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.

Table of Contents 2020: FamilyCourtMatters.org’s Just Ten Posts (Jan.-July) and Its Only Page [Publ. May 18, 2021..]

leave a comment »

This post was just expanded; it is “in transition” (I expect to off-ramp introductory sections so as to feature more table, less talk).

Just now, I stopped mid-edit in a narrative section after adding some quotes on “stakeholders,” a bit of a sore point from my perspective. So-called “stakeholders” in national (and global) policies demand a closer look at usage of the term and who decides who is NOT a stakeholder, typically those most impacted by exclusion and/or decades of policy- and field-building without reference to things (we) know about, things easy to observe once attention is called to their existence, something (for efficiency and power reasons) typical stakeholders in the operations don’t particularly want.

I am NOT happy with this post just now, but not kidding myself about the level of traffic coming to it.  Will consider editing options…

Post revision will not happen immediately.  Thanks for your patience meanwhile.  The Table Of Contents is still here, and plenty of other reading material on the blog, accessible through main pages and sidebar widgets //LGH, 6/15/2021.


Title: Table of Contents 2020: FamilyCourtMatters.org’s Just Ten Posts (Jan.-July) and Its Only Page [Publ. May 18, 2021..] (short-link ends “-cKH”)

This is a “sticky” post.  For more on that and short-links nomenclature see my “Front Page” (just type “FamilyCourtMatters.org“). “Sticky” (pinned to the top) makes this now the top of 14 sticky posts accessible through the “Current Posts” doorway (page) to this blog. That’s why you get some introduction before the actual table of contents… Expect some post-publication revisions, including removing excess text where I feel it appropriate….

Some posts are marked sticky to provide access other years’ tables of contents. For example:

Reviewing those 14 sticky posts, which go back to January, 2017, to shorten their “teasers” (how much text before the “read-more” instruction), I found two I’d like to mention here. The first one (despite its wordy title) was top of the blog when I restructured it, with a “Let’s Talk!” message.  The two posts, both from April-May 2018, and so about three years old now, are:

May 2, 2018

Post Title In 2018, Clamors to Fix, Reform, or Make Kids Safe WITHIN Family Courts STILL (Abusively, Territorially, and Intentionally) Limit Possible Answers by Censoring Terms Admitting Other Historic Evidence — About The Courts (not “Batterers!”) AND Government Itself — while Coaching (even Certifying) Others to Imitate. (Published May 2, 2018) (case-sensitive short-link ending -8Ly,” about 10,700 words)

April 19, 2018

Post Title:Q1, 2018 Posts and “You Are Here,” on my Blog. Meanwhile, WE are Here, Collectively. (Or, From ‘Hewers of Wood + Drawers of Water’ To Functionally and Financially Illiterate** Consumers of Information, Products, and Social Services). (Publ. April 19, 2018) [Case-sensitive, WordPress-generated shortlink ends “-8X8” and this post ends after about 11,000 words]

**Explained more below in this post, and in a typical post. No apologies for failing to sugar-coat the news. Or for long sentences in the next few indented paragraphs, summarizing my understanding and explaining that comment. With additional “show-and-tell” relating to the rest of this post (and blog).

Timing of the above two posts with my life events:

As life happened, by the end of that year (in fact within a few months of May, 2018) I was about to be driven out  — again — of my still-transient (hotel!) housing and decided at that time to just leave the state.  I’d already been driven into hotel housing to start with, needlessly, after years of attempting to “negotiate” with another (family relative, then professional) skilled abuser after the years of devastation following separation from violence.  We were not even a family where “custody evaluators” of the dual-track system (can or can’t afford custody evaluators. supervised visitation, divorce lawyers, expert witnesses, etc.)  Basically, it seems that the local courts hadn’t identified us as a family with wealth, therefore “court-ordered-mediator: one 40-minute appointment” and subsequent report it was, then “good luck seeing your kids again…” I couldn’t even afford transcripts, most of them….

Certainly almost any state would be less expensive for housing than California, and most with fewer forest fires also…. but these were secondary reasons.  I left for safety reasons involving not the family court system, but to a family trust (with family members involved), for which the local “family justice center” and “family violence protection” entities in that area (famed internationally, at least one of them) had no help.  I deduced some of this related to my no longer having minor children who, in this system, seem to be a “marketable” commodity.  I didn’t have discernible assets (house, business, etc.) to fight over, and basically, the principal revenue-producing activities for BOTH parents had, specifically through practices and policies, brought at least mine, and apparently his, work lives to a standstill.  His seems to have been more by choice….

About three years later, I still consider it one of the best decisions I’ve made since deciding to file for protection from domestic violence (wife-batterer spouse, small children in the home, he’d begun to stockpile TWO kinds of potentially lethal weapons (i.e., guns and knives) and was getting tired of “the devil made me do it” talk alternating with the “Head of Household, God, Jesus” etc. rationale.  The man wasn’t getting help voluntarily or about to; and it was time…. Case in point, we are all still (I think!) still alive.

(More Text added June, 2021, likely to be moved or removed soon):

It’s a sad thing to realize I’m better off as a stranger to a state than in one where for decades I had developed and fought to maintain: work, family, education (networked with other parents working on getting their children to college) and where, once absent the “wife-battering” aspects good prospects for adequate work well into my seventies, in a profession I’d degreed in and practiced before marriage and was practicing, for a short season, after separation (that short season coinciding with just about when the same restraining order expired)…

(Personal, summarized impromptu):

However, once a weak (to start with) restraining order became a family court (fiasco) proceeding (paired with involvement of child support enforcement entities specializing on “compromise of arrears” particularly for “noncustodial” (i.e., male) parents, combined with — it’s commonplace — family clan issues (I discovered that what I’d thought was a loosely-connected family (my generation) had congealed sometime while I was initially, thankful just to be rebuilding and healing after domestic violence (despite dealing weekly through court-ordered visitations with their Dad) into, as best I can describe it — and certainly how I experienced it — a cult, clan, gang, private club with unwritten rules which normal, sensible life choices seemed to unilaterally break.  With appropriate punishments for attempting to assert boundaries.

Sorting through the level of (expressed and acted on) anger from my own relatives, who are not particularly fundamentalist about divorce or marriage (or religious in any traditional sense), for making sound decisions as a competent adult, as I had pre-marriage, and — necessary for physical survival, to the extent possible — during marriage and raising young children with an unrepentant “The Devil Made Me Do It” — “God Says I’m the Boss” Jesus-citing wife-thumper and terrorist (qualities NOT made evident pre-marriage, and I knew the man a few years before marriage) — was quite an ordeal, but as I already knew his character over the years (married/post-separation) it wasn’t the man, but the systems which produced the greatest shock and sense of betrayal.

“WHY?” and “HOW?” I wondered (then) was it possible to drive people out of their work and, eventually, homes, for the “crime” of living single, female, taking care of one’s children well, and with clear boundaries?  What kind of systems are we sponsoring (with taxable work and all other forms of revenue-generation associated with access to the courts, to drive (licensing etc. fees) when we can’t keep people alive going to and from work, and when a system exists where a clear criminal action (in our case, beyond the battering, which did result in injury, but never in an arrest or jail time, ther ewas a child-stealing event also, followed by (the father’s) abandonment, not to mention COMPLETE interference with “access and visitation” (court-ordered or any other form) once the children had been successfully transferred to the “thousands of dollars in arrears of child support / not-looking-for-work-either” father w/ new girlfriend from the law-abiding, family court-order-compliant single working mother?  is downgraded to a family dispute by the existence of a different venue (forum, court system) it can be directed towards?

But I am better off having moved to a different time zone:  housing, health, sense of safety, sense of HOPE for a different future have returned — not to where they were before, but in a good way, I no longer feel like a sustainable future is just impossible, or that I am any day dealing with potential stalking (it’d been an ongoing issue), nor am I exposed to the associated PTSD triggers from contact and familiar scenes where violence and shock had taken place over time.

It also helped to know both children have turned adult and made their exit from the state also, giving me little other reason to remain there longer.  My ex no longer bothers me (I do not even know where he is).  What was sacrificed just to get to this point of feeling relatively safe again, shouldn’t be happening in this century, or any developed country. Something is horribly wrong, and that something is far more than described in any “domestic violence” nonprofit agency, resource center (national or state), in fact, they are some of the worst offenders in covering up just how much our own government has begun waging war against mothers-leaving-abuse, in fact independent single women with children, based on their marital status and relationship status — not character, individual behavior, or competency as parents.

This blog is in part (and part — not all!) of my learning curve in defining WHAT’s taking place (however, you may characterize it as “right” or “wrong” or “good” or “bad.”  Unlike my summary expression here (which I take responsibility for as my experience), most of this blog — according to blog purpose — is to get both men and women (whether involved in the court or bystanders) AND the public witnessing all the chaos — to take a closer look at things that are NOT “hearsay” and “he said/she said” and start talking about those.

Policies to stop domestic violence, poverty, child abuse, and “fatherlessness” and to promote, basically, almost anything, including marriage, same-sex or “man and woman only,” and (fill in the blank if it’s a CAUSE:_____) require resources, typically run through tax-exempt organizations and profiting consultants, media experts, subcontractors, and sub-grantees.  These resources are a combination (overall) of public, private, or both — but the “public” can be easily hidden within a single tax return, as can inter-relationships.

So it gets to be more a matter of, how much do we know and will we bother to find out, about who runs the money through which conduits.  It gets to be about taxes, tax-exemption, and databases (run either by governments — who sometimes also outsource them) describing what entities (public or private) operate, where, and how lawfully and honestly do they do so.

It should be understood that governments (in particular the U.S. Government) still seem to hold the income-producing assets in the form of investments, and in the form of control of persons who work and pay taxes (i.e., the power to tax).  We should understand in the U.S.A. (and those not here, dealing with the same causes as so concern me here  — how to safely, with children, leave violent relationships, i.e., CONTINUE to survive — when institutions provide obstacle after obstacle to doing so) — “how things work” and why some centers of power expand, others disappear over time — and along with them, strands of relevant truth.  In particular here, about the family courts and the issues they handle.

I found it fascinating, interesting, and definitely a “transferable skill” to have learned all this.  My technical skills as a self-taught blogger and (to what degree ANY such skill exists) social media user (Twitter, mostly), lag far behind, but on these topics, I have confidence on what is, in fact, taking place.

And we are not amused…

The following text with quotes added 6/15/2021 is another topic and will be moved off-post. End of this edit/added text is marked by comment in a box of similar background-color):

Unfortunately, U.S. national policy now simply prevents law-abiding and single working parents, with a particular national policy focus on decreasing “fatherlessness” and castigating single mothers, as a public welfare and social liability for generations to come… The leadership and self-proclaimed “thought leaders” of this policy (both political parties) seem to think there’s no hypocrisy in maintaining both a robust “stop violence against women” movement and resource centers, and the “promote family values, especially father-involvement” movement and resource centers, both federally and privately funded, with appropriate appreciation from consultant, advertising/media, and all kinds of subcontractor agencies whose own offspring and personal, physical (let alone financial/work) lives are not at stake.

In fact the term “stakeholders” (Lexico.com definition) (Investopedia definition) I’ve noticed in conference and other literature available on-line in cause after cause, often excludes (except for token representation) those with the most at stake.  Investopedia contrasts “stakeholders” with “shareholders” who can better limit their losses:

Stakeholders vs. Shareholders

Stakeholders are bound to a company by some type of vested interest, usually for a longer term and for reasons of need. Meanwhile, a shareholder has a financial interest, but a shareholder can sell a stock and buy different stock or keep the proceeds in cash; they do not have a long-term need for the company and can get out at any time.

For example, if a company is performing poorly financially, the vendors in that company’s supply chain might suffer if the company limits production and no longer uses their services. Similarly, employees of the company might lose their jobs. However, shareholders of the company can sell their stock and limit their losses.

An extended article from Britannica.com, by Cecile Modvar, I learned the approximate origin (and originator of) the term as used in the 1960s and later expanded to the 1980s.  Recommended read:

Stakeholder, organizational element

Stakeholder, any individual, social group, or actor who possesses an interest, a legal obligation, a moral right, or other concern in the decisions or outcomes of an organization, typically a business firm, corporation, or government. Stakeholders either affect or are affected by the achievement of an organization’s objectives.

In a corporate context, the term stakeholder was introduced in the 1960s by the Stanford Research Institute (SRI) as a generalization of the terms stockholder or shareholder. SRI’s work was focused on firms, and the stakeholder concept was focused on the firm’s most closely related actors. From the mid-1980s, the meaning of the concept was stretched through the development of its social and political dimensions, making it a key concept for governance in general.

Stakeholder theory and analysis

Stakeholder theory proposes that stakeholding has a dual instrumental-normative quality. On one hand, incorporating stakeholders’ participation enhances the organization’s management capabilities in a globalized context characterized by increasing socioeconomic interconnectivity. On the other hand, promoting plurality and inclusivity and recognizing the intrinsic value of stakeholders’ interests makes it morally superior (e.g., in terms of democracy and social justice) to traditional managerial approaches based on the mere optimization of shareholders’ gains. [….]

…Stakeholder analysis typically consists of the systematic identification and characterization of the most relevant stakeholders for an organization or initiative—that is, those stakeholders exerting, or trying to exert, influence on the company’s decisions and activities.

A company is one thing, but an entire government is another…. At what point are citizens of any country, including this one, NOT “stakeholders” in its policies, their impacts and their personal costs for which the same citizens will be paying?  Notice:  “most relevant” = “exerting or trying to exert influence on [its] decision and activities.

Example of usage in advocacy fields:

National Domestic Violence Hotline: (thehotline.org/stakeholders), “For Stakeholders”

BIG letters, Purple Color, Lots of White Space (followed by a menu with icons):


Elected officials, community advocates, and other local leaders have a valuable role to play in the fight against domestic violence. @@#The authority bestowed by leadership comes with a responsibility to protect survivors and facilitate healing to disrupt cycles of abuse. This work is best informed by a deep understanding of the facts, trends, and current state of relationship abuse in the United States.

With years of experience serving survivors and advocating for their safety, The Hotline is uniquely positioned to offer detailed information about the far-reaching impact of domestic violence to drive political change.

[bold emphasis as on site, not added, highlight and italics, I added].]

TO BE CONTINUED: REVISIONS (additions on “Stakeholder” theme) stopped abruptly, see note at top of this post//LGH).

This “2020 Table of Contents” is also, in case you hadn’t noticed yet, a (short, for me) post on top of a table of contents.  I’ve repeatedly attempted to chop it down to JUST THE TABLE, but (when it comes to gut instinct versus what seems like common sense), the bottom line is, if I’m blogging, I’m going to be speaking openly.  Therefore, you have about 6,500 words,: some is the table but most of which is preliminary, my commentary… as in other years…  Deal with it…

I’ve added some subtitles and section indicators (this next color scheme, or another one), or none, but still included what’s on my mind now and, (separately) was when I began reviewing my 2020 posts last fall.  This blog is about the only place I can say this in complete sentences, with links, and full paragraphs and leave a footprint, any evidence, it was said. I don’t consult and am not self-published (yet…)… I don’t, like certain of the networked organizations I write about, have either “cronies” or colleagues who will either debate (i.e., acknowledge my arguments and supporting evidence for them even exist) or quote, cite, link to or abjectly — as they do for each other constantly — reference.

It’s as though we are supposed to inhabit the same fictional world where ONLY the politically correct (pick a side…) “stakeholders” who’ve made a living addressing problems the rest of us actually live through, exist.  (assault-and-battery, i.e., domestic violence, family court systems) Survivors who don’t play along with standard “family court reform” protocol (based on standard analysis producing predictable solutions based on the same) aren’t mentioned, or to be acknowledged, although we and our children and relatives, paid life-changing, heavy costs just in the process.  I assure you, however many, we do!  It’s hard not to be jaundiced, and the message isn’t a friendly, easy-to-sell one, but I still believe (again GUT instinct) that truth is of extremely high value, and we must sooner or later get around to it, and where and when chronic lying is discerned (a hallmark also of chronic abuse and a form of it), it should be called out.

?  First Person, Singular:I’d been wondering whether this blog had reached the limits of its useful life. Time and again, I’m addressing on-line the same issues referring to previous posts which, I feel, laid them out coherently enough (at least as to the writing if not the presentation visuals!).  The blog isn’t that interactive and is constructed more to teach and present than to debate.  In sheer mathematical terms, it takes long enough to produce a post, and without a substantial distribution network of any sort, justifying the volunteer effort is sometimes questionable.  I have a deep curiosity about how things work, including when they malfunction, and do not regret the time putting into the research behind this blog; it’s just a little frustrating not publishing.  Self-publishing (and/or the formation of a nonprofit) is under consideration to put this content into a decent, and obviously, condensed! form.I’ve kept it going so my voice and this line of understanding, isn’t just lost in the better-funded and easier to grasp (though I say, far less honest and in the public interest of understanding our own justice systems and government(s)) media and nonprofit-sponsored coverage with shorter sound bytes.If and when a time comes I can come out of anonymity (a few more hurdles remain), I would like to be ready and available to speak openly — under my own name and with my own (audible) voice, and in more than one location.  I also sense that the time is coming to put some of this into direct letters to decision-makers (far more formal), at university and at government level, not that I’m particularly positive about being heard and believed.  When that time comes, I plan to be ready; therefore have stayed involved reading, commenting, and keeping my head in the game (so to speak) as policies expand internationally, and organizations proliferate while the history of many of them, evaporates…

Others survivors (of domestic violence in the home) continue to get in the book-publishing game.

The mixture of voices therefore may be at any point:  survivors, survivors who publish and hit the conference circuits, nonprofits who promote survivors (with either their published stories, or their testimonies), “investigative series” on main media which is immediately distributed nationwide by virtue of it being major media (i.e., NBC, etc.) and academics promoting their latest work, or testifying before some legislature in association with, this season as in previous seasons, parents of family court-facilitated, murdered children.

Staying silent on chronic cover-ups has never been my long suit, but I also have a personal life to manage, without the typical social support systems people who’ve NOT been through the family court gauntlet may still have, somehow.  This includes from any of my own family members.  As when I first threw out an abuser with legal intervention (two decades ago), I’m having to rebuild from scratch again — this time I chose a new geography, without a stable work history and, as it so happens by now, as a senior.  So there are just some tactical considerations I have to weigh with how much effort I can put into a blog I’m not sure is making that much difference — although I know that writing was worthwhile, and has helped specific individuals not go mad dealing with such craziness (or so they say).

So it took me a long time even to get around to this table while working on other things; I was less urgent to do so since the last ten posts (when last year I only wrote ten) were still visible on the right sidebar.  Once started, it took even longer because I kept wanting to talk right into the post about what was then on  my mind, summarizing, making my points, and constructing links. This, combined with some new software upgrades in WordPress I had to navigate complicated basic blog html (formatting processes) I could do almost in my sleep.  I was also more active on Twitter, which, until the local community started opening up a little more (to where I could write with laptop in public, as opposed to with cellphone), has some technical roadblocks.  Screenshots are easy to take, harder to find; access to information stored (at home on) computer hard-drive, always helpful background info, wasn’t at hand.

Getting back out and onto the computer again was a relief, but also tedious, even just to continue labeling and organizing the information I research (look up, read, find, consider, decide to save and hope to publicize) takes hours, but important hours because at least the results are searchable.  All this is just part of staying current enough on certain topics to be able to speak to them, at least on-line, and “know that I know” what I’m talking about and referring to.  The thing is, getting others links or screenshots of what I’m talking about is another matter.

To get any post, especially tables of contents, from draft to published status, the main challenge isn’t constructing the table, but just shutting up!  My natural tendency once writing on this topic is to “get the message out!” regardless of how appropriate the place or time.  I’ll post excerpts to Twitter, or Twitter threads on this blog, make up unique hashtags to call attention to certain vocabulary, or challenge blissful re-tweeting by  organizations one hasn’t looked up, and without awareness of where they fall on the domestic violence, child abuse, family court reform, family court administration — or marriage/fatherhood (family values as promoted via governments) spectrum.

For example: remember U.S. Presidential Elections (during pandemic) Fall 2020?  Having started this post (months ago), I took occasion then to address then-President-elect Joe Biden’s history on/association with the Violence Against Women Act in relationship to his (simultaneous) endorsement of fathers’ rights legislation, as they interact with each other at the local level, and at the funding level.  One of my 2020 posts had a certain tag:

Another post (2016 here), similar themes (though not under that tag), five years ago(!) looks at the DVRN (Domestic Violence Resource Network)‘s self-description, and where there was an identifiable entity (not all “resource centers” had one), the tax returns.  The following post calls out abysmal failures(? unless intentional) in labeling, basically policyspeak marketing babble.

When it comes to funded ENTITIES, the first thing is, “find the entity.”  Some (documented) change name and location, had pre-existences under other nonprofits (rarely mentioned).  The words “center” “initiative”  “Project” “Council” or almost any other word used in a list of supposedly similar “agencies,” where some are entities and others aren’t, isn’t accidental or simply poor writing.  It serves to put the diligent off-track in identifying exactly what’s being done with federal resources, in the very place that is being related to the public.

These topics are usually on my mind, but were also appropriate for the presidential election season.  That season now being past, I’ve left those posts in draft, have some more coming responsive to more current news media, and my ongoing attempts to explain this subject matter and be able to link to it when engaged on social media not designed for in-depth explanations of anything…

Drafting posts also requires renewed researching, quoting, formatting, and editing, and for this blog, always, deciding how to present topics that require different vocabulary and concepts even to start discussing.  So I started writing, then off-ramped the writing…  None of those posts are out (yet) but the topic came up when I ran across one 2020 post (Feb. 12, seen below) front-loaded with tags, I knew it’d been an intense time…. This tag got me thinking about it again: Global focus on VAWA obscures existence of HHS-backed Fatherhood.gov and 1996 Welfare Reform,[<~~~This is a tag, not a post…]  [[SOME, not, all, post tags needed correction at first.  As of May 22, all tags have been checked and all should work fine now..//LGH]].

Click on it to see other posts as “just a taste” of how DV grantees avail themselves of fatherhood funding on the receiving end, but their discussions of promoting “responsible fatherhood” as a protocol are directed more towards fellow “practitioners” or stakeholders — not the public.  The public isn’t supposed to really grasp the scope, saturation level, or mechanisms of how this “funding both sides of a gender war” works.  Or, for that matter, how nonprofits and the nonprofit sector works, even when people may work in it….

This time (again) I chose to make some peace with my internal urge to speak by getting some expressions, points, observations, off my chest. To skip that section, scroll or page-down below the text (in this color scheme) and the few paragraphs just below it.

Look for the table:  here’s a sample with the first row, showing how it’s organized:

2020 FAMILYCOURTMATTERS.org, The Year in Posts & Pages,* 2020 (with approximate word counts for each and “tags” for some. “Pages” highlit yellow and so marked) URL: short-link ends:
Jan. 3 Arizona! (Career AFCC Academics’ Self-Disclosure Habits, Home Habitats/Economic Niches, cont’d.) [Started Nov. 13, 2019, Publ. only Jan. 3, 2020]..

(with Footnote “Just a Few PRWORA-Explaining Posts from my Blog” about 7,000 wds)


Until I publish some more this year, the same basic posts (up to the last ten) will appear also under the “Last Ten Posts” widget on the narrow right sidebar, a few inches down on the right side.


Shortcuts to key posts, including the widget marked “The Ten Most Recent Let’s Get Honest Posts…” remain on the right sidebar.  More patient readers or those who prefer to browse can instead scroll down below the sticky posts to get to the last one published. Access to “Pages” is different (why I started including them in the Tables, plural, of Contents); see my Front Page for more info.Personally, I recommend browsing this, and prior year’s Tables of Contents (all are marked “sticky”), and other Sticky Posts  first.  Anyone who hasn’t already done that, or done so recently probably needs basic concept, and points of reference reminders, which I tend to include in most posts, but cannot re-hash every single one.  I’ve developed them over time by just staying on this process and, generally, reporting on the field in media, but my main focus is tracking the economic landscape of it through along both government (especially in the USA) and corporate, that is, along both public and private sectors, especially the tax-exempt sector so deeply in bed with the government sector, in any country.


My blog tends, and intends, to disrupt and counter the status quo on both sides of the political, gender and religious divides; it’s become more and more important over time as momentum builds in the “Family Court Reform” circles, which includes several academics with long-standing access, apparently, to interns, university assistence in publication on-line, and resources to get in front of a constant flow (so it seems) of newly traumatized or distressed parents, especially mothers (a featured demographic), to promote reforms which refuse to take into account things they’ve known — but won’t discuss openly — and it’s hard to know how many others really know as by and large, mainstream media even blogging on this topic, won’t typically reference, either.

I have been blogging for more than ten years now, but my experiences post-domestic-violence restraining order with kickout, a.k.a., “in the Family Courts (caps intentional), goes back the decade before, that is just before the turn of the 21st century.  That experience was in California, which I finally left — fled, literally, not as a criminal, but as a senior who’d have had to start more litigation to protect myself as a senior, had I stayed — for another state in a different time zone, and which one currently is “NOYB” !!

If it (and those of my predecessors who began exposing this; several of us know each other), been taken more seriously and its premises and contents shared more widely, I believe it would have and still might effectively do so.  That would be a very unpleasant experience for those with career paths in the existing status quo — on family courts, domestic violence, and the “family values” rhetoric and ideology typical of both political parties, if you look close enough.  The left, progressive, so-called more feminist-friendly sides are less open about it, leaving people like myself (not a hard-wing right-winger or fundamentalist, etc.) to discover this “progressively” over time when systems claimed to exist to protect, don’t, for long….

And for those, likely, who’ve been so successful in the advertising, public relations, and “nonprofit consulting” practices, which while they may prefer one political side or the other, can profit from either.

My blog calls out advocacy and standard investigative journalism (on these topics) practice. I call out this using vocabulary and writing style NOT from the “intended for the public” news media, NOT from the “intended for the public to see, be impressed by, and help by publicizing our arguments online,  academics in formal debate, with footnotes and bibliographies — vocabulary”  BUT INSTEAD in more objective one more common to both business and governments (public and private sectors) — on both sides, not to mention on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean and (if you count Australia & New Zealand) the globe.

I tell people, constantly, for any topic they’re pursuing, and either side of the big (political, gender, religious, etc.) debates

If (or “Since, I see,”) you want to promote, disseminate, or just argue online, especially the topics of domestic abuse/ domestic violence / spousal abuse / family violence / intimate partner abuse / CHILD abuse / CHILD maltreatment … or talk “Coercive Control” … or argue against (or for) the use “Parental Alienation” … or how Family Courts (in your or others’ countries) handle any of the above, or allegations of any of the above or how to prevent any of the above and you’re dedicated, as a formal or informal volunteer or for some form of internship or low-pay option (with a view to publishing your story later?) to consciousness-raising about any or all of the above, why (did you, so it seems, NOT) take a look at the key players in the field FIRST?

START by identifying, for any given article, the entity (and find its financials if tax-exempt or if possible), and the same for the writer/s’, and while I’m at it (not that much further a stretch or lookup), the media platforms.  Nonprofit or for-profit,  ongoing journalism has sponsoring companies/employers or independent contractors.  Get educated and help others learn how the money works:  think that’s unrelated to how governments (including their various courts of protection and services) work?


To state the obvious (if you live here), in the United States we have an IRS.  We have an IRS database listing legitimate — and revoked — tax-exempt organizations (currently at:  http://apps.irs.gov/app/eos).

State-level, Charitable Registries and/or “Secretary of State (Corporation Divisions) hold yet more information:  Some states (New York, California…) have state charitable registry requirements where those tax returns and more info is often posted, such as when they take government grants, from which governments!) Some organizations volunteer their tax returns and audited financial statements, but in promoting major causes, to be honest, most don’t, or not their most current ones. On eventually finding them, some say “available on written request” or even “not made available to the public,” however, they are to be made available to the public!

Other countries have other tax and reporting systems, obviously — I’ve navigated a few (mostly in the UK), but with the level of international coordination of intended “family court practices” and borrowing from US organizations and experts, I believe those countries experiencing re-importation or importation of bad policy from the USA, learn about the organizations so promoting it (in collaboration with your governments or similar-purpose charities, local) as to their filing habits, transparency, and whether or not they really DO speak for or represent the population of this country.  For the most part (either size or via government processes, i.e., representative government principles) they do not!

START sorting a few things, like billion-dollar tax-exempt organizations (and their behaviors, Gates, Buffet, MacArthur, Ford, Annie E. Casey … and by now many “Community Foundations” —  by size and age and transparency practices.  Learn where the various databases posting IRS returns, government financials, and (state-level in the USA, as it applies) Business Entity Searches, Charitable Registry Searches.**

**[I have a Twitter account which keeps some links on the profile, and has for years, but they are easily searchable — though not always easily accessed, or necessarily for free, when it comes to state-level accountability.]

For domestic violence and child abuse prevention, the USA has a specific-to-the-USA infrastructure involving federal funding to the states and to tax-exempt organizations lined up with specific causes  (as in previous picture).  There have been “key players” for decades, and you’ll need at least an overview of their names.  One place to start is seeing who’s in control of the funding streams (in the federal departments) and where they’re going (as to nonprofits).  There has to be some general reading (beyond news media) and there should be drill-downs enough to become familiar (if you’re not yet) with the concept that tax-exempt organizations (USA), mostly, have to file tax returns with the IRS.  Finding and reading these is not optional in any learning curve.

So this is a teaching-by-example blog which shows my own learning curve, and why I’ve taken a hard-line position on domestic violence advocacy networks (domestic and international as to Commonwealth countries, USA’s neighbor just to the north* and the UK, Australia, New Zealand) who are taking a soft-line on USA’s notorious FEDERAL-GRANTs- and US PRESIDENT- (current & former) ENDORSED “fathers’ rights-promotions, EXCEPT (if a Democrat, progressive, or left-ist administration or advocacy source) where “fathers’ rights” under Welfare Reform 1996ff happens to cross a political taboo associated with the a la carte issues…

If you continue reading my blog, or at least surveying its post and page titles, you’ll likely run across examples where I’ve documented how these same organizations long ago embedded “father-outreach” and engagement into their policies, catered to the social science/psychological evaluation and treatment sectors, and simply did not report, as I do, on how groups like a small private Illinois tax-exempt corporation, characterizing itself as an interdisciplinary, international “association of family and courts” feed off federal grants streams like those demonstrated at sites like “fatherhood.gov” or “healthymarriageinfo.org” (both government-funded), university “Centers” (or other non-entities) as at Temple University in Pennsylvania (FRPN.org), which contains the word “fathers” in its name; Texas-Austin (Child and Family Research Center makes little pretense at being egalitarian towards or even that interested in mothers as a demographic, even on its home page: see images), or (learn more about the other involved research funders and named projects, such as the Ford Foundation and Fragile Families) through faculty bio of Ronald B. Mincy  Columbia University, New York’s mouthful-acronym “CRFCFW” center, that is its “Center for Research on Father, Child and Family Wellbeing) I deduce this center (it says, created only in 2007) became basically inactive in transitioning to other projects about Oct. 2012 (an announcement proclaims), but its founding faculty member isn’t.


Whatever the cause and side on the debate, as taxpayers and citizens (I’m U.S.), I’ll keep saying, look at the operations, learn the basic vocabulary and definitions between what’s government and what’s not.  Learn how, from a news article, a website ending “*.org” or “*.com,” or even *.edu, to look up a nonprofit and IF its first or main headquarters are in the USA, DEAL WITH that nonprofit’s Form 990 IRS tax return!

One of the first wakeup calls in that process is realizing where the same does not exist, or where one does, either how (poorly) it’s filled out, or what inter-relationships with other organizations — and governments, whether through direct grants, program service revenues (meaning contracts — paid for services provided, as opposed to grants — with obviously government-supported programs (Medicaid, Foster Care payments, etc.), or tax-exempt bonds from some unit of government, to finance previous debt or some form of construction / real estate purchases for that charity…)…

Unless you are looking at more than one TYPE of information source, other than social media or ANY form of press release or news media (alternate or otherwise) regarding an organization, program, or policy of concern, you aren’t really looking.  The overall context is, your government financing. Another context is private financing.  OF course they not only interact, they also mutually invest.

Be aware (the USA is a large country) which universities are private (can you follow their financials?  ) Ever looked at one?) and which public, and that both types, if they’ve been around long enough, tend to have dedicated ‘centers’ which are not trackable entities (separate from the university) but which certainly DO have revenues, funders, sponsors, and usually faculty interacting with undergraduate or graduate students i.e., volunteer or low-paid work in exchange for mentoring and resume-building.  These are often in the news according to special causes.

Question: Do those undergraduate or graduate students get genuine feedback from ANY survivors of domestic violence or child abuse who survived long enough and cared enough to track the public AND private money through these fields?

Where will their “other points of view” come from if all the service is mediated through mentoring by those already invested in the status quo of developed fields, and how to maintain funding for those fields without regard to continuing feedback from outside the inner circles, those invited to private conferences and roundtables?

There are of course also nonprofits generated with a university address, or by students or faculty there, in addition to “centers.”

(No new posts since August, 2020, the lone page I found was April 13.  A list of my other about sixty pages is as a separate “sticky post”– scroll down from the top of the “Current Posts” page to find):

~ | ~ | ~ | ~ | ~

The table begins right below this line:

Making a shortlink protocol:  Posts begin “Http://wp.me/psBXH” (and add the final 3 characters with hyphen).  Pages begin the same except for a capital “P” in “PsBXH.”  My only post was April 13 and is clearly marked.

For which 3 characters to add for a shortlink, see rightmost column, a convenience mostly for my administrative use (but if quoting a post; please include!). Clicking on post (or page) titles also connect directly to that post (or page). Title hyperlinks are also in short-link format and easily copied and pasted for those who know how to do that.

Publication dates now typically also part of the titles, too.

2020 FAMILYCOURTMATTERS.org, The Year in Posts & Pages,* 2020 (with approximate word counts for each and “tags” for some. “Pages” highlit yellow and so marked) URL: short-link ends:
Jan. 3 Arizona! (Career AFCC Academics’ Self-Disclosure Habits, Home Habitats/Economic Niches, cont’d.) [Started Nov. 13, 2019, Publ. only Jan. 3, 2020]..

(with Footnote “Just a Few PRWORA-Explaining Posts from my Blog” about 7,000 wds)

Jan. 21 Pay For Success Social Impact Funding (SIF) = Same Old Public/Private Pipelines, Faster Flow: Why Do We Submit? [Too bad was NOT published Jan 21, 2016, but is Now: Jan. 21, 2020] (about 5,500 words) -2Sr
Jan. 21 TAGS Tagged with: [AFCC, AFCC’s street address is near a division (sic) of NCCD in Madison Wisconsin, Big Society Capital (BSC) Oct 2016 SAID Bus School Case Study on SITF + Sir Ronald Cohen’s Leadership in the same in the UK, HBR-Bridgespan’s “Insight Center on Scaling Social Impact” + Sir Ronald Cohen, NCCD (National Council on Crime and Delinquency), NCCD Nat’l Council on Crime & Delinquency taking int’l govt grants (EIN#131624111), Public Private Partnerships, Public/Private Partnerships (as the Food Chain), Public/Private Partnerships – Social Innovation Funding (SIF) through CNCS, SIF = Social Innovation Fund ] N/A
Jan. 25 ‘Divorce Mediation & Domestic Violence’** (per a 1997 NIJ-funded report by Jessica Pearson, Ph.D. of CPR, (and now, FRPN.org) raises the questions: Does the DV Industry USA know about AFCC? (Yes!) Since When? (I DNK). Are These Orgs. Acknowledging This? (Generally, No!). So…? (Know Your Organizations!) [This Nov. 19, 2019, off-ramp from Post ‘Oh Arizona!,’ Publ. Jan. 25, 2020′] (about 10,000 words) -bE7
Feb. 12 Major Transform/Reform Campaigns [Regardless of Cause] Involve Branded, On-line Media Platforms. Keep an Eye on Who Owns Which Brands & Platforms: Do Periodic Drill-downs.. [Publ. Feb. 12, 2020, but Media Drill-Downs from my Feb. 2018 Page ‘Consolidated Control of DV Advocacy’]. (about 12,800 words) -c9y
Feb. 12 TAGS CLICK ON ANY TAG FOR MORE, SIMILAR POSTS.  Some of the longer ones probably unique to this post.

Tagged with: [“Keep Your Eyes on the Assets” – Remember to do the Drilldowns, 1996 Welfare Reform, Bendheim-Thoman Center for Child Well-Being at Woodrow Wilson School (Princeton Univ), Bendheim-Thoman family + Leon Lowenstein Foundation (EIN#13-6015951) + Columbia connex for Thoman-Bendheim, Brookings Institution EIN#53-0196577 – ½ $Billion @ YE2014, Brookings Sponsorship of Haskins-Sawhill CFCC combo, Buying and Selling Major media, CMP Media (formerly published InformationWeek and other titles), CRFCFW=Columbia University School of Social Work’s “CENTER FOR RESEARCH ON FATHERS CHILDREN & FAMILY WELL-BEING” (Ronald D. Mincy PhD), Cynthia Osborne (UTexas Austin CFRP), Domestic Violence Coordinating Councils (as a control tactic), Expanding the Welfare State from TANF forward, FRPN – Fathers Research and Practice Network (at Temple Univ in Philadelphia but see also CPR (Pearson – Thoennes) in Denver + HHS grant 90PR0006, Global focus on VAWA obscures existence of HHS-backed Fatherhood.gov and 1996 Welfare Reform, Irwin Garfinkel (Columbia Population Research Center) married to Sara McLanahan and formerly director of UWisconsin-Madison’s IRP, Isabel Sawhill + Ron Haskins (MDRC Brookings Urban Institute Moynihan Prize etc), Jessica Pearson and Nancy Thoennes (1998 Stanley Cohen Awardee + Denver-based CPR), NOW founded 1966 in part in response to Moynihan Rept of 1965!, The Future of Children, The Moynihan Report (1965)]

2020 Comments: I see I was enthusiastic about communicating certain concepts, centers, and specific professionals via tags, here!  Looking into these individually and into how they connect is stll highly encouraged.  We need to understand the role of specific academics within specific university centers — and in the family court arena as drawing (USA) off Welfare Reform Block Grants to the States (and some direct for Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood PR campaigns) Columbia, Princeton, Temple, UTexasAustin are directly promoting specific fathers’ rights policy.

Columbia/CRFCFW/Ronald D Mincy Irv Garfinkel ~Princeton/Brookings (TheFutureOfChildren) SaraMcLanahan (the Center) + Ron Haskins+Isabel Sawhill (@ Brookings) “TheFutureofChildren” project) ~ UTexasAustin/CFRP/Cynthia Osborne (who got her PhD at Princeton, probably mentored by some of the above) and for Temple U in Philadelphia, the non-entity, FRPN (Jessica Pearson, Nancy Thoennes of CPR in Colorado) with others, gets “marriage/fatherhood”-focused HHS grants.  The grants go to Temple, not the smaller Denver-based 501©3 and so are harder to track.

@?@ No Posts Published in  March (computer down).
PAGE APRIL 13 THIS IS A PAGE NOT A POST (see right column for full shortlink):

This will not appear on the “Most Recent Posts” widget because it’s not a post…


wp.me/ PsBXH-cew

April 13 So Many Web Addresses End “.org,” Even This One. But Notice Which Entity, If Any, Is Behind Each, How Transparent, Who’s Backing It. RE:’EJUSA.org’ and ‘TheAppeal.org’: One of Those Makes You Work Much Harder Than The Other to Find Its Owners/Backers. [Draft: Feb. 24, Published April 13, 2020].

(About 6,000 words)

April 13 TAGS Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , N/A
May 13 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) So As To Hold Gov’t Accountable to Those It Taxes: the People Employed in Public and/or Private Sectors (Moved Here Dec. 25, 2019)(case-sensitive short-link ends “-bXO,” last letter “O” as in “Ohio” not the symbol for zero (“0”) and about 10,000 words)

(On post, see title clarifications for “Giant” and “Gov’t.” Plenty of organizations []tax-exempt foundations] are far larger than the APA and ABA — but their unified influence on government?  Maybe not.)

~~>I consider this an important post to work through until its basics are understood.  See next excerpt (quoting APA self-description) from near top of post. Yellow-highlighting and some bold font added during the copy.<~~


APA was founded in July 1892 by a small group of men interested in what they called “the new psychology.” The group elected 31 individuals, including themselves, to membership, with G. Stanley Hall (1844-1924) as its first president.

APA’s first meeting was held in December 1892 at the University of Pennsylvania. The basic governance of the APA consisted of a council with an executive committee. This structure has continued to the beginning of the twenty-first century: Today, APA has a Council of Representatives with a Board of Directors.  …

Realizing that the growth of applied psychology represented a potential threat to its preeminence, the leaders of APA reorganized during World War II. Under this reorganization plan APA merged with other psychological organizations resulting in a broader association organized around an increasingly diffuse conceptualization of psychology.

Now the association’s scope included professional practice and the promotion of human welfare as well as the practice of the science of psychology. This flexibility in scope has remained to the present.

Psychology boomed after the end of World War II with the greatest increase in membership coming between 1945 and 1970….

May 13 TAGS For “The Giant APA and ABA Typify the People’s Problem” post

Tagged with: [, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ]

May 17 Privatization, Functionalism, the Complete Mental Health Archipelago.  It’s Here, So Why Should We Still Care? (May, 2020) (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)..

Blog ends w/ reminder:  “A BUDGET IS NOT A BALANCE SHEET.” In this row: blog excerpt, from the top:  

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.”

Click a second time on blank page icon to load the pdf)  Almost amusing.. An NSF grant (2009) helps promote the integration of “evolutionary psychology” into all academic disciplines, and comments on how the idea of “shifting the theoretical underpinnings of psychology” is meeting resistance.  Psychology (its representatives, including the APA) is ALWAYS seeking more prestige and r.e.s.p.e.c.t. when compared to other academic fields.

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?

May 17 For “Privatization, Functionalism, the Complete Mental Health Archipelago…”

Tagged with: [*** (Apparently I made none.  May add some after I publish this Table of Contents… I see that the blog posts tags from several posts from July, 2017, which it recommends reader review for previous treatments of this topic.) ]

May 20 For Political Clout, Big Isn’t Always Best, as the National Fatherhood Initiative, Inc. (1993ff, EIN# 23-2745763) and its Disproportionate Influence for its Small Size and Financially Fuzzy IRS Tax Returns Show (Started Jan. 20, 2020, Published May 20). (Case-sensitive, generated short-link ends “-c80,” that final character is a “zero” not capital “O”as in “Ohio.”) (about 5,200 words). Minor copy-editing revisions May 29.

“Explanation: Reviewing my most recent posts in draft status today, I chose this one and published as written with few changes. || This post holds some text I’d compiled in 2016 on a Page (published separately April 27, 2017 but before then on my home page, Sept. 2016), then moved here as a draft post, with updates, January 23, 2020 and SHORT intro. It had since then remained in draft status. //LGH 20May2020″
May 20. TAGS [Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ] N/A
May 20, DRAFT (When Posted, this’ll show in 2021, but I’m showing, the topic was on my mind at this time.  I think it’s an important topic, or wouldn’t report it here.  Plan to post this month.  It’s short but pungent. (May, 2021//LGH)).

May 20, DRAFT Tagged with: [***] N/A
June 26

Think About It: Will Any of These EVER Admit to AFCC’s Influence AND US-based Fatherhood | Access Visitation agenda for the (AFCC-promoted, specialized) Family Courts? (My Sentiments + Evidence May 29, 2020, Updated and Published June 26). (short-link ends “-crl”{<~last character “l” as in “lovely”), (almost 21,000 words!).

June 26 Tagged with: [*** Untagged.  I should change that!//LGH] N/A
July 8 CBMA and CFUF in #BlackLivesMatter: What’s Up Now, 2020, with (Famous-Foundations-sponsored-) Campaigns for Black MALE Achievement and (Still U.S. Gov’t-Sponsored-) Centers for Urban Families (fka “Fathers”)? [Started June 20, 2020, Publ. July_8]. -cVS
Tagged with: [***Untagged.  I should change that!//LGH] N/A





Written by Let's Get Honest

May 18, 2021 at 7:00 am

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: