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

Like many of my posts, it will undergo some post-publication editing, usually for clarity or layout (how images display). [[In fact,  this next segment added post-publication update, on 7/19/2017.  I’ll mark where the added segment ends.]]

 [[Segment added post-publication update, 7/19/2017]]

The ongoing theme has been …”DO YOU KNOW YOUR NGA, NCSC, NCSL, NCSEA, NCJFCJ, NCCD, NACC,  NASMHPD, not to mention ICMA?” that is, do you know? about the network of private nonprofit associations named after public offices or officials who are networking together to function as government without being government entities? In this theme, drafted October, 2014 under basically that title, I split it into three basic parts, with the last (“Part 3”) about the ABA (Bar) and APA (Psychological).  I also wrote at length and an extra post about the pushing of the mental health/illness theme when it came to the NASMHPD (National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors) which is operating under a cooperative agreement with the “NGA.” (National Governors’ Association).

The NASMHPD is problematic through:  (a) involvement with the objectionable TMAP (Texas Medication Algorithm Project), a way of getting around failed clinical trials to promote excess and more expensive types of (unsafe, injurious it turns out) medication for use statewide, an area over which, obviously, groups like the NASMHPD would have some influence as its members are state-level heads of “Mental Health Programming.”  (b) in general, taking funding from some of the same “Big Pharma” (Rx) companies developing and pushing some of the drugs, including several who are now being sued by state attorney generals and others for their responsibility in current very unhealthy (except for business profits) opioid abuse epidemics and ===>>> (c ) patterns of networking AS nonprofits with a specific theme intended to go national, which brings it into an area I have now researched as to several different fields (including marriage/fatherhood, domestic violence prevention, child abuse prevention, supervised visitation and related, and more recently, school reform initiatives (public/private liaisons with big foundation money behind them).  I believe that the extent of such networking when it comes to mental health (and related Rx possibilities = major financial incentives to at times inappropriately control population, and bill the public for it) is pervasive and should not be ignored.  However, it’s the organizational tactics in the nonprofit sector (regardless of “theme”) to also be aware of, and how organizations copy other organizations’ successful models.

Another factoid is that many of these same pharmaceutical companies can ALSO sponsor or get to government officials more easily ( for membership or Corporate Donor/Partner fees  — which they can certainly afford to pay) — which brings us back to the NGA, NCSC, NCSL, etc. list above.  The fact that the organization (as to that list) is in the private sector makes it legal, and because these organizations themselves are not usually in the headlines AND on Forms 990, donations are aggregated, at least as far as public gets to see (i.e., contributions are lumped together into a single number on the return), harder to follow. The collective influence is also harder to see simply when it is dispersed among many entities. This influence is not less for being less seen — it still is there, but when results are showing up inappropriate, specifically WHERE to resist or protest should be known.  My point is, the nonprofit sector PER SE sets the stage for this.   The nonprofit sector understood as a factor of everyone else (incl. corporations) getting taxed, brings it back to the point of taxation, specifically the income tax.   

That’s also WHY the “CAFR” material is so important to grasp!

re: (a) TMAP (Texas Medication Algorithm Project) (just a reminder):

Two screenprints, one from TMAP Wiki (part not shown describes whistleblower Alan Jones’ experience, including being fired from his state’s OIG after reporting on this).  You can see readily how it would intersect with politics and government:

While I didn’t quote “CCHR,” in Los Angeles, formed in 1982, however for more info on the TMAP details, you can see its “psycho-pharma front groups” page.  (See organizations on its right sidebar).  Just be aware who you are dealing with (as I recall, which could be challenged, as having its roots in Scientology — in other words, rather than having people drugged up, perhaps it’s better the become “clear” through other means). (Or, see CCHR and its 6166 Sunset Blvd Los Angeles “Psychiatry: An Industry of Death” Museum opening, featured on Scientology.org). That said, they provide a lot of documentation, and are not the only people protesting TMAP, “Big Pharma” or in appropriate over-drugging of vulnerable populations under state control! I have quoted CCHR before, much earlier on the blog and in passing, probably re: the New Freedom Mental Health Commission.At least they post audited financials and Form 990s.  Mission description from a recent 990. (EIN#680005541):

THE CITIZENS COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS (CCHR) IS A NON-PROFIT, NON-POLITICAL, NON-RELIGIOUS MENTAL HEALTH INDUSTRY WATCHDOG WHOSE MISSION IS TO ERADICATE ABUSES COMMITTED UNDER THE GUISE OF MENTAL HEALTH. WE WORK TO ENSURE PATIENT AND CONSUMER PROTECTIONS ARE ENACTED AND UPHELD AS THERE IS RAMPANT ABUSE IN THE FIELD OF MENTAL HEALTH. IN THIS ROLE, CCHR HAS HELPED TO ENACT MORE THAN 150 LAWS PROTECTING INDIVIDUALS FROM ABUSIVE OR COERCIVE MENTAL HEALTH PRACTICES SINCE IT WAS FORMED OVER 48 YEARS AGO.

---

re: (c ) patterns of networking AS nonprofits with a specific theme intended to go national (just a reminder):

I  also looked at, if you read these (my) posts, other mental health/illness-named nonprofits, which have “umbrella” or “parent” organizations (Mental Health America, National Association on Mental Illness, now branded as “NAMI”) and “DBSA” (Depression Bipolar Support Association), including in “Even More Considerations on NASMHPD (and DBSA, and NAMI), and MHA.…”  Each of the above associations has spawned, launched, inspired, and helped support (including sometimes through direct grants ) the creation or organization of many — several dozen similarly-named (after originating nonprofit) for each, or more, for some, as I recall — but I did post sample screenprints showing the list– fiscally independent (filing their own tax returns, not under a group membership) and “unrelated” (NOT referenced as “related entities” on the main group entity’s tax returns — MHA, NAMI, or DBSA) nonprofits also, typically named after a state, metropolitan region, or county.**  Each entity may have different by-laws on how this works (for example, I believe it was NAMI which allowed only ONE state-level affiliate per state).  In other words, networks of “kinda/sorta related” organizations, but not really when it comes to the IRS.

**So does CCHR (look at its organization-posted FY20015 Form 990, Schedule C (Schedules come after all Roman-numeral identified Parts of the Return, That is, I, II, III etc.), which provides a two-page list of affiliated entities all named “Citizens Committee on Human Rights” — and add a geography identifier (i.e. state or city name, etc.).  While there look at its Schedule B named contributors and see that one couple gave $886K and other individuals over $70K each such that ⅓ of its contributions/donations (See Pt I and Pt VIII) came from just a few people.  Advertising (Pt IX) occupied about ⅓ of its functional expenses, while a pittance (Sched I) was returned to affiliates and some to the Church of Scientology, nearby on the same street.  There  were some membership fees and there was some (Schedule F) recorded international activity.

The APA and the ABA are also so organized, which I also gave in sample screenprints in previous posts. My point is become aware of the networking in the private, nonprofit sector as organized nationally (or, internationally) targeting specific functions or services provided by government, with the purpose of controlling in which direction they are moved.  Also become aware of them as a financial force if and when their assets and investments are collectively pooled.  This happens in both the private and the public sectors, which also interact (trade, buy, sell, etc.) with each other.  This type of information isn’t “journalistic” and doesn’t tend to sell newsprint and may lack social media “curb appeal”– but it’s part of how our country operates, and has its core basis in WHERE one falls along the tax spectrum or continuum (exempt, or not).  It’s essential to know and come to terms with!

 [[This  ends a segment added post-publication update, 7/19/2017]]

---

I have been putting out some long posts recently.  But this one is shorter at about (with above addition, now) 8,800 words. It introduces the concepts from and links to some of my key prior posts on the same (I picked out five specific ones), then continues on a post that references them, published 07/12/2017, called Featuring Five Vital Posts on …. Our Assigned Places in the Tax Continuum Pecking Order (from ABA, APA post update).  That continuation post has more substance on the Five Vital Posts.  This one (that you’re now looking at) serves as an introduction, and has some extra material not on the continuation post (in light-blue background section).

The originating post itself actually I see reflected three major subject matters, although that length of title also reflected what was actually covered in the post three years ago.  The three subject matters are reflected in the post title’s three sentences:

The huge October 2014 post may have not been published possibly from my awareness at the time that it contained personal narratives, and being under considerable pressure at the time, I was probably not comfortable with hitting “publish.”   I had blogged for several years without identifying myself by name, except as “Let’s Get Honest.”  In spring 2014, I had reason to post a public petition for help and at that time, while not focusing on my name or current case, at least stated it on the blog.

Not to mention, on re-visiting that huge October 2014 post which, throughout 2016, somehow I thought HAD been published (without remembering the date it was written — or I’d have remembered that I stopped posting June 29, 2014, for a year and a half), a major section’s paragraph breaks had vanished (been erased somehow).

Now that the major work was done for this portion (on  “Featuring Five Vital Posts,”) and it’s now published, I feel OK about putting out this shorter segment.  There is some overlap; the main reason I’m putting this one out also is the section linking to financial statements of the US Government, and the colorful section showing at least one response to the topic of those financial statements having been brought up in public.  (Next two images, in miniature):

 

ANECDOTAL: I remember Fall 2014 as an ongoing crisis in my personal situation / family dealings (my generation), which had followed a very tough few years. We were about to go back into court about the situation.  In hindsight, I can see why I was so intent on piecing together HOW could certain types of things continue to happen, year after year as types of basic abuse of persons (not to mention theft of property) in the USA, as well as how could the same types of aggression (with only slight variations by “venue”) keep occuring so long after originally identified, protested and legal intervention sought, and after (in my individual situation) I’d taken all possible actions I could to protest, resist, and separate myself from the offending persons, yet continue working to support my household and participate as a human being in non-family-strife/litigation parts of my community and of, in general, society.   I was already worn out from excess litigation stretching out years; THE primary legitimate, legal as to existing family court orders, and normal life activities (primarily relating to work and family) I’d been involved in before the litigation had been, literally, stopped.

---

So in October 2014 and earlier, and as you can see from the recent posts, I was hammering on the ABA and the APA in large part because of where they “met in action” in the family courts, and because both are so large, have been around so long they may seem immoveable, and as to the APA, an acceptable ongoing feature of the country, while functioning entrenched, and controlling major networks of power and influence.

---

The post draft showed that in 2014 I was already aware of the “Related Entities” concept and had noticed them for these two organizations, the APA and the ABA.  I’d referenced it, as well as a good deal of the organizational timelines.

Separately, I’d read extensively on psychology in general (especially after 2012) because it kept coming up as a topic, and among professionals striving to control the “fix the family courts” and so-called protective mothers/parents movement.

---

In 2017, during the update, I decided to put these ABA- and APA-related entities on display — another reason the post became so long.

A third reason was a lot of the earlier narrative dealing with my personal situation.  However, understanding why this type of narrative came up still relates to why I’m writing. It reflects some of the power dynamics I’ve been writing about, so just cutting out the entire discussion didn’t seem to work.

I went to work on the updates.  Because the topic focused on “related posts” (i.e., I’d already been publishing on these topics, steadily), at least one of those also had to be reviewed and reformatted somewhat (“A Different Kind of Attention“).

---

I’ve already been working on this post nearly a week (see Archives showing last published dates) in fact, before the “Even More on…” post, regarding (four mental health-focused organizations) post was published ca. July 8).

From the top of the “Even More” post…

The theme, continued, is still …”DO YOU KNOW YOUR NGA, NCSC, NCSL, NCSEA, NCJFCJ, NCCD, NACC,  NASMHPD, not to mention ICMA?”

Post full title: Even More Considerations on NASMHPD (and DBSA, and NAMI), and MHA. See Also Recent Epidemic? of Attorneys-General Suing Big Pharma over the Opioid Abuse Epidemic [July 2, 2017 review + updates] (with short-link ending “-79i”)

This post being published July 6, 2017 evening is about 8,000 words (shorter, for a change!). It comes in two basic sections — ICMA-related,** and The Four Organizations (NASMHPD, DBSA, NAMI, and MHA) related.

[**The section there on the ICMA — International City/County Managers Association and its related? entity ICMARC.org (the ICMA Retirement Corporation) is significant, and valuable information.  As the ICMA people are who, probably, manage local government investments (including whether to pool them up to a larger state level, such as county or state, or into the PMIAs or LAIFs (see “State-Run Banks” 7/17/17 post for discussion), this would also be relevant to Walter Burien’s TRF solution, which entails, I believe, keeping the same fund managers in place — they’re already experienced — but consolidating (at each government level) the funds for transparency, and let the investments fund the budget, so phasing out taxation.]

---

I hope that by removing this section from the original, I can get that one out, and follow up with this material.  SOME of the material was left on original site.

I think it’s time to reclaim some language which categorizes groups according to their taxable status and their relationship to their function in relationship to government and from there, given we are taxed, to taxation. In that context, who is controlling whom, and who is serving whom? Let’s talk finances and accounting. Let’s talk about taxation is to be with — not without –representation and by informed consent.  How can one consent to what one is not informed about? Any one can talk “rights,” endlessly, by a sub-population’s profile, but while systems are changing to accommodate a constantly swinging pendulum of profile-based rights, by the decade it seems, what happened to a representative government, locally, where we live, and due process under those laws in those courts when we need to resort to them?

To Identify and Understand shows Why [and How] We Must Withstand.

The existence, with so little notice and public commentary, of so many such organizations as those above signals a presence that is NOT MEANT to be understood by the masses, whose income provides most of a yearly federal budget receipts as shown from HERE:

FMS-TREASURY-GOV piechart + legend, 2013 Federal receipts 10% Corp, 46% Income Taxes, 30+% SocSec-Retiremt Contributions-2 and with some discussion,in a bright yellow box (my post) here.    THIS LINK is to more details at the Fiscal Management Service which as of 2001 is as I understand it a new, combined office:

The Financial Management Service (FMS) and the Bureau of the Public Debt (BPD) have consolidated into the Bureau of the Fiscal Service. You will now be redirected to the Combined Statement of Receipts, Outlays, and Balances, Bureau of the Fiscal Service Web site. If you are not redirected in 15 seconds, you can continue to this site by visiting Combined Statement of Receipts, Outlays, and Balances.

A little percentage talk (see also that piechart): Corporations only pay 10% of federal receipts, in part because there are (maybe…) fewer corporations around than individual taxpayers around.

On the other hand, corporations, smart ones, are smart enough to avoid excess taxation — which their shareholders and investors wouldn’t like, by donating to some terrific philanthropic (tax-exempt!) “foundations” or “trusts” — which are NON-stock and can be privately controlled. Or, to form such tax-exempt (nonprofit) associations. From there, without too many eyes on the money, they can go about influencing government policy.

This leaves the bulk of the federal receipts (as shown above) to contributions from: Income Taxes (46%) and Social Security/Retirement Contributions (30%), which is to say, to (as I understand it) a HUGE public investment platform commonly known as “Social Security,” obviously not just one big fat trust fund, but a variety of them. In others, you work, and you pay into Social Security, maybe even retirement, by virtue of working. So does your employer. If you are self-employed, you pay the whole amount yourself.

Every one pays in now for a return on their deposits later, (except those who do not pay), if that makes any sense.

In plain English, (math, I should say), what does “46% + 30% = 76%” add up to — less than, or more than half of federal receipts?

---

Yet, the public is lectured and pushed as to our burden of the public debt, while tax-exempt corporations + government operations collaborate to set up systems of population management, including utilizing professionals with skills of persuasion and/or intimidation so we will not forget who should be blamed, and tagged, for the public debt.

---

For an antidote, go read some Walter Burien (May 10, 2010, “Is our Government Bankrupt?…. Analogies are Fun to Use: Is the Columbian Cartel short of cocaine?,” Clint Richardson (July 20, 2013, “Detroit: The Latest Bankruptcy Lie” (<==hover cursor over link for an abstract, and read the top part, too)), or Carl Herman, who asks such questions as, “CAFR summary: if $600B ‘fund’ can’t fund $27B pension, $16B budget deficit, why have it?? (from his 2012 article) and, like the others, can also walk people through it, and has:

• Interview: Game-changing CAFR trillions explained (Feb. 14, 2014)….These astounding funds are disclosed in official Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFRs). Government and media “leaders” claiming no options but austerity while failing to honestly communicate surplus trillions is OBVIOUS criminal financial fraud . . .

So did a deceased person, deceased not long after posting a guideline how to locate and research CAFRs and about the budget surpluses accumulating year after year:  Colonel Gerald R. Klatt (Qualifications) (Review Process, a walk-through to total the funds for any CAFR once it’s been located, “computer not needed.”  By design CAFRs follow a certain format. They do have tables of contents and explanatory notes, and introductory Transmittal letters also. So, that link walks you through the format.) Colonel Klatt also set forth a “CAFR Budget Process.  I think Mr. Burien may not agree with his proposal, but I want to point out what Klatt said about “Problem #1” of the budget process in most state and local governments.It would seem to apply to the federal and I think may help people understand what’s going on, what’s being referred to, when when “DEBT” and “BANKRUPT” claims are being pushed through the media:

The funds not spent in one year are seldom recycled and considered in the next years budget, and tend to increase and accumulate year after year. The potential surpluses disclosed in the State and local government reports on this site clearly proves that surpluses are allowed to accumulate, and do not receive adequate consideration in the budget process.

Or, you could even read some of my posts on this since discovering it, Spring 2012, and relating this to the family law field and welfare reform over at my “Cold Hard Facts” blog.  I actually started posting CAFRs on the sidebar there while pulling strands of information, really chronologies from corporate, economic, academic, and family law fields together.

---

So, if you still think that those in power (whether at the top of the government or the top of the philanthropic heaps, so to speak) are going to give a more honest, more expert acknowledgement of the above section, good luck!

If this non-response or “change the subject” response is still unclear, watch the response when someone in power is challenged on their facts: Carl Herman couldn’t get an answer when he attempted to characterize “omission” as criminal fraud.

---

Burien couldn’t get an straight answer from Public Banking promoter and Green Party Candidate for California State Treasurer Ellen H. Brown in 2010, nor I in January/February 2014, but it didn’t take long to find out who was coming from a more honest question, and who was dodging answers.  [[Reader note:  this post wasn’t published til summer 2017, but it was originally written in fall 2014.]]

---

In the last situation (Herman, Burien, “Let’s Get Honest,”) I came out of “left field” to Web of Debt author and website, Ms. Brown, apparently as a nobody on “Web of Debt” blog.  I asked the same individual some very simple, very basic questions, noted the responses, and posted the responses on my blog. Being a woman myself, and knowing how some of our gender operates (playing the group-association mentality when they don’t have the “stuff’ to give a straight answer without their “friends” validating it), in my own email inbox, I watched Ms. Brown’s attempt to “divide and conquer” three men (Clint Richardson also (“realitybloger.wordpress.com”)) who were all informed about CAFRS, and later paid more attention, myself to what was going on in this field.

---

See my 2014 posts, probably within the last ten, on my sidebar. {{@Jun 2017, obviously no longer true — that section holds only most recent posts.  See Table of Contents pages, access from top of blog.//LGH}}Look for the ones with the brightest colors so people with short attention spans, might still read them.  Like Accounting Literacy Matters. Cause-based Literacy Doesn’t. (Spring 2010, Ellen H Brown tangles with Walter Burien’s info, or at least tries to.)May 4, 2014.
Look for this section of the post, although know that I did update it some just now, 2017:

(Original context for next, bolded statement (written in 2014) is missing-in-action, that is, the action of editing and splitting the posts.  If found, I’ll post it here again; the organizations referenced probably related to NGA, AFCC, etc. and others promoting marriage/fatherhood and in the process, changing or worsening the existing culture and dynamics of the family court systems towards minimization of criminal behavior, in attempts to therapize the entire family wherever possible, or simply extort them or turn them away if no real money is to be made from churning specific cases.)

I have run across every one of the organizations they represent (where they actually do) in the course of researching and writing this blog, and essentially NONE of them outside it.

I have also been subject to policies set in many of [said organizations referenced in the “Accounting Literacy Matters” post] against the concept of individual legal or human rights, in favor of relationship talk and gender-based rights, and as a woman and like many women subjected to having national policies set, coordinated, and even legislated through these networked, often elitist groups, some of them historically entrenched in their influence for decades groups.

---

I learned about them {[said organizations referenced in the “Accounting Literacy Matters” post and similar ones] “piecemeal” (piece by piece, parts of a larger puzzle) while looking up other information, and gradually gained the vocabulary to talk about them to others. Some of them I know more than others about.

---

Several (not just one or two) have set policy and practice affecting people who divorce or two-parent households, particularly those with kids. Please notice I didn’t even list “AFCC” (Association of Family and Conciliation Courts) or “CRC” (Children’s Rights Council, despite its name, an acknowledged fathers’ rights group from the mid-1980s), yet both those groups (certainly their leadership) know about many (if not most) of the above organizations and do some business with some business with some of them.

So how come people who can now (finally) recognize SOME acronymslike “AFCC” or “CRC” and know or even recite by rote a few pieces of information, probably not well-processed, which have finally seeped into the consciousness of SOME parents concerned about the family courts in SOME circles don’t know about ALL of those in the title of this post?##

Be assured, that’s only a partial list of ones that have come to my attention, which by no means guarantees is a complete list of major influential groups whose names begin with the letter N (or, I) who may be (and have been) affecting their take-home pay, or civil, legal, or human rights?

• {{##Post was split in three, this was referring to title of the original (Oct. 25, 2014) draft reciting a list starting [approximately] “Do You Know Your NGA, NCSC, NCSL…etc.” //LGH Jun 27, 2017}} 

Maybe we were barking up the wrong tree, as coached to, and forgetting to use our other senses, like, seeing, hearing and smelling something out of place, bloodhounds for the truth, we treed some quarry, maybe, but the hunt was staged.Maybe part of this is because of running with a pack of dogs instead of thinking like their masters, like full-status, intelligent human beings.

Maybe we weren’t meant to know. Maybe some of us should ask all those groups presenting, consistently for ten years at Battered Mother’s Custody Conference and running with California Protective Parents Association/Mothers of Lost Children (et al.) I’ve been posting on this spring, and ask them how come it took about ten years (and exposes by politically incorrect and/or “excommunicated” mothers not presenting or hanging with the same crowd, “lone wolf reporters,” ongoing and ignored meanwhile) to even utter the words “AFCC” in a group mailing, habitually on a website, or (“God forbid”) from a podium. And whether that has anything to do with the correspondence between professionals in at least three fields (psychologists/mental health; lawyers, or one prominent ex-(disbarred) lawyer, and (whether JD, Psy.D. or not), DV leadership among all of the above?)

---

Again, I’ve been blogging it independently and consistently between major family incidents and setbacks (like other parents) since 2009 and have brought it up to many of the groupies year after year, but I’m not seeking major journal publication, so apparently that doesn’t count, although what’s on this blog, alone (even reduced to its bare bones) would still make a book significantly addressing the awareness gap. I’ve also seen blogs (and at least one forum) with plenty of my expository comments on them go down or be shut down; which is one reason I started a blog that wouldn’t go down that easy.

---

Now, after years of this, I see how rare a conversation that still is, despite how important it is.

Related posts, see “Vital Links” on sidebar:

• Abolishing Representative Gov’t through Presidential Executive Orders: How 50 States become 10 Federal Regions
  • Politically, 50 states and territories. Economically, 10 Regions. Compare to HHS regions.
• The “Social-Sciencification” of America (Roosevelt’s Reorganization Act of 1939, the EOP, and: Brownlow, Merriam, Gulick– and Ruml)
  • EOP = “Executive Office of the President.” Ruml, we can thank for Pay-As-You-Go Income Tax.
• A Stunning Validation //Emotional Tyranny,The Assault on Truth, Psychoanalysis (5/12/2013):
  • with 6 comments
    This post has been “sticky” to the top of my blog for a long time. Its contents are primary… [to comprehending]the philosophical underpinnings of the entire Family and Conciliation Court system. I decided to make it a page 0n 5/7/2013. Comments welcome. …Yesterday, it had been my intent simply to present some basic information on the domination of psychology and education as fields of choice for those involved in population management through the courts. BUT — a single woman from Indiana University’s “Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences,” (cf. Kaiser Wilhelm Brain Institute, and there is a connection), well, enough was enough and one thing led to another. [[Sigmund]] Freud KNEW but he was censored and silenced. It haunted him. Others knew (including Anna Freud) but they also censored. I’m getting tired of all that…. In writing this post, I looked up some personnel. One of them (below), a 2012 AFCC Stanley Cohen awardee, had participated in “The Kinsey Institute.” I looked up one of the other investigators and in a book list ran across: Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson: “Against Therapy: Emotional Tyranny and the Myth of Psychological Healing.” (2012) . . . “With passion and clarity, Against Therapy addresses the profession’s core weaknesses, contending that, since therapy’s aim is to change people, and this is achieved according to therapist’s own notions and prejudices, the psychological process is necessarily corrupt. With a foreword by the eminent British psychologist Dorothy Rowe, this cogent and convincing book has shattering implications.”
• NAMES: “Center, Council, Judicial, Legislative, Institute…” But WHO they are, and how legit, is in the LABEL. (8/30/2013)
• A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment (3/14/2014)
  • Or, a more recent version of the same title:
    A Different Kind of Attention develops Sound Judgment  [Original, March 23, 2014.  Reformatting and Reminders March 14, 2017, Three Years Later][+July 2017 update]. (short-link ending “-2qm”)

[Commentary on the post, not a quote from it:]

This pain-in-the-neck-to-read post covers major ground. Although it needs to be split, it is worth reading NOW and with its recent update, for breadth of topics, and for asking hard questions I have NOT heard or read others ask yet, to date. Possibly people operating from a position of lack, or of fear (which I certainly can understand and have experienced), including fear of losing professional connections after having formed them and shared a spot in the sun, published, conferenced, been commended in the family law, or correcting /reforming-it field, are just not going to acknowledge or bring up the topic of blind spots, communal professional agreement to NOT-TALK about certain topics, and instead of talking about the “elephants (plural, big ones) in the room,*” OR the other critters in the shadows outside the politically correct, restricted-topics list of things wrong with the family law system to complain or conference about — like what’s it doing here to start with? continue circling around them and associating as if they were just not there.

---

Well, I may be just dumb enough, or have already lost enough (including professional connections in a field I respect a lot more than this one, in the course of attempting to protect both children and a work life from chronic harm), or I may be smart enough, or it can be that I care more about saying this (so others know) than the social graces and ongoing, and increasing compromises, to just blurt it out. Someone has to speak up while there is a window of time and a few doors of opportunity.

---

I’ve published an update on that post.

Further discussion (on earlier post) removed 7/7/2017, published 07/12/2017 as Featuring Five Vital Posts on …. Our Assigned Places in the Tax Continuum Pecking Order (from ABA, APA post update) (with short-link ending “-7bR”)

Remember also to read the more recent post to supplement the middle section (above, light-blue background) re; Carl Herman’s positioning on this issue and some ongoing publishing associations… I took the time to do this in part because of who else has been pushing that issue, and on what basis:

State-Run Banks? — at Least Two Activists Who Understand CAFRs, How Governments Stockpile Assets, Take Polar Opposite Stances on What to Do About It (Burien, Herman). And Perhaps Why.. (case-sensitive short-link ends “-7gN”) (About 13,000 words, posted 7/17/2017).

---

---