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

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

Archive for February 19th, 2017

Progressive Language Creep Section from 2012 “Reconceptualize This” post (reviewed and reformatted 2017)

with 2 comments

CONTEXT, SEQUENCE of this Post with its 2012 parent…

Any post on this blog should stand alone, interesting and relevant, but many communicate better when read as part of the designated ensemble.  Generally, no one post will contain all the information (that I’ve written up and published) on any single organization or program, nor could any post contain enough of that basic information, I believe, to show both depth (drill-down Show-and-Tell) and discussion of where it fits in the larger networks of public agencies or entities (like State — State of Ohio, State of Florida, State of New York…) with private ones, fauna and flora varying from minuscule to nearly invisible to the naked eye, and “forces to be reckoned with” even for U.S. Presidents.

Among the “nearly invisible,” one has to distinguish sometimes those with bigger mouths (found testifying for more funding for “the cause” before state or U.S. legislatures, or their subcommittees), but below-zero budgets (as I round recently in Ohio: this DV entity, which my 2012 post had mentioned, managed to maintain a below-zero deficit from 2002 – 2015, but that didn’t stop the spokepersons (its leadership) from testifying, citing to the organization name each time.  My question was, why maintain a constantly over-spending and obviously not well-funded entity in the first place?)

Full title of that 2012 “…Reconceptualize This…” post, with shortlink ending “-101”ABA, APA, AFCC, AAML, . . and others:  Reconceptualize This!  [Some Ohio Councils, Commissions, and Headlines, Incl. Basic Links][Chosen to represent 2012 in my 2017 Retrospective, includes its own]

I’d pulled out the section beginning:


and am keeping it separate, here, connecting a link, there.  THIS post with short-link ending “-5SR, ” is “Progressive Language Creep Section from 2012 “Reconceptualize This” post (reviewed and reformatted 2017)“] Completed Feb 14, 2017 (Valentine’s Day 🙂 ) but being one of perhaps 3 updates to the “Reconceptualize” post, there is a natural sequence in which should be published first, so I may delay another day or so. [published 2/19/2017]

…(and with two or three of its own 2017 offspring)

Two main themes (one regarding a program, another one person/ality and his related organizations under similar but not identical names) developed in this post have also been siphoned off to further develop them.  Marked in context when it comes up.

so that what remains here, each marked by a large heading will be:

(1) a substantial “Preview” and  (2) “2012 Contents, Formatted and Updated,” which represents the original 2012 contents (bottom under the Progressive Language Creep section), but with most formatting cleaned up and replacing some links no longer valid.  The preview contains more of my current understanding, the 2012 Contents (the rest of post) shows which organizations,  programs and their rhetoric had raised red flags back then.   I am still concerned about the same organizations, programs and their rhetorics (particularly as a woman and a mother), but it’s clear in reviewing the material I hadn’t fully migrated to “skip the debate on the rhetoric:  FIRST, show me the money, and the money behind the money, in terms of business registrations and tax returns !!!” Also, five years is a long time, and I’d researched (done “drill-downs”) on many organizations and tax-exempt foundations, as well as federal grants streams, since then.

“Progressive” in the title refers to “gradually, over time” which the post reviews in a year-by-year sampling of developments in the fields I blog, not to the political persuasion commonly though to be the polar opposite of “conservative.” The words “Language Creep” communicate the “gradually over time” sense well enough but in 2012 I’d added that word to intensify the meaning.

Anyhow, this update is now done, is now about 12,000 words (was originally closer to 6,000) and has some extra screenprints where former links were broken.


This post ends looking at the American Humane Association historic involvement in the Child Protection Services without quite focusing on this on its main website, and the “QIC-NRF.”  (Screenprinted, added this 2010 reference) found at “CalSWEC.Berkeley.edu…/QIC-NRF…”

I’d blogged recently on CalSWEC for its promotion of some funky (shell-game, move the money among all 3) Ohio nonprofits in exactly this field as regional trainers, too).  That post link & title:

Searching “QIC-NRF,” there are plenty of results.  (next two images have links in their captions):


CLICK HERE FOR FULL-SIZED! QIC-NRF search Page 1 of 2 Google Search Results.  Youtube (image nr bottom) reveals connections btwn QIC-NRF participants (incl pilots) and existing recipients of other HHS Father-focused funding. NewDay Services also active in Access&Visitation grants (Tarrant County TX) as I recall: “Uploaded on May 26, 2011 Duane Yales tells his story and journey through the Child Welfare System. Duane was asked to represent Texas on the QIC-NRF National Father’s Advisory Council. NewDay Services for Children & Families was the local service provider for the project. Duane’s story has been a source of inspiration to child welfare workers to see fathers in a different light than they have traditionally seen them. This has led to better engagement with fathers, leading to better communication and better outcomes for the children. Category Nonprofits & Activism License Standard YouTube License”


CLICK HERE for FULL-SIZED! Page 2 of 2 Google Search results for “QIC-NRF” includes NACChildlaw, Fatherhood.gov, CBExpress (Children’s Bureau newsletter), DCCourts.gov and more


may not be full-page image. See CalSWEC.berkeley.edu link for the same.


From same document, same link (2010 report)


















I chose the CalSWEC one and discovered internal consistencies, errors (in naming the supporting grant) and avoidance of naming the actual players and what was their various relationship (let alone dollar amounts) flowing among them through a common practice, though not a moral one, of speaking of a project or program as though it were a corporate person, i.e., with a life of its own to receive and disburse funds.

A Program =/= a Person (business entity).

This is subtle, but it cannot be unintentional, and it is a red flag (especially with other symptoms) of something “not quite right” about the situation, and typically involving a financial trail slated for derailment.  Otherwise, why not just tell the truth up front, and the first time, about who paid whom for what?

[From an inside page] The National Quality Improvement Center on Non-Resident Fathers and the Child Welfare System (QIC-NRF) is a collaborative effort among the American Humane Association, the American Bar Association Center on Children and the Law and the National Fatherhood Initiative, and funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Children’s Bureau  [Image shown above]

This gets interesting — as the inside page is only referencing the QIC-NRF factor, but the cover page references QIC-NRF and ‘QIC-Child Welfare System” both.  Which is it?

So the National QIC-NRF is the “effort” or project, but it’s spoken of as if it’s the producer. or curriculum funder, on the face page, with no reference to the role of the HHS:

[From the cover page] Curriculum Funded by the National Quality Improvement Center on Non-Resident Fathers and the Child Welfare System

One moment it’s an entity, the next, a collaborative effort by 3 other entities (all nonprofits, the ABA a big one, the AHA, an old and generally respected one, and the NFI, while more controversial for its programming, having incorporated in 1994, has been influential and its programming is not entrenched within 1996 Welfare Reform and social services delivery systems through establishing grants administered by HHS, authorized under 1996 Welfare Reform.  As the HHS decides who gets these discretionary funds appropriated to it, I’d say HHS leadership (which in some years was closely entrenched with NFI leadership — do some homework, even Wikipedia, it will come up) is also a collaborator.

Read the rest of this entry »

Retrospective @ 1/2017: Beginning-of-Year Posts (“As I’ve Been Saying, Since 2009”) and an Update or Two

with one comment

Retrospective @ 1/2017:  Beginning-of-Year Posts (“As I’ve Been Saying, Since 2009”) and an Update or Two (<=this post title with case-sensitive shortlink ending “-5wN”)

This is from the juicy center of “Dear Readers (2017 Themes, Ongoing Concerns)” post. It’s here as temporary scaffolding to work on the structure, but may end up putting down roots separately, and I’ll provide a skywalk (link) back to the original construction site (post).  It is referenced as a major section there, but when both are published, probably will be found here.


Retrospective: Beginning-of-year posts, since 2009:

(Inside the sky-blue borders.  Below this is more text, written first under this title).


February 28, 2016 postCredentialing and Schooling Psychologists (speaking of MN and the Grazzini-Rucki case) (My second in 2016).  Definitely a thorough and interesting read, even more relevant today in showing the proliferation of for-profit education, schools of professional psychologists, and who’s been investing of them, as well as connection to major (as in NYS) “Centers.”  They just want to improve lives — and courts — according to a mutually shared model…


2015 — no posts published all year.  It was a “busy” year…

2014, with an “Update” below.

2014 – 8 posted in January, I picked this one as typical:  How many “governments” are there?  What do they do?  What’s the Collective Cost?  Example, funding of NFLG (Nat’l Fatherhood Leaders Group, in DC) and others.  [appearance/para. breaks of this post not the most stylistic..]

2013, two posts, with a second “Update” below.

For 2013 – I’m picking two (I also considered well-developed draft.  Maybe later…)  

Somehow (in later revisions) I got into AFCC again, so there is a brief section with its tax returns and a few annotated images mixed into previewing the second chosen post for 2013, (“Hardly Breaking News .. Black People and the Tavistock Institute”) .. These are complicated to annotate and insert/label, and having put that section in as part of the natural flow, I’m going to just leave it in place…. The felt connection was of having had one’s family life, essentially, violated, and children alienated from their origins, trained to discredit and deride them.  

There are very real connections to population control as exercised in South Africa a century (plus) ago, and our current, USA, social services (welfare) system, in fact the overall systems of population control and management, complete with the “separate but unequal” and inbred caste systems — while an ongoing insistence that anyone helped should just accept the patronizing attitudes of those who condescend to do so.  Apart from a felt similarity in the operational “DNA” of the current “family court systems” (and related ones), there remains also the historic developments of the same. 

At this time I was blogging in html-only mode (I remember why – it was during a lean time, and related to the input device),.  The posts lack logos or images, and some of the tables didn’t hold their position over time. I’m not real proud of the formatting,  but I am of the information and points made which did not coast downstream on existing currents, but continued observing and looking for an anchor to others’, more publicized interpretations of the problems with the family courts vis-a-vis domestic violence and child abuse.  A quick cleanup [using techniques learned since] of the better earlier posts would be helpful, but I don’t see it happening soon.

2013 posts tended to quote extensively from websites (links provided) which links may have dissipated since.  They are one form of historical chronicling of this field. Another place to look is the Wayback Machine (internet archives), but it’s only as good as the web pages of which it takes snapshots, and only on those specific dates.

(1) Jan. 9, 2013, STILL Too Hot to Touch with a Ten-Foot Pole?  Supervised Visitation Racketeering (Shockome/Viola Stroud case) and Professionalization (SVNetwork.org) etc. [publ. Jan. 9, 2013]  [This post has two comments from a mother in Arizona [username “stillhere”], with whom I later had extensive conversations, and re: whom I also checked out the criminal docket referenced on her ex..She had also attended the 2012 Broken Courts Conference (which was in Arizona).  We lost touch in last year or so.  A nearby post continues the theme of people who just didn’t want to talk about that financial fraud which continued to surface in this grants-sponsored/non-profit administered field.

FYI the “Don’t Ask|Don’t Tell” approach to system-wide abuse of power doesn’t work. Bad idea..]

(2) Jan. 16, 2013, Hardly Breaking News, But Still True:  “Black People and the Tavistock Institute” (2009 post)  (about 10K words, and wide-ranging, but to the point.  Someone else wrote the 2009 post is one written another which spoke to current issues…

Excerpt:  Imagine that a stranger broke into your home, robbing it, leaving it in ruins and then kidnapped your children to work as servants within his home.  This stranger, fearing an eventual retribution from these kidnapped children will find it necessary to implement systems for ensuring that these children remain loyal.   The stranger may do so by routinely showing the children pictures of their ruined former home while falsely retelling the details of the event (and) that he merely rescued them from their ruins, and that their parents didn’t want them.

In effect (though the “breaking, entering, taking, and alienating” took different forms) many of us do not have to imagine this.  While this is referring to at least the previous African kidnapping for intercontinental slave trading when it started and continued in previous centuries — with subsequent plans to integrate and acculturate the subjugated population at the appropriate level, only, in society — that paragraph also accurately describes what IS happening now, individually  but in a widespread fashion to independent and self-sufficient, law-abiding women and mothers .

And the systems in place to make it happen made NO specific media attention during the recent US Presidential campaign, transition time, or most recently, inaugural speeches or celebrations.

This also happens I’m sure to men and fathers, but the difference is when there has been violence, threats, terrorism, and destruction already within the family unit, public institutions which virtually worship “the family” endanger women by minimizing the abuse, and setting up a “separate and unequal” system of courts for us as parents.

Read the rest of this entry »

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

February 19, 2017 at 8:51 pm

%d bloggers like this: