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

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

Caught! Chronically Usurping Communication btw. Government and the Governed, Pushing Back Legal Boundaries Set by Subject Matter and Geopolitical (State and National Borders), Undermining, basically, The USA [Published Sept. 16, 2019].

leave a comment »

Caught! Chronically Usurping Communication btw. Government and the Governed, Pushing Back Legal Boundaries Set by Subject Matter and Geopolitical (State and National Borders), Undermining, basically, The USA [Published Sept. 16, 2019] (“-b4j”, about 8,600 words with footnotes).  [Over one dozen tags, only added Oct. 2.  This post covers key important basics influencing family courts’ purposes & principles]

(Top part — discussion.  Mostly prose, my writing.  If you want the individual professors’ organizations’ or advocates’ names, more pictures, and links, scroll down!  Based on the original word count above, I added about 2,200 words, including those long titles to connecting posts, so that’s not too far.  Tags for this post are shown on the previous (“Builders”) one.  Publishing as-is, without extensive copyediting and without apology. . //LGH Sept. 16.)

This post continues from the bottom of:

Builders and their Blueprints: Who, Really, Designed the Family Courts, How, and Since When? (“The Evidence Speaks”) [Started Aug. 17, 2019, Published Sept. 15].(short-link ends “-aI6” and the middle character is a capital “I” as in the pronoun,  or as in “Idaho.)

For the immediate context of that discussion, go to the very bottom of that post, which has a link to here. Handling the Blueprints/Builders topic above brought up the topics, and specific university centers, psychologists, and nonprofit government-advising institutions (i.e., Brookings Institution, in the USA) engaged in facilitating the usurpation.  I’d also brought up (quoted) an article on the “Transnational Ruling Class, … or Anglo-American Establishment” referring to the historic close, friendly, relations between the RIIA (London) and the CFR (USA). I searched those two terms as symbolic of the ongoing, functional undermining/ bypassing of local (i.e., within national boundaries) representative government in “developed” countries.  There’s a direct connection to the family law practices through, Tavistock Relationships (<~~that Wiki, while flagged, is still informative in this context), formerly Tavistock Centre for Couple Relationships, but also through historic development of the “psych” fields in Europe, what’s now the UK, Canada, the USA and globally. Particularly psychoanalysis (Freud & following) traditions are troubling when entrenched in government practices.

There, I had referenced and quoted:

This undermining of jurisdiction and the effectiveness of geopolitical (national, and within the USA, state, borders) process through perpetually-created crises has been taking place for at least a century, (For example, on the RIIA-CFR topic: Think Tanks and Power in Foreign Policy pp 189-214,CFR-RIIA Interconnections: A Transnational Ruling Class, Liberal Atlantic Community or Anglo-American Establishment? by Inderjeet Parmar, (“Chatham House” referring to the RIIA factor).

My post title here is generic but the original, specific details on this post cover common recent themes and situations in my blogging.  If I were to list them, I’d say:  “Psychologists and other Patriarchs, and their habitat: university centers” and then simply name specific ones, calling attention to in which countries they  were, the specific (i.e., Michael Lamb, Nicholas J. Cummings, Milton H. Erikson) professionals’ spheres of current and recent operation (also relevant here) and who mentored them, and how (Byron R. McCandless, Frieda Fromm Reichman) — which was the “new to me” part of this post, meaning, it’s not just a re-hash of material I’ve already said, posted, or otherwise covered.  There is much review, but it’s not just review!

Also, who mentored those mentors, for example, such as Kurt Lewin, at the Iowa Child Welfare Research Station (1933-1945) he ran after emigration from Nazi Germany, and how it influenced funding and directions in American psychology.  I’ve also included reminders about what scope of studies are involved in the Princeton-Brookings-Columbia (and now University of Cambridge) connections, as well as the patriarchy behind “Fragile Families” research, ongoing…  Just look for the more colorful parts of this post….

FYI: To think you can handle the women’s rights or “domestic (or family) violence (or abuse) prevention” field as somehow separate from all that is mistaken.  They are two arms off the same tree trunk. and tap root. The important thing (in my opinion) is locating the root system, its nutrients, and in which direction its growing. Both arms off the same trunk want to treat  and train as many people as possible, coordinate and saturate government with their knowledge, and, to the extent possible depending on just how gullible or vulnerable the public is, pretend the other arm doesn’t exist.   In addition, they want to get to ALL children as they are being born for proper rearing, and are using “violence prevention” or, alternately, “fatherhood promotion” or “evidence-based child development” (etc.) rationale for doing this.

(Example:  Harvard Center on the Developing Child and its extended reach/special sponsors, involvement of “The Frameworks Institute” and so forth).  The tangled mixture of participants, if laid out side by side and sorted into their respective categories, including “unidentified” then laid onto a chronology (identified date of origin) would be, I suppose, like a combination of the finds from an archeological/anthropological dig.  Except that it’s recent, and the artifacts  are being created at the speed of: collaboration, electronic transmission of data, and travel expenses for personal conferences, website expenses for webinars, most of it written off as exercised in some nonprofit format.

I’ve DONE some digs like that on this blog (check out a few posts from April, 2017 on a center at Brown University involving the Annenberg Foundation: yegads!), with the results being characterized — properly — as “dense walls of text.”  One recurring challenge — I’m intent to use vocabulary which categorizes according to public or private sector, entity or non-entity (which most centers within universities are), whether tax-exempt or not, and who is in which legal domicile — while the power-players and their hired/sponsored professionals in same sectors (both public AND private!) seek to do, and successfully do the exact opposite — blurred, meldedpersona… and they hire consultants to coach them how to do this!  The public, thus the more confused it is (we are) the less able they are to resist sales tactics or manipulations into, if nothing else, ongoing passive consent.  This is so much! like the tactics abusers also use on their targets.

I am also Tweeting on this, as it comes up (i.e., most days) along similar lines though of course mostly focused on this subject matter.

IF neither the UK and Canada has, as the USA does (however effective is another question, but we do have) any requirement to disclose their respective charities’ (tax-exempt entities’) tax returns — NOT the same as financial statements, audited or otherwise — that the public, theoretically, anyone with [un-censored by their own government] access to the internet regardless of national origin (it’s on the internet, in other words) could look up and look at, and learn from over time (and specifically as to individual tax-exempt entities which are required to file) then it’s quite possible this might only be dismantled and comprehended from the USA point of view.

Some organizations post “available upon request” or “available for inspection at our offices” but that’s impractical for any overview and financially burdensome to the person seeking it.  Some organizations do seem “open and transparent” by posting theirs, but on closer look many are partial, many are not even close to the most recent tax year’s (or the year’s before) and many when it comes to tax returns, may have related entities — with money moving between them — but only post one of the entities’ 990s.  There seem to be dozens, if not hundreds, of ways to put off the interested member of the public from getting to the truth of their fiscal operations or even status.

Unless there is some parallel in other countries for developing an understanding and perspective of how their own government revenues are collected, disbursed, and most important — accounted for (invested).  (See “Walter Burien” (currently out of Arizona) for more and concise summaries of this type of information on CAFRs, he says, reporting on it since 1989. He has a mailing list and while emails are rare (i.e., your inbox won’t be cluttered with solicitations), when they come they are very effective communication).

“Unfortunately,” groups here have been so busy ensuring, particularly when it comes to children, families, child welfare, domestic violence prevention (i.e., treatment for both victims and perpetrators:  treatment for ALL), that the thought of looking up with a view to understanding tax returns, let alone CAFRs (Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports for government entities) or (audited financial statements, where possible, for private companies) is rare:  some reporters may do it; most people do not. It’s not easy to present visually, and when I do, I often get the response, “speak normal language” “dumb it down…” etc. It IS another language, but it’s the language involved in handling populations and running governments. We’d best learn some of it!

Failure to look up is not only irresponsible (when dealing with or promoting any organization — or volunteering for it!) it’s also negligent citizenship, in that only looking FOR them where they should be provided shows (where provided): if current, if complete, if filled out honestly, or if even filed.  Unfortunately, the databases showing this are often privately controlled and error-prone.  BUT, it still opens eyes to a different way of comprehending any organization AS an organization, than the pro/con public relations (cause-based) point of view.

However, I’ve found that the more I look at other country’s systems (specifically those two, Canada and the UK (England and Wales, separately Scotland at times) — I haven’t got that much into others’, for lack of being four people who never sleepthe better I understand what’s been tried over here first and having found to be an utter fiasco is then (seemingly) imported back to the UK and Canada for use upon their own people.  Especially practices when it comes to the family courts.  The former colonies now the United States of America,  I guess is a nice proving-ground…and some people seem to wish we were colonies again.  Maybe always have been, in some ways….

As to the USA, and some tactics now common in welfare circles — some of these were first tested out in sub-Saharan Africa, and I’m thinking specifically what’s now South Africa and Namibia and involved, at times, genocide or attempts at it, the model for concentration camps (pre-Hitler) and the treatment of some humans as less than human and attempts to justify it scientifically (i.e., phrenology, eugenics, etc.).  I have blogged this here and on “Cold,Hard.Fact$” at length, earlier. Look for “From Transvaal to TANF” or articles on the Chronicle of Namibia, Cecil Rhodes, Rhodes Scholarships, Shark Island, and so forth.  Or my post on the separate but unequal education system designed to raise literate-enough workers to serve the existing power structure. (“Hewers of Food”) which has definite parallels in education systems here. It’s a long, bloody, racists AND sexist history and is turning out to be also in the USA, when it comes to 1996 welfare reform’s impact on protection from family violence.

I have read that our system was based on the British NHS with “behavior modification” at the top of most lists.  You might also want to consider why “Voices for Children” (a blog run by father-focused “FamilyInitiative” and the various family law associations in the UK are so enamored of practitioners (sic) from the USA, esp. ones with AFCC connections. To be a “practitioner” requires a stream of clients on which to practice.  Where do they come from, and who guarantees continuity of such streams of clients to practice upon?

NONE of the above is good news for most people, but I am talking about the specialty fields involved in population control and how to entertain (and flatter) the masses with notions of justice and “choice” en route to slavery, again and still.

Among the people most cognizant of what it takes to enslave are those now enslaved.  When it comes to domestic violence survivors, somehow we are the ones to be sold the greatest hope of reform and assurances “we’re on it!” because of the existence of programs by that name. Hmm.


When I say “caught” I mean, I’m outing this.  It’s been hidden out in the open for a long time, such that (like a stalker) it may seem a natural part of the overall landscape. Then again, how many people even think consciously about following the money — which would require knowing the difference between public and private, and looking at how entities characterize themselves, etc.  Caught doesn’t mean stop and it certainly doesn’t mean “prosecuted.”

At best I might hope we could stop feeding this system, however, the real coercive control seems to result in higher places than individual households.

I wrote this first on Builders and their Blueprints: Who, Really, Designed the Family Courts, How, and Since When? (“The Evidence Speaks”) […Publ. Sept. 15, 2019].(short-link ends “-aI6” BEFORE getting to that post’s main content (this is more background), then named this post (awkwardly, I admit) THEN moved it.  Some review, other is new information to this blog and me as a blogger. It ALL relates to the family court system and I hope you get through the post.

“Builders” post has so far had already been further partitioned into two other posts Unsure about how soon either of those two might see daylight, but for reference, they are:

~~> If Family Courts were: Buildings, Bridges, Dams, Levees OR Cars, Food or Rx’d Drugs with such Roadkill, Wouldn’t Blueprints, Builders (and the Business Model) have been Questioned By Now? (short-link ends “-b3S”) [STILL IN DRAFT, Oct. 2, 2019] and

~~>‘Anecdotal Narrative | Indignation (Aug. 2019) and Feelings (Sep. 2019) Footnoted (from Builders and Their Blueprints post) [started Sept. 14, 2019] (short-link ends “-b41” and the last character is a number).  Moved here at about 1,000 words from the other post). (and which begins):

This off-ramp began as commentary on the family courts as potent weapons to be directed, at will, towards almost any family, and about like this:

The concept of “builders of these courts” has been for me a topic of interest and exploration since at least as far back as 2009, by which year the personal devastation experienced post-DV, by way of […see list below!..] was effectively (I thought at the time) accomplished.  Finished.  Done with, so that I could move on in life..

For simplicity, the many tags I added to “Builders” post before partitioning will stand in for all three posts, including this one. Also there is some (though I think minor) overlap of material here, on the “Ohio Family Court Feasibility Study” which was a main topic of “Builders.”  I do not have unlimited time to put into producing perfect posts, but am still intent to get the information out as additional points of reference, if possible, consistently over the years.

I have a sense this upcoming season I may need to cut out for a while, though to continue to keep “body and soul” together, although “spirit” remains indomitable, perpetually(!). See also Twitter threads, which will overlap but respond more dynamically to news in the arena.

(Still me talking..just in smaller font…//LGH) This morning I looked into a Tweet on the Scotsman.com, two of the domestic violence experts quoted (one associated with the University of Bristol), which (short bio) brought up (her: #MarianneHester) involvement in European Network only formed (incorporated, it seems) 2014, but around since 2006, and organized out of Berlin, Germany (WPP_ENN).  The other was #MhairiMcGowan.  For WPP_ENN, funded by the OAK Foundation (original source of wealth:  #DutyFreeShoppers) and the EU, watch out:  seeking to uniformly coordinate AND evaluate (See project “IMPACT”) with member organizations, and aligned functionally aligned (Brexit or no Brexit!) with member organization RESPECT which I already knew is running “Safe&Together” trainings in London, a product of US-based David Mandel (entity legal domicile, Connecticut) & ______ (in Denver, Colorado)

Basically, the DV organizations are “OK” with perpetual involvement and male leadership embedding “perpetrator interventions” (batterers’ intervention services in US terms), i.e., treat BOTH the victim AND the perp, who isn’t now really a perp but a client.  The money is in the trademarked trainings, and in getting governments to sponsor their “capacity-building” and running them, evaluating them, and perpetuating them.  Downloadable, etc.  The need for constant networking and centralization is promoted, when in fact this is tightening the drawstrings of a far different type of “coercive control.”

This is an economic-cartel which cannot afford to reveal, among other things, the reality of the nonprofits driving major world governments from the sidelines, and seeking to control not only our ALL populations but also our ALL resources.  It seeks to operate sometimes below visibility level (while getting established) sometimes above it, and wherever possible, tax-exempt and accessing public resources, and with its finances BEYOND the reach of any single country’s jurisdiction (I tweeted and still say, this behavior reminds me of “BCCI” (Bank of Crooks and Criminals International.  Analyze them both and compare — what do you think?)... Once in place, the overhead cannot be that high, but no question travel expenses can be written off.  //LGH Sept. 14-15, 2019

Caught! Chronically Usurping Communication btw. Government and the Governed, Pushing Back Legal Boundaries Set by Subject Matter and Geopolitical (State and National Borders), Undermining, basically, The USA (Started Sept. 14, 2019) (“-b4j”).

Most specifically, unlike the House of Representatives which, while not that representative of the overall population (certainly not as to gender, nor as to religious diversity, nor race), still has an overall concept of tying a representative to a home jurisdiction, with access by those in that jurisdiction through their state representatives to the state legislatures, through the Congressional ones to the US Congress, and so forth — the newly created (you’ll see!) family court venues are “represented” instead by those with vested (financial) interests in how they are operated, and by the “shadow” government sprung up by civil servant functional names — as to some organizations.

In other parts, they are simply expanding the clout and involvement of a basically state-supported field of practice with identified origins in the practice of war and its consequences… i.e., mental health specialists treating trauma and violence, orphans, widows, veterans, etc. had plenty to practice on after World Wars I and II specifically…and by this, yes, I do refer to the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, which has recently further solidified ties to a separate state (agency?) reporting to the Ministry of Justice, effectively controlling at least England and Wales’ private family courts {CAFCASS.  See Sept. 2019 posts and top two Sticky posts, or Twitter//LGH, 11 September 2019}

This connection is in addition to international connections through university centers (I’ve already identified repeatedly in this blog:  see “Future of Children” references, among others (such as having a Cambridge University psychology professor now head of an APA (American Psychological Association) journal blending Psychology, Public Policy and the Law..

(Search of media library, previously posted, captions from any original posting).  Three images (from cellphone, swipe left to see the other two; at least know there are three):

At this time, Professor Lamb was President of Division 7, “Developmental Psychology” of the American Psychological Association (“APA”) whose motto, predictably, is “Advancing psychology to benefit society and improve people’s lives.”  The division is clearly interested in young and adolescent children:

Of this division, for non-membership contact, viewers are now (I don’t monitor, so don’t know for how long) directed to Professor Sonja P. Brubacher at Deakin University/School of Psychology in Australia. (LinkedIn shows that address is at least a year and a half out of date) (Read for details, click on the NICHDProtocol.com; she’s been a trainer in it since 2014, which also brings up a connection (at least in part) to Lamb. She did spend a couple of years in the USA, not many…).

The awards specified for this division, however, are named after G. Stanley Hall (for senior scholars) and Boyd R. McCandless (1915-1975; <~that’s a Google books search result; see “Footnote BRMcC“**) (for young ‘uns) and an “Outstanding Dissertation” for new Ph.D.s.  Click more on the Div. 7 website (incl. the “About” button to see more named (recent) awards (Mavis Hetherington, Mary Ainsworth, incl. for mid-career professionals).

**From that link (published date: 1982), I see that Professor Lamb, from (what’s now?) South Africa with a B.A. in 1972, went straight to the USA for some more degrees at East-coast private universities in 1973, ’74, and ’76, (Johns Hopkins in Maryland, Yale in Connecticut) teaching positions (just a few years each) at three U.S. (State — all of them) Universities in Wisconsin, Michigan and Utah.. had begun getting “Outstanding Young PhD” and the Boyd R. McCandless awards in the mid-1970s.

McCandless (about p.3 in the book preview) had trained in Iowa under Kurt Lewin and worked there many years.  These young psychologists being so awarded were all born just after World War II ended; i.e., “Baby Boomers.” NB: This “by recall” after reading it just once summary is for general impressions to encourage reading what I just read, and should be compared with the images I’ll post, or the link above. I.E., I may not have all the details right.

From APAPsycnet (for a reference on Kurt Lewin in Iowa), note the date is 1992.  This is the Abstract, to I hope with the citation, there’s no problem quoting it:
Ash, M. G. (1992). Cultural contexts and scientific change in psychology: Kurt Lewin in Iowa. American Psychologist, 47(2), 198-207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.47.2.198

Kurt Lewin’s scientific biography after his 1933 emigration from Nazi Germany and his move to the US exhibits a complex mix of continuity and change. In his work at the Iowa Child Welfare Research Station between 1935 and 1944, Lewin tried to recreate the scientific microculture that had formed around him in Berlin. In the process, he converted biography into theory, adapting to current cultural concerns, to then-prevailing research styles, and to changing institutional and funding networks in American psychology. However, despite their considerable impact at the time, the later reception of Lewin’s ideas and methods by American psychologists was ambivalent. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

And from the University of Iowa, College of Liberal Arts, “Dept. of Psychological & Brain Sciences” (“psychology.uiowa.edu”) (up now, but it says, taken from a 1991 history; see nearby image also):

Department History — The Iowa Tradition

The Psychology Laboratory of the University of Iowa was started in 1887 and dedicated in 1890. Like the six American laboratories that preceded it and those that followed, the Iowa laboratory was an expression of a specific historical event and a general philosophical idea. The event, of course, was the founding by Wilhelm Wundt of the Psychology Laboratory at the University of Leipzig in 1879. The philosophical idea, expressed in a variety of ways by numerous philosophers and scientists, was that if the methods of natural science could be applied to psychology, a level of understanding of the human mind and human action would be achieved that would approach our comprehension of physical, chemical, and biological phenomena.

The Psychology Laboratory at the University of Iowa owes its birth to the efforts of George T. W. Patrick, a graduate of the University of Iowa, who received his doctorate at Johns Hopkins University under G. Stanley Hall, who had previously studied both with Wundt and William James. The founding of the Department of Psychology, however, is due to the efforts of Carl Seashore, who was hired by Patrick with the charge of developing a topnotch department of psychology. Seashore received his doctorate at Yale University in 1895 under Edward W. Scripture, also a student of Wundt’s. …

Shortly after his arrival at Iowa in the late 1930s, Kenneth W. Spence became Head of the Department of Psychology. In addition to Spence, the arrival of Kurt Lewin at the Iowa Child Welfare Research Station and the philosopher Gustav Bergmann, created an atmosphere at Iowa in the early 1940s that placed psychology at the cutting edge of theoretical advances that would, it was hoped, transform psychology into a sophisticated natural science.

The key dream merchant for graduate psychology students at Iowa was Spence. These dreams emerged from his collaborative efforts with his mentor at Yale, Clark L. Hull, to create the Hull-Spence theory of conditioning and learning. Over a 26-year span at Iowa, Spence directed an amazing total of 72 doctoral theses    (etc.  emphases added)

One more reminder on Kurt Lewin (who influenced Boyd R. McCandless, whose name comes up in association with Michael E. Lamb, who has my attention mostly because of his known involvement with key U.S. individuals who have — successfully! — persuaded our government (that is, Congress) to set up and sustain a field of practice actually called “fatherhood” and pay people, to research, network, publish and train “practitioners.”  I just happen to be a mother. Naturally, this is likely to have an impact — with the weight of the U.S. Congress behind it — at the local level.

KURT LEWIN (2015), www’goodtherapy’org|famous-psychologists|kurt-lewin’html ~~Screen Shot 2019-08-18

This is from GoodTherapy.net under “famous psychologists” on Kurt Lewin Biography  I’m posting an image, but that’s not the whole page.  The group dynamics, theory of change, and which universities were involved still matter:

Any reminders of where the development of this field came from (such as, Germany) and when (where in the USA) as well as how (the expanding APA continuing to set up various divisions) I feel is good to keep in mind, generally speaking, when thinking about the family courts as we now experience them. There have been major wars.  This comes with consequences.  William James, G. Stanley Hall, Clark Hull, Kurt Lewin, William Wundt, (along with Freud and the parallel but separate legacy of names leading towards the psychoanalysis as a practice and how these then blended together with key professors and professionals in position to wield some influence)… Should be, generally, kept in mind.

An APA website search-function, “Michael E. Lamb” kicked out 103 references, the first one referencing the above publication.  Picking the second search result (because I’d already read the first one), “APA honors Psychology’s stars” (an August, 2015, APA conference in Toronto announcing awards), I found he had two: notice for which:

From the American side, Princeton/ Brookings Institution (which has through who runs it, direct connections to the major welfare reform movement of 1996 — and the lead up to it, the following redirection of public funds to private nonprofits engaged in the legislative purposes:  promoting two-parent families, “healthy marriage/responsible fatherhood” and, apparently to better make this happen OUTSIDE the family courts (then being established, though not in all 50 states or territories), “access and visitation” grants — to states, not people — funding the specific types of services that, coincidentally (?) AFCC specialized in at that time, and more since.  Meanwhile in the 1980s, the push to make mediation (one of those services) mandatory to anyone bothering the local courts with safety issues or such, minor children involved mandatory — which succeeded — had primed the setup.

The short version of getting from “Princeton” to U Cambridge/Michael Lamb” (Psychol.Cam.AC.UK) is by way of https://futureofchildren.princeton.edu/about/partners (see the bottom link).  For those more familiar with AFCC authors or names, the third image below “In the News” shows several such names, next to the Future of Children personnel (Sarah McLanahan, Irwin Garfinkel (Columbia and — FYI — they’re married) and (same image) Ron Haskins & Isabel Sawhill.

(Similar blog Media Library search of “Brookings”):

This executive snapshot is from Bloomberg.com (viewed 8-8-2017) click image to for link. I didn’t confirm this is the same person as on the Bendheim-Thoman Center for Child Well-Being at Princeton, but sounds like a reasonable assumption… [Leon Lowenstein Fndtn (EIN# 136015951) 990PFs table included in this 8/8/2017 post) (Website says establ. 1941, that they don’t take ANY unsolicited grant requests, and grantees only visible via a password.  There’s a paragraph, a street address, a “contact us form, and that’s about it!) {{previously posted by me on FCM, Aug 19, 2017?}}

Fine print at the top showing donor or honoree: “The Bendheim-Thoman Center for Research on Child Wellbeing” in the Woodrow Wilson School of International Affairs at Princeton University (with the “Office of Population Research” as it says).  It’s from here (with participation of Brookings Institution) that “the Future of Children” has a publication voice. CRCW at Princeton mirrors the terminology of that at Columbia and shows involved personnel (with known affiliations (Board of Directors) with other institutions. {{Previously Posted by me April 17, 2017, with the caption seen here. That page probably different by now. Find and bookmark it! I mean the from the Princeton.edu website!!//LGH 8-18-2019]]

From the top, referencing “the Builders” themes.

These “family courts” clearly aren’t working for too many; aren’t protecting children, preventing women and children, men, and among the above, sometimes innocent bystanders, literally, sometimes responding police officers (i.e., to a “domestic disturbance” or a public attack — it’s happened — upon an ex-wife), and at times also extended family members, or new partners’ parents.  People are getting hurt, even murdered around this phenomenon.

Movements are also being built to fix or enhance them.

That’s where I take issue, having run the gauntlet myself and dealt with several leaders of organizations fronting for, “spearheading” or whatever else you may call (perhaps a more feminine/less phallic verb might apply), this movement in more than one state and, it’s come to my attention, now more than one country. So I want this information ON the table — not “tabled” as in, put in the “to be shredded” file.

Princeton University now displays (on a drop-down list) 20 centers.  The one I just showed above has radically changed its appearance as you can see here: https://wws.princeton.edu/departments/bendheim-thoman-center-research-child-wellbeing. Whether it’s changed its purposes and character while retaining the same leadership, I can’t say.

That’s the “Woodrow Wilson School (at Princeton) access; see CRCW.Princeton.edu for the restructured (some basic themes and color schemes retained) website.  Click on “Future of Children” for a brief summary, click a second time to get to the full-orange-on-white large-print version…

Meanwhile here’s a “Fatherhood.gov” website referencing this Bendheim-Thoman center in 2003. This field has been up and running for decades now and seems to coincide judging by the decades with the continued promotions of family courts under state jurisdiction.  From that summary (National Baseline Report 2003 on surveys conducted 1998-2000), the pdf is at: https://fragilefamilies.princeton.edu/sites/fragilefamilies/files/nationalreport.pdf

(Next: four total images: front page, middle excerpt referencing PRWORA and (naturally) the minority, race-focus (African-American and Hispanic), and the final page, split into two images when enlarged for readability.  The “FFCWS” as you might see elsewhere, refers to this study.  Because the HHS is a sponsor, it seems that some of the working low-income mothers and fathers they are interviewing and profiling, are helping pay to be the subject matter for the career “Population Research” professionals…
Anecdotal Narrative NOT Footnoted: All this was going on (without my awareness) while, on the other side of the country, I was in the properly validated state — married — and dealing as a mother of young children with an in-home batterer.  By the time I got out, the field was pretty well established, and in the course — women leaving violent, economically enslaving abusers who are also fathers of their children, need to know this! — of seeking ANY help regarding child support enforcement, or if necessary for a brief season, even food stamps or a bit of cash aid — one is likely to run into the influence of this crowd, and become a self-perpetuating validation of how rough it is for children in single-mother households.  As a type, we have been under strategic attack launched with public and private funding out of prestigious university centers, apparently sponsored in part by (see Bendheim-Thoman Bloomberg.com image above) MANY funders… MUCH of that attack comes through and by way of the family court system.  //LGH

So, I ran across a single document from Ohio summarizing the “history of family courts” as summarized by a “feasibility study” in 1997.  I’m going to show and tell, and have already marked up the images. SOME of this is my prior turf from having previously researched, over time, things “Ohio” from several different angles, as well as, several of the “national organizations’ referenced in it as cooperatively drafting “proposed family court model legislation” as far back as 1959 — yet by 1980, fewer than 13 states were known to have started them up.


Post: Reform, Solutions, Enhancements, Adjudication Improvements Built on WHAT? (Unproven Because Unspoken Assumptions about the Deliberate Design = the Deliberate Purposes of the Family Courts in the USA)., (short-link ending “-9PC” started May 2,  revisited and expanded June 6-8, “sure hope to publish soon” status, Aug. 6-7, [all dates listed~>] 2019…)

(Restating the three parts of that post, I expanded upon the “Builders” theme in the preview, as well as upon the concept of “blueprints” which I’d raised in the text).

Two (originally was three) section titles,

1. “Preliminary Chat (Health System Flush with Cash),”  2. “If it was built, there was a plan.”

These builders over the decades promoted and with visibly coordinated efforts pushed through not only specialized family  (and conciliation) courts or divisions (*i.e., states reorganized their courts) and “services” (i.e., “Family Court Services”) and involved judges administratively set up at times related specialized courts or dockets — even regional “high-conflict” courts, fathering courts, child support courts — but also established and guaranteed funding (see “administrative rulings by presiding judges” at, for example, a local level) some of the professions to go with them. It seems to me, judging by the AFCC’s self-accounts this started with local (county-based, in the USA) counseling for divorcing parents, eventually by the 1970s, morphing into county-based (with the courts as referral centers) court-appointed mediation, and eventually, successfully making mediation mandatory (at least in California) in the 1980s — and boasting about it.

All along the way, the same “builder” organizations including membership organizations where the members cover a variety of civil servant posts, like: judges, legislators, district attorneys (USA local/county-based term) and others stayed active ALSO in training and setting and distributing among their membership and other organizations, “model guidelines” and practices for such issues as domestic violence and child abuse, and other criminal behavior, as well as some which wasn’t necessarily overtly criminal but was still harmful and dangerous.  

The professions particularly being lobbied for in this case — as the USA was heading towards legitimizing no-fault divorce (again, 1970 in California) — included a heavy load of psychologists (psychologists getting their PhDs or PsyDs from independent schools or colleges in the field, seems (quoting Nicholas J. Cummings)** to have been jumpstarted in the late 1960s.  

California School of Professional Psychology (“CSPP”) was one (now absorbed into Alliant International University in San Diego, from which we get — “for better or for worse” projects (trade names) such as “IVAT” (Institute for Violence, Abuse and Trauma, (Robert Geffner) and associated “Journal of Child Custody(<~~See Editorial Board, which has a number of AFCC members alongside a number (at least two) well-known Family Court Reform” activist spokespeople), basically controlled by the same few individuals with the psychology emphasis.  

MINI-SECTION added Post-Publication:  Journal of Child Custody & IVAT

Journal of Child Custody|Editorial Board (Taylor&Francis) Geffner Editor, staff heavily IVAT, (Alliant Univ etc) (<~~This was taken May, 2018 and is an annotated pdf, i.e., previously published on this blog)

The purpose of this section is simply to call attention to the journal whose main listed affiliation and control (judging by the editorial board) is referred to by a “dba.”  In context, it relates to the history of development of independent professional schools of psychology with which Nicholas J. Cummings (next inset) claims, and was, associated.  I’ve posted on IVAT a number of times before, and this is unlikely the last time.

On this round, however, other than the obvious, I again noticed:  You have people historically who refuse to reference “AFCC” in their publications who are, side-by-side, listed on the varying categories of editors on the journal not even published in the United States.  Besides that, the journal’s face page (whose responsibility — those submitting information, or the publisher’s, is unclear) with MANY copyediting inconsistencies, a few spelling mistakes (!), a capitalization mistake, mistakes in number (singular/plural labeling), inconsistent level of detail when citing affiliations (i.e., while IVAT is at Alliant University ℅ FVSAI, not all listings mention “Alliant.”).

What’s more, people associated with nonprofits can have a geography almost anywhere.  In at least one key (to this overall subject matter) nonprofit, where I already know the website conceals the legal domicile state (which is Michigan) by calling it “Pennsylvania,” the professional cited next to the nonprofit’s name is listed as in Maryland.  So does the geography for all of them refer to their affiliations, or their state of primary practice?

What I do see is highly unprofessional presentation in a formal, academic-oriented journal (focus: psychology and trauma, obviously), and while apparently run from Southern tip of California (which San Diego basically is), has chosen a publisher based in London, England.  

RE: “and associated “Journal of Child Custody(<~~See Editorial Board, current) which has a number of AFCC members alongside a number (at least two) well-known Family Court Reform” activist spokespeople)” (originally I’d just said “associated journals” because I DNR the exact name and was focused on the surrounding contents here…).

And it is published out of London, England, by “Informa Ltd” dba “Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa Business.” (see footer).  Also there are several typos (and inconsistent labeling) even on the page listing of: editor, co-editor, associate editor (sic — there are several), assistant editors (properly labeled as plural), senior editorial assistant (properly singular — there is just one), editorial assistant (improperly singular — there are two), and Editorial Board.

EDITORIAL BOARD (and some of the above categories): Other than the obvious Nicholas Bala of Ontario, Canada (recognizable with other known AFCC individuals), and people prone to presenting or being promoted (i.e., Daniel Saunders & Kathleen Faller of University of Michigan) by those who historically have presented at the BMCC (Battered Mothers’ Custody Conference in New York State), these three (Journal of Child Custody Editorial Board) show one from the Netherlands.  Another (not shown here) references “American International University” but no country to go with it… (i.e., which campus?).  IVAT (written out) occurs 5 times and “IVAT”

Corine Ruiter, Ph.D. –  Forensic Psychology Professor and Arkin Mental Health Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands** 
Amy Russell, MSEd, JD, NCC – 
 Arthur D. Curtis Children’s Justice Center, Vancouver, WA ***
Daniel Saunders, PhD – 
 School of Social Work, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI

**Miscellaneous, supplementary info to “Arkin Mental Health Institute.”  The US “NIH” Feb. 2018 published a multi-author description of one of its many RCTs in comparing hospitalization vs. out-patient care for acute psychiatric incidents, dated Feb. 2018 (C. Ruiter not listed among the many authors, but it shows a US HHS / Amsterdam connection to this particular institute):  “Intensive home treatment for patients in acute psychiatric crisis situations:  a multicentre randomized controlled trial” ( or RCT)  Main domain name:  NCBI.NLM.NIH.GOV, a domain name I broke down in a different “Don’t Shoot the Messenger” post in 2018 (or 2019, DNR which)….

***After adding and viewing a May, 2018 pdf of the same listing, in addition to other changes, I noticed that Amy Russell was formerly at a Gundersen Child Protection Center in St. Paul, MN — so this is a new listing or position. (again, miscellaneous detail).  What is the “NCC” for, I wonder… I added the link seen in the quote above, which is directly to county-level government, where it seems this justice center is.  They mention many fine-print things, and “Family Solutions” without identifying what that is.  The phrase “nationally accredited” is also used without specifying “by whom”…  too bad… Is “Family Solutions” a local or out-of-state nonprofit, a class, or what? Again, while minor details there are unanswered questions regarding who’s who and affiliated with whom on this particular journal’s editorial board.

IVAT being a dba of “Family Violence Sexual Assault Institute” is also a small, odd (allegedly dual legal domicile — impossible because in the US organizations must choose ONE legal domicile; all others where it may operate are then deemed “foreign” — regarding different states).  is reflected, the California Secretary of State indicates one state, the California Office of Attorney General, Registry of Charitable Trusts (which communicates with the SOS), another.  The original state was Texas.

I’d keep a record of the Editorial Board handy, and if not a literal, a mental set of columns listing, for starters, GEOGRAPHY, and at least one column for other affiliations: AFCC, BMCC, DV professionals (if any), etc. Understanding how small the FVSAI is and historically has been (per its tax returns) also shows just how odd the situation is. I’ve met a few of the editorial board members over the years, including at least one while in significant trauma still from overnight loss of children via family court ruling based on (a number of unproven allegations, which is inherent to family court systems overall — “proof not required… generally,…”).

[End, additional Mini-Section, Post-Publication, added 9/18/2019]

I searched “Cummings” on this blog’s Media library, these were posted in 2014 (as pdfs, a second click on blank page icon will be needed.  Before that second click, the title of originating page will also display as part of the associated filename; the urls also show Year and Month of the associated original post):

2002 FALL MiltonHErickson Newsltr Vol22-#3~3 (NickCummings Intv pp1,24 SMARTMARRIAGES ad, pg6-Browse! and See Para. 4 and His Experience, May 3, 2013 Certification of Nicholas_Cummings_Declaration

**See FOOTNOTE “NJCummings|CSPP| etc.” near bottom of this post, which quotes from these two links, and is a theme I’ve explored (and posted on) at this blog over several years, particularly since Spring 2012, the “Our Broken Family Courts” conference, which his foundation helped sponsor and which took place in Arizona (an area where, Cummings, says, the Doctorate in Behavioral Health (“DBH”) degree, his profits from integrating psychological healthcare with primary systems (Hawaii Medicaid experiment, Biodyne ~~>Nicholas & Dorothy Cummings Foundation ~~>endowed university chairs in Arizona and (?) Nevada...  First pdf is also from a Milton H. Erikson Foundation newsletter (2002), of interest because of the focus on Hypnosis in Therapy and how Cummings (also for twenty years involved as head of health at Kaiser Permanente (following Timothy Leary of LSD fame…) and briefly President of the APA.  That newsletter interview also relates to his decision to become a psychotherapist and get a degree in psychology (from UC Berkeley) was inspired by a combination of wartime experiences (Persuading paratroopers to jump to their deaths, 82nd Airborne(?), World War II, and Freda Fromm Reichmann, whose course he took under William Meninger’s (military-related) training for men whose job was talking those men into jumping, not panicking….  **Sigmund Freud contemporary Freda Fromm Reichmann 1889-1957 in Rockville,MD (short, almost dismissive bio at JewishVirtualLibrary.org) (much more informative one at JewishWomen’sArchives.org) Both mention she was married to Erich Fromm; the second mentions that he was her analysand and that while separated quickly, did not divorce (m. 1926) until 1942.  Unlike the first, the second also actually details her influences, contributions, and puts it in context.  I also appreciated this 2001 extended Book Review of “The Life of Frieda Fromm-Reichmann” (Book 2001 by Hornstein; review in APA’s Div. 39: “Society for Psychoanalysis and Psychoanalytic Psychology” (Author:  Hornstein, Gail A. / Publisher: New York: Free Press, 2000  / Reviewed By: Karen W. Saakvitne, Summer 2001, pp. 51-53

As with real blueprints, which became obsolete (says that Wiki) around 1990, besides the generic use of the word, for (road, building,etc.) construction before 1990, where the records may still be on blueprints, it’s “prohibitively expensive” for them to be transformed into digital.

What about the pre-1990s build-up to the formation of family courts; what about pre-internet access to records of the nonprofits involved in lobbying for this?

The traditional term “blueprint” continues to be used informally to refer to various types of image. Practicing engineers, architects, and drafters just call them “drawings” or “prints”.

Many of the original paper blueprints are archived since they are still in use. In many situations their conversion to digital form is prohibitively expensive. Most buildings and roads constructed before c. 1990 will only have paper blueprints, not digital. These originals have significant importance to the repair and alteration of constructions still in use, e.g. bridges, buildings, sewer systems, roads, railroads, etc., and sometimes in legal matters concerning the determination of, for example, property boundaries, or who owns (and/or is responsible for) a boundary wall.

These self-declared (family court) builders are still around and active (internationally), sometimes calling themselves reformers also (in a sort of split-persona stance, so it seems).  If other (?) advocates’ and family court reformers’ intent is to engage and counter them internationally on their various problematic theories, philosophies, and professionals’ (such as judges, custody evaluators, etc.) beliefs about, say, child abuse or domestic violence — or men, or women — perHAPS one place to start might be to acknowledge in public, then if needed, challenge the blueprint/s.

I just found — and eventually got a year for (1997) an Ohio “Family Court Feasibility Study“** conducted by the NCJFCJ, but commissioned or sponsored by the Ohio Supreme Court and the Ohio DHS. Notably, this was right after 1996 welfare reform. **(That link is from “supremeCourtOhio.gov” after I first ran across it, absent any year, at: SCONET.State.OH.US (labeled “The Supreme Court of Ohio & The Ohio Judicial System” but, as you can see, the domain name ends “*.us” not “*.gov”. Having then gotten to the Ohio Supreme Court publications page, I browsed, and it didn’t take long to see other related publications (more recent), such as one displaying the “Safe & Together” (David Mandel) connection).

The 1997 Ohio Family Court Feasibility Study begins:

The Family Court Feasibility Study, sponsored collectively by the Supreme Court of Ohio, the Governor’s Task Force on the Investigation and Prosecution of Child Abuse and Child Sexual Abuse Cases (hereinafter referred to as the Governor’s Task Force), and the Ohio Department of Human Services (DHS), is a natural step in the evolution of Ohio’s concern for families that find themselves interacting with the State’s system of courts and the law.

This “natural step” seems to have had significant prodding from specific organizations over time, all of them known to be very “prodding” in nature, and with some history of working together on similar issues, promoting local passage of agreed-upon legislation after regional or national private collaborations on the same (roundtables, etc.)….No mention here of other related situations of national significance — such as welfare reform which had just passed….

While this (single source (but in two links) validates my statement that family courts (a) were not nationwide even as late as the 1990s and (b) were in many ways pushed through by specific private associations, I cannot say too much here because (given what I also know of the Ohio situation, including its fatherhood commission, its recent profiteering out of Cuyahoga County OH (through forced-consumption parenting courses run on-line by at least one nonprofit based in Oregon (Jack Arbuthnot, Donald Gordon; I posted), the history of the Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives (also in Ohio) which presumably still exists), it’s so upsetting.  Maybe later, after a personal time-out!

~ ~ ~

FOOTNOTE “NJCummings|CSPP| etc.

2002 FALL MiltonHErickson Newsltr Vol22-#3~3 (NickCummings Intv pp1,24 SMARTMARRIAGES ad, pg6-Browse! (<~~recommended: read all of the NickCummings Interview; he’s been influential and it’s a window into understanding the field.  I see I posted this over five years ago (March, 2014).  

DS (Interviewer): Y ou have also been involved with the graduate training of future psychologists.

NC (interviewee): In the 1960’s I became disgusted with the fact that the majority of graduate students were being trained by professors who had never worked with psychotherapy patients. I decided to do something about it. In 1969 I became the founding President of the California School of Professional Psychology (CSPP). It was the first doctoral-level clinical training program to emphasize experiential learning, personal therapy as a requirement for trainees and a faculty of practicing clinicians. I was the founding president of all four campuses and continued to serve as pres- ident for seven years. The educational model that we incorporated changed graduate training in psychotherapy forever.

The “personal therapy as a requirement for trainees” seems to mimick (or at least parallel) requirements, especially in America, for practicing psychoanalysts — one must first undergo psychoanalysis, thus establishing a guru/mentor relationship.  It also likely establishes that the mentor knows the deepest secrets of the analysand (if that’s the right term) which might, conceivably, be used against the individual or as a factor in controlling them (as with Scientology, or other religions featuring “confession”).  Nicholas Cummings also involved in psychoanalysis (and where I first heard about him was through an ad for his conference through a SF psychoanalytic website; see this blog).

See Para. 4 and His Experience, May 3, 2013 Certification of Nicholas_Cummings_Declaration~~~

Footnote BRMcCBoyd R. McCandless (1915-1975; <that’s a Google books search result).  I don’t like looking at this format, however some of the more academic references either had no abstract, or were closed to me.  Book is “Advances in Child Development and Behavior” © 1982 Vol. 16; and it begins with a brief biography of McCandless.

In this book (searching the name) I found that the award named after him, started, 1977 or 1978, was first given to four young scholars — among them Michael Lamb (initially “Michael A. Lamb,” later in the same book, the middle initial is “E.”) who got it one year, then was on the task force(?) recommending the next year’s recipients.

In the process a brief bio of McCandless’ life and work, and, no less interesting, Professor Lamb’s in the early 1970s.  Such as his having been born in South Africa (N. Rhodesia/Zambia), getting several degrees in quick succession in the early 1970s: 1972 in his homeland, then 1973, Johns Hopkins, Yale, and then quickly to professorships at: University of Wisconsin, University of Michigan (not long in either place), then University of Utah.  Can we say, “Midwest USA?  At some point (not shown in this book) he went back to Cambridge and has been leveraging that connection with the USA (and vice versa) to continue explorations of, as you can see above and will continue to see if you continue to explore, things particularly “Fatherhood”….

Not the main point of this post, so: you have the link.  Fuel for the overall mental information database I hope is accumulating within readers heads — there’s much more than meets the eye in this whole field and the history of it!



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: