KTVU com VALLEJO, Calif. — posted 10:07pm Monday 2/13/2012

Two women, a toddler, and two other people were struck by gunfire during a shootout at a Vallejo nail salon Monday evening, according to Vallejo police.  . . .

Two other people arrived at Bay Area hospitals with gunshot wounds and officers were able to connect them to the nail salon shooting, police said.

Two-year old shot at nail salon in Vallejo

(abclocal.go.com, by Amy Hollyfield) (updated 7:38am today)

VALLEJO, Calif. (KGO) — Vallejo police are looking for more suspects in a shooting rampage at a nail salon last night. Five people were shot, including a two-year-old girl who is in critical but stable condition. The little girl is the niece of the nail salon owner. The child was shot twice, once in the leg and once in the buttocks.

Around 7:15 p.m. police received a call that shots were fired at Tina’s Nails on Springs Road. Police say it appears that a man walked into the nail salon and began shooting at a female customer. Someone inside the salon, possibly a male friend of the customer, began returning fire and even ran outside the salon and continued to shoot.

The nail salon owner said she has no idea why this happened. The woman who appears to be the target is a loyal customer.

The two women and two menwho were shot are expected to be OK.

Anyone with information about the shooting is asked to call Vallejo police Detective Fabio Rodriguez at (800) 488-9383 or the anonymous Solano Crime Stoppers tip line at (707) 644-STOP.  (Copyright ©2012 KGO-TV/DT. All Rights Reserved.)

Three people shot at Vallejo nail salon

(same source, by Alan Wang, 2/13/2012)

VALLEJO, Calif. (KGO) — Three people are shot inside a Vallejo nail salon, including a 2-year-old girl. The violence then spilled into the parking lot where gunshots tore through the neighborhood. Gunmen targeted the initial victim and it appears a friend of hers fired back.

It all started inside Tina’s Nail Salon in the middle of a shopping district on Springs Road. It seems to have been one serious gun battle.

Springs Road at Maple Avenue was shut down late Monday night as police investigated the shooting. Three people were shot, including the 2-year-old granddaughter of the shop’s owner.

The owner’s son told ABC7 two armed men walked into the salon around 7:30 p.m. and opened fire on a female customer. They ran off, but apparently came back to finish the job. That’s when the victim’s male friend was ready with his gun and that’s when the majority of the bullets began to fly.

OK, that’s not cool to go run after the guy after the man realized it wasn’t going to be easy target practice inside the salon . . . . .  But imagine if NO ONE owning a gun had been in the place?  Would it have been another Seal Beach?   Let’s see who he was aiming at, because the articles sure are not mentioning any relationship between the shooter and the FIRST person he shot in the place, a woman.

One more account has some names:

11:49 AM, Feb 14, 2012, News10abc

. . . .Two suspects entered Tina’s Nail Salon on 1833 Spring Road and opened fire on a female customer, son of the nail salon owner Huey Tran said.

A male friend of the victim then returned fire. Tran said during the fire fight the nail salon owner Rose Tran was shot in the arm and her 2-year-old granddaughter Hannah was shot in the leg.

Vallejo police said the 2-year-old was lifeflighted to a hospital in Oakland.

The target of the shooting was shot three times, but her condition is unclear.

What’s most disturbing about this is that the men knew where to find their target, and apparently her male friend being armed, shot back — whereas, what men walking into nail — or beauty  — salons, expect to find resistance?   Mostly they are inhabited by women.   This is now the third major incident in California, and the only one that did NOT result in deaths, although it terrorized people involved, tore up the shop (as did another one) and what a horrible way to begin life for a little girl.

Usually the news indicates if there’d been some romantic relationship between the two — which it doesn’t here, although in another case in the same general area, it clearly does (murder/suicide, no prior domestic violence, ex-boyfriend (36) shoots woman (3), then himself, in car, it say — he dies later).  This article objectifies “murder/suicide” claiming the life of a couple.   The AP version says it happened in a home, and she was a woman “whom he had once dated.”  This appears to have been around the same time (one hour earlier) as the Vallejo incident.   The Oakland Tribune (Robert Salonga and Christ Benedetti) adds, in “Alameda Couple killed in Apparent Murder/Suicide”

While the man and woman had previously dated each other, it remains unclear what may have motivated the man to shoot her before taking his own life, Lynch said   The extent of the relationship is still being sorted out,” he said.

She apparently struggled outside and was found there, while he was still inside.  She died at the scene, being only 30 years old:

Pre-Valentine’s Day Murder-Suicide Claims Two Lives In Alameda

A couple who had previously dated are dead in what investigators are calling a murder-suicide that happened just after 6:30 p.m. last night in Alameda. A 30-year-old woman was found dead outside her home on the 2100 block of Alameda Avenue after there were reports of shots fired. A 36-year-old man, suffering from a self-inflicted gunshot wound, was found still alive inside the home.

He later died in the hospital.

Police are still looking in to the circumstances surrounding the incident. But come on. It was the night before Valentine’s Day and she had probably broken up with him…

That was from a blog, “sfist.com,” spinning off the Salonga article.    Is it always necessary to objectify the cause of death?  She was dead, but he was “suffering” — and it was the murder-suicide that claimed two lives — not “A man murdered a woman” (probably who rejected him).  Like a language tic, somehow the headlines never attribute cause, but how sad for both of them.

Regarding the Vallejo Incident — should women attending or running stores that cater to women, who sit down in the store for service (hair, nails, etc.) — hire security and up the prices?    Should ALL women, who feel they may have offended or slighted some man, whether an ex, a former dating partner, or someone they have children with — simply abandon their children and leave the neighborhood just in case (because it’s REAL clear if they attempt to leave with the children, how the courts are likely to respond) — and of course don’t seek child support, or you’re in for a real battle?  Also don’t go on welfare, because then the county will seek child support (unless a very good cause not to exists), in which case the battle is still on — whether or not the guy even wants it, or to see his children.  You both just put a nice target on your lives by entering a system.

The woman who was a loyal customer of this nail salon (it’s nice to patronize stores where one likes the service, or the people there, or if proprietor is a friend, right) — should women who think that ANYONE may have a cause against them, and might be violent, begin to live like fugitives, lest there is another incident?

Should ALL people who are in any way involved with or know someone who has an irate ex (or other problems) simply withdraw all moral and social support immediately, lest one’s granddaughter get in the crossfire (or be targeted?). . . . . Let ’em die, don’t pay for all the DV trainings, and fewer mouths to feed??  Is that a rational answer?

It’s Valentine’s Day.  Here’s another one from Chicagoland (actually, near Peoria, Illinois).  An elderly couple (73 yr old man, 83 yr old wife); he shot her once, then himself.  He was “citizen of the year” 3 years earlier, too, it says.   Here’s one from Florida (man and woman were in their 40s, not sure yet if it was “domestic-related”….”The initial investigation revealed this may be a domestic related murder-suicide. The exact cause of the shooting is still under investigation, police said.”…

Here’s one where a Restraining Order, Didn’t — she’s 31 and he hasn’t died yet:

Police: Tucson woman is fatally shot at home  …

Tucson police received a 911 call about 9 a.m. Monday about a woman whose ex-boyfriend showed up at her home despite having a restraining order against him.  Officers arrived at the home in the 6800 block of South Kolb Road nine minutes later and found signs of forced entry.  They found the woman inside the home dead from a gunshot wound and a man with a life-threatening gunshot wound that appeared to be self-inflicted.  (this is an AP article).

This wasn’t his fault — it was “Domestic Dispute”‘s fault — the headline says:   Domestic dispute may have led to double shooting.  She was merely dead, but he was dramatically “fighting for his life.”  Arizona Daily Independent doesn’t note WHEN she got that R.O., but “Co-workers say that the system failed Claudia Pascual.”    The woman possibly called her friend, who then called 911 (?):

The caller said that a female friend had just called saying her ex-boyfriend arrived at her home. The caller indicated that the friend possibly had a court order prohibiting the ex-boyfriend from contacting her.

 Maybe both called.  The man was in his 40s.

Finally, we learn this woman had children (by him?), was being stalked, and her friends now speak out, including one from a Hair Salon:

Friend of domestic violence victim: “She was afraid of him and he killed her“

Friends tell 9OYS the system failed to protect their friend

Reporter: Corinne Hautala

TUCSON (KGUN9-TV) – A 31-year-old mother of two was found dead inside her home in the 3800 block of South Kolb Road.

Tucson Police said it responded to a caller, who told the 911 dispatcher his friend called him and said her ex-boyfriend had just arrived at her home.

When police arrived, officers said they found Claudia Pascual dead and a male suffering from an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound.

“Today we lost a loved one. Today we lost one of our stylists to domestic violence,” said Claudia’s friend and boss, Sheila Dodge-Harrison the owner of Transitions Hair Studio.

Pascual’s co-workers said that Pascual had a restraining order against the gunman. They said after a domestic violence incident she broke up his him and that’s when he started to stalk her.

“He was stalking her, followed her everywhere,” said Dodge-Harrison. “She couldn’t get away from him. She reported it. Nothing could be done. {{AZ has no anti-stalking laws?  But if they did, who would enforce them?}} She was afraid of him and he killed her.”

Her friends believe the system failed to protect her.

“She got lost in the system. The system did not work for her,” said Dodge-Harrison.

 Now the gloves are off, so the reporter has to get the other point of view, and asks an attorney (they don’t say what kind of attorney — prosecutor?)

When a news source wants a serious answer, they go to the experts.  Here’s (probably) this Mike Piccarreta.  notice his area of focus — DEFENDING criminals:

I decided to look this case up — because of its location (Pima County, AZ).  Note — a strong disclaimer on the site says this is NOT the official record.  How true it may be — however, this is what a plebian, a simple member of the public, is able to look up.  Like they say – -that may or may not reflect was what official record.  (See Joseph Zernik of L.A. area for more on that topic);  HER restraining order was ONLY last November:

Case Number: File Date: Caption: Judge:

Party Information Party Full Name Party Role Name Type CLAUDIA GABRIELA PASCUAL Plaintiff True JAMES B LEONARD Defendant True

Case/Document Information Document Type Document SubType Document Caption File Date Image Affidavit Affidavit Of Service AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE – JAMES B LEONARD 11/22/2011 Available at Courthouse Receipt All Money Receipts All Money Receipts #1630010 11/21/2011 Available at Courthouse Order Order Of Protection/Restraining Order Order Of Protection/Restraining Order 11/18/2011 Available at Courthouse Open Petition For Order Of Protection Petition For Order Of Protection 11/18/2011 Available at Courthouse ME Petitions HEARING ON EX PARTE PETITION FOR ORDER OF PROTECTION 11/18/2011 Available

It’s a very simple declaration — first is just a form (showing), 11/18/2011defendant did not show.  About a year earlier, the minutes show Claudia is an “Other” (?) when the man gets an ex parte DV order on someone else, Geraldine Ortiz, meaning there’s some relationship between James B & Grealdine.

Case Number: File Date: Caption: Judge:

Party Information Party Full Name Party Role Name Type JAMES BENJAMIN LEONARD III Plaintiff True GERALDINO ORTIZ Defendant True CLAUDIA PASCUAL Other True

Case/Document Information Document Type Document SubType Document Caption File Date Image Mail Return Mail RETURN MAIL – UNABLE TO FORWARD – JAMES LEONARD 9/20/2010 Available at Courthouse Affidavit Affidavit Of Service DECLARATION OF SERVICE 9/20/2010 Available at Courthouse Order Hearing Order HEARING ORDER 9/15/2010 Available at Courthouse Misc Request For Hearing/Continuance REQUEST HEARING 9/15/2010 Available at Courthouse Order Transfer Order & Notice Of Hearing TRANSFER ORDER 9/15/2010 Available at Courthouse Acceptance Acceptance Of Service ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE 9/13/2010 Available at Courthouse Receipt All Money Receipts All Money Receipts #1430318 9/10/2010 Available at Courthouse Order Order Of Protection/Restraining Order Order Of Protection/Restraining Order 9/9/2010 Available at Courthouse Open Petition For Order Of Protection Petition For Order Of Protection 9/9/2010 Available at Courthouse ME Petitions PETITION FOR ORDER OF PROTECTION 9/9/2010 Available

I do not know if these are all the same person:

Party Name	Case Number	Case Caption	Filing Date
JAMES B LEONARD	C298863		2/2/1994
JAMES B LEONARD	D20073807	TERESA D LEONARD VS. JAMES B LEONARD * * *	10/17/2007
JAMES B LEONARD	DV20071928	TERESA D LEONARD VS. JAMES B LEONARD	10/22/2007
JAMES B LEONARD	DV20112447	CLAUDIA GABRIELA PASCUAL VS JAMES B LEONARD	11/18/2011
JAMES BENJAMIN LEONARD	L120747		4/23/1999
JAMES BENJAMIN LEONARD	L5820750		4/23/1999

* * * This is the Divorce case, and note:  5 days later, the wife seeks a restraining order.  The typical very active docket, which I imagine would be very stressful for both parties, and we see children were involved.  And of course they both must take parenting classes.  We can see by the murder/suicide event how very helpful parenting classes are, and how effective (assuming same person….)

One can see the impact of Access/Visitation funding (parenting classes), of consolidation of protective order with dissolution (typical) and the mediation (which is insane, when there is DV, but that’s the practice).  Also see dates — as of July 2011, this other woman Claudia G. Pascual (d. 2/13/2012….) was apparently overlapping with his divorce, and perhaps child support payments . . . . . Were those his biological children left behind with Teresa?

/Document Information

Document Type	Document SubType	Document Caption	File Date	Image
Mail	Outgoing/Incoming Mail/E-Mail	LETTER REQUESTING EMPLOYER FULL NAME AND ADDRESS	7/7/2011	Available at Courthouse
Notice	Notice-Change Of Employment/Address	NOTICE-CHANGE OF EMPLOYMENT- RESPONDENT	7/7/2011	Available at Courthouse
CourtNotice	Notice Re: Reassignment	Notice Re: Reassignment	2/14/2011	Available
Notice	Notice-Change Of Employment/Address	NOTICE-CHANGE OF EMPLOYMENT/ADDRESS	5/11/2010	Available at Courthouse
Notice	Notice & Acknowledgment Of Receipt	NOTICE & ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT	3/25/2010	Available at Courthouse
Notice	Notice-Change Of Employment/Address	NOTICE-CHANGE OF EMPLOYMENT/ADDRESS	3/12/2010	Available at Courthouse
Receipt	All Money Receipts	All Money Receipts #1186758	4/9/2009	Available at Courthouse
CourtNotice	Notice Re: Reassignment	Notice Re: Reassignment	2/2/2009	Available
Order	Child Support Order	CHILD SUPPORT ORDER	5/29/2008	Available at Courthouse
Worksht	Parents Worksheet	PARENTS WORKSHEET FOR CHILD SUPPORT AMOUNT	5/28/2008	Available at Courthouse
Decree	Decree Of Dissolution	SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE & DECREE OF DISSOLUTION	5/20/2008	Available at Courthouse
Order	Settlement Conference	SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE ORDER	5/6/2008	Available at Courthouse
CourtNotice	Pretrial Compliance	PRETRIAL COMPLIANCE	4/29/2008	Available
Ptstate	Pretrial Statement	PRETRIAL STATEMENT/RESPONDENT	4/18/2008	Available at Courthouse
Misc	Inventory Of Property	INVENTORY OF PROPERTY & DEBTS/HUSBAND	4/18/2008	Available at Courthouse
Affidavit	Child Support Financial Affidavit	CHILD SUPPORT FINANCIAL AFFIDAVIT	4/18/2008	Available at Courthouse
Affidavit	Affidavit Of Financial Information	AFFIDAVIT OF FINANCIAL INFORMATION OF JAMES LEONARD	4/18/2008	Available at Courthouse
Affidavit	Affidavit Of Financial Information	AFFIDAVIT OF FINANCIAL INFORMATION OF JAMES LEONARD	4/18/2008	Available at Courthouse
Ptstate	Pretrial Statement	PRETRIAL STATEMENT	3/19/2008	Available at Courthouse
Misc	Inventory Of Property	INVENTORY OF PROPERTY – PETITIONER	3/19/2008	Available at Courthouse
Notice	Trial Notice	FAMILY LAW TRIAL NOTICE	3/14/2008	Available at Courthouse
Motion	Motion To Set	MOTION TO SET & CERTIFICATE OF READINESS	1/30/2008	Available at Courthouse
Misc	Conciliation Court Status	CONCILIATION COURT STATUS – NO AGREEMENT	1/17/2008	Available at Courthouse
Order	Order To Appear	ORDER TO APPEAR FOR MEDIATION	1/4/2008	Available at Courthouse
Notice	Notice Of Program Completion Parent Ed Course	NOTICE OF PROGRAM COMPLETION PARENT ED COURSE	12/31/2007	Available at Courthouse
Affidavit	Affidavit Of Service	AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAIL	12/14/2007	Available at Courthouse
Notice	Notice Of Program Completion Parent Ed Course	NOTICE OF PROGRAM COMPLETION PARENT ED COURSE/T. LEONARD	12/12/2007	Available at Courthouse
Misc	Request For Mediation	REQUEST FOR MEDIATION WHEN THERE IS A CURRENT CHILD CUSTODY/PARENTING TIME ACTION BEFORE THE COURT	11/26/2007	Available at Courthouse
Order	Order To Consolidate	ORDER TO CONSOLIDATE CASES	11/2/2007	Available at Courthouse
Order	In Chambers Re:	IN CHAMBERS	11/1/2007	Available at Courthouse
ME	Re Hearing	HEARING RE: ORDER OF PROTECTION	10/31/2007	Available at Courthouse
Affidavit	Affidavit Of Service	AFFIDAVIT AND RETURN OF SERVICE / TERESA D LEONARD	10/30/2007	Available at Courthouse
Receipt	All Money Receipts	All Money Receipts #967695	10/29/2007	Available at Courthouse
Affidavit	Affidavit Re: Minor Children	AFFIDAVIT RE: MINOR CHILDREN	10/29/2007	Available at Courthouse
Application	Application For Deferral Or Waiver Of Court Costs/Fees/Service	APPLICATION FOR DEFERRAL OF COURT FEES AND/OR COSTS	10/29/2007	Available at Courthouse
Order	Order For/Of Deferral Or Waiver	ORDER RE: DEFERRAL OF COURT FEES AND/OR COSTS AND CONSENT TO ENTRY OF JUDGMENT	10/29/2007	Available at Courthouse
Answer	Answer/Response To Petition	RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE	10/29/2007	Available at Courthouse
Misc	Request For Hearing/Continuance	REQUEST FOR HEARING	10/25/2007	Available at Courthouse
Order	Hearing Order	HEARING ORDER RE: ORDER OF PROTECTION	10/25/2007	Available at Courthouse
Motion	Motion To Consolidate	MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES	10/24/2007	Available at Courthouse
ME	Petitions	EX PARTE PETITION FOR ORDER OF PROTECTION	10/23/2007	Available at Courthouse
Affidavit	Affidavit Of Service	AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAIL UPON JAMES B. LEONARD	10/22/2007	Available at Courthouse
Order	Order For/Of Deferral Or Waiver	ORDER FOR/OF DEFERRAL OR WAIVER OF COURT FEES / COSTS	10/18/2007	Available at Courthouse
Affidavit	Affidavit In Support	AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION FOR DEFERRAL OR WAIVER OF SERVICE	10/18/2007	Available at Courthouse
Application	Application For Deferral Or Waiver Of Court Costs/Fees/Service	APPLICATION FOR DEFERRAL OR WAIVER OF COURT COST/ FEES/SERVICE	10/18/2007	Available at Courthouse
Order	Order To Complete Course In Domestic Relations Education	ORDER TO COMPLETE COURSE IN DOMESTIC RELATIONS EDUCATION	10/18/2007	Available at Courthouse
Affidavit	Affidavit Re: Minor Children	AFFIDAVIT RE: MINOR CHILDREN	10/18/2007	Available at Courthouse
Prelim	Preliminary Injunction	PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION	10/18/2007	Available at Courthouse
Open	Dissolution With Children	DISSOLUTION WITH CHILDREN	10/18/2007	Available at Courthouse
Receipt	All Money Receipts	All Money Receipts #963470	10/17/2007	Available at Courthouse
Open	Dissolution With Children	Dissolution With Children	10/17/2007	Available at Courthouse
Prelim	Preliminary Injunction	Preliminary Injunction	10/17/2007	Available at Courthouse
Affidavit	Affidavit Re: Minor Children	Affidavit Re: Minor Children	10/17/2007	Available at Courthouse
Order	Order To Complete Course In Domestic Relations Education	Order To Complete Course In Domestic Relations Education	10/17/2007	Available at Courthous

and etc.  For DV,Pima County Resources for Domestic ViolencePima County Superior Court, 110 W. Congress, Tucson, AZ 85701

General Information (520) 740-4200 TDD: (520) 740-8887

Clerk of the Court (520) 740-3200

Conciliation Court (520) 740-5590

Let’s take a look at “Conciliation Court” (that’s if a couple has children in common right?  Or if were married, co-habiting, and here comes domestic violence.  Divorce is worse for society than dangerous domestic violence, hence we have Conciliation Causes throughout the land):

The Family Center of the Conciliation Court Provides Family Law Court Services Free of Charge to Residents of Pima County.  Mediation  Conciliation Counseling  Custody/Access Evaluation  Parent Education Program  Community Education  Educational Material  Forms  Family Law  Frequently Asked Questions Grace Hawkins, LCSW Director Conciliation Court 32 N. Stone Ave. Suite 1704 Tucson, Arizona 85701-1403 Office Hours: 8:00am – Noon 1:00pm – 5:00pm Monday – Friday (except Holidays) Phone: (520) 740-5590 FAX: (520) 624-4034 E-mail: fccc@sc.pima.gov

Please note that “Conciliation Court” and “Family Law” are two different links.  Under Parent Education:

In an action for divorce, annulment, legal separation, paternity and in some post decree actions involving a minor child common to both parties, parents are required to attend a parent education course. Unless otherwise ordered by the Judge, parties must attend the class within 45 days of filing or being served by a petition. You must register for and complete the course whether or not you are responding to a petition. Failure to attend the course will not delay your divorce, but may result in the court denying you any future requests for relief such as modifications in custody, parenting time and/or child support.** The course is mandated by the Arizona Legislature (ARS § 25-351) to help educate parents about the impact separation, divorce, family reorganization, conflict and family litigation can have on children and parents. The class will provide you with information that can help minimize the stress and harmful effects upon you and your children in what can be a very difficult time in your lives.  Register Online Q. Class Fee

That is not the real reason such legislation passed.  The real reason such legislation passed is to accommodate those in power who are also closely affiliated with those (or simply ARE those) who will be running the classes, and because diversions from Title IV-D (child support enforcement) enable them to possibly fund some of this from more than one angle. And, quite honestly, simply because they can.    I don’t know what the classes are in Arizona, but I do know that the ones being marketed through Kentucky and based in the FBI-raided Pennsylvania (a certain county’s) court consist of a nonprofit which is also marketing some of the material from authors (including Philip Stahl) formerly or currently California.   Kentucky also markets classes from a publishing company in Georgia, by which we see what is really meant when the words “FAMILY Court” are meant.  It’s the family of professionals bemoaning how hard it is to deal with “imperfect” parents, and what to do with them (read on)….

Pretty much, Arizona is a very “AFCC” state (it has a chapter there) and one can see them pushing Parenting Coordination right from the superior court site.  The language of “conflict” and “Access” is all over the text.  Here is the list of “parent coordinators,” including a “Picaretta” which makes me wonder if it’s any relation to the criminal defense attorney Michael J. Picaretta, above….  interviewed in the aftermath of Ms. Pascual’s murder.  Maybe not — she is all “conflict resolution” and has been appointed parent coordinator, mediator, and served as a pro-tem judge, nice revolving door to inhabit if one is going to handle where children live.  Thank GOD no kids were killed in the Valentine’s Day – minus- one situation involving a mother of two boys.

Piccarreta, Marie, J. D. Divorce Mediator 881-2021 145 South 6th Avenue Tucson, AZ 85701

Looks like Arizona’s AFCC just had its conference, highlighting, as usual, how to insert more Parent Coordinators and the problem of “imperfect parents” (something none of the presenters, presumably, have experienced enough to understand how common this ground is to humanity), with Philip & Leslie Stahl (P. Stahl is a professional Parental Alienation/Forcible Reunification Theorist, from what I can tell of the background).:

Workshops: 8:30 – 10:00

A1: Using Parenting Coordinators Strategically A2: Theory Meets Practice: The Child’s Attorney A3: Collaboration of Different Professions for the Benefit of Children  (OH, is that what it’s for???)

Break: 10:00 – 10:15 Workshops: 10:15 – 11:45

B1: Families Enmeshed in Immigration Issues B2: Parent Access and the Reluctant Child

B3: Parenting Communication Resources for the High Conflict Family

Here’s Dr. Stahl’s workshop.  Notice it helps to have a Judge in there to lend it credibility:

**the word “intransigent” (I linked to a definition) has a NEGATIVE value, expressing refusal to compromise on “Extreme” (also a value-laden label) position.  The fact is, when there has been abuse — one parent, OR child, is RIGHT to take a so-called “EXTREME” position (and often didn’t get there overnight either) — called, keep your damn hands (etc.) off my kid; or, when you last threatened to (xyz), we know you weren’t kidding.

However “extreme” is only in respect to a point of view.  The point of view of AFCC is to ALWAYS force conciliation – until children are removed from a noncooperative protecting parent, particularly (see parent coordination) a female.  Forcing concilition when conciliation just shouldn’t happen is great for business, and one gets to hold conferences talking like martyrs about the difficulties of dealing with such “families.”

The real conflict is of value systems.  Anyhow, here are synonyms for “instransigent” — a very revealing word choice:

OBVIOUSLY those are words intent to describe an animate person, or perhaps animal — and not an INanimate or generalized situation.  My point — in using big words (which this crowd loves to do), someone used them wrong.  If they can’t speak straight, how can they think straight?  And if they can’t think straight in private conference, what kind of policies can we expect from the same folks?  If I’d been there, I’d have raised my hand and said “excuse me — but access issues relate to real issues, and they aren’t alive — the people involved are).

Some kids are “adamant.”  Alanna Krause was; some mothers are, and even go to jail for their kids rather than force contact.   But notice what Dr. Stahl (moderator) sessions suggests for “intransigent access issues.”   Here’s a better translation of the “alternatives” for intransigent access issues (what’s really meant is, basically, the mother):

Rough translation:

I feel this lawsuit (or at least a representation from it at that link) is worth citing — because it hasn’t changed the “obdurate” intent of AFCC one whit since — just tactics.   While they are in some situations QUITE willing to force reunification, I have talked to parent after parent with no criminal record, no allegations of abuse, and eventually getting bankrupted and destroyed– not just economically, but personally and psychologically — after his or her children were removed WITHOUT allegations of violence or abuse, overnight, and almost permanently.  And sometimes having to pay to see them an hour or two per week.  Basically, some parents are being treated like breeding stock for court-connected programs, and crooks/perverts.  These sound like a few — the kids had to spend a MONTH in forced reunification.  I only include the “Factual background” stated there.  Apparently the mother got them back.  I don’t know the case personally, but most of us (moms) have heard of this “Rachel Foundation” in Texas.

9. Plaintiff and her ex-husband, Alan Carr (“Mr. Carr”), were divorced on March 8, 2005 in New Jersey. Plaintiff and Mr. Carr are the parents of two minor children (the “Children”).

http://www.drjackgferrell.com/the-rachel-foundation.html  The term “The Rachel Foundation” is taken from the Bible, and (here, mis-applied)

Thus says the LORD: “A voice is heard in Ramah, lamentation and bitter weeping. Rachel is weeping for her children; she refuses to be comforted for her children, because they are no more.”

 For those who are interested.  Also see its use (quoting Jeremiah) in Matthew 2:13-18 regarding how Herod slew all the children of a city in an attempt to get at the child Jesus, who fled into Egypt WITH his family (Joseph, Mary), til Herod was dead.   The other mothers in the case were not so lucky.

In a 2006 Arizona AFCC meeting, there is (reluctant?) acknowledgement of domestic violence issues, and “stalking” (in quotes) issues.  As this actually does happen, it’s important for the family court powers that be strategize how to approach it (in nice places far away from parental input….):

Arizona Association of Family and Conciliation Courts 2006 Annual Conference

February 3-5, 2006 Hilton Sedona Resort and Spa

Pre-Conference Institute – Friday, February 3

“Child Abuse, What You Need To Know” – Leslie Drozd, Ph.D.

Plenary Speakers: “Long-Term Consequences of Divorce for Children” – Paul R. Amato, Ph.D.

“Domestic Violence and Parenting Evaluations” – William Austin, Ph.D.

“Stalking Behavior” – Mindy Mechanic, Ph.D. & Maureen O’Connor, Ph.D.

Claudia G. declared she was stalked.  But somehow not enough domestic violence to seriously restrain the ex, who we now know was already being pressured (most likely) from a prior relationship.  It’s a shame women take up with such men, too….  But they are looking for someone else, often someone else with children may be in need of some help (either babysitting or rent, or a man around).  From what I can tell, there has to be a better way.

Here’s yet ANOTHER, 2012, Valentines-Day Timed murder.  This Time the Dad got his wife’s 19 year old niece too.  Now an 8 and 12-year old (relatives?) also got to hear the gunshots at home.  You’d THINk sometime, sooner or later, the AFCC collective might figure this out — but they just do not seem to care.  All divorces need to have co-parenting and parental access, bar none.  Unless of course, one parent has been recalitrant or there is an intransigent situation, in which case that parent can be punished somehow (like, by allowing their children to be controlled by an abuser, sitting through indoctrination classes, or simply being cut off from the kids, period).      THIS ONE was from Texas:

Husband arrested in fatal shooting of wife and niece

By Dale Lezon and Cindy George Updated 12:46 p.m., Tuesday, February 14, 2012

A 30-year-old man has been arrested in the shooting deaths of his estranged wife and her niece at a home in northwest Harris County early Monday morning.

Ricardo Jose Prado Jr, 30, is charged with capital murder in the deaths of Rachel Prado, 29, and 19-year-old Jasmine Nicole Rhodes at their home in the 7800 block of Mosewood near Vernwood about 1:20 a.m. Monday, according to the Harris County Sheriff’s Office.

. . .Investigators said they believe Prado ambushed the two women when they backed their car into the garage when they returned to the home from a dinner. He shot them both inside the garage and then left after the shooting. Deputies said Prado has history of domestic violence against his wife.

This might have explained her “estrangement” — but what explains him still being on the loose?  (rhetorical question)

Rachel Prado’s mother and two small children, ages 8 and 12, who also live in the house were at home at the time of the shooting. They were not harmed. The woman told investigators she was asleep when gunshots woke her. She looked out the window and saw Prado running from the scene. Then she found the two women shot to death in the garage.

. . .[9 gunshots were heard]   Clifford Schoffield, who is Rachel Prado’s uncle, said the family is in shock. He said Rachel Prado had been trying to get out of the marriage because it was no longer working.

“It’s a love triangle – ‘If I can’t have her, nobody will’ – that’s basically what it is,” Schoffield said.

He may not have hated his niece. She maybe just happened to be a witness..

It appears those were the children, too:

Rachael Prado’s family told News 92 FM that her husband was upset because she wanted to divorce him and end their marriage after 11 years together. The couple has two children.

Interesting — the woman thought that they’d be safer if they were together.  Instead, a 29 year old and a 19 year old were BOTH shot to death (and in the back, the coward!) The alleged shooter being a “respectable man” in his 30s:

Both Prado and Rhodes arrived home together “for safety reasons,” Schoffield said, adding that the older woman was trying to get out of a marriage that wasn’t working.

“He wasn’t a bad person, up until now,” the uncle said. “They had their ups and downs and he was probably doing some things I wasn’t aware of, but he was part of the family.”

Schoffield said the alleged shooter is in his 30s, has been “very respectable and very mannerable” and was in between jobs.

Funny how the public (or at least our representatives & congressmen, and clergy, and many others) will believe almost anything they are sold about poor people and the cause of poverty and abuse, and about the fatherlessness crisis — but they simply will not believe that this thing has gone well overboard, and that some men should not be fathers — if they can’t cool it on the wife-assaults.   In this case — what family court would’ve cut off visitation from such a father (and I’ll bet, did not in this case, either).  She has to live somehow — she moved in with her mother, and the grandchildren — and paid with her life for not taking greater precautions.  Should I look up that case history too, or had no one filed yet?

Harris County Record:

Print Summary Case (Cause) Summary File Date 2/6/2002 Case (Cause) Status Complete Offense ASSAULT-FAMILY MEMBER Last Instrument Filed Misdemeanor Information Case Disposition DISP-021302 Case Completion Date 2/13/2002 Defendant Status DISPOSED Bond Amount $1,500.00 Next/Last Setting Date 2/13/2002 Defendant Details Race/Sex WHITE / MALE Eyes BROWN Skin LIGHT BROWN DOB 4/26/1981 Height/Weight 5’10 / 240 LBS Hair BLACK Build HEAVY In Custody Y (Locate) Address 8206 TIGER LANE HOUSTON TX77040 Markings TAT L ARM Court Details Current Court 12th Address 1201 Franklin (Floor: 10) Houston, TX 77002 Phone:7137557738 JudgeName Robin Brown Court Type Criminal

NOTE:  I am not sure this is the exact same person.   It seems to match, period.  The “in custody” would make sense in light of recent events.

LOOK:

There’s NO WAY that every time there’s a major, family-oriented holiday (which most major holidays, or minor ones, tend to be sold as) — that all responding police to 911 calls could get there in time.    There’s no way all piece-of-paper protective orders actually protect (not they say “protectIVE”).  So the only way I can see is either:

• Continue to allow women, and associates, and sometimes the kids, to be shot to death, and places of businesses serving women also get shot up, in which case a lot of money can be saved by not doing any more domestic violence decades-long studies and comparisons.  PERHAPS some of that money could then be used to allow women and children to completely relocate (assuming no one’s going to jail, which is likely).
• That of course doesn’t handle any remaining-behind-relatives which might be at risk as hostages if a person is REAL determined.
• OR . . . .. . 
• There could be mandatory — not MEDIATION — but self-defense AND weapons-training for victims of domestic violence.  They will then, from this point forward, start protecting themselves (in many more cases) which would send a collective message that it ain’t going to be so easy for the NEXT guy — and it might just be you, not me-then-you in any exchange of gunfire.  in other words, deterrence. 
• 
  

However, to be completely consistent on this one, the family court system would have to be utterly dismantled, because it sure as hell isn’t going to voluntarily dissolve its “problem-solving courts.”    Then again, this WOULD save the country a bundle — think about it — not only all the obvious (salaries, several court-houses and family law facilitators, etc. etc.) — but also the slush funds, and all that money disappearing down the black hole of ero accountability (or something close to it) in the child support system, too.

Of course several religions will have nothing to do with this — therefore a related solution would be to remove their tax-exempt status on the grounds that it’s been used as an accomplice to some of these disasters, and besides, worshipping anything (including one’s status as the head of a household, or “family” or “fertility, etc.”) is per se “idolatry” which is the FIRST commandment, but which the apostle Paul compared the 10th with i.e., “covetousness, which is idolatry.”  (covetousness meaning greed).

Unless you’re Catholic, and the 2nd Commandment has been eliminated (no graven images, nor bow down to and serve them), and the 10th, “Thou shalt not covet” decimated and explicated — kind of like domestic violence — to limit only TWO things one shouldn’t covet.      I forget which two they are, because it seems to me the original is better.

There are all kinds of potentialities to human relationships if certain groups would get that the basic unit of our COUNTRY (in the US, and legally speaking) should be the individually — and not the family.  Society can have its variety then — families, and non-families not that I’m anti-family.  I just think it’s been over-rated, and regret that I set such a high value on it myself, parallel to my own work life, which was doing just fine about the time I married.  SO much for THAT concept …..

BUT BACK TO THE 2006 AFCC CONFERENCE EXPERTS ON “STALKING” (notice, above, it’s in quotes, as though “alleged” and not real).

Dr. Mindy shows up as a domestic violence resource, and in fact in 2011 (report date) even published with others a nice study about the dangers of Intimate Partner Abuse, mandatory mediation, or (whatever . . . . . . ).  Of note — it was DOJ grant-funded, and the family court system was heavily involved in it.  As AFCC & the Family Court System are pretty similar in practice and purpose, the study is pretty much of a moot point.  Nevertheless, here it is:

The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report:

Document Title:  

Intimate Partner Abuse in Divorce Mediation: Outcomes from a Long-Term Multi-cultural Study

Author:  

Connie J. A. Beck, Ph.D., Michele E. Walsh, Ph.D., Mindy B. Mechanic, Ph.D., Aurelio Jose Figueredo, Ph.D., Mei-Kuang Chen, M.A., M.S.

Document No.:     Date Received:    Award Number:

236868      December 2011     2007-WG-BX-0028

SO very many people worked hard to make this possible. [*]…

([*] Notice “Leora Rosen,” at bottom of next text — well-known in the domestic violence field.  I also know (Thank you, Leora) that she and some of her compatriots fought pretty hard to discourage mandatory mediation in cases involving violence.  They lost, obviously.   I heard (elsewhere, years earlier) that this was fought tooth and nail, and as history shows, for the most part defeated — or possibly out-spent.  The world is not ready to accept independent single mothers or accept how common wife-battering is, or simply killing after separation, when it’s possible to get even MORE grants from the theme that what the world needs now is less divorce and more Dads involved in raising their kids.  Or else.

Anyhow, just scan the acknowledgements, and thank GOD — No, the friends and sons of Claudia G. Pascual thank you — for all this hard work in actually studying The Effect of Gamma Rays on Man-in-the-moon Marigolds   The Effect of Requiring Divorce Mediation With a  Seriously Dangerous Domestic Violence Perpetrator Intimate Partner Abuse {{by flawed parents within a High-Conflict Family undergoing reorganization}}.  

Her life / death / murder, and those of the other women around THIS Valentine’s Day across the country, bear testament to the “wisdom” of trying to blend domestic violence awareness with family theory run by The Reunification Party. . . . 

The study was a massive undertaking spanning nearly a decade. There are many people who were indispensible in making the study possible. We would first like to thank Pima County Superior Court Judges Karen Adam and Jan Kearney for recognizing the importance of this study for family law in Pima County, Arizona, providing access to the databases and for their support and guidance throughout the project. Without their support the project could never have been completed.

“No problem,” I can imagine the reply.  However, now this samey family law court gets to say, it cooperated with people concerned about violence against women, and yes, we understand domestic violence (although I’d say it seems they don’t…..)

We would next like to thank the current (Grace Hawkins) and former (Fred Mitchell) directors of the Pima County Family Center of the Conciliation Court. Grace Hawkins was instrumental in assisting the study by providing research office space, record storage space, access to computers and court databases and for allowing the research team to spend years collecting data at their offices. Fred Mitchell continued the work of former director Linda Kerr in identifying the need for adequate screening for intimate partner abuse at the study site. Dr. Mitchell instituted a policy requiring use of a written questionnaire screening measure, which became an integral part of the data. Paul LaFrance, former office manager, identified variables within the mediation case files and consulted on many aspects of the initial design of the study. Without this long-term support the project would not have been possible. Thank you to the many mediators and office staff at the Conciliation Court for answering our questions and providing assistance to us as we collected the data. It is a rare public agency that welcomes this type of in-depth research and analysis of their work.

We would also like to thank Sergeant William Briamonte of the Tucson Police Department and Mr. Frank Gonzalez of the Pima County Sheriff’s office for working closely with the research team and designing methods for data collection from area law enforcement databases. Our colleague and friend Dr. Edward Anderson of the University of Texas at Austin provided vital statistical consulting and conducted the latent class analyses in this study.

There are few studies which can be conducted without the extensive support of students. We thank the many undergraduate students (Jessica Jorgensen Willis, Fairlee Fabrett, Merredith Levenson, Stacey Brady, Whitney Kearney, Melissa Rubin, Ryan Davidson; Karey O’Hara Brewster), Devon Harris and graduate students (Caitilin Taylor, Marieh Tanha and Melissa Tehee) who contributed to collecting data, abstracting information from court records, coding and entering data and conducting reliability checks. In particular, a heartfelt thanks to Karey O’Hara Brewster and Ryan Davidson. Karey served mid-study as lead research keeping the project organized and training other students in data collection. Ryan served as the lead research assistant and liaison to the law enforcement agencies and kept the project going in its final stages.

Thanks are also due to the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) for the financial support of this project. Funding for mediation research is so difficult to secure yet so important for the lives of divorcing parents and children, particularly those with intimate partner violence. We thank the NIJ staff members who have worked with us over the years. Leora Rosen was instrumental in stewarding us through the grant application and review process

Here’s another one that came up when I searched “Leora Rosen mandatory mediation” which shows that someone knows, it’s dangerous:

Mandatory Custody Mediation: Empirical Evidence of Increased Risk for Domestic Violence Victims and Their Children 

 by  Dennis P. Saccuzzo ; Nancy E. Johnson ; Wendy J. Koen

DATE RECEIVED April 2003, GRANT AWARD # 1999-WT-VX-0015

And this is what it said:  Note, date received is eight years EARLIER than the 2011 above — but practice still continues unabated…(some words may not copy too well– see original).  This is from the intro:

Nearly all states utilize mediation for child custody disputes.’ Individual states vary widely, however, from optional mediation at the parties’ expense2to mandatory mediation with no exclusion for domestic ~iolence.~

It is in cases of domestic violence where the use of mediation has drawn the most c r i t i c i sm.  Although proponents argue that it is possible to mediate child custody disputes even where there is domestic violence, critics have noted the potential harm to both the battered woman and the child viclims of domestic vioIence.* Nevertheless e,ven the most optimistic proponents agree that in order for such mediation to be successful, the mediator must acknowledge the violence and balance the power. **

**the voice of experience here — this is how the compromise principle can manipulate a case completely of protection.  As I was not privvy to the discussions between experts determining that, well, if they couldn’t keep such violent situations OUT of forced mediation, at least they’d try to train the mediator — or hope the mediator — would “acknowledge the violence and balance the power.”  Which is a crock, given who is paying for court-appointed mediation (fatherhood federal funds, since 1996, for the most part; local counties) and what the purpose of mediation under stuch funding IS (increased NONcustodial parenting time.  By definition, if a DV order creates a noncustodial parent (and child support order to go with it, esp.), then to increase the NONcustodial parenting time is to increase the time a batterer has with his children, and they have without the victim to protect, buffer, or defer his abuse.  And, it also increases the victim’s time with the batterer, too through more frequent exchanges, etc., etc.  Altogether, not a wise idea IF child’s best interests is a serious interest.

6 Because mediation is a confidential process, the empirical literature has had relatively little to say about whether mediators acknowledge the violence, much less balance the power.

Empirical evaluations of the effects of mandatory custody mediation in domestic violence as well as non-domestic violence cases are exceedingly rare. Thus far, evaluations of mandatory custody mediation have focused almost exclusively on retrospective self-reported satisfaction, with little regard for evaluations of equitable outcome^.^ The primary goal of the California courts in custody decisions, for example, is not parental satisfaction, but rather the health, safety and welfare of the children. Self-reported satisfaction may have little relationship to the critical outcome:of safety for the victim and child. There is empirical evidence that when mandated to mediation, even the most extremely violent couples agree to terms of joint custody with the mother as possessory parent,but standard visitation-an arrangement that is ill-advised for the mother and child(ren).’

Just another paragraph about what appears to be unique to California.  Mediation is Confidential.  Well, no it isn’t — if it’s child custody mediation.”

The iaws governing mandatory mediation in California nave resulted in a unique opportunityto study mandatory mediation in child custody disputes for families that do not reach agreement. Most mediation in California is confidential, because the legislature recognizes the valueofalternativedisputeresolutioningeneralandmediationinparticular. California’scivil code provides for confidentialityin all mediation, with the exception of child custody mediation. The confidentiality statute for child custody mediation is different:

FamilyCodeQ3177. Confidentialityofprioceedings Mediation proceedings pursuant to this chapter shall be held in private and shall be confidential. {{{BUT — only the word ‘BUT’ doesn’t show up here to inform the casual reader}}} All communications, verbal or written, from the parties to the mediator made in the proceeding are official information within the meaning of Section 1040 of the Evidence Code.

The first sentence of the statute is similar to the one in the civil code. The second sentence, however, makes confidentiality an illusion in certain circumstances that depend, in part, on geography. Each jurisdiction is allowed to decide whether custody mediation will retain strict confidentiality. Counties may decide to allow their child custody mediators to make formal custody recommendations to the court following unsuccessful mediation.

IN CASE you were wondering how “increased noncustodial parent time” was obtained — this is where mediators can come in.  That’s how I became a noncustodial parent overnight also (well it took a few short days — weeks — for a mediator to rubberstamp the criminal violation of a physical custody order according to California Penal Code.  while most of us would tend to think that the criminal violation should pre-empt a family law violation, in fact– at least in my wonderful state — these entities work quite well at bouncing cases between criminal and family, or OUT of criminal INTO family, where it’s decriminalized because it’s a family experiencing conflict — not a person who stole children, or knocked a parent upside the face during a high-conflict moment, or lots of them.

Well, that’s enough from the 2003 National Institute of Justice funded STUDY, and back to the 2011 (report rec’d) NIJ funded STUDY:

Despite three decades of scholarly research on numerous aspects of divorce mediation, there is no comprehensive understanding of the short- and long-term outcomes for couples legally ordered to mediation to resolve custody and parenting time disputes orfor those using free (or low cost) conciliation court mediation services to do so. Even less is known about the use or effectiveness of court-mandated mediation services among couples alleging intimate partner abuse (IPA)

Pre-Conference Institute – Friday, February 3

“Child Abuse, What You Need To Know” – Leslie Drozd, Ph.D.

Plenary Speakers: “Long-Term Consequences of Divorce for Children” – Paul R. Amato, Ph.D.

(Dr. Amato is from Penn State.  I would like to hear his commentary on the Sandusky/Paterno situation.   Be that as it may, here is some of his funding, and notice the national council on family relations.  SO long as family relations continue this strained, people like this will never run out of work:

Several research awards including Stanley Cohen Distinguished Research Award, Association of Family and Conciliation Courts; Reuben Hill Award from the National Council on Family Relations

Fellow of the National Council on Family Relations

His site also links to a 2009 USA Today article, “Federally Funded ad campaign holds up value of marriage,” in which we learn another role Dr. Amato plays, when HHS gets involved:

Faced with such numbers, the federal government is funding a $5 million national media campaign that launches this month, extolling the virtues of marriage for those ages 18 to 30.

“We’re not telling people ‘Get married’ but ‘Don’t underestimate the benefits of marriage,’ ” says Paul Amato, a Pennsylvania State University sociologist and adviser to the National Healthy Marriage Resource Center, which is spearheading the campaign.  {{which is itself a joint HHS/Public Strategies Inc. type WEBSITE}}

The resource center, a federally funded virtual clearinghouse, works under an agreement with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration for Children and Families.

Where else one can find Dr. Amato, of PENN STATE UNIV… — helping spearhead the OMI, which as I’ve shown, started by taking $10 million (check site for exact##) of “contingency TANF funds,” quickly bypassing the legislature, and starting to promote marriage for (almost) everybody in Oklahoma, a pattern that has been followed from state to state.  By now (if you read my blog) you should recognize several of these names, esp. the 2nd and 7th.  Plus Markman and Stanley of Denver, who are probably very happy that their business PREP, Inc. was chosen as the vehicle….

OMI Research Advisory Group Members:

Paul Amato, PhD – Pennsylvania State University
Bill Coffin, MA – National Association for Relationship and Marriage Education
Ronald B. Cox, Jr., PhD, CFLE – Oklahoma State University
Kathryn Edin, PhD – Harvard University
David Fournier, PhD – Oklahoma State University, Emeritus
Sarah Halpern-Meekin, PhD – Bowling Green State University
Ron Haskins, PhD – Brookings Institution
Alan J. Hawkins, PhD – Brigham Young University
Christine Johnson, PhD – Oklahoma State University
Pamela Jordan, PhD, RN – University of Washington
Howard Markman, PhD – University of Denver
Theodora Ooms, MSW – Marriage and Family Policy Expert
Galena K. Rhoades, PhD – University of Denver
Scott Stanley, PhD – University of Denver

YEP — Longitudinal and Sociological Studies of “Marriage” and “Divorce” have been very good to certain types of professionals.  Just remember the “previously published as None Dare Call It Conspiracy,” and how the move to collectivism included taking over American Education and moving it to the collective model, featuring social sciences, and AWAY from the individual, rights-based model, which is problemmatic for future distatorships.

This is an Amato article published in The Future of Children (Princeton), which you can look up who’s funding THAT.  Here’s a Diagram of Well-being indicators:  “Life-Span Adjustment of Children to their Parents’ Divorce”  Be sure not to mis “Figure 1” which is a dramatic pictorial of the index of well-being based on whether a family is divorced, or “intact.”   This appears to be from April 2008, and shows him as associate professor of sociology at Univ of Nebraska/Lincoln.  As expected of the about 87 footnotes, not including the ones that are to his own work, others are to well-known AFCC people (wallerstein/kelly/janet r. johnston) and others to those also on the fatherhood foundation-funded publishing circuit, such as Sara McLanahan. And it goes on, and on, and of course . . . . ON….

here’s a random source (from apparently a religious site) and this is among the footnotes.  Here we see Amato AND Markman AND Stanley all together in one cite — not bad, eh?  Notice (guess that’s just part of sociology), the concern with labeling things according to ethnicity and trying to calculate whether this, along with the marriage factor, has some influence (that could be manipulated pro or con?) on adolescent sexuality.

Don’t you sometimes wish all the experts would publish less and  _ u _ k  more?  And give the rest of us a break?  Perhaps then they could study their own anatomy and relationships for a change; it’d be about as equally valid as collectively studying others in theory!

DeMaris, A., Rao, K. V. 1992. Premarital Cohabitation and Subsequent Marital Stability in the United States: A Reassessment. Journal of Marriage and the Family 54: 178-190.
Kamp Dush, C. M., Cohan, C. L., & Amato, P. R. 2003. The relationship between cohabitation
and marital quality and stability: Changes across cohorts? Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 539-549.
Phillips, J. A. and M. M. Sweeney. 2005. Premarital Cohabitation and the Risk of Marital Disruption among White, Black, and Mexican American Women. Journal of Marriage and Family 67:296-314.
J. Teachman.  2003.  Premarital Sex, Premarital Cohabitation, and the Risk of Subsequent Marital Dissolution Among Women. Journal of Marriage and Family 65: 444-455.
Stanley, S. M., Amato, P. R., Johnson, C. A., & Markman, H. J. 2006. Premarital education, marital quality, and marital stability: Findings from a large, random, household survey. Journal of Family Psychology 20: 117-126.
Paik, A. 2011. Adolescent Sexuality and the Risk of Marital Dissolution. Journal of Marriage and Family 73: 472DOI: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00819.x.

(from the AzAFCC in 2006 conference, again):

“Domestic Violence and Parenting Evaluations” – William Austin, Ph.D. “Stalking Behavior” – Mindy Mechanic, Ph.D. & Maureen O’Connor, Ph.D.

(Probably this William Austin….)

Austin Child Custody Services dba (303) 670-6767 voice   (303) 217-8990 fax Office: 710 Kipling, Ste. 306, Lakewood, CO 80215

Dr. Austin and Austin Child Custody Services provide a broad range of forensic services to attorneys and courts within Colorado and in other states. He is licensed in Colorado and North Carolina. He provides services in other states only if permitted by state law. Almost all states allow out-of-state licensed psychologists to provide services on a temporary basis. Dr. Austin specializes child custody cases when there are issues concerning relocation and domestic violence/intimate partner violence.

Forensic evaluation services: Dr. Austin provides Child Custody Evaluations. In Colorado, custodial evaluations include Parental Responsibility Evaluation and Child & Family Investigator. All evaluations are neutral, impartial evaluations conducted with an appropriate court order. Parties involved in the litigation must sign a Statement of Understanding that describes issues involved in the evaluation, procedures, and fees.

Attorney Consultation: Dr. Austin provides several forensic consultation services. . . .

He often provides testimony on the relocation risk assessment model and research on the effects of relocation on children of divorce. His forensic models on partner violence include how to assess the credibility of allegations of partner violence and violence risk assessment in custody cases. He is currently developing with colleagues an integrated theoretical framework for considering partner violence in custody cases that revises the new typology of partner violence and emphasizes behavioral dimensions and research-based risk factors in developing parenting plans. Instructional or educational testimony may be combined with testimony as a Reviewer.

Yeah, well, he is a social psychologist from North Carolina & Wisconsin, and no attorney.  His website is GOING to have a “gatekeeping and alienation” part — but it’s not up yet (probably too busy on task forces and with professional associations, including the National Council on Family Relations(getting nice marriage/fatherhood grants these days, and very conservative).   He is going to protest relocation for the most part, and of course no way is a parent going to actually be able to leave a very abusive situation WITH children and actually protect them (or herself) without some behavioral dimension assessment, if he has something to do with it.

ONE WEEK, OR JUST OVER, IN “DOMESTICVIOLENCECRIMEWATCH.COM“

The next time you run across some social science prognostications, please remember how many, how diverse, and likely how AVOIDABLE many of these deaths were.    Some occurred in front of children.  Some occurred surrounding a child support hearing (after protective order).  SOME (though not most) were a woman (wife, or girlfriend) offing an ex.  Most egregious, on the side, was a case where families were suing for damages — someone should’ve listened when others warned about a dangerous COP, who ended up killing 3 women (and himself) off-duty.  Here’s that info:

Families of women killed by off-duty Clackamas deputy file $8 million lawsuit

Published: Thursday, February 09, 2012, 4:45 PM     Updated: Friday, February 10, 2012, 6:05 AM

here’s about how that went:

The families of two women murdered by an off-duty Clackamas County sheriff’s sergeant filed an $8 million lawsuit Thursday, alleging that the county, Sheriff Craig Roberts and two of his top aides knew the man was dangerously unstable but failed to intervene.

Roberts and other defendants knew Sgt. Jeffrey A. Grahn presented a threat to his wife, Charlotte, and that he was emotionally unsteady, angry, depressed and had substance-abuse problems, according to the wrongful-death lawsuit filed in Multnomah County.

On Feb. 12, 2010, Grahn confronted Charlotte Grahn and two of her friends, Victoria Schulmerich and Kathleen Hoffmeister, at the M&M Restaurant & Lounge. 

{{please note the time of year, though it was 2010}}:

Grahn, who was legally drunk, entered the Gresham bar, argued with his wife and threw a drink in Schulmerich’s face. He then grabbed Charlotte Grahn by her hair, pulled her outside and shot her in the head with a Glock .40-caliber pistol. He returned to the bar with his gun drawn and killed Schulmerich and Hoffmeister with shots to the head.

Grahn again went outside and, standing next to his wife’s body, committed suicide.  . . . . . .

A year before the killings, the Sheriff’s Office received reports that Grahn was abusive and potentially explosive and asked the Portland Police Bureau to investigate. 

“The Sheriff’s Office knew that Grahn was violent, abusive, and out of control. They were specifically warned that he was likely to kill his wife, his family, and himself. Nonetheless, the Sheriff’s Office intervened to prevent the Portland Police from sending their investigation of Grahn to the Clackamas County District Attorney. Now, four people are dead,” said Greg Kafoury of Kafoury & McDougal law firm, which represents the Hoffmeister estate.

If the case goes to trial, it will shed light on how the Sheriff’s Office and other law enforcement agencies handle domestic violence issues involving their employees.

In case there are ANY remaining questions to just HOW dangerous this was, and how it was NOT responded to properly, here’s a bit more of the article:

According to police reports obtained by The Oregonian, Charlotte Grahn allegedly told one of her husband’s co-workers, a deputy, that she was the victim of domestic violence but the deputy did not report the incident.

The reports also show that a couple — both law enforcement officers and long-time friends of the Grahns — told the Sheriff’s Office they had serious concerns about Jeffrey Grahn’s behavior. The friends and Charlotte Grahn’s sister “fear .. that they will receive a phone call one day that Jeffrey has killed everybody in his family then himself,” according to a report written by Undersheriff Dave Kirby in April 2009, 10 months before the shootings. One of the friends said Grahn had “gone off the deep end” and drinks “like there’s no tomorrow,” Kirby noted.

Charlotte Grahn {{that’s the WIFE!}} told an investigator that Jeffrey Grahn exhibited signs of depression and suicidal behavior and was worried that if it became known he had obtained a prescription for anti-depressants, it could affect his employment. 

Portland police investigators said Grahn was depressed, angry, drinking heavily and occasionally suicidal.

Just in case the significance of this has not yet sunk in — sheriffs and police are often to whom women may turn when they feel in danger, even still these days.  Mentally we associate them with “law enforcement” and believe, naturally, that this is what they are for, which is why they have extraordinary powers compared to the average citizens, including weapons training, tactical training and sometimes weapons.   Plus the ability to arrest (apart from any citizen’s arrest, which how many people ever know about, or use?  Or, are backed up if the do attempt to use?)

Certainly, and obviously, it is very stressful to be a police officer.  On the other hand, it’s also stressful to contemplate how restraining orders are just a piece of paper, some cops brush off warning signs, former batterers stay loose and sometimes then, being more irate, escalate. . . .   Many things in life can be stressful.  BUT — when you next hear AFCC in conference, just remember that Valentine’s Day along with almost any other holiday, can be a very tough and frightening time for some.

I personally think we ought to “cool it” on exalting and promoting marriage.  It ain’t all it’s cracked up to be, and some seem to take disappointment better than others.   Whether it is or isn’t, the last thing ANYONE needs is his and her own government pushing the institution for its own reasons, most of which do not have to do with individuals’ welfare ,or in the best interests of children.

NOTE — there’s one below from Alabama — an incident that was reported last Friday.  Two children (ages 6 & 7) witnessed the violence, which involved

death by stabbing (it seems) of their father and his girlfriend.  Just a note — it seems he was custodial? and they were returned to the care of their mother.

Can you imagine this?  Yet here it is — and we are concerned about father ABSENCES? ???   This is a man who got his kids, got a girlfriend, and someone killed both of them (which was which is unclear) and the fathered-children “got” to witness all this blood and then — alone with the two bodies — go seek help from a neighbor.  They wanted a ride to school. . . . .

AND — FYI — the site is also advertising, or possibly promoting one solution or another — for example, I note a “Crisis in the Family Courts” post (predictable).  I believe it’s clear enough where I stand on that one . ….  As well as on all the domestic violence studies, when this level of violence is still ongoing.  Perhaps less studies and more self-defense might help, but — bottom line — it’s probably going to have something to do with more equality (gender equality, starting in the Congress), and reduction of the religious domination of women by men overall (that’d be a cold day in hell . . . . . ) — which would be something of a deterrent.   Or at least stop giving churches, mosques, synagogues, temples of ANY kind, even pretty ones, even ones that feed th homeless or sometimes shelter them —  tax perks (nonprofit status) — AND grants….!  If the product is that great, it doesn’t need a tax perk.

The St. Paul girl case, below, is particularly horrific.  The woman held captive and BEAT for 3 days was the the mother of a little girl, and their relationship had started out abusive (it says) — and when father was 17 and mother 15.   He would’ve killed her, but apparently after 3 days of beatings he decided to go to work (taking car keys, cell phone, and laptopS) — that brings back some memories — there being snow on the ground — but she escaped to neighbors, and her family (where was her family BEFORE?) took her to the hospital.

Another note to people fleeing — maybe try not to stay with your parents, it gets dangerous, as the accounts will say.

I believe in light of this record here, that we should rethink the next round of grants to give “FUTURES WITHOUT VIOLENCE’ there share of $36 million, or $16 million, or whatever it is, to stop violence against women by teaching fathers, and international global leadership (etc.) — and insist they do something at home first — and PROVE it makes a dent — before getting any more.

Police Say Man Admits to Wife’s Murder Monday, February 13, 2012 Chattanooga, TN:  A Chattanooga man has admitted to police that he shot and killed his wife the day before Valentines.  Police found Elizabeth Hardnett, 34, shot at least four times inside a business at 1907 Daisy Street, near the intersection of North Orchard Knob and Daisy Street.  » more at News Channel 9 Mother Says Vineland Murder Victim Was Not Engaged to Man Accused of Killing Her Vineland, NJ:  Britton Loyden and the man accused of killing her last week had no relationship for the past 16 months, Loyden’s mother, Tracy Freese, said.  Ismael Pierce, 24, of the 900 block of South Spring Road, is scheduled to be arraigned Tuesday on a charge of murder, Cumberland County Prosecutor Jennifer Webb-McRae said.  Pierce is the father of Loyden’s 1-year-old son, and on social media sites MySpace and Twitter, the two talked about their relationship before her murder.  » more at Press of Atlantic City Carolinas Mystery: Missing Woman, Dead Fiancée Mount Pleasant, SC:  Dara Lee Watson left her parents’ store in downtown Boone a week ago Monday with fiancée David Hedrick, headed back to their home in the Charleston suburb of Mount Pleasant.  Watson’s boss and a friend received text messages from her phone Wednesday, but nobody could reach her by email or voice.  » more at Charlotte Observer Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/02/14/3011718/carolinas-mystery-missing-woman.html#storylink=cpy Police: Ex-Boyfriend Killed Tucson Woman, Then Attempted Suicide Monday, February 13, 2012 Tucson, AZ:  Tucson Police believe the ex-boyfriend of a Tucson woman allegedly shot and killed her, then turned the gun on himself – but survived, police say.  The woman who lived in the southeast-side home where the shooting occurred was in her 30’s, and was a mother of two young children.  » more at KVOA TV Boyfriend Charged With Murder in Neptune City Stabbing Monday, February 13, 2012 Neptune City, NJ:   Homicide investigators have charged a local man in connection with the stabbing death of a borough woman Monday.  Jarrone J. Perry, 33, of Morris Avenue, is charged with the killing of his girlfriend, Kamealah Talmadge, 30, of the same address, according to Marc LeMieux of the Monmouth County Prosecutor’s Office.  » more at Asbury Park Press Husband Arrested in Fatal Shooting of Wife and Niece Monday, February 13, 2012 Houston, TX:  A 30-year-old man has been arrested in the shooting deaths of his estranged wife and her niece at a home in northwest Harris County early Monday morning.  Ricardo Jose Prado Jr, 30, is charged with capital murder in the deaths of Rachel Prado, 29, and 19-year-old Jasmine Nicole Rhodes at their home in the 7800 block of Mosewood near Vernwood about 1:20 a.m. Monday, according to the Harris County Sheriff’s Office.  » more at Houston Chronicle Kingsport Man Accused of Stabbing Girlfriend to Death Saturday, February 11, 2012 Kingsport, TN:  A Kingsport man accused of stabbing his live-in girlfriend sometime overnight Saturday was arrested Sunday morning in Johnson City.  Mark W. Breeding, 46, 1037 Bloomingdale Pike Apt. 323, Kingsport, has been charged with first-degree murder by Kingsport police in connection to the stabbing death of his girlfriend, Beverly “Birdie” Hartsock.  » more at timesnews.net Man Dies Following Suicide at Gun Range, Linked to Wife’s Death in Tamarac Saturday, February 11, 2012 Tamarac, FL:  A suicide at a South Florida gun range led to the discovery of a second dead body in a Tamarac home as BSO investigators discovered it wasn’t just a suicide but a murder-suicide.  According to BSO investigators, a 52-year-old man walked into the Arizona Shooting Range, located at 4317 North State Road 7 around 10:40 a.m. where he rented a gun and shot himself in the head.  » more at Miami Herald Wife of Man Found Dead in Lower Valley Apartment Arrested on Suspicion of Murder Saturday, February 11, 2012 El Paso, TX:  The El Paso Police Department’s Crimes Against Persons unit has arrested a woman on suspicion of murder in connection with the early morning death of her husband.  Fire Medical Services and El Paso police responded at about 5:30 a.m. Saturday to an apartment at 7840 Knights Drive in the Lower Valley where they found 34-year-old Salvador Juarez dead.  » more at El Paso Times Spouse Held on $500K in Death Friday, February 10, 2012 Douglas, MA:  A former International Arm Wrestling Federation arm wrestler is behind bars in connection with the death of his wife.  Police Friday night arrested Allen M. Stilkey and charged him in the death of Lisa A. Stilkey.  The 44-year-old woman fell through a second-story window of their home at 38 Gilboa St. and died of her injuries.  » more at Telegram Ex-Boyfriend Surrenders in Fatal Drive-By Friday, February 10, 2012 Covington, GA:  A man wanted in the drive-by slaying of his former girlfriend turned himself in to Covington police Saturday, authorities said.  Hannibal Wayne McMullen, 47, was charged with murder in the death early Friday of Ketitra Techelle Jones, who had filed for a temporary order of protection against the man.  » more at Atlanta Journal Constitution S.F. BART Saxophonist is Fugitive Killer, Cops Say Albuquerque, NM:  A popular BART station saxophone busker was arrested this week on suspicion of murdering his ex-wife 25 years ago, and had been on the run for decades, even while serenading commuters, authorities said Friday.  The “jazz man” often told BART riders his name was Garrick Sherrod when he played in places like San Francisco’s Embarcadero Station. But when authorities arrested him Monday, they knew him as Ronald Brewington, a man who allegedly shot and killed 37-year-old Diedre Brewington in her Albuquerque apartment in August 1987.  » more at San Francisco Chronicle Murder Suspect Dies in SWAT Standoff Friday, February 10, 2012 Houston, TX:  Two people were murdered Friday in northwest Houston. The suspect was on the loose until he took his own life Saturday evening.  Police said Friday that Diego Martinez shot and killed his wife, 40-year-old Martha Nava De Martinez, and a male friend who was visiting her — 31-year-old Omar Salazar.  » more at KTRK ABC 13 Man Claims He Was Asleep When Girlfriend Died; Charged With Murder Friday, February 10, 2012 Lincolnton, NC:  A Lincolnton man has been charged with murder after police say he called 911 and said his girlfriend had died while he was sleeping on the couch.  According to Lincolnton Police, 41-year-old Jerry Alvin Black, Junior, called 911 on Friday afternoon at 1:30 p.m. and told the dispatcher that his girlfriend was dead.  » more at WBTV Two Young Children Witness Murder-Suicide in Eight Mile Friday, February 10, 2012 Prichard, AL:  A young boy trying to get a ride to school Friday morning led a neighbor back to his house where his father and father’s girlfriend were dead. Prichard police described the Eight Mile-area case as a murder-suicide.  The dead were Ronald Coleman Jr. and Charmeall Powe, both 39.  » more at al.com Man Shot Stranger, Stabbed Own Family in Deadly SWAT Standoff in Deerfield Beach Thursday, February 9, 2012 Deerfield Beach, FL:  The man who led a deadly 7-hour SWAT standoff at a Deerfield Beach RV park shot an elderly stranger before bursting into the home and stabbing his own wife, two sons and himself, authorities said Friday.  According to the Broward Sheriff’s Office, 41-year-old William De Jesus, from Port Orange, drove his red Ford Mustang into the Highland Woods RV park at 900 Northeast 48th Street around 6:20 p.m.  With De Jesus were his 37-year-old wife, Deanna, and sons Samson, 7, and Jeshiah, 9, the BSO said.  » more at NBC Miami Victim Came Back for One Day Wednesday, February 8, 2012 Marion, OH:  A woman who had moved away out of fear was killed the day she returned.  Police found Amy Lynn Aldrich, 30, dead from a gunshot wound at her cousin’s home, 617 Bartram Ave.  “She was a beautiful person inside and out,” said Margaret Reed, Aldrich’s mother.  » more at Marion Star Afton Teen Dies of Gunshot Wounds Thursday, February 9, 2012 Jay, OK:  A teenager who deputies believe was shot by his estranged girlfriend has died, Delaware County Undersheriff Ron Teel said Friday.  The name of the 16-year-old Afton boy has not been released.  Deputies believe Jazmine Flynn, 18, of Bernice, shot the teen before shooting herself.  Flynn was found dead at the scene from a single gunshot wound, Teel said.   » more at Tulsa World Autopsy Says New Bern Deaths Murder-Suicide New Bern, NC:  Preliminary autopsy results show a deadly double shooting last week in New Bern was a murder-suicide.  Brittany Jones and Johnnie Neely were found dead inside a home on Julia Clay Street Friday afternoon.  » more at WITN TV

WELL, ANOTHER VALENTINE’S DAY HAS COME AND GONE.  WE LOST WHITNEY HOUSTON THIS WEEK ALSO, IT WILL DEFINITELY GO DOWN IN MY MIND — HOWEVER, HOLIDAYS ARE HOLIDAYS — THEY NOW NO LONGER SERIOUSLY INTERRUPT MY LIFE, AT LEAST I DON’T HAVE TO BE TERRIFIED ABOUT ONE COMING UP ANY MORE (ALTHOUGH I DO REMAIN CAUTIOUS, FOR SURE).

I hope some will forgive me for bringing all this up on a day dedicated to love, romance and marriage — but there are two sides to the coin.

Let’s do what we can to keep it in balance, OK?

Pending the eventual dissolution of the AFCC family law system (which can’t accept that these things actually happen — or simply doesn’t care, so long as they get to pronounce about it in private meetings and order parents and children around, for a fee.