forum) had one meaning, and his reply (particularly with context removed) “control the conversation” (by removing the post, or posting privileges) is a context-switch.  In context of the message exchanges, I was talking about the habit of reply to challenges of facts with comments deriding women as women — or me, as a woman.  (we have never met or talked on the phone).   This also serves to derail and curtail exchange about whether or not some assertion was true — or false.

Here’s  my prior comment, preparatory to taking myself off there (the alternative would be doing battle regularly on falsehoods that i believe intentionally mislead parents so they do not follow actually get enlightened about the role of the fatherhood funding, child support diversions, and grants in the courts — identify conflicts of interest, or other leverage to expose fraud — and act on it.

Though I believe Joe knows better (i.e., has himself filed plenty of lawsuits and right-to-know letters), he has not, to date, been willing to acknowledge (1) the fatherhood factor, or (2) the role of the nonprofit trade associations which the exact players they are protesting (several of them) belong to, and which is how they tend to organize, in PA and elsewhere.  And I believe the reason the fatherhood funding can’t be acknowledged is because it would admit sexism as a factor in the courts; and the AFCC, I don’t know — except that the information came from a female who challenged him.

I know I’m not going to hang around with people who are not hungry to keep learning, and so here’s my comment, preparatory to  getting my behind off the forum, including with some disgust not so much at the T&A factor in the gravatars, at the dog-in-the-manger and egotism.  Well, and do I want to support a group of people, particularly mothers, who haven’t put two and two together:  Your leader, whose lead you are following, and help are so grateful are, hates women in the general, and being challenged in the particular — so if you expect assistance, just deal with it.

Trust me, “just acommodate it,” that’s a dead end!

Anyhow on the date below, I wrote; quoted segments (easier to see on the forum) in  BLUE

Outlaw_Wild_DoubleBill-KickbackCourts Status: Online Posts: 97 Date: Dec 12 3:02 PM, 2011

(and so on — I posted more links showing the “fatherhood” grants, affecting custody matters as they are intended to….) and at the bottom of the same comment (again) linked to my blog, and to an on-line radio show which I’d been recommending people to — including with vivid, bold graphics — which explains the financial trail, or at least says it’s going to. As follows:

I’m the person who connected the host of the show with this forum, who then apparently got him — although he was late so a woman whose case he has espoused got on in his stead — on the show, after I also was.

If you’re salaciously or otherwise curious for the verbal karate of the exchange, go here:

*

Next thing you know — here is a referral to the same show (without acknowledging that this was my submission), and a further summary of “how it works” which — again — being pretty easy to read, narrated in local terms — contains no links to anything, makes several unsubstantiated (and false) claims, and again completely omits the role of the nonprofits in the courts.  It also accuses a different judge of taking kickbacks (without identifying that he has) and cites a $20 million payment for judges — without showing the readers how he got that figure.

I’m going to respond to it on THIS forum (and place a link there), which I do have control over, and hopefully it will make a point about the importance of teaching others how to access their own information to draw their conclusions, rather than maintaining the position of authoritative summary — but including some wildly inaccurate, and excluding some very accurate, and relevant — information about how things work, and leaving behind a better educated readership.

The very links + quotes that make my post (and this blog) hard to read are actually the sources to proof.  At least links — without the commentary if necessary — could’ve been placed in the post.  They often are in his posts — but in this summary, they aren’t.  Their presence — assuming they are relevant — lends credibility to the talk.  However the ONLY link here — is one that I provided.  In fact, I brought the radio show host to the attention of this blog and vice versa.  I’ll do a “[*1, 2 (etc.)]” where have a reply.

This is a good basic summary, but it’s in the parts that are NOT accurate, or incomplete — where unless people can — and know how to —  actually follow the advice in the last statement:  “Stay out of the system,” this summary, generally speaking, is the picture.  But it completely omits how the players get organized, and is vague enough that no one, other than the reference to “a lot of RTK (FOIA- Right To Know) letters” has a clue what to do, where to look, what their actual legal rights are, or their judges’, GAL’s, custody evaluators’, or mediators’ rights, responsibilities, and limits are.   In the process, it whips up some antagonism (not saying it’s undeserved) and accuses of a judge of taking kickbacks — when I don’t see any evidence this particular judge has. i don’t like what he’s doing, and in fact there is paperwork posted that he brought in his crony (Danielle Ross, who is a local in the area, deeds show she was a notary public before GAL, I think it was her anyhow) on by simply writing a judicial order!  Not passing it by the taxpayers, city council, and citing no statute to justify burdening people with this (evidently).

IF the point is to stop the corruption, one must first identify it — the corruption in respect to what is the standard.  If this is shown, then others can do the same work, locally and elsewhere. Joe’s leadership and aggressive qualities (turned against those who oppose them) also come with legal savvy (plenty of suits being filed, and brought to the appeal level show on the courts) and somehow the ability to stay housed — well, until the recent PFA from his wife — and fed meantime; which is something that a lot of parents IN the system, as it says, can barely (or sometimes NOT) do.

I am not leading this group of people, and they do not know me — however, as a concerned US citizen who’s watched this happen (and experienced similar situations) across the nation — because I talk to people from different states, and get my behind on this internet to look things up, etc., interact also where ppossible in person with leaders of various groups — I am sad if an opportunity such as Lackawanna has just seen (FBI raiding the courthouse in response to exposure of corruption) is squandered, plus energy wasted on the ill will and name-calling part, rather than channeling some of it into the look it up part.  (IT seems from the forum that people do get out and attend their local council meetings, a WIDE variety of topics are tracked on it, not just the custody ones.  However, the forum shows visits — and the Doherty Deceit threads on the courts are getting some serious traffic.

Also, against all odds and common sense (yesterday), I started a topic on it about the nonprofits, which is here, as an “FYI” for anyone who may eventual “get” it.  For those who have some patience, a newsletter from the online radio talk show “64/34 effect” is VERY worth reading:  look for the black background and white print.  It’s an education in itself, in one page (with links) and pulling it together (better than I do).  I did this because what ties the co-parenting, FBI raid (GAL-related) and Kids4Kash (aka get out and protest on the street corner) threads together — or should — is the nonprofits that crank out these situations to start with.  They are the FUNDING COVERUP link, and the motivation to keep it up!  Plus, as half of them aren’t even operating legally, that’s a vulnerable area for shut-down.  So, I started this topic on the same forum:

About the Nonprofit Front Groups that Help Traffic Kids (and just exhaust their parents, to get an “unfit” declaration)  nonprofit front groups kickbacks double-billing The Second Mile tracking money trailStop Slush Funds=Reduce Child-Trafficking  (Preview)

The Hosting Website is http://dohertydeceit.com/ and bears this graphic:

The Forum or Message Board — which is supported by Sparklit company — is a link off the website, ‘FORUMS,” and seems more active than the actual site.  However, don’t forget the link “CASES” and look at some of them also, including the one involving the ACLU helping keep the forum open, and especially this one:

http://dohertydeceit.com/node/4488

ROSS is the GAL.    This case takes information affecting the FAMILY (Domestic Relations) court — and handles it where it should be — as a FINANCIAL matter in a different subject jurisdiction.  His standing is as a taxpayer.  Any fool should know not to try to handle the matter IN family court, which is psychology-based.  Which tells me, this guy is no fool:

Plaintiff submits that The Lackawanna County Commissioners, Ken McDowell (County Controller) and Judge Thomas Munley have acted beyond the scope of their authority as follows: 1) By allowing Danielle Ross to collect bi-monthly payments of $1,538.33 since September of2008 2) By allowing Danielle Ross, as a private entity, to occupy prime office space on County property for free and to access free office supplies, equipment and secretarial resources. 

The question is, if there are followers, at what point are they going to wise up?  Here’s a little more detail from the case summary (but paperwork appears to be viewable on-line).  This is at the heart of who AFCC is and what they started back in Los Angeles County.  Alas, Scrantonians are not going to be understanding that if they read only commentary talking about personalities, from another personality.   Either they’ll need to learn it themselves, or find someone who will lay down some footprints — maybe a little exhortation — which is where, if anywhere, I’ll come in.  Look at this — it took resources, time, initiative and follow-through to put together a suit like this one, and I appreciate it.  Is there pay for this work?  I doubt it, and unless there’s plans in the future to turn it towards income, or public office, I’m going to call this what it is — public service, voluntary.  A good standard to copy:

7. Ross has received, between September 11, 2008 and June 14, 2011, a total of sixty-seven checks in the amount of$1583.33, totaling $106,081.10.

8. Exhibit “C”, the Invoices, indicates clearly that Ross has been paid for GAL services above and beyond the $1,583.33 bi-monthly charged by Ross.

9. Ross has never had a GAL services contract with Lackawanna County and no such contract exists to this day.

10. Ross has never had a GAL services contract with the Court of Common Pleas or Family Court and no contract exists to this day.

11. Ross is not an employee of Lackawanna County or Family Court.

12. Ross’s office occupies prime office space on the first floor of Family Court at 200 Adams Ave., Scranton, PA.  (Like Marv Bryer said of another entity in Los Angeles, over 10 years ago)

13. Ross pays no compensation for occupying prime office space on the fIrst floor of the Annex Building located at 200 Adams Ave, Scranton, PA, 18503, where she functions as an independent contractor working in the capacity of a GAL.

14. Ross, as an independent contractor, pays no compensation to the County for the use of utilities or various office equipment and materials relating to her occupation of an office on the first floor of Family Court.

15. Ross, as an independent contractor, uses county-paid staff to assist her in operating her independent business as a GAL, in particular, she uses Sue Mcllwee as her secretary and personal assistant to take phone calls, make phone calls, take messages, mail correspondence, receive correspondence, make home inspections, discuss GAL cases with clients of Ross and other assorted secretarial duties.

Docket:

11-CV-4759

This literally is THE pattern of the family court system, and inherent to it.  Good deal!

Moreover, look at this action:

FBI Raid, as posted on the forum under coparenting coordinator Termini (they’re by date– this post was the same day).

AND get this (partial showing — for the rest, see forum):

Attachments View image View image View image View image View image View image View image View image View image View image  (partial display from a nearby post on same thread): View image

(brown image posted Oct 5 2011; by Joe P., whose on-line ID shows 10,604 total posts!)

He posted the information received from his Right To Know inquiry, Oct. 3, 2011.  Images are intermixed above, but viewable on the forum.  Catch ’em while you can, particularly the hotel voucher to pay for a conference — which turns out to be a 2009 Brooklyn Conference from National Association of Counsel for Children, where Termini (this person) presented along with the then-presiding Judge Chester Harhut, and the GAL that has everyone so upset, Danielle Ross. I posted that info on the forum also.

(INCIDENTALLY, despite no contract, etc.  in the nonprofit NACC — her membership ID – besides containing almost no other information — list her as “Lackawanna Family Court.”)

The point being is, Joe is obviously good at getting the information and getting it posted — and this is rare.  I know people who write “RTKs” (or, I think sometimes called a ‘FOIA”  -Freedom of Information Act request) and who understand that this is one way to find out what’s happening on their case.  I have not run across almost anyone — in a public forum for either gender and not just specific to family court crisis (which on-line groups can get pretty inbred…..) — who simply posted the images for God and everyone to see.  Then whoever provided them forgot to redact SS#.  Rather than calling him and saying “take the SS# off!” Termini then simply filed a suit to get them off, which was also documented.

This is why I’d bother to give the forum the time of day.  Because it’s different.  What a shame that means wading through the misogyny as well, and not just for me.  In a workplace I wonder if that’d be grounds for harassment.  (I blogged this earlier:).  Look at how the Good ol’ boys handled it:

Sexual Harassment is also common at the “top” of society as another article shows, re: New Jersey Chamber of Commerce.
http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/10/19/40740.htm
NJ Chamber called a nest of Drunken Vipers

TRENTON, N.J. (CN) – Good ol’ boys at the top levels of the New Jersey Chamber of Commerce habitually get drunk on the job and sexually harass women who work for them, and when a new president, a woman, fired one of the chief harassers, the boys got together and found him “a plum and prestigious position in Governor Chris Christie’s Office,” then fired the president, and a vice president who complained of the harassment, the former VP says.

Yep, there are likely to be some cultural changes when women come on the scene.  Then men really get organized to protect each other!  But she didn’t fold:

Carol Gabel sued the New Jersey Chamber of Commerce and four of its top officers in a discrimination and harassment complaint in Mercer County Court. The individual defendants are senior vice president Dana Egreckzy, president Thomas Bracken, Chairman of the Board Jeffrey Scheininger, and former Chairman of the Board Dennis Bone.
Gabel says she worked at the Chamber from 199 until she was fired on March 16 this year.
“The sexual harassment of plaintiff grew out of the ‘Old Boy’ network and ‘culture of intoxication’

. . . CONTINUED ON THE NEXT POST . . .

— after some introduction & a new development

Actually, it looks like I’ve interwoven them too much (footnote factor) –

so from here on down is actually DUPLICATED on the next post — with update material on the top of the post.  Sorry about that ….

FOOTNOTES responding to the post in blue about “this is how it works, above”

COMMENTARY on Joe Pilchesky’s SUMMARY (in full, above):

The federal govermment distributes millions upon millions to each state in grant money. A large portion of it is intended to go into the control of politicians who simply use the money as a private campaign war chest by redistributing it to businesses that support them, who then kickback 20% in cash. (That’s called a democracy these days) See white envelope. However, a chunk of about $20 million goes to the judiciary EVERY YEAR, also a government entity, don’t forget, where the money is, as stated above, distributed to cronies in businesses that serve Family Court, i.e., evaluators, guardians, coparenting coordinators and last, but not lease, mediators.  [*1]

Intimately, our local players have been identified. [*2] A the top of the money heap is Judge Harhut (gets the biggest kickback)[*3]. Harhut organized this collosal scheme to keep the federal money flowing into our area, called an economic boost, except only a few get boosted, like Harhut.[*4]

[*1].  First Paragraph:  Sentence 1:  That’s one (not the only) source of grant money going to the courts and affecting them.  Also federal money goes in part direct to the county, including Lackawanna County.  I already posted the link to a federal database and what money is going to Lackawanna County related to their problems, on the forum.

Sentence 2:  This is speculation, subjective, and alleging kickbacks, plus amount of kickbacks (20%).  Readers are to take it on faith.  In short, Sentence 2 just derailed the car that might’ve actually NAMED the federal funding, found out HOW it was distributed, and as taxpayer or citizen, once this was known, put together a protest about its use to the legislature — not the courts!

Sentence 3:  “See white envelope” — Cute statement, but specifically, where?   If you show it to me, or show a very similar situation where a white envelope was found, that might help.  I’ve posted some, Others know some, but as far as Scranton is concerned, although they FEEL there’s a white envelope, until they FIND it, they have NOTHING to go to court with — at least on the matter of kickbacks, and if it’s systemic, that’s RICO and could clean up a whole lot of courthouse problems !

Sentence 4: “A chunk of about $20 million goes to the judiciary every year” — he’s talking grants here, and “the judiciary” is a broad enough term, I’m going to say — Show it.  WHere’d you get that figure from?   Or is that ex cathedra?       If it’s exactly $20 million, still — the point is, says how, and show it, or at least point to a source.  This man, again, has filed lawsuits and knows how to produce evidence to support a point.  Does he need to be top dog, or is he willing to train others?  Then make the habit of showing where you got the insight!   It’s not about you — it’s about helping others navigate the system.  SHOW and tell, don’t just tell!

From HHS (Only) — just checking, I typed in “judiciary” and limited it to PA, 2011: Details show since 2005 one kind, since 2006 three kinds of grants:

0601PASCID , (State? Court Improvement Program) 0601PASCIT (SCIP Training) , and 0601PASCID (SCIP Data Analysis)

For all years (from this source) — mostly court improvement program, data, training — it shows 23 actions totalling:

This is grants — not contracts, payrolls, etc.   Since The TAGGS database was so nice to actually give me a DUNS#, and since it’s simple to do, I hopped over to USASpending.gov and piped in that DUNS#, not selecting a year (at all) and typed it in.  this shows only 6 grant actions totalling (all years) $769,197 — apparently the HHS database has a negative entry representing a 2006 grant which is the difference.

And in case we still think that the Judiciary Courts of the Commonwealth of PA are only in to matters of justice, the details in this grant series speak differently, and tell what “Court Improvement” means:

Transaction Number # 1

In fact, I just ran HHS for PA for the year 2011 — and it’s a nice snapshot, showing how very interested the State is in children (especially studying them, it seems) and families, parent education, and pharmaceuticals among other things.  DPW gets the largest grant — over $15 BILLION, and in order to prevent domestic violence and rape, by comparison a pittance (assuming that’s actually what these organizations do. i’ve expressed my doubts on other posts);

PCADV (per DUNS# @ usaspending.gov) has received $12 million so far,  30 grants:  10 from DOJ, 20 from HHS, starting year 2007). The DOJ ones have a variety of purposes, worth looking at, either Technical Assistance (OVW source), Congressionally recommended (probably a VAWA grant), grant to help local DV agencies, and grants to coalitions series.  The point being, (see below0 when it comes under CFDA 93.592 (see below) — notice that Prevention and Services/Shelters/Discretionary — means that the shelters are sharing forces with the educators.  Guess who probably gets the short end of the stick in a world stuck on conferences and training everyone?

AWARD ACTIONS

Showing: 1 – 1 of 1 Award Actions

(As shown on USASPending, searching by the DUNS#):

Federal Award ID: 90EV0410: 0 (Grants)

SORRY — of blog topic, but I couldn’t resist getting in this comment:  Look what it (says it) does, and who it is:

Since 1993 the National Resource Center on Domestic Violence (NRCDV) has been a comprehensive source of information for those wanting to educate themselves and help others on the many issues related to domestic violence.

I do recognize the term, but as there are so many resource centers running around, who knows which one I was thinking of?

This $1.5 million federal grant is the only one showing, and it dates to 2011.  The organization in PA was only incorporated in 2011 (see below — I just checked)  The copyright on the wonderfully designed website (banner above) also is 2011:   © 2011 National Resource Center on Domestic Violence. All Rights Reserved. 
The NRCDV is a project of the Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence.  

As there cannot be a tax return on an organization that just started in 2011 (yet), when it comes out, I look forward to finding out how much of the $1,500,000 went to setting up the website and for which contractor.  Oh — I almost forgot — who’s the Exec Director, what’s their pay and how many other boards do they sit on?

Here’s what the State of Pennsylvania Corporations search (secretary of state) has to say on this:

In fact, in incorporated on 4/11/2011 as a nonprofit, and does not appear to have an EIN# yet (per PA or national search).  That’s a nice office building, too (I looked it up) different from the PCADV street address also.

BUT — let’s say, on the outside, that this group really DID exist as some sort of “it” (Other than in just people’s minds– clearly if it existed as an organization, it was either not in PA or  — as a project of PCADV — under some other name, which eliminates it as an “it,” or out of state and oNLY privately funded — those are a real stretch to make the claim some how legit…) let’s say it did start in 1993. . .

As such — and PA being pretty close to Washington, D.C. — this organization’s job is to make sure it does NOT educate anyone on Congress having passed welfare reform (1996), and what impact this has on the family law system, and to “Technically assist” women going into that system what they are up against.  Or enough about the family courts for any woman leaving violence going into them, to defend herself, or for example, look up who’s paying whom with some nice fatherhood and marriage promotion funding – on her case.  To not update her on anything since 2001 (faith-based), 2002 (California NOW Family COurt Report of 2002 has PLENTY to say on what they’re up against), or in fact to consume intellectual material outside DV experts ON DV.   As such, PCADV at least has done an excellent job of not biting the hand that feeds them 2 out of 3 grants (PCADV), and didn’t do squat, that I can see, to prevent the kids from getting sold into camps in Luzerne County, or “outing” anyone selling kids into foster care, or in short anything at all that might have helped MY children and hundreds of others (if not thousands) across the country, once they tangled with custody matters.

More narrative:

Today, through its key initiatives and special projects, such as VAWnet, Women of Color Network and the Domestic Violence Awareness Project, NRCDV works tirelessly to improve community response to domestic violence and, ultimately, prevent its occurrence. Our comprehensive technical assistance, training and resource development are just a few examples of the many ways in which NRCDV broadly serves those dedicated to ending domestic violence in relationships and communities.

THE COMMUNITY AND FEDERAL RESPONSE HAS BEEN BASICALLY BACKLASH AND TO BRING IN THE FAITH COMMUNITIES TO WAGE WAR AGAINST THE NON-CRIME OF “DIVORCE” AND, IN EFFECT, TO  — LIKE CHURCHES DO — GIVE PEOPLE IN THE SAME BUSINESS (BASICALLY MEDIA CAMPAIGNS, WEBSITES, PUBLIC RELATIONS, CONFERENCES, MEMBERSHIP-DUES BASED NONPROFITS, AND TEACHING THEIR CRONIES HOW TO KEEP THE GRANTS COMING – – – WHICH THE FATHERS’ RIGHTS GROUPS ALSO DO — A WIDE BERTH, AND LET THE PEOPLE CAUGHT IN THE GAP FEND FOR THEMSELVES.  THIS DV MOVEMENT DROP-KICKS WOMEN IN THE CUSTODY COURTS, WHERE SOME OF THEM ARE MURDERED! WHILE OBEYING A COURT ORDER MANDATING VISITATION.  OR, (Michelle Fournier, Seal Beach, CA) while at work or (Tonya McCall, Oakland, CA) in a church parking lot AND (INCLUDING THANKS TO ME) WORD OF THIS SELL-OUT IS GETTING OUT.

I DO NOT MEAN TO DISRESPECT THE ORIGINAL WORK, WHICH WAS NEEDED.  BUT IF YOU ARE GOING TO BE A SELF-STYLED EXPERT ON A TOPIC, THEN YOU NEED TO KEEP UP WITH EVENTS AND REPORT ACCURATELY, AND AT LEAST 50% OF THE TRUTH.  DV AGENCIES, IN THIS MATTER, DO NOT!

We encourage you to take a closer look and explore our many programs and initiatives as a resource to you in your domestic violence intervention and prevention efforts.

This is a Healthy Marriage Grantee, a nice religious one, I’ve blogged it that (among other things) helps market curriculum from another healthy marriage grantee….That should counter the DV material nicely:

As a matter of fact, the money that is distributed to cronies in Family Court does NOT come just from the feds to the state to the judiciary to the cronies, and I showed already one set of grants that went from HHS to an organization providing supervised visitation, locally.  etc. ….  The money supporting the MEDIATORS (in particular) is the Access/Visitation money (at a minimum) and comes to the Welfare Department — not the Judiciary.  It’s administered federally through the HHS Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) which is not the Judiciary.   Here are the grants.  I’ve posted about the A/V grants on the forum.  Notice how far back they go.   This is almost 2012, and so far, no mention of these grants in public discussion about their impact on custody cases.  yet they are intended to increase noncustodial parenting time, and allow the head of HHS to run social science demonstration projects on people.  And that’s just a fraction of funding to the courts.  MANY programs relating to the courts appear to have ties to the DPW….

Results 1 to 23 of 23 matches.
Page 1 of 1

[*2]  “Intimately our local players have been identified.”  Partially true.  Not all the players were identified, and those that are in the game have not been fully identified — i.e., their association allegiances, their contracts, and etc.  The judges’ statements of conflict of interest, to my knowledge, are not in discussion.  That’s a critical element. And it’s NOT JUST ABOUT the local players, even though it’s a nice handle to get people to focus on.

[*3]. A the top of the money heap is Judge Harhut (gets the biggest kickback).

Harhut is not at the top of the heap (depending on which portion of the heap one is looking at).  He is probably not even king of the local hill.  It takes a team to pull off anything, and team members are subject to each other’s (a) cooperation and (b) collective secrecy.

That Harhut gets ANY kickback is speculation or hearsay til proved, and that any alleged kickback is the biggest one can’t be even shown til several are found.  Statements and summaries like this don’t do almost anything to help anyone find out IF a kickback has been involved to start with.  I suspect The Hon. Harhut is by now accustomed as judge to being talked about in all kinds of ways, none of which are going to affect his being judge, his salary, and certainly not putting a potential kickback in any immediate jeopardy — at least not from this crowd!  As such, the statement is bluster.  I don’t think JOE is all bluster — he can get the goods when he chooses to, or finds the time to — but in this case, has not.

[*4]    Harhut organized this collosal scheme to keep the federal money flowing into our area, called an economic boost, except only a few get boosted, like Harhut.

RFQ Divorce and Family Education Providers NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to a fair and open process, sealed submissions will be received and reviewed by the County of Lackawanna (the “County”) Board of Commissioners (“Board of Commissioners”) for Divorce and Family Education Curriculum Providers(Provider). Date Posted: 3/31/2011

http://mfri.ucf.edu/smsf.cfm

The University of Central Florida Marriage and Family Research Institute was created in 2003 to facilitate the development of research and clinical initiatives to better support couples, marriages, and families. The Institute conducts original research and facilitates and supports scholarly activity of faculty and graduate students interested in marriage, family, and child issues. Additionally, the Institute can provide outcome and process evaluation services for other research projects part of and independent of the Institute.

OFA Together Project
	MDRC-SHM Implementation Plan
	PAIRS Evaluation Project
	SMSF**

**Stronger Marriages and Stronger Families (SMS

. . . . [92% of Floridians believe that happy marriages are reelly, reelly  important] And yet, programs to support marriage are not a standard service available to married or soon-to-be married couples.

What if a program existed to support married couples? Do you know if it would help them achieve the long, strong marriage and raise happy, healthy children for which they wish, hope and dream? Neither do we.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and MDRC, a research and evaluation organization in New York, has given the Marriage and Family Research Institute in the College of Education at the University of Central Florida the exciting opportunity to study the effects of marriage education and support mechanisms on low to moderate income married couples with children – through the Supporting Healthy Marriage (SHM) Together Project.

{{TRANSLATION:  they have an agenda, and access to $$.  UCF gets the $$, supplies the young energetic, or (at least enrolled in their institute) people, and hopefully everyone is happy and no one will say that Marriage Education for Everyone is not a fantastic idea….}}

As part of a national demonstration and evaluation program, the SHM Together Project and seven other sites in New York, Pennsylvania, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas and Washington (two sites) will each recruit and interview 800 couples. Randomly, 400 couples will be assigned to the control group that receives no SHM-related services, and 400 couples will be assigned to the program group that will receive 12 months of SHM-related services including 30-hours of marriage education, continuous family support and extended marriage and family-related activities. At the end of the year, MDRC will test the difference between the two groups and ultimately answer the question, “Do marriage education and supports help low to moderate income married couples with children have longer, stronger marriages and raise happy, healthier children?”

{{With true scientific objectivity it is assumed that — basically — ALL couples & people are basically the same, so if one group spread between 7 sites in 5 states + DC  (400/7= 57 couples per site, and for five states, that’s 57 couples per STATE) seem better after a year of this –and 57 or so couples didn’t — we’re going to say it was a thumbs-up and should be expanded….      I notice it says “moderate-income” so apparently TANF wasn’t funding this one?…}}

This being a university, I find it a little deceptive to use acronyms:  SHM, SMSF…

ONE — OFA Project:

This is really a PAIRS project, but as PAIRS is listed separately, this makes it look like more things are on the burner, and more grants may, indeed, be involved….

OFA Together Project

In October 2006, The Office of Financial Assistance of the U.S. Department of Healthy and Human Services has awarded the Institute a five-year grant to design and implement the Together Project. The Together Project aims to bring marriage education services to low-income married couples with children in the Central Florida region and to collect data comparing couples who participate in marriage education with those in a control condition. Over the life of the project, the goal is to serve 200 couples and to collect data on 200 control couples. Control couples will be placed on a waiting list for services and will be eligible for marriage counseling services at the UCF Community Counseling Clinic after completing one-year follow-up data.

{{LOW_income couples only got a 200-couple sample.  Moderate-income couples get an 400 couple (+ 400 controls) sample, although more spread out. HIGH-income couples will pay their dues in divorce court anyhow, and/or contribute to some of these nonprofit front groups, so let’s not mess with them…}}

The marriage education treatment for the Together Project is the PAIRS curriculum (Gordon & Frandsen, 1993). There is some empirical support for the PAIRS approach (c.f. Durana, 1998; Goss, 1995). The curriculum was selected because it has this research support and because it focuses on emotional intimacy and bonding rather than a purely behavioral skills approach.

Of the INSTITUTE– the website has a “Resources” link.  The first FIVE resources are government supported!  With the exception of “SmartMarriages” which is a trademark from Dianne Sollee, who  must be making a bundle from all this:  she runs conferences where various curriculum providers can get their strategies together, buy into a franchise possibly, and even (if they’ve been smart enough to form a nonprofit association before coming to the conference) get the expenses written off.  BASICALLY — the individuals pushing healthy marriage (See GWBush the younger and friends) are simply using a public university to push franchising of their favorite ideas about society.   They call the tune.

The following are some informative links related to marriage and family research:

	Administration for Children and Families (ACF) Healthy Marriage Initiative
	Florida Commission on Marriage and Family Support Initiatives
	Florida State University’s Family Institute
	Smart Marriages
	National Healthy Marriage Resource Center

WTF does this have to do with Lackawanna county and an off-hand remark about Ronald Refice as a custody evaluator?  well, his corporation shares office address with this woman whose experience says it includes this FLorida group — and that group’s site indicates a Pennsylvania test site, so who knows?   Perhaps there’s a connection there.  I just googled the street address, found this, backed up to the hyperlink (Marriage Resource Center) she was under — looked for Refice (who doesn’t show up there) and took it from there.  One of the therapists (not this one) had the florida connection.

Tolerico, Catherine ACSW

823 Carmalt Street, Dickson City, PA 18519

That’s the same street address as Refice is under.   It’s a home — maybe they are partners or married. Therapy building is:

Website: Marriage Resource Center

Professional Arts Building, 327, N. Washington Ave., Suite 105, Scranton, PA 18503

Clinical Director:

Jill Ballman, MA, LPC, LMFT (it was her bio I followed up on from the site).

ANYHOW —

I just found another nonprofit that Danielle M. Ross, J.D. is a member of:  “Council of Contemporary Families”   (sigh) and recognize several of the memberships.  It appears to have started in 2006.

http://contemporaryfamilies.org/conference/2011-conference-presenters.html#Burton

Their Board of Directors are from all over the country, and it appears to have begun its conferences (at least uploading them to the site) in 2006.  Every time you go from one section to another of the site, it attempts to sign you up for newsletters, which is annoying …

http://contemporaryfamilies.org/about-ccf/board2011.html

http://contemporaryfamilies.org/member-bios/

A long list of bios includes one for renowned Fathers’ Rights lawyer Jeffrey Leving (out of Chicago, whose firm is a sponsor? of Fathers and Families Coalition, a large group with close HHS ties, or at least a VERY friendly relationship with whoever’s heading it up each year — David Hansell, you name it).

Danielle’s is on there — so depending on how the FBI results turn out, probably some of the colleagues will still welcome her with open arms in some other state.  Unless she is disbarred or gets a temporary wrist-slap for financial fraud….

It reads:

I am an attorney in Scranton, PA. My full time position involves being appointed as a Guardian ad Litem for children involved in custody proceedings.

Hmm.  That’s interesting — who’s her employer?  Or does she work FT somewhere else and part of this “involves being appointed”  – is she doing something for the judge that appoints her? Or is this simply just dishonest (or not a current listing….).  Hmm, hmm, hmmm.  (see Pilchesky v. Ross et al.).  this is probably why court professionals have to join so many out-of-state organizations; so people don’t catch on to the truths of the matter….  I did find an EIN for Council on Contemporary Families (522070511) and a State (Illinois) See below:

My undergraduate degree is a B.A. is Psychology from the Pennsylvania State University. My juris doctorate was acquired from Widener University School of Law. I am currently pursuing a M.A. in Forensic Psychology.

My area of interest is family law and educating the judiciary to incorporate clinical assessments, impressions and research, when making decisions for families involved in the judicial system. I am interested in insuring a collaborative approach** is applied when dealing with these families in our system.

CONTACT: (etc.)

*(**meaning, we get to have our day in the sun, after all, doesn’t a B.A in Psychology + a J.D. = an expert in family life?)

COUNCIL ON CONTEMPORARY FAMILIES NCCSDATAWEBS LISTING (no 990s on form, looks like a small operation)

The family therapists are trying to pull in more arts & humanities themes to increase their credibility, which at this point, is pretty darn well about shot from those who sit under them:

Organization Details
EIN:	522070511
Name:	Council on Contemporary Families — Google
Location:	Uic Mc312 1007 W Washington Ste Bsb Chicago, IL 60607		Report Address Change
County:	Cook County
Ruling Date:	1998   (Approximate year when founded)
IRS Type:	501(c)(3) – Public charity: Religious, educational, charitable, scientific, and literary organizations…
Legal basis for public charity or private foundation status (FNDNCD):	15 – Organization with a substantial portion of support from a governmental unit or the general public
NTEE:	A99 – Arts, Culture & Humanities N.E.C.
Most recently completed fiscal year (TAXPER)	12/2008
Total Revenue	$33,598
Total Assets:	$86,232
Organization Mission Statement and Purpose
The Council on Contemporary Families is an association of experts on the family from fields of sociology, psychology, anthropology, history, the law, and family therapists. it is an organization devoted to education of the public through bringing to public attention the best research available on the american family in all of its diversity. it is devoted to promoting informed and constructive public discussion of Contemporary Families’ needs and how those needs might best be met.

With all those members, and being around for now 10 years, they finally coughed up a tax return?

ORGANIZATION NAME	STATE	YEAR	TOTAL ASSETS	FORM	PAGES	EIN
Council on Contemporary Families	IL	2008	$86,232	990EZ	9	52-2070511

Per tax return — (the last we heard of this group) they are preparing to write a book (got a $25K advance for it?) in which each member (well, now there are around 200) contributes a chapter.

The street address is University of Illinois Chicago (UIC).

It is signed by Co-Chair “Waldo E. Johnson, Jr.”  You KNOW I’m going to look him up, right?

http://www.americanprogress.org/events/2011/03/inf/JohnsonWaldo.html

This sounds very well-educated, well-recognized, if not exactly gender-neutral:

Waldo E. Johnson Jr., Ph.D., is associate professor at the School of Social Service Administration and faculty affiliate and immediate past director at the Center for the Study of Race, Politics and Culture at the University of Chicago. He is also a research associate for the Program for Research on Black Americans at the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan. He teaches social welfare policy, human behavior in the social environment, and research methods in the M.A. and Ph.D. programs. A family scholar, his research focuses on father involvement among low-income, unwed African-American fathers and the relationship between African-American males’ physical and mental health statuses on their family and societal role assumptions and performance across the life course. Most recently, he has been a consultant to the Chicago Community Trust as well as the United Way of Metropolitan Chicago in the development of their respective African American Male Initiatives.

His book, Social Work with African American Males: Health, Mental Health and Social Policy (Oxford Press, 2010), examines the developmental and social challenges and barriers experienced by African-American males across the life course. He is also interested in the use of qualitative research methods {{presumably about AAM MALES}} for guiding social policy. He is a member of the Ford Foundation Scholars Network on Masculinity and the Wellbeing of African American Males; a member of the National Steering Committee and Fatherhood Subcommittee (of what institution or arm of gov’t?) ; chair of the 2025 Campaign for Black Men and Boys; and the inaugural chair of the Commission on Research for the Council on Social Work Education.  {{That should take care of it being to female-focused}} During winter 2011, he will be a visiting scholar at Clare Hall, Cambridge University, and the University of Cape Town.

WJohnson holds a Ph.D. in social work from the University of Chicago, an MSW from the University of Michigan, and a B.A. from Mercer University. He was a Ford Foundation Postdoctoral Fellow at the Poverty Research and Training Center and the Program for Research on Black Americans at the University of Michigan

HERE”s the Blurb from the CCF website — which didn’t file tax returns, that we can see, except for the year 2008?  I’ll put a ? on that, but generally speaking, I can find tax returns.  I found ONE here.  The memberhip in 2008 produced fees of about $14K, I’ll go back and see what they are, and do some math…

Waldo E, Johnson, Jr. is associate professor at the School of Social Service Administration faculty has conducted research and published widely on father involvement among unwed, low-income urban fathers; the physical and mental health statuses of African American males and the use of qualitative research methods in guiding social welfare policy. He is a member of the leadership team (chair of the Community Engagement Work Group) for the South Side Health and Vitality Study, a family of interdisciplinary social science, epidemiological and community based studies to be conducted in the 34 community areas (neighborhoods) served by the University of Chicago Medical Center aimed at enhancing the health, wellness and health service delivery of residents.; Building Healthy Communities: A Focus on Young Men and Boys of Color Research Collaborative, initiated by the Chief Justice Earl Warren Institute on Race, Ethnicity and Justice of the Berkeley Law School of the University of California funded by The California Endowment and the Disenfranchised Men Forum, an initiative sponsored by the New York University’s Metropolitan Center for Urban Education and the Ford Foundation which brings together academic researchers, policy and practice practitioners to address challenges facing disenfranchised males.

Well, at least we know what focus are dealing with here, and he co-chairs the organization, apparently. The Foundation Scholars bio has a photo and further notes some collaboration with the Illinois DCFS.  The Illinois – South Side of Chicago & Ford Foundation connections particularly interesting (OBama was here before the White House, we may recall).

Steven Mintz of Columbia (per 2008 tax return) was managing the list-serv.  Here’ his bio at that site, HISTORY Department:

Steven Mintz  Director Columbia University Graduate School of Arts & Sciences Teaching Center

Biography Steven Mintz was a fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford and John and Rebecca Moores Professor of History and Director of the American Cultures Program at the University of Houston before becoming the director of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences Teaching Center.  An authority on the history of the family and of children, he is the author and editor of 13 books, including Domestic Revolutions: A Social History of American Family Life, Huck’s Raft: A History of American Childhood, and Moralists & Modernizers: America ’s Pre-Civil War Reformers. He has also published extensively on film history, slavery, abolition, and American reform movements. A pioneer in the application of new technologies to history, he is the creator of the Digital History website (http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu) and past president of H-Net: Humanities and Social Sciences Online.  He has also served as President of the Society for the History of Children and Youth, and chaired the Council on Contemporary Families, an interdisciplinary organization of scholars and clinicians dedicated to enhancing the national conversation about what contemporary families need and how these needs can best be met.  A member of the Society of American Historians, he is a past chair of the Bancroft Prize jury and a member of the advisory board of Film & History, the History Teacher, Slavery & Abolition, and the Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History.  Here’s a 5- minute interview, talks about meeting Georgia O’Keefe and confirms he’s a professional educator with interest in behavioral sciences, too

Stephanie Coontz (also on Board of Directors) has a decorated history, at least she is an author and is quite the presenter.  Some of the places she presents seem very conservative (National Council on Family Relations, etc.) she has a book on the history of marriage.

Welcome to Stephanie Coontz’s official website!

Stephanie Coontz teaches history and family studies at The Evergreen State College in Olympia, WA. She also serves as Co-Chair and Director of Public Education at the Council on Contemporary Families, a non-profit, nonpartisan association of family researchers and practitioners based at the University of Illinois at Chicago. Her work has been featured in many newspapers such as The New York Times, as well as scholarly journals such as Journal of Marriage and Family, and she is frequently interviewed on national television and radio.

 …Coontz has testified about her research before the House Select Committee on Children, Youth and Families in Washington, DC . . .  In 2004, she received the Council on Contemporary Families first-ever “Visionary Leadership” Award (being on its board of directors……). (from a group that doesn’t file its taxes and exists through membership fees, with hopes to compile a book they’ll sell, no doubt).  and ….She also received the 2001-02 “Friend of the Family” award from the Illinois Council on Family Relations. She served as a marriage consultant to The Ladies Home Journal from 2006-2009.

I THINK it’s a SAFE BET — CONSERVATIVE (?). ….

Anyhow, they don’t show up on a corporations search in Illinois . . . .

And they have NOT — at least under this Name OR EIN# — filed with the State of Illinois as a charity.  Not so hot if their c0-chair of the board of directors is a professor!

And a lowly GAL from Lackawanna shares professional membership with this level of professional exposure and Ph.D. accomplishments.  That should help her out after the FBI returns its reports, assuming it does anything….

(also – is that street address strange enough yet?)

WELL, I could do this all night, despite what week of the year it is (like a few days before Christmas, much?)

This post needs to be split in two, but I’m glad it finally got published!  

Back to Ms. Ross’s bio on this illustrious organization, with its illustrious membership (too busy to finish tax returns, I guess, but ready to change the world through influencing policy with their research, etc. )

My area of interest is family law and educating the judiciary to incorporate clinical assessments, impressions and research, when making decisions for families involved in the judicial system. I am interested in insuring a collaborative approach** is applied when dealing with these families in our system.

Ms. Ross – these families?   it’s their system — they pay for it.  Probably more of them work an honest job than you, at least til you get involved and strip them of their resources!   You are in the public servant role within this system.  We intend that you and colleagues begin to understand WHOSE system it is, and adjust accordingly.