Privatization, Functionalism, the Complete Mental Health Archipelago. It’s Here, So Why Should We Still Care? (May, 2020).
ANY post (or page) may be further edited (copyedited, condensed, or expanded, or all of the above) after publishing. Blogger’s privilege! THIS one should be: I tired of working on it amid so much else to blog. Publishing, “as is” but still worth reading, I say. Another consideration: I’m not paid for writing — this blog isn’t an adjunct to a consulting career; it comes from the heart, mind and efforts of a family court (and domestic violence-) survivor parent and aggrieved U.S. citizen whose own government institutions (with all the private conflicts of interests so involved) trashed a family, my career, and didn’t even leave me a safe place to stand after our children turned adult. Instead of restraining the worst in humanity, it seems to bring out and amplify that worst (greed, economic corruption, selfishness, arrogance, and dishonesty). Re: this blog, I am looking for more efficient formats to communicate this information in, or ways to “index” what’s been researched (including the “drill-downs”) on here into key — but documented — topics.
It’s actually a database technology issue. I continue learning, but can’t produce at the same pace as I learn, or anything close to it. //LGH
You are reading:
Privatization, Functionalism, the Complete Mental Health Archipelago. It’s Here, So Why Should We Still Care? (May, 2020) (case-sensitive post short-link ends “-cmj, about 7,300 words”). See also nearby (and just-[re-]published May 13) “The Giant APA and ABA Typify The People’s Problem…” which this came from)..
Others have applied the phrase “Gulag Archipelago” to prison and other institutions across the US, or used the word “archipelago” with other adjectives [1] but my usage here is “Mental Health Archipelago.”
I just re-posted and updated (again, “The Giant APA and ABA Typify The People’s Problem <~link) [2] on the size and extent of at least three American “psych” organizations (for psychology, psychiatry, and psychoanalysis, with the even larger legal association, the American Bar Association). All of “[2]” is added the day after I published this post and relates more to the previous one, except to show how late filing and/or posting of tax returns enables the “chameleon corporation” activity. Where is the concern for the public in all this?
[2} After posting May 13, 2020, what had puzzled me about the APA Services, Inc. entity, my own related post (WordPress generates these and shows at the bottom of posts) from two years ago confirmed by a shared EIN# that a name change had taken place. The D.C. business filings do not provide uploaded, viewable pdfs to see actual images of any filings, so I was in looking there unable to see that fact. Some states do (Massachusetts, California, Florida) to varying extents, but the District of Columbia does not. That topic is another post and project (“feel free,” anyone… to take it on). As I quoted the APA website on my recent post (but not in this color scheme)
APA is positioning our field to play a leading role in addressing the grand challenges of today and the future. In February 2019, APA’s Council of Representatives adopted a new strategic plan that provides a roadmap to guide and prioritize the work of the organization for the next three to five years. The implementation process will be transformative and comprehensive, with the association realigning itself and refocusing its work in concert with the new APA/APA Services, Inc. strategic priorities.
“APA Services, Inc.” is in fact at this time NOT new; the DCRA.DC.Gov record (I posted images) shows that entity dates back to 2000. The wording is tricky: the “strategic priorities” shared by BOTH organizations is new, so technically, the statement is true. But it provides no links (or financials) to show APA Services, Inc. And at first, as stated on the post, I couldn’t find its EIN# from a name search (because the name had changed!) Such situations irritate me… However, after I published the post and saw WordPress’ auto-generated “related” posts, I did find the EIN# and about the name change…
That post:
Do You Know Your…ABA, APA (Founders, History, and via their Forms 990/O and Financial Statements, As Nonprofits?), Or How the ABA from its start maneuvered around Membership Admission for “men of color” despite existing suffrage and qualified men until long after women also got the vote? If Not, Then You Also May Not Yet Know Your [the Public’s] Assigned Place in the Tax Continuum Pecking Order. (Oct 2014 update, Pt. 3A) (Post title with case-sensitive shortlink ending “-76j”)
(I THINK this is the answer at least, as of now): Former name: “APA Practice Organization.” It’s a 501©6, purpose “To promote the mutual professional interests of psychologists.” There’s already an APA PAC (presumably 501©4)…NEW (trade)name, APA Services, Inc.
From my July 7, 2017 post on this, here’s a FY2015 Form 990, as uploaded there: APAPO EIN#522262196 FY2015 (45pp) (Sched I of Grants only Grants were USD 471 268 Other Exps (mostly Paymts back to the APA) USD 3 687 269 (<~link to entire return posted there). NOTE: My FILENAME has a typo in the EIN# (click through shows it to be: EIN# 52-2262136). The link is a pdf and will require a second click on blank page icon; I have some annotations on its page 2). The IRS only has (latest return) FY2017 (calendar year), not 2018, or 2019 (and I’m writing in May), obviously not reflecting the name change. IRS FY2016. The website shown there is “http://www.apapracticecentral.org” Likewise my “Candid.org” search of that EIN# shows only up through FY2017 (Year End, December 31) and under the old name.
APAServices.org viewed May 18, 2020
A NEW WAY TO HELP PSYCHOLOGY: Meanwhile, if you’re savvy enough to find it (or know a psychologist who will tell you), here’s a discussion of actions taken at the August 2018 meeting transforming the relationship between APA and (the former) APAPO, namely membership in either IS membership in both and only 40% of APA dues are to the 501©3 and hence deductible. 60% goest to the 501©6…
On this website a “financials” page created, it says, Feb. 2019) does post financials|IRS Form 990 for FY2018 (which neither the IRS nor Candid show yet) — however, there’s no “IRS-scanned” date and time stamp (all electronic) and the “date signed” [electronic signature?] by CFO Archie Turner (APA salary, $750K) is Nov. 13, 2019 for FY2018.
APAServices.org viewed May 18, 2020
APAServices.org viewed May 18, 2020
It seems to me that despite the entity being deliberately separate (so it could lobby) it was making APA members feel obligated to pay dues. A class action? lawsuit by members was filed, and now APA Services, Inc. has worked hard to re-characterize itself as NOT the bad guys — while re-writing their laws to dedicate more APA dues to supporting their lobbyist entity.
THIS TYPE OF BEHAVIOR IS DEVIOUS & SELF-PROTECTING, AFTER HAVING BEEN CAUGHT IN WRONG-DOING, BUT I ALREADY SHOWED THAT IN THE SELF-DESCRIPTION OF ITSELF AS A “CORPORATION” OMITTING THE ADJECTIVE “NONPROFIT.” HOW MUCH DEVIOUS BEHAVIOR IS ACCEPTABLE — IF ANY — IN SUCH ASSOCIATIONS COLLABORATING TO INFLUENCE GOVERNMENT POLICIES NATIONWIDE (AND, APA, BEYOND THE COUNTRY’S BORDERS)??
[LATE FILING OF TAX RETURNS, and the DISCREPANCY between what IRS uploads and the “as yet unannounced unless you already know it new website posting tax returns later than available to the general public…not nice either…]
(If you want links I have so far, submit a comment and ask). [This para. added post-publication 18May2020//LGH).
This declaration (post) emerged as I was writing the introduction when I recalled how the organization “NASMHPD” fits into the mix, which I’ve also discussed before. The acronym stands for “National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors” and its home page references a forty-one-billion-dollar ($41B) ‘”public mental health service delivery system.”
About Us: [http://nasmhpd.org/content/about-us]
As a private, not-for-profit 501(c)(3) membership organization, NASMHPD helps set the agenda and determine the direction of state mental health agency interests across the country, historically including state mental health planning, service delivery, and evaluation. The association provides members with the opportunity to exchange diverse views and experiences, learning from one another in areas vital to effective public policy development and implementation. … together with the NASMHPD Research Institute, Inc., a partner organization, apprises constituents of the latest in mental health research in administration and services delivery …
NASMHPD has an affiliation with the approximately 195 state psychiatric hospitals located throughout the United States. The facilities include hospitals for children, adults, older persons, and people who have entered the mental health system via the court system. In addition, NASMHPD has helped establish the following regional organizations, each of which meet annually: the Southern States Psychiatric Hospital Association (SSPHA) and the Western Psychiatric State Hospital Association (WPSHA).
That is functionalism and privatization for a built-up field, well-networked and massive in influence.
In July, 2017, I did a series of posts (some with earlier origins) showing how conscious certain networks were of their influence in Washington upon state legislators, across all fields.
How’d I get here? It doesn’t take long searching the subject matter of this blog to run across the local court-connected nonprofits and the more (inter)nationally-focused membership associations’ agenda — more mental health behavioral health and (mandated, privatized processes) for EVERYONE approaching the courts, and if possible their families too.
“Pass laws mandating it and funding it — lots and lots MORE of it.”
It’s the general concept behind the family court system — take a judge, the lawyers, and add counselors, mediators, custody evaluators — set up curriculum attracting profiteers, run the curriculum (typically through individuals under a trade name, or nonprofits set up to do just that by people who “pay to play” (sit through trainings) or have already some connection with individual courts. …. or the AFCC (<~basic link).
One of the more detailed posts on the organization which inspired (when I thought of it again) this one, had this subtitle, which is the question I still have to pose: Historically, Governments Fund Mental Health Offices and Programming, So why Not Look at How the Networked Nonprofits Previously Set to Coordinate, Expand, and Standardize the Field Actually Operate, and See which Drug and Insurance Companies FUND them?? (“-79i”). (July 6, 2017) This one describes the “Big 7” nonprofits, whose names I recommend posting on any spare refrigerator space, assuming you have a refrigerator — somewhere you’ll REMEMBER they exist and REMEMBER that the converse of the income tax is the tax-exempt organizations, and (generally) what they do financially and, if not involved in the same schematic, you can’t.
Here, I say “archipelago” to help with the concept, but the real help (for any specific individual) starts the moment he or she looks for, opens up, and starts to think about tax-exempt organizations and their tax returns, and, behaviorally, continues looking for them as each new cause or corporation presents itself for public service/rescue/fix/transform operations. Our economy involves the tax-exempt sectors ongoing interaction with individuals as a whole because of tax-exemption! The tax-exempt sector is also by nature more private because NO one can monitor all of it (not even the IRS) and it’s not public-traded (nonprofit = nonstock; that’s part of the deal that goes with the privilege).
When you combine how many specific functions (including but not limited to violence-prevention (and treatment), fatherhood and marriage-promotion, etc.) have been privatized, while being public-funded, the awareness can be overwhelming, but waht it she alternative? No awareness of how many entities count on continued taxation and forced consumption of services (as in the family court systems) will and does result in dissociative or just plain dumb talk and efforts to protect the most basic concepts of liberty, or justice, or individual choice for which wars have been fought, again and again.
The other organizations (of more recent May 13, 2020, post: psychology, psychiatry, and psychoanalysis) by name, obviously represent specific (controlled) fields, however, NASMHPD does represent a field of practice, but by its own definition civil servants — people in authority (i.e., over resources and grants-making) at the state governmental level, i.e., Mental Health Programs. Both the four giant organizations (prior post) and the NASMHPD are, by their set-up, private, non-profit (= non-stock) entities. Their relationship seems symbiotic — and drug companies of course are also involved when the field is “psychiatry” OR “state mental health programs.”
Collectively, these nonprofits exert influence and seek to direct public opinion and policy. to accept, continue, and maintain the infrastructure (the “Mental Health Archipelago.”) We ought to become more aware of this “type” of nonprofits (it’s largely my category based on observation): specific ones that will be especially prone to taking resources (grants and contracts) from the United States Department of Health and Human Services (directly or indirectly) and/or coaching, consulting, providing technical assistance in showing other groups (typically also set up nonprofit) how to access the same.
While I used the word “archipelago” in the title, keep in mind that the main topic is “Privatization, Functionalism” and how, gradually and incrementally, this undermines the rule of law, and how far back indeed it started – – – not “just yesterday.” I spend some time on the vocabulary, but the main point is what’s happening — how tight is that network’s noose pulled on the public?
It’s beyond time to wake with a start from the “dissociative” state which current public policy seeks to induce/inculcate and maintain for the masses, with all the finger-pointing and partisanship periodically marked by calls for global unity in the face of each new, successive, global crisis, whether fiscal, social, medical, or all three, while almost no one opens up, thinks about and then posts and TALKS about the actual tax returns (USA) of nonprofits, to be made available and many are made available on-line, or even some through the IRS databases, let alone any entity’s independently audited financial statements, or to show how hard it is to get TO them in so much media.
VOCABULARY for my ANALOGY
“Archipelago”?
Some brief definitions from the NOAA, National Geographic & “Wonderopolis”
…and a few etymological (word origins) cites explaining: why a word which now represents islands began representing the deep, wide, ocean itself, how and perhaps when the “archi” part got there, i.e., language changes and meanings are extended, or sometimes, transferred; and how a word with two separate parts that are obviously Greek (“arch-” and (transliterated) “pelagos” came across from medieval Italian.
Now the noun in association with the word “gulag” came to represent a network of some very negative systems of exercised political power in two major world powers, in the 20th century. (Solzhenitsyn’s book, 1970s). Looking at the concrete, material, physical points of reference (specific well-known archipelagoes, or maps of them) should help shed light on the usage. I am saying in effect, watch out! Think about the situation!
From NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under the US. Dept. of Commerce:
An Archipelago is an area that contains a chain or group of islands scattered in a lakes, rivers, or oceans. The word “archipelago” comes from the medieval Italian word archi, meaning chief or principal, and the Greek word pelagus, meaning gulf, pool, or pond.
Or deep sea. Other links say “root of uncertain origin” and suggest perhaps the “pelagic” part came by association with Greek town of “Pelagos” and by association with the Aegean sea’s (obvious) scattered islands, by extension to any other sea with such a scattering.
Etymonline.com (and and another from wordster/author ‘Paul Anthony Jones’ (HaggardHawks.com, June 2015 post on the word. 3 minute read).From National Geographic. They can be formed by volcanoes (some were formed over a single hot spot), or glacial retreat. The world’s largest is the Malay Archipelago:
…Many island arcs were formed over a single “hot spot.” The Earth’s crust shifted while the hot spot stayed put, creating a line of islands that show exactly the direction the crust moved.
The Hawaiian Islands continue to form this way, with a hot spot remaining relatively stable while the Pacific tectonic plate moves northwest….
…The largest archipelago in the world was formed by glacial retreat. The Malay Archipelago, between the Pacific and Indian Oceans, contains more than 25,000 islands in Southeast Asia. The thousands of islands of Indonesia and Malaysia are a part of the Malay Archipelago.
From “Wonderopolis.” Several countries are actually archipelagoes (as is “Hawaii”):
Several large modern countries are actually archipelagos. Some examples of these include Indonesia, Japan, the Philippines, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. Many of the world’s archipelagos consist of oceanic islands that were formed as a result of eruptions of volcanoes on the ocean floor.
(Some emphases added to the above quotes)
Since I’m using the word “archipelago” figuratively, you can probably deduce (from this blog) what I meant by the ocean and the archipelagoes — the scattered islands throughout it which viewed individually may seem disconnected, but probed further beneath the surface of the water, obviously aren’t….
Understanding common known physical, material objects (geographic, oceanic, or otherwise) to me helps symbolize the concepts behind various types of entities and how their economic niches depend upon what side of any tax status and/or accountability divide they exist as impacting their behaviors and what kinds of “fruit” (outcome, products, services, results etc.) they are likely to produce within their respective niches. I saw the niches by doing drill-downs on enough entities that basic categories (a “taxonomy of tax-exempts” or “public/private partnerships” ?) emerged.
Looking for ways to express this, certain analogies make more sense than others.
My phrase “mental health archipelago” may be unique, but I’m also thinking qualitatively and structurally of the Solzhenitsyn’s “Gulag Archipelago: 1918-1956″ (<~~from Amazon’s book summary, excerpt quoted below): Vast systems of a governmental bureaucracy and the people warehoused/managed/impacted by the same.
The Gulag Archipelago is Solzhenitsyn’s attempt to compile a literary-historical record of the vast system of prisons and labor camps that came into being shortly after the Bolsheviks seized power in Russia in 1917 and that underwent an enormous expansion during the rule of Stalin from 1924 to 1953. Various sections of the three volumes describe the arrest, interrogation, conviction, transportation, and imprisonment of the Gulag’s victims by Soviet authorities over four decades.
This book was published 1973-1975; the author’s “archipelago” standing for “the vast system of camps … scattered through the sea of civil society” and “gulag” the Russian term for the agency that managed them (from Britannica.com):
…The Gulag Archipelago is an exhaustive and compelling account based on Solzhenitsyn’s s own eight years in Soviet prison camps, on other prisoners’ stories committed to his photographic memory while in detention, and on letters and historical sources. The work represents the author’s attempt to compile a literary and historical record of the Soviet regime’s comprehensive but deeply irrational use of terror against its own population. A testimonial to Stalinist atrocities, The Gulag Archipelago devastated readers outside the Soviet Union with its descriptions of the brutality of the Soviet regime. The book gave new impetus to critics of the Soviet system and caused many sympathizers to question their position….
[emphases mine; I removed a few links which were simply word definitions]
Looking for my prior references to the Gulag Archipelago on this blog, I found many, dating back for years, some to even the earliest Table of Contents on this blog. An image or two (taken from the bottom of posts to highlight that tag, and show next and previous posts along with date published of the one whose tags are displayed):
[INSERT IMAGES HERE]
Dates, if you wish to use the Archives to locate these posts (pick Month & Year from drop-down menu, then click on the closest date with a hyperlink):
In order of search results, which is probably in order of prominence of usage of that phrase in the posts. The results are not in chrono order or reverse order…
~~Sept. 1, 2010, “Gulag Archipelago, Bahrain Archipelago — Systems to Silence Dissent” (this predates any published table of contents on the blog. Besides clicking on the link, it’s accessible by month and year (then click on that date) through “Archives” function on top right. Archives may be +/- one day, but I don’t post daily, so distinguishing shouldn’t be hard.
~~Dec. 21, 2017 (shortlink ending -8cC)*;
* Dec. 21, 2017 post: While reference to Gulag here is brief, this is a fantastic post for drill-downs and visuals re: reunification camps and their providers, and the AFCC. It drills down on “Transitioning Families” usage (and entities), tracks AFCC personnel on both coasts of the USA (one connected to/exploiting high-profile stranger abduction case that cost the state of California (for its missed opportunities to have prevented or corrected it) $29M, and the involved (AFCC) professional transferring the publicity and some concepts to parental/familial abductions), and shows how I did it. This post was written about seven months before I finally had to flee the state of California (which was summer 2018) & shows maintaining focus on this subject matter while still under personal duress, chronic, long-term relating to family-court-connected income (and life) destructions made possible in our wonderfully progressive (?) “Golden State.” A good read overall, I believe. (In case you’re new here, for disclaimer on my bad attitude about all this, see also a brief FOOTNOTE “WHY MY SARCASM about the Dec. 21, 2017 post?” at the bottom of this one).
~~December 27, 2012 ** “Mother Says” — Words to the Wise in Custody Challenges“;
Quote from the Dec. 27, 2012 post. I see from the block-copy that both links at the bottom, if you hover the cursor over them without clicking through, have added “title” text (pop-up, fine-print extras, i.e., that I must’ve copied from the website and added while blogging).
The peace, stability and security you may have — which we, your friends sometimes seeking help, support, or protection individually that the courts and law enforcement REFUSE to give us for more than a few moments, and at a very high price (contact with our children, etc.) — is also temporary, and is being used to build and sustain these terrorizing institutions in which truth is subject to re-definition by a presiding judge and his professional “staff” who are primarily in the mental health fields, formerly called “mental hygiene.” For where that’s leading, see Solzhenitsyn (1978 Harvard Address<~in author’s voice, his words) (Gulag Archipelago <~about the book)
~~May 10, 2010: “Monkeying with Mothers, Lovely (but motherless) Russian Orphans, and “Child Care Research Scholars” (This one cites three articles, and shows some of the early experimentation upon animals in the field of psychology)…
Again, you are reading my post:
Privatization, Functionalism, the Complete Mental Health Archipelago. It’s Here, So Why Should We Still Care? (May, 2020). (case-sensitive post short-link ends “-cmj”)
Is the presence of this Mental Health Archipelago OK, acceptable because
“Someone has to fight the bad guys, crime, and epidemics… right?”
Where this post is coming from, chronological (the blog in motion):
POST and FRONT PAGE PARTITIONING (2019-2020):
In September, 2019, I put the Front Page of the blog (where typing “FamilyCourtMatters.org” gets you), only established in January 2018, through some major revisions and haircuts (off-ramping sections) . [For more see FOOTNOTE: “WHY this Format” at bottom of the post]
In December, 2019, in fact, on Christmas Day, I moved this section (and several others) from the Front Page onto a new post I called:
…which post has been sitting in draft for four months while I navigated some more basic life transitions, including how to manage altered life with a global pandemic – – – and until I could afford to replace my trusty laptop which had finally become totally untrustworthy. It bit the dust. On getting a functional laptop, I found exactly 1,001 posts in draft and picked the “Giant APA and ABA” one to publish, particularly as I thought I already had done so…
Before those four months in draft, most of that post had been published perhaps nearly a year on the front page of the blog. As a fine example of what surfaces when you start to look up nonprofits’ financials, especially key players in today’s society (and in the family courts, those two are big ones) and start to become aware how many there are. I figured for this topic, why not start with some of the older and influential ones whose professionals are active, it seems, throughout government services, schools, colleges, prisons, and of course, courts.
In preparing to publish drafts left idle for months (or more), I tend to add extended introductions and fresh take on the information (while they may have been idle, I certainly haven’t been, when it comes to staying within range of developments in the field at least to read where I may not be able to fully write)… and did so with “The Giant APA and ABA Typify The People’s Problem: Distinguishing PUBLIC (Gov’t Holdings and Operations, i.e., Assets and Cash Flow) from PRIVATE (Corporate Holdings and Operations, i.e., Assets and Cash Flow)…”
This post comes from my update to that December 2019 off-ramped post.
What prompted me to remove this section from the extended introduction before publishing the other post, other than shortening it:
I remembered a certain organization with similar, if not aligned, purposes, but different structures to the American Psychological Association: “NASHMPD.org” I’d written on this (and in the context of similarly organized nonprofits, self-consciously aware they exist where, I’d say, most people are not aware they exist) nearly three years ago (Summer, 2017). Connections between pharmaceutical industry (including said industry’s influence on peddling drugs to vulnerable populations in public institutions) and sponsors of this and/or related nonprofits are discussed in those posts. It’s in fact, a dirty business in many respects.
I provide some keywords for internal connections to prior drill-downs on NASHMPD, some information (links) on Functionalism (the field, a key player, when it was most prevalent, when a resurgence seems to have come into play), and as part of this, some quotes and a quick-look at the Tennessee Valley Authority as a type of government surrendering geographical (territorial) rights for a common project, which so impressed David Mitrany, and it was felt could/should be replicated. I’m here to say, it has been and is continuing to be as we speak.
The goal is — certainly the practice has been — continually framing “social problems and their solutions” as justification for continued surrender of people’s legal rights under their own nations, or states (as to family courts under state jurisdiction in the US, not exclusively so in other countries with their own subdivisions (whether provinces or countries, i.e., England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, or the Australian states)…. While people’s consent is desirable, it is not always necessary once dominance and bases (plural) for dominating are established.
Again, I’ve warned repeatedly of the massive buildup of the (US) Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) and its National Institutes of Health (NIH), and of the aligned public/private interests which are NOT all on the same page as the interests of the nation’s population overall. Private interest, especially those functioning non-profit, provide an impenetrable maze while accessing privilege of tax-exemption and public funds. The mix is generally not answerable to the public, and (my opinion) has no real desire to ever become so.
I’m not going to repeat the process from scratch on this post; have brought it up before. I am thinking about how to start a separate blog (or Facebook page) to communicate current relevance; just continuing to build (solo blogger) onto “FamilyCourtMatters.org” is making less sense to me in recent months.
I felt it was worth another reminder as we enter the third month (March, April, May, 2020) in some states of the USA, of COVID-19 (coronavirus pandemic) restructuring and business shut downs, combined with major communications and “we’re all in this together” messaging on-line, on socio-media, and of course on mainstream media.
Where this post is coming from, topical:
(My) POSITION STATEMENT
In the family court system within the USA (or other “Anglo-Commonwealth” countries (Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand) where certain types of involved professionals including domestic violence/fathers’ rights (etc.) consultants, advocates and (as part of this) authors from the USA keep solidifying their private overseas (& Canadian) connections to run niche programming), we are NOT just dealing with a few “bad apples” in a good bushel, or a few bad organizations (although one key organization keeps coming up year after year; it has many similarly organized friends in high places),** and above all, we are not just dealing with a few bad judges, flawed practices, or untrained professionals. [**see my Twitter profile home page, @LetUsGetHonest, hashtag referencing a few of them. Or this blog’s Table of Contents.]
We are dealing with systematized re-direction and attempts to distract the at-large public (and individual parents) from identifying, seeing the scope of and comprehending the networks, the types of entities (both public and private) involved IN the networks, and that the family courts are a fragment of the larger whole with similar DNA.
We are dealing with an established Mental Health Archipelago — that’s a good term, I still believe — as a means of population control. MOST of the population is being treated like any domesticated animal flocks: For exploitation and management, including periodic culling and discarding the less productive members, unless they may be used for social engineering / behavioral modification experiment data accumulation. They are resources for their masters and hired-hand managers. Breeding, reproduction, mating is to also be monitored and controlled, as we can see with a close look at the rationale behind “welfare reform” of 1996 (with its roots in sociologist analysis (sic) from the 1960s, i.e., “the Moynihan Report.” [Tag and searchable on this blog or on-line].
Regardless of how much the mental health and counseling components are associated with drug-dealing by government itself (both the legal and illegal kinds), the overall infrastructure is directly tied into the global economy and some of the largest companies on the planet. The endgame of establishing such an Archipelago is that NONE are exempt except the very, very elite at the top [i.e., its originators], and MOST people, period, are not to be shown how it’s run; and those who catch on must be discredited.
It is every bit a power play, and I believe looking through the economic lenses (“Who stands to profit most from the paradigm shifts? . … Who, the least?”) is better analysis than comparing created vocabulary borrowed primarily from psychological and sociological fields.
Post (The Giant APA and ABA Typify The People’s Problem: Distinguishing PUBLIC (Gov’t Holdings and Operations,…) has more interior drill-downs. This one is more in summary format on material I drilled-down some years ago, and reviewed (briefly) this past month, because it was originally intended as an introduction.
I hope that post, combined with this one (and many others on the blog), helps people better comprehend the downsides of privatization of government, the dismantling of local and representative government accountability through functionalism (the reign of the anointed/appointed experts: social science/behavioral health/mental health in this case) and how very well established is the mental health archipelago we deal with and support nationwide.
The organization and operations of family courts are one reflection, or possibly symptom of obsession with mental and behavioral health and seeking increasing funds, training more professionals in the field
EXTENDED SUBTITLE:
Ongoing Privatization of Government | Relinquishment of Basic Rights through Functionalism (the reign of the experts) and the set-up, especially 1950ff, of a public-funded Mental Health Archipelago for the vulnerable (and dissidents to the above) and as many others as possible at any given point in time. It can increasingly be targeted to individuals and/or at the policy level by demographic profile.
The infrastructure is already in place.
As usual while most advocates and individuals calling for reform or fixes respond to and echo cause-based and “improve the quality of service-based rhetoric,” I continue to focus instead on what we can (and should) know from the basic accounting standards and reports which reveals operations, which in turn reveal historic design and, I say, intent.
This design and intent exposes itself for individual entities, and over time, with continued drill-downs providing more basic data (for the reader), for interconnected public-to-public, private-to-private and public-to-private systems, including how they connect and over time, erode jurisdictional borders AND the boundaries between the public and the private sectors.
It does NOT reveal itself if one never looks beyond the websites to and at the associated financials and continues to pay attention.
If nothing else, I hope readers (and, generally, people) become aware that both public and private entities, typically MUST file financial reports, each of its own kind, and that these, even when absent or truly hard to locate, often reveal more than, and what websites (and typical media journalism, overall) just will not voluntarily reveal, about specific entities. These reports are excellent, basic diagnostic tools. But first, you have to find them, then read enough of them to get some basis for comparison and familiarity with the output.
Many of these reports in both sectors are supposed to be provided for public access, but if that access is delayed by late-filing, becomes outdated/irrelevant through the public not bothering to look (and talk about) the reports, and by gaps in credibility between the filing entity and the place where its reports show up, … accountability and public comprehension of about the larger enterprise (‘game, or endgame), can be bypassed. The society-transformers are about solidifying relationships and power (economic and the power of persuasion — through controlling and financing media), too.
Distinguishing public from private in system infrastructure takes on a new importance with the current global coronavirus “COVID-19” pandemic with its associated elevation of the power and authority of the public health sector and institutions and exercise of state governors’ (USA) and federal executive branch dictates.
We are in the middle of a historic global economic “reboot” (shake-up) for which it seems to me, several rehearsals have already taken place, most of which I learned about while writing this blog. Like many women and mothers, I experienced some of the shake-ups (i.e., those affected especially by Welfare Reform when, historically, I had no acquaintance with the welfare system before filing for protection from abuse). On leaving a violent marriage of many years and the chronic, stressful survival mode associated with it, I found myself — by virtue of saying “no” to abuse, hauled into a family court system — where saying no to almost anything was re-framed as being a bad (single) mother. I later learned that for many states (if not most) these family court divisions (as opposed to family law itself) had not even been established until the 1990s!
For every shake-down (or shake-up) there is usually first a set-up. See it coming by watching the financials of key players in the courts (ABA and APA), and watching how they interface government entities responsible for major resources obtained from the public.
While the virtues of global cooperation in stopping bad things are being publicized everywhere, the downsides of breaking down accountability to taxpayers and forced-consumers of government services (whether because impoverished or seeking protection, or justice) I believe will be even further burying and distancing accountability and undermining basic rule of law within individual countries.
Because I’ve lived here my entire life, and for its size and influence globally too, I’m particularly concerned about burying the “missing, incomplete, late, and who-gives-a-damn-about-them anyway” tax returns and financial reports that the US system says must exist.
FYI: Yes, I’m social-distancing now in compliance with state orders. As a domestic violence and family court survivor, all but aged-out now, like many, I had years of prior experience in social isolation and “excommunication” from the ranks of mainstream, normal working adults in any sense of the word, while my demographic doesn’t match any special-interest group in favor by most politically-correct standards. “The experts are on it” is the usual mantra when, in fact, I know many to be far off base, and from accountability (to the public) standards, not even close to “the good guys.”
While in this socially isolated (in part for my physical safety from certain family members) state I’ve done a lot of research on the institutions that did not restrain under criminal law when it sure seemed that crimes were involved, the people involved. I am thankful to as alive and healthy as now am, but not about to shut up on these topics and continue to seek better ways to communicate on them.
//LGH 28April 2020
. . . .
For earlier coverage on this blog of these topics (and on the background of the APA and ABA as referenced in the related post I took this one from), I recommend using my “Archives” function, set it to July, 2017 (I see 8 posts were published that month) and reading the posts. This screenprint of the “tags” (Bottom of post) from July 6 and July 10, gives an idea. Beyond that, on the actual posts, you can click on some of the tags, including the one on the NASMHPD I remembered, and referenced, here.
Appropriate timing during global pandemic and the race for a vaccine? You betcha!
Some posts contain extended quotes, most contain images, tables of tax returns, and (probably) some personal narratives of my own situation which might help readers understand why I didn’t just “drop” this topic despite not seeing satisfactory presentations of either the problems, or proposed solutions to the “family court fiascos” which upended, so far, two generations of my family line (a third was affected, but is now deceased through old age):
All that detail in right-column are tags. On the image (two shown above), below are most recent and next posts (in calendar sequence, with “<<” and “>>” marks). Above, upper left corner are the dates published. I am NOT going to repeat this level of detailed exhibition (on NASMHPD and related organizations) in 2020; I posted it at the time as I was also learning it.
Posts from this particular month, July 2017, would also be good to pair with the “Giant APA and ABA” post (“The Giant APA and ABA Typify The People’s Problem.). Also on my blog’s right sidebar are several “Tables of Contents”for anyone who prefers to look at the top of posts and their titles first. I just think that “Archives: July, 2017” might be the simplest way to get there, then browse contents.
FUNCTIONALISM in SOCIAL SCIENCE / MENTAL HEALTH ARENA: As in NASMHPD
(Did You Know? This represents just one private nonprofit with civil servant membership organized to access the public mental health sector)
See top home-page image below posting its motto referencing a collective “$41 billion public mental health service delivery system” serving 7.5 million people across 50 states, 5 territories and pacific jurisdictions, and the District of Columbia.
The NASMHPD.org, a member organization whose members by definition must be civil servants in decision-making authority, over public-funded programs, (i.e., directors, only one per state as I recall) is not this nearly big, by a long shot. (I know because it does post its financials and I took a quick look at the latest ones on website.)
It’s more of a “technical assistance and trainer” operation, but, it characterizes the public health delivery system USA-wide and D.C. as approximately $41,000,000,000. That summary posted on its home page (nearby image) doesn’t show whether that refers to the “public mental health delivery system’s” collective budget or its total balance sheet, or cite or date that statement.
As a nonprofit, NASMHPD’s revenues and contracts (as well as accounts receivable) are primarily government contracts. It’s clearly seeking to unify mental health policy across jurisdictions. Yet how many people even know an “NASMHPD” exists feeding off that $41 billion system?
This seems a good example of functionalism in social science,* though within a single country rather than internationally (*Encyclopedia Britannica; see its link to American sociologist Talcott Parsons) and, visit at least the “Wiki” and Britannica (just a few paragraphs) on search string “Functionalism, David Mitrany (1888-1977)” which brings up the articles on functionalism in international relations, particularly relevant right now. (I’ve posted on this before on this blog: search “Mitrany”).
[From Brittanica.com on “Functionalism: International Organizations” starting in Para.1]
…The central feature of the functional approach is the creation of international agencies with limited and specific powers defined by the function that they perform. Functional agencies operate only within the territories of the states that choose to join them and do not therefore threaten state sovereignty.
Typical examples of the functional approach in operation are specialized agencies of the United Nations (UN) such as the International Civil Aviation Organization(ICAO), the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), and the World Health Organization (WHO), each of which has nearly global membership. The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) are also based on functional principles. The UN Charter makes explicit reference, in Article 55, to promoting conditions of stability and the promotion of higher living standards, economic and social progress, and development. Functionalism therefore underpins the UN system’s entire range of activities outside of the collective security role.
The period of 1945 to 1975 represented the most successful period for the application of the functional approach, when a broad consensus about the theories of John Maynard Keynes on the provision of international public goods in sectors prone to market failure prevailed. The last quarter of the 20th century, however, proved to be problematic. …
Mitrany was Romanian-born, British Scholar. The Tennessee Valley Authority (<~Wiki) from the United States example impressed him. Note: The TVA, crossing state borders, would I believe NOT be listed in the US Census of State and Local Governments. How many more like it are there? (continuing the Britannica quote).
Rationale For Functionalism
David Mitrany, a Romanian-born British scholar, is most closely associated with promoting a functional approach. Mitrany was employed in the British Foreign Office during World War II, planning postwar reconstruction, and was inspired in part by the New Deal public works programs of U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s administration. Mitrany was also influenced by observing the elaborate processes of interallied collaboration made in preparation for the Normandy Invasion and the plans for the postwar administration of Europe. The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) was an example of a new institution providing a particular public service that was separated from the territorial basis of state authority. In the TVA case, seven state governments renounced their authority over the river-watershed and agreed to create one specific agency to plan and execute an ambitious plan of dam construction, hydraulic engineering, electricity generation, and job creation in an area subject to regular flood damage. Mitrany advocated the creation of a range of similarly constituted technical and scientific agencies with potentially global reach to implement infrastructure and reconstruction programs, organized on a technical or functional basis rather than on a territorial basis.
The Tennessee Valley Authority (<~Wiki) was a “New Deal” act, signed before the Social Security Act of 1934; it was a time of major national transition and between the two World Wars… At some point in here also (see any “history of money” covering the USA) currency was taken off the gold standard, citizens were ordered to surrender all but a certain amount of gold (“or else..”) after which the price of gold was fixed creating a profit for the federal government.
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed the Tennessee Valley Authority Act(ch. 32, Pub.L. 73–17, 48 Stat. 58, enacted May 18, 1933, codified as amended at 16 U.S.C. § 831, et seq.), creating the TVA. TVA was designed to modernize the region, using experts and electricity to combat human and economic problems.[10] [Paragraph out of sequence: it’s under “Early History” in this Wiki]
[Some links of common words, like state names, or “agrarian societies” broken in this quote, as Wiki has so many of them…All emphases mine (underlining, bolding, any highlighting//LGH]
TVA’s service area covers most of Tennessee, portions of Alabama, Mississippi, and Kentucky, and small slices of Georgia, North Carolina, and Virginia. It was the first large regional planning agency of the federal government and remains the largest. Under the leadership of David Lilienthal (“Mr. TVA”), the TVA became a model for the United States’ later efforts to help modernize agrarian societies in the developing world.[3]
… Despite its shares being owned by the federal government, TVA operates exactly like a private corporation, and receives no taxpayer funding.[4] The TVA Act authorizes the company to use eminent domain.[5]
…The Tennessee Valley Authority Police are the primary law enforcement agency for the company. Initially part of the TVA, in 1994 the TVA Police was authorized as a federal law enforcement agency.
(History[edit] Background[edit])
During the 1920s and the 1930s Great Depression years, Americans began to support the idea of public ownership of utilities, particularly hydroelectric power facilities. The concept of government-owned generation facilities selling to publicly owned distribution utilities was controversial and remains so today.[8] Many believed privately owned power companies were charging too much for power, did not employ fair operating practices, and were subject to abuse by their owners (utility holding companies), at the expense of consumers.
etc.
While the private not-for-profit NASMHD (National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors, dependent on public-sector finances) is not organized as an international association, it still symbolizes the crossing of jurisdiction and out-sourcing (hence, privatizing) of a major component of public policy to private ‘experts,’ further distancing people paying state (most states) and federal income taxes from those running their business locally.
The same local (state-level) representative government vs. privatized and run from afar principles are also heavily violated surrounding the family court system, and its “functionalist” handling of such basic criminal issues wife-battering, spousal abuse, domestic violence, abandonment, kidnapping, (etc.) and is designed to influence, basic legal rights under STATE law issues such as marriage, divorce, child-rearing, child support enforcement, freedom of associations, right to relocate, and more issues affecting basic human rights and liberties.
The basis of outsourcing them is typically justified under the Social Security Act, i.e., public law, as affecting public safety, health, and the public budget. That post-separation poverty and lack of safety for men, women, and children, overall, may be a result of the experts’ assessments of ideal family structures and subsequent major, ongoing interventions to re-design them subliminally by the federal government funding or withholding funding from state budgets, does not seem to be on the “more research needed” list of acceptable topics.
Because I think it’s interesting and may add some more depth or detail to the concept which I will likely use again, regarding the system of inter-networked (but not so seen that easily on the surface) nonprofits peddling mental health for all in the vast ocean of other things public policy promotes nationwide (specific focus area, mostly the USA, but it’s evident also throughout the UK, and these organizations, foundations, and public officials (i.e., gov’t employees, or appointed/elected authorities) certainly talk to each other, people can and do rotate from public to private arena smoothly when not holding both at the same time)…
…
FOOTNOTE “WHY MY SARCASM about the Dec. 21, 2017 post?”
In case you’re new here, my children were parental-abducted overnight from my household I’d just signed a lease on, and from the school they’d just enrolled in during family court proceedings –in the same general area as that $29M California high-profile, stranger-abduction case — years after I’d separated because of abuse (domestic violence) and ON a court-ordered visitation I complied with, in the context of increasing non-compliance by their father (my husband: divorce wasn’t finalized at the time). I was left to gradually discover the institutional non-responses/rewarding abductor behavior over time, discover a separate but unequal set of laws to handle abuse, and the burgeoning, state-sponsored field (since especially the 1990s) of “responsible” fatherhood and “healthy” marriage promotion as a public benefit for the whole country.
Criminal law says that’s a crime with potential punishments including jail time and fines (as well as return of the stolen children). This provides some false assurance to those generally aware of such laws (and that kidnapping is a crime), but the “Catch-22” is that FAMILY court laws don’t. Family Court practice in effect, rewards the behavior with child support arrears compromise (reduction), in some cases reversing who pays whom child support (after the court procedures have already dismantled normal work and lives where they existed to start with), and justifies it sociologically and psychologically, but authorized as “to better reduce public debt with.” [THIS summary is at the basic level and doesn’t handle contradictory sections of law also WITHIN the family court code in at least the state of California].
To understand why, when an easy opportunity to prevent threatened crime before it happens, when it happens, or right after it happens — involving parents in common of minor children — is ignored, one really has to look at the federal AND private financial incentives NOT to do so. How the system interacts with itself as opposed to how it talks of itself, matters. While it may not resolve the problems (so far it hasn’t — but then again, so far most people don’t show the patience to dig down to SYSTEM financials as opposed to any financials in their cases, only — or their advocacy group’s favorite poster-child cases)– it does remove some of the shocked “why? what happened?” flustered, or mis-directed anger reaction.
Those entities involved fail to pass most basic forms of “responsible” and their activities notably dismantle anything within range which might be, absent such intervention, on its own, healthy, fiscally responsible, or sustainable. My real shocker was to what extent “those responsible” means the U.S. Congress, which appropriates funds to its executive branch for ongoing media campaign and mass public indoctrination on the relative values of fathers as opposed to mothers in the lives of all kids. State Congressmen and women (i.e., legislatures) and commissions followed suit. Political party doesn’t make much difference in this one, except one is more upfront about it than the other.
…..
FOOTNOTE: “WHY this Format?” The next paragraph is just one sentence. Its subject and main verb are in the last few lines.
As I am NOT personally available to explain, broadcast, consult, or individually teach people this material (being also affected by long-term involvement in the courts and the aftermath of them after domestic violence — decades of life and legal events, and I’m an average person who was further impoverished through the behavior of a controlling and violent spouse while trying to safely raise our mutual children, not a serial entrepreneur or independently wealthy) I still can’t hit the conference circuit yet, (in fact am not telling since leaving California (where these events occurred over three decades) MOST people I’m related to even what state I live in, although I will say, it’s within the United States), therefore much of this blog is WYSIWYG.
In other words, lacking the means for proper ongoing Q&A, not having made a profession out of explaining all this, I just lay out my thinking on the basics and link to the supporting evidence. People with patience, diligence and the motivation to sustain them can figure out (utilize) from this blog basic principles, resources, and places to look that more standard reporting (and especially on just journalism or standard advocacy groups specializing in one issue or just a few different ones in the family court arena) will not even raise. Those places shed light on the basic arguments presented (or implied). In fact, the important searchable terms for the most basic comprehension are often not even raised, and if raised, not put in context or presented thoroughly, from what I can tell, having continued to look at these things for years. This level of obstruction is in fact a form of harassment, to the extent the reporters know or could have reasonably known other viewpoints, “filters” for those viewpoints.
I am aware of the limitations of long sentences and long posts. Perhaps with this better laptop device (and assuming I can better figure out a personal life with adequate resources for basic expenses) I can get to a better format, or with the time saved, master enough graphics technology to get what I understand into understandable images, symbols and presentations (a.k.a. “memes” and uploads).
…..
[Coordination with other individuals outside the mainstream advocacy cartels:]
Over the years I’ve found one of the hardest elements is finding people “going through it” or reeling from just having gone through it not too long ago (among the highest motivators around: for survival, out of sense of injustice and indignation, and above all, for not just one’s own children, but future generations: for “what’s right.”) who can and will stick around and stay in touch long enough. Over the ten years of this blog,I’ve had repeated household relocations, a 1.5 year gap, or month-long or more time span (for example, recently) where I just cannot produce consistent, in-depth output, just part of life circumstances: I am NOT paid for this work.
Another factor where I differ from most,whether in these matters or just in life, generally, is that I am to the point where I can document and assert that this is NOT a politically partisan-driven issue: Left or Right politically, accordingly at any point in time the current U.S.President is (especially in highly-charged 1990sff politics) either a hated enemy or the nation’s true “messiah.”
Such (partisan) thinking is so pervasive, even outside the fringes, that getting people’s attention to the financials, well, just doesn’t seem to have that much “curb appeal.” It’s not sexy, not (for most) instantly gratifying enough to organize around. So much teaching and learning seems involved. I happen to find it interesting on its own, not just because it’s relevant. “Once blindsided by the family courts, twice and ten-times shy..” What we do not know has hurt us (across-the-board. It’s a degradation of due process and basic rule of law), can continue to, and will continue the next generation too, if not acknowledged and handled. [text in blue added 5/18/20].
…….”For what it’s worth…”
Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History 
Leave a Reply