Archive for May 28th, 2013
Family Justice Centers, revisited (Model Programs with Major Design Flaws) [post updated 5-31-13]
Family Justice Centers, revisited (Model Programs with Major Design Flaws) [post updated 5-31-13] (Post title with case-sensitive short-link ending “-1IF”
(This segment comes from the middle of the “Jump in and Start a Conversation” post. Taking it out cut the post size by about half! Guess I have a lot to say….. [The first several paragraphs were added during the “move” process..responding to more information found about some of the collaborations.] I also back-dated the publish date by two days to 5/28/2013, so as not to interrupt the current subject matter focus around the matters of CT AFCC, and getting the evidence on the corporations in the courthouse….)
Please notice the gap between when an individual survivor and person (me) discovered this programming, compared to when the justice centers began: seven years, two years — years, before we catch up to which model is being applied where LOCALLY. Another way to understand this in advance is the simple concept: CIVIL SERVANTS have become experts at forming NONPROFITS according to NATIONAL MODELS AGREED UPON IN THE CONFERENCE CIRCUITS OF THEIR OWN TRADE ASSOCIATIONS. Hence, it all gets back down to the public’s habit of tolerating forking over their earned income in advance (as income taxes) and continuing to believe we can individually survive in the face of collective, organized, tax-exempt incorporated entities whose membership include people whose salaries we, the public, have already paid — because they work in government.
These conferences, multi-state, specifically move discussion on the important matter away from the public, who can’t afford to attend them all. I’m not the only person noticing this (Center for Public Integrity, noting which two universities sponsored the most judicial conferences). The for-profit/not-for profit itself (even if operated totally “legally”) creates a caste system to enable further centralized control (and private influence). Excerpt from another post “Circles are for Girls, Councils are for Boys, and Trademarked Trainings are for . . .”
So many of our public issues relate precisely to the income tax and the caste system created by the for-profit/non-profit power differentials. ALL social and societal relationships are affected by this, with the favor and advantage going to those whose social connections and/or background are willing to take advantage of wage-earners by themselves operating under nonprofits. I hope this post sheds some light on the situation through a single example.
The other day I also added a page on “Abolishing Government Through Regionalism.” All fun and mocking aside (one possible response to the ludicrous concepts), this is a sobering issue, and I believe it’s creeping (only not creeping, more like rapidly spreading — with the speed of incorporation) FACISCM. This is what governments tend to do, period, unless held in check. If they hold “the checks” (the money), it becomes less and less relevant what the laws, or statutes, actually are.
More individual people need to accelerate their learning curves, and deepen their understanding. If it sacrifices something less important, so be it. There’s a reason I come down pretty hard on advocacy groups which derail the conversation from the money trail. Find out who’s funding them, it gets pretty interesting; the groups are far less naive then they may seem.
RE: The Family Justice Centers:
I also did a few articles in earlier years on “Fast Food” One-Stop Family Justice Centers hit San Diego in 2002, Oakland, and London, 2007,” (posted Dec. 2010) and “Dubious Doings by District Attorneys (June 2010)” and “Mrs. O’Malley Goes to Washington: SB-577 Legislating the One-Stop Justice Shop” (May 2011), Mrs. Nancy O’Malley being an Alameda County (SF Bay Area/East Bay, Oakland, Berkeley, etc.) District Attorney, and the O’Malleys being politically active (superior court judges, D.A.’s, etc.) in the area. Here’s Ms. O’Malley’s election statement, taking credit for creating the Alameda County Family Justice Center (actually, the model was borrowed from San Diego). Of which she is, or at least was, very proud:
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
Someone got this Evidence. You Could Too. What’s the Follow Up Plan? (Connecticut AFCC/pt.1.)
APPARENTLY, most people are convinced they can’t keep up with investigative bloggers because the investigation skills are either not there, not being consistently exercised, or because the people that need this most are struggling to handle their own court disasters and are pressed for time — and economically.
**Note: expanded a section after publishing, re: connection between certain protective mothers advocacy speakers, their related nonprofits, the NACC, and billing problems in Connecticut,
Could you put together information like this? Would you have? Have you before?
Washington Times Communities Article, 5/23/2010, by Anne Stevenson
Whether or not, here is an example of what COULD be done, so let’s cut to the chase. What’s up next? More complaining and sarcastic commentary?
Admittedly, it’s not easy. It requires a commitment of time and energy and a focus that says, I’m not going down other dead-end paths. Most of us aren’t independently wealthy, and the type of investigative blogging MOST needed are from individuals with a vital interest in the truth, but who are NOT actual stakeholders in organizations whose very essence depends on a stream of distressed or disgruntled parents. As parents are almost never listed as “stakeholders,” I also say, this should normally be at the minimum, parents who’ve been exposed to the courts, and/or have personally experienced some of the critical issues that drive parents in front of the courts.
But a subset of this group has to be people who have not lost their minds and/or been recruited into some advocacy group with characteristics a cult-like as the groups we need to report on! And unfortunately, there are a lot of recruiters out there. A sound-minded individual will want proof and not be satisifed with fast, easy or shallow answers.
However, another reason they “can’t” keep up is just an “I won’t” or “I don’t feel like,” or any other number of excuses.
Some would rather sit on comments fields, or sit back and let others do the work, and boo or cheer them, as well as boo or cheer the local judges, or local judges’ ideas, and look for a group to join on-line. So what, really, ask yourself, is the excuse for cheering on good investigative bloggers — but failing to imitate what they do?
“Time’s Up!” for those excuses.
Exhortation
Sure we all have natural talents, mindsets, and skillsets. But — what are you doing with yours?
Too many excuses are no longer valid excuses. Some people tenacity to investigate because they choose to investigate year after year.
Read the rest of this entry »
Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History 