Archive for May 12th, 2019
Apparently Common Family Court Reform Practice (Why my Uncommon Approach is less “Flawed”) [Published May 12, 2019]
Happy Mothers’ Day. Good Mothers Give a Damn! (but not always about what others think of us while we’re doing so). I hope you make it through this post which I published because I do, too.
“You are Here”~> Apparently Common Family Court Reform Practice (Why my Uncommon Approach is less “Flawed”) [Published May 12, 2019] (Case-sensitive short-link here ends “-9Qq”) (Produced earlier, moved here to shorten “More about these perspectives and key concepts (and actors)…,” published May 6, 2019. Its shortlink ends “-9MU”). About 13,600 words including footnotes.
My May 6, 2019 post and its primary content.
I’m glad to have written all this but sad I had to gut the center of another post to shorten it and improve the chances of both being read.
That post begins (see nearby image)~~>
“PRACTICE”: There are apparently common family court reform practices, in the generic sense of the word “practice” not in the specialized sense as with a licensed professions (medical, law, etc. ).
Within family court reform, one can see the practices and the “practitioners” (in the most generic sense). Their own writings often show the theories and with the theories, the built-in assumptions on which those theories stand or, if based on false assumptions, fail logically — and will fail those the theories justifying the transformed practices purport to help. The “unspoken & unproven theory” situation is so common, I classified it as a practice, and am further illustrating in a separate (upcoming) post because it is, as a practice, innately, tricky. You have to Stop, Look (read), and Listen (to common sense & gut instinct). Post full title, below.
Symptoms of “stealthily delivered” assumptions typically surface around the perimeter of any article, report, resolution or proposed solutions, even in the first sentence or paragraph. Whether the deliverer/s knew or didn’t know (was just being used by others as a carrier of such assumptions) matters and sometimes can be shown by simply watching what happens after a challenge.
IF you give a damn about: due process, family courts (or children, families, or public accountability for use of public funds, i.e., representative government by consent of the governed), you should read this whole post.
Just before publishing here, I decided to add an exhortation, some “red ink” bordered in red. If the color red means “STOP” in some cultures and in traffic signals, let it mean that now: “Stop, Look, Listen!” I laid it out briefly and I believe convincingly, but on a new page. Please read!
This post Apparently Common Family Court Reform Practice … “amazingly” is comprised of a Top (“Introduction”), Middle (the section gutted from there (“More About Those Perspectives”) and deposited here; it summarizes and provides some details on “Apparently Common Family Court Reform Practices,” and contrasts with my approach), and a Bottom (footnoted comments from the intro). In that sandwich, the slices of bread stacked together probably equal the juicy middle part in length, but each part has its own flavor and spices.
The top and bottom describe and define two basic categories the family court reform practitioners (so to speak) falling into two basic categories, and the middle, common practices I’ve noticed from one of those groups.
About that Middle Part:
In writing the middle part, I looked for a public link describing just one of the practices (“Safe Child” theme and “H.Con.Res.72” a Congressional resolution just passed in 2018). What I saw occasioned another quick drill-down on an H.Con.Res.72-associated (lobbyist) organization.
That drill-down unearthed geographically and corporately other people and organizations that hold national and international significance, and expose developing situations among those people (and organizations). This is new material to me (networked chambers of commerce memberships lobbying through a regional businessman’s “council,” a specific nonprofit entity “Urban Land Initiative,” and local government planning departments or commissions are deeply involved) and I bet their collective connectivity is to most of readers. A spinoff post was inevitable and has been written (is in my post pipeline to be published). Full title and link are listed further below.
That subject matter falls within the topics of <> regionalism/internationalization and <> continual, incremental compromise of jurisdiction (which, individually and taken together, eliminate any possibility of informed public consent), which I’d noted in my two preceding posts (published April 19, May 6).
Read the rest of this entry »
Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History 