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.

[Where the 2017 update intro originally started a few days ago].

This older post also shows where I’ve come from over time, and how early certain major points and principles were known (but perhaps skills to pursue them further yet to be acquired).

In citing earlier posts, I am often embarrassed about their formatting, and may get involved in cleaning them up (also replacing that sickly light-green default page background hue that has tinted all posts, retroactively  where I don’t specify something different, which came along with a minor blog upgrade).  While re-formatting I sometimes add supplementary information on the topics raised back then.  PREVIEW marked in fine print and light-pink background color.  Other mid-post updates may be seen by their content — screen prints of tax returns (which I didn’t know how to do in 2012) and some printouts of tables of tax returns (which I don’t believe I was doing at the time, being probably more focused on program’s content and on HHS grants).

(Jan. 22, 2012 post started here):

 Notice any progressions, any devolution, any connections among the language of conferences, commissions, task forces, projects and books about?

• Domestic Violence IN the family law system
• Protecting Children & Families (and animals)
• Batterers IN their families and in the family law system
• The Jargons of the Psycho-Legal-Sociologist Expert Collaborations

The visits involved a child who allegedly was victimized during a visit at Children Services offices on Reeves Road on April 27, 2011. The biological parents are charged with raping the child, accused of sodomizing her.

Nick Kerosky, Children Services executive director, could not be reached to clarify whether Moon supervised the visits directly or whether she supervised employees who handled the visits. Kerosky confirmed earlier this week that one employee had been disciplined for her involvement in that child’s case but didn’t identify her until Friday.

Kerosky said an internal investigation of the incident is ongoing, so there might be additional disciplinary action forthcoming. Moon has a “good work record,” a letter attached to the form says.

The alleged sexual assaults, supposedly videotaped on a cellphone, have touched off criminal investigations of the parents and Children Services, as well two administrative reviews by the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services.

A man repeatedly shot his adult son and two sisters-in-law in his living room, killing them in front of his terminally ill wife, then fatally shot himself on the front porch as family tension about the cancer-stricken woman’s care apparently boiled over, authorities said.

An earlier dispute about whether the woman should have been fed tea and toast or the orange her husband had peeled for her apparently set off the shooter Monday, 63-year-old Paul Gilkey.

The sick woman, 59-year-old Darlene Gilkey, who’s dying of cancer, witnessed the shootings from a hospital bed in her living room but was uninjured, Hocking County Sheriff Lanny Northsaid. . .

Killed inside the home were Darlene Gilkey’s sisters, Barbara Mohler, 70, of New Straitsville, and Dorothy Cherry, 63, of New Plymouth. Also killed was Paul Gilkey’s son, Leroy Gilkey, 38, of Columbus.

. . .Investigators say Leroy Gilkey had power of attorney over his mother, a fact that added to Paul Gilkey’s stress, according to Peggy Gilkey.

**This links to the 2011 report, which is a short and I must say informative read…

http://www.fcf.ohio.gov
While “Fatherhood” in Ohio is originated (at the state level) into 12 regions, CFCs are still set up, it seems, by its 88 counties, make just where the overlap happens, a little harder to become aware of UNLESS you’re already eagle-eye on the subject matter and practices, that is, on government and social services financing.

Ex-director of Ohio’s Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives linked to prostitution ring

By Aaron Marshall, The Plain Dealer
on January 15, 2009 at 4:30 AM, updated January 22, 2009 at 6:25 PM
Robert Eric McFadden

---

Update (01/22/2009): Although McFadden’s resume said he was a co-founder of the Catholic Alliance for the Common Good, the group disputes that claim.COLUMBUS — A man once hired by Gov. Ted Strickland to head a state office because of his ties to Ohio’s religious community stands accused of being involved in an online prostitution ring.

Robert Eric McFadden, former director of Strickland’s Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, was arrested Wednesday morning in the Columbus suburb of Dublin. He has been charged with seven felonies, including pandering obscenities involving a minor, promoting prostitution and compelling prostitution, according to a Columbus Police Department spokesman. || Police spokesman Sgt. Richard Weiner confirmed that the 46-year-old is the same person who worked for Strickland. [||=2 paras. combined]

McFadden headed the faith-based office for nine months before taking a demotion and a pay cut for a short-lived job as an administrative assistant with the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction.

McFadden was hired by the Strickland administration in February 2007 and paid an annual salary of $75,000. Strickland knew McFadden before he was elected governor in November 2006.  [Para. out of order]

Police believe that McFadden was the man they have been looking for in connection with a prostitution ring that was run from Craig’s List, according to a report on the Web site of Columbus television station WCMH. Police cracked the ring when men involved in a Web site that posts reviews of prostitutes held a raffle for sex at a brothel near downtown Columbus …

For his last month as director, McFadden’s pay was slashed to $41,600 and his replacement was brought in. On Oct. 28, 2007, McFadden was transferred to the corrections department, where he coordinated volunteer and outreach efforts for the prison system’s faith-based services. 

He was laid off on March 22, 2008, due to budget cuts, said corrections spokeswoman Andrea Carson. 

He is due in court today for arraignment, police said.

Like all states, they also have a Coalition Against Domestic Violence (actually two groups listed at “NCADV” — see  http://www.odvn.org/  (“Increasing Safety for Ohio Families through Support, Advocacy and Education”) and

 and

http://www.actionohio.org/about_us.htm  (“ACTION OHIO’s core services are resource/referral, technical assistance, professional education, public awareness, community outreach, and public policy leadership within the domestic violence community.”)

[[Added section in this background-color and with a green border, on ACTIONOHIO.org dated Feb. 2017]]

(Also:

OUR MISSIONBack to top
ACTION OHIO’s mission is to promote quality programs, services, and resources to survivors of domestic violence. Our goal is to ensure equal rights and empowerment for all individuals as we work toward the eradication of family violence in our society.

STATEMENT OF PHILOSOPHYBack to top
We believe that:

• All people have the right to live free from the fear of violence;
• Each person has the right to and the responsibility of self-determination;
• Family violence is a systemic, not an individual, problem;
• Domestic violence is a crime and is not to be tolerated;
• There is strength in diversity.)

ACTION OHIO (2017 commentary) is one interesting, and unfunded (basically) group.  It has been operating at a DEFICIT, tax returns show, since at least 2002.  This 2003 tax return has at the back a printout of Officers and Directors with their related affiliations, which you should read. That return appears to have been signed by Michael E. Smalz (the handprinting under the signature is illegible, so this is a closest guess), of Ohio Statewide Legal Services Association — but EVERY tax return since I’ve looked at (which is most of them) has shown Phillis L. Carlson-Riehm as the Executive Director, mostly not being paid much, and running the organization deeper and deeper into the red (over $133K @ 2015) instead of admitting it’s not making ends meet and shutting it down — OR, finding other sources of revenue.  Grandiose schemes are nice, but failure to finance them just doesn’t make sense — UNLESS it’s possibly intentional.

Total results: 6. Search Again. (the top organization shut down in 2004, strangely.  Meanwhile,

My quick-look (only!) comments: The bottom one which has 3 “related” organizations (incl. the Ohio Poverty Law Center as a “Disregarded” Sched-R Pt. I entity, and two more as Tax-exempt Pt. IIs), in 2011 gave the main grant (as most years it seems) to one of its related entities – Legal Aid Society of Columbus (EIN# 314416407), BUT in Year 2011 also gave $47K (says its return) to a different “Western Ohio” LSC entity, at least different EIN#…. I was in fact looking for the name Michael E. (or “R.”) Smalz, Esq. on the statewide affiliate’s board of directors…

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
Western Ohio Legal Services Association	OH	2004	990EZ	13	$0.00	34-1014595
Western Ohio Legal Services Association	OH	2003	990	18	$151,205.00	34-1014595
Western Ohio Legal Services Association	OH	2002	990	18	$401,592.00	34-1014595
Ohio State Legal Services Association	OH	2014	990	43	$2,708,223.00	31-0718185
Ohio State Legal Services Association	OH	2013	990	36	$3,481,406.00	31-0718185
Ohio State Legal Services Association	OH	2012	990	39	$4,737,656.00	31-0718185

Those tax returns are incidental to a potential connection to the one below, through Mr. Smalz.

Click to read this Commentary on Yr2011 OLSC Sched I (Grants) vs Budget Deficit of about the same amount.

 In Tax Year (=Calendar Year also) 2011 (one year before that shown on table above)OH State Legal Services Assoc, whose main income is gov’t grants and main expense, salaries (employing, it says 96 people) shows a budget deficit of $1.5M for total (Pt. I Line 23) total expenses of $9.2M.   It only had ONE sentence to say about its “program service accomplishments” and neglected to write in the amount for grants there, where prompted:

4a. (Code ) (Expenses $ 8,199,052 including grants of $ ) (Revenue $ 9,400

PROVIDE LEGAL ASSISTANCE IN NON-CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS OR OTHER MATTERS TO INDIVIDUALS IN THE STATE OF OHIO THAT ARE UNABLE TO AFFORD LEGAL ASSISTANCE

I included an image of the grants.  This legal assistance organization “forgot” to type in over $1.5M of grants as functional expenses on its main page (p.2) describing what it did that year.  It also didn’t bother to provide much description — in my opinion, a sign of arrogance “we’re well-known, and don’t have to.”

(see screenprint showing they didn’t fill in category 4b, although on the IRS 990 form itself are asked to list to three largest accomplishments by category and expenses for them, on this form):

Also, on page 1 it lists three functions in opening statement:  “Advocacy, Education & Empowermt”

OSLSA (Ohio State Legal Services Assoc) Tax Yr 2011 self-description of 3 main Program Service Accomplishmts (Pt. III, Line 4) shows they opted to just take one sentence to describe one of them, omitting the amount spent on grants, AS REQUIRED. Click Here to see full-sized.

Part I Summary statement shows 3 purposes. The very next page (colorfully annotated above (shows org. didn’t bother to describe its 3-pronged approach in 3 categories, with expenses for each function. This also shows gross receipts for Year 2011

The comment on OSLA Pt III Program Service Accomplishmts and (above that) Schedule I on Grants refers to a Grant to Legal Aid of Western Ohio. This printout shows there’s also a Legal Aid Foundation of Western Ohio, and if you look either up, even more Related Entities (Sched R) can be found. Not main topic of this post, though.

See more on Action Ohio Coalition for Battered Women (incidentally, the organization name reads differently:  “Ohio Action Coalition….”) on the post to which I moved the look-ups done so far…

 

---

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
ACTION OHIO Coalition for Battered Women	OH	2015	990EZ	14	$36,822.00	34-1376870
ACTION OHIO COALITION FOR BATTERED WOMEN	OH	2014	990EZ	11	$39,366.00	34-1376870
ACTION OHIO COALITION FOR BATTERED WOMEN	OH	2013	990EZ	11	$50,690.00	34-1376870

FY2001 showed a “windfall” – “repayment of Shanklin Debt” $40K. Otherwise, the program service revenues of trainings (not shown, but on same tax return page) is minimal, under $4K. The entity had loaned to someone “Shanklin”?  In much later returns, among its liabilities, year after year was an $8,000 loan [no details].

.

=================

[[This section also a Feb. 2017 update, just on a different DV organization!]]

[Old logo link broken, here’s one as of 2017]

 pink background and extra images ON OVDN.org (Ohio’s Statewide Domestic Violence Network not in original, added during 2017 update]__________________________________________________

.

Screenshot of home page of OVDN (2017) words in logo barely visible. Check whether website has seen fit, YET, to reference the existence of OHIO.FATHERHOOD.gov and its ramifications…

(Tax returns of ODVN were not in the original post, either):

Total results: 3. Search Again.
(Click on the column headers to sort.)

ORGANIZATION NAME	ST	YR	FORM	PP	TOTAL ASSETS	EIN
Ohio Domestic Violence Network	OH	2015	990	32	$1,059,051.00	34-1622848
Ohio Domestic Violence Network	OH	2014	990	38	$1,163,144.00	34-1622848
Ohio Domestic Violence Network	OH	2013	990	31	$1,009,814.00	34-1622848

ODVN: Purpose (2015 tax return, p.1):

THE PURPOSE OF THE OHIO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE NETWORK IS TO SUPPORT AND REPRESENT MEMBER PROGRAMS, INSURE THE CONTINUANCE OF SAFE, EFFECTIVE SERVICES TO VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE THROUGH TRAINING, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND ADVOCACY TO MEMBER PROGRAMS AND ALLIED PROFESSIONALS, EFFECT SOCIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE THROUGH INFLUENCING PUBLIC POLICY, ADVOCATING FOR VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, CREATING PARTNERSHIPS WITH GOVERNMENTAL AND NON-GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES, AND PROMOTING PUBLIC AWARENESS AND EDUCATION

“ADVOCATING for Victims of Domestic Violence” seems almost an afterthought.  It’s certainly not the top priority or first listed.  As you can see the primary function is as a membership organization. It’s more about control of the field (implication:  “quality control”) through (green bolded font) “Training, Technical Asistance and Advocacy to MEMBER PROGRAMs and ALLIED PROFESSIONALS.  (does it say DV victims anywhere?) and, sounds like, do some political-influence pushing.  Notice the readiness to do “partnerships with governmental and non-governmental agencies” and then of course PR.  That’s what its own tax return says, now let’s look, briefly, at the numbers, in a year where (see Ohio.fatherhood.gov) the fathers’ rights organizations have two funding streams, and were getting $10M statewide.  This one is named after the State ,and it’s almost entirely government-grants-funded.  It also was formed in 1989 and at any point in time SINCE could have “technically assisted and trained” its member organizations to inform their traumatized adult female + minor children involved with the same (plus those without children) clients (assuming that’s who comes to “member organizations”), often women and children, often mothers, that the other grants streams existed and were focused on forced co-parenting with their abusers/batterers and/or re-unification of families where Dad was incarcerated.

Screenprint of FY2014 (the latest available.  Fiscal Year 2015 ended 9/30/2016 — so where is the tax return?):

(see above table for originals to tax return screenprints here. except the next colorful one, link in its “Caption.”):

Click HERE to read the annotations and a closer look at the numbers on Ohio’s DVNetwork (Form 990), then see next screenprints.  (Added during 2017 update)

Look at the images, then look at the fine-print screenprint (p2) showing, it doesn’t really bother to categorize its $1.5M (approx) of money, government money, for how it was spent, really — but does note $112 Grants under a certain program —  not reflected (later) in supporting detail (Sched I) on the grants by that program name.

---

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Page 2 of OH DVN (ODVN.org) 2014 Tax Return. I’ve copied the text also into post, but see annotations. (full-size — see pdf link)

LINK to see annotations to Pt. III:

ovdn-ohios-form-9902014-pt-iii-page-2-program-serv-accomplishmts-shows-tta-and-national-coordination-is-the-focus-plus-12012-pass-through-of-dv-delta-grants-evaluating-other-programs-screen-s

Text from Page 2, Pt. III, “Program Service Accomplishments” (a.k.a. “what did you do this year?”):

4a. (Code ) (Expenses $ 1,232,805 including grants of $ 55,471 ) (Revenue $ 24,770

THROUGH ITS MEMBERSHIP IN THE NATIONAL COALITION AGAINST VIOLENCE AND THE NATIONAL NETWORK TO END DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND ASSOCIATION WITH A VARIETY OF OTHER NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND RESOURCES, THE OHIO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE NETWORK (ODVN) HAS ACCESS TO CUTTING EDGE RESEARCH AND ADVANCES IN THE FIELD ODVN IS ABLE TO DISTRIBUTE THESE BEST PRACTICES AND IDEAS TO ITS CONSTITUENCIES THROUGH A VARIETY OF SERVICES, INCLUDING TRAINING, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, A RESOURCE CENTER, TOLL-FREE INFORMATION/ REFERRAL LINE, NATIONAL STANDARD CAMPAIGN, CHILD ADVOCACY CAUCUS, WOMEN OF COLOR CAUCUS, NETWORK NEWS, AND PUBLIC POLICY INFORMATION ODVN OFFERS A VARIETY OF TRAINING PROGRAMS ON TOPICS SUCH AS IMPROVING THE MEDICAL RESPONSE TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN THE WORKPLACE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED BY ODVN INCLUDES ON- SITE AND TELEPHONE CONSULTATION TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROVIDERS AND ALLIED PROFESSIONALS

4b. (Code ) (Expenses $ 128,012 including grants of $ 128,012 ) (Revenue $

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PREVENTION ENHANCEMENT AND LEADERSHIP THROUGH ALLIANCES (DELTA) THE OHIO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE NETWORK PROVIDED A GRANT TO DELTA TO FURTHER THE PURPOSE OF THE DELTA PROGRAM DELTA SEEKS TO REDUCE THE INCIDENCE OF INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE BY PROVIDING EDUCATION AND KNOWLEDGE IN ORDER TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE DEVELOPMENTAL PATHWAYS AND SOCIAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT LEAD TO FIRST-TIME PERPETRATION AND FIRST-TIME VICTIMIZATION OF INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE DELTA ALSO HELPS OTHER ORGANIZATION EVALUATE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF EXISTING PROGRAMS TO REDUCE BOTH VICTIMIZATION AND PERPETRATION

 Still regarding one Ohio Statewide Domestic Violence Network, a nonprofit run primarily on government grants (from where, isn’t shown on a basic tax return), this shows Part VIIB (Independent Subcontractors) is BLANK, and Part VIII top, showing main source of revenues.  Compare to Page 1 showing the largest expenses were in categories (1) salaries (11 employees and FYI the Exec Director, only about $88K that year), and “Other Expenses” over $500K.  Of this, it turns out from another part, $346 is “Contractual Services” — but apparently not for “professionals” because Part IX Line 11 doesn’t show this amount under “Fees for Professional Services” in any category, including “other.”  There are some grants, but under $200K.  etc.

Described above, click here to see comments on Pt VIIB and Pt VIII (image shown), full-sized

odvn-ein34-1622848-fyr2014-990-pts-vii-showing-no-indep-contractors-over-100k-and-viii-showing-1431734-govt-grants-and-nearly-nothing-else-screen-shot-2017-02-11-at-75906-pm <==click here, or on caption to image.  (both added in 2017).

 

 

 

 

Comments on Pt IX Expenses, an oddly large amount is “Other” (Line 24e). I compare it to Total “Other Expenses” on page 1. Click for full-sized

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

RETURNING to the JANUARY 22, 2012 NARRATIVE:

If this weren’t enough, Ohio is now collaborating with the Battered Women’s Justice Project:

The Ohio IPV Collaborative Builds Competency Within Child Protective Services

The Ohio IPV Collaborative works to build Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) competency within child protective services agencies and fosters enhanced partnerships among child welfare, courts, DV/IPV service providers and other critical stakeholders, consistent with several recommendations in the Greenbook, a landmark 1999 publication.  The Greenbook set forth guiding principles and sixty-three recommendations from the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges.

ANOTHER 2017 UPDATE: I could say a LOT more than I did just here, on this situation….  IN FACT, on finally seeing who started this up, and a BWJP special on the situation (commended for adopting Green Book practices) I think this had better go, as did ACTION OHIO BATTERED WOMEN’s COALITION, to another post.

[2017 UPDATE MATERIAL BEING MOVED TO A NEW POST…][WILL get the LINK HERE SOON]….

…BACK TO THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED (2012) CONVERSATION:

Why is it so hard to accept?

Year, 2009

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

SERIOUSLY?

(apparently, yes!) 

Battered Women’s Justice Project, Praxis, AFCC & NCJFCJ as paid for (funded) by the OVW and its May, 2010 workgroup moderated by a Canadian Sociologist.  (That seems “appropriate” for something funded by American taxpayers):

BWJP and its project partner, Praxis International, are expanding recent multidisciplinary efforts to more effectively protect the safety and wellbeing of children and their parents in the family court system by crafting a more practical framework for identifying, understanding and accounting for the contexts and implications of domestic violence in custody arrangements and parenting plans.

Why should there be ANY parenting plan after certain levels of assault, battery, death threat, or sexual abuse of minors?  I am sure it would send a very clear message to the nation if a solid rule would set up:  You beat your wife, you molest your kids, you don’t get second chances.   We, the public, are simply unwilling to finance your desire for second, third, fourth, fifth, or other attempts to create a warm family feeling for men (or women) who lack understanding of what’s criminal and what’s not, and what children are — and are not — for.  You will have to go find work, or someone else, who also will have the right to report your assaulting behind if you don’t get it straight.

But no — instead, the practitioners (networking with other practitioners)  apparently endorse the concept is that such parents are going to stay “IN” the family court system, despite domestic violence by (a parent), for a good while.  This is wonderful for getting along with organizations which profit from the same funding source — HHS, and DOJ — and avoids antagonizing those in the family law system by reporting on what they are actually doing! I mean, financially!

BWJP and Praxis staff  have formed a National Workgroup with representatives from the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ) and the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts(AFCC).  In consultation with leading researchers and practitioners, {{Not mentioned:  PARENTS}}  they have begun to examine the institutional processes by which family courts commonly reach and/or facilitate crucial parenting decisions, including the use of auxiliary advisors such as custody evaluators, guardians ad litem and court appointed special advocates.  The intent is to identify the ways in which current institutional practices produce both problematic and helpful results for children and their parents.

NOTE:  The head of NCJFCJ in 2007-2008 was Susan Carbon.  How, she is heading up the Office of Violence Against Women (if I got which title straight), i.e., the DOJ funding stream.  Get it?  Before that, she was a family judge in New Hampshire, where this nice parenting coordination association got started, and has a handbook adopted from the Indiana version of the same thing.  AND so, a project coming from a nice collaboration between two or three of these groups (NCJFCJ, AFCC & BWJP) is naturally going to be entail continuing involvement of the family IN the family law system, which two out of three of those organizations are involved with already (and AFCC helped create to start with):

Again;BWJP and its project partner, Praxis International, are expanding recent multidisciplinary efforts to more effectively protect the safety and wellbeing of children and their parents in the family court system by crafting a more practical framework for identifying, understanding and accounting for the contexts and implications of domestic violence in custody arrangements and parenting plans. They intend to find some positive results of such involvements when DV or Child Abuse has happened (which tend to be a great cause of “disputed custody” which then gives the courts/state jurisdiction over the parent’s children, even if one parent is completely innocent of any child abuse or criminal activity:

The intent is to identify the ways in which current institutional practices produce both problematic and helpful results for children and their parents.

RESULTS?

I am unaware of any “helpful results” for children or their parents to date; but am sure if enough funding is produced, some will be found.  (the “helpful results” site has a few “invisible mother alerts,” this last one being from Ohio, dating to YESTERDAY (referenced above):

Dad jailed for binding daughter, locking her in dog cage (Springfield Township, Ohio)

. . .a father is accused of binding his daughter’s hands and legs with duct tape, locking her in a dog cage, photographing her and having the images posted on Facebook. . . While the girl was in the cage, he dropped small amounts of water on her face. The child was trapped in the cage for about 20 minutes until her brother let her out. . .

To get back at her father, she began pouring water on his head and in his ear, according to police.

Tapke bound his daughter again with duct tape and stuck her back in the cage. Then, he ordered his son to go to the garage and retrieve the electrical jump pack so he could electrify the cage as another means of punishment for his daughter.

Tapke never actually attempted to shock the cage, but he threatened to several times. His son obeyed his father and brought the jump pack in from the garage, which was set in front of the cage so the girl could see it.

Finally, Tapke let the girl out of the cage and her grandmother helped her remove the tuct tape.

Once again, it appears that the father here is custodial. Notice that dad JAMES TAPKE is jail, but it isn’t “clear” who is caring for these kids. There’s no mention of a mother either–just a passing reference to a grandmother. 

It seems that BWJP, however, is on the job in Ohio also, collaborating to prevent domestic violence:

The Ohio IPV Collaborative Builds Competency Within Child Protective Services

Differential Response (aka Alternative Response) has emerged as an expanded continuum of child protection responses. The model recognizes that child protective service agencies receive broad variations in incoming reports and that an investigative response is not always the most productive for the family or most beneficial for the child. It differs from traditional responses in that it is more attuned to child and family strengths and their self-articulated needs. Most significantly, services are provided without the traditional requirement of a formal disposition (substantiated or unsubstantiated) of maltreatment or risk for maltreatment. Currently, a three year evaluation of Ohio’s Differential Response is being conducted by theHuman Services Research Institute.  (CLICKED ON, WE SEE THAT):

HRSI has a history focusing on people with disabilities and mental health problems.  Is domestic violence a mental health problem?  Or are so may people interested in “treating” it that now it’s been diagnosed as one?

With funding from the U.S. Children’s Bureau, HSRI is conducting a three-year evaluation of the Differential Response (DR) Initiative in Ohio, a best-practices approach to serving families reported for child abuse or neglect.** DR provides an alternative to the traditional child welfare investigative approach, rather offering families a more critical role in assuring the safety and well-being of their children. Ohio is one of three states who are implementing a DR model and the Children’s Bureau is funding a cross-site QIC evaluation of the three sites to contribute to the scientific evidence of the effectiveness of this approach; HSRI’s evaluation will significantly contribute to this effort.

Moving on  . . . ..

Year, 2008:

Reconceptualizing Child Custody: Past, Present, and Future—Lawyers and Psychologists* Working Together A Continuing Education Conference

(in other words, basically ABA & APA)*

Year, 2007

Changing the Culture of Custody  (Pennsylvania)

 (more on this, below, in fact most of today’s post is on this).

Year, 2006

Rethinking Domestic Violence (Donald Dutton, book)

 

Presents an analysis of domestic violence research that crosses disciplinary lines, including sociology, psychology, criminology, affective neuropsychology, and criminal justice.

Book ID 2695 at UBC Press (Univ. of British Columbia, i.e., we’re in Canada here).  Read the summary (it has TOC also).  (Dutton was, maybe still is, a professor of psychology there.  Read the write-up on that link.)

“Donald G. Dutton teaches in the Department of Psychology at the University of British Columbia. He has written extensively on the subject of domestic violence.”

&

U.B.C. Law Review

BOOK REVIEW: RETHINKING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE by Donald G. Dutton, Vancouver: UBC Press, 2006, 432 pp. ¹

June, 2008

41 U.B.C. L. Rev. 179

Excerpt

In Rethinking Domestic Violence, Donald Dutton opens his book with 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 and he argues that “women use violence in intimate relationships to the same extent as men, for the same reasons, and with largely the same results.” ⁴

((**a review of the same book on Dutton’s site says the book is “distinctly feminist” in viewpoint.  “He has gathered the latest work from multiple disciplines to create a volume that will surely be a cornerstone of a radical, distinctly feminist rethinking of domestic violence practice.”I doubt it…)

(Dr. Dutton teaches in the Dept. of Psychology at Univ. of British Columbia)

MEANWHILE:

BATTERERS INTERVENTION PROGRAMS ARE GETTING NICELY ORGANIZED, STANDARDIZED, Certified, etc.

BISC-MI Welcomes You!!!

Click for additional information

. . .

Year, 2002?

The Batterer As Parent:

[AN ENTIRE CONCLUDING SECTION (from 2012 version of post), ABOUT 6,000 words, is moved for easier reach in formatting cleanup. I will either replace it in better form, or a link to it, which might have to display as a newer post (I cannot “retroactively” post). Title keywords, “Let Us Now Look at some of this progressive language creep…” (in other words, slippage over time).. might be a keyword if it remains a separate post.]]LGH 2-13-2017

THIS post with short-link ending “-5SR, ” is “Progressive Language Creep Section from 2012 “Reconceptualize This” post (reviewed and reformatted 2017)“] IS that section.

Due to my habit of adding extended, and (now that I can also show and annotate screenprints of website and tax returns) sometimes colorfully illustrated with my arrows, rectangles, ovals, and sarcastic but, I try to make it, accurate and documented commentary (and rhetorical questions about what, REALLY, does this signify?)  we now have over 13,000 words — but split into two parts:  TOP, and BOTTOM, which is still around the original size.

The other reason for such length is that I am uncovering not just one or two alliances, but, literally, NETWORKS of organizations, public/private partnerships involving (at this point) a law school, and some nonprofits which are doing a good imitation of serving as a front group for other nonprofits which may not want to take direct credit for the initiatives — like the Ohio IPV Collaborative.  Also, in the “person” of “National Center for Adoption Law and Policy” (which turns out to be a registered trademark of a private, nonprofit university (with a law school) in Columbus, Ohio, we have entire levels of mis-leading statements that would have anyone’s head scratching — at least anyone who expected the provision of services to U.S. Citizens to leave clear footprints to WHO is involved, and WHAT PATHS did federal funds trace.

So if it takes time to document and narrate, don’t shoot the messenger.   🙂
 

Just as a reminder, or to get quickly back to the top, you’re looking at this post:

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”}

{With 2017 updates inspired, as it says at the top, by this:} 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.