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

This Post Is: ‘‘From The Beginning, March 2009, FCM Has Been More About This Organization Than Me’ (FrontPage Sept. 2019 Subsection #1, Published/Expanded Sept. 9). (Short-link ends “-aUu,” as off-ramped, only about 1,500 words, with a mini-preview, about 2,500 words only and at the end of the day [9/9/2019] just over 6,000).

(“FCM” meaning, this blog. FrontPage on this blog meaning “FamilyCourtMatters.org“).

ANY post may be further edited (as in, condensed, or expanded, or both) after publishing. Blogger’s privilege!  

(This one was edited so much before, it’s unlike to have major changes soon after, though).

---

The writing and images posted below (where clearly marked) were previously published on the long front page to the blog and probably written in December 2018.  Originally, just meant to show a few images from my existing media library for a few key points of reference.

It’s not intended to be a full drill-down with a developed argument and many kinds of connecting points of reference to support it, but just a call-out —  an alert, not an expose.

However it still exposes many things.  The images are either annotated or captioned or both, providing along with the few quotes plenty of details.  The organization referenced in post title here to me symbolizes a key part of the larger system, even though it also is literally (not just symbolically) a major part of my blogging and I believe source of the ongoing problems “in” the family courts in more than one country.

However, those family courts exists within systems, not vacuums.  Bottom line, they employe judges, the judges are paid by governments:  a major part of those systems IS government itself (yours, mine, others’…).  To understand government includes understanding its financing and who it hires (contracts with and grants to, employs etc.) to do its various businesses.  That’d be a great place to start.  BUT if one wants to focus, first, solely on the family courts, each one, and collectively (by jurisdiction) they still exist within an immediate level of government, and surrounding components, and encompassing (higher levels of government).

Those systems must be seen and discussed in public.  Complaints about system outputs should be tied to documentation of system blueprints (original design intended). (See my next, “impassioned” inset):

---

The original intent of my Dec. 2018 section from the Front Page being just a call-out makes this post a shorter and easier read, unless your mind works like mine, looking constantly for supporting arguments and proof when some assertion or assumption seems questionable but is unsupported.

Being so short, it doesn’t really need much of an introduction or guide to its layout (!), but as I had to make some introduction, I chose to re-emphasize those points and add a very short (informal, not in-depth) update referring to a different, participant in the larger system, illustrating the “Across-the-Pond”flavor of the family courts.*

Which family courts (or at least their preceding and their judges’ decisions) have upset so much of America, and which from time to time, many say and I have to agree, end up getting people killed in the context of divorce and/or in the context of separating from abuses in order to NOT, with their children get killed, or allow the children to be abused. Sometimes we know there’s collateral damage (bystanders, extended family, responding officers, too).  Hard to disagree that there are such problems, while assigning blame for them is still under debate**

*While doing this (summary/intro/lead-in) I as always had to deal with my tendency towards sarcasm and mouthing off.  Sometimes sarcasm makes the point quicker, whether or not it proves a point…

** Family courts + professionalizing all the ancillary services they exist to order (whether by a mass-mandate or as individually, but often, court-ordered — relationship education for all… education for parents that divorce impacts kids … behavioral modification for dangerous or alleged dangerous parents…) + then professionalizing, certifying or licensing anyone hoping to become a “new-kid-on-the-block” provider apparently is expected or desirable to lessen the governmental burden of too many people seeking justice (or protection from dangerous people) in the criminal courts, so the sacrifice of life must be worth it…

(“Why can’t you all just get along??“)(with our dangerous exes, the other parents to our children). 

The next footnote has a long title, but  not footnoting it would make the post top-heavy. (it also pushes the total word-count just over 5,000 words).

See FOOTNOTE “FAMILY COURTS OFF-RAMPED FROM THE CRIMINAL TO RELIEVE DEMAND ON RESOURCES.  IT’S NOT WORKING.  SO NOW WE SHOULD ON-RAMP CRIMINAL STANDARDS INTO THE VEHICLE/VENUE/”NEW VESSELS” INTENDED TO EXCLUDE THAT “OLD” (I.e., not “behavioral science”) LANGUAGE IN  THE FIRST PLACE?

---

Originally, the December 2018 section had only two basic topics. On it you’ll see large annotated images, some related quotes and these two headings:

• From the Beginning, More about This Organization Than Me (i.e., “thanks for all the stories, but Let’s talk about these systems!)** “Who am I and Why Does This Blog Look and Talk So Different Than Others on “Family Court” matters?), and
• Who am I and Why Does This Blog Look and Talk So Different Than Others on “Family Court” matters?

** See  Footnote “Why Talk Systems more than Our Experiential Stories“?

---

Having now moved it here, September, 2019, there are more additions than changes:

~~>I added this summary above (and you’re still reading it), part of which I footnoted below, necessary because of my sarcastic commentary and opportunistic tendency to emphasize main points..(so, I ran my mouth and wouldn’t just delete the content..). This summary came after…

~~>I added a Mini-Preview to include two short articles about a British parallel organization (so to speak) which has now become “BFF“[Best Friends oFFicially] with “this organization,” both of them in 2018/2019 are more open about it than ever, although some of us detected this basic cross-Atlantic dyad of public policy romance, perhaps based in beliefs about how family court systems — and families — should be run (and, by whom)…

The irony about it is that at home, domestic violence advocates — lawyers, psychologists, social workers, perchance some judges — writing internationally — Collective Memos to WHO, as well as various nonprofits formed and networked across Canada, Europe, Australia, the UK and of course some in the USA– arguing about “parental alienation” (mostly) and  how to handle domestic violence (or abuse of it) IN the family courts, whether this should (William Bernet and friends) or should not (Joan Meier/Joyanna Silberg — and friends) be classified as a new disease or a variety of some pre-existing (DSM-listed) disease (last I heard, Craig Childress) are NOT open — at all — about the very existence of (this organization).

And others publishing on how to fine-tune or tweak the vocabulary yet achieve the same results…

That itself is (it seems to me) like being a Scientologist — (or, pedophile, or polygamist in countries where it’s illegal) — but being sure NOT to mention this in polite company.  In other words, when you meet a colleague in public, as far as the public is concerned, cite your other affiliations, not this one… Some of the young-uns still coming up in the (family court-connected) field can mention it on their resumes more openly until they get more varieties of credential to cite.

In other words, behaving like a secret cult: dual-functions, dual-relationships, and private interests while in public office.  Attempts to dissociate conversations depending on possible audiences.  That’s crazymaking…  Some places, boast about each other as a group.  Other places, don’t even reference its name (the word “masonic” comes to mind in secret-keeping).

All the while seeking more power and influence globally, and to standardize practices across national borders and force sovereign countries to just accommodate it.

My Mini-Preview basically just mentions the UK-member of the cross-Atlantic family court decision-making (judge-advising) dyad and provides two articles about it.

and, a cosmetic change only to 2018 contents:

~~>now having some more vertical space available, I made all the images much larger, rather than “two-up” as they were before.  Enlarging them so much changes text-wrap (more text may show lower down on the page); some comments may not then be immediately next to what image they first referred to.  As there aren’t that many comments, it shouldn’t matter much..  Also, expanding images sometimes dilutes their clarity, if so, remember please they are just for points of reference at a certain (though not that long ago) point in time.  Make a note of the names or even websites I mention; they’re mentioned because they come up repeatedly in the this field (the inter-related fields).  The main headings I’m sure are big enough to read.  Thanks.

---

Mini-Preview, Sept. 2019:

Some new visitors and contacts to the blog are around, so I didn’t want to 100% “unpublish” this information and points of reference mentioned in the post title, “…FCM Has Been More About This Organization Than Me:…”  I say that in specific opposition to some blogs, or even legislative campaigns, which are more about people’s life experiences and stories with the courts than about who’s been creating them in the first place, and running/reforming them (getting legislation passed favorable to certain private interests while convincingly alleging it’s in the public interest) (and should be paid for accordingly — even more than before — by the public.  Added layers of bureaucracy, training, consultancies, etc.) ….

---

To the extent these newer readers may be already involved in the courts, or dealing with concerns about them, they probably have heard of some of the professionals’ names mentioned below (meaning, from the 2018 sample), and given the more overt US/UK connections, probably this organization also.

The more I read, the more parallels I see between the agenda and practices employed (i.e., purposes) of CAFCASS and “this organization” (despite one being a private nonprofit with judicial — and other court-connected type of people membership, that is, the one I’m mentioning below — and the other being, literally part of the UK Ministry of Justice and funded by it).

For more current discussions on the international organizational family court recently blossoming b/romance, read more recent posts here, or meet me on Twitter!  Be aware that Cafcass only started, by legislation, in 2001 and sometimes (as I recall from reading) takes private foundation funding it seems (as in, from the Nuffield Foundation. Leverhulme, and/or others). Cafcass has also sponsored reports by university based professionals whose names crop up in significant debates about, among other things, equal parenting time, PAS and of course, reunification programs to counteract it, not to mention domestic violence, abuse, parental kidnappings, and the UN CRC etc.).  To mention just a few off the top of my head.

I did locate and read the most recent Cafcass financial statements on-line, and tweeted some images from it.  There is a “Cafcass” and a “Cafcass Cymru.”  These are just two quick ‘Cafcass’ on-line articles I ran across (randomly, versus ‘diligently looked up’…):

(1) “What Goes Into the Cafcass Family Report” by Chris Nickson In Equal Rights for Separated Dads, April 1, 2019. One image is from the top of that page, the other is (miniature, I realize) two of the comments from among several posted.  I included because comment dated Feb. 2017 mentions (a father, I gather) having been prosecuted for “coercive control” and assault… which he challenged, apparently successfully.

What I like: this post or article briefly describes the context and the process, in case it’s a new point of reference for some American readers, i.e. where parents can’t agree, an FCA (Family Court Advisor) will be assigned and report to the court…  Definite parallels with practice in the USA, though the mechanism and terms are a bit different.  See my comment below the quote..

Equal Rights for Separated Dads, “What Goes Into the Cafcass Family Report“ by Chris Nickson, April 1, 2019,

For an agency that’s not well known, Cafcass (the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service) wields an awful lot of power. Whenever parents can’t agree over an application for a Contact Order, they become involved, compiling a report on the family, both parents and children. The document they produce carries a great deal of weight with the Family Court.

Two comments from a forum, Equal Rights for Separated Dads (UK),”What Goes Into the Cafcass Family Report” by Chris Nickson, April 1, 2019. (Pls Click image to enlarge)

Both Cafcass and Family Court have undergone their share of controversy, the first for some of the content of their reports and its methodology, the second for operating in relative secrecy. Cafcass presents its report as a completed document at court, and interested parties have no chance to challenge it beforehand, although they are sent copies. ...[This is a short post.  See nearby image for comments]

---

That sounds to me amazingly like the “mandatory mediation/ recommending counties” (California, SF Bay Area) except that we didn’t even get copies before the hearing — but you must go through mediation to even get TO a hearing…

Here’s another link I ran across talking about how Cafcass makes sure to mentor “NQSW” (Newly Qualified Social Workers), which I found helpful because it again stated the difference between private (cf. our “family”) law and public (cf., I believe, criminal courts, i.e., where the state is the prosecutor of a person) system, as well as the mentoring itself:

(2) Cafcass: Care that’s “All about the child” | Cafcass professional careers, June 21, 2019 in The Guardian.UK, under “The Guardian Labs.”  Notice the fine print (top left) on the image of the glowing report on a program for mentoring new Cafcass Workers which mentions content paid for (by: Cafcass).  Still, I a short read and special-cohort mentoring arrangement good to be aware of.  (The article begins on the image; my quote starts with the second paragraph. Emphases and image caption are mine):

“NQSW” = Newly Qualified Social Workers….

Cafcass: Care that’s “All about the child” | Cafcass professional careers (June 21, 2019 in ‘The Guardian (Labs), Paid-for (by Cafcass) content, for my “From the Beginning, March 2009, FCM has been more about this organization than me” {short-link ends “-aUu”} Front-Page off-ramped (Sept. 2019) post (Pls. click image to enlarge or just  click “The Guardian” link to see full-sized)

Cafcass: Care that’s “All about the child” | Cafcass professional careers.

…[23-year old NQSW Scarlett] Clode is one of a small cohort who have joined Cafcass’s unique programme for NQSWs.** Launched in 2006, the scheme keeps numbers low to ensure tailored, individual support – 72 people have been through it so far. “I’m being developed at my own pace – if I don’t feel I’m ready for something yet, then that’s OK,” she says. “The training has also been very specific to me – I struggle sometimes with emotional resilience, and was helped with that as well as building my confidence.” Advice from senior practitioners is never far away: “The social workers are very experienced,” she says. “I’ve found that really helpful, learning from them, feeling inspired – it really is learning from the best of the best.”

…Launching your career as a children and family social worker with Cafcass opens up unique opportunities. Social workers work across both public and private law – an option denied to those who choose the more traditional route and work for a local authority. All Cafcass social workers are employed as family court advisers (FCAs) and, whether they are involved in public or private law, their role is always the same – they are in court to represent the voice of the child. Clode, who now has a mixed caseload, spent most of her first six months in private law, and has just started taking on public law cases that deal with local authority care. “When I was a student, I thought private law was just about what happens when families split up and where the child lives,” she says. “We do have cases involving access, and also others where the child wants to keep their second name, or relocation issues where a parent wants to move to another country with a child. We also get involved in cases of surrogacy.”

All NQSWs have a protected caseload. They have access to a physical and virtual library – requested books are delivered to their desk within 24 hours, journals and other research material within the hour …. [para break] There is a support network of NQSWs, which, according to Clode, has been invaluable: “It’s like group supervision,” she says. And all NQSWs have higher-level supervision than other FCAs. “Because our NQSW numbers are small, they can be embedded in a team with a smaller caseload and they are supported and protected on the assessed and supported year in employment (ASYE) that all social workers do.

[Moving on past the bad grammar and perhaps basic math/verbal (understanding common words) deficit…]

This reveals Cafcass promoting a group dynamic, looking for “newbies” (whether still young like the one above, or those involved in a career-change) and special treatment (protected case load).  The word “cohort” whether used militarily or academically, or otherwise, implies progressing through a process together and with it, maintaining (then and ideally later), personal social bonding, as different and more special than other employers of NQSWs.

---

BELOW THIS LINE (except any Footnote) :  Previously Written and moved from LGH Front Page Sept. 2019 to shorten it.

---

From the start (blog started March, 2009) I talked openly on-line and on this blog about the next organization and its membership (see next several images chosen, somewhat at random, from existing “Media library” on this blog, that is, ones I’ve already posted) because it, and how others relate to and talk (or don’t talk) about it is key** to understanding the whole.

It is “key” (adjective) not the only key (noun), but I believe understanding how this organization itself, and this organization as a type, as well as how this organization acts in association (conferencing, networking, incorporating (or not) with others of similar interests, most of them publishing individually and with members prone to publishing a LOT)  is key, and opens a wide door to further doors of understanding.  But who walks through them?

---

Who am I and Why Does This Blog Look and Talk So Different Than Others on “Family Court” matters?

It appears that this was a one-hour webinar (!) as posted at AFCC, with this bio blurb for presenter Dr. Saini:

Michael A. Saini, PhD, is an Associate Professor at the Factor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work, University of Toronto and holds the endowed Factor-Inwentash Chair of Law and Social Work.  He is the Co-Director of the Combined J.D. and M.S.W. program and the Course Director of the 48-hour Foundations to Custody Evaluations. He is a Board Member of the Association of Family Conciliation and the Courts and an editorial board member for the Family Court Review and the Journal of Divorce and Remarriage. He provides risk management consultation for working with families involved in high conflict child custody disputes, he leads parent groups for separated families, he provides parent coaching, and for the past 18 years, he has been conducting custody evaluations and assisting children’s counsel for the Office of the Children’s Lawyer,** Ministry of the Attorney General in Ontario. He has over 100 publications, including books, book chapters, government reports, systematic reviews and peer-reviewed journal articles. His publications have focused on access to justice, child custody disputes, interparental conflict, cultural dynamics of separated families, alienation, supervised visitation, virtual visitation, child protection services and parent competencies post separation and divorce.

Recorded Webinar Certificate of attendance will not be issued for recorded webinars  Handouts

**This office, as I understand it, deals with the criminal issues of child abuse and can order protection from it; family law proceedings would be different.  Saini as you can see is active in both and in two major journals in the field, while active in both Law and Social Work in his university capacity.

---

[NEXT SEGMENT]

I considered putting here an “About Me” “Who Am I” and “Why the heck this blog?” section but still don’t feel comfortable with it.  I am not functioning as, nor is this blog tied to, any nonprofit enterprise nor soliciting any tax-deductible contributions.  So far (and that’s a long time!) nor have I been through this blog or separately selling downloadable or print/electronic media product, coaching services, or (like many) certification on some franchise involving managing family court cases.

So, I am blogging, period.  If what I’m saying is worth consideration, then consider it, maybe even talk it up (if you quote it definitely provide links to THE page or post quoted, and cite both blog name and page or post full title (and date)– thanks!)   If not, then keep moving and find something more entertaining to do with YOUR free time.  I know what I’ve done with mine, most of it…

REGARDING PRIVACY: Several people (mothers, fathers, professionals) in this field already know my name. It shows up occasionally in very fine print on annotated image in the blog in part because, with all the trouble I take to look it up, take screenshots, annotated them, post them, caption them on the blog, I believe some credit is due…  One time in recent years (not this year or last) I felt so jeopardized, based on chronic and no signs of changing behavior of certain people (relatives), I went public to ensure a public record — and posted a petition elsewhere, referencing it on this blog.   I was being held economically hostage to people involved in aggressive destruction of income/profession during the post-DV/Family Court litigation years. …I still: do not answer phone calls from any number or area code I do not recognize; or even from an area code I may know, but not the number; I seek to spend more time in public places than isolated even in where I sleep overnight; and am a “bear” about maintaining access within as few short steps as possible to (my) transportation.  Where possible, I typically patronize only places with both a front and a back door —   once you’ve been trapped in small places with a batterer, stalked (as I was), or, as for a season I also was, living in a street ending in a “cul de sac” with only one street exit, or an apartment without a back door, (all of which my ex took advantage of after I filed for protection and despite that protection), you plan ahead as much as possible.  So no, I am not ready to make this blog about “my story” — because it isn’t “my story.”  It’s about the systems.

If my position on further self-relevation changes, something will show up here, most likely.  Like many people who have tangled for years with the family court (that much will come out eventually on the blog, and has), I have certain safety concerns around specific individuals from whom NO government or government civil servants charged with protection has shown any inclination to protect me and (specifically) California, “The Golden State,” certainly did not – nor did the belated (1994) Violence Against Women Act or the US DOJ “Office on Violence Against Women” charged with administering its (largely discretionary) grants.

[END of 2018 SECTION OFF_RAMPED from Blog FrontPage in Early Sept. 2019]

Sept. 9, 2019: In getting ready to publish, as happens, I got on the soapbox again.  So I footnoted it: