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

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

Ten Posts, Plus One, of nearly 600 published, Covering Basic Issues (+ abstracts)

with 2 comments

[I’m “unsticking” ten posts formerly held near the top of blog, a.k.a., redecorating..for functionality  ..and out of boredom looking at the same thing every day..This post is “sticky” and stays on top.  New posts are beneath the ones marked “This post is sticky.” Also note, I often revise or expand (alas) after (at times long after) publishing. WYSIWYG..] First, the “Plus One.”  Regarding biotech, pharmaceutical, and gene-tinkering disruptive technology corporations — don’t mistakenly think they have nothing to do with the family courts, or kids in foster care and other vulnerable populations.  SOMEbody has to fund studies, and someone has to become the subject matter of them; we are all interrelated — in our various assigned sectors. Below, I chose 10 formerly “sticky” posts to Unstick them, and put actual new posts closer to the top of the blog.

Part of this blog, I sometimes look up the corporations that fund the foundations that tell our government what to do, especially with low-income people, and those who actually have to show up in the family courts over something or other.  Or, who actually have child support orders, which also might end up hauling in a few strays into the system for the sport of watching everyone squirm and struggle for air.

After discovering the Corporate Fellows of the National Governors Association (which I’d previously discovered was helping push marriage, fatherhood, abstinence, etc. for years), I took a mental break from investigating stupidity (like, what we’re constantly being told to justify stupid policies) and began studying some very smart people,  noticing and reflecting again on how, almost universally, they do NOT do what they (or colleagues at the institute/think-tank level) are telling the rest of us to do. Instead, very often at an early age were able to opt out of regular K-12 public school educations in the USA and being led to believe that the way to prosperity was through seeking and holding a steady job at almost anything.

Some of their stories are inspiring (not just frightening). Genzyme, BioEnvision, ImPath, Sanofi – New Strains of Fish in the Ocean of Commerce [2013, 07/17]

Yes, it’s disheartening reporting (from the front lines as well) what makes people broke and drives them homeless or close to it (particularly, federal policy and welfare reform with its diversions into Designer Family Curricula). However, in looking at this policy one continues to run into some of the larger industries (corporations) running and directing the policy of our non-representative governments (US, state, county, regional, etc.). See the list @ What Brings All These Companies Together in One Electronic Place and for One Cause?” (July 7 LGH post)… That question is still on the table; most of my comments these days are “spam.”

However, there are other networks (like phone, email, etc.); the word is out. [Hover cursor over the “Genzyme, BioEnvision” link — or click through — to get more of the opening.  Including the guy who speculated about resurrecting Neanderthal DNA, finding a human mother surrogate, and if so, how this couldn’t be just an isolated birth, but the new creation would need some playmates and colleagues for the rest of us to see what we missed when they became extinct….You have to admit, that takes a certain mindset…Is it REALLY that far from those running welfare reform through the family court system?]]]

1.  Look and See, Show and Tell! (Selected Media/Library Exhibits to this blog) [2013, 11/11]

2. My Media/Library Uploads Retrospective– but First, The Context!  [2013, 11/11]

3. Gravatar, Cont’d…. (2013 Oct)  – [2013, 10/27]

4. NAMES: “Center, Council, Judicial, Legislative, Institute…” But WHO they are, and how legit, is in the LABEL – [2013, 08/30]

5. A Testimony for these Times … (hypothetically before an Appropriations Hearing) – [2013, 07/04]

The House Ways and Means Committee should quit funding Welfare Diversions (or child support demonstration programs) to promote “marriage and fatherhood” as an antidote to poverty, when we by now know that’s not its real purpose — at all. (In my opinion) it is a federally franchised distribution network whose central product, apparently, is trademarked curricula, and those who pay the entrance fees (certifications) can get in on the networking. The fun corresponding part is that, regardless of whether or not this actually helps fathers, children, or reduces poverty, abuse, or is in the public best interest — or not — no one, but almost no one — is ever going to consistently follow through and find out which of the nonprofit grantee corporations, formed precisely to get these grants, stay incorporated or not.

(That’s a link to the CRS [Congressional Research Service) Feb. 2012 on “Fatherhood Initiatives:  Connecting Fathers to their Children.”  (RL31025) ALL people should be aware of this House Committee (House Ways and Means means the “Means” to fund things…) and certain Subcommittees. You can subscribe to their alerts (which will reflect partisan ideas from whoever controls Congress at the time, i.e. right now, it’s anti-Obama in flavor) — but more important, I would stay aware of hearings on THESE matters, which reflect HUGE appropriations of funds extracted from the public through taxes, and acculated over the years through investments, ROI, interest on savings accounts, etc.:

6. Join or Start a Conversation on Family Court Matters. Jump in Somewhere! [2013, 05/16 [had been “pending” recently re-published]

I’m looking for better ways to organize and communicate the material, as well as better understanding of what does, or doesn’t communicate to people IN custody situations.   I have a lot of personal feedback through networking, and from some people who took time to comment and I can tell from other groups who formerly resisted talking about some of these essentials who now, have had to — because their followers also read this blog. Word is getting out. I can show which direction human beings are driving this entire system (the Titanic ship of state, including the courts) based in a common language of economics and evolving corporate structures.  Whether or not that’s a good or desired direction, matters.   Wouldn’t this knowledge be helpful for whether to start “fixing the broken courts” (tinkering with their settings) or dismantling them for other, different options?

But First, As usual, “In My Opinion.”   Please argue it if you disagree, or state your own elsewhere, including in the contact form!  Bulleted commentary on, essentially, the conference circuit and its publications, may be helpful insight….

7. A Stunning Validation by Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson: The Assault on Truth, The Origins of Psychoanalysis [2013, 03/05]  [this one remains a “sticky” post]

is now also a page. For many (if not most) posts I wanted to keep the economic focus. I was looking up some board member and ran across the book, looked up the man, and realized it’s time to re-address this issue.

This is a must-read, in my opinion

Curiosity and attention to detail paid off this time. Am I obsessive at looking things (and people) up? Perhaps some are just not curious enough. That act is called gathering data (scanning the horizon) for related information. Yesterday [@Feb. 2013], it had been my intent simply to present some basic information on the domination of psychology and education as fields of choice for those involved in population management through the courts. BUT — a single woman from Indiana University’s “Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences,” (cf. Kaiser Wilhelm Brain Institute (see Ritter, Rudin, noticing the specialties), and there is a connection; also on p.2 here, see the Rockefeller contributions), well, enough was enough and one thing led to another. Freud KNEW but he was censored and silenced. It haunted him. Others knew (including Anna Freud) but they also censored. Moussaieff Masson discovered and reported what Freud knew, and Anna Freud et al. censored, and was himself exiled. I’m getting tired of all that…. Whatever kind of person this author was, or wasn’t, I’m with him on this one. In writing this post, I looked up some personnel. One of them (below), a 2012 AFCC Stanley Cohen awardee, had participated in “The Kinsey Institute.” I looked up one of the other investigators and in a book list ran across: Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson: “Against Therapy: Emotional Tyranny and the Myth of Psychological Healing.” (2012): From this author’s “JeffreyMasson.com” site, this is how it goes:

In this ground-breaking and highly controversial book, Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson attacks the very foundations of modern psychotherapy from Freud to Jung, from Fritz Perls to Carl Rodgers. With passion and clarity, Against Therapy addresses the profession’s core weaknesses, contending that, since therapy’s aim is to change people, and this is achieved according to therapist’s own notions and prejudices, the psychological process is necessarily corrupt. With a foreword by the eminent British psychologist Dorothy Rowe, this cogent and convincing book has shattering implications.

8. Exposing and Prosecuting Judicial Corruption through Common Law Discovery (1997 Interview) [2013, 01/24] [remains a “sticky” post]

File this Article under “What a Difference One Person can Make, if that person:

Has Guts, Will Obtain Evidence, Look at Evidence, Come to Logical Conclusion regarding Evidence Obtained AND Publicize It!

 PRIMARILY to promote this ONE link. It’s a 1997 interview of a grandfather witnessing his daughter’s custody battle, I believe in Los Angeles. You don’t get much more relevant and central than what’s happening in the Los Angeles County Courthouse. This is where the “Conference of Conciliation Courts” began and, in a real way, a good deal of the entire system we have today (although definitely national and international alliances were involved early on). It says:

Marvin Bryer’s discoveries began when his daughter was involved in a custody battle for her son. Apparently a judge received a bribe to rule against Mr. Bryer’s daughter, and as a result Mr. Bryer discovered a judicial slush fund bank account, and a common law discovery for overcoming judicial immunity.

Right away, we are in the financial category: Bribe, Slush Fund, Bank account, overcoming judicial immunity. He got (from the bank — not through FOIA, which can be forestalled more easily) the records of all Donations from the County Bar — to the Superior Court. The County Bar was an Association — and I have another post about Bar Associations, because the topic is so vital. Judges have immunity for what they do on the bench — but Bar Associations do not. If there is a conspiracy between bench and bar…He is not talking “they just don’t understand” (custody matter) — but words relating to the handling of money: fraud, grand larceny, racketeering; in other words, taking money for funds that don’t exist — then the angle of approach is getting the evidence and understanding the pattern in those areas.. . . .This approach and information runs completely contrary to any and just about ALL the advocacy efforts in any number of advocacy groups  and shows MOST of them for who and what they truly are: self-serving collaborators who have intentionally engaged in a virtual “media blackout” on the economic angle to the courts. That last comment was not made lightly; it was made from a place of both observation, a good deal of personal acquaintance, networking — AND lookups. (Like most of my opinion, I no longer “take it on faith” but administer a “show me the money!” as well as often watch a group’s actions and affiliations develop over time).

Can you read 7 pages “for the cause”? And think about it?If given a brief pop-quiz of about 10th grade level on what it’s talking about, how much of the vocabulary or ideas could you remember?

EITHER GET SOME ECONOMIC UNDERSTANDING  Or, GO INTO EITHER “DYSFUNCTION” OR “DENY & DISSOCIATE” MODE — which is the last thing needed for target populations.

 [this post also has the next table, handled also on other posts since]: . . . No one said it was going to be easy — but this is important stuff!

Another question: What’s the difference between a “Family” court and a “Conciliation” court? And why are so many programs in the courts being pre-planned by membership of a private nonprofit association which (eventually — after people started pestering it to get its own EIN# and quit hiding and evading taxes under the County’s EIN#) called “Association of Family and Conciliation Courts,” which previously was a “Conference of Conciliation Courts”?

What does that mean, legally? How many states did this happen in — has it happened yet in your area?

Law was passed in Arizona, it says, in 1962:

Conciliation Services of the Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County was established in 1962 after the Arizona Legislature enacted Conciliation Services law (ARS 25-381). Conciliation Services offers:

  • Conciliation Counseling for parties contemplating divorce.
  • Mediation of Legal Decision Making and parenting time plans for families of divorce, post-divorce or in paternity actions.
  • Evaluation Services to the court when parents are unable to agree upon a parenting plan.
  • Parent Information Program provides information to divorcing parents, or parents involved in other domestic relations actions, concerning what their children may be experiencing during this emotionally difficult period.
  • High Conflict Resolution Class designed specifically for high conflict parents.
  • Premarital Underage Counseling for persons under the age of sixteen contemplating marriage.

(see choices on left margin of site)

Apparently High Conflict is Bad. Treatment to eliminate conflict between parents can be accomplished by a court-ordered class (only $50). Sure, yeah — and I have a great deal for you on some land under the Brooklyn Bridge.

9. “Mother Says” — Words to the Wise for Women in Custody Challenges  [2012, 12/27]

[This excerpt is far down the post.  The post is hard reading, in part because at the time I was still clumsy with html color schemes (slightly — not much– better now!).  However I put it in the “Top Ten” because it covers in one post, basic and important themes. ONE  theme I am continuing to expose — the TRUTH OF THE PAIN from the Custody losses and ongoing challenges is the BAIT, that draws people into various advocacy groups, after which they get HOOKED into specific rhetoric, become follow-those-leaders, and forget to do their homework (lookups).  People who have been previously in traumatized or stressed situations (i.e., abused, or seeing immediate relative abused) can get hooked into the next groupthink identity — and be told what is the problem, who is the enemy, who are one’s friends, and how to think about it.  While the “to the contrary” analysis is not debated — just simply censored. Somehow, once hooked, many just never seem to figure out that there was a hook, and resort to excommunicating and other paranoid/angry behavior towards those who broke free.  It doesn’t seem to get around to analytical mode, just social and moral (blogging, showing up at rallies, etc.) mode. And that’s not a cult? At this time (almost one year ago) I had witnessed so much of this, and felt called to address it, having (for a short, but critical period of my own) wrapped up into this crowd, after which I finally wised up and started looking from a different, and more objective perspective — at what you see so much of in this blog.  Like corporations, tax returns, and funding outlines…  in short, I walked away.   I feel sorrow and some distress for people who can’t, and from time to time anger at this particular draining of significant female (mother) energy into building support for existing organizations, rather than retaining a healthy screening and fact-check process on the ALL groups (ongoing) and learning to navigate who’s who among all the fish in the fix the courts sea. In this post I also bring up the concept of the Gulag Archipelago, Solzhenitskyn reported some basic truths of communism:

Solzhenitsyn definitively and painstakingly laid the theoretical, legal and practical origins of the Gulag system at Lenin’s feet, not Stalin’s. According to Solzhenitsyn’s testimony, Stalin merely amplified concentration camp system that was already in place . . . Historical impact of the text  [the book, “The Gulag Archipelago. Vol. 1. 1918-1956] [hover cursor] Solzhenitsyn argued that the Soviet government could not govern without the threat of imprisonment, and that the Soviet economy depended on the productivity of the forced labor camps, especially insofar as the development and construction of public works and infrastructure were concerned.

This put into doubt the entire moral standing of the Soviet system. 

ARCHIPELAGO, I believe is a very good, and still relevant analogy. From the post (cont’d.)

Part of the Problem: We have been so “sold out” by people who have spoken a language we empathize with (domestic violence is “bad,” child abuse is evil, help us stop it!) but in the bottom line, are more concerned about the preservation of their own professions and organizations than the truth. And so we have for too long and too often adoptedtheir language without editing it for reality,supplementing it with our own research and validating/invalidating it; too often without testing it for logic, or doing background checks on the people talking a certain talk.  This is hardly surprising, because as one follows the money, it is taken from a major resource (federal government, plus private foundations, etc.) and a lot is dumped into virtual media campaigns.

Each of us have gone about this as individual bloggers (burnt out in different years, passed the torch in different ways, and I think eventually reached something of a tipping point in that now some of the groups which refused to deal with this, are doing so — although in a very diluted and misleading manner to their followers, STILL not giving them the basic tools to confirm information themselves. (I’m working on a timeline from this perspective). Look, when fishermen go fishing, there is often bait, right?  That bait is legitimate food — it just has a hook in it.  The same is true of the domestic violence industry AND moreover, the developing “Crisis in the Courts” industry (they want the same privileges and press that the domestic violence, fatherhood promotion and child protection industry had, and are copying its worst, not its best, practices). Of course there is SOME truth in there, or who would bite — but not all the relevant truth and not necessarily the most relevant truth.  I actually see them as intentionally derailing the conversation in a way that obscures the “operational realities” which anyone can learn to look up — it’s not rocket science! And when I learned about this from some predecessors, too late for my own children (basically) I made up my mind to report it, AND report the people I know who simply didn’t care enough to report it, although they knew.  Sometimes professionals just have tunnel vision (and arrogance) and an agenda; in this agenda, incorporating our actual feedback recommending changes is less welcome, than our warm bodies, donations, referrals, and email lists soliciting our anecdotal stories. They want the public (the government) to pay attention to them, and attract funding to put out a certain message — but not the whole truth.   It is AS important to understand (and research) groups “on your side” of any debate (whether or not the gender divide) as on the other side.

and finally,…

10.  What It’s Still About….(… in Summer 2013)

(Nov. 2013 intro to this post, after re-reading it): Value of this blog.  Taking the information now known about the CAFRs, and then published (1990s) about the Los Angeles County Judges slush fund, I ask — how might have things played out IF more people knew how to read their government financial statements (CAFRs) and had an active curiosity about their contents?  Might we be better able to hold government in check, and been better citizens? These are hardly idle questions.   I’m facing things, currently, that were unthinkable in my parents’ generation — I was raised safe and intact; educated and with a work ethic, married, children and then for the fact of saying NO! to being threatened, assaulted, and eventually (as was on track for ours, at least) literally murdered in the esteemed institution of “Marriage” — I am now in prolonged, forced dependency through the courts, my children have been essentially sold at the auction block, and taught every lesson as a mother I would NOT want them to learn:  1.  Abuse is OK, make all the excuses, do anything but stand up to it, or report it….   and 2. Court orders, in fact, the law, is meaningless, and not to be taken seriously as a way to resolve any problem, and 3.  In order to survive, ditch one or more of your own relatives ,or exploit them. I’ve been repeatedly looking down things, full in the face, such as ugly human nature (VERY ugly and dangerous), corrupt systems of government (the word does apply) and imminent homelessness, and possibly further physical harm, still (i.e., stalking issues) — which I just would not have imagined at any other decade of my life and was not personally, that I’m aware of, involved in.  I’m facing not just mortality (that’s hardly a new scenario for me), but the despair.  HOW DUMB ARE WE, COLLECTIVELY? Information that is exposed, but not put in a framework for understanding in some death, goes away, and is forgotten.  Let’s not forget that we were given some good roadmaps some years ago.  The “Gilding the Gavel” link also leads to a series of similar articles exposing what later (from all I can deduce) became “AFCC” (per also California NOW Family Court Report of 2002, not that California NOW has stayed exactly on course of exposing this, either….).  So that’ sone reason I have this in the Top 10 and hope it will be read, and thought about: [From the post, and more commentary on it (from the post in “quotes”)]:

So, re: this information, now over a decade old: GILDING THE GAVEL? SUPERIOR COURT PAYMENTS DEPOSITED IN JUDGES’ PRIVATE ‘COFFEE’ FUND. The purpose of this (or any) news article isn’t to tell us the whole story. It’s to alert us of a further untold story and that we need to understand more than we do ….However, all along there were Los Angeles County CAFR’s (if not online they did exist) which is where it has to report its “FUNDS.” Not until around 1989 did (as I recall) Walter Burien start publicizing them, with others. Search “Carl Hermann” to hear about some more of them, in Los Angeles specifically. And, again why isn’t this skill taught in public schools?

From what I can tell, discussion of certain of these “funds” which was a hot topic a decade and a half ago, has (except for certain email lists) been almost dropped from the airwaves, as more and more “coalitions” of advocacy groups who just ignore it — have gained steam.  The BMCC has contributed to the scenario, one reason I will continue to take this on in future posts.  For example, read some of this:

Controversy over the fund has been stirred by several dozen families involved in lengthy custody fights who felt they did not get fair treatment in the family court system. La Crescenta resident Marvin Bryer, 62, a retired computer analyst, has spearheaded the effort, spending more than $100,000 and years of effort trying to help his daughter Karen, 32, in her custody battle over her 12-year-old son Nicholas Van Meter. Bryer, former San Fernando resident Irene Jensen and Sierra Madre resident Idelle Clarke have filed various motions in their family law cases and lawsuits in recent years attacking the judges’ fund because of the contributions from lawyers and court-appointed visitation monitors who profit from child-custody battles.


Every generation has its task of what to understand, and what to do, in these fields.  But dropping the thread of vital information like that?  Makes no sense, except in a context of NOT caring enough about the truth — because this is a critical part of the truth.   Some people may have dropped reporting on it from sheer exhaustion (others might have become roadkill), others because they got tired of the subject matter having been dismissed by louder voices, and not developed (or been able to develop) organizational structures themselves to keep the knowledge “live” and “current.” I may not be around to continue bringing this up, which is one reason I put four years, diligently, into blogging it, and am now consolidating this blog (some).  Doing this was of course a sacrifice of time, born in part out of indignant outrage and disbelief that so many could have “bailed” on such vital information, and looking around to see — who else is going to find the strategic planning to follow through, so others do NOT have to unearth it after THEIR kids are absent from their lives? I absolutely do not expect or want this to become a “profession” — I too want my life back.  In the long run, I think love (love of the truth, of justice, of concern for others beyond one’s lifetime — not just “my family”) sustains during the marathon.  I’m a mother and I don’t have to be actually looking at my children or living with them, to care about them and think in terms of WHICH MOUNTAINS CAN I MOVE?  for them, and for of course, others. Hopefully this blog, and sticky post, will help keep the topics alive.  AND kicking.  I hope they kick some field goals, too.

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Texas is launching a new study on pedophiles.

    I’m pondering several things I’ve stumbled on in corp wiki…. Like Masonic links, links to organ donor banks, and the drug connections. Also I think fathers rights are tapping the personal health information of the moms.


    Sent from my HTC EVO 4G LTE exclusively from Sprint


    November 24, 2013 at 6:35 pm

    • Do you have a blog? Are you up on the information at least in the sidebar widget for this blog (the big long one?). Where’s a link to the article you just raised, particularly as it’s pretty heavy subject matter, or how should I respond to it? The idea behind links is fleshing out some of the thoughts so others have some way to grab hold onto them, if they have substance.

      Fathers’ rights is not a specific term, it’s generic. Anyhow, with California Protective Parents (and friends) continually recommending mothers outline the DETAILS and PLAYERS in their cases and forward them to “we’re getting a Congressional Hearing / We have a connection” central without guarantees of privacy (or results), do “Fathers’ rights” whoever that means, even need to tap secret sources of information?

      I’m not disagreeing with the possibility. I’d just like to hear some thought-through thoughts, or they are more of a distraction.

      Hope you are well.

      Let's Get Honest

      November 29, 2013 at 2:51 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: