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

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

‘High-Conflict’ Court-Ordered Parenting Classes and Certified High-Conflict Divorce Coaching USA is Now on Steroids. Yet USA FamilyCourtReform Collaborators Using This Jargon still expect to be taken seriously (and are, for example, by at least one UK/Europe-focused journal.) [Begun Feb. 16, 2022, Published March 1.]

with one comment

This Post Is:

‘High-Conflict’ Court-Ordered Parenting Classes and Certified High-Conflict Divorce Coaching USA is Now on Steroids. Yet USA FamilyCourtReform* Collaborators Using This Jargon still expect to be taken seriously (and are, for example, by at least one UK/Europe-focused journal). [Begun Feb. 16, 2022, , Published March 1.](short-link ends “-dEA” and remember that’s case-sensitive after the “wp.me/” of all shortlinks for this blog (if posts, “p,” if Pages (rarer), “P”).  http://wp.me/ps-BXH-“). 
(After many arduous revisions; some text was removed, other added//LGH 3-28-2022).

~~Post-Publication Disclaimer on Post Length (and  paragraph order),

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

The “Late-March Revisions” summary (formerly at the top here) is now on a new post.  Link coming within a few hours here…

(last paragraph of that summary, or “Intro to Revisions,” still here):(1) Four Reasons Why I Wrote “High-Conflict on Steroids,” my March 1 post, Now and (2) Intro to my March 26 Revisions of the Same [Publ. Mar. 28, 2022]. (short-link here ends “-e1z”)(REVISIONS SUMMARY FOR THIS (March 1) POST ARE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE ABOVE POST.  I THINK ITS EXPLANATIONS MAY HELP PEOPLE BETTER SEE THE NETWORKS, AS WELL… DV NETWORKS + PROTECTIVE PARENTS NETWORKS…

NOT A REVISION, BUT, I also (pretty far down) went through the logos on NSPC website (at the time) and briefly summarized those that represented murdered children, at least to make a statement (from the links provided) what happened to whom, where, and when.  BUT this exploitation of tragedy needs to stop.  [Appeal for use of my DONATE button removed..]..
Thanks for your patience!  (now it’s about 15,800 words…) //LGH

~ || ~

I’m not exactly reporting good news here..  For a preview of some of the personalities, you might want to look at my August, 2019 response to a different situation involving the same hot topic:  “parental alienation” usage, globally, and what people arguing its pro/con have in common with each other…That topic, “parental alienation” pro/con distracts from far more important issues; succumbing to the constant drone of this and similar (court-connected) generated jargon lulls into ignorance of, failure to investigate and report on what’s been happening under our noses: systems labeled beneficial for the public (and families, and children) facilitate fraud and theft of assets, and the public funds this.Through weariness, ignorance, fatigue (or is it, just don’t care?) we’re letting people who ought not to be representing us in other countries, to do exactly that and (collectively, in conferences and journals (etc.) with each other, determine what laws we will be subject to, and that we must accept at face value their assessment of problems WE face daily.

My posts so far this year focus on putting the word “national” as descriptive when applied to anything with or, more typically any part of an entity — United States legal domicile in its place and (not that I’ve EVER let up on that theme) maintaining a basic “entity awareness” and keeping talk about that in the forefront as it’s relevant to where our public funds are going, public funds too often (my studies show) gone “missing in action.”  Over-application of the word “National” to a business entity’s legal name — or to a program or initiative of something run by a business (or government) entity is commonplace:

Two recent additions, with no less national (and some international) aspirations more specific to  my recent posts and blog focus are, this time neither one of them (yet/so far as either website shows) separately filed business entities, a quality (non-entity) which makes it harder for outsiders to fact-check or follow financing, and easier for those running the named non-entities (but with enough of a name to have a web presence and some social media accounts) to, should they choose (and it seems they have) exaggerate how grassroots, how many “members” and in short, why they should be followed (or even respected) more than anyone else…

National Family Violence Law Center (at George Washington University, sometime after September 2019, with perhaps a 2020 add-on, however its “Dear Friends” launch announcement (just found now as I didn’t have the website url memorized and searched for it) is undated (no month, day or year)

(Saved as a pdf insert in case the announcement (at myemailcontact.com, not at the university) disappears: ‘Joan Meier and GW Law Announce New National Family Violence Law Center (MyEmail.ConstantContact.com, 100% undated but must be 2020ff)’~~2022.Mar.29 Tues

and the National Safe Parents Coalition, website apparently up just February 2022, which has a Twitter account and has already blocked me…  Both discussed in more detail below on this post.

We should not be allowing private nonprofits with mutual self-interests not necessarily the public interest to run the courts, the judiciary, and certainly not our legislatures (USA: U.S. Congress or states).  State constitutions should not be basically defanged and made puppets to the federal and enslaved (through dependency on federal grants and contracts) to its policy making.

That is, however, what we have.  The list of of entities or “resource centers” named “national” and funded public (and/or private) is long.  The two I mentioned above are neither the largest, but they are in the same tradition of attempts by the few to mastermind (the rest of us) according to the vision of the few.  This does not speak well for representative government and with it, human rights (let alone civil or legal rights)… no matter how much people talking ONLY “human rights” in the global context say it does.  [paragraphs added during update].

My August, 2019 post may serve as a preview of some individuals I mention here, and of their mutual-referring habits: MY Concerns about the July 21, 2019, Collective Memo of Concern to WHO about (‘What else?’ – parental alienation!) [Aug. 28, 2019]  (shortlink ends “-aSg,” about 6,000 words)…

That Collective Memo of Concern to WHO was only posted as I recall the previous July. I got right on it. My short August, 2019, post delivers some punch.   In my post’s top half (before responding to the Collective Memo of Concern) I show US/Canadian connections (precisely) referencing batterers intervention programming origins (David Adams/ Emerge DV and “Caring Dads”) the common origins.

It also has some images (I’d been posting that season) on the Canadian use of terminology for their “family court clinic” style violence preventions, strikingly similar to the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts concept here (and starting around the same time).  Keywords (or, acronyms for now — see that post): LCCEWA, London (Ontario, Canada) Family Court Clinic, CREVAWC (Peter Jaffe)…

My post also calls out some of the writing habits, (errors, missing key data in footnotes, loading the footnotes with cites (disorganized, odd choices), etc. which became obvious on a close reading of the Memo, including its footnotes. I made extensive comments on the footnotes.

Criticizing such errors may sound hypocritical given my own, abundant lack of copyediting and proofreading diligence (while also writing and researching solo…) but isn’t when you recognize that these authors have advanced degrees (one, a Ph.D.), access to help with their writing (and research), and apparently steady salaries. When they ask a global audience to listen to them as professionals and experts in the respective fields and to act according to their requests, we should expect this to be accompanied by having SOMEONE proofread and fact-check their own footnotes, and to choose footnotes responsibly in line with their academic achievements. Citing to an entity which barely stayed incorporated, and getting its name wrong (correct:  Our Children Our Future Foundation; as quoted — differently.  See my post! (short-link ends “-aSg”)

As a solo blogger. who has run three different gauntlets so far, in a struggle to stay alive, housed and free from ongoing threats specific to my own family line:

(1) abusive and violent / battering marriage, one decade (1990s), (2) legal intervention (DV order) + prompt family court dismissing it (= no protection from a local, stalking ex, while women and children “dropped like flies” (were murdered) around me, locally, in the San Francisco Bay Area (where I was living), also in Southern California (where, a few times, I was driving), the next decade, and (3) family trust appropriation to keep me in a dependent state after destruction of, in particular, “(2”) involving a child-stealing and recurring trips to court seeking (but not getting) protection and regaining contact with children from (see “1”, above) in San Francisco Bay Area, the next decade (2010-now, ongoing, though geographic distance and a bit of privacy has helped at least my sense of independence).

For me, “(3)” in this case was shown to have been planned since the start of “(2)” and in my opinion, was the real motivation for that campaign strategy/ battle to get me OUT of my children’s life, (eventually their father was booted out or abandoned them, too — but didn’t tell me, OR the courts: another felony), and then (remotely) control their lives with NO legal guardian (legitimate) and neither parent in their home,

…. alternating blogging, fighting to stay alive, to keep children alive, to regain contact with children (and vestiages of a by-then badly damaged work life), and eventually flee the state — I had and still have NONE of the typical resources for publication support and collegial feedback that most of the signers of the Collective Memo to WHO have had for years.

Typical “domestic violence prevention” protocol after we file for protection is to distribute (on-line, or handed out) lists of 800-s to call for help, which don’t help; major time wasters for those who keep hoping that there may be some redemptive quality in referrals.  That any mother could, and so many mothers do,  produce coherent and consistent reports even with typos and incomplete sentences (which I know I still have too often) and choose to do so, in the context, is an accomplishment.

I knew I couldn’t get a full-scale and appropriate to the situation post out quickly enough, so  I re-tweeted my August, 2019 post  (“-aSg”) and a few screenshots from it earlier today (March 1, 2022), stayed on top (as best I could) developments, and worked on the writing.

What excuse do the thought-leaders intent to globalize controlled use of two words “Parental alienation” have for such quality writing on such a public and heavily promoted (by its authors and those who agree) document as the “Collective Memo of Concern to WHO”?

Read my August 2019 while you can.  I don’t think you’ll find this information elsewhere with both depth and scope and proving both along the way.

//LGH March 1, 2022. 4pm PST (Note:  not the time zone I’m in…)

‘High-Conflict’ Court-Ordered Parenting Classes and Certified High-Conflict Divorce Coaching USA is Now on Steroids. Yet USA FamilyCourtReform* Collaborators Using This Jargon still expect to be taken seriously (and are, for example, by at least one UK/Europe-focused journal). [Begun Feb. 16, 2022, , Published March 1.](short-link ends “-dEA” and remember that’s case-sensitive after the “wp.me/” of all shortlinks for this blog (if posts, “p,” if Pages (rarer), “P”).  http://wp.me/ps-BXH-“)

*I used the phrase ‘FamilyCourtReform” without spaces to match a hashtag common on Twitter. I’ve begun using the phrase “#FamilyCourtReformists” to refer to certain collaborators, and with a different meaning, related to the meanings of “Reformist.”  I’ll show elsewhere on why it applies here

You can see the title has two basic parts.  The post sections alternate between these two parts.  Each one on its own is a major topic to show.

  • ‘High-Conflict’ Court-Ordered Parenting Classes and Certified High-Conflict Divorce Coaching USA is Now on Steroids.
  • Yet USA FamilyCourtReform* Collaborators Using This Jargon … are taken seriously, for example, by at least one UK/Europe-focused journal.

To document the first major topic I have to show my entity-drill-down on members of a coalition formed to avoid individual scrutiny of members’ affiliations (or, filing status, which FYI, I’ve been tracking also| suspended, delinquent revoked are not new to the crowd; others are so newly formed they haven’t had a chance to get “IRS-status-revoked” yet).

To show the other major topic (USA FamilyCourtReformists in UK/Euro-focused journal backslapping each other) involves persuading readers — the “lay” people —  that “know the journals” — comparing different academic journals with overlapping content (and authors) meant to influence the family courts, domestic violence, and child-abuse prevention fields is not optional, especially the one mentioned here seems to have generated (among #FamilyCourtReformists USA) a sort of “victory dance” in recent weeks.   Better awareness of the various journals (which ones go with which societies or associations) also helps understanding footnotes, when academic articles are made available on-line, or any other publications with lots of footnotes to support the points.

Both topics deserve follow-up reporting, based on what I’ve found so far.  If you wonder why (here) I’m giving the UK/Euro-focused journal (Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law) and its article and authors such a hard time here (and to a lesser degree — just asking questions there — on Twitter), the further background on United States “DV” organizations showing up there is in part why.

What’s taking place is outrageous. If people (#FamilyCourtReformists or #DVorg leaders USA) want to go in their private capacity — and on their own funds — that’s one thing.  But they aren’t: they are going citing their USA affiliations and collaborating, synchronizing internationally — with the consequence that what’s happening “domestic” stays off the table and out of the public eye when they publish and share those articles.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Which “UK/Euro-focused journal and which article in it? This Journal and Article:

 Introduction to the Special Issue, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, Volume 42, No. 1, by Elizabeth Sheehy & Simon Lapierre (2020)

The above UK/Euro-focused one features what appears to be American (USA)** theory and authors while another USA-dominant journal and article  I show below, for comparison, which only published a certain article on-line in 2022, features Canadians Simon Lapierre and Isabel Côté among the new darlings of certain American FamilyCourtReformists …

…along with almost anyone not in the USA who, not being subject to our policies or so familiar with how things work here,  probably won’t challenge the American (FamilyCourtReformists) on what’s been done to their own country by a movement calling itself (currently) “national” and “pre-eminent” — before which “thought-leaders” and a few other modest names shared among friends and friendly organizations while failing to account for certain family court issues unique to my country, where I live, the USA. So do the FamilyCourtReformists (that I reference here), but their loyalties seem to lie elsewhere.

**(American, American (USA), and USA labels here): It’s common to call the United States of America just “America.”  That’s complicated when one of the points of reference is also, technically speaking, in North America, i.e. Canadian. To get around this, I may use “USA” where (to me) the word “American” would make more sense but might be offensive to Canadians… Saying “USA” so much doesn’t make me a member of the Tea Party or any alt-right movement!

~ ~ ~

I only discovered the  Introduction to the Special Issue, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, Volume 42, No. 1, article on noticing (on Twitter) other Americans so enthusiastic about an Australian journalist (Grant Wyeth).  Before this post got so long, I showed exactly where, but now that’s off-ramped for another time (it was on post as originally published, for a week or two)…

The UK/Euro-focused journal article is from 7 January 2020. The one from the US-controlled journal (below) was published on-line only in 2022, though “applied November, accepted December, 2021”

RE: International propaganda absent country-specific annoying details and direct feedback from the people affected in each countryThe Journal of Family Trauma, Child Custody and Child Development.  See two nearby images:Citation:

  1. Simon Lapierre, Isabelle Côté & Geneviève Lessard (2022) “He was the king of the house” children’s perspectives on the men who abused their mothers, Journal of Family Trauma, Child Custody & Child Development, DOI: 10.1080/26904586.2022.2036284

See also the “quid pro quo” mutuality referenced below, I found on Twitter, ℅ several multi-source self-promotions timed as if a grassroots collective groundswell of parents who’d just had enough and broke out into a united coalition spontaneously and not the heavily-language-censored and strategically thought-through, public relations campaign by few (not many) individuals with a personal (financial and career) stake in the outcome, “just in time” for a February 9, 2022, hearing to get a “Kayden’s Law” appended to a US VAWA reauthorization, with some help from celebrity actor Angela Jolie’s dramatic skills adding to cross-border academic cites and the drama of family-court-facilitated child murders), in another journal  by the same (UK-based) publisher).

The manipulation isn’t easy to see unless you’ve developed and maintained the habit of following the entities, professional personalities, and branding permutations with some basic awareness of where each one (historically) is coming from and heading towards.


Introduction to the Special Issue, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, Volume 42, No. 1, by Elizabeth Sheehy & Simon Lapierre (2020)

Journal Aim and Scope

The Journal of Social Welfare & Family Law presents research and analysis of social welfare, family law and policy issues from a UK, European and international perspective.  The Journal provides an interdisciplinary forum to which academics and professionals working in the fields of social welfare and family law can turn to for information, comment and informed debate.

(Publisher Disclaimer, italics added):

Taylor & Francis make every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in our publications. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions.

Part 1 of “Terms and Conditions”  defines the publisher’s identity and legal domicile (home countries):

1. Information about Us

The Site is owned and operated by Informa UK Limited (“Informa,” “We,” or “Us”) whose registered office is at 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG. We are registered in England and Wales under company number 1072954.

TInyUrl to Journal of Family Trauma, Child Custody & Child Devptmt” article ‘He was King of the House’ published online (only) Feb. 2022 for my ‘High-Conflict on Steroids–UK/Euro-focused Journal’ Post.

That language censorship and mis-representation of who or what any branded promotion consists of is manipulation not “representation” should be obvious.

Mixing the same jargon across multiple media (including many the average person has no timely access to, such as the academic journals), and taking it international too, is a statement of intent to cloud the names, numbers, and identities of the planners, administrators, overseers, and executioners (executing the scheme) involved here.

This other journal, Journal of Family Trauma, Child Custody and Child Development (obviously with a subject matter interest in the family law system^), often features and is run by US individuals familiar to this blogger and protective mothers conference and social media circuits: https://tinyurl.com/JFamTrauma-Fb2022-Lapierre. Non-subscribers can read the description and at least the abstract.

^Notice the three topics in journal’s title: two referencing fields heavily dominated by psychology with the one referencing legal systems sandwiched in the middle ALL referencing “family systems” which is a heavily psych- behavioral health topic.

TInyUrl to Journal of Family Trauma, Child Custody & Child Devptmt” article ‘He was King of the House’ published online (only) Feb. 2022 for my ‘High-Conflict on Steroids–UK/Euro-focused Journal’ Post.

One journal focuses specifically OUTside the USA; the other while international as to its publisher (both have the same publisher) includes most leading editors IN the USA.

See Also “FemAnVi”: .

The name Simon Lapierre unknown to me before promotion on Twitter) is labeled (click above), “Co-founder of FemAnVi Collective.” FemAnVi website shows that in recent years it’s been entertaining a few different USA DV or BIP notables — including one from the NCADV (Ruth Glenn), David Adams (“Emerge”) and of course supporting most anything written by Joan Meier of George Washington University (GW Law).

~ ~ ~

(The USA-run journal: see nearby pdf (uploaded to this blog earlier, and showing its editors) and (current) image and read its “lengthy” “About-us” (Journal Overview: Aims and Focus) description with attention to what types of experts opinions are sought and in what fields.

  • LGH-ANNOTATED 5-page pdf from May 2018 on this Journal’s Editors: Journal of Child Custody|Editorial Board (Taylor&Francis) Geffner Editor, staff heavily IVAT, (Alliant Univ etc) <~~~Please load and read; It was taken May, 2018 and I annotated it; shows collaboration among known AFCC members, how heavily the journals production is, basically, “IVAT” and as to the “Editorial Board” listed them, known “#FamilyCourtReformists” like Ducote, Silberg, Faller, Saunders, and others.   [It may take two clicks to load the pdf:  this one does work].

Meanwhile, the publication (journal) has changed its name, as shown in next image, to:

“Journal of Family Trauma, Child Custody and Child Development” (fka “Journal of Child Custody”)

While the publication office is in Philadelphia, the bottom of the page shows company ownership, which reads:

(Section added March 25, 2022):

Below, I copied the “latest articles” (mostly for March, 2022) as links; only one is labeled “open access”: not the one on parental alienation — but for the one on parental alienation (and two reunification programs), you can read the Abstract, and about its two authors under “contributors.”

I’ll show that abstract, and I think you’ll understand my point that, basically, this journal is controlled by a single professor at a single (small) nonprofit at Alliant International University — and so understanding that university is important!


Note: I don’t recognize any of the author names at first glance.  It’s focusing on adding more international input, but never straying far from individuals (typically female) under Geffner’s oversight and, dare I say?, control?  He’s editor in chief.  Judge for yourself: read the abstract and read the acknowledgements in “Contributions” for the article I featured below which references parental alienation, reunification and even (the name of a specific program) “overcoming barriers.” It’s critiquing two reunification programs — but not the concept of reunification programs per se, that I can see…

Samantha Smith et al.
Article |
Inger Kristin Heggdalsvik et al.
Article |
Elena Andreopoulos et al.
Article Commentary |
Robert Geffner et al.
Article |

Let’s look at the Abstract for that article:

Parental alienation is a phenomenon in psychology that has garnered tremendous controversy over the past sixty years (Joshi, 2021). Especially within the realm of high-conflict divorce cases, parental alienation is considered by some mental health professionals as a great concern that can be resolved through reunification therapy or related educational programs. These educational programs, which aim to bring families together and attempt to rectify the concern of parental alienation, are seen in Linda Gottlieb’s Turning Points (New York, New York; Austin, Texas) as well as Deutsch, Ward, Sullivan, and Friend’s Overcoming Barriers (Palo Alto, California; Natick, Massachusetts; New York, New York). In this paper, we highlight research findings of the programs, methods used, limitations, as well as critiques of the programs. Ultimately, there is a lack of reliable research behind each of these programs and a potential concern for traumatizing individuals who engage in such programs.

Pardon the interruption but on the passing reference to “(Joshi, 2021)” I should point out the reference and then move on.  I’ll make this a different background color and small font, but don’t ignore it!  Come back later if you don’t have time now… it’s important enough that I mentioned it at the “Updates” section at very top of this post (May 26, 2022, summarizing changes to date).

That Joshi link sounded familiar to me.  I looked it up: Ashish S Joshi has a new-ish book out, on published by the ABA July, 2021 (344 pages, paperback 7×10); read about it here: “Litigating Parental AlienationEvaluating and Presenting an Effective Case in Court

There is no doubt that parental alienation exists and that U.S. courts have acknowledged the concept, although the theory can sometimes be misused. This practitioner’s manual provides an overview of the concept of parental alienation and explains how to correctly handle it in court. “Hands-on” practice pointers and sample materials on litigating parental alienation make this an essential resource for the family lawyer.

if you want to see more “quoting AFCC without mentioning they’re AFCC, look at the LawpraciceCle.com (series of slides) by Joshi on Parental Alienation in Family Courts, “Not just Gardner’s Theory” I have no idea what year it was, but the upload reads Feb. 2020.  Joshi is also (I see now) a member of PASG.info (Parental Alienation Study Group) and under his name (alpha by last name) a Summer 2021 issue of “Litigation” (of which he’s a “senior editor” it says) has him interviewing Richard Warshak and a trial court judge, with an article “Leave No Child Behind: Parental Alienation in Family Courts”  I’m not reading it, just showing it. This guy is prolific and aggressive (and publishing constantly): I’d make a note of it….

Look Also at FamilyAccessfightingForChildrensRights.com for the general idea. I’ve just linked to an article by him on “Coercive Control” in Michigan Family Law Journal from just this past November (Vol. 51 No. 9 , Nov. 2021); he’s quoting Evan Stark by Endnote 3 and it seems often (article is about three pages long, single-spaced, double-column, an easy read) but see Endnote 1’s title:

  1. Olivia A. Hess, Ready to Bridge the Disconnect: Implementing England and Wales’ Coercive Control Model for Criminalizing Domestic Abuse in the United States, 30 Ind. Int’l & Comp. L. Rev. 383, 386–88 (2020)

I’ve been saying, battered moms, Evan Stark set us up:  This man (Ashish S. Joshi)  is as rabid “parental alienation” as it gets, but has no problem with “Coercive Control” as domestic abuse.  That terminology going to be paired with applying parental alienation as abuse of children and be turned on women.  Mine’s not the standard, mainstream view — but I happen to be right.  Stark’s no friend of mine! I’ve called it out long ago. And it’s already migrated from basically, Evan Stark (Rutgers University, NJ, but he had a Fullbright Scholarship) into a book, took root in the UK before here, criminalized in 2015, now coming back here and already made law in a few states within the US — including California, I heard.  

I realize the phrase “coercive control” was around long before Stark capitalized on it and further popularized it, but the book certainly became a “call to action” and successfully so.

Talk about the power of propaganda…

JOSHI (LinkedIn) seems to have only come to the USA and gotten his LLM from the University of Michigan in 2002, before which he was in India.

Deutsch, Ward, Sullivan (and probably Friend) are activist AFCC.  Does this article mention that? Also strange:  both programs are referencing states distant from each other: New York-Texas; California-Massachusetts/New York). Now look at (just for this single article) “References” link, who is its other author, and (scroll down if going through the website’s link) notice the comments under “contributors”

Received 03 Aug 2021, Accepted 09 Feb 2022, Published online: 15 Mar 2022

So now you see that “et al.” means “and one more author…”

I think the wording is relevant here.  Take a look:


The authors would like to greatly thank Dr. Robert Geffner for the initial guidance on this article and the space created to discuss these ideas. Thank you also to Dr. Jean Mercer for the additional insight and support for this work. Lastly, thank you to all the editors, including Dr. Brittany Crowell, for the guidance on the publication process.

Additional information  – Notes on contributors 

Elena Andreopoulos:

Elena Andreopoulos, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University; Maastricht, the Netherlands; Alison Wexler, Clinical Psychology Department, Alliant International University, San Diego, CA.
Elena Andreopoulos is currently an alumnus of Maastricht University.

The study was guided by Dr. Robert Geffner, in relation with the Professional Clinical and Forensic Services Department at the Institute of Violence, Abuse, and Trauma (IVAT).**

 [Andreopolis’s contact details not necessary for this post/omitted/available on-line]

Elena Andreopoulos, MSc, is an alumnus of the Forensic Psychology Master’s Program at Maastricht University and currently works as an International Human Resources Consultant in Mechelen, Belgium.

Alison Wexler, MA, is a doctoral candidate of the Clinical Psychology PsyD Program at Alliant International Universityin San Diego, California.

Elena Andreopoulos (and her father: I’m pretty sure this is him🙂 are both interesting.  He’s Professor of Political Science at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, at CUNY, with degrees from:  University of Chicago (B.A.), Cambridge University (LLM and PhD) and (“by incorporation”) J.D. from University of Athens.  Take a look (I’ll upload a faculty profile image):

By continuing to look, I learned she, too, was for a season at IVAT and with Geffner, although her current position is in the Netherlands.  That information won’t fit on this post; I’ll see which other one I might include it on…

She was at Smith College completing an honors project for an BA (in psychology) in 2017:

The role of gender, sexual trauma and psychopathology in predicting sexual boundary violation risk among psychotherapists

Alternative Title: Gender differences in sexual boundary violation risk

Elena Alexandra Andreopoulos, Smith College

Publication Date 2017-4 / First Advisor  Nnamdi Pole / Document Type Honors Project/ Degree Name Bachelor of Arts /Department Psychology

Here’s a SD Summit Poster #10 – IVAT (“What Do You Think of Jodi Arias” — co-authored with Geffner, but citing Elena’s connection to Maastricht University.  It’s colorful, and towards the bottom explains what she was doing at IVAT at this time in these words:

Elena Andreopoulos is currently pursuing her Master’s Degree in Forensic Psychology at Maastricht University in the Netherlands. After graduating from Smith College with a Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) in (Clinical) Psychology, Elena moved to the United Kingdom to work with clients. She worked as a support worker for mental health clients in supported living, while also working with clients diagnosed with learning disabilities and challenging behaviors. Elena then went on to work at a residential therapeutic community as a Recovery Practitioner (Assistant Therapist) and also served as a Medication Manager in Eastbourne, England. There is where she worked with clients diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder and Paranoid Schizophrenia, as well as substance misuse issues. She spent the last year as a Professional Clinical and Forensic Services Intern at the Institute on Violence, Abuse & Trauma, where Elena worked on prominent forensic cases and saw clients clinically via telehealth.

Just a side note:  the over-capitalization here is, well, not exactly literate.  Five phrases of capitalizing what are not proper nouns (either the positions, or the conditions)  — although I’ve no doubt with her parental pedigree (and time at Smith) she is.  With her father’s background in Cambridge (and possibly with here there also), it may explain her interest in working in England (and Europe).. I’m curious how she might have been drawn to psychology…

**IVAT is a dba of FVSAI, which is a nonprofit of which, last I looked, he’s President… it may have a “forensic services department” for all I know, its latest tax return, for a bit of perspective says that having “Departments” within this entity may be a stretch.  Latest tax return at the IRS is for its Fiscal Year 2019 YE June, and I am biting my tongue to not just post this, screenshot by screenshot and show just exactly what FVSAI has told the IRS it is, what line of work it’s in, how inbred it is.

(SEE, at bottom of this post, FOOTNOTE ADDED 3/25/2022, THIS POST” FVSAI TAX RETURN FY2019 PRESENTS ANOTHER VIEW OF HOW “PROFESSIONAL” IT ISN’T…). I’ll say this here, however:

The FVSAI TAX RETURN shows the background of “Journal of Family Trauma, Child Custody & Child Development” for what it really is — run by an editor and editorial board that is, taken as a whole, strange, error-ridden, inbred, secretive and not even ashamed about any of the above… Also dishonest in reporting (to the IRS) about itself, withholding (any financial statements from the public) and it’s been around since 1984 (about 1999 in California) just like this.  It seems to be run like an extended (cult) family with ONLY Geffner at the top and supervising everything… and ONLY compliant, mostly female, assistants, interns, and doctoral students in tow…
– – – –
I mention more of these journals and authors as points of reference here to warn others that what some individuals here are doing when not here and not sharing such activities openly and timely to their United States readers and followers, as prompted and urged by US legal-domiciled nonprofits named after protective or battered mothers, safe children, and anything positive and noble-sounding with the words “domestic violence” or “family violence” attached.

Essentially, the “collaborative” collegial and friendly supportive talk, certainly in this Special Issue of the “Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law” seeks to raise support for outside-in making laws to impact the United States without regard to what’s already taking place legislatively and economically here and without regard to how that may be causing (not even just ‘affecting’) the outside-in proposed legislation which terms make no reference to and do not even acknowledge what’s taking place legislatively and economically here directed towards the family courts and social services (i.e., child protection, welfare, and all that goes with it) specifically.

Since our respective economic and constitutional systems differ, perhaps, the way to standardize them and minimize such differences was determined to be the “shared” language of psychology and social science, and in this issue, with a heavy dose of simply arguing about family court jargon spread primarily by (and certainly in the publications) of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Inc., i.e., for short, “AFCC.”  But not admitting this openly, of course.

I oppose the process and am definitely opposed to the outcome to date.

Ohio Family Court Feasibility Study (1997) (pdf is 129pp), for my 14Sept2019 post Builders and their Blueprints: Who, Really, Designed the Family Courts, (link ends ‘aI6″), [Publ. Sept. 15, 2019].

Naming this article and journal issue here puts a date and time stamp on my raising the points of how strong, prolonged and pervasive is the push to blend social science and law; psychology and law; behavioral health/mental health and law, and to justify the continuation of the corrupt family law system already established AND run and essentially controlled (USA) by power-hungry private judicial and other membership associations.  (ABA, NCJFCJ’s “NCJJ” and the AFCC have been mentioned).  (See the post — published Sept. 15, 2019 already — in the nearby caption link.  I ask some good questions there which challenge the assumption that “family courts” were ever designed to have anything to do with child protection — and about the nonprofits driving the conversation about “parental alienation” as if somehow more relevant.)

These international connections continue to solidify around what NOT to discuss while many of the authors consistently ignoring our cries to come to some integrity^^ in logic, argumentation and reason regarding the family courts.

^^I don’t say “come BACK to some integrity” unless I’ve seen it to start with — and regarding “founding” associations in the so-called “National Safe Parents Coalition” (it’s a website…) and before that, in the more recent “National Family Violence Law Center” (“NFVLCgwu”) seeking to become the “family court reform” clearinghouse like existing domestic violence and healthy marriage (and “fatherhood”) clearinghouses already in place — they want to play with the big guys… and get public recognition (and money) for it:  not be answerable to the commoners.

Before NFVLCgwu there was (same university, same primary, Professor Joan Meier) “Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals” (its website “DV LEAP” but I call it “DVLEAP”), a 501©3 at least.  What was uncovered in the 1990s and by the late 2000s, must NOT be discussed openly.

That somehow justice can be rammed down the throat of a twisted (family law) system centered on blending behavioral health and law by working the Appeals process for cherry-picked cases must not be questioned — instead, it’s  “Keep trying… More trainings for more judges. Give us more control over who gets to testify (and those trainings), and above all — federalize the system from the top down…” (easier than getting informed consent of the public)…(keeps the drama going, etc…). Kids still getting murdered?  GOOD — that’s good for the agenda.  Stopping it earlier through putting ALL the relevant causes on the table (openly) and then talking — like adults, and to others as equals — which in this country, allegedly, we are, with or without J.D. or Ph.D. or Psy.D. specialization — about what MIGHT be in the heads of those judges who “just don’t understand” abuse, abusers, manipulation, coercion (etc.)…is NOT on the table..

I only discovered the  Introduction to the Special Issue, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, Volume 42, No. 1, article on noticing (on Twitter) other Americans so enthusiastic about an Australian journalist## who (like them) refuses or can’t be bothered to admit AFCC exists, that the USA has a website “fatherhood.gov” (etc.) and government backing specific to the family courts promoting fathers’ rights and serving fathers. I quote that other article also below…

This post would be shorter and a lot simpler if I didn’t reference these, but current developments in my judgment, demand a strong response.

##Welcome to the cult, Mr. Wyeth (or had you joined earlier?)  Do you know what you’re getting into, or care what it signifies to people “on the ground” here and without international media connections (i.e., we have no more vulnerable minor children to be stolen, often no assets to divert into this court system, just a trail of destruction where-ever this system — USA– has encountered and messed with our lives)…under the watchful eyes and (so they claim” leadership of the same entity also in Australia you just can’t be bothered to name, either?”

My next insets reference FamilyCourtReform sociologists and legal scholars discussing cross-border how to fix the family courts (vis a vis the chronic injury and trauma they inflict), but in a journal with editors mostly, though not 100%, from the USA and (while I’m at it), associated with Robert Geffner, Ph.D. (Editor in Chief) and his (basically it’s his) nonprofit #FVSAI with a dba #IVAT at Alliant International University in San Diego, California.

Watch how those involved seek to — on both sides — discuss issues from the international (if not fully global yet) perspective in journals, where editorial control ensures that “the voice of the people” or protests (such as mine, in this blog, year after year) are not heard, discussed, or given any credence.  Because one of those journals has its historic editor-in-chief in San Diego, California, USA running a certain nonprofit and conferences year after year (emphasis: psychology and trauma: not law or economics), in a rather odd way, I took time in this post to reference and summarize.  Since then I published separately on one of the dbas (NPEIV), again.

See the first insets link to two posts where I’ve posted more details on what those two acronyms (and that university) are and represent and, below that I summarize that the situation with those entities, and California School of Professional Psychology as a absorbed (and now controlled) by Alliant International University which (as I show) is now a for-profit model owned by German billionaire (family, essentially), “Bertelsmann.”

I still periodically publish reminders that “IVAT” is just a “dba” and that “FVSAI is essentially Robert Geffner — and that several journals, not just one journal, are published under his name.

Odd bedfellows as far as I’m concerned for the Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, (<~~Link to editorial board.  Please read and consider carefully which countries are the focus.)  I will post on this soon. It’s interesting and it’s important and relevant to the development of sociology and social science; influence of Arnold Toynbee at its heart). (//LGH 25 March 2022).

NPEIV, IVAT, FVSAI, CSPP/Alliant SECTION IN MOTION:  Summary Timeline left here:

[“FAMOUS LAST WORDS”] I’m not defining FVSAI and IVAT here:  use either hashtag on Twitter where I have, look it up, or you’ll find I detailed it (quite a bit) in this post (partial title here): Corporations …Coordinate Campaigns named after a Cause, but We (the Public) should Coordinate to Get and STAY Cognizant of the Corporate(and Gov’t Entity) Contexts. [Page added March 28 2018] (shortlink ends “-8R5.”). A Page not a post.  Scroll down to see the images on this topic.

I see from this post that the journal referenced in my next inset changed its name from “Journal of Child Custody” to as shown below (Journal of Family Trauma, Child Custody and Child Development) some time between then and now. Another post, (short-link ends -57T) also references in the context of another nonprofit “CAFI” (Child Abuse Forensic Institute) with which IVAT works.

I added to the reference to NPEIV and its context after publishing this post March 3, 2022.  I got to reviewing the context and history of Alliant International University relevant to the family courts for its absorption of the California School of Professional Psychology, and for the university’s visionary William C. Rust’s obsession with international expansion to the brink of bankruptcy and getting itself sold (and himself finally booted out) to survive. By 2015, it turned for-profit and is now part of a  German billionaire family’s enterprise (Bertelsmann). Still producing psychologists for family court proceedings in the USA — just foreign ownership of the entire university.

This history I hope puts some perspective on how highly we must really revere people with certain advanced degrees in psychology and be subject to their (basically trainings, labels, vocabularies, world views and vagaries), or support institutions which subject entire family lines and communities to this type of domination and control.

I (re)moved this section despite its relevance to the journal I’m quoting below, but left a substantial footprint, an informal time-line with a few quotes, here, which I’ll mark with a different background color (as of March 20, 2022).

The off-ramp is to: “NPEIV envisions a world free of all forms of interpersonal violence” [Let’s take a closer look][March 3, 2022]. (short-link ends “-dNd).

(This summary by recall only, but right after including then moving the material).Key terms (besides NPEIV, IVAT, FVSAI and remembering how each relates to Robert Geffner, Ph.D., and maintaining awareness that its home base is what’s not called Alliant International University.(“Alliant”) which houses California School of Professional Psychology (“CSPP”).  Also remember United States International University (“USIU”).  2001 merger of USIU + CSPP = new Alliant (private, nonprofit).  That wasn’t working with all the international campuses, which were eventually (all but one, in Africa) sold off (I DNK when), so in 2015 Alliant is still called “Alliant” but changes its type of incorporation to “public benefit.”  I’m sure the California Secretary of State will leave some trail of the transformations or at least a few fading footprints that this occurred.Synopsis: Notice the years and name-changes:  

I’m attempting a timeline drawn from the detailed links and quotes I’m moving off-post. It may be better with the quotes, but this is my narrative drawn from them:

Balboa Law College (1924, San Diego) became California Western University {not just a modest law school] in 1952. William C. Rust became President after its  move to a new Point Loma campus, with financial help from — get this — the Southern California-Arizona Conference of the Methodist Church.

While promising to keep it “small,” he certainly didn’t.  That’s just not going to happen under certain “visionaries” like William C. Rust… By 1966 it was now “United States International University” (“USIU”) but his multi-campus expansionism was quickly taking the cause into bankruptcy, and others with it. Featuring international students wasn’t helped much by the events of 9/11/2001, either. He was unable to out-race the debts through continually expanding under grand names and schemes; in the early 1990s leadership finally got rid of Rust and started repairing the situation.  Wiki says an entire sports program was scrapped and in 2001 it had to merge.

In 1969, California Professional School of Psychology was established. A sign of the times…

Meanwhile, in 1973  California Western School of Law moved to downtown San Diego campus and in 1975 became a separate identity (apparently it lasted only until 2002?).  So there’s no now more “School of Law” within USIU.  In 1973 what was left of USIU (without the law school) then sold its campus to Point Loma Nazarene University.and move to another place (still in the city). Wiki on USIU:

In the late 1980s USIU became known for catering to wealthy international students, including royalty from the Middle East. {rest of that paragraph, just below]:

Separately, in 1984 (Tyler Texas) Geffner founds FVSAI.  In 1999, he moves it to San Diego but it retains the Texas legal domicile, where it continues, until today.. By then perhaps a mainstay of Alliant is ℅ training psychologists.  It’s certainly not a normal college or university, whether public or private.  it’s not part of the California state system, and doesn’t have its own endowment.  SOMEONE or something (including quality) is going to pay, along the line, for this.

Wikipedia on USIU (which again, only existed until 2001):

The university’s main campus from 1952 to 1973 was the land that is now occupied by Point Loma Nazarene University.[14] With the name change to USIU the university moved to its new campus in Scripps Ranch, and opened national campuses in Maui and Steamboat Springs as well as international campuses in London, Mexico City, and Nairobi. Additional campuses were proposed. The Nairobi campus is the only one that still exists and is now known as United States International University Africa.[6][15] The multi-campus, international concept shaped the university with its student focus and core curriculum. In the late 1980s USIU became known for catering to wealthy international students, including royalty from the Middle East.[16] In 2001, a yearbook photo from 1990 of Osama bin Laden‘s brother attending USIU became public.[16]

USIU merged with CSPP in 2001 to become Alliant.

So now we have still a mega, multi-campus university (although William C. Rust was gone by now) training generations — thousands — of psychologists, many going into — guess what — marriage counseling (family law custody evaluators — get the connection yet?).  As I recall, the “fiscal agent” NPEIV (citing to IVAT, which is really FVSAI) seems to have begun also in 2001.

By 2015, Alliant went “public benefit corporation” i.e., it’s for-profit now.  A new category of corporation based on its supposed contributions to the public good.

(Off-ramp is to: “NPEIV envisions a world free of all forms of interpersonal violence” [Let’s take a closer look][March 3, 2022]. (short-link ends “-dNd)

I’m embedding (just) two tweets which reference this or related material, to show some of the promotions of each article or journal publication which might mention — or agree with — the people at (self-labeled) “National Family Violence Law Center” at George Washington University (Law School) who have a problem out-ing AFCC or talking about things “financial” when it comes to “evidence-based” researches.  The first is my comment.

The first one is (If I can keep it straight):  National Family Violence Law Center, in GWU, Washington, D.C. (i.e., American) promoting Dr. Adrienne Barnett, non-practising barrister of Law, at Brunel University-London (UK) promoting the article by Simon Lapierre, of Canada — in a journal with editor-in-chief Robert Geffner, of San Diego, California, but with publisher Taylor & Francis (TandFonline) owned by Informa in the UK…  Dr. Barnett’s background, (at Brunel.AC.UK/People…) notice the activity, research areas, and funded studies, and position/s of influence…

And this is Simon Lapierre promoting an article by himself and two others, the one I cited above.

 Professional coss-border mutual back-scratching, I say.

About half this post — the first half — addresses that UK/Euro-focused Journal reference and half — the second half — documents that “FamilyCourtReform Collaborators” (specifics will be shown) include those operating certified High-Conflict Divorce coaching.

The term “high-conflict” is an “AFCC” tell, which point should be beyond debate. Its over-use is a serious problem.

No one should use the term “high-conflict” without awareness of its origins, consciously or unconsciously.  If you have unaware, get smart and learn about its origins, and stop using it in that manner unless you’re in favor of privatized judicial systems and abandoning the rule of law (including laws against criminal behavior) in favor of the rule of “healthy relationship” experts.

The term “High-Conflict” was well-thought through as a marketing phrase and has since introduction been leveraged to sell services year after year across multiple applications. I see from this post the term now works easily on both sides of any “domestic violence/child-abuse” concerned campaigns.

“Divorce Coaching” application by “One Mom’s Battle” (a.k.a Tina Swithin and just one other person on the California LLC) shows how using that term can make friends in high places (in family courts and family court reform both…)

I’m not showing OMB website content this post so much as the California corporate filings (OMB was a nonprofit but never registered with the State of California or filed even a minimal Form 990-N, that I can see). If you love big pictures and primary colors with lots of headshots of an amazing number of (mostly) blond women with straight hair and you like talking psychology (not economics), you’ll love OMB and related websites too.  But I also read for content, and it didn’t take long to see where this was coming from (a few years ago also) — survivor Mom or no survivor Mom.

Let me spell this out, then on this post I’ll provide more details.

From A~~> B ~~>C = “You Are Here”:

A: Family Court reformist-featured collaborator;  B: Profiting from promoting and aligned to perpetuate the usage “High-conflict” which is quintessential AFCC; C: Furthering AFCC agenda, “parental alienation remedies” and all…

Supporting and promoting A = supporting C, no matter what characterizations occur along the way..

Even if you’re one of the affected, supposedly being helped “Safe Parents” = this is either unwittingly  or knowingly sabotaging not just yourselves and possibly own case, but also the prospects of others who (“looking before they leapt,” or learning the hard way: experientially) declined to join, and future generations.

I have to ask:

How badly compromised, morally and financially, possibly legally (I’m talking, extort-able) or chronically traumatized beyond the point of functional cognition could someone be to join ANY cause spouting “High-Conflict” —a cause whichas organizedjust about directly promotes collusion with a non-entity (NSPC, website first up about only Feb. 4, 2022, that I can see..) promoted vigorously by another non-entity (NFVLC, [<~~Law.GWU.Edu/[NFVLC “what we do” The url reveals the main domain name is the university: GWU.edu, and the law school at it…]) whose members and associations through a specific membership organization entity [guess which one…] with international chapters (but not even twenty-five, let alone fifty (one per state) within the USA) are already helping run USA’s family courts and it seems influential in some other countries,’and while said entity‘s loyal activist members routinely, strategically, placed in positions of influence close to power, especially but NOT only throughout the judiciary and anywhere giving access to mentoring new family lawyers, mental health professionals, and (of course) dispute resolution professionals (and governments’, plural,’ funding streams) claiming to be innovators in courts they reasonably know the entity helped create — problem-solving (family) courts — yet claiming to have a solution for their own problems —under the guise of “fixing” them?  Is it really that hard to tell truth from lies, and friends from foe?

(OK, I know I went a little overboard on that sentence with the descriptions, adding links, descriptions of what I linked to, and an effusive characterization (in this color font) based on what I know** about “said entity” (**”what I know:”  see investigative blogging/entity drill-downs herein, 855 posts, about 60 pages, written across 12 years, give or take a forced hiatus for relocation, or handling another round of  litigation, as I grow old, or try to, in some vestige of peace..)

I am, after all, describing a multi-layered, complex, and full of misdirections to conceal connections between parts** substantial and evolving situation.

**misdirections (inconsistent labeling) conceal whether said parts ARE entities or not.

Identifying entities is essential to following public funds. Creating a nearly impenetrable maze at every level and needlessly is no accident — such a set-up is a choice, that choice systematically prevents the public from following either public or (appropriately, where tax-exempts are involved) private money and how those two DIFFERENT types  — public and private — of resources interact with each other to manage public institutions, i.e., like our courts.

By association this also conveniently (for those involved) also continues to hide the backers and the finances, or fact-checking size, amounts, and timeline when backers are advertised for validation of a cause.

In this case, I’m thinking that the use of NSPC is to exaggerate, not minimize, how many people and organizations are truly behind their agenda, based on what I’ve seen of who’s behind those logos so far.

~ ~ ~ ~

Here’s the “pre-elaboration” statement of ‘how compromised could anyone be?” I wrote it first as expression, not definition; I’d condensed the elements of a situation to a formula, then responded to it in a rhetorical question.  Later, my oblique (indirect) points of reference got a little out of hand; I’ll try to be good this time:

How badly compromised, morally and financially, possibly legally (I’m talking, extort-able) or chronically traumatized beyond the point of functional cognition could someone be to join ANY cause which as organized just about directly promotes collusion with a non-entity promoted vigorously by another non-entity whose members and associations through a specific membership organization entity [guess which one…] with international chapters (but not even twenty-five, let alone fifty (one per state) within the USA) are already helping run USA’s family courts and seems influential in some other countries, under the guise of “fixing” them?  Is it really that hard to tell truth from lies, and friends from foe?


Post dividing line is easy to spot: look for these words, this big:


(*& AFCC-affiliated Business Opportunities)

I say, and it’s not that hard to prove with logic and attention to details, that those ‘influencers’ making the loudest noise about murdered kids and claiming to hold the key^^ to making (family) courts safe for kids are barely concealing** now that they are playing for (controlled/owned) by the opposing team.  It’s a set-up! Labels sound right, but substance, the content and (which I tend to also look at) even the containers (those websites and entities involved) doesn’t add up.

(**Perhaps these influencers they are close to complete victory, to accomplish legal changes embedding private purpose into federal law in such a way it can’t be later undone?)

The mood in 2022 seems at times exultant, other times## pitiful and desperate or, when called for, courageous and outraged. Other times (i.e. writing for academia to be referenced to the wider public), for the experts, the tone is almost clinically detached and speaking as to colleagues [keep the dirty details our of the discourse..].  Once published, of course, there’s the promoting of any journal article helping solidify (and advertise) who’s connected with whom as academics (social science, psychology and/or law overlapping.

##(when seeking support, i.e., telling us what to tell our legislators to vote for — as if it was our own (sound) thoughts, was grassroots, and was not framed from the start by those most likely to profit from passage of such solutions)

“Whatever suits the audience at the time…”

(^^USA:  Reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, but Tweak it some to add-on “child safety” and enclose who may and may not testify regarding “parental alienation” (read the fine print — the add-on doesn’t say eliminate the term…”  USA must also globalize its language in this cause and not reference laws, governments, or specific contexts which make this unreasonable, although it’s approved to cite “American” experts on domestic violence in almost any context globally, and (when in the USA) point proudly to how many experts overseas acknowledge the Americans.

Not mentioned so often (why I keep doing it here…) — how UNrepresentative some of the experts are, how they exploit disaster custody cases for a public mentions to get laws passed favorable to their — obviously not the devastated and forlorn (etc.) but still determined to make SOMEONE pay for it and “fix the system that did this to my child” parents’ — interests, i.e. more training for judges — but of a specific type which (as I read it) sounds like an “a la carte” menu for the same experts.


NationalSafeParents.org ‘Members’ page viewed Feb. 25, 2022, with now 15 logos).

Quick Look at Logos (shown under “Members” and each one clickable (there, not on my image..) at National Safe Parents.org (website started ca. Feb. 4, 2022).


The article in the UK/Euro-focused journal published by Taylor & Francis, [Informa UK Limited registered in England & Wales owns the site] (also linked/referenced above: Introduction to the Special Issue” Dec. 2020relates to a center at a law-school which is (and not accidentally — constant promotion, self-referrals, and social media presence helps…) so “into” these collaborators who, on their part also feature its (sic) leadership and websites featuring — my term (it seems appropriate) “Family Court Roadkill”** that the center at the law school, for testimonial, even directly cites one of the (mothers) who’s made a business right alongside known AFCC promoter and popularizer of this term “High-Conflict” for years.

(Found under “Law.GWU.edu/(NFVLC) Giving” page.  Scroll down == beneath suggested gft amounts starting with $10k000 –) two  see five parallel narrow testimonial quotes (I’ll upload an image nearby, below): On the Left, Tina Swithin.  Second from right,”One Mom’s Battle on-line forum.”

Left to Right:  1.  Tina Swithin.  2.  A Protective Stepfather.  3. A European Mother.  4. OMB On-line forum; 5. Trauma Therapist, the Netherlands.

Tina Swithin and one other person (shown below), as of latest check at California Secretary of State), run the LLC “One Mom’s Battle” which was previously named (until summer 2021?  See below on this post, I detailed it) was “Tina Swithin, LLC” Tina’s operation (OMB) is the only specific name in all the testimonials.  Not one battered mother USA is named.  Perhaps DVLEAP (NFVLC predecessor) hasn’t really helped many of us, over the 15 years of NOT mentioning that AFCC might be a factor in custody decision-making?… No characteristics of “European Mother” are provided (not even from which country).  By absence of any other specific names in all four columns, guess who’s being promoted?


National Safe Parents.org (cont’d.)

(**laws featuring first names of  children murdered after or as a parent raised the issue of domestic violence in court.  Recently, current names in circulation seem to be (top level): Keira (for Keira Kagan) in Canada (often referenced in connection with): (NationalSafeParents.org, under menu option “The Crisis“, white letters on black background): 

  • Kayden for Kayden Mancuso, a 7-year-old girl from Bucks County, Pennsylvania, mother had custody (2018?) but she still was murdered. There is a 501©3 it says..

NationalSafeParents.org website shows coalition member logos; I see now fifteen logos in a neat chart, 3X5, alternating (if explored individually) victims names, protective parents associations (California – top middle; Connecticut, its clone essentially, bottom-middle), one “coach” entity (Child Justice, Inc., long involved) and a few less familiar to me but which I will look into promptly, posting if not here at least on Twitter, any entity  and identity (who’s running it) information available on-line.  The first 12 or 13 I already did, but haven’t posted yet). 

  • Greyson for Greyson Kessler, a 4.5-year-old boy, died May, 2021;
    • mother had custody, Fort Lauderdale, FL, she’d just asked for protective order and had requested injunction for emergency pickup from visitation.  Father John Stacey was suffering from PTSD as ex-Moonie, acc. to news links.
  • Piqui for Aramazd “Piqui” Andressian, Jr., barely 5 years old, 2017:
    • (&lt;~facebook page shows many followers) he was missing for 71 days after his father was found unconscious in a park, later Piqui was found dead in Santa Barbara County, California (found June 30, 2017).  Astoundingly, under Los Angeles County orders, his mother Ana Estevez still had to pay the father $2,000/month spousal support (guess he survived)!  Wordpress website not yet complete, but gives details: www.piquisjustice.org
  • Corey for Corey Micciolo, 6 (<~a private Facebook Group created May, 2021 with nearly 17.4K members (123 joined last week). Facebook group labeled “New Jersey” His mother writes:
    • I created this group to fight for justice for my son, Corey Micciolo. He was only 6 years old when his life was taken from him, by someone who was supposed to care and love for him. His father. We have an army here and we will not stop fighting until justice is served
    • (I looked for more on-line: https://www.jerseyshoreonline.com/southern-ocean/mother-learns-more-about-suspicious-death-of-her-child/.  Ocean County, NJ, suspicious circumstances of his death, the father Christopher Gregor hadn’t met his own son until Corey was five; mother had complied, it seems, with some court-ordered visitation but reported to the local DCFF. (Note: my very early posts include one on Ocean County (use Search function: that county, or “Toms River” to find. It had unusually high traffic). This poor Mom, and her son! (See the article for more details).

The other logos do not represent specific children or children in the USA:

At least two logos — “Custody-Peace.org” and “Movement of Mothers” as I recall only represent a combo of at least two other logos/members shown, specifically One Mom’s Battle. I’ll re-check (and any reader could, also!). Or possibly Movement of Mothers represented Custody-Peace + OMB.  I was alerted because such activity inflates the sense of how representative a coalition is.  

Between publishing this post and a few days ago, @CustodyPeace (of website custody-peace.org) and @Safe_Parents (featuring the NSPC website, above) and lastly (after I asked for a link and started speaking out on Twitter) journal article author I mention here, Isabel Côté, all blocked me on Twitter.

Luckily it’s a little harder to block a person from visiting one’s website while trying to engage more people to sign up on the same website. Non-solidarity is not permitted — but keep telling yourselves this is no cult.  It just doesn’t tolerate non-conformity and non-solidarity, or even (so it seems) non-support from within any demographic they’re claiming to be representing and concerned about…. //LGH 3/26/2022.. 

When on Twitter, I also pay attention (generally) to websites associated with logo-branded accounts, which was how I found out. Overall awareness of who’s who helps recognize themes and aligned “dream-teams” quickly.  A separate post and (my) reporting on NSPC in the works (my drafts pipeline) since early February. This website showed up suddenly, grew rapidly and has some fans (obviously) in positions of influence already, and was clearly timed to urge for passage of a specific version of #VAWA, calling upon and citing to specific U.S. Senators in on-line Tweets, etc.

(Carrying the High-Conflict virus… and behaving like AFCC):

Like AFCC’s “bait and switch” entity-filing patterns historically, this one Mom’s business entity filings of two kinds (one nonprofit which never registered, one for-profit LLC which did, and a quick name-change). Bait-and-switch is a tactic; it’s important, so I’m showing it below regarding this situation.  It turns out I may have earlier on the blog in a different context, but in 2022, here it is with an update.

You may notice some of that in my recent (late January, early February) Tweets & Replies threads. Several include links and images which I’m not taking the time to upload here, although I do have some images below on the main topic: High-Conflict on Steroids.

Now, about the First Part (of post title) and Main Point of this post,

High-Conflict (Court-ordered) Parenting Classes and Certified High-Conflict Divorce Coaching USA is Now on Steroids. …….[ begun Feb. 16, 2022](short-link ends “-dEA”)



(*& AFCC-affiliated Business Opportunities)

Why now?  This is hardly the first time I pointed out where the obsession with this hyphenated adjective to be applied to, almost anything to do with divorce, custody, or domestic violence issues!

(Previously, based on a search of my “Published posts” (just a few selections, it’s a really key phrase in these fields!):

The term “HIGH-CONFLICT” — Docketed, Trademarked, Franchised, and Distributed! Published May 10, 2012 (About 5,500 words; case-sensitive short-link ending “-14I”…)

HIGH CONFLICT is turning out to be a HIGH-CASH-COW in the Family Law business:

(in that one, I show some of those trademarks and LLC’s formed, as well as solicitations for people to be trained as “high conflict diversion coaches” (Expensive, no doubt).  These two images from such a provider (Brook Olsen; one image describes the class, the other Brook (who’s a guy, not a girl).  Images are dark because I searched the phrase.  (Screenshots from the above post only. This was back in 2012

Screenshot from my May 10, 2012 post on trademarking of “High-Conflict.” image is darkened because I searched the term on my own post. Easier to read on the post: shortlink is https://wp.me/psBXH-14I

Screenshot from my May 10, 2012 post on trademarking of “High-Conflict.” image is darkened because I searched the term on my own post. Easier to read on the post: shortlink is https://wp.me/psBXH-14I


Yet another AFCC-style wet dream… Someone needs to mop up around here. [‘Conflict Happens'[like in the Seal Beach massacre?]/High-Conflict Institute’, Publ. Nov. 16, 2011] (Case-sensitive shortlink here ends “-UD”)

(My Nov. 2011 post above opens with images of two colorful AFCC conference brochures using the term and continues to identify AFCC players in (then, shocking) a mass-murder scene (inspired, supposedly, by a divorce) in Southern California, i.e., Seal Beach.  As I recall, seven people were murdered in cold blood, most of them bystanders who happened to be in the way of a man who wanted to murder his wife although they already had (as I recall) 50/50 visitation.  A beauty salon was involved… Seems to be a theme… Understand that my opening text on that post was sarcastic:

(My words):


From the “High Conflict Institute”   “CONFLICT HAPPENS” (<~~ Bill Eddy’s High Conflict/”New Ways for Families” Institute)

No longer are DIVORCEs or FAMILIES “high-conflict” but “People” are.  In fact, the issues are not the issues either.

When someone comes up to you with an issue — he or she (<=the usual application) doesn’t really mean what s/he says and is not to be taken at face value (ask the forensic psychologists).  The REAL problem with family courts isn’t the family courts, and it isn’t even high-conflict families, or high conflict all by its rocky-mountain-high* self.  The REAL problem is high-conflict people.  Buy this book [“Splitting”] to know if you’re dealing with one:

and, also in that post: the image opines that women are more likely to be BPD, while men tend towards Narcissistic Personality Disorder.  Patience, please, this comes up with the recent “National Safe Parents Campaign” participant/s featured below, also…

Bill [EDDY] sure was ahead of his AFCC time.  While others were simply developing and lobbying for more parenting coordinator rights in Florida, Texas, and wherever — he was writing this book explaining that the Issue is not the Issue, and all the conflict in the family law venue really comes from disordered personalities in the court system.

…I noticed this some months back [2011], but didn’t get around to blogging it yet.  They had apparently been running out of ways to work the words “high-conflict” into a sentence (substituting for accurate descriptions of concrete events with identifiable actors), let alone names for conferences that pair the words “high-conflict” with alienated.

Next image (black & red font on white background) is the screenshot (Quoting Bill Eddy) on the gender-specificity of personality disorders that show up in the family courts:

From my Nov. 16, 2011 post, this is a screenshot of a quote. Link to post is: https://wp.me/psBXH-UD

[Section removed here, 3/26/2022, just a re-statement of why I was writing this post at this time… about 1,000 words].

What I’d hoped to be a brief illustration of just who is promoting this theory  in a recently-enmeshed orgasm of mutual retweeting and self-referencing congratulations with some celebrity attachments (i.e., Angelina Jolie, a talented actress, producing real tears for VAWA reauthorization testimony) got longer when I started looking closer and finding more to report.

That’s just part of the writing process.

Specifically, regarding Law.GWU.edu and the National Family Violence Law Center at it, calling attention to Tina Swithin testimonial (about the NFVLC)  posted there, then showing (listing the various filing versions of) Ms. Swithin and “One Mom’s Battle,” something I’d seen through initially (because I do background checks for business entities pretty soon after I become aware of them, in these fields) as being an “AFCC” carrier, but hadn’t untangled the corporate registration name switching, entity-changing.  It’s like the label for one type of container (a nonprofit) was then carried over to another type (an LLC), but the LLC container had to officially change its label — and good luck figuring out that happened just by clicking on the entity’s websites — no, the record is at the Secretary of State Business Entities Search level (in California). Searching there, the “nonprofit” comes under “Corporation” option (name ends “Inc.”) but the LLC, the other LLC/LLP option.

“OMB” is just one of the original (now there are more) logos in the “NationalSafeParents.org(National Safe Parents Coalition” (sic) website which showed up just in time to tell us “protective  Moms” what to vote for.

(No guarantee the image below is the most current one of NSPC)

NationalSafeParents.org (two more logos added: Child Justice Inc and #EIGE (United Nations-related) ~~ viewed 2022.Feb.04 Fri

Regarding the AFCC cover-up, in which most statewide CADV coalitions also participate (perforce) as well as California Protective Parents, Inc. (incorporated 1999) and (I recently heard) also Connective Protective Moms, Inc. (only incorporated June 2020):

[This short Section added during update to define (sort of) and show lists of  Statewide “CADV” within the United States.  Why relevant to NSPC — the Protective mothers groups (California and Connecticut are members here) with strong ties (CPPA) to Battered Mothers Custody Conference, (“BMCC”) which from nearly its beginning (about 2003) were aligned with an encouraged (at BMCC) to view the DV organizations as (our) friends and allies.  Time showed, they weren’t — at all.  If anything, the opposite…. Submit a comment to this post (or contact me on Twitter) if you want a link to some documentation in the words of one of the ongoing presenters there (Barry Goldstein). It’s not exactly a secret.  So, things the CADVs won’t/can’t report (like fatherhood organization grants, and their collaboration with the same) quite so openly to battered women and their children, or battered MEN), the NSPC here won’t be either, nor for many years did the BMCC.  That’s an important concept to remember.

CADV means “Coalition Against Domestic Violence”.  Each one of these, each year, is an federal grantee administered by HHS, authorized under a law (I’ve blogged it, see right sidebar on the DV orgs) with their name on it, and separately from the national or special issue “resource centers” which are the same law, different “line item” and delegated by subject matter.  THAT topic is (for a Twitter hashtag, “#DVRN” and searchable on-line.).

Statewide CADVs coalitions may be found (how current, your guess is as good as mine, but they probably don’t change much year by hear)

 at NCADV.  At NNEDV, with a short cover statement describing who they are and how many, listing also its seven regions by name (did you know these coalitions were organized by region)? and in its “History” (which I didn’t know / hadn’t seen before) claimed to be the impetus (in 1990) for the passage of the VAWA (Violence Against Women Act).  Separately, I’d read another organization (now, “Futures Without Violence”) say IT was primary in pushing for VAWA.  Either way, NNEDV is a nonprofit, seemingly based in Washington, D.C.  Checking briefly for its “Financials” I see NNEDV is offering up (instead of “Audited Financial Statements” + Forms 990), only Forms 990 and Annual Reports (with a single page, page 12, and piechart summary (not audited) of the same financials, for Year 2020 — but its latest Form 990 uploaded (and the url indicates, probably only uploaded a full year later, i.e., FY2019 ends December 2019, and is shown (per URL) as a 12/2020 upload.  In other words, not even the most current one Form 990.

Another interesting place to find acknowledgement of the statewide “CADVs” I found recently, looking up the sponsors of AFCC conferences; this one was “OnlineParentingPrograms.com” as a Platinum Sponsor (second from the top) for upcoming May, 2022, AFCC 59th Annual conference in Chicago.

So, obviously AFCC knows about the DV Coalitions — so why aren’t the DV Coalitions talking about AFCC?  This OnlineParentingPrograms.com had little mention of domestic violence (odd, considering the population its marketing to).  I had to hunt for it on the colorful, curriculum-promoting website, but eventually found a list of the coalitions a few clicks down, under “referrals”

**This strange lists (omits all territories and Puerto Rico, Guam) instead of giving the statewide coalition for California, and for Wisconsin (the ones I noticed) substitutes more local ones for both states — strange…)… California is a huge state and their statewide CADV is well-known; the omission probably no accident.  Wisconsin is home (at least entity address) to AFCC; but I can still think of no reason why such a faulty though seemingly complete list would be up there.

Joan Meier is just covering up (big-time, and for a long-time) for the entity AFCC which lies behind most of the family court issues and, for those who look, most of the USA domestic violence policy-making lead nonprofits for the last twenty years, original or spin-off varieties.  She knows she’s doing this and doesn’t seem to have a conscience about it.

Beyond that IF “parental alienation” were the real problem, why not deal with (that is, “expose”) the prime tax-exempt organization promoting it decade after decade, and rather than ordering more trainings and resources for them, pull the plug on existing financial incentives (the elephant in the room) to switch custody to abusive, particularly (emphasis here has been throughout) fathers?

No answer on that yet, and none expected.  Professor Meier won’t deal with the question because the answer would dismantle much of her theories, including amicus briefs and leadership claims…  She’s leading, all right — but in what direction and at what cost?

I don’t think there’s much question at this point Meier is playing for the wrong team and not about to admit this voluntarily any time in the next decade, as hasn’t yet in the past two.  However, if her cause and interests are to be taken at face value, some explanation for how she’s come to this ONE solution and no other, when others might very well be possible and work better.  She may have begun well and been compromised early on, or simply not have cared so much as about carving out anew “family law appeals” precedent and niche, on behalf of herself and a few colleagues (as in, from the Leadership Council/Joy Silberg), for more credit to her university base (George Washington University), and of course her alma maters Harvard and Chicago.[different color only because para. added later. //LGH 3-26-2022.

By contrast, Tina Swithin appears to have drunk the AFCC Kool-Aid early on and is barely trying to hide it, with all the “High-Conflict Divorce Coaching” in association with, you guessed it, both NFVLC at GWU, and with the NSPC so promoted (I speak of Twitter mostly, plus on their associated websites).

Beyond that, Swithin website has been promoting books by “Mr. AFCC High-Conflict Himself” (Bill Eddy). “High-Conflict” the term is literally being rammed down website visitors’ throats every which way.

How this relates to her having success at her case, I wouldn’t know, but I doubt there’s no such relationship.  Looking at the websites’ color, nature, themes, and tactics (not to mention business plan), it’s possible the narcissist in THAT situation was Ms. Swithin — unless she’s just been compromised and now has to front for AFCC big-time.  Either way, look at the prices being charged, and the disclaimers on certifications for becoming a (what else?) High Conflict Divorce Coachyou can sit through the classes (and pay for them), but permission to be listed on her site is “at-will” and not guaranteed.

Not only that, but Ms. Swithin’s corporate/LLC, for-profit-not-for profit filing tactics are remarkably similar to AFCC tactics: essentially “bait-and switch” entity names and types, but keep the logos.

I detail some of this below.  ALL of it wouldn’t fit on one post — which is part of the tactic.  To think that causes and jargon being promoted by fewer people than it seems (if traced back to the origins, or close to it), are coming at readers and consumers of social media “from every which way.”

From years of tracking nonprofits of both political sides, it seems to me that the Democrats, who may talk a better talk as to causes, don’t actually walk it.  There’s an expertise in proliferations of bright-colored, high-contrast background websites seeming to be more actual entities than they are.  There’s a typical (as to nonprofits) pairing of 501©3/501©4 related entities visible at the tax level, but often not at the website level.  Money of course is traded back and forth between them.  For an extreme example of this AND the use of fiscal agent status to try and outpace any conservative causes, got explore the Tides Centers, Networks, Entities (I believe one of which is now called “Nexus.”).

As a woman well aware of some of the more conservative takes on “women’s roles” and well aware of how religions also tend to treat us (go explore Focus on the Family’s networks), at least in that sphere you know what you’re dealing with.  On the other side politically, you just don’t.  Just my “two bits” of observation.  Take it or leave it, doesn’t change what I’m saying here, or invalidate it.

Even within the “National Safe Parents Coalition” one logo represented is a blend of two others, one of which is, you guessed it Swithin. That’s yet another post in my (getting longer by the day) pipeline…

I will show some of this below, in the usually manner.  Swithin’s LLC (which just changed its name from “Tina Swithin, LLC” in June 2021 only) happens to be registered in California. So being familiar with my former state’s Business Entities Search (and Registry of Charitable Trusts under the Attorney General’s Office), went looking (again) and posted what I found.  Among the findings in one of the LLC versions, a woman from Trenton, NJ ALSO marketing High-Conflict (because your ex has a Cluster B narcissistic personality disorder, “obviously”) Divorce Coaching similar to Swithin, only for a lot less.

Tina Swithin at website “One Mom’s Battle” (OneMomsBattle.com, not “.org”) soliciting funds for “National Family Violence Law Center” with a graphic showing the exact donation url for the same.

Tina Swithin’s “One Mom’s Battle.com” website proclaiming it’s glad to be a member of National Safe Parents Coalition (NSPC), (on which I have another blog pending, out of necessity, deeply related to this one…(!))  Because that banner is not a specific url to that page (most pages don’t seem to have separate urls), I’ll show — for this one — an image. I realize it’ll not be a sharp image but will at least show what part of the page I was referring to:  It reads (below the phrase in yellow):

“We are a national coalition of more than 100,000 survivor parents and concerned citizens in the United States advocating for evidence-based policies which put child safety and risks at the forefront of child custody decisions.” (Take Action / Join the Coalition).

The “Take Action” website (typical for this crowd) in large letters (with no link to the underlying legislation, or saying WHY) tells readers to tell their legislators what to vote for. (click to see, but I’m also going to post: it’s part of the context! Notice (near bottom of image) a reference to Angelina Jolie’s testimony for this VAWA reauthorization (with “Kayden’s Law” safe child provisions).  Jolie’s testimony was (I believe) only February 9, 2022.

From what I can tell (via Archives.org/Internet “Wayback Machine” the NationalSafeParents.org website only really became active about Feb. 4, 2022…with several visitors (not web crawlers, but volunteer archivists saving pages, say the details spending nearly 19 hours solid on the site…)

High-Conflict Divorce Coaching (I.e., Tina Swithin at HCDivorceCoach.com).

Compare with “Center for Divorce Education (Don’ Gordon’s) “Divorce-Education.com/ high-conflict-solutions” (entity address in Oregon but the legal domicile is OHIO, and I documented extensively in (at least, probably not only) Cuyahoga County, Ohio (which contains the city of Cleveland), an AFCC Presiding or Administrative Judge ruled back in about 1994 to mandate parental education ONLY to the few providers, for which the only one for Spanish Speakers or On-Line.  Don Archer Gordon, Ph.D.  This website is selling court-mandated parenting classes (including “high-conflict classes”).  The home page, featuring bright, high-contrast colors and very big letters, now has a series of “Reviews” by various professionals: only two I do not already recognize as AFCC (ringleaders, in various places).  [Search for my post title which includes the words “Don’t Shoot the Messenger”!].  For what it’s worth, (see ‘Developer” link), Don Archer Gordon got an award from the Children’s Rights Council:

“These programs have received the Positive Parenting Award and Active Parenting Award presented by the Children’s Rights Council” (no link, of course).”

California Business Entity Search showing that, at least a domestic NONprofit, “One Mom’s Battle (California Entity #C3683559) only existed from 2014 through 2017, when it elected to dissolve.**

(**It’s got a few steps but is still easy!: To repeat my search, use that link, then on left sidebar menu, click “Business Entities Search.” page or scroll down to see the search fields (they have a lot of text on the top, too!), for Type Search, click on “Corporation” not LLC/LLP, if you’re going to type in the name, or Entity# to use the number I just provided here, click through to read the cover page (at the California Secretary of State) and a few pdf filings you can click on and read)…  Interesting, this nonprofit was in California, and the non-entity (NFVLC; it’s a special fund within a major private tax-exempt university) is in Washington, D.C., about 3,000 miles away (West Coast, East Coast USA/48 contiguous states)…

(in May, 2014, Tina Formed “Tina Swithin, LLC” as an LLC.  However, only on June 24, 2021, did she change its name to “One Mom’s Battle, LLC“)

(in JUNE, 2014, Tina (via LegalZoom) filed One Mom’s Battle, Inc. (as a nonprofit, entity# shown above), which existed only until 2017, at which time (per the other source, California Registry of Charitable Trusts) it voluntarily dissolved, ‘Having no assets.”

In May, 2016, San Luis Obispo (County, in California/SLOchamber.org) Chamber of Commerce holds a ribbon-cutting ceremony (seriously?…) for “Tina Swithin, LLC.”  If the link is clicked on, confusingly (until you do the lookups — at least three or four of them…) to a website whose fine print at the bottom reads “One Mom’s Battle, LLC.”

In 2017, the Corporation, One MOm’s Battle, Inc., a “nonprofit” self-dissolved, having NEVER completed (that we can see) a proper registration with the California Office of Attorney General — or obtained (that we can see, and I also looked at the IRS website) an EIN# as a nonprofit…

In 2021, as I said above, Tina Swithin, LLC (at the time business was “Consulting Services”) filed for a name-change, and with this name change listed its business as “Consultant/Author” and said it was a “member-managed” LLC.

Please click and read (none are that long) EVERY pdf involved in the California Secretary of State business filings here.  I normally do in studying any entity.  Here, the incorporation shows OMB used LegalZoom (Cheryl Moseley is a name I recognize), but the 2016 filing shows two people (only):  Tina Swithin and “Lorrie Gerstnicker Eubanks” — a unique name if I ever read one — in Trenton, NJ.  Here’s Lorrie’s (listed only as Lorrie Eubanks) LinkedIn on its label, but the url “LoriGerstnicker.”  Expand the available fields to understand at least her connection to Swithin, including “LLG” creations:

Mother | Advocate | Consultant | Coach | Artist | Sewist | Volunteer | Fighter | Creator | Do-er | Achiever. (Metro Public Adjustment, Inc.)

Talks about #divorce, #justice, #advocacy, #familycourt, and #publicadjusting | Trenton, New Jersey, United States

(LinkedIn “About” section, expanded): ~ Hands-on leader, relationship builder and resilient problem solver, results focused and data driven decision maker. ~ Strategic and operational expertise to articulate a vision, translate into strategy and work cross-functionally to deliver and execute on plan.

An advocate championing for the rights of children nationwide. Consultant, friend, guide support to victims of abusive narcissists. Strategic and tactical critical thinker.. Active listener, empathetic feeler sharing skills with the determined and capable. Sharing plans to implement goals based on strengths and ability.

Activity: (hashtags): #KyrasLaw #FamilyCourtReform #FreeTheKids#ChildrenHaveTheRightToLiveFreeOfAbuse #childadvocacy

Experience (Community College, NJ, Trained as an Executive Secretary/Assistant ca. 1997), not including the most recent (begun Oct. 2021 only): Independent Coach

  • LLG.Tactical.Coaching provides consulting services for those who are embroiled in what the courts label a “high conflict divorce/custody case”. Lorrie is well versed in providing support and strategies that can have a positive impact on your case and your general well being. We can help you learn how to communicate in a way that the courts will understand. We can provide the tools you need to successfully combat false allegations of “alienation”, “PAS”, “Parental Alienation”, Interference, and any other term they decide to use to describe the debunked terminology known as Parental Alienation. If your kids are refusing to visit with the unhealthy parent, you cannot afford not to schedule a session.

Volunteering: (OneMomsBattle.com, 2014-2017 ()2 years 10 months) Secretary of the Board)

LLG.Tactical Coaching is (it seems) a WordPress website.  it is clear from this website that this individual has decided that “Parental Alienation” claims = DV cases with a “Cluster B Personality Disorder” and is featuring (see “Services” for the prices) coaching on how to communicate with the courts about this personality disorder.  The usual disclaimer (not an attorney or therapist), and a revealing paragraph few paragraphs (on the home page) within the colorful website (Lorrie’s LinkedIn which I’m quoting above and below) shows some artistic talent and interests…and how she possibly got from point A (trouble in family courts after DV, or volunteering at a DV organization (probably not an “agency” which’d be part of government) to Point B (a one-piece solution:  It’s due to a personality disorder in (the abuser):  solution:  enlighten every one, and by the way single sessions $125..

  • volunteers at her local DV agency as an advocate she has studied family court, domestic violence, child abuse, false allegations of alienation and the dangers of reunifying with abusers thoroughly and is a well-respected member of a large group of well known, outspoken advocates [1] whose aim is to protect children and the parents who are being further abused by the Family Court System.

The Here and Now

As for the present chapter, Lorrie founded LLG Tactical Coaching after a discussion with her longtime friend and fellow advocate who gave her the push to begin consulting healthy parents who were facing false allegations of alienation. She struggled with the idea of charging for a service that she had been providing at no charge for some time.  However, the number of people who need help were more than the hours available while working a full-time job.  In order to provide help full time, and be able to assist more victims, Lorrie decided on a very small rate (in comparison to other divorce coaches and experts).

LLG Tactical Coaching also offers payment plans, scholarships, and pro-bono services to those who are in dire financial need and cannot afford a service as such. Lorrie authored“Contested Custody with a Cluster B” an e-book, as well as creating the LLG Litigation Ledger, an all in one binder insert for documenting evidence, the first of it’s kind. In fact, Lorrie has created an entireTactical Toolboxfilled with all your family court needs.

[1] “[A] large group of well known, outspoken advocates” who apparently shall remain un-named…

She may also have filed an LLC  or a dba: I don’t know…. I’ll upload one image:

~ ~ ~ ~Get the general picture here?

It’s hard to spit anywhere within range of family court operations, diversions, court-ordered parenting classes, and their owners, or divorce coaches for dealing with “high-conflict personalities” and in general, to get far from that term, these days (at least USA).  There’s even a whole court in Middlesex,Connecticut labeled “High-Conflict” to (subject matter jurisdiction) grab high-conflict cases and run them through, I gather an expedited settlement or pre-trial process.

Gee, guess WHICH key entity featured and propagated this language (and “parental alienation” and “domestic violence differentiation” and “false allegations” (of DV or child abuse)?  C’mon, guess!

Perhaps one whose motto is “Improving the lives of children and families through resolution of family conflict” and whose business name includes the word “Conciliation.”

Search results for “high conflict divorce” run the gamut, but please notice this one from WilliamJamesCollege (cf. Robin Deutsch, Ph.D.) I see is now offering classes to help people who want to become “high-conflict coaches.”  Unbelievable: https://www.williamjames.edu/community/department-of-community-engagement/children-families-law/beyond-conflict-becoming-a-coparenting-team.cfm

[This inset for my comments] (William James College, renamed from “Massachusetts School of Professional Psychology around 2012, is the perfect East-Coast USA compliment to Maryland’s (at University of Baltimore School of Law) “Sayra & Neil Meyerhoff Center on Children, Families and the Courts” run by Barbara Babb (AFCC, FamilyCourt Review Editor in Chief recently — possibly still) and Gloria Danziger, for about twenty years now.  William James is of course sometimes called the “father of American Psychology”), etc.  between these two centers (one at an independent school of psychology, the other at a much larger school of law within the state University system) and AFCC chapters nearby (NJ, CT, Mass, MD probably — check for yourself) and a literal “High-Conflict Court” in Middletown, Connecticut — what’s NOT “high-conflict” and profitable to handle, unless you’ve somehow merited the label, or have been persuaded (tricked) into believing that your ex’s personality problem is a bigger problem than the court systems themselves…(Above paragraph;  One professional (Deutsch) focuses on Psychology, the other (Babb) on Law (“Therapeutic Jurisprudence”): Kind of like AFCC itself….and key to its philosophy — the urgency of blending Behavioral Science and the Law…In effect, continual injections of the language of behavioral science (mental health, social science, psychology, psychoanalysis, group-dynamics, psychoeducational classes, etc.) into existing institutions which bear the reputation and demeanor of representing courts of LAW — not ‘Behavioral Science and Law.”

To fully flesh out this routine, it’s necessary to set up all kinds of specialized “(Problem-solving”) diversionary courts, starting probably with drug and mental health courts.  You can research the history in USA.  It has a history and key lobbyists for more and more of this, directly coordinated with the massive build-up of the U.S. Department of HEW (health, education and welfare) (1980f, Health and Human Services), with Dept. of Educ splitting off in 1980.  But functionally, the intent seems to blend operations at the local level anyway (i.e., public schools become health-support facilities and outreach, conflict-resolution classes and domestic violence prevention, (abstinence), and of course fatherhood being targeted towards younger and younger ages.

National Family Violence Law Center (at George Washington University) donation solicitation site with its first testimony from Tina Swithin (Scroll down to see).  I’m setting a context for GWU School of Law which may help explain (?) why some of its professors are so intent to carve their own niche in a wall of fame for being leaders in a profession which seems a bit down-played within the school, more internationally focused, it seems..

From GWU-Schools-Colleges (School of Law blurb):

GW Law has been at the forefront of American legal education since its establishment as the first law school in the nation’s capital. Here, students receive rare insight into how the law is actually created and debated. Our professors are eminent scholars who have filed briefs—often with the help of students—on behalf of members of Congress. …[Discussing international connections] ..Our students develop practical skills through pro bono legal clinics that have provided hundreds of thousands of hours of real-life legal assistance to the D.C. community for more than 40 years. As GW Law celebrates its 150th anniversary and continues its academic mission to engage the leading legal and policy questions of our time, it’s no surprise that GW Law is often ahead of the curve.

Sound’s like it’s got a reputation to hold as being “thought-leader” to the nation.  It’s impressive!

GW Law At a Glance” lists its size in students, no less than NINE journals published (none in family law), SIX Summer & Study Abroad exchange programs, many LLM degrees offered besides the JDs, and at the very bottom, eleven “Research Centers & Initiatives” — where, right now, the “National Family Violence Law Center” is not yet listed. (This link is about three clicks away from the GW Law one above.  Just keep clicking on “About” to see):

Student Body [First subsection gives brief history and description of GW Law School]

The law school has a total enrollment of about 1700. Approximately 1,400 students are in the full-time division for the JD degree and 125 are enrolled in the part-time division. 175 students, many from abroad, are enrolled in graduate law degree programs.


The George Washington University Law School boasts more than 32,000 living alumni, of whom some 150 are judges serving on local, state, and federal benches, including 10 justices on State Supreme Courts. The Law School counts among prominent alumni the late John Foster Dulles, the late J. William Fulbright,** and the late U.S. Senator Daniel K. Inouye (JD ’52),  former Treasury Secretary John W. Snow (JD ’67), U.S. Senator Harry Reid, (JD ’64), three former Internal Revenue Service Commissioners, and many prominent leaders in business, industry, and government.

**Wiki link for JW Fullbright (1905-1995) added; Please read, also about his signing “the Southern Manifesto,” being an Anglophile and supporting the involvement of US in World War I. He’s familiar to me because, having been a Rhodes Scholar (i.e., Oxford) he then created the Fullbright Scholarship program (in 1946), an American version of the same theme.  Another famous Rhodes Scholar — also from Arkansas — was former U.S. President, Wm. J. Clinton…. (See “early life, family, and education,” browse, including the subsection “chicken wars”…)

(Degrees offered:  JD Full Time & Part-Time, no less than TEN specialized “LLMs” (not one references family law or domestic relations, or criminal law) and a General LLM, and a (specialized) SJD (Doctor in Juridical Science), apparently especially elite.

~ ~ ~

Details from its charitable registration at the California Registry of Charitable Trusts, which I’d looked up earlier may still load: FVSAI (EIN# 752401334, Geffner, San Diego) Char Details No Founding Dox shown, highest year ca 2001-02 (and RRFs, IRS forms not uploaded for those years)
Latest tax return at the IRS is for its Fiscal Year 2019 YE June, (besides only three officers listed on Part VIIA, one is CEO, another Treasurer, and Geffner President.  …
Did I mention, the Secretary is his daughter, and he is in control of the books. Under Part VI Line 19 (“disclosure”) the printed form asks how the organization makes certain governing documents and “financial statements” available to the public.  This is answered on “Schedule O” which says, simply “No documents available to the public,” i.e., not coughing up any financial statements (a basic requirement for showing any nonprofit’s full profile).  However, it notes that the Form 990 differs from the Financial Statements in not disclosing a $125,500 PPP (COVID Payroll Protection) loan from the government.  …. The header info, for “website” is filled in “N/A” and for Legal Domicile, lists “California” which it’s not — it’s Texas.  The mission description (Page 1, Part 1, Line 1, Summary, pretty basic stuff) contains a basic sentence error (redundant “on the issues of …. issues” assumes there is a need for such an “international” center of such a small scope and with a board of just 3 people, and, generally speaking vague:



Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

March 1, 2022 at 5:02 pm

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011)

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: