New Here? A Roadmap with some Chronology, Links, Issues (Sidebar-Plus) originally published Feb 24, 2014
WIDGETS: This 12,600-word post, first published 2/24/2014, contains essentially two or three of this blog’s sidebar text-boxes (“widgets”), each designed for total strangers, novices, and/or followers. They are there to alert, expose new readers to key concepts and themes by immersing them into the narrative, and leaving footprints (links) for the curious and to keep reminding us of basic information which has been forgotten through advocacy-group neglect over (as of 2014) a period of 15-20 years minimum.
To understand this information is also to get a grasp on the essence of the relationship between “government” and the individual, and to call more individuals to wise up to how this works.
Citizenship is an economic contract; it is a concession of power for implied mutual benefit. The party entering (or even born, but then became adult under) this contract has no excuse for failing to monitor the other party to the contract. Ignorance may be the cause, and ignorance of the significance of welfare reform, or of simply paying taxes, doesn’t exempt one from the consequences of it.
Be assured one side, the public, is being monitored MORE than adequately, with tools they have helped fund through taxes and consuming services (wanted or mandatory) to develop the tools (the technology, and the salaries of to staff the offices, and contracted vendors, who are keeping count.
Private tax-exempt foundations such as the Annie E. Casey Foundation (based on originally UPS corporate wealth), which tax-exemption IS a benefit, are also keeping counts and based on their results, demanding political and justice (child welfare and juvenile) systems change. Click the logo to read the summary:
{UPDATE 7-20-2016, having in recent months also explored some of the noprofit (501©3) “Kids Count” Organizations in Georgia and Alabama, and how they are organized statewide.}
…In addition to including data from the most trusted national resources, the KIDS COUNT Data Center draws from more than 50 KIDS COUNT state organizationsthat provide state and local data, as well publications providing insights into trends affecting child and family well-being. Through its National KIDS COUNT Project, the Foundation develops and distributes reports on important well-being issues. Much of the data from these nationally recognized publications, including the KIDS COUNT Data Book, are featured on the KIDS COUNT Data Center.
Heres’ that List. I think people should be aware that whether the organization name reads “Voices for Children” ‘Children First” or ‘Children’s Alliance” chances are it’s been designated the statewide organization for public/private partnership increasingly being substituted for normal governmental process in the use (and distribution) of public monies.
The problem here is TRACKING the money and MULTIPLYING NONPROFITS absent MONITORING of the NONPROFITS. Keep reading my blog (or check yourself) and you will find some amazing illiteracy, incompetency (in filing out tax returns), evasiveness (in showing up as a legitimate registered business identity and STAYING THAT WAY! (legally incorporated at the state level, filing its annual reports — and filing its tax returns, let alone filling them out accurately) so long as it is running programming, or receiving funding):
From ANNIE E. CASEY Kids Count State Organizations Link above. For a quick example, I broke out the Georgia one, because I’d been recently posting on Georgia CPCs (Children’s Policy Centers) and “Voices for Children.” … Some of these are also, FYI, receiving and going for the abstinence promotion and marriage/fatherhood promotion HHS money –and getting it, too.
The Annie E. Casey Foundation funds a network of state-level organizations in all 50 states, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and the District of Columbia that provide a community-by-community picture of the well-being of children and families. The KIDS COUNT network collects and reports credible data that is featured on the KIDS COUNT Data Center. With these data, state organizations provide policy analysis based on evidence and shine a spotlight on pressing issues in order improve programs and policies for children and families.
- ALABAMA VOICES for Alabama’s Children
- ALASKA Kids Count Alaska
- ARIZONA Children’s Action Alliance
- CALIFORNIA Children Now
- COLORADO Colorado Children’s Campaign
- CONNECTICUT Connecticut Association for Human Services
- DELAWARE KIDS COUNT in Delaware
- DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DC Action for Children
- FLORIDA Florida KIDS COUNT
- HAWAII Center on the Family
- IDAHO Idaho KIDS COUNT
- ILLINOIS Voices for Illinois Children
- INDIANA Indiana Youth Institute
- KANSAS Kansas Action for Children
- KENTUCKY Kentucky Youth Advocates
- LOUISIANA Agenda for Children
- MARYLAND Advocates for Children and Youth
- MASSACHUSETTS Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center
- MICHIGAN Michigan League for Public Policy
- MINNESOTA Minnesota KIDS COUNT
- MISSISSIPPI Mississippi KIDS COUNT
- MISSOURI Family and Community Trust
- MONTANA Montana KIDS COUNT
- NEBRASKA Voices for Children in Nebraska
- NEW HAMPSHIRE New Hampshire Kids Count
- NEW JERSEY Advocates for Children of New Jersey
- NEW MEXICO New Mexico Voices for Children
- NEW YORK NYS Council on Children and Families
- NORTH CAROLINA NC Child (formerly Action for Children North Carolina)
- NORTH DAKOTA North Dakota KIDS COUNT
- OREGON Children First for Oregon
- PENNSYLVANIA Pennsylvania Partnerships for Children
- RHODE ISLAND Rhode Island KIDS COUNT
- SOUTH CAROLINA Children’s Trust of South Carolina
- SOUTH DAKOTA South Dakota KIDS COUNT
- VERMONT Voices for Vermont’s Children
- VIRGIN ISLANDS Community Foundation of the Virgin Islands
- VIRGINIA Voices for Virginia’s Children
- WASHINGTON Washington KIDS COUNT is a joint effort of the Children’s Alliance and Washington State Budget & Policy Center [sounds like two separate EIN#s, or projects under someone else’s EIN#]
- WEST VIRGINIA West Virginia KIDS COUNT
- WYOMING Wyoming Community Foundation
Clicking on the Georgia option, GEORGIA Georgia Family Connection Partnership we find a logo and some brief language about how many participants in this collaborative. Although the description is “public/private” there is an “Executive Director” which suggests a separate organization coordinating it all:
Georgia Family Connection Partnership
235 Peachtree Street, Suite 1600
Atlanta,GA30303 404-527-7394 communications@gafcp.org | http://www.gafcp.org
Gaye Morris Smith, Executive Director, Georgia Family Connection Partnership
Georgia Family Connection Partnership (GaFCP) is a public/private partnership that supports 159 Family Connection county collaborative organizations across the state and serves as a resource to state agencies in improving conditions for Georgia’s children and families.
Whenever what looks like a business entity or organization NAME attached to a website (this one ending in “.org” implies its nonprofit, not for-profit) is followed by the word “IS” … whatever follows may be true, false, or irrelevant. For purposes of “what’s being done with PUBLIC funds” the main question is “WHO” is it as an entity, and from there, what has it been doing financially. What this statement above does tell is that GaFCP is functionally providing a sort of statewide umbrella structure and participating with many similar ones (on this subject matter and for other subject matter, designated by sound-byte or CAUSE) making a joke of “county-based” by diffusing and confusing actual influence and sources of funding. Counties would be, I believe, the political structure of the State of Georgia (under which, municipalities, cities, whatever the state’s constitution is set up for).
In this situation anyone wishing to explore the Kids Count influence or activity is welcome to go running around all 50+partnerships and looking at EACH ONE’s website, annual business entity registration, and tax returns, attempt to correlate this where applicable to HHS direct grants, or state-level funding, and in general figure out what is at least the FEDERAL FUNDING involved, and as distributed according to Annie E. Casey Foundation advice. “Thanks a lot” for having restructured the legislated flow of authority into the private sector and multiplied it, in this case, by looks like 159 organizations — at least for Georgia, and as to this ONE project.
Looking at the GaFCP website, which reads like an on-line bulletin board heavy on the graphics, sidebars, and a flurry of links to ongoing events and promotions, IRONICALLy when it comes to the subject of Taxation (Tax-Exemption being the corollary) and USA History in re: 1913 Establishment of the Income Tax, Federal Reserve, etc. — they are having a conference at JEKYLL ISLAND (!!):
Back to my 2014 post writing:
With the private, family-controlled wealth having remained under private control to become one of the largest foundations in the country (again, through tax exemption privileges), Annie E. Casey is demanding, alongside other such wealthy and tax-exempt foundations, a stronger voice than most individuals will ever have through their local county supervisors, or state legislature, or even Congress (either house), in just how our courts and public institutions are run, and what policies are set in them. http://www.aecf.org/ — colorful and classically designed website shows what projects are this private foundation’s top priorities, at least today: “Advancing Child Welfare and Juvenile Justice for Kids in America“** … ” Promoting economic opportunity for working families” … “Creating Community Change for Kids and Parents…
The issue of Private, or even Public tax-exempt Foundations (however the largest ones seem in private hands) is a major driver of governmental policy. I will move the discussion elsewhere. But, to discuss anything about government policy and practices without comprehending (by seeing it!) and acknowledging the historic influence of private tax-exempt foundations, and from there getting to the primary topic of why are we then still being income-taxed at all if all this tax-exempt wealth exists to drive government away from the representative form into the “roundtable” forms?
QUESTIONS:
- What would this country have looked like if we (and generations earlier) had not consented to be taxed –everyone that can’t figure out to avoid taxation through forming profitable corporations and dumping the otherwise taxable profits into other vehicles called foundations, and/or nonprofits?
- Where is the “we” when the average person comprising the so-called “Us” — has no way to track their own government’s expenditures from the central storehouses out through the distribution system to (a) government and (b) non-government places, and see how much private money is added to the solution to dilute, divert, or change the legislative purposes?
- How many more years of the “we, the public” just not bothering to find out where the taxes are being spent, and how government is funded, and how government distributes its funds? Would you expect to work in, or run, any business where you are completely clueless as to how money is made and spent, and what are the profits?
None of this is “rocket science” to understand. It simply takes a wake-up call to decide to understand, and after that, paying attention and taking some time to look and a few tips on how to look (Please feel free to tell myself and readers more, if you’re aware of any), and from having looked, make a sound judgment about what you simply don’t know — and from there, another sound judgment (assessment) about how hard would it be to grasp the overall situation. AND, from there, a determination — am I going to turn my back on the problem, or get involved and do something about it?
I have (I hope it’s obvious) already made that decision. This morning I even considered whether to set up a call for “interns” in this matter. I could not pay — but learning how to look things up and having solid information to take to others, IS a reward. It is solid ground for reform p absolutely will make for a better, and more responsible citizen. Our entire public and, to be honest, university system is NOT geared to towards teaching all of us to understand government — just to cooperate with it, and prepare for jobs in various industries.
Within this generation (this century), I have seen blood-chilling changes in the justice system, that can trap anyone who gets on the wrong side of it. These courts (and the child support and child welfare/juvenile justice systems that accompany them, the VAST mental health/behavioral health influence) are dangerous to individual and, because of their vast scale, the collective physical and psychological etc. health of this country. We are headed towards slavery and, in my opinion, depopulation (massive) and an unbelievable and completely unacceptable level of control. If one generation who might have been MORE free than the previous, is disconnected from their own children to remind them what that freedom and what a bit of personal privacy looked like, then who will even continue to expect it?
This is a self-help blog: help yourself to this information by reading, clicking, considering. If you copy and paste part, or re-blog it elsewhere, also copy the link and give credit to username “Let’s Get Honest” also, please.
If you think it represents a good thing– and are able — there are DONATE buttons on the right side. I have already paid for it in the form of TIME….and this one. Thanks!
First published February 24, 2014. In July 2014, I added things I felt relevant. As these things go, depending on how much it grows, the added material may be “re-allocated” elsewhere on this blog.
Please feel free to converse on any of the programs, funding, and policies mentioned. Be as specific as possible when discussing any program, or include some links to it so others (like, the 291 followers or people who visit the blog) will have some idea what you’re referring to. I am not interested in how you feel about your ex, or how angry you may be about an individual court professional (who isn’t?). This is a public interest blog, with a goal of educating people in any state of common practices (or structuring of how the courts refer business to court-connected corporations and professionals) which might be also active in other states.
Example: A woman from Georgia not too long ago sounded like she was going through hell. Without specifics, I was able to empathize, was not able to help, and couldn’t see how to verify or validate anything she was saying UNTIL she mentioned an $11 million settlement split between a group that sued the child welfare agency and the attorneys involved. With that name, I realized she was dealing with “Children’s Rights, Inc.” who goes around suing state agencies and forcing them to restructure. The restructuring appears to refer business to one of this group’s subcontracting agencies, a VERY interesting (and long-standing) nonprofit called the National Council on Crime and Delinquency (“NCCD”), with offices in D.C., Madison Wisconsin, and Oakland California. NCCD has several trademarked software programs it’s selling AND it takes international governmental donations.
Doing the specifics can then connect (by leaving specific search terms) to others who may have written on the same organization also.
For example, this blogger (like myself) noticed that UPenn sociologist Richard J. Gelles had joined the “CRI” ranks. I did this incidental to revisiting a 2006 ABA Commission on Domestic Violence and How to Counter Them and noticing that Gelles had written a rebuttal. {Context: Mothers Day 2014, I took this post out of draft on a related blog, as a critical issue to handle this year, and as 2014 posts here reflect.}
A Maryland nonprofit “SAVE” (Stop Abusive and Violent Environments) in Aug. 2010 has a “Special Report” which leads with Gelles trashing of these myths up front. SAVE-Myths-of-ABA-Commission-on-DV-Summary-2 . (….”Professor Gelles, who has devoted his career to the study of family violence, has warned, “Policy and practice based on these factoids and theory might actually be harmful to women, men, children, and the institution of the family.”) …
The point I was making was just what a fine career it can be indeed, studying and publishing expert opinions and viewpoints on family violence, or working for nonprofits offering technical assistance and training — or starting more nonprofits to technically correct course of the prior set. … As opposed to surviving it up close, which can and does cost careers (and sometimes lives), AND tax dollars, and as opposed to stopping it, which would force most of these professionals to find some way to make an honest living that doesn’t involve taking so many federal grants as a lifestyle. THAT’s not being on PhD’s welfare because it comes from a more socially respectable program from the same basic source — the federal grants faucets.
The resume of Richard J. Gelles, Ph.D., Dean of University of Pennsylvania’s School of Social Policy and Practice, just goes to show what a fine career can be made, of course with diligence and presumably plenty of hard work, by majoring in SOCIOLOGY and heading straight into federally-funded grants to study — family violence. Domestic Violence. He got a B.A., M.A. and Ph.D. (1968, 1970, 1973) all in one subject: SOCIOLOGY. Under “Honors,” The American Sociological Association honored him with a Congressional fellowship, which would seem to indicate his input was heard during the critical years of “welfare reform” (which was passed in 1996):
American Sociological Association, 1996 Congressional Fellowship • Legislative Fellow: United States Senate, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee
on Youth Violence • Legislative Fellow: United States House of Representatives, Committee on Ways and
Means, Subcommittee on Human Resources
The 26 page list of accomplishments seems to focus on studying people such as myself (I must be of similar age) who, over a similar period, spent approximately HALF that time surviving domestic violence and seeking to sustain some employment and stability first while under direct battering assaults and intimidation (i.e., in-home), and thereafter, through forced ongoing relationship in the family court venues. I did this during THE key decades this country’s fiscal policy said, while it cannot completely dislodge feminists and women’s rights, it could collaborate with them (pay them off) to dilute the conversation about whether wife-beating is a crime or simply a marital dispute. The last three entries of is where I caught the reference to “Children’s Rights, Inc.” and promptly went to look up their corporate filings and tax returns:
Principal Investigator, John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, The State Juvenile Justice Collaboration Project, 7/01 to 10/03, $400,000.
Co-Principal Investigator, Jessie Ball DuPont Foundation, Improving the Decision- Making Capacity of State and County Child Welfare Agencies. 1/01 to 12/03, $150,000
Principal Investigator, Children’s Rights, Inc. Case Record Reading: New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services. 8/02 to 5/03, $125,432
Children’s Rights, Inc., succumbed to the “more of the same” delusion:
I’m as sick of Children’s Rights, Inc., and its approach to “reforming” child welfare as Richard Wexler is (see “Attn. CR: If you REALLY want to curb abuse in Georgia foster care, stop trying to shovel so many children into it” at the NCCPR Blog), but for some reasons other than just that the states keep shoveling children into care.
My first inkling that something had seriously gone awry at Children’s Rights was when it was announced that Richard Gelles – proud architect of the Adoption and Safe Families Act – had joined their ranks. Thank you very much, Mr. Gelles, for swelling the ranks of foster care with a new category of “legal orphans.” (See my July 15 posting for a discussion of this phenomenon, complete with references and a possible solution).
I wrote about revenue maximization in an article published in 1999 . . . .
Today, most family advocates understand what the “penetration rate” in foster care is, just as they understand how financial gimmicks such as “Targeted Case Management” are used to draw down federal revenue for foster care and juvenile justice from the Medicaid program. In short, they understand that their children have not been removed from their homes for “protection,” rather they have been removed so that their particular state can enrich its coffers at the trough of federal funding.
What sickens me the most about CR’s approach is its continued reliance on the despicable practice of revenue maximization. Indeed, they go so far as to compel the “dysfunctional” (Lowry’s term) agencies that they strive to reform to draw down even more federal dollars so that their bureaucracies can grow even larger than they already are. And, while it is laudable that they are bringing the thorny issue of abuse in foster care to the public’s attention, they pay scant attention to the unnecessary removal of children from their homes, and to revenue maximization’s role in promoting just that.
[Click here to read more, including about Georgia’s “Targeted Case Management” and “Revenue Maximization Initiative,” after which, along comes Children’s Rights, Inc. to demand more of the same:
“…The state has dedicated significant time and financial resources to planning, establishing, and implementing the RevMax Initiative and Centers, which tell us just how important maximizing federal dollars are to our programs,” the Manual explains.
The Manual continues on to discuss Targeted Case Management {{“TCM”}} Services, which will assist individuals in gaining access to and managing needed medical, nutritional, social, educational, housing, and other services…“Each county is given a TCM goal based in caseload size and the percentage of cases that are eligible for Medicaid.” The Manual also explains that: “If we don’t bill for all eligible services, less money is available to the State and for positions.”
What is Georgia’s solution to these problems? “RevMax will be the gatekeeper for court orders. Social Services staff will be required to forward a copy of all court orders and referenced attachments on active children in foster care as of June 30, 2007, to RevMax,” the Plan explains.
“Just by calling for more workers, more training, better academic credentials, advocates serve to maintain the status quo,” Pelton {{professor of social work}} explains, adding that: “Even radical critics have succumbed to the delusion that more of the same, albeit of higher quality, is what we need.”
If anything, the state of Georgia has been doing a fine job of maximizing federal revenue at the expense of families and children. Now, along comes Children’s Rights, Inc., demanding more of the same and writing that into its Consent Decree. It’s a phoney solution that this advocacy group continues to promote time and again.
Thanks.
I write as a survivor (“client/consumer”) first of domestic violence (assault, battery, etc.) married, then inappropriate steering of the case by domestic violence nonprofit providers into almost immediately downgrading the violence and keeping the door open through “joint legal custody’ recommendation for further torture through…. family courts services (mandatory mediation, ex parte consolidation of a restraining order renewal with a father-initiated dissolution and suit for custody which, at the time and time later showed, he didn’t really want anyhow — but this immediately switched venues and court jurisdictions, eventually resulting in the elimination of child support for both our children before either of them turned 16, after first having run up a significant arrears, while they lived with me), and I’ve seen how this was done, and where it goes. Public policy says fatherlessness is bad. If that doesn’t happen naturally individual circumstances, it can be made to by a variety of means and tools.
Not all of these tools reside within the courthouse — that’s what I wish others to become more aware of them. And some of them are “very big sticks,” which can be wielded against the heretics. Other very big sticks are wielded previously in the name of protection from violence. Between both of them, it would be best described as a cattle drive. By raising awareness of BOTH of these (and a few more), I intend for more people to be less sheeplike and avoid the herds being driven into very bad places individually…
And to start raising consciousness about in just how many ways the public (at large) has consented to letting others drive their business and private lives by giving them access to our work energies and wealth, I’m talking, through taxes. That is where (bottom line) these several years of writing and lookups led me to. Our government has too much weight to throw around, and it is clobbering entire communities with that weight, while naming program after funded program “Community.” It is a natural consequence of conceding ANYHING to bullies (or paying off under duress) that that bully, or that extortionist, is going to enjoy the situation and want more, while telling the target, “this is for your own good,” and that target knows intimately what may happen if they decide not to comply.
The difference here is that, unlike how prostitutes will know, or at least has a very clear idea of, his or her pimp (or at least enforcer/collector), here, in these matters, it’s so large in scale and has been set up over time (decades), we do not really properly know. It’s being done over time, done other places, done by other means, and often, done to others. We have been conditioned to submit, or else, and to police ourselves into this submission, for our own personal comfort and belief in a very unjust system.
To correct this imbalance, the balance of power has to change, and that requires people to communicate across their policy-created sectors of information, and find the common ground, where there is some. I acknowledge many of these sectors and divides are also legitimate, and there for legitimate causes — but I still say, the closest common language we MIGHT be able to speak is that of commerce, and economics. These are not neutral areas when assessing their relative importances to one group, or another — BUT….the benefit is, their language is the language of facts, math (numbers) and a form of measuring whether or not specific groups are: A. telling the truth, or B. lying, when they identify themselves and their programs. This language also lets us get multiple snapshots, and some chronology on individual groups over time, most importantly — are they taking public funding or not and, if a corporation, is the door between civil servant and private corporate board member revolving fast, or are they simultaneously claiming to represent the public welfare, while sitting on a corporate board which, by definition, is responsible to mind the corporate profits. FYI, corporations aren’t formed to LOSE money and shrink — unless that’s the intention of a diversified set of owners. They are made to profit (bring profits to) their owners.
Thinking we are all on the same page as citizens of one country is simply a fallacy. We are not. Government, itself a form of incorporation (backed by the military, including the power to appropriate lands and to enslave) to start with, and entered into “for mutual benefit.” This includes the USA. And as with any corporation, at any point in time it makes sense to examine, “benefit whom?.” And the language to do that is going to be economic, ownership of that which produces profits. Period.
I also write being familiar with others who have (likewise) been forced to consume yet more services, and I have been consistently networking (phone, on-line, follow-up emails, sometimes in person), and blogging. And I’ve been in and seeing this system close-up and by looking at its basic elements, nationwide now for now as long as some (many) of the experts claim their expertise. At some point I found out where the loopholes and trick junctures were (something we are not supposed to find out til it’s too late…) , and have been sounding the alerts ever since.
Where I probably differ is the level of curiosity, and the genuine concern others at least have a chance to learn what I learned through school of hard knocks in marriage following another the “school of hard knocks” in the courts, including their origins (why aren’t more people more curious about this?) and, as they continue to morph and be restructured to this day, where it seems to have come from and where it’s heading, too. These ARE “problem-solving courts” and in that worldview, guess who the “problem” is? So, what is the eventual intended solution to the “problem” of independent and protesting adults to a capricious and no-due-process (but out-come based) court system?
I have a sense of just how little is still known about the setup (origins, history) and propagation of family courts, and an awareness of just how far from the apparent source, some of the problems lie.
And from what I have read, that’s ignorance is no accident. Even within the last generation, or last dozen years, efforts to redirect conversation and attention away from several of the largest “elephants in the room,” which I insist on discussing anyway, can be documented. But to see it takes an attention span beyond the latest news, or one’s latest friend’s custody battle’s news. It takes developing a bit of vocabulary, beyond the usual terms and from an economic, governmental and corporate, scope, history and structure of the courts viewpoint. “A Different Kind of Attention Leads to Sound Judgment.” It’s possible to evaluate sources of information and head towards the more relevant and away from the less — but not until the scope is seen better.
Is all that worth knowing? Well, what’s at stake here? Future generations…. the integrity of the courts … is that something to leave to others, to fate, to chance, to fancy…. (?).
It’s fashionable (common practice) to limit conversations about the family courts to two or three key themes at a time, and stake some ground pro- or anti (for example, “parental alienation,” or “Mothers'” rights vs. father’s rights, etc). Examples: PMA
OR, to just jumble them up together without a sort, select or labeling process EVER kicking in, just indiscriminately providing “helpful information” and links, making no distinction between them, and leading to little critical understanding, in a field which is (a) entrenched and (b) expanding rapidly.
So, there are many things. At some point there has to be a “family court 101” from a users’ and funders’ point of view. This blog is a start.
For example of “Jumbled Up,” in this blog (<=<=hover cursor, or see list of links at far bottom right of that blog). I’ve communicated with the blogger several times about it, and given up — there is a refusal to use the “sort and select” process, setting up lists of links alphabetical and “all over the place.” There was a decision not to decide, and that’s damaging to people for whom time really matters.
As a survivor of domestic violence and family courts, I know what it’s like to be scouring the internet, reading books, reading the law, reading court rules, and burning up the phone lines (often leading in circles) seeing how the local nonprofit agencies responded, for information they do not reveal, do not offer, and people at the intake or service level just may not know, either. I know what it’s like to just not understand the basic operating principles of the courts and federal grants networks, yet these very networks are making a fine livelihood off exactly that. They arenot going to voluntarily to show their hands. So, instead, I have been showing where to look, and how to call some of the bluffs.
This practice doesn’t really educate, and doesn’t equip anyone to deal with the courts: it doesn’t explain the context. The narration with links to evidence, does, which may be why I get occasional feedback from a mother, in particular, that this blog helped her not lose her mind through trauma, and confusion, after showing expecting due process, and instead getting devastated, and losing contact with her own children, with no valid or sensible explanation why. There is a very valid reason why — it’s profitable to some, not just “my ex” or the local judge.
So here, I just start conversing about several themes I have spent (often) years investigating, and have because of that investigation come to understand are key to the context. I’m not doing presentations, seminars, conferences, etc. there are including key links to more information and presumably you are an adult and can read, if you want to see and not just sit and be told by some stranger. The narrative starts connecting the parts… It’s interesting and it’s relevant to all of us. I hope you take a look!
A close look at the chronology and the wider context shows “intelligent design” of many system factors, and strategizing to implement that plan over the years. We can look at just one or two elements, however why do that? when the system is intended, by its designers, to produce specific outcomes? Overall, I find the unifying element is the profit motive — the outcome of this designed systems moves funding through various infrastructures, blending them together (public and private) over time to accumulate assets and set up professions.
GET AN OVERVIEW, DON’T DROWN IN THE DETAILS: Anyone who dives into any of my posts (like those who are drop-kicked into custody hearings involving “high-conflict” or violent or simply cold, calculating and possibly sociopathic others are also often overwhelmed) may be deluged with details of distressing data about how far downstream we ARE in the complete elimination of representative government, by jurisdiction to be replaced by the [globally aligned] corporate administrative model, centralized and with an involuntarily subscribing membership being the population of the United States of America, segmented as we intentionally and truly are by caste in relationship to how we do business, and with whom.
It’s time to start swimming and knowing which currents are flowing which way. I had to. I know others can, but you have to want to understand – not just want to win. CROSS-JURISDICTION, PRIVATELY CONFERENCED, NONPROFIT TRADE ASSOCIATIONS: Key to this model is strategizing, rehearsing, and planning it across the political jurisdiction lines and in “roundtables,” commissions, councils, task forces, and let’s not forget — CONFERENCES — without proper public participation. That’s done, my friends, usually through nonprofit trade associations with civil servants [judges, child support agency directors, family court services directors, sometimes even state attorney generals, etc. on the corporate board. Funding to nonprofits is harder — a real pain in the neck — to track. But it still can be at least looked at.
FAMILY COURTS ARE, “WORRISOME,” BUT PROBABLY THE LEAST OF OUR WORRIES: The family courts are only a part of the [globally aligned] corporate administrative model in lieu of government of, by, or for any of US as a true “US.” But family courts (along with probate courts), are definitely a critical part (inter)nationally. WHY? because they affect so many – -and can overnight organize/re-structure all primary relationships of parents, children, with each other and with the local community. And they can and do disrupt and transfer wealth from household to household, or from any household to the state, in a flash.
WHY I PRACTICE INFORMATION OVERLOAD — LIFE IS INFORMATION OVERLOAD, BUT ITS BASIC PROCESSES AND PRINCIPLES, ARE NOT TO COMPLEX TO UNDERSTAND WELL ENOUGH TO LIVE and MAKE A DECISION. IF I DIDN’T REFER TO OUTSIDE CONTEXT IN A TYPICAL POSTS, I’D BE ENGAGED IN CENSORSHIP. THE CONTEXT ALWAYS MATTERS ,AND IN THE FAMILY COURT MATTERS, WE NEED TO BECOME AWARE OF THE LARGER, AND THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT. I KNOW NO ONE IS GOING TO READ THE WHOLE BLOG, SO INCLUDE REFERENCES TO CONTEXT, IN ALMOST EVERY POST.
@!@ LEARN TO SORT AND SELECT AND FIGURE OUT QUICKLY, IN ANY SCENARIO, WHAT IS THE BASIC OPERATING PRINCIPLE: I AM LOOKING FOR LEADERS, AND FOR PEOPLE TO MAKE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES INT HE STATUS QUO — FOCUSING ON THE FAMILY COURTS, WHICH HAVE THE CAPACITY TO DISRUPT AND DESTROY ANY HOUSEHOLD, OR ANY COMMUNITY, FOR A DECADE AT A TIME (ONE GENERATION AT A TIME).
[[“@!@” is just a formatting tag for the next time wordpress (again) strips all the paragraph returns out, so I can put them back in again, in html mode….sorry about the visual inconvenience….]]
@!@ So yes, I realize my writing style is to “overload” information, with links, and then expect people to catch on. Some are, but not without actually reading some of the posts, and clicking on those links, using a few of the many lookup tools also posted.
@!@ ARE YOU: Too Busy? Not motivated to look long enough? You want a short, fast, FAQs page which you can read, and then not have to validate, or invalidate, consider?
@!@ ARE YOU: still in the habit of believing that, the more people “like” or re-blog something, the more relevant and truthful it is? (Haven’t learned about who funds public media campaigns yet or WHY?). If so, I’m so sorry — where did you get this belief that the better the PR (advertising, media campaigns), the more truthful it is?
@!@ Are we not yet aware that our own government has invested federal welfare funds diverted from, welfare, into PR campaigns to its own population? And that under the premise that what’s best for us all [[whether to go to war, to go to work, or to stay married when it’s not in ours, or what is the hierarchical relationship to be maintained between men and women, nationwide]] is to be unified around mass-indoctrination programs we ourselves fund simply by the act of going to work, or related acts, of buying things that are taxed? This may help.I know the FAQs, could list from 5 to 10 of them in any situation (often do in public conversations) and occasionally write them up. However, that’s not the purpose of this blog. @!@ The purpose is that you see enough to understand how vital it is to “Look and See.” That what you see sooner or later grabs your attention; that your attention span increases on these matters; that your capacity to absorb truth (even if it’s distressing or negative, if it’s still truth, that alone is healing).
@!@ It’s the Looking and Seeing that may produce change — not my authoritative, jazzy (which it isn’t), socially acceptable and top of the popularity sites (which it also isn’t), and visually creative (ditto) trademarked (nope) material which will draw thousands of shallow, temporary and uncommitted “likes” and no personal change.
@!@ I am looking for others who see what I have seen –and asking, what they plan to do about it? If the answer is, “nothing” and that answer is universal and consistent enough, then MY response will (and should) be, after a specific time, “fine! Then go save yourself, protect your assets, kids, future, status quo — and I will drop this, and with a clean conscience, adopt a selfish, non-reporting lifestyle with the one goal — profits to counter dependency on this tax system, and probably in a country NOT known for having the world’s largest per-capita prison population.
@!@ However, presently (2014) people from a few different states have responded, I am in touch with them, and we are in touch with members of Congress, or candidates for mid-term elections. So I’m still blogging and messing with this blog to categorize, make it a little more accessible, and adding as I find insight and material, or seeking better ways to communicate it.
@!@ Sometimes material has to just stay out there (on the web) long enough to make SOME difference, like enzymes, catalyzing digestion of (here, information/ideas) consumed, and changing the chemical composition of understanding. For more “opinion” on moving this Widget to Post status (without changing it — it’s nearly identical to the one on the far bottom of the right sidebar) — see below it. The idea is, read, scan for subject matter, click on links at will. This is more like a “course overview” with samples, than a pretense at the whole.Thanks.
[First post-publication/addition:] OK, for people who need more LISTS, here’s a list 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10, 11 — Top Ten Plus OneSticky Posts & Abstracts. Just realize my mind doesn’t work in perhaps traditional ways, and is thinking instead of layering depth, seeking understanding. Some of the quest to really understand comes from “once burnt, twice shy”* Anyhow: On November 24, 2013, I managed to do some “Top Ten Posts, Plus One, of nearly 600 published, Covering Basic Issues (+ abstracts)” posts. That’s a list of them (at the time) and some short abstracts underneath. I stay on a learning curve, so consider these a snapshot in time, though. Inside the next box, an intro and a reminder that in this blog, each new posts comes underneath however many ones are “stuck” to the top of the blog. So get used to that scroll bar, cursor-down, whatever works on your internet device. My posts aren’t really set for reading on a mobile phone, but I know some people who do anyway.
[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.
(**only neither once burnt, nor twice shy, does justice to JUST HOW MUCH sense of betrayal applies when one delivers offspring for a weekly, court-ordered exchange in SOME shreds of hope the system means something, to just not see them again, essentially, for any major holiday, and in some cases, for years. If there’d been some legitimate stated cause (and any proof of it), that’d be one manner. But, to date, no proof in this system = “So what! Who cares?” @!@ I didn’t, however, understand WHY it (the system) “doesn’t care” until I understood some of the history, fauna & flora (i.e., ,the push to include psychologists in the court process) and the intentional hybrid jurisdiction grab, i.e., into “therapeutic jurisprudence” as a desired judiciary value, at least as funded by one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical company’s philanthropic foundation (i.e., from Johnson & Johnson, to Robert Wood Johnson Foundation sponsoring the Unified Family Courts [subject matter jurisdiction grabbing] model. See recent posts.) @!@ Personally speaking, the shock factor is continuous and takes work to overcome, without just becoming desensitized. I will also testify — at a certain point, it just never gets better. That has been my experience, whether trying, or not trying, to make a significant difference in the individual situation. But at least, once I got the “rich people fund problem-solving for problems their grandchildren have, possibly in part because they hadn’t had to work a day in their lives (thanks to the family trust), or in part because they abuse, falsely imprison, abandon, and betray their own as well, resulting in issues like: substance abuse, diabetes, etc.” it made a lot more sense why we, too, should ALL have to deal with their various ideologies, idiosyncrasies, and shared visions of global utopia, and sacrifice our legal and civil rights to that vision. [See posts on the topic, for that to make a little more sense]
|
While I’m here: the Domestic Violence Trust Fund: $7,109,685.
Interesting, for sure…
there was also a statement that in 2005, Florida passed a law that All unallocated General Fund revenues [i.e., profits!] were considered “Working Capital Trust Fund” That shows as $74+ million. However, the feds added $34+ million to it, making more than $109 million. That’s for 2010-2011 only. So, like, sure, yeah — state governments, the federal government is broke. TIGHTEN YOUR BELTS, SHOULDER THE LOAD…. Here’s the same document, 2013 version. This Working Capital Fund now has a number (“2792”), and is holding: WORKING CAPITAL TRUST FUND 2792 $96,972,452 [state] + $62,234,538 [fed] = $159,206,990[totl]. Total holdings in all trust funds: Over $45 billion. And that’s just the trust funds…. [Again this is just “table talk” saying, think about it; actual documentation – would take more work and more official sources]
QUESTION:How many child support payments could be delivered on time and in full IF the interest from that or other funds was used, instead of pretending to the parents that a direct payment from Dad is where the direct payment to Mom (or vice versa) actually comes from, and not talking about the collective stash and its interest earnings?
Article: The “blame it on the new computer database/switchover” excuse. “When questioned last year by federal regulators, the Department of Revenue blamed the mounting sums of undistributed support on missing information, incorrect addresses and errors that occurred while state child-support offices have been switching to a new computer system. In many cases, support payments fell through the cracks. ” I’ll bet this can be stopped. But not alone, and not without organization, and documentation! Any ideas how??
| BUT WHO PAYS and WHO PROFITS in the LONG RUN??? Sound familiar? “Baa,….baa…. just step on to this nice boxcar here, take a survey, come to our classes, it’s for your own family’s good… Men to the left, women to the right, (Children in the Middle**) Blacks to the left, Hispanics over here, whites over there…. Are you religious? Then here’s your version. Faith leader? Want to take our train-the-trainers certification for your flock?” [[**Actually “Children in the Middle” is diff’t pew, same church/business [running people through classes, these, divorce or transition-related] – out of Texas. Hover cursor to see the corporation/trademark/ class trail. The designer of the Children in the Middle class Mr. Craig was a social worker, then developed the class in 1998, in 1999 launched his private corporation/s and by 2003 was contracting with social service agencies again to run people through the classes. Such a field for a niche-sensitive entrepreneur]. Hover cursor to see that his fields of practice match PRECISELY the professional niches originally pushed, lobbied for, and where possible, legislated into existence [there’s an art and a system to that process…]]byAFCC, which he probably also is…. |
There’s been a real “feeding frenzy” in this type of programming. WHY?? In part, see “sheep” section, above. But also, courts can order participation. Social Services outlets can push classes to TANF (welfare) recipients [22pg. read]. [hover cursor] Counties can pay. Harvard Kennedy School “Poverty Scholars [Kathryn Edin, see also Oklahoma Marriage Initiative link, just previous]” have made prosperous careers out of talking about it…. National Poverty Centers can pay people generation after generation to write up the “Implementation Results.”Also, religious (non-990s-filing exempt 501(c)3s) and their other little-critter rapidly reproducing 501(c)3s under their roof can advertise, persuade, recruit evangelize for Sunday morning marriage (etc.) participants* (and volunteers, or workshop leaders who already are primed to think that running businesses for their leaders and marketing the products, is actually a “ministry”….
*WMR being run out of Peacemakers which is run out of TrinityChurch.tv (Miami), which shows already $8 million of HHS grants, mostly in this category: “Trinity Church offers a transformational relationship course entitled, “Within My Reach” on Sunday mornings at 10:30a.m. … Each couple requesting marriage/couples counseling will be required to take the “Within My Reach” class concurrently, as part of their relationship improvement plan. For an appointment, please call [so and so] at (786) [a phone#]… Funded by Trinity Church and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families.
For example, it’s no longer politically correct (and might be political suicide) to admit one admired Hitler’s tactics, essentially still believes in eugenics, and is pushing for breeding-control policies to protect the “superior” race even if one still does. Quoting “Paul Popenoe” (see the link, notice Human Betterment Foundation, Pasadena, CA) on “The German Sterilization Law” (1934)) would be too obvious. Notice the page references influence of “E. Fisher” on Hitler. Eugen Fischer practiced guess when and where[1927-1942, Berlin] and on guess who [earlier, in Africa] (hover cursor, &/or scroll down or search the name)? But repeatedly quoting his son, DAVID Popenoe, of Rutgers, The National Marriage Project founded 1997, apparently goes down a little easier on the public, in this American Designer Family domestic breeding control program called “Healthy Marriages, Responsible Fatherhood,” and all the PR that goes with it. Popenoe was chairman of his father’s Institute, sociologist and behavioral sciences dean at Rutgers, where he worked for 45 years…. [A colleague Judith Stacey, misquoted by him in the New Yorker, responded in 1993 article, “Good Riddance to “The Family” a Response to David Popenoe” [see link for cites] said she’s been doing moonlight shift responding to his polemics on air and in newsprint ever since. And again, that “family” is NOT an institution, but “an ideological, symbolic construct {{i.e., people Constructed it that has a history and a politics.” This was published by ANOTHER group, the National Council on Family Relations dating to 1938 that despite Judith Stacey, above, has played a long and out-sized role in pushing “fatherhood” also, and doing it in realms where others like myself are doing moonlight AND overtime shifts responding, including how this has impoverished us and our offspring. …Popenoe quoted in a Catholic Education Resource Center… Who’s going to pay for the PR? Those who approve of such programs, and of course the population to be studied controlled — through their taxes, collected up front. See history..
Bad people die. But their bad ideas don’t; they simply change form and continue, carried forward (or is it “Verwoerd“? see South African (as opposed to German SouthWestAfrican) apartheid..Verwoerd studied under Fischer, then rose to power (Prime Minister 1958 til assassinated in 1966) in “Republic of South Africa.” Here’s from a 5/31/1966 patriotic speech, given 5 yrs into this republic and at Praetoria:
“This is a White republic, ruled by the white man, part of the white domain of the world, but with full understanding for the ambitions and objectives of the Black man of Africa within our own midst, our closest neighbours and those farther afield. … When viewed in terms of space, the White man’s domain in the world is fairly small; a tip of the great Asian-European Continent, Australia, New Zealand, great parts of the Americas, and this tip of the continent of Africa which is the anchor too of Western civilization. The White man and all that he has created for humanity through the past ages, is of incalculable importance for civilization and for history, and not only for history that has passed. He, and the spirit with which he is endowed, the characteristics which led him to this day and will in the future provide his inspiration, will always be needed where order and peace and progress are desired.“
Interesting how “the White man” did all this alone with his creative spirit — not even one single reference to anyone bearing his babies. Linguistically, women, even wives (mistresses, daughters, sisters, aunts) don’t exist in that world, except as white-man carriers?? [in speech: white man=6x, black man=1x, “woman” — not at all. “Women” of any color make a closing appearance for having bled to death, with men. “The blood of brave men and women has drenched our earth.” 1966!!! A few months later, he was assassinated (2nd attempt). Brief Account from “Africa-Crime” site: Verwoerd, born 1901, in Amsterdam, got his start as guess what: Professor of Applied Psychology and Sociology. By 1936 was joining professors in preventing Jewish refugees from being accepted into the country, and 1937 began editing Johannesburg’s “Die Transvaler” (The National Party paper). Incidentally, also the son of a Dutch Reformed evangelist, [fine print from “sahistory.org.za”]… attended a church school and High School for Boys, being very smart, got a scholarship to Oxford, but instead chose to study psychology, in Germany. And sociology in America. Hover cursor on that link for his other proclivities, including a lot of welfare (for poor whites, that is) work and committees. What a “real nice guy.” (Jews were resented as competition for professional positions for Afrikaners). Also at same link] to push for a Republic, engaged in election-time tricks: lowering voting age for whites, ignoring a 2/3rds rule for any constitutional change, etc. So, add real nice guy PAUL Popenoe (1888-1979), early practitioner of Marriage Counseling, [after developing expertise in Date Growing, New World and Old, why not try humans?] and the Human Betterment Foundation (1928-1942, see who-all was involved) and you get things like “Sterilization for Human Betterment: A Summary of Results of 6,000 Operations in California, 1909-1929,” as practiced in the state psychiatric hospitals. Add to this the American Institute of Family Relations (Los Angeles, 1930), for roughly the same purposes — “Along with his advocacy of sterilization programs, Popenoe was also interested in using the principles of German and Austrian marriage-consultation services for eugenic purposes. Aghast at the divorce rate in US society, Popenoe came to the conclusion that “unfit” families would reproduce out of wedlock, but truly “fit” families would need to be married to reproduce. With financial help from Gosney, he opened the American Institute of Family Relations in Los Angeles in 1930. The Institute was described in 1960 as “the world’s largest and best known marriage-counseling center” with a staff of seventy.[3]” and you are ALMOST up to 1939, the first Conciliation Law passed in family courts. IN CALIFORNIA. Somehow the liberal progressive and agnostic agencies forget to tell others the ramification of this, but religious groups absolutely understood, clearly. “>Defending Our Father’s House” in Michigan (bookmark this one, these guys talk in military terms in the “Defense of Holy Matrimony”!). Proposed Strategic Line of Defense outlined includes forcing all Christian couples out of the courts and into church-sponsored reconciliation, AND saturating the “Community” so every one else is forced also into conciliation; eliminating no-fault divorce, replaceable with “responsible spouse” laws, and in general quoting the Pope as to why.
As to Verwoerd and friends, the same fields of applied psychology and sociology mark and saturate our governments today, as do many similar IDEAS, Obama or no Obama.
[FYI, I’ve also been “assets-stripped” in this process, one reason this button keeps showing up. Still working on the situation. I also know from networking how hard it is for people who are still in the courts to communicate, get up to speed in their basic FAQs from a side that represents their — not just the social services, practitioners, PsyD’s, PhDs, Esq’s and retired public civil servants’ — point of view, or interests.
People who have seen and done their lookups, taking care to keep it diverse (jurisdiction), well-labeled (it is Corp, Gov’t or Hybrid?), have done enough LOOKups, understand that money is made in the trainings and laundered (and/or lost) through fake, dissolved, or multiple-personality corporate names (you’d be shocked!!), and a few more things, such as what a accidental-on-purpose lousy database, or a deliberately-dual-system database (when it comes to court records, that is) means, should be able to real off a documented and NOT second-hand rap, or rant — of the basic elements here, and then say “Do This! with us!” and not need to be next to a guru to defend a point without lapsing into cause-based jargon.
It’s NOT the specific systems only, but how they inter-relate.
So consider yourself warned. Listen to people who’ve dealt with these levels of suffering, resisting or confronting abuse, and understanding the tactics in miniature, within the family or court systems! These are the politics and practices of slavery and exploitation. ARBITRARY (not natural exertion or stresses in pursuit of any worthy cause) and Inconsistently applied suffering and shaming/degrading/labeling is to teach a lesson on Who rules; Who’s the Boss; constantly negotiating for time (to strengthen the dominant position) is ALWAYS a tactic.
This mindset carries forth throughout the 1970s, 80s, and 1990s into welfare reform law — ignoring the: racism, control of assets, organized crime elements — and insisting as a (religious mantra?) that NO, it’s the breakdown of the family which is really central.
Quoting “Robert O. Blood Jr.” (see pedigree and wife’s), or Donald M. Wolfe [Experiential Learning Theory, Applied Social Science], the detached commentary on “Matriarchy” has left a bloody legacy decades later, and encouraged yet more profiling and labeling of human beings as objects of PhD’s professional study and discourse.
Keeping the “Focus on the Family” [“Family Impact Seminars” — see the funders in fine print?] means less focus on (“Let Me Count the Ways”) the Shell Game (grants fraud, misappropriation, lost money, concealed assets, etc.). Divide and Conquer, get disempowered minority men to turn on even more disempowered minority women. If that works, which it has, expand and apply to all people, all income levels. Social Security Act (Titles IV-A, IV-D, etc.), in successive versions, did exactly this. As some are now reporting.
Women with children who file for protection are coached to, and often will need to, seek TEMPORARY help with food stamps or cash aid– which putting them on the radar (if they weren’t previously) then triggers (unless they know to opt out) a child support case. The federal Office of Child Support Enforcement [HHS/OCSE] distributing Social Security Act Title IV-D Congressionally appropriated funds has been re-tooled as a weapon, an incentive [Fed to State payments, Complex formulas averaging the pool of potential families], and Sec. 469B, “Grants to States FOR Access and Visitation PROGRAMS” to support all kinds of businesses to export judicial procedures into private hands (mediation, supervised visitation, parent education, etc.) small and as to at least child support enforcement, large (Maximus settles $30.5 million Medicaid fraud case 2007 and its EEOC and other lawsuits for mistreating their own employees!. However (Aug 2013) this disreputable corporation, whose main customer is governments, still expects to add $150 million of business as a result of the Affordable Care Act, complicating tracking of government expenses; “fatherhood practitioners”, and as leverage to keep this custody game going long after it would probably otherwise subside.
(If you want to help stopping that redirect/diversion of public moneys to preach at an catalogue (all of us, but starting with the poor, like I said, I’m working on repeated FAQs summaries, Table of Contents, and could stand to upgrade the platform. It’s mostly my conscience that’s keeping the forward drive).
It needs to be shut down or boycotted. Our Poverty or Distress fuels others research institutes and endless Webinars. Actually ending it, or domestic violence or child abuse, is absolutely off the table. Discussing it, is a career path. Any and all ridiculous ideas will be funded. APPARENTLY, direct help to the newly created poor is contingent on their submitting to scrutiny and write-ups. They are NOT true “stakeholders” in this discussion and their feedback is not welcome in academic conferences (one reason those conferences usually aren’t held at the street level reality of the same people).
That’s why I publish here, and consider this class of individuals a species to be studied (fair’s fair, right?) in their natural habitat and historic context, including WHO FEEDS THE PROFESSIONS? Again, let’s remember approximately where it began — possibly at Shark Island and thereabouts? What was to be expanded upon all populations for better control, is generally speaking means-tested on Africans, or here, African-Americans (PREP, Inc. wasn’t but I’m sure it was on the map to get a version based on middle-class white beliefs about patriarchy and family into the mainstream welfare population.
PRWORA perfectly set the stage for this and like I keep saying — these people are not “dumb,” and they are determined. Let’s quit funding this, resist mass-indoctrination conditioned behavior (just do something DIFFERENT!) insist that budget =/= assets, and force government to quit concealing its holdings, and through organized non-cooperation, insist that the astronomical for-profit enterprise called governing, either (as Walter Burien keeps recommending, and Clint Richardson keeps explaining (4/21/2013) for those of us not so fast on the uptake, and Carl Hermann, Harvard.edu, economics (7/12/2012) also keeps documenting, not to mention my drops in the same bucket (my “other” blog) either put the layperson as beneficiary (not subject matter and sheep-to-be-fleeced regularly, bred regularly, farmed out, and eventually eaten) — or reduce the profit margin to something more reasonable.
- Why the expansion? Because it’s profitable! for those involved in the products and professions it’s been sponsoring, and sometimes creating which parents can be forced to consume, and taxpayers or people filing anything with the court, can be funding unawares, when parts of their filings fees are diverted to a cause. Our state governments, particularly family court services, website have become not much better than a professional, official-looking marketplace.
- The system has, on examination, obviously has more accountability holes than a sieve. Things [millions of dollars] fall through the cracks between government financing at several different levels (which most of the public doesn’t follow closely, or know how to) and nonprofit service providers dealing with the courts (whose corporate records, at secretary of state level, charitable trust filings at state charitable trust registries, IRS legitimacy (or not) in another place, and tax returns, if any, somewhere else), not to mention what also happens — money being deposited into defunct organizations, or organizations that never bothered to incorporate as by law, they ought to. Sometimes, right out of the courthouse. It’s been reported, not as much as it should be, but it can also be seen.
- What’s more, the virtual “vertical monopoly” formed between public officials (as high as, for example, the California Judicial Council, presides over the largest court system in the country) and those sitting on private boards or running businesses that the public MUST (by legislation at the state level) consume every time they twitch in the direction of a child custody visitation or modification, divorce, etc. Certain trade associations’ memberships know to get on those boards and protect those interests. I’m thinking particularly of “supervised visitation” and “guardian ad litem” matters, but before then ,and it would seem initially years ago, the thing to push was mandatory mediation for everyone who wanted (1970ff for sure) an “irreconcilable differences” or “no-fault” divorce.
- Parents who will not consume these categories of forced services can be held in contempt, or simply bye-bye your kids– no court hearing. (I was faced with this when my children were stolen overnight, too). Or, they can be ordered into coordination type conferences, after having been labeled “high-conflict” because, sometimes, they are simply sticking up for what’s rights, or their rights.
- Behind much of this is the giant in the room — federal welfare funding, through “HHS” (the largest? grant-making agency of them all), and behind that, the United States Congress appropriating each year money to pour into those holes, and into propaganda justifying new profession after new profession, thus setting the newly solvent (in some cases) “practitioners” (cf. “fatherhood practitioners”) in a conflict of interest against the public, who may have had better use for their dollars, but being taxed, doesn’t have complete say in such things.
- However of course there’s also US Department of Justice Funding (particularly when it comes to the Office of Violence Against Women, i.e., but also regarding Juvenile court matters.
- And then there’s the private funding of the nonprofits contracting with the courts, and the trade associations, etc.
Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History 
Great work!
Please contact me 570 877 2319.
Bruce Levine
February 24, 2014 at 3:55 pm