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

ABA, APA, AFCC, AAML, . . and others:  Reconceptualize This!  [Some Ohio Councils, Commissions, and Headlines, Incl. Basic Links][Chosen to represent 2012 in my 2017 Retrospective, includes its own]  [Words in italics added during 2017 update (adding an intro with images)/formatting cleanup]. {With case-sensitive Short-link ending “-101”}

So here’s the deal: I have been reviewing early (January)-year posts back to 2009 and was looking for a representative one, or at most two, for each year.

The “Reconceptualize This!” phrase came from having observed how hard certain types of professionals, and their associations, in their conferences (and publications, presentations) etc. were working to “reconceptualize” assault & battery behavior, and the other criminal behavior that accompanies (1) domestic violence and (2) child abuse, and (3) other related felonious behaviors – as something else.

ANYTHING but calling it what it is, and attributing cause to the actual perp, as opposed to say, his or her spouse (for lack of communications skills), society (for prejudice against, in this case, his race or gender), or his lack of a biological father in the home growing up (i.e., blame it on his single mother, or conditions which discouraged women from getting and staying married when they have children), and so forth.

“Coincidentally” in the process of reconceptualizing the criminal laws defining what is and is not a crime in the country as needing some serious behavioral modification makeovers for actually holding perps and lawbreakers responsible for their own actions, the presence of bad childhoods, missing daddies, difficult divorces, or poverty, notwithstanding, [the language also changes.]

So, in this post, you’ll find its own internal retrospective — and along the way naming MANY key entities, organizations, and personalities still at work in the same lines of work, that is, to make the justice system work for their mutual, private purposes, and calling it the public interest.

Year 2009: Development of a Framework for Identifying and Explicating the Context of Domestic Violence in Custody Cases and its Implications for Custody Determinations

Year, 2008: Reconceptualizing Child Custody: Past, Present, and Future—Lawyers and Psychologists* Working Together A Continuing Education Conference (in other words, basically ABA & APA memberships) (Chicago)[*see “notes2008 below the quote”]

Year 2007:  Changing the Culture of Custody  (Pennsylvania) 

(more on this, below, in fact most of today’s [1/22/2012]post is on this).

Year, 2006:  Rethinking Domestic Violence (Donald Dutton, book, Canada) [**See “notes2006 below the quote”]

Year 2005:  Batterers’ Intervention Programs still going strong:

Year, 2002: Batterers As Fathers: Rethinking and Reconceptualizing Policy and Practice (book, Lundy Bancroft/Jay Silverman)

[I commented] ~ ~ ~ How many people can actually “reconceptualize” a world in which the habit of battering automatically precludes the habit of parenting, of participating IN a family, and of having anything at all to discuss in the custody courts?

Not going to happen.  Too much profit in the less-effective alternatives & case-churning.

The truth of the matter is, too many believe that the sky would fall, government wouldn’t work right, and the economy would go under IF men’s (AND women’s including mothers, stepmothers, and new girlfriends) rights to be around children, or romantic partners, would CEASE, QUICKLY and PERMANENTLY – — over the crime of what would be a crime if perpetrated upon a stranger.

[My 2018Oct18 thought added, though it’s not a new thought]… In effect, preserving the “right-to-abuse” and commit crimes upon relatives & family members as basic and intrinsic to the concept of “FAMILY,” and infringing upon said “right (of men) to abuse (esp. women & children)” as a true human rights outrage, while the abuse itself, apparently, isn’t REALLY so outrageous…  

But, it not being politically correct to say this outright, ways and rationales to “work around” the system are found.  Distractions — and professionalizing “father engagement” qualifies — abound.

[**”notes2008 below the quote”]

In moving this summary to the top of the page, I unearthed more information from the 2008 reference, screen-printed and linked/captioned it, included more from 2006, and threw in just for good measure two screenprints from the “Batterers’ Intervention Programming link to BISCMI.org, a situation and organization (because of what it’s doing and who shows up at its conferences!) I’ve been paying attention to over time, and have done some major drill-downs on conference attendees.  Particularly when I found the recently-renamed “Family Justice Center Alliance,” which public/private collusion in combination with “theDuluthModel” and the associated DV cartel has done more to set up women for the take-down than, perhaps, the violent men they were fleeing in individual situations, generation after generation, including up to today.

That model for the uninitiated isn’t just “globalist” it’s socialist.  FYI not all women protesting personal violence wish to become socialists simply to escape the same, and not all women who are adamantly more in favor of the US Constitution then a UN-based world order in which national boundaries, for almost any key subject matter (cause, values) area just doesn’t matters, are necessarily avid, say Donald Trump followers.

In fact if there’s anything women in, for example, my situation MIGHT wish to do is to quit being forced to join cults in order to survive other cults, and I’m referring in my case to the so-called Christian ones in particular. (Another flavor there is just how much Unification Church, then and now, still permeates what many may think is actually some version of right-wing Christianity…) We would LIKE to live peaceably in our countries, wherever that is (and mine happens to be the USA) and from that perspective have a good understanding of What The F _ _ _ our country (adjust according to which is yours, respectively) is doing with its tax receipts from our work energies and wages over a lifetime, and as disbursing “services” throughout the land, several of them of the compulsory (if not entirely necessary) variety — and particularly when faced with women seeking personal AND social change in accord with, not in utter disregard of, the laws of the land.

So, I moved my expanded version (of above summary) and several screenprints below it, to:
[Who’s Been Covertly — in widely dispersed conferences and publications — insisting we (in the USA)] Reconceptualize This! (cf. my Jan 22, 2012 post and 2017 updates) (<= This post title’s shortlink ends -5SI)

[**”notes2006 below the quote”]

BUT:   A few notes on this one: I replaced an image in the post for this $87 (hardback/ only $37 paperback) book

See URL for more description of this title.  Donald Dutton is a professor of psychology at UBritish Columbia as of date of this abstract (it also has a book TOC).

published by University of British Columbia Press (UBC Press), self-described as:

UBC Press | thought that counts
The University of British Columbia Press is Canadaí’s leading social sciences publisher. With an international reputation for publishing high-quality works of original scholarship, our books draw on and reflect cutting-edge research, pushing the boundaries of academic discourse in innovative directions. Each year UBC Press publishes seventy new titles in a number of fields, including Aboriginal studies, Asian studies, Canadian history, environmental studies, gender and women’s studies, geography, health and food studies, law, media and communications, military and security studies, planning and urban studies, and political science.  UBC Press publishes many series (etc.)

From this book abstract:

… the stated aim of refuting what he describes as feminist “dogma preservation” 2 in the field.** He seeks to dislodge the perceived dominance of this perspective by providing his own “more enlightened” 3 and “dispassionate” viewpoint, one which disputes the relevance of gender to domestic violence and foregrounds a gender-neutral and exclusively psychological account of its causes. Dutton argues that because personality disorders have not been acknowledged as the real cause of domestic violence, legal responses to domestic violence have been misguided and ineffective.Dutton extends these two primary themes throughout the entire book. Dutton designates the first seven chapters to explaining why feminist accounts that identify gender and gender inequality as relevant to domestic violence are wrong  (DID I mention, he’s a tenured psychology professor there?)

https://drdondutton.com/about/ His PhD in Social Psychology was in 1970, from Univ. of Toronto, and his work experience 1973-1995 includes court-ordered “Assaultive Husbands” therapy.

From 1979 to 1995, he served as a therapist in the Assaultive Husbands Project, a court mandated treatment program for men convicted of wife assault. In the course of providing therapy for these men, he drew on his background in both social and clinical psychology to develop a psychological model for intimate abusiveness.

He has published over 122 peer reviewed journal articles and 10 books, including the Domestic Assault of Women, The Batterer and The Abusive Personality.

Dr. Dutton has served as an expert witness in criminal trials involving family violence, including his work for the prosecution in the O.J. Simpson trial.

Note — the off-ramped/off-shored post has more information connecting Dr. Dutton to AFCC (June 2016 conference in Seattle, Washington) and showing in the same conference, more organizations listed below here, and which I have been blogging for several years.  This is important information to know, and I hope to publish it soon and that readers will take time to consider what the situation really signifies, particularly as I’ve already blogged, in 2016 as I recall, “Outflanking National Sovereignty through Functionalism” and “Accounting Literacy Matters:  Cause-based doesn’t.”

I am putting so much time into this particular update (so far, I believe three extra posts have branched off from it) because it really did identify — now FIVE YEARS AGO — many key players, contradictions in their mutual claims, networks among the various players, and that the overall programming intent, collectively, was indeed to decriminalize domestic violence, while setting up women for failure in believing that the many advocacy groups were still thinking or acting independently enough, and could be trusted to help us more than, sometimes, temporarily

…and after that, sometimes women might make it free long enough to struggle in the family courts for YEARS, and others, they might not — having gotten simply “offed” (or their kids) shortly after filing.

This is still happening, according to social media reporting on the headlines, something I could no longer stomach, as a survivor, doing and was not primarily about in the first place on this blog, either. ///LGH Feb 13, 2017.
Read the rest of this entry »