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

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?' (See March 23 & 5, 2014). More Than 745 posts and 45 pages of Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Behold, a municipal family court clinic, “Inc.”|| London, Ontario, Canada’s Answer to AFCC, USA (or vice versa?): ‘LFCC’ (1974) — I mean, ‘CCF in the JS’ (sometime <2009)– no, make that ‘LFCC’ (2014) but led by at least one AFCC-affiliated "C.Psych"  and, like AFCC, set up privately to feed off [a.k.a. ‘service/help’] BOTH Family (Private*) and Children’s Office (Public*) Court by way mostly, of Referrals & Lots of Gov’t Funding (Publ. Oct. 19, 2019).

with one comment


Just so you know:  This post has many large BIG pictures with pretty springtimebright colors, even a few cartoons, directors’ head-shots in circle’d cutouts and is possibly even shorter than its title.  

I’m as tired of the word-games / name-changes as anyone else, but not too tired to make fun of a few of them such as the ongoing attempts to use graphics, including pie-charts  with tiny numbers, and half the facts to coverup conflicts of interest and erect barriers to seeing the financials (even as posted under a link labeled “Financials”) followed by a lot of name-dropping (parts of Canadian government and specific foundations that are behind it).

POST TITLE: Behold, a municipal family court clinic, “Inc.”|| London, Ontario, Canada’s Answer to AFCC, USA (or vice versa?): ‘LFCC’ (1974) — I mean, ‘CCF in the JS’ (sometime <2009)– no, make that ‘LFCC’ (2014) but led by at least one AFCC-affiliated “C.Psych”  and, like AFCC, set up privately to feed off [a.k.a. ‘service/help’] BOTH Family (Private*) and Children’s Office (Public*) Court by way mostly, of Referrals & Lots of Gov’t Funding (Publ. Oct. 19, 2019).  (… “-bkw”)

This one is about 7,500 words, after I did “just a bit more” look-up and added that information to the top of the post (and more updates, reformatting Oct. 20).

LONDON FAMILY COURT CLINIC INCORPORATED

Digging for information:

Basic Website: https://www.lfcc.on.ca  Motto: “Professional Services for Families in Court”

Directors:   Daniel T. Ashbourne, C. Psych, Kimberly C. Smith, C. Psych, Joyce Radford, C. Psych.

(No JD’s or accountants?)

LFCC.ON.CA Charity Registration from gov’t website. Read the legend for the categories. Fees for services and “All other revenue” under which they’d be included (dark green) only 20.8% or about 1/5th. What kind of assets are accumulated? Doesn’t show.

(Bio snapshots of each from web page shown in 21-image series below).

Is it a Court, or a Clinic? Well, Canadian Charities Search Site has it as a charity (private entity), effective date 1977 (not 1974), Fiscal Year ending March 31, and a pie-chart (differing from the one shown by the organization on where its revenues come from by category (Remember: not US$)

LFCC.ON.CA Charity Registration from gov’t website

 


 

Originators, per its “About Us/History” page,## which holds just three short, “link-less” paragraphs to cover over forty years (##an image provided below also):

Judge Maurice H. Genest, “mustered a small group of local professionals” to start “family court clinic” modeled after one in Toronto — but where to get the money?  Oh… the Ministry of Health… .

In the early 1970’s, his honour Judge Maurice H. Genest, mustered a small group of local professionals to pursue the idea of a local Family Court Clinic, one modelled after that in Toronto. The major stumbling block – funding – fell away when Dr. Naomi Rae-Grant secured support from the Ministry of Health. As Judge Genest continues the story; “ a modest complement of staff was hired, a volunteer board of directors was established, and in 1974 the London Family Court Clinic was started.”

What was then two people conducting “pre-disposition assessments” for the juvenile court is today a multi-faceted agency with 25 staff* and 13 different services areas.  Annually we provide between 1100 and 1300 services that includes: work with individuals and families, consultations, assessments, court testimony, alternative dispute resolution efforts, and trainings and resources for prevention and interventions

More than 10 years ago** we changed our name to Centre for Children & Families in the Justice System. The decision to return to our original name in 2014  was both difficult and comfortable. The London Family Court Clinic had built a reputation as a leader in the field and while the Centre for Children & Families in the Justice System is a descriptive of our focus, it does not roll off the tongue easily and many continued to refer to us as “LFCC”.  Old habits die hard for good reason sometimes and we are glad to be “home” again.

Click here to view our 2017/2018 Annual General Report***

“*,” ‘**” and “***” from the quote above:

LFCC.On.CA (# of employees and pay-scales shown, for FYE March 2018)

* A Charitable Registry report from the Canadian government (see nearby image) says they have only ten (10) FULL-time staff, one of which was paid $120K or more (Canadian).  But as the comment about how many staff is neither dated nor qualified in any way, who’s to say it wasn’t true at some point in time — or false… With no good way to fact-check, it’s “take it on faith” time… Storytelling about themselves….


**If an exact year, 2014, can be given for when it returned to the original name, why not a year (vs. a “range” somewhere between 1974 and about 2009!) it left the original name?  No one keeping records over there? Was there some initiating reason for the original name change, such as any failure-to-file status, or impending investigations looking for the financials?  *** What’s called “Annual General Report” here is the same link for that year under “Financials” sub-menu to “About Us” (see nearby image). Both pages stretch information rather thin… Much of the large image gallery below taken from that link.  Two of the images  reflect what’s quoted above so you can see the presentation also.

More details from the quote led to a whole background-story around Dr. Naomi Rae-Grant and the establishment of Child Psychiatry as a field in Canada. (Including her memorial which notes she preferred being addressed as “Ingrid,” her middle name, but wasn’t successful in getting the habit established despite all the other career successes…) , illuminating the origins of at least the funding for this charity still operational in London, Ontario, Canada.  After which, another quote gives a bit (not much, but some) further information on the originating Judge referenced above…

Dr. Quentin Alexander Frain Rae-Grant (1929-2016) “integral to the development of Child Psychiatry in Canada.” [Context: History of LFCC.ON.CA (original funding was ℅ his wife, Dr. Norma Rae-Grant w/ connections at the time to the Ministry of Health, it says. Viewed Oct. 2019

Who is/was Dr. Naomi Rae-Grant?  Her husband who outlived her, Dr. Quentin Alexander Frain Rae-Grant (1929-2016) “integral to the development of Child Psychiatry in Canada.”

Found it:  In Memoriam Naomi Ingrid Rae-Grant 1929–1998 (with detailed biography) at ww1.cpa-apc.org (Canadian Psychiatric Association, Founded in 1951; web domain name (CPA-APC) reflects both English and French acronym word orders)  At the time of his death, Dr. Quentin Alexander Frain Rae-Grant, it says above, was Board Chair of the CPA-APC, but I’ve not looked at the history of the organization.

This explains how they met, why they followed a U.S.? Doctor E. James Anthony met at the London Institute for Psychiatry, first, to St. Louis, then to Washington D.C. /Baltimore area (Psychiatric Institute at University of Maryland) (while starting a young family themselves)  and eventually the Rae-Grants moved to Toronto, then London, Ontario.  Read the article, not my quick-read summary of it!

Elwyn James Anthony (1916-2014), not too surprisingly, was a British Psychoanalyst with a lifelong interest in children and (per Wiki) allegedly a co-founder of Group Psychotherapy.  This Wik is “flagged” but I’m still going to quote it at the bottom because it does contain information on what he did which intersects with the strong “child development” and psychoanalysis influence within the family court system, which I’ve mentioned for many years on this blog. He co-published at times with S.H. Foulkes (originally ‘Fuchs’) on whom I found more (post-publication), an extensive biography care of the Wellcome Trust Archives of his and his (3rd) wife’s papers. Fascinating, and Freudian.  https://tinyurl.com/SHFoulkes-Papers-WellcomeTrust

Both were Influential in spreading the concept of Group Psychotherapy (with Psychoanalytic Focus).  Founding of various societies and associations helped spread the concepts.  Still true today…

Psychoanalysis also involves being psychoanalyzed which tends to develop strong, if not loyal, relationships and mentoring/guru status (senior to junior) which MAY explain in part why the newly married couple followed this man across the ocean to the USA to build their careers.

Please note that there’s no reference to “psychology” in the couple’s profiles; the emphasis throughout is Psychiatry — he was chair of “Psychiatry” she, Child Psychiatry, in general.

From the 1999 In Memoriam it seems like Dr. Naomi Rae-Grant had unusually strong support for a woman at the time (and was no doubt strong herself), married quickly (within six months) after meeting her husband, both as students in related fields, and they seemed to have formed a quick or strong mentoring relationship with Dr. E. James Anthony (“E.” stands for Elwyn), following him to the USA, from where their careers further developed and eventually led to Canada…

No doubt her growing up as a child during wartime had an impact on the lifelong interests.  She was also likely lucky if her husband was not abusive and didn’t have a major problem with an educated wife, which is more than all of us can say a few generations later!.

…The Rae-Grant family joined Quentin in Toronto in 1969. Over the next 5 years, Naomi held the positions of Director, Children’s Services Branch, Mental Health Division, and Senior Psychiatry Consultant and Principal Program Advisor, Medical and Nursing Branch, Personal Care Standards Division, both in the Ministry of Health for Ontario. Through these positions, Naomi was highly influential in determining the service delivery programs in child and adolescent psychiatry in Ontario.From 1974 to 1979, Dr Naomi Rae-Grant held the position of Chief of Child Psychiatry at the War Memorial Children’s Hospital in London, Ontario. The  couple preferred to maintain themselves professionally at arm’s length from one another .In 1987, Quentin and Naomi moved to the University of Western Ontario. Quentin became Chairman of Psychiatry, while Naomi, on her return to London, became Head of the Division of Child Psychiatry.

….Her prevention initiatives were represented in her career through a multiplicity of consultation positions that crossed into several sectors and ministries (health, social service, education). Her contribution to prevention is recognized nationally and internationally through work ranging from the Cardoza Project in Urban Planning in Washington to children’s services consultation in Nova Scotia, Ontario, and North Carolina…. Her significant committee work included chairing the Strategic Director Task Force for the Ministry of Community and Social Services,...[[This is a long list!]]…She received distinguished contributor awards from the Ontario Association of Children’s Mental Health Centres and the Ontario Association of Family Court Clinics.

(I tweeted images of this quote with a different-color background recently.//LGH Oct. 20 2019).

…. Well, ‘the Ontario Association of Family Court Clinics‘ sure has a familiar ring to it…especially if you take out the geographic reference (make it international), add “and conciliation” and remove the word “clinics” leaving just the word “courts….


This way of organizing government-supported services receiving referrals from public institutions is common in the USA (and complicated, subverts awareness of who, exactly is setting policy, and makes for a real “money maze.”). I have not been able (yet) to find any “Ontario Association of Family Court Clinics,” with any rapid-search; hardly surprising when databases go back only so far, and organization names change; organizations (being also corporations usually) also often merge in and out of existence).

Currently I think there’s a similarity between this an “FamilyServiceOntario,” with its (now) 45 member nonprofit associations, but I certainly have no way of verifying without more quick research, which am not about to do now. I am, however, now aware of that organization if it comes up again in the course of blogging, or looking up something else..//LGH Oct. 20, 2019 comments.

All this sheds some more light on Judge Maurice Herbert Genest’s search for funds to set up a Family Court Clinic…. and getting help from Dr. Naomi Rae-Grant… in the mid-1970s… Now, anything more about the Judge himself?

Without going to “Ancestry.com” (I see, from being barred access to read his 2006 obituary), what more I could find (on short notice) on Maurice H. Genest who started up this London Family Court Clinic comes from a 2008 request by his (unnamed) son to the London Council have a street named in his honor.  The short blurb says why, and without specifying which years mentions his 27.5 years on Family Court and 10 years — again, which years not mentioned: why not? Family habit? — teaching Family Law at “UWO” (University of Western Ontario, probably) as part of a “Streets of Honor” Campaign. The Judge lived 1930-2006.

The UWO connection is significant because that’s where CREVAWC now is, and with it, Peter Jaffe…

I am nominating my father Maurice Herbert Genest as an exemplary London Citizen who for 27.5 years served the people of his community with compassion and empathy as a Judge of the Ontario Court of Justice. In 1970 he spearheaded the establishment of a Big Brothers organization in London and in 1972 served as that organization’s first London president. In 1975 my father again with much enthusiasm established the London Family Court Clinic. During that same period he won a hard fought battle to build a safe detention centre for young offenders in London. In 1995 by an Order in Council the London Juvenile Detention Centre was renamed in his honour as the Maurice H. Genest Detention Centre for Youth. He also taught Family Law at UWO for IO years. He received an award in 1974 for Distinguished Community Service from the London Chamber of Commerce. His 27.5 years on the bench here in London was a period of considerable change and improvement in which my father was often not only a participant but a catalyst. His commitment to the families and children of London and the youth of the provinces is well known and for this reason I feel he should have a street named in his honour.


(Fund at: Council.London.ca/CouncilArchives/Agendas/Planning Committee (2008-11-24) (url shortened; the pdf is LONG, but apart from Nominee Name and Birth/Death dates, that is the whole paragraph of the son’s request).


And this is overall part of a “Coordinated Community Response to Domestic Violence (USA terminology) or “Violence Against Women and Children” (Canadian version?  At least in CREVAWC)….

CREVAWC Basic Website: http://www.learningtoendabuse.ca

More on this below the images, particularly as the alpha male (?) and only middle-aged male on the CREVAWC’s faculty & staff biography admits to being on the US-based NCJFCJ (in a specific capacity relating to “enhancing judicial skills in domestic violence cases” and being a founding member of the “London Coordinating Committee to End Woman Abuse” (LCCEWA) I just posted on (this week), of which the London Family Court Clinic, which pre-dated it, was obviously the originating force, especially with is Strings-attached grants… — but for some reason (unlike Director Daniel T. Ashbourne, above) doesn’t care to reveal his AFCC connections, which it’s not exactly “rocket science” to see.  But, nor is it made known on his bio: file under “withholding the obvious, important affiliation when it comes to family courts”.  See “FOOTNOTE CREVAWC”

Note: This bio is for Peter Jaffe at “CREVAWC” at Western Ontario, not the main topic of this post, although there is overlap for obvious reasons (LFCC has paid him for some services; he’s AFCC and so is the current leader (Daniel T. Ashbourne) of LFCC.

However, I should mention here (through an image from the LFCC) that among the activities paid outside Canada (this past fiscal year ending, well, March 31, 2018) was $13K (Canadian $$ no doubt) to “Peter Jaffe” in the US… Sounds to me like these two things (one “Centre” and the other, a registered charity) have more in common than may meet the eye looking at their respective websites.   Because the web page doesn’t allow one to re-grab anything showing the financials and the entity name at the same time, I’ll repeat it, making three images here:


My post title (shown again) also referenced something I may not have expressed too well, but did want to reference in part.  The next section (written before all the extra research just above) is my disclaimer for it, with some more, Footnoted.   I’ve bolded which section I mean of the title:

Behold, a municipal family court clinic, “Inc.”|| London, Ontario, Canada’s Answer to AFCC, USA (or vice versa?): ‘LFCC’ (1974) — I mean, ‘CCF in the JS’ (sometime <2009)– no, make that ‘LFCC’ (2014) but led by at least one AFCC-affiliated “C.Psych”  and, like AFCC, set up privately to feed off [a.k.a. ‘service/help’] BOTH Family (Private*) and Children’s Office (Public*) Court by way mostly, of Referrals & Lots of Gov’t Funding. (Oct. 18, 2019) (short-link ends “-bkw”)

That there are public and private courts (and what that means, in various countries) is a topic to keep on the radar.  I have a general sense, not a fully-functional working definition, at least not imprinted (with confidence it’s accurately) in my brain.  That’s possibly understandable when in the US system, there are parallel but contradictory handlings in separate systems (can be in the exact same geographic place) between the “State v. [Person or Corporation XYZ]” criminal and, by contrast, the “Person v. Person” civil and underneath the civil (so it seems), Family Court versions.  I’ve seen enough of Canada to realize it’s substantially different in which court gets which cases under which circumstances.

The family courts are a more recent development than the juvenile ones.  My sense is mostly they’re as late as the 1990s in many United State; with significant laws being passed in the UK and Canada in the mid-1990s also.  Again, that’s not my area of expertise, however.  Ask a qualified lawyer! (But, don’t expect a straight answer, if any answer, on bringing up the AFCC!)

Post Title disclaimer and explanation of the  PUBLIC/PRIVATE COURT (“*”) parts of it:

This title reflects what I recall of the contents; one thing I do not recall perfectly, however, is the structure of Canada’s family vs. public (federal) courts, although making a reference to them in the title.  Correct at will if you have a better understanding or recall of the exact name, or see my “*” disclaimer and related footnote.


The disclaimer to go with the “*” in this title is important.  I’m not a politician or a lawyer (or a Canadian), but wanted to make some reference to both sectors because there are differences of jurisdiction, and for AFCC members to be possibly tied into both, is a Very Big Deal.

I don’t want any unintentional inaccuracy in that terminology to distract from the main content of the post, which is from LFCC’s own websites and material it’s posted about itself.

The prior post quoted posts linking to and referring to the LFCC in association with other (well, exactly what they are, respectively is up for debate — see that post’s title on lack of clarity on the same! I started the drill-down, and have classified just a few parts of it so far…).

The setup of Canadian public vs. private courts is not the main part of this post.  Who is the LFCC and who’s been running it, what exactly IS it — is. If my points of reference bother you, see the Footnote:  “Public vs. Private Courts, Jurisdictions (USA, Canada)” in post title.  I’d address it here, but vertical space says the top of any post is more valuable “real estate” and the topic is a lower priority for this post, which I am at this point, simply trying to get published within a certain timeframe and my personal level of interest in this particular drill-down,  (as a volunteer, “pro bono” investigative blogger) now that I’ve at least brought it up.

I am not an expert on the Canadian charitable registry (or corporate) databases, and from my little exposure to them, do not want to spend major time on them.  People who live in Canada ought to become such experts, at least to a basic competency level, and when discussing ISSUES “south of the border” (with USA), be able to compare notes along those lines.  What are the similarities and differences not just between court systems, but between financial accountabilities for public entities and private entities which we ALL KNOW are involved in those court systems and taking business from them –as they are also involved in university centers (also taking public funding) and so forth.  In other words, citizens of both countries pay for their own government entities which deal with private businesses and professionals.

SO THERE MUST BE A WAY TO DISCUSS BOTH SYSTEMS WITHOUT ADVANCED DEGREES IN ‘LAY TERMS’ WHICH TIE TO PUBLIC REVENUES, PUBLIC EXPENSES, PUBLIC ASSETS HELD, AND PUBLIC LIABILITIES ACCRUED AND ALLEGED.  OBVIOUSLY MAJOR INSTITUTIONAL FUNDS AND PUBLIC PENSIONS ARE INVESTMENT PLATFORMS IN BOTH COUNTRIES, AND PRODUCE REVENUES WHICH ARE ACCOUNTED FOR SOMEHOW, RIGHT?

The USA charitable databases and federal grants databases have enough problems (anomalies, discrepancies, and lack of connectivity where it’s called for) for me to even talk about in a single lifetime — and I don’t have a full lifetime ahead of me; just “the last third” if normal human longevity (absent disease or domestic violence or neighborhood criminal activity) is taken into account.


This post completes, for now, the one shown below (Exploring “Coordinated Community Response” | London, Ontario, Canada’s CREVAWC (1992), LCCEWA (1981), London Family Court Clinic (1974?)) I just updated. It exists mostly to deliver some promised graphics which were supposed to be added to the bottom of the earlier post. — however my title reflects questions posed, at least in my mind, by those graphics (webshots from the London Family Court Clinic’s own websites, i.e., self-descriptions).  Which came first — the Canadian setup here, or the one in the USA we know as AFCC?

The format of the LFCC’s web pages are also a message in themselves — some features are huge print, big photos, and bolded — with a LOT of blank space around. Other parts — like the pitiful excuse for producing even half a financial statement (and certainly not in any independently audited format, or a complete one) as I showed in part on the prior post, are also a statement of “catch it if you can” regarding the exact relationship between government and this private clinic seeking to take business from it relating to the family court system in Canada.

To be honest, seeing it I am really wondering which came first — the Canadian LFCC (as modeled, it says, on a Toronto, i.e., nearby, situation — or the US-based AFCC. No question the latter organization is in love with this business model (and a similar but not identical setup over in the UK, both England’s and Wales’ version, i.e., “CAFCASS.” (See my Twitter profile page and pinned Tweet for more on that connection)).

And, in retrospect, it seems that both of them “got the jump” on any movement to protect battered women in either country, ensuring all would be, in due course, diverted into “therapy” or some version of privatized handling of what really, ought to be public matters because they involve crimes against persons — both adult and children.


Which — if you think further about it — brings us BACK to about 1972 and Dr. Phyllis Chesler’s,  (doctorate in psychology, that is), ground-breaking book “Women & Madness.”

(Dr. Chesler is definitely a non-traditional feminist; my only gripe with her, and certainly not often on my mind, but it may come up periodically, is continued support of any sort for the betrayal that is the “Battered Mothers’ Custody Conference” and (cronies)….

I’m an older woman so perhaps can get away with that term more than a man of any age who dared to use it referencing assemblies of women working together on woman’s causes. See last post for why the term really does apply:  see also “cronyism,” generally…

(Continued at “FOOTNOTE:  BMCC, Dr. Chesler, and My Beef with Both; the former moreso than the latter.” at the bottom of this post. It really is a footnote not an essential part of it; side-commentary…)


Exploring “Coordinated Community Response” | London, Ontario, Canada’s CREVAWC (1992), LCCEWA (1981), London Family Court Clinic (1974?) (Short-link ends “-aPz”.  Started Aug. 26, 2019, published Oct. 17 with notice of more images to be added Oct. 18, or 19th) 

Title Correction & bonus update comments:… If I were to be more consistent, I’d also add the acronym (which is reflected on its url) for the London Family Court Clinic, “LFCC.”

I also learned eventually (by reading; the usual way!) that this “family court clinic” (in fact, a private entity) had a temporary name change to something else and only reverted back to [LFCC] about 2014.  The temporary name change to something else closely resembled the “CFCC” pattern shown in both California  (California Judicial Council/AOC/CFCC) and in a center at the University of Baltimore (part of public university system in Maryland), originally with the acronym “CFCC” but now with some major donors’ names prefacing it, i.e., “Sara and Neil Meyerhoff” [CFCC].  BOTH public sectors (California’s highest ruling body of the state’s courts and Maryland’s law school center under direction of Barbara Babb (and last I looked also Gloria Danziger) involve AFCC professionals as employees and in positions of authority.  As does, at least now,  I found out, the London Family Court Clinic, also.//LGH Oct. 18.


My updates to this post totaled exactly 7,500 words (before the promised images). I decided to quit while ahead and post those images here instead, will of course leave a link “back at the ranch” so no one gets lost…

The latest post had substantial updates, I hope you read them… On reflection, I realized how inter-related two recent (but not consecutively recent — one from June, one from August, 2019) posts had been. …. In September I was working substantially on the blog Front Page as it says (and “most recent posts” list also does). …. I continue, as I can, staying current on-line with some (not all) other developments in economic and social-science engineering field (you can see by the recent post on the NSF).  ……
Hopefully this one is painless to compose, annotate if needed, and simply publish to keep my own promise to produce the visuals I was referencing within “24 to 48 hours” as I also promised…


[[UPDATES INSTEAD ADDED AS THIS NEW POST PUBLISHED OCT. 19/20th ( “-bkw”), which you’re now reading.]]

……….My publication standards for this post:  I’m slapping the images up here, not providing “Cliff Notes.”  If so far, you haven’t figured out that involvement of AFCC leadership and failure to produce adequate financial reports while throwing up something half-@assed representative of it at the end of a “financials” link (more annual report / advertising than audited information which might be somehow fact-checked, with the help of a hired private investigator few can afford, especially if they’re not motivated to look for one BECAUSE they’ve been run through some of the clinic’s programs — then I’m not sure how much my narrative would help.

I have other things on my mind at the moment to (research) and post. I have no doctoral supervisor or grants administrator to answer (along with no grants to facilitate such research), at times I can be stubborn, headstrong, or fail to adhere to Chicago Style or any academic style within this blog.

Then again, I’ve read enough excerpts (as made available periodically) from journals, and some of their inaccuracies on cover pages describing the journal, to be aware that what often looks like some academically uniform and respectable style, when examined at the footnote and fact-check level often isn’t — in fact may not even have been proofread as posted on-line.  See last post for references to other posts (i.e., “My Concerns about Collective Letter of Concern to WHO”) showing as much — as well as showing the poor labeling and erroneous links (basic, simple typos in a URL address) on the “LCCEWA” website, too. Taken together, the message seems to be, the public doesn’t matter that much; it’s OK to waste (our) time in many different ways IF the goal is fact-checking or follow-through, rather than just being impressed by how many references and members of any network can be listed at any given point….


What’s below:  This is an “Image gallery” — 21 images, numbered in, probably, the order I took them (a bit arbitrary).  I’ve made them full-sized so the only separation between images will be a single number (or, if I decide to add a link to this post, I may).

You can see the first one has shows the url “www.LFCC.on.CA” at the top.  SOME are annotated (at least one, as previously posted this past week), but most are not.  Where you may see a block of text with medium-blue background and white letters on an image, this represents where I highlit some text (the default highlight color seems to have been that blue background).

POST-PUBLICATION FORMAT CHANGE to IMAGES, but not ‘Image Gallery”: 

I’m keeping all the large mages, removing the “Image Gallery” designator to ensure they can all be viewed on cell-phones, not just larger viewing devices like laptops, iPads, Notebooks, etc.).  In effect, readers will have to scroll, swipe, or page down, rather than swipe, click, or otherwise move sideways.  A comment I made after posting expresses why, when I saw how it displayed.//Oct. 20, 2019.

Former (all very large) IMAGE GALLERY of 21 NOW EXISTS as INDIVIDUAL IMAGES. Captions may differ slightly, but the images and what order they are in (vs. were) does not…//LGH Oct. 20, 2019. Below Image 21 is “Footnotes” section.

(Breaking them into groups of 4 images each with horizontal lines; last group of 5 images: IMAGES 1 – 4 inclusive):

1 LFCC.on.CA bottom of page w/ lots of big pix.

2 LFCC.on.CA

3 Short quote (website) shows name switcheroos over the years and offers a reason why… Branding…

4 More logos showing how well-supported, popular (etc.) it is. (“Ontario Trillium Foundation” and three? more Provincial agencies). Fuzzy quality image…Check main website: is it clear?


(IMAGES  5 – 8)

5 “Families” means “Fathers-only” as to adults? A wonderful (presumably? Father&Son) photo. I did notice, in the WHOLE annual report, not ONE photo of any child with any adult woman, or presumed mother. File under “Moms M.I.A. “

 

6 Pretty Colors & Cartoons (See also top of image = bottom of prev. page) abound. Just not the financial supporting doc’ts.

7 Financials page (not audited financial statement report), arrows & comments are my annotations. LOOK how small the labels! Notice the %s even so. … AND — No statement of Assets to Liabilities as a government CAFR would require (or any other formal audited set of financial statements). Image 8 (next) confirms by showing page-break.

8 (see comment on image 7)


(IMAGES  9-12)

9, = Last page of the Annual Report. “Our Financial Supporters” (unsorted: an alpha sort doesn’t show category of funder) + an extra help for the report itself from the “Margaret McCain Foundation…”  of “2018” (Fiscal year ends March 31, so presumably this is 2017-2018) Annual Report for LFCC.ON.CA taken from its website (Oct. 2019)…

10 (Just showing an under-developed website as of Oct. 2019) “About” has sub-menus; the main “About” however is just plain blank….

11 First of Three C.Psych’s and Executive Director, Dr. Daniel T. Ashbourne, bio at LFCC.on.ca (my annotations). Freely admits AFCC connections. Do the math. (Image 12 shows more detail). ….

12 Just highlighting certain text.. See image 11 (of 21 total taken Oct. 2019 for LFCC.ON.CA).


(IMAGES 13 – 16)

13 Dr. Daniel T. Ashbourne details, cont’d…

14 Dr. Kimberly Harris, C. Psych (two images identical except for which parts highlit, between 14 & 15…)

15 Dr. Kimberly Harris, C. Psych (two images identical except for which parts highlit, between 14 & 15…)

16 Dr. Joyce Radford, C. Psych helps supervise members providing Section 34 assessments to Youth Court. Highlit to show the context of such reports. (One of just three directors of LFCC listed on its main page)..


(IMAGES 17, 18, 19, 20 & 21 of the original “image gallery” I uploaded here originally).. In choosing these images I was simply exploring the website a little further.  Order of presentation is arbitrary… people ought to do their own explorations anyhow; this post is just some “Show & Tell” (mostly show).

Extra Comments interjected here Oct. 20:  Again, I’m a U.S. citizen not a Canadian, and while some of us do share concerns about a common organization (“AFCC” ) across borders, there are some projects I don’t expect to take on during (what’s left of) my lifetime, much as I might like to know more about how exactly this state of affairs (untraceable public/private networks taking untraceable — that I can see — public/private grants, and the public is supporting it all HOW???) came into existence.


On Twitter today, I responded to a Tweet by a vice-president of the organization MAXIMUS talking up its combination AI (Artificial Intelligence) / Live Agent seamless interface to customer calls, not by responding, but by reviewing my own remembered history of this organization involved (internationally) in providing government services  — most recently selling off less profitable and staying focused on health-related services (including child support collections, which are part of that)  by simply reviewing its Wiki (and some subsidiary links) on all the many acquisitions, how it started altering from military to welfare analysis (1975ff), went public in 1997 (NYSE) and within the next 10 years had a leader forced to step down for mistreatment of a female employee (Lynn Davenport, ca. 2004 or 2006) and up through 2018 continued acquiring businesses — including some I’ve blogged earlier (Policy Studies, Inc. of Denver was acquired in 2012 for $67M Cash)….

Even the “Criticisms” section of Maximus (goes back to about when it went public) is pretty full, and just the tip of that iceberg.  It’s also doing business and hence has access to personal information in several different countries (US, Canada, Australia, UK, UAE — sound familiar yet?).

All along the way it can somehow afford to settle out of court, pay major penalties, and keep on grabbing government outsourced projects, now matter HOW outrageous the complaints (including sexism, I saw one stating UK benefits were withheld when customers refused to take adequate:  get this — addictive opiate-based medications!).  See “Wikipedia.”

So we may think we can section-off at the national borders, but not with privatization.

Now for those final five images from the London Family Court Clinic (some referring to services it provides):

17

18

19

20

21


FOOTNOTES:

 

FOOTNOTE CREWAVC: (leadership and maybe another image gallery, but smaller):

From Peter Jaffe bio (extended) from the CREVAWC Website, with some personal color-coding to break up and feature certain telling phrases:

He has co-authored 10 books, 29 chapters and over 80 articles related to children, families and the justice system including Children of Battered Women, Working Together to End Domestic Violence and Child Custody & Domestic Violence: A Call for Safety & Accountability. He has presented workshops across the United States and Canada, as well as Australia, New Zealand, Costa Rica and Europe to various groups including judges, lawyers, mental health professionals and educators.** Since 1997, Peter has been a faculty member for the US National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges’ program on “enhancing judicial skills in domestic violence cases”.

“Hmmm….” now WHICH organization focused on: judges, lawyers, mental health professionals and educators” with international membership focused on (Primarily, those countries – -notice “Costa Rica and Europe” add-ons  (nice conference locales…) might this have been with?…..

Why would someone associated with such an organization (which, he is:  look it up) not even name it or have it named within his own biography on such an important topic?

I don’t know, but perhaps ask Dr. Linda Nielson (or Professor Joan Meier, of the USA (DVLEAP) who supported her draft of a Collective Letter of Concern to WHO re: Parental Alienation (Posted on the CREVAWC, which is where I first saw it, under “Recent News” (as of today, Oct. 19, 2019, it’s still showing, the second to last pdf on that right sidebar widget)… That letter, and generally (I’m more familiar with Professor Joan Meier’s work than Linda Nielson’s, mostly because both of us are in the USA system, where I had to deal with the post-DV family court setups for many years (i.e., until his and my children turned 18)…

Dr. Jaffe was the founding Chairperson of the London Coordinating Committee to End Woman Abuse and is currently actively involved in research on the impact of domestic violence on children. He has also been instrumental in the foundation of the Battered Women’s Advocacy Clinic and is a former chairperson of their Board of Directors. He has served on various community advisory committees for the London Police Service. Peter has been a trustee for the London Board of Education (now the Thames Valley District School Board) since 1980, and he has served two terms as Chairperson (1987-88, 1999-2000). Peter has provided leadership in the development of violence prevention programs within the school system.

Between 1991 and 1993, Peter, was a member of the Canadian Panel on Violence Against Women. This federally appointed committee examined the issue of violence against women through meetings in 139 communities across Canada, encouraging individuals, community groups and professional associations, to identify solutions from their perspective. The final report heightened public awareness of the problem and outlined prevention strategies to end violence.


Sounds to me like he’s been all along ideally positioned to oversee and nudge the response to domestic violence against women & children in a certain direction, rather than any other directions it might naturally otherwise take — such as a closer examination on the background of the family courts and the organization Association of Family and Conciliation Courts with a known branch (at least now) in Toronto….

There are two other (may I say “mature” or apparently middle-aged) women listed under “Faculty & Staff” there:  Linda Baker (above Peter Jaffe on the web page, who manages two of the projects listed by clickable icons on the home page),

Other than two women possibly around Jaffe’s age, it’s what looks like young women research assistants or associates (college age or thereabouts) and just one younger man.  While maybe this reflects the “Feminist” orientation, it also means they’re doing the bulk of the work and (most likely) not being told much about AFCC… and if they were, the Faculty directors include Peter Jaffe with obvious seniority in this field.  All at a University Centre with no financials posted, just as with “LFCC” featured on this post…  Annual and Impact reports — yes.  Supporting details? No.

SIGNIFICANCE:  Both the family court clinic and the response to violence against women and children exposed to violence (in civil, criminal AND family justice systems) show prominent involvement of AFCC-aligned professionals.

(ADDED POST-PUBLICATION):  This embeds my recent Tweet; you may need to click on the “Media” icon for it to display.  (I’m a bit new to “embedding Tweets” on the blog).

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

This next link is a short thread, another embedded tweet, and references (when it came up in someone else’s article) but links to another professional Alan LeSchied, who publishes with Jaffe and has been at Western Ontario (and the London Family Court Clinic) for decades now.  Read his c.v.)…

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js


 

Footnote:  “Public vs. Private Courts, Jurisdictions (USA, Canada)” in post title

I wanted to make some reference to both sectors.  From what I can tell, possibly, this parallels within the USA of differences between courts where the state is an actor (i.e., criminal, including child welfare or dependency courts dealing with child abuse).  One difference with the USA system is that these courts remain under state — not federal — jurisdiction as I understand it (unless something else in individual cases qualifies them for federal jurisdiction — i.e., trafficking across state lines, kidnapping across state or country lines — I’m not the expert on where the dividing lines are drawn).   It seems to me as an outsider that — as with corporations — there are somewhat complex differences of court jurisdiction within the Canadian system, some of which does, and some of which does not, cross province borders.Public vs. Private Courts in Canada: I have read about this, it’s just not second nature to me yet, as a United States citizen who has had enough trouble figuring out the US systems of overlapping and contradictory standards for what is, and what is NOT (depending on which jurisdiction it lands in) a crime — when the jurisdiction may turn a commonly understood crime into a “dispute” (i.e., downgrade criminal prosecution) while elevating bona fide (good-faith, innocent… until the consequences show up…)  attempts to stop it, report it, or protect children (or self) from said crime/s into relationship crimes, thought crimes or, lately and (as ever if women are involved) a pathological mindset needing treatment.

The corresponding sectors in the USA might be child welfare courts (criminal matters involved) versus family courts originally set up to address issues of divorce, custody, child support, and visitation — not criminal, protection, or safety matters.  Look at the blueprints and originators…


FOOTNOTE “Dr. E. James Anthony (British Psychoanalyst 1916-2014) who impacted Naomi Rae-Grant, who helped jumpstart (obtain funding for) the London Family Court Clinic, as shown above.  This is a wikipedia quote:  the quote is “flagged” and I’m including it here just to flag this situation generally, as typical for its times and possible impact of very few people on very many other people now dealing with systems they helped set up while (obsessed?) with mental health, psychiatry and (in his case) psychoanalysis.

One book he was known for, I see, is “The Invulnerable Child” (<~ERIC listing, 1987; I’ll post the image which describes it)..

From Wikipedia “James Anthony (Psychoanalyst) viewed on the day I published this post (Oct. 19, 2019)

….Anthony was recruited from England in 1958 to hold the world’s first endowed chair in Child Psychiatry, the Blanche F. Ittleson Professorship at Washington University in St. Louis where most of his longitudinal research was conducted. His work in St. Louis at the Edison Child Study Center included many grants from foundations and the NIMH. His collaboration with Foulkes, who became his training analyst, began at Northfield Hospital and in the 1950s he became a founder member of the Group Analytic Society.

Anthony was born in Calcutta, India and educated in Darjeeling, India from the age of four and a half by Jesuits before immigrating to England for medical training. He was a protégé and collaborator with Jean PiagetAnna FreudErik EriksonJohn Bowlby and Sir Aubrey Lewis who throughout his early career introduced him to international and cultural aspects of child development.

He attended medical school at Kings College during the Second World War, including delivering babies during the bombings of London. His first assignment as an officer was to work at Northfield Military Center with S.H. Foulkes, dealing with “shell shocked soldiers”. There they started rudimentary group psychotherapy. Later he was transferred to Hong Kong as chief medical officer for Southeast Asia and was charged with setting up day care centers for Japanese children who survived the Hiroshima bombings. When he returned from the war, he continued his psychiatric and child psychiatric training at the Maudsley Hospital and received the gold medal from the University of London. He was a member of the Royal College of Psychiatry and his numerous lectureships included a standing appointment at the London School of Economics.

He was a senior lecturer at the Hampstead Clinic and received a Nuffield Fellowship to study with Jean Piaget. At the same time his collaboration with S.H. Foulkes on Groups led them to co-author “Group Psychotherapy: the Psychoanalytic Approach” considered to this day as the bible of group psychotherapy with many reprintings including one this year.

……


FOOTNOTE:  BMCC, Dr. Chesler, and My Beef with Both; the former moreso than the latter.

I have in my emails (though not sent at the time) and memory some attempts to reach out about this situation, generally, with respect for her different career emphasis and focus (i.e., Islamic, Gender Apartheid; Honor Killings), a question why she was not exposing the AFCC and the USA Family Values Based HHS grants represented in Welfare Reform.  At the time, she’d as an author updating her book (as I recall) “Mothers on Trial,” seeking more individual mothers’ accounts; and I was at the time involved in some on-line mothers groups discussing our issues retaining custody of children after reporting abuse, which would’ve put it sometime after 2009. I did know some of the stories of mothers who did report and (anonymously) got theirs reflected in the book.As you can see by this blog, I took an entirely different tack (as in a sailing term: approach).  However this approach as a possibility was by then (for about ten years) already made known in California through people and organizations deeply involved with this BMCC and with (as it existed then), California NOW.  Two documents from 2002 and a letter (from Gloria Steinem) 2005 come to mind, not to mention the work on the East Coast of Liz Richards (of Anandale, Virginia; there is another “Liz Richards” around), Cindy Ross (NAFCJ-California), and some women from So-Cal, Los Angeles area, not to mention one man, too, who is well known to some in the field:  Marv Bryer, as in his “Court Cancer Metastasizes” chapter in the CA NOW 2002 “Family Court Report” which (as I recall) bears Chesler’s name, with a few others (Rachel Allen and….Helen Grieco?  I DNR offhand), on its cover.

So, she had opportunity to “woman up” and demand accountability for the money trail.  Instead, the tact was (understandably given the profession, but still in another sense, unforgiveable) to ignore that and continue ensuring that stories would be told, articles written and something of a living be made in that process.

For this, publicity to a niche market ℅ Battered Mothers’ Custody Conference in upstate New York was ideal.  You couldn’t have a more “captive” needy (&/or angry) audience… ready to be sold goods & services, network opportunities, ANYTHING which might explain what it (said audience as “custodially-challenged mothers,” particularly those who’d been battered, in front of or along with their children, and some involving also incest) was experiencing, witnessing, and would be naturally eager to stop the destructive impact of such systems.

As I learned, and continue to maintain, these women (I was one, but no longer am or would say “we”) need to look to themselves as leadership and their own mental, cognitive, research and analytic skills — with a “consumer beware” attitude  to get the background information from outside sources on “the system” and not accept any handy, empathetic-sounding, emotionally resonant labels for it handed to them from a conference podium, or spin-off websites, books, and services….

Updated post is nearly 7,500 words now. To go back to the top of the page, click on the title link here:

Comments are open. You can also comment individually on amy image, I believe. I should be notified by email if you do…

One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Just Having published this post And checking it by cell phone as I usually do, I noticed that of the 21 images I posted in large size, easily viewable on my laptop, only three can be seen by swiping on my iPhone. If anyone else is having this problem I’d like to know and will in the future stop using image galleries although they are very handy for keeping things organized.
    As typically happens I’ll be back on this post within a day or so to for the copy edit and correct the image gallery problem. The information on the original judge and funders of the London Family Court clinic i.e. judge Genest who died in 2006 and Dr. Naomi Rae-grant who died in 1998, I found very interesting. Reading about them deepen my understanding of the overall picture. On the other hand, locating financials in a Canadian system is very daunting come in at my age I don’t wanna spend a lot more time trying to do it. If there is no parallel for the US system of writing tax returns which actually show boards of directors and details at least as reported to the IRS, what they did with their money, that there really is not accountability throughout the system. As a United States citizen I would not want to be doing public policy business with in the system which does not provide financials that can be connected from public to private and viewed by the public

    Let's Get Honest

    October 19, 2019 at 6:51 pm


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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter 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: