Archive for November 1st, 2013
What’s with Women Judges forming Nonprofits to run Fatherhood Programs? ….
What’s with Women Judges forming Nonprofits to run Fatherhood Programs? ….
(THAT’S AN ACTIVE LINK, ABOVE)
(… is it about the Dads? Or is it about Imminent Embezzlement Scams”
2019 Update:
(This, 6,900 word-post was published Nov 1, 2013. Its short-link ends “-22j.” It, or a near-version of it is on the VERY bottom right sidebar of my blog, which sidebar is so long it’s getting in the way of my editing process. I decided this widget (under the above title) could go, but seemed to remember having moved it or a version of it off-side-bar long ago, and so went looking. And, here we are!)
Why do I post such titles, and this material?
No, I am NOT trying to permanently alienate myself from anyone who might help, like judges, attorneys, or domestic violence professionals, or social service employees or allegedly concerned advocates who might also just so happen to be: judges, attorneys, or domestic violence professionals, or social service employees. I just like the truth to get known — and in truth — some of this is disgraceful. And there IS some strange bio-receptor attraction between women in powerful positions — and poor, disenfranchised fathers. For example, the first organization here, in its founding paperwork talks about “parents.” But I dare you to find that to include BOTH fathers and mothers — rather than fathers and Grandmothers. Moreover, they are promoting programs from the National Fatherhood Initiative (is THAT about mothers too, somehow — when it comes to judges possibly involved in family courts??)….
However, my question stands: Is it that emotional chemistry — or is it the fact that this IS a certain way to move money around between nonprofits, spreading around various government based riches (keeping in mind that “government” while one word, has many levels, ALL of which tend to dispense both grants and contracts to nonprofits, and might feel more comfortable doing so to nonprofits run by people they know — like: judges, attorneys at work in the courts, DV professionals, or social service employees. et al.
BACKGROUND /Context:
Healing and Hope* versus: “Change is Here: Lead, Follow, or Get Out of the Way“
More specifically, “Defending a Woman’s Rights Activist Who is Under Attack” — a 6/2013 post by Lundy Bancroft which is prefaced:
NOTE: This post is about some of the internal dynamics of the national movement fighting for the custody rights of abused women (also referred to as “protective mothers,” because they are in the position of needing to protect their children from the other parent, but family courts are not permitting them to do so). If this issue doesn’t interest or affect you, or if you get triggered by news about infighting, I encourage you to skip this post. But for those of you who are involved in the custody issue, it’s important to know about the attacks on activists that are happening.
For over a decade I have been one of the leaders in the international effort to secure full human rights for protective mothers and their children. There is no cause that remains as close to my heart day in and day out.I am writing in response to the ongoing controversy on the web regarding the Protective Mothers Alliance (PMA), a grassroots advocacy organization that I helped to co-found and that is directed by Janice Levinson.
Today’s post, I didn’t elaborate much on the Claudine Dombrowski vs. Lundy Bancroft issue, or fully expose where Jerry Tello fits in, although you should probably be aware he has a close connection (like a mentoring connection) to a local, and well-established, community services agency which whose chief officers pled guilty and agreed to repay what they stole (to avoid jail time for stealing it) below.
This post instead focuses more on what I found by simply checking out, what’s Lundy been up to recently — and following up (corporate, economic, nonprofit, who’s who lookups, etc.) about that — which was, as ever, fascinating. I should of course mention (there is now a more complete sidebar widget in this also) — that I have yet to find “Protective Mothers’ Alliance, International” showing a corporate identity. Which I find personally objectionable, and less than upfront. I think it’s part (not all) of a character indicator, to talk as if one was a corporation, unless one actually IS.
I do see from this Healing and Hope blog, “Introducing the Protective Mothers’ Alliance” (one-co-founder is from Florida, the other ?? apparently on the road a lot, Lundy, and has, strangely, chosen an underfunded and low-profile (corporately) but high-profile (on the web and as to drawing distressed mothers into its ranks, etc.) FISCAL AGENT from California, “California Protective Parents Association):
PMA looks forward to your support. Contributions can be made out to “California Protective Parents Association” (our fiscal sponsor) with “Protective Mothers Alliance” written on the memo line, and sent to CPPA, P.O. Box 15284, Sacramento, CA 95815-0284.
No indications that the situation has ever changed in the past four-plus years, in other words, that it went ahead and got its own corporation status which might allow some of us to look at the books, funders, and directors.
PMA the website pushes certain themes in certain manners — and it also publicizes for Bancroft, who collaborates with Barry Goldstein and Mo Hannah (BMCC crowd), etc. MOST of who for most of their now TEN YEARS of conferencing, talk and conferenced as if there was no federal government, grants to the states, welfare reform, or in short, any financial, nonprofit structures at all related to the business of the courts. Which I find odd.
Speaking of that, and of the Santa Clara County-related topic of THIS post:
It does make you wonder, in this context, why we even show up in court asking for some sound judgments, and some justice — when our own leaders can’t keep their pet projects properly incorporated — and steer clear of large fiscal agents of their smaller operations [case below]– which get caught in headlines, and in theft from their own employees. Or is that “can’t” my assumption, and it’s a “won’t” or “don’t” and some are simply in on it? I mean, tax evasion and theft are certainly tempting to SOME (when handling millions of $$ of OPM that is, “other people’s money,” as obtained from, guess who — various branches of government, for a nonprofit or, below, a community services agency, and a real established one….
Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History 