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

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?' (See March 23 & 5, 2014). More Than 745 posts and 45 pages of Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Archive for October 1st, 2012

Family Courts: Crippled, Incompetent and Corrupt — or just “Broken”?

with 7 comments

In 2002, California NOW put out a report declaring that the family courts were “Crippled, Incompetent and Corrupt.”
Meanwhile, many coalitions of professionals, have popularized the phrase that they aren’t corrupt, they’re “broken.”
Which is it?  Because, that’s a good question and depending on the answer, a different response is called for.  I have cited both references below, and blogged both of them before.
Unfortunately, I don’t see any public platform where there would be an open debate, with an audience! Preparations are being made (this week!) for Obama v. Romney — but who is even talking back to:

Our Courts are Corrupt v. Our Courts are Broken?

Instead, the different sides, Balkanized, put out their own materials, and own conferences.  Generally speaking the “our Courts are Broken” conferences are run by some of the would-be fixers, and this viewpoint has much more financial backing!

But — the question CAN be answered, and has. However, the answer is psychologically disturbing and very unpleasant, and to verify it, most people would have to take out some private time to read the record.  And that’s not what most people’s minds are tuned to these days.

Mine only is because I don’t like losing complete contact with my kids overnight, and thereby losing my ability to self-support, or a period of time in which to rebuild what was destroyed in the last boxing round, which court events when combined with family events, are.  I also didn’t like my children losing their right to child support when it was in serious arrears, or their contact with an ethical working mother.  The existence of the family law system parallel to a criminal law system is  logical dilemma.

Is there a formula for when the identical behavior is considered criminal versus a family dispute, or is it a coin toss?  Does it depend on local politics, the money in one’s family, luck, or is there a strategic plan (as yet unexposed) which the public and the peopel running through the courts don’t know?

If no one cares to give me a reasonable explanation why these things are so in my state (other states) and this country — if this is business as usual, then either it has to change or I will seek a safer place to live out what remains of my life, if one exists.   

Period. So, I look things up until things that fit with the facts and the record make themselves known, but I am always interested in validating or invalidating statements; are they reasonable or unreasonable, or ridiculous. If they are borderline ridiculous (the root word for “ridiculous” is Latin for “to laugh.”), then who is promoting these ridiculous viewpoints, and where’s the profit in them?

Now, the profit is not that hard to track — it’s objective. It takes work to track, but it can be found (even the LACK of incorporation, nonprofit 990 tax return, etc. can be “found,” i.e., when the group says it’s a nonprofit, and the IRS says it’s not, and hasn’t been — that’s a found fact….)

RE:  “Our Broken Courts” —

Amazingly, even families (often mothers) who have been more than just “broken” by the allegedly broken courts — they are “broke” financially, devastated emotionally, and some are homeless, others have been killed, and many have no real contact with their own children. others may have contact, but are paying heavily (that’s paying a lot financially) to do so — they have been put in supervised visitation themselves!  yet, they continue to endorse, listen to, and socially etc. support others who are promoting the “broken” viewpoint.
But, they have taken up the phrase themselves, along with phrases calling themselves losers (“Mothers of Lost Children” being a phrase that calls for the emotion of desolation, but moreover, it associates “mothers” with the word “Losers.”  A better word would be “stolen” children….)   Other emotional adjectives, even if true, engrain the trauma into the group name:  “Battered Mothers’ Custody Conference,” focuses on the language of battering.   Etc.
I pulled this segment out of the middle of the last post, which was about the quality of the TAGGS database, and believe this topic is more than timely right now.  I also (obviously) expanded it.
The answer is surprising and informative.  By getting to it, I believe anyone will be better equipped as a citizen here, children or no children.  But, you must make up your mind where you stand sooner or later.  I am asking those that are NOT part of the expansive business empire of the courts to make that “sooner.”  Thanks for reading this post!

(Just jump in….)

I personally believe, after looking at this particular marriage/fatherhood grants system intensely — that it was intentionally set up to be untraceable and as a series of slush fund operations. I.e., HHS helps set up the shell corporations with compassion capital funding, then shove money their way (by the millions, sometimes), sets up operations through church, welfare, community grants, you name it! I’m not just talking the “Faith-based Solutions, LLC” out of Nevada (the obvious fraud), but this WAIT Training which goes through multiple incorporation versions in a short period (see my comment on yesterday’s “not close enough for jazz” post, which links to another post where I painstakingly looked up in Colorado Secretary of State site, the various versions of itself), and more. This also follows the pattern of their grand-sugar-daddy & grandma corporate forebears, the original ConciliationCourts Conference (sic), which eventually became Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.

This is a 2002 piece, Trish Wilson of “The Liz Library” arguing Glenn Sacks about this particular report, but you can see it is arguing more about content of custody decisions — and not about the historic development of the family court practice — not CORPORATE matters.  This 2002 report was a literal Christmas gift, a goldmine, of research on how we got here. It hasn’t got enough press.  What I would call the critical part of its message has been drowned.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

October 1, 2012 at 3:00 pm

%d bloggers like this: