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

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

What does Custody-Switching REALLY have to do with Unsound Psychological Theory? (Not much, actually)

with 4 comments

BLOGGER note:  I determined to start posting “fast and furious” which may mean, less developmentally edited.  So, you may see in this one what a copyeditor or developmental editor would clearly mark as two or three different “starts” to the post.  That is indeed what happened.  You may also notice not completely consistent styles for quotes (though I tried to mark off the different sections).  I am sacrificing these technical issues for quantity of publication on material already looked up.  I may (or, may not) come back and clean it up, add a full list of “tags.”  I often tweak published posts when possible (out of desire to avoid humiliation if nothing else, at the format, or wording).      BUT, this is still good material, so out it goes.  Also — thanks to some recent paypal contributions through my Donate Button, much appreciated.  They are rare, generally speaking….and to reiterate, I am not a 501©3.

FYI, I am also in significantly pressured litigation involving my immediate future (I’ll leave it at that description).  I just came from ANOTHER (local) court venue yesterday, and now have another level of understanding of what “theater” means.  I had the facts, I even complied with the rules of court; the plaintiff didn’t have a cause of action, proven standing, the lawsuit was obviously retaliatory for exercising known rights, and I was up “pro se” and under conditions of ridiculous duress (documented in my Answer) against two lawyers, ONE of who I learned in this process was a frequent-flyer in this jurisdiction and after a “rout” (which was clearly expected) expressed (his) real feelings about women like me, and about the class I represented in the present case.  A reference to the Salem witch trials (process of trying the witches) was made.  The other one (the real motive behind the  lawsuit and not the “fake plaintiff” labeling), being much younger, represents literally decades more of this self-assured crooked behavior being financially rewarded without objection from anyone wearing a black robe.

On the bright side, I heard (though haven’t seen the print yet) that Sandra Grazzini-Rucki was just released from jail.   Not from having to face a felony trial in the near future — but at least she’s been de-incarcerated.  GOOD.

This post highlights the a footnoted portion of a recent post, published January 23: 2016 More Business As Usual in MN? (Criminalizing, Terrorizing, Jailing Mothers) which picked up on some passing language in a related Carver County Corruption post which, unfortunately (in my opinion) was circulated, it says, to 150 legislators.

Please take into consideration the next few paragraphs.

I know they may have long sentences and what may appear to be “far-off” topics.  However, you are hearing from an individual (myself) who has been studying and writing on this for SIX YEARS now, diligently, while also, experientially, dealing long-term with many of the institutions and issues involved over time:  domestic violence, family courts, custody/visitation / child support issues, overnight switch of care-taking parent, abrupt cutoff of contact with one’s own children, corollary (and predictable) impoverishment through ongoing court litigation, stress (off the charts, throughout), forced dealings with social service organizations, familiarity with the wild-goose-chase of 800#s people approaching any public institution for help tend to get, usually coming up empty where actual help is concerned.

I’ll bet several of those legislators, know a lot more about why custody-switching takes place (and under which programs) than the well-intentioned authors.  There is no bliss, nor do I see any purpose, in continuing to ignore how power is consolidated in and around government in an urgent focus to obtain press coverage of specific, local, or even county or state-level policies.  As a country, we have been (I eventually learned) at least 100 years, ALL of us (all citizens, all taxpayers, and most residents, citizens or not) living and functioning in a land where public/private partnerships are the political clout.  Public signifying “Government Entity” and Private signifying “NOT government entity.”  I did not always know this — I deduced it after about a year of delving into the realm of non-profit organizations strategically coordinated to co-opt the judicial process.  

The Private “NOT government entity” functions in both tax-paying (corporate) and NOT tax-paying (corporate) forms.  I’m over-simplifying that, obviously (government entities pay FICA, social security, etc. — but they do NOT pay the corporate taxes because, as entities, because they themselves are receiving payments collected by the IRS or (depending on the level of government, if federal, state, local, special district, or multi-district, i.e., Joint Powers Authority, etc.)

Legislators, already by  definition in positions of power, are more likely to be aware how  financial power circulates among from public (federal to state to county, or metro regions or “joint power authorities” etc.) to, and in combination with private (for-profit/nonprofit corporations and associations) and in and through academic centers at universities, and all that ….. The University of Minnesota is, I hear, the 9th largest research institution in the nation and is essentially part of government.

As to domestic violence issues, a center at its School of Social Welfare called “Institute on Domestic Violence in the African American Community” has several people on its steering committee, including Oliver Williams, PhD (who has published alongside Jeffrey Edleson, PhD** who has moved from UMN to UCBerkeley, where he is Dean of School of Social Welfare) as well as Johnny Rice II, M.S.,

Minnesotans, Did You Know About IDVAAC and MNCAVA?  And, “the Jeffrey Edleson” Connection, how Men’s Groups & Father’s Rights (federally supported) Continue to Influence DV Policy?  And how, separately, the Duluth-based nonprofit (cf. Ellen Pence) “DAIP” fits in?

IDVAAC is a key — but so far as I can tell, unincorporated website and collection of networked professionals, at UMinn School of Social Welfare; an example of coordinated control of national social policy from “centers” or “institutes” within academia.  

But that’s another topic — coming soon…..

  • Attributing PAS Theory as a CAUSE in Custody-Switching:Should We Focus on the Individuals (Judges + Psychologists), or Perhaps Court-Connected Corporations [especially 501(c)3s]  + Their Networks, Initiatives, and Projects?
  • Why Focus on Individual Judges + Psychologists, instead of their Networks of Court-Connected 501(c)3s + Favorite Initiatives, Projects, and Purposes?

The absurdly long titles are the same rhetorical question I’ve been asking for years, and already know where I stand on it.  As most people go with the other choice (focus on individual performers in the family court system), I’ve had a lot of free, not-socializing time to keep investigating the networks, in a public-access, free (except for time invested!) way, and continue to learn about some of the key players.  The patterns are easy to see, but not of course, if you never, EVER, go through a few basic look-ups to start to see some of the evidence revealing those patterns.  

For one, the systems are not designed so as to be easily viewable by ANYONE struggling with a current case, or by tax-payers, because they involved corporations.  Tax-exempt, and able to take both private and public donations, and as corporations, not as restricted to local political (state/county/municipal, metro, etc.) jurisdictions as are the specific courts themselves.  But, heck, it’s not as though they are 100% leaving no footprint, or linguistic similarities to identify themselves.

My last post (“Business as Usual in MN”) started out at a neat-and-sweet 6,000 words, approximately.  When I noticed in the footnoted, 3/13/2013 article posting a letter sent, it says, to 150 legislators regarding the Grazzini-Rucki case, a reference to the organization “NCJFCJ” and arguing that the reason involved a belief in the scientifically-discredited “Parental Alienation Syndrome” (PAS) theory — and as I have recent finds (of things which have existed for years– but I just found them… ) on the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges — as well as ongoing understandings of its functions as an HHS and USDOJ grantee — I got in there and started elaborating — after my first post in 2016 (and after zero posts in 2015) was published.

Re: “Dakota County MN Judge David L. Knutson/Case of Grazzini-Rucki” = March 13, 2014 Carver County Corruption post.   At the bottom of this was a letter:

Dakota County neighbors Carver County in Minnesota. Both Dakota and Carver County are in the First District Court. [letter sent to 150 state reps and senators]

Judge Denies Mother Contact With Her Children
The case of Sandra Sue Grazzini-Rucki and her children

With apologies for people who may have read the updated version all the long way through, I’m moving the bottom half of “2016 – Business as Usual in MN?” to this new post, to continue the theme and set up other posts (already drafted) which focus on certain Systems and Organizations which have over time have been given federal funds to coordinate and consolidate nationwide, for example, legal approaches that actually come under state-level jurisdictions.  By setting up specific nonprofits — often in different states — the only apparent connection, unless one literally tracks some of the involved organizations — can be seen if one, on the other hand, tracks specific federal funding direct to some of those nonprofits.

I did that as a domestic violence survivor.  I became aware of the organization “NCJFCJ” a very long time ago as one of several taking coordinated HHS grants to set up resource centers intended to affect at the STATE level through FEDERAL  + PRIVATE grant-making, how the United States of America views and handles the issues specifically of crimes against the person.   What seems to be a barely-hidden agenda (other than using the family courts to dump many of the cases into….) is pushing throughout the system, diversionary services into mental health, behavioral health, and other services — for all ages, particularly youth.

Sneak preview of upcoming post re:  NCJFCJ  VIP (very important person)… and major contributor….The next question is mine:

What happens, however, then this push for diversion into behavioral health services happens to coincide with nonprofit board members and employees (let alone judges, psychologists and family lawyers) engaged in for-profit enterprises that deal with — oh, say, institutions for running behavioral service programs on youth, private prisons, and when not actually institutionalized, court-ordered treatments anyhow (such as, oh, say, batterers intervention, supervised visitation, parent education, child abuse prevention, relationship skills interventions, marriage-promotion, and all things “fatherhood”?)

Well, for one, you get (and help set up) such things as “Kids for Cash” (RICO opportunities), the private prison industry (we have beds, now lets keep them filled so shareholder dividends produce a good ROI), and the US as one of the worlds’ largest per-capita jailors.   Still making news, but I wonder how many people pointed out, like I did ca. 2011/2012 and will continue to — the Juvenile Law Center that helped file a class-action lawsuit (or at least was considering it in 2009) was also DIRECTLY involved as a statewide actor in the MacArthur Foundation-sponsored “Models for Change” being run in Pennsylvania (and other states) at the time:

2/13/2009, CNN, Pennsylvania rocked by “jailing kids for cash’ scandal‘ –

As scandals from Wall Street to Washington roil the public trust, the justice system in Luzerne County, in the heart of Pennsylvania’s struggling coal country, has also fallen prey to corruption. The county has been rocked by a kickback scandal involving two elected judges who essentially jailed kids for cash. Many of the children had appeared before judges without a lawyer. Video Watch the corruption scandal that is rocking Pennsylvania »

The nonprofit Juvenile Law Center in Philadelphia said Phillip is one of at least 5,000 children over the past five years who appeared before former Luzerne County President Judge Mark Ciavarella.

Ciavarella pleaded guilty earlier this month to federal criminal charges of fraud and other tax charges, according to the U.S. attorney’s office. Former Luzerne County Senior Judge Michael Conahan also pleaded guilty to the same charges. The two secretly received more than $2.6 million, prosecutors said.

The judges have been disbarred and have resigned from their elected positions. They agreed to serve 87 months in prison under their plea deals. Ciavarella and Conahan did not return calls, and their attorneys told CNN that they have no comment.

Ciavarella, 58, along with Conahan, 56, corruptly and fraudulently “created the potential for an increased number of juvenile offenders to be sent to juvenile detention facilities,” federal court documents alleged. Children would be placed in private detention centers, under contract with the court, to increase the head count. In exchange, the two judges would receive kickbacks.

The Juvenile Law Center said it plans to file a class-action lawsuit this week representing what they say are victims of corruption. Juvenile Law Center attorneys cite a few examples of harsh penalties Judge Ciavarella meted out for relatively petty offenses:

This move should revert what is otherwise a 15,000 word post closer to its original size.  This means many of the tags naming people or organizations, may actually apply more to this post, than that one.

Topics in this post:

I’ll use acronyms where organizations are involved.  In case you didn’t notice, they are inter-related.  Paul Reitman

I know Reitman only as the psychologist cited who recommended custody-switch from the Grazzini-Rucki (5) children’s aunt (who’d been doing temporary, unpaid foster care in the home Sandra had been just thrown out of) to their father, David Rucki.
  • (under ‘NCJFCJ”) a reference to the ABA + the APA as a powerful force in society, and united in purpose in, well, the family court venue (I showed at least some of the “Total Assets” of each).
  • Online Etymology descriptions of some of our nation’s favorite “PSYCH” buzzwords (professions utilizing these have been mainstreamed)  and their root origins, not to mention date of origins.  ONE of them reads “Freud” and I hope you read that section….This resource gives DATES of first approximate popular use, which is good information to keep in mind.  A time existed when these professions did not, hence they had promoters, popularizers and funders.  Unless we want prefer to adopt the child-like ahistorical view of reality, in which case they’re here now, so they always will be and probably there’s a valid reason why they originally came into popular usage that we should no longer ask questions about. (YOu may have noticed I do tend to question-the-professions–not just the professionals– on this blog.  I do this as an observer whose noticing the current impact, got curious about the origins.  Interesting indeed.).
  • NCJFCJ.  There should be a consciousness raising on NCJFC, and on its participation in
  • The Greenbook Initiative
  • Paul Reitman, PhD, FAFCE. and a recent article Deprogramming Children and Adolescents published March, 2013 in an on-line magazine with Minnesota Psychological Association, with
  • Tori Espersen-Sturges (anticipating a 2016 PhD in Biological Psychopathology, dissertation under
  •  Dr. Shmuel Lissek who’s director of a lab called “ANGST” (see “angst.pych.UMN.edu”):

[Makes you wonder what kind of experiments are being run to figure out what happens when fear is triggered…]

  • As the Reitman/Espersen-Sturges article sites only three references, one of them being “Baker, A. J. L. (2007). Adult children of parental alienation syndrome: Breaking the ties that bind. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.” just a bit of Heads-Up on the Amy JL Baker  (that’s an abridged resume) conference circuit as expert witness, apparently, in talking about parental alienation…and her ties to “National Parents Organization (until recent years, known as Fathers and Families, until it got a token female board member with a California location)…
  • The Greenbook Initiative, which led to a county-based version or implementation plan for it, so,…
  • Kids in Common~California retired Judge Leonard Edwards” 

FOOTNOTE: from http://carvercountycorruption.com/2013/03/14/dakota-county-mn-judge-david-l-knutsoncase-of-grazzini-rucki/

Post from Carver County (MN) Corruption, posted March 14, 2013 (almost two years ago) re: Grazzini-Rucki case.  This is a “copy and paste” job except, I may highlight certain portions.  Also available on the link:

Dakota County neighbors Carver County in Minnesota. Both Dakota and Carver County are in the First District Court.
[letter sent to 150 state reps and senators]

Judge Denies Mother Contact With Her Children
The case of Sandra Sue Grazzini-Rucki and her children.

Dakota County Judge David Knutson issued an order on September 7, 2012 that denies the mother of five children any contact with her children. He ordered mother to vacate her home of 15 years on the same day as the court order. Mother was able to take only a suitcase of her clothes. She was forced to leave her home and all of her possessions which she has never been able to recover. She was denied any due process. She was told she would be arrested and jailed if she refused to follow Judge Knutson’s orders. She now is homeless, has no vehicle, no bank accounts, no credit cards, and no assets other than her clothing. She has only her job as an airline flight attendant which she has held for approx 27 years while taking leaves to care for her children. As a professional flight attendant, she is routinely tested for alcohol and substance abuse. All her independent psychological evaluations are completely normal.

Her wages are garnished 25% for payment of past marital taxes even though mother has been left destitute with prior use of MN Care Insurance and food stamps after the divorce. Her ex-husband’s income is in excess of $200,000 per month and he retains all of the marital property. There was no hearing or any finding that she ever hurt or abused any of her five children in any way.
The five children, ages 10, 11, 13, 14, and 16, were ordered to live in the custody of two aunts. The four youngest children have lived with their maternal aunt for almost six months without support from anyone. The children have not had or been allowed any contact with their mother except for one three-hour heavily supervised visit in late December, 2012. They have not had any contact with their father who has physically and sexually abused them and who hate him. In court on February 26, 2013, this aunt said she no longer is willing to provide for the children. The oldest child, a boy 16 years old, now lives in the former home of his mother with his father, who we believe a car and other expensive gifts in an attempt to buy the boy’s loyalty. The four youngest children no longer have a relationship with their oldest brother.

Why did all of this happen? In late August, 2012, Judge Knutson appointed an “expert” to make a recommendation on the parenting of the children. This expert, Dr. Paul Reitman, met with four of the children for about thirty minutes. ## He conducted no other evaluations, tests, or analysis. Yet, on the basis of this meeting, he issued his report that the problem was caused by the Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), a condition of the mother. Parental Alienation has been rejected by the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, and the American Medical Association. They believe it to be unsubstantiated. In fact, the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ)* has published guidelines stating that “The theory positing the existence of ‘PAS’ has been discredited by the scientific community.”

My insert/interjection here has major two parts, based on references in that paragraph above.  (1) PAUL REITMAN, and (2) NCJFCJ as an organization and what it’s up to.
BOTH extended sections show why quoting NCJFCJ’s opinion on PAS is less relevant than what business it’s in, generally speaking… and a few terms that ought to be commonplace to people concerned about family courts. (“The Greenbook Initiative “being one of them)


Paul Reitman, Ph.D., L.P., F.A.C.F.E., Forensic and Clinical Psychologist,  has rather enough initials to deserve another look, which brings up the issue of professional schools of psychology, credentialing (facilitating lots of initials other than the more commonly-understood “Ph.D.” behind anyone’s resume), and is waiting on a separate, soon-coming post.  Incidentally, (simple name search), a single-page dated February 2012 is on-line, title “The Challenge of Reunification Therapy” and it makes reference to the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.

Think, “maybe,” he’s a member?  (Mentions it four times in one paragraph as the acronym, and two times written out, so make that 6 times in one paragraph on a three-paragraph page….) Anyhow, the tone is clear — some people aren’t upholding clinical protocol, there are lax standards in the field, and this is a really tough judgment call for any forensic examiner (it’s short, here are just two paragraphs. Love the lingo….):

Child custody cases are notoriously acrimonious and can be quite difficult for forensic examiners to complete. One of the examiner’s most important evaluative decisions is that of custody and visitation rights and one common recommendation of these evaluations is reunification therapy in which parents and children undergo a process that aims to reconnect the bond and work through any issues that may have stemmed from the separation. This important evaluative decision and the process that follows necessitates that the individuals providing services to the family in this process (1) be appropriately qualified; and (2) follow a standardized protocol when performing reunification therapy. However, it appears that standards for credentials can be quite lax, and no empirically supported protocol has been developed. The threefold purpose of this article is to examine the credentials required to provide reunification therapy, discuss the importance of reunification based on both child development and the long- term effects of parental absence on a child, and outline appropriate reunification therapy protocols. …

There has been no nationwide consensus on what credentials are required to perform a child custody evaluation. However, the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) an international organization of cross-functional Family Court specialists from judges to custody investigators, is attempting to do so. According to AFCC, “Child custody evaluators should have the minimum of a master’s degree in a mental health field that includes formal education and training in the legal, social, familial and cultural issues involved in custody and access decisions” (Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, 2006, p.8). This recommendation is consistent with field observations made by master’s-level therapists and social workers who are often called upon to perform these evaluations. {{and may, or may not, be coincidentally also AFCC members}}The AFCC further posits, “Child custody evaluators shall possess appropriate education and training. All evaluators who have fewer than two years experience are encouraged to seek ongoing supervision prior to offering to perform or accepting appointments to conduct evaluations” (p.9). It is important to note that the AFCC offers these guidelines as aspirational and that these guidelines are currently not legally binding requirements.   [Paul M. Reitman, Ph.D. co. 2012]

That’s in 2012 (nearly 50 years after AFCC claims origins, i.e., it claims origins of 1963).  We’re at 2016, and if there’s a potential that AFCC could make ITS credentialing standards legally binding for custody evaluators, they will no doubt go for it; meanwhile, there’s been plenty of progress in controlling courtrooms around the country through presiding judgeships, coaching up-and-coming family lawyers through membership placed at law schools (including in MN: William Mitchell College of Law, Nancy ver Steegh), and other places.

IN FACT, I just noticed the above paper is posted on his main website, under “Selected Papers” (showing so far, not many).  See also, from that website, and a clickthrough shows it was published in “Minnesota Psychological Association,” i.e., the statewide membership association:

Deprogramming Children and Adolescents published on March 29, 2013 in Advocacy & Legislative MN Psychologist Online.  

Intentionally Alienated from a Parent by a Custodial Parent

I have been doing reunification therapy for the past 20 years.  Family law, in my forensic experience, is one of the most difficult areas of the law for a forensic psychologist to engage in.  First of all, the range of credentials that various professionals may have who are engaging in custody studies, reunification therapy, psychological evaluations, may be anywhere from no degree, a Bachelor’s degree, a Master’s degree, a law degree to a Ph.D./Psy.D. in Clinical Psychology.  Clearly, the more training a professional has, one would assume that the professional has been trained in developmental psychology, clinical psychology, and the ability to engage in psychological/psychometric assessment to evaluate the psychological status of a child and the parents.

Parental Alienation Syndrome, while rejected by DMS-V, still remains to be a real phenomenon in my own professional opinion.  Of course, parental alienation will occur naturally in any type of adversarial marital breakup.  It does not mean that a parent will have it in their mind to intentionally alienate a child from the other parent.  Instead, the post-marital conflict is certainly experienced by the child and/or adolescent and because of their cognitive development at any particular stage, they typically will align themselves with one parent or the other.  It is difficult for that child or adolescent to come to the conclusion on their own that while their parents are divorcing, they have a right to love each parent, and to stay out of their marital and post-marital arguments.  This is, in fact, one of the most fundamental therapeutic goals I have when I am treating children or adolescents whose parents are going through a divorce.  I have encountered many cases where there has been intentional estrangement of a child from another parent.

At this time, it may be useful to review some of the literature on parental alienation.  Baker (Baker, 2007) identified a cluster of eight symptoms dubbed “Parental Alienation Syndrome,” which have been discussed in research literature since 1980.  The syndrome hinges on a preoccupation by the child with criticism and depreciation of a parent, and occurs when one parents tries to alienate the child from the other parent, either deliberately or unconsciously.  PAS was considered for inclusion in the DSM-V as a childhood disorder but was rejected. …..

Baker, A. J. L. (2007). Adult children of parental alienation syndrome: Breaking the ties that bind. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.

Godbout E., & Parent, C. (2012). The life paths and lived experiences of adults who have
experienced parental alienation: A retrospective study. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage,## 53(1), 34-54.

Lowenstein, L. F. (2005). The psychological effect and treatment of parental alienation
syndrome. Justice of the Peace, 163(3), 47-50.

Wow.  I looked up Journal of Divorce and Remarriage (check out the brief description) and found it published by Haworth Press, Inc..  I clicked on “Haworth Press, Inc. [indicating an American company]” and was redirected to “Taylor and Francis Group.”  with clear emphasis (first column) on “Behavioral Science” featuring “Psychological Press” [“Psychology Press publishes an impressive portfolio in all areas of psychological science, including Cognitive Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience, Developmental Psychology, Social Psychology, Neuropsychology, and Industrial Psychology.“], second column “Humanities & Social Science” and third column “Science” (generic). I looked at the bottom of the page there, and found “Taylor and Francis, an Informa Group Company” with indicators, we are talking the UK.

(started in 1798 with one publication by Taylor, with the chemist Francis joining in 1852…

In 1936 Taylor & Francis became a private limited company with leading scientists as directors and shareholders. The last two decades have seen the most dramatic and rapid growth with the setting up of publishing and distribution centres around the world. This growth, fuelled by significant and strategic acquisition, led Taylor & Francis to a successful flotation [[cf. “public offering”]] of the Group on the London Stock Exchange in 1998.

Shortly after the flotation, the Group more than doubled in size with the acquisition of the Routledge Group of companies, which includes Routledge, Spon Press and Carfax. The acquisitions have continued with additions to the growing lists from quality publications…


I clicked on that, and, after noticing under “Where we Are” a lot of UK, Moscow Federation, the Netherlands (in 128 office locations), a brief diagram of Informa’s bloodline, which yes, you guessed it, it British from the start.

But as to the Paul Reitman 2013 paper:

This article is essentially a paragraph or so of introduction, a listing of the “Amy Baker” 8 symptoms of PAS, and another paragraph summarizing the other two sources.

Amy JL Baker *[<=”abridged resume”] who seems to make something of a living on the conference circuit? and as an “expert witness” about PAS, and appears to be an AFCC afficionado.  BS 1982 from Barnard College (major psychology/minor education), PhD 1982 in “Developmental Psychology” from Teachers College of Columbia University, “Expert Witness”

EXPERT WITNESSES (that’s first info under her identifying info):

*Provided expert opinion in AK, CA, CO, FL, MA, MD, MI, NJ, NY, PA, WY. And Ontario Canada. Passed Daubert hearing in MA in Lee V Hendron July 2011.


Workshops to legal and/or mental health professionals about PAS and psychological maltreatment at national conferences of Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, American Association of School Social Workers, American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children, American Psychological Association and International Cultic Studies Association. Workshops also at regional conferences of NJ Institute of Continuing Legal Education, NJ Association of Social Workers, NY Association of School Psychologists, NJ Association of School Counselors, PA Association of School Counselors, MA Association of School Counselors, NJ Association of School Counselors, NYC Administration for Children’s Services, NY Prevent Child Abuse America,#  and

PUBLICATIONS: On Parental Alienation**

Baker, A.J.L. (in press). Alienation research and the Daubert standards. In International handbook on parental alienation, 2nd edition. Baker, A.J.L. & BenAmi, N. (in press). To turn a child against a parent is to turn a child against himself.

To appear in Journal of Divorce and Remarriage.

BenAmi, N. & Baker, A.J.L. (in press). The long-term correlates of childhood exposure to parental alienation on adult self-sufficiency and well-being. American Journal of Family Therapy.

#I studied that group this summer — there’s a parallel but different one, both are running programming through multiple nonprofit organizations named after the parent one + a geographic center.  (I think the other one might’ve been Child Abuse Prevention Council).  Fascinating setup. Searchable at “990finder” for a partial flavor of the scope of activities.

**On-line, on that multi-page resume, I searched the phrase “parental alienation” and my computer wouldn’t even count — it said “found on 5 pages” and highlit those on the next page — about a dozen!!  Amy J.L. Baker is a favorite of fathers’ rights groups, such as the (now renamed) National Parents Organization(tm) out of Newton, Mass. In fact she’s listed as a “National Volunteer” on their “Our Team“.  Some of my readers may recognize the names of founder Ned Holstein, MD and Robert A. Franklin, J.D. (Texas, right), from the former “Fathers and Families”

Robert A. FranklinNed Holstein[“Ned Holstein, MD, MS (left):

  • Founded Fathers and Families in 1998 to reform the family courts
  • Harvard College, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Mount Sinai School of Medicine


(From Massachusetts Corporations Search, details):

The name was changed from: FATHERS AND FAMILIES, INC. on 01-22-2013
The name was changed from: FOUNDATION FOR FATHERS AND FAMILIES, INC. on 04-24-2002

What’s also “cute” is that apparently no annual reports for “Fathers and Families” were filed for about six years (2003,04,05,06,07,08, and 09), they caught up with past-due filings  around Thanksgiving 2010, then two weeks later (or 12/10/2010 anyhow) added there one female director — from California (all others being from the East Coast) 

Anyhow, re: Deprogramming Children and Adolescents published on March 29, 2013″ and referenced on Paul Reitman’s “Selected Papers” page:

It’s co-authored by Reitman and apparently a graduate student (female) in clinical psychology (Tori Espensen-Sturges <==link to C.V.) at University of Minnesota. Ms. (soon-to-be, “Dr.”) Tori-Espersen
[mis-spelled Esperson-Sturgest] in the MPA article] only got her B.A. in Psychology from U South Carolina “Honors College” in May 2011 (with a Minor: Medical Humanities Honor’s Thesis Advisor: Rosemarie Booze, Ph.D.). She appears more interested in lab rats and neuroscience at this point, but has already conducted some custody evaluations and sex offender evaluations, per that C.V.) Ms. Espersen-Sturges’ current PhD adviser is Dr. Shmuel Lissek, with a B.A. in Sociology (1995) from Columbia University, and who, on his faculty page, talks like this.  Also, he directs the “ANGST” Lab in the Psychology Department at UMN:

What happens in

Shmuel Lissek the human brain and body during fear-related learning, memory, and decision making? What aberrancies in these psychobiological processes are associated with the e

motional, cognitive, and behavioral symptoms of clinical anxiety? These questions of central interest are addressed using neuroimaging, psychophysiologic, pharmacologic, and behavioral assays of classical and operant fear-conditioning. The cross-species nature of this conditioning approach brings to bear a wealth of animal data with which to elucidate the neurobiology of fear and behavioral avoidance in the human instance. Specific areas of interest include: 1) the generalization of conditioned fear to stimuli resembling the learned danger-cue as a pathogenic marker of PTSD, panic disorder, and generalized anxiety disorder; 2) the neurobiology, psychophysiology, and pharmacologic-modifiability of conditioned fear generalization; 3) the conditioning-dependent plasticity in neural representations of learned danger-cues that may subserve the generalization process; and 4) the psychobiologic substrates of classically conditioned fear as predictors of operant avoidance.

Biology (and other sciences) have their jargon. It seems psychologists, psychotherapists, psychoanalysts, and others, don’t want to be left in the dust, and they have theirs too.  As the debate STILL isn’t closed on whether or not psychology is indeed a real science (there seems little question it’s a practice, and has plenty of professional clout — see the APA!), a lot of language is sprinkled in with those more commonly accepted as sciences — like biology, genetics, etc.


** NCJFCJ // Greenbook Initiative // Kids in Common~California retired Judge Leonard EdwardsFootnote inserted soon after publishing this post, as I hadn’t noticed the NCJFCJ reference earlier — and I’ve been studying that organization again…]

American Psychological Association DC 2013 990 98 $257,045,386.00 53-0205890
American Psychological Association DC 2012 990 64 $236,941,077.00 53-0205890
American Psychological Association DC 2011 990 71 $193,166,631.00 53-0205890

    For the psychologists to get the lawyers welcoming them in to several venues, particularly the family courts, must have been a major triumph — compare the relative size of the organizations:  (this list is only 3 EIN#s.  $346M for the ABA vs. $257M for the APA… 

American Bar Association IL 2014 990O 98 $356,575,456.00 36-0723150
American Bar Association IL 2013 990O 56 $329,776,848.00 36-0723150
American Bar Association IL 2012 990O 63 $298,105,242.00 36-0723150
American Bar Association Endowment IL 2012 990 38 $115,268,381.00 36-2384321
American Bar Association Fund for Justice and Education IL 2014 990 143 $24,702,609.00 36-611029

The next set of word-origins are from “Online Etymology Dictionary” which show not only root meanings, but when certain usages came into play.  I’m copying in the first several under “P” starting with the first one that begins “psy” — notice the years these came into use, AND their root meanings, please!  As far as language goes (especially Greek) these are pretty darned recent — late 1800s, some, 1900s, most.  Those are thanks in part to “founding fathers” with connections to Yale, Harvard (money), etc. ….

psych Look up psych at Dictionary.comas a noun, short for psychology in various senses (e.g. as an academic study, in student slang by 1895). As a verb, first attested 1917 as “to subject to psychoanalysis,” short for psychoanalyze. From 1934 as “to outsmart” (also psych out); from 1963 as “to unnerve.” However to psych (oneself) up is from 1972; to be psyched up is attested from 1968.psyche (n.) Look up psyche at Dictionary.com1640s, “animating spirit,” from Latin psyche, from Greek psykhe “the soul, mind, spirit; breath; life, one’s life, the invisible animating principle or entity which occupies and directs the physical body; understanding” (personified as Psykhe, the beloved of Eros), akin to psykhein “to blow, cool,” from PIE root *bhes- “to blow, to breathe” (source also of Sanskrit bhas-), “Probably imitative” [Watkins].

Also in ancient Greek, “departed soul, spirit, ghost,” and often represented symbolically as a butterfly or moth. The word had extensive sense development in Platonic philosophy and Jewish-influenced theological writing of St. Paul (compare spirit (n.)). Meaning “human soul” is from 1650s. In English, psychological sense “mind,” is attested by 1910.psychedelia (n.)Look up psychedelia at Dictionary.com1967, from psychedelic + -ia.psychedelic (adj.)Look up psychedelic at Dictionary.comoccasionally psychodelic, 1956, of drugs, suggested by British-born Canadian psychiatrist Humphry Osmond (1917-2004) in a letter to Aldous Huxley and used by Osmond in a scientific paper published the next year; from Greek psykhe- “mind” (see psyche) +deloun “make visible, reveal,” from delos “visible, clear,” from PIE root *dyeu- “to shine” (see diurnal). In popular use from 1965 with reference to anything producing effects similar to that of a psychedelic drug or enhancing the effects of such a drug. As a noun from 1956.psychedelicize (v.)Look up psychedelicize at Dictionary.com1966, from psychedelic + -ize. Related: Psychedelicizedpsychedelicizing.psychiatric (adj.)Look up psychiatric at Dictionary.com1847, from French psychiatrique or else coined in English from psychiatry + -ic.psychiatrist (n.)Look up psychiatrist at Dictionary.com1875, from psychiatry + -ist.

A psychiatrist is a man who goes to the Folies Bergère and looks at the audience. [Anglican Bishop Mervyn Stockwood, 1961]

An older name was mad-doctor (1703); also psychiater “expert in mental diseases” (1852), from Greek psyche + iatros. Also seealienist.psychiatry (n.)Look up psychiatry at Dictionary.com1846, from French psychiatrie, from Medieval Latin psychiatria, literally “a healing of the soul,” from Latinized form of Greekpsykhe- “mind” (see psyche) + iatreia “healing, care” (see -iatric).psychic (adj.)Look up psychic at Dictionary.com1872, “of or pertaining to the human soul” (earlier psychical, 1640s), from Greek psykhikos “of the soul, spirit, or mind” (opposed tosomatikos), also (New Testament) “concerned with the life only, animal, natural,” from psykhe “soul, mind, life” (see psyche). Meaning “characterized by psychic gifts” first recorded 1871.psychic (n.)Look up psychic at Dictionary.com“a medium;” 1870; see psychic (adj.).psycho (adj.)Look up psycho at Dictionary.com1927, shortening of psychological; 1936 (Raymond Chandler) as shortening of psychopathic (adj.).psycho (n.)Look up psycho at Dictionary.com1925, short for psychologist; as short for psychopath from 1942

Notice that “psychoanalysis” was actually coined BY FREUD in 1896 !!  There are still (turn of the 1990s- 2000s) ongoing debates on whether psychoanalysis is  a real science, as opposed to a well-developed vocabulary — but I’ll save that for later:

psychoanalysis (n.) Look up psychoanalysis at Dictionary.com1906, from Psychoanalyse, coined 1896 in French by Freud from Latinized form of Greek psykhe- “mental” (see psyche) + GermanAnalyse, from Greek analysis (see analysis). Freud earlier used psychische analyse (1894).psychoanalyst (n.) Look up psychoanalyst at Dictionary.comalso psycho-analyst, 1910; see psycho- + analyst.psychoanalytic (adj.) Look up psychoanalytic at Dictionary.com1902, from psychoanalysis + -ic.psychoanalyze (v.) Look up psychoanalyze at Dictionary.comalso psycho-analysepsychoanalyse, 1911; see psycho- + analyze. Related: Psychoanalyzedpsychoanalyzing. Earlier waspsychologize (1830).

“Psychopharmacology” goes back to about 1919:

psychopharmacology (n.) Look up psychopharmacology at Dictionary.com

also psycho-pharmacology, 1919, from psycho- + pharmacology. Related: Psychopharmacological.  

psychotherapist (n.) Look up psychotherapist at Dictionary.com1894, from psychotherapy + -ist.psychotherapy (n.) Look up psychotherapy at Dictionary.com1892 in modern sense, from psycho- + therapy, in model of French psychothérapie (1889). In early use also of hypnotism. Related: Psychotherapeutic

Many psychotherapists (and, psychoanalysts)  to this day employ hypnotism and have societies to train in its use. PHARMA (refers to drugs) seems to go back further …

pharmaceutical (adj.) Look up pharmaceutical at Dictionary.com1640s (pharmaceutic in the same sense is from 1540s), from Late Latin pharmaceuticus “of drugs,” from Greek pharmakeutikos, from pharmakeus “preparer of drugs, poisoner” (see pharmacy). Related: Pharmaceuticalspharmaceutically.

… but “pharmacy” as a place where drugs are made and dispensed, not til early 1800s…. (Dictionary page🙂

pharmacy (n.)Look up pharmacy at Dictionary.com
late 14c., “a medicine,” from Old French farmacie “a purgative” (13c.), from Medieval Latin pharmacia, from Greek pharmakeia “use of drugs, medicines, potions, or spells; poisoning, witchcraft; remedy, cure,” from pharmakeus (fem. pharmakis) “preparer of drugs, poisoner, sorcerer” from pharmakon “drug, poison, philter, charm, spell, enchantment.” Meaning “use or administration of drugs” is attested from c. 1400; that of “place where drugs are prepared and dispensed” is first recorded 1833. The ph- was restored 16c. in French, 17c. in English (see ph).

I’m not doing this for a game — language use indicates a point of view.  So when a young person about to get a PhD in “Biological Psychopathology,” above, has a dissertation professor, still also a young man Dr. Smuel Lissek  I see (PhD in 2002), who speaks of clinical anxiety as an “aberrancy” in certain processes — what is he really saying?

What happens in
Shmuel Lissek the human brain and body during fear-related learning, memory, and decision making? What aberrancies in these psychobiological processes are associated with the emotional, cognitive, and behavioral symptoms of clinical anxiety? These questions of central interest are addressed using neuroimaging, psychophysiologic, pharmacologic, and behavioral assays of classical and operant fear-conditioning


I just looked up “Pharmacologic” and see that the FDA has a definition of the Pharmacologic Class label — (and has to do with the study of drugs and their actions)..

Pharmacologic class is a group of active moieties that share scientifically documented properties and is defined on the basis of any combination of three attributes of the active moiety:

  • Mechanism of Action (MOA)
  • Physiologic Effect (PE)
  • Chemical Structure (CS)

An FDA “Established Pharmacologic Class” (EPC) text phrase is a pharmacologic class associated with an approved indication of an active moiety that the FDA has determined to be scientifically valid and clinically meaningful.

The word “moiety” comes from the word “half” and its usage as to molecules — or sociology/anthropology –=can be looked up if you’re interested in it!

So, above, under paragraph “Why did all this happen?” at:


[letter sent to 150 state reps and senators]

Judge Denies Mother Contact With Her Children
The case of Sandra Sue Grazzini-Rucki and her children.Dakota County neighbors Carver County in Minnesota. Both Dakota and Carver County are in the First District Court.
[letter sent to 150 state reps and senators]

Judge Denies Mother Contact With Her Children
The case of Sandra Sue Grazzini-Rucki and her children. . . . 

Why did all of this happen? In late August, 2012, Judge Knutson appointed an “expert” to make a recommendation on the parenting of the children. This expert, Dr. Paul Reitman, met with four of the children for about thirty minutes. ## He conducted no other evaluations, tests, or analysis. Yet, on the basis of this meeting, he issued his report that the problem was caused by the Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), a condition of the mother. Parental Alienation has been rejected by the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, and the American Medical Association. They believe it to be unsubstantiated. In fact, the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ)**  has published guidelines stating that “The theory positing the existence of ‘PAS’ has been discredited by the scientific community.”

Women (mothers in custody/divorce/domestic violence/child abuse-involved court actions have been coached (online, group email lists, and sometimes at conferences, such as the Battered Mothers Custody Conference (“BMCC”) for years [by Broken Courts (now “Safe Child”) groups such as the Leadership Council, California Protective Parents Association, and others…] to fight and debate usage of a psychological theory instead of to analyze systems of organizations serving as court-connected conduits, and where opportunities for slush funds, money-laundering, and case-specific, or organization-specific potential kickbacks (through, for example, money that went “missing”).   They were discouraged from talking and thinking in analytical terms about nonprofits or the money, or about the federal grants.  They were encouraged to support organizations as their “Friends” and allies which promoted, as recently as the year 2010 [14 YEARS after PRWORA welfare reform] a book by two people prominent in the BMCC circuit over the years (including one of the conference’s founder, Mo Hannah, Ph.D.) called, and with its abstract, notice the use of the term “broken courts” and the call to reform them:

Domestic Violence, Abuse, and Child Custody: Legal Strategies and Policy Issues

Editors: Mo Therese Hannah, Ph.D. and Barry Goldstein, J.D

Civic Research Institute
Format: Hardcover Book
© 2010 approx. 710 pp.
ISBN: 1-887554-76-9

For many years protective mothers have complained that unfair custody courts are taking their children and forcing the children to live with abusive fathers. These concerns have now been confirmed by a definitive new book, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ABUSE and CHILD CUSTODY co-edited by Dr. Mo Therese Hannah and Barry Goldstein. The book contains the most up-to-date research and information from over 25 of the leading experts in the US and Canada including judges, lawyers, psychiatrists, psychologists, sociologists, journalists and domestic violence advocates. One could reasonably argue about when the research became so clear as to confirm the failure of custody courts to handle domestic violence custody cases in a way that protects children. The common practices and approaches adopted over thirty years ago when there was no research available have been discredited, but they are so deeply ingrained that the courts have not been open to reforming the broken system. Today we know the system must be reformed. This book should be used by journalists to expose the problem, courts to fix the problem, legislators to reform the system and the public to demand the courts stop sending children to live with abusers.

 As posted (that link) at organization NOMAS in Denver:  “pro-feminist, anti-racist, gay-affirmative, enhancing men’s lives.”

National Organization for Men Against Sexism
3500 E. 17th Avenue
Denver CO, 80206

As I saw it (first edition), there was not a single chapter on the child support system, and while mentioning “fathers’ rights groups” there was zero reference to the PRWORA-funded federal grants series, or, for example, key nonprofits’ influence in getting it set up, perpetuated, and etc.  And of course, nothing about the Access and Visitation grants.

Yet they were coached, for the most part, to fight this theory, sometimes even quoting well-connected associations (like the APA and the NCJFCJ) and organizations but without the same coaches publicizing and teaching about the connected, entirely relevant, information on who was propounding the “PAS” theory in conferences throughout (the land), in particular the APA- and NCJFCJ-friendly Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCCnet.com) and, individually, professional members of the same.  Essentially, this is like telling soldiers to surge forward into battle — without a scouting report, and of course without defensive weapons, or at times, even a roadmap.

Apparently this drama works well enough for psychologist-affiliated organizations and associations arguing theory — but I don’t see that it’s worked well for the populations supposedly being protected with that approach. What women were not told is the “professional courtesy” of silence about the underlying networked of organizations that are content to promote/debate PAS until the sun goes down — so long as those grants and court-referral businesses keep coming…

 Therefore, I believe that

  NCJFCJ discrediting PAS is far less relevant than who is this organization, and what has it been doing over time.  Section moved to below the Carver County Corruption Footnote.

**Let’s Get Honest comment on quoting organizations that discredit “Parental Alienation” to support mothers under attack — who has ANY idea who NCJFCJ is?

It’s a membership organization, been around for years, whose membership are, with private foundations (such as the MacArthur Foundation) working on systems-change to push diversionary services (for first Juvenile, then also apparently Family court cases) into behavioral-health sector, whether private professionals, or privately-run institutions.  It’s a 501(c)3 based in Reno, Nevada (actually three different, related organizations exist under the name, per tax returns), in fact at the University of Nevada-RENO.   It’s also a significant HHS-grantee (appearing under the wrong name as entered onto HHS’ own database, “TAGGS.hhs.gov.”  Some of its leadership, or former leadership, have gone on to direct the USDOJ/Office of Violence Against Women (I refer to Susan B. Carbon, who was also a presiding family court judge in New Hampshire…)…

If and when any human being decides to look up HHS grants to NCJFCJ (as listed under the wrong name — try an EIN# search if you get around to it) at “TAGGS.HHS.GOV” (through ADVANCED SEARCH is recommended — check several fields to get those columns in the resulting report) — you will see that, alongside the DAIP (Domestic Abuse Intervention Programs) they got some grants — and around the same size, too — labeled “FOUR SPECIAL ISSUE RESOURCE CENTERS.”  NCJFCJ was one of the four.

For more information, see “Footnote NCJFCJ” below here.

Back to the Carver County Corruption post of 3/14/2013

Nevertheless, Judge Knutson appointed another expert, Dr. James Gilbertson, to attempt to re-unify the children with their abusive father. He said he would “reprogram” the children to like their father—he saw them 3 times in 6 months. This failed leading to the February 26, 2013 hearing. At this hearing, Dr. Gilbertson arranged for the children to appear before Judge Knutson in a conference room. Judge Knutson listened to the children’s short statements and told them he was going to issue orders that they had to follow. The transcript of this meeting has been ordered. The mother has requested information from Gilbertson and Reitman such as appointment dates, payment history, and other documents, but these have been denied by the practitioners saying they are protected by the judge and do not need to follow the guidelines of their respective professional organizations. Judge Knutson has not allowed the opinions of any other professionals to be heard.

The four youngest children will now be homeless. They begged to be with their mother. Their lives have been seriously disrupted. The Guardian ad Litem (GAL), Julie Friedrich, initially agreed that they belonged with their mother. Her story has now changed. She told the children that everything had been given to their father, and that their mother was homeless and without a vehicle. (The children reported this information to their mother at the late December 2012 meeting.) Ms. Friedrich also informed the children that their mother was in a mental institution, in jail, had moved to Philadelphia, PA, had been fired from her job, and that mother’s whereabouts were unknown. Julie also told the children that their mother didn’t want them and that she was gone. She informed Dr. Gilbertson that no further contact between mother and children should take place. Mother has not been allowed to schedule any further visits with her children despite numerous

The youngest child, 10 years old, has a significant medical condition that since his birth has been attended to solely by his mother. His complex medical issues include dealing with numerous doctors, surgeries, and providing day to day care and attention. Over the last 10 years mother has been the sole provider of his care along with his pediatrician, Dr. Tim Anderson, who in a letter and in a conversation with Guardian ad Litem Julie Friedrich, stated that his mother has been the sole provider of his medical care and in the best interest of the child he should be with his mother due to her history of care and knowledge of all factors relating to him. He is placed at risk without her care.

Mother was the beneficiary of a life insurance purchased by her father, now deceased, that provided $1.3 million for mother’s use. This total amount was exhausted in the spring of 2012 when mother was ordered by Judge Knutson to pay substantial amounts for attorney’s fees and debts that became hers as a result of the original judgment and decree. She is now Pro Se, unable to afford her own attorney.

When David Rucki failed to pay the court ordered child support, the state pulled his driver’s license. Judge Knutson wrote an order to child support and the state noting that David’s license was not to be revoked now or in the future. This ruling breaks state and federal law. His passport also was removed according to state and federal law due to child support arrears, yet Judge Knutson is attempting to over-rule federal law by reinstating his passport in defiance of the Dakota County District Attorney’s affidavit telling the judge that he cannot do this as he has no authority to over-rule the US Department of State. This is clearly our of Judge Knutson’s jurisdiction, yet he has scheduled a hearing on the matter.

Judge Knutson refused to order the normal parental arrangement where one parent has primary custody and the other parent visitation. He refused to follow Minnesota laws on parenting. He refused to give mother any due process or to follow court rules of procedure. There is no penalty or consequence to him because of his violation of law and other abuses. He is not accountable to anyone. Judge Knutson is actually a member of the Board of Judicial Standards where complaints against judges are sent! He has refused to remove himself from the case, denied a change of venue, and no action has been taken against him for the clear violations he has enforced. A letter of complaint about Judge Knutson’s actions to the Board of Judicial Standards from concerned citizens in the Burnsville, Lakeville, and Eagan area had no effect whatsoever. Clearly, this needs to be changed. There needs to be legislative oversight of the judiciary.

Sandy Grazzini-Rucki was recently able to hire an attorney with the financial help of a close friend. Sandy retained a local attorney from the MacDonald Lawfirm in Minneapolis Minnesota. Link to pdf download of a scathing and impressive memorandum written by her attorney on behalf of Sandy and her children. LINK: MacDonald Lawfirm 90-3345

Footnote “NCJFCJ // Greenbook Initiative // Kids in Common~California retired Judge Leonard Edwards” continued from interjection in Footnote CarverCountyCorruption, above.

NCJFCJ has participated as a player (as I recall) with (then-called “Family Violence Prevention Fund of SF”) in “The Greenbook Initiative.”

  • 2008 Final Report of the Greenbook Initiative published by ICF International (which is also — strangely– mis-labeled on TAGGS.hhs.gov — and a major HHS grantee.  UNlike many of the others, ICF isn’t even a non-profit — it’s a multi-million-dollar, international for-profit business.  It also runs, or was running, a resource center on strategizing how to better promote marriage/fatherhood (etc.). In fact, I read tax returns (fairly recent ones) of the diminishing in size (?) “National Fatherhood Initiative” founded first in 1994, showing that in addition to direct HHS funds to ICF, NFI, which also received (if not got started originally) significant infusions from HHS over the years, though certainly NOT the largest amounts, was apparently subcontracting with ICF, giving them money also.
  • American Bar Association Fall 2008 eNewsletter (Vo. 12) reporting on “The Greenbook Initiative” by Jeffrey L. Edleson, “Collaborating for Family Safety: The Greenbook National Demonstration Initiative and its Results.” … Jeffrey L. Edleson is now (Dean of) the UCBerkeley School of Social Welfare, but guess where he was before that? — UMinnesota.  Footnote 1 cites the funding grant — federal, both USDOJ and USHHS are involved.
  • NCJFCJ website featuring “Effective Intervention in Domestic Violence &  Child Maltreatment Cases: Guidelines for Policy and Practice by Susan Schechter & Jeffrey L. Edleson (1999, plus 2008, 2009 updates):
February 6, 1999

This publication, also known as the Greenbook, is the official policy of the NCJFCJ and sets forth principles and recommendations for improving the policies and practices of child protection services, domestic violence services, and juvenile courts. The five chapters contained in the Greenbook (Guiding Framework, Foundation Principles and Recommendations, Child Protection System, Domestic Violence Services for Families, and Courts) are outlined in theExecutive Summary. For more information regarding the Greenbook Initiative visit http://www.thegreenbook.info/.

Cost: one FREE copy, $5.00 for each additional

Greenbook Initiative started a few years after 1996 welfare reform — interesting, huh?

Another reference to the Greenbook here, from Silicon Valley, California (Santa Clara County — FYI, also with significant history of AFCC-judge involvement, I’m talking about Judge Leonard P. Edwards, ret’d.), from a site “KidsInCommon” (I guess another nonprofit) — this county was part of the Greenbook Initiative Pilot, and the site claims “Kids in Common” was the implenting agent.  The website holds this description of it — this is their story of the Greenbook Initiative reference in (odd) “U.S. Department of communities.”)

In 1998 the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, Family Violence Department brought together a group of national experts to write a policy blueprint to design effective interventions between Child Welfare Services, domestic violence agencies, and the juvenile dependency court. Because of its green cover, the policy manual became fondly referred to as the “Greenbook.” In December of 2000 and January of 2001, the U.S. Department of communities under an Inter-Departmental demonstration initiative: “Collaborations to Address Domestic Violence and Child Maltreatment” to implement guidelines from the Greenbook. Santa Clara County applied for and was selected as one of six pilot sites around the country to implement policies from the Greenbook. In Santa Clara County, project management was provided by Kids in Common.

“Kids in Common” as a California 501(c)3 is located in San Jose.  Website says:

Despite the fact that Santa Clara County is one of the most affluent communities in the world, our most vulnerable children suffer from lack of basic health care, adequate food and shelter and opportunities for learning and succeeding in school.

Today, Kids in Common is the only organization that focuses on systemic change to improve children’s lives in Santa Clara County.

I see it incorporated in 1988 (1980s being the decade of increasing “Children’s Rights” groups, actually many of them fathers’ rights.  Another example:  David Levy’s Children’s Rights Council (on the East Coast USA) has been so acknowledged…. [this from California’s Business Entitities Search at the Secretary of State site]

Entity Number Date Filed Status Entity Name Agent for Service of Process

That entity# helps me find their Charitable Registration (with State of California): they are I see Delinquent:

Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registration Type Record Type
KIDS IN COMMON 073659 Charity Delinquent SAN JOSE CA Charity Registration Charity

Why to little nonprofits like this matter?  Well, when a Judge’s name is on them, and they were originally started at the inspiration or urging of a prominent judge … what do you think?

From the state website, I looked at the 2006 and 2007 RRFs (single-page form which shows Gross annual revenues — what’s left at the end of the year — and answers Yes or No to Question 6, “Did you receive government funding?”

Kids In Common, while turning in the form several months late, answered YES for both years — reporting annual revenue (all sources) of $272K (with assets left, $12K) and $132K (with assets left, $8K) respectively.  Both years, their government funding cited was from:

  • Santa Clara County Social Services Agency Office of Contracts Management, 333 W. Julian St., 4th Floor San Jose, CA 95110 Attn: Tonhu Do, Sr.

Fiscal year 2008 (ending in 2009) didn’t acknowledge government funding, was signed by not even dated by its executive director, and reported:

For your most recent full accounting period (beginning 07 / 01 / 2008 ending 06 / 30 / 2009 ) list: Gross annual revenue $ _ 1 6 3, 0 3 8  ̄ Total assets $ 9,399.

In Fiscal Year 2004 (and from a different street address), with Revenues of $430K, they were receiving from two different government entities, per RRF:

  • County of Santa Clara County Social Services Agency Department of Family & Children’s Services 333 W. Julian Street, 5th Floor Administration San Jose, CA 95110-2335 Lynette Harrison 408/491-6760
  • Santa Clara County Partnership for School Readiness c/o United Way Silicon Valley 1922 The Alameda San Jose, CA 95126 Loretta Bums 408/345-4361

From their founding documents (available at the Charitable Registry Site) I see their 1988 Articles of Incorporation were from the start to combine public/private resources, including as to private both for-profit and not-for-profit. And, they had a name using the word “County”– “Santa Clara County Alliance for Youth, Inc.”

The public and charitable purposes of this Corporation are to facilitate and enhance the provision of goods and services to youth and children at risk in Santa Clara County, and to form a cooperative network to bring together the public, private-for-profit, and nonprofit sectors to meet the needs of these at-risk youth and children.

By the time they showed a tax-exempt number (the next year) the name had become “Kids in Common.”  Like many nonprofits, it had no members — all powers were vested in the Board of Directors.

“Kids In Common” California (and Massachusetts) is currently showing 0 income for past several years, available tax returns show it was typically filing late, not bothering to fill out the IRS forms where prompted but simply being labeled “See addditional data” or “See Statement” (which isn’t illegal, it’s simply inconsiderate to the public, and lazy), and — running the revenues into the red.  There seems to be another one (same name) in Massachusetts.  These results are from “The Foundation Center” (990s database).

Kids in Common CA 2014 990EZ 8 $0.00 77-0230821
Kids in Common A Children and Families Collaborative CA 2013 990EZ 8 $0.00 77-0230821
Kids in Common A Children and Families Collaborative CA 2012 990EZ 4 $0.00 77-0230821
Kids in Common A Children and Families Collaborative CA 2012 990ER 1 $0.00 77-0230821
Kids in Common Inc. MA 2011 990ER 2 $0.00 04-2978915
Kids in Common Inc. MA 2011 990EZ 8 $0.00 04-2978915
Kids in Common Inc. MA 2010 990EZ 12 $23,132.00 04-2978915
Kids in Common Inc. MA 2009 990EZ 10 $43,365.00 04-2978915

This is just a sample reading of one IRS from “Kids in Common” promoting the welfare of youth and families throughout Silicon Valley’s (and, San Jose’s) “Santa Clara County” with a famous judge on board:

From a Year 2008 IRS form, we can see that only $30,000 is labeled as government grants, $100,715 non-government contributions. This was spent primarily about half on an executive director, and half on other (unnamed) employees, with Revenues – Expense (that year) = ($90,475), i.e., $90.475K below zero — a deficit. Adding to the prior year’s $278K deficit, the cumulative deficit reported was $368,478.. The same year, this is the plan — and what they spent $138K doing:

Kids in Common’s activities exemplify how it promotes cross sector collaboration, identifies and supports systems change, and leverages resources. The Children’s Agenda provides a common vision through which community leaders, governmental agencies, public and private funders, and community-based organizations can collaborate to measurably improve children’s lives. Created on the premise “What gets measured, gets done.” Kids in Common asked its community to identify its top priorities and goals for children and ten measurable outcomes. Kids in Common will use these outcomes to focus its efforts to improve children’s lives and track its progress over the next ten years by tracking the data.

Will it?  At the time, KIC was being run into the ground financially by its small board of directors…

By tweaking a URL (i.e., changing the year, and removing the “EZ” from the “990EZ” Part of it, I found a year 2007 return, which shows a board of only 4 people, one paid officer and Hon. Leonard Edwards as one of the board (also:  Dana Bunnett, Exec Director (only paid director), Richard Garcia, Jenny House, and Barb Larson.

This utter non-compliant, failure of a nonprofit hasn’t slowed down the judge any. To show his positioning (and influence, and the site also has his C.V.):

From http://judgeleonardedwards.com/aboutjudgeedwards.html

Judge Leonard Edwards is a retired judge now working as a consultant, educator, and trainer. He served as a Superior Court Judge in Santa Clara County for 26 years and then for six years as Judge-in-Residence at the Center for Families, Children & the Courts, a division of the California Administrative Office of the Courts.

The California Judicial Council AOC/CFCC (Center for Families, Children & the Courts) is a center of “AFCC” personnel and practice over the years.  I’ve blogged it, looked at it over time, and do not make that statement lightly.  I see his business address now IS c/of the SF-based CFCC (i.e., a government site).

As a judge he worked in the juvenile court for over 20 years. As Judge-in-Residence he served California’s courts as a consultant specializing in juvenile and family law, domestic violence, drug courts, mediation, judicial ethics, and other issues relating to children and families within the court system.

A graduate of Wesleyan University (1963) and The University of Chicago Law School (1966), Judge Edwards has dedicated his professional life to working in the court system to improve outcomes for children and families.

Judge Edwards is a well-known teacher, trainer, and lecturer, having taught at the University of Santa Clara Law School, Stanford Law School, and the California Judicial College. He has conducted trainings in 47 states and 11 foreign countries as well as over 300 invited presentations in the United States …

In his work as a consultant, Judge Edwards has assisted judges make (sic — grammar — s/be “assisted judge in in making” or “helped judges make”)significant changes in their court system including starting mediation programs, family drug treatment courts, CASA programs, and other innovations. His primary focus is improving court practice in order to improve outcomes for children and families in the courts system.

The innovations typically range to diversions to community or private services.  The agenda follows typical AFCC fare.  Notice website says What is One Judge-One Family, and how can this concept improve outcomes for children?” From the resume, “Organizations Founded”

  • Child Advocates of Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties (1986) (member of National CASA organization)
  • Kids In Common (a non-profit organization attempting to bring together the public and private sectors on behalf of children. (1989). (co-founder)
  • Juvenile Court Judges of California (a Section of the California Judges Association), 1988.
  • Santa Clara County Domestic Violence Council (1991) (Co-founder)*
  • Greenbook Project, Santa Clara County (1997)**
  • Forensic Human Services Certificate Program (Santa Clara County) – Founder, 1992

*I believe sidebar (near the bottom) on this blog has some more information regarding that Domestic Violence Council, and what it’s doing.

**?? that pre-dates the 1999 “Greenbook Initiative”….

I also see from 2006 tribute posted at  “CAPITOL WORDS.org“, on his retirement, that this judge was the son of Congressman Don Edwards, AND that he also served as President of the NCJFCJ (though when, is not mentioned).

On looking up the father, I see that he lived to be 100, and died this past October.  I’m sorry to hear of his death, glad anyone can live to be 100!!

New York Times: Don Edwards, Congressman Who Championed Civil Rights, Dies at 100

Don Edwards, a former president of the California Young Republicans who became one of the most liberal Democrats in Congress, drafting every civil rights bill in the House for two decades, died on Thursday in Carmel-by-the-Sea, Calif. He was 100.

His son Leonard confirmed his death.  [There are 3 other surviving sons, apparently no sisters in the family…]

Mr. Edwards, an F.B.I. agent in the 1940s, was also an early opponent of the Vietnam War and a champion of civil liberties who took on the F.B.I. on domestic surveillance and budget issues.

A more local commemorative article, in the San Jose Mercury-News, adds this:

Former Rep. Don Edwards:  1915-2015” 10/2/2015, Julia Prodis Sulek.

..Born in San Jose in 1915, William Donlon Edwards graduated from San Jose High School, earned a bachelor’s degree from Stanford and spent two years in its law school before becoming an FBI agent in 1940. During World War II, he served as an officer in the Navy, then followed his grandfather and father into the land title business. He joined his father as executive vice president of Abstract & Title.

It didn’t last long. Edwards had married Nancy Dyer in 1938 and they had three sons, but his romance with Clyda Guggenberger ended his first marriage, and damaged his relationship with his father and his family. Divorce was not acceptable to Christian Scientists, and the elder Edwards fired his son. Valley Title Co. resulted, when Edwards and his new wife set up shop in Palo Alto during the 1950s.

For a brief period, Edwards joined the California Young Republicans and became president but resigned when he showed his liberal bent as chairman of the United World Federalists, a group that wanted Red China admitted to the United Nations in an attempt to control the spread of atomic weapons. He didn’t find that inconsistent, noting that Earl Warren, a Republican, was one of the great liberal chief justices of the United States.


Another thing even a delinquent, noncompliant, and “showing no funds” nonprofit does is give one or more of its directors a platform for being quoted in the press.  Look at the Kids in Common tax returns above, 2012 – 2014, Assets “0” and filing only a Form 990EZ — yet here’s a KCBS News Report on use of pepper spray at Juvenile Hall (In Santa Clara County) and somehow Dana Burnett of “Kids in Common” Is the second person quoted:

KCBS Cover Story:  Pepper Spray to be Allowed to Use at Santa Clara County Juvenile Hall Despite Opposition

9/26/2014 by Matt Bigler

Earl Thaxton, president of the Santa Clara County Association of County Educators decried the project. “Pepper spray in Juvenile Hall will set a dangerous precedent,” he said.

While the goal of the project is too decrease injuries to staff, advocacy group Kids in Common Executive Director Dana Burnett disputed that assertion.

“There is no data to say that it does do that and in fact I’ve just read one article that says injuries actually increase with use of pepper spray, due to slipping and cross-contamination,” she said.

Here she is, March 29, 2010, presenting (and the only “Presentation”) at a City of Mountain View Council Meeting, on the Children’s Rights Agenda — and under the name of “Kids in Common.”Bill of Rights for Children and Youth to be accepted by Dana Burnett, Executive Director of Kids in Common.” (Link may not still be active). ANother reference to it under First Focus, a D.C. group associated with The Children’s Network, the year being 2010: (“Changing the Paradigm: A Bill of Rights for Children & Youth.”)

In February of 2010, Santa Clara County, California adopted their own Bill of Rights for Children and Youth, a public declaration that all children are entitled to certain basic rights. In this essay, Dana Burnett, executive director of Kids in Common, discusses various cities and counties across the United States that have made children’s rights a priority in their policy agendas….

And if you click on the pdf and expand (to make it visible….) it appears her name is on this publication, which states:

History of the Bill of Rights for Children and Youth
The Bill of Rights for Children and Youth has its roots in the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). In 1979, the UN began work to develop “an inclusive, legally-binding human rights treaty for all the world’s children.”1 In 1989 the CRC was adopted by the UN General Assembly, and in 1990 it was instituted as international law. One hundred ninety-three nations have ratified the CRC and have used it as a guide to develop and implement policies and programs that impact children. But although all these nations have adopted the CRC, the United States has yet to endorse it. The United States was actively involved in drafting this important document, yet only the United States and Somalia, of all the nations that are a party to the UN, have failed to ratify the convention.
Portland, Oregon Becomes the First U.S. City to Adopt a Bill of Rights for Children and Youth
In August 2006, after city representatives spoke with more than 3,000 children and youth about how they described their rights, Portland, Oregon, became the first city in the nation to adopt a bill of rights written by and supporting children and youth. Several months later, Multnomah County reinforced the region’s commitment to youth and joined its largest city, Portland, in adopting “Our
Bill of Rights: Children and Youth.” Since that time, this historic document has guided the development of city and county policies.

So, to summarize on the larger trends, from 1999 – about 2008ff, it was The Greenbook Initiative.  About 2008ff, now, with similar personnel/agencies, it’s “Family Court Enhancement Project.”

This is a continuing process — but as to NCJFCJ — it’s a membership association, private, non-stock, non-profit, tax-exempt, and its members include the judges of the family and juvenile courts across the land.  The intent to control, direct, and restrict HOW domestic violence is considered, handled, and labeled — I do not believe should be funded by the public institutions, run IN the public institutions, but driven by private corporations like this one, especially as taking funds from foundations representing some of the major wealthy families of the country (David and Lucille Packard  — of Hewlett-Packard (HP printers, remember?) or the MacArthur Foundation.  BUT, that’s what we have in place.

NCJFCJ is also now also a major player in the “Family Court Enhancement Project” I mentioned above; in fact, it seems they are the grantee, and the courts sub-grantees (double check– that’s as I recall) — at any rate, they are a technical trainer.  They were [with five other entities, or groups, ONE in Minnesota] also technical trainer on the recent OVW Discretionary Grant solicitation 2013, labeled “Court Improvement Program.”  I’ll be posting on it shortly.

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

February 25, 2016 at 2:34 pm

4 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. How do we set up a conversation?

    David F. Hendren mobile: 617-645-5053

    From: Lets Get Honest! Blog Reply-To: Let’s Get Honest! Blog Date: Thursday, February 25, 2016 at 4:34 PM To: David Hendren Subject: [New post] What does Custody-Switching REALLY have to do with Unsound Psychological Theory? (Not much, actually)

    WordPress.com Let’s Get Honest posted: ” BLOGGER note: I determined to start posting “fast and furious” which may mean, less developmentally edited. So, you may see in this one what a copyeditor or developmental editor would clearly mark as two or three different “starts” to the post. Tha”


    February 26, 2016 at 8:47 am

    • Normally when people provide a phone# I don’t automatically publish the comment. Do you want this one left up or not (apparently “approved” from cellphone)?

      With the middle initial, I was able to locate Augmentum, Catalyst Ventures, PLI (faculty), a few other associations, and a VC startup speaker bio which even gives graduate/undergraduate degrees. I’ve already been on the related state websites.

      Because (case in point, this post), my blog is NOT about making squads of friends in high places nationwide, although I do call this a public-interest blog, I am not set up for ongoing private conversations. What is your interest, please.

      See second paragraph of this post (box, light-pink background) shows my immediate priority. Right now, I need some aggressive, smart lawyering (or non-standard but effective responses) to protect my person and essentially all my property, in the face of what is documented corrupt practices in the personal litigation, in fact-a whole set of related “below-the-belt” dealings which those involved have already been put on notice, I will not allow to be kept “under-wraps” any longer — particularly as doing so exposes me to an insane level of stress and ongoing squandering of time and money. The word “theft” and “fraud” would also be appropriate descriptors for the ongoing situation.
      If you are qualified in deciphering “interesting” investments found associated with some of the key players in this blog, I have plenty of data I’d like explained. I’m particularly curious why hedge fund investors are so fond of promoting public/private investments and “save the world” scenarios such as the Harlem Children’s Zone model, etc.

      The area you seem to come from is hot-wired with organizations in the family court and child abuse areas as well as individual parents I’ve had connections with. For this and other reasons, a general statement of interest would be appreciated, for example. Check your email later today, and comment here (I’ll be notified by email) if you want the comment “Unapproved.” Meanwhile, I’ll consider calling, probably after business hours because of pressing tasks related to (again, see paragraph 2 on this post).

      Let's Get Honest

      February 26, 2016 at 1:14 pm

    • Thought I’d already replied — first, do you wish this comment to be published or not (I could Unapprove) now that request for contact has been made. Second, if my reply ever did go through, I need to know what is the interest before making private contact with complete strangers. As this comment gives me a middle initial, I did deduce that, probably, I am speaking to someone who has an interest in venture capital, hedge funds, investment management, and teaching at a “PLI,” as well as speaking at a 2007 conference for young start-ups in New England. I found a number of company names, and viewed on state-level business entity search pages. I see a prior page was “liked” (thank you) but if you could communicate what is your reason for seeking personal contact. I also saw an academic background associated with speakers’ bio, etc.

      This blog was not based around “making friends in high places” in the positions I take, so I hope the reason for caution on my part is understood. Thanks.

      Let's Get Honest

      February 28, 2016 at 6:40 pm

  2. […] What does Custody-Switching REALLY have to do with Unsound Psychological Theory? (Not much, actually… […]

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: