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

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

Archive for the ‘1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011)’ Category

Read (with the goal of understanding!) Our Own Government’s Independent Agency Annual Financial Reports (at least parts with texts and colorful graphs) and “learn stuff.” Like NSF’s Brain Initiative, Its Big Ten Ideas, and Domestic|Foreign, Public|Private Revenue Sources. I just did…(Published Oct. 16, 2019)

leave a comment »

This post is:

The National Science Foundation (“NSF,” 1950ff, under President Truman) history ties in closely to Vannevar Bush. So does the history of Abt Associates (1965ff) as it intersects with Raytheon.  In many ways the history of the NSF illuminates the history of the United States in the 20th Century.  You can’t understand much of where we are now, and why, without some acquaintance with it.

NIH.BRAIN.Gov (Google the term; many web domains will come up describing it, and President Obama’s 2013 launch of parts of it!).

The NSF website has a nice version, but this enthusiastic short summary is from Research! America, a nonprofit I also researched because of its involvement with (and dependency on) the buildup of the HHS and NIH especially as promoted Mary Lasker, and because of other certain Brain Institutes (as I recall) funded by, well, rich people….

Any history of the NSF will mention how it arose after World War II and in the early years, USA was caught off guard by Russia in the “Space Race.”  “What’s it to me?” (Keep reading…)

I have a short post on Abt Associates who, possibly because of its data-crunching ability, like many companies formerly involved in U.S. government military contract, found purposes in both consumer electronics AND continued dealings with the might of the U.S. government built up for and during wartime as turned to “health, education, and welfare” purposes (1953-1980) thereafter, at least that “health” part called “Health and Human Services” — the largest grant-making department.  Other groups  (like MDRC or the Urban Institute) would run the social science R&D on poor people and certain types of consulting agencies would then analyze and write up the projects — like Mathematica Policy Research, MEF Associates, and Abt Associates.

Some companies, also specializing heavily in federal contracts and consulting, seem to have managed to both get grants to run the projects AND be on the evaluation teams (I’m thinking of ICF International which got so wealthy doing this it continued acquiring other companies and now is a multinational for-profit (i.e., global) corporation.  Its advice was sought during the 2000 Greenbook Initiative on Overlap of Child Maltreatment and Domestic Violence, with participation from (then-called) Family Violence Prevention Fund, which has also since gotten fairly fat on contracts and grants — and become a real estate investor in the San Francisco Presidio, too. (Searchable on this blot).

My recent, short, Abt Associates post:

Abt Associates, Inc. (1965ff, first in Cambridge, Mass.), Social Research + Evaluation Validating the Social Science R&D ℅ (per Devex.com) that $2B Global Development Industry [Started June 25, 2019, updates Sept. 29, Publ. Oct 10].. (Case-sensitive short-link ends. “-abD” only 3,000 words)[Devex.com is a media platform for this industry; Abt Associates also has (or at one point had) advisory board member on its board].

While NSF as a backer of some reports came up periodically in my blogging, it only hit home recently (when I took a closer look at its Annual Financial Report for Year Ending 2018) just how much its purposes, while primarily scientific and technology-driven (and preserving a national workforce capable of working in the fields) still overlap, and historically overlapped with “Social and Behavioral Sciences” — and that’s my turf when it comes to activism about the destruction-dealing family court systems whose “reason for being” centers in and is justified (still) under social science, public welfare, and psychological (i.e., mental health) theories about what’s good for people, what stops crime, what deters crime, what promotes prosperity (reduces poverty) and — of course — what’s best for little children, and all children.  Low-income and middle-class kids in public school systems or headed towards them, primarily, that is.

When I say “my turf” that doesn’t mean I’m in one of those professions.

It means that I’ve seen what that theory driving these systems does to the other professions when people (particularly women) opt to (try to) stay alive and functional by separating from an abusive parent (particularly men who have threatened to kill, destroy, kidnap or drive them into poverty, and some still succeed).  Count me as a skeptic, especially after years of reading the studies and comparing their contents to their originator’s (institutions’) tax returns, which often lack just as much connectivity to reality.

Again, this post was started on my Front Page, has been referenced for a few days on Twitter, and for now is called:

This comes in two sections I, embarrassingly, typed right into my own blog Front Page (“FamilyCourtMatters.org”), and a third one you’re about to see (on the NAS) before them. Plus tags.

This post holds a lot but not pretensions to completeness; it’s a general alert, reminder to maintain awareness of what areas public/private partnerships are flowing towards (nationally and internationally) and to keep following up by looking ALSO for the respective (public AND private) financials.  I’ve also been Tweeting about it recently.  Here’s a short-link to the NSF AFR I’m referring to in the post title, where the key phrase “International Brain Initiative” caught my attention.

Not mentioned in the post title, I also (for now) have a significant section on the NAS (National Academy of Sciences.  Note: that’s ONE “academy” for Sciences (plural).  It has more than one related entity, but from the start was intended as a singular, as was THE National Science Foundation).

Read the rest of this entry »

Abt Associates, Inc. (1965ff, at first in Cambridge, Mass.), Social Research + Evaluation Validating the Social Science R&D ℅ (per Devex.com) that $2B Global Development Industry [Started June 25, 2019, updates Sept. 29, Publ. Oct 10].

leave a comment »

Abt Associates, Inc. (1965ff, first in Cambridge, Mass.), Social Research + Evaluation Validating the Social Science R&D ℅ (per Devex.com) that $2B Global Development Industry [Started June 25, 2019, updates Sept. 29, Publ. Oct 10].. (Case-sensitive short-link ends.  “-abD” only 3,000 words)

[Devex.com is a media platform for this industry; Abt Associates also has (or at one point had) advisory board member on its board].

Devex.Com self-definition of their platform referencing the market niche for the $200B industry  (viewed 6-24-2019)

Offices as you can see in Washington, D.C., Barcelona, Spain and in Manila, the Philippines.

In very fine print from the very bottom of (most?) pages.

Devex is the media platform for the global development community.

A social enterprise, we connect and inform 1 million development, health, humanitarian, and sustainability professionals through news, business intelligence, and funding & career opportunities so you can do more good for more people. We invite you to join us.

[[Its “Terms of Use” statement as of today is labeled version Feb. 2, 2012, and gives more understanding of the purposes, esp. under 4) DISCLAIMERS [first five paragraphs], and at the bottom UNDER “10) MISCELLANEOUS, h) “CISG Not Apply. The UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods does not apply.]]

Abt Associates is probably not the largest of its kind, but its niche and types of work it does is typical of those who derive federal, private, and state-sponsored business operations from evaluating social science R&D run upon the poor of, well, to start with, the United States, and eventually (or tested there first) applied internationally too: see the words “international” or “global” and the word “development” in goods & services descriptions.  By virtue of using this word, implied contribution of at least SOMEONE’s home government is implied.

In the UK:  “DID”  the USA:  USAID, etc.  By definition it is likely to be public/private in nature, even when individual projects may be primarily private:  Their sources of revenues often comes from pre-existing government funding understood to be ongoing through the power of taxation.

2011 Announcement (also from Devex?) of appointment of a well-known person already on Devex Board of Advisors (or part of it) to director at Abt Associates. See nearby pdf for full list as of March 2019 (from Massachusetts Secretary of State data on corporate and LLC filings)

Abt Associates Inc 2019(June21) Annual Rpt, showing Shares + MD address, states purpose is ‘Social Research’  <~~

In multi-page (2 or 3 pp) pdf format. (the report I viewed 6/21/2019 was for (regarding) the fiscal year ending 3/31/2019). This is the master cover page for Abt Associates, not its “Filing Details” record. Unlike some states, Massachusetts delivers a lot of information, such as prior names (and since when) up front on that master page.  For older companies, an ID# which matches EIN# may even be showing (helpful where that company is operating nonprofit).

I had an enjoyable day yesterday (June 24) researching (in my own way) some background on this company which keeps coming up because, like Mathematica, the Urban Institute, MDRC, and I’ve even seen (the two-partner) “MEF Associates, Inc.”, it continues to show up, usually with some partner, evaluating something taxpayers funded because some branch of federal, or other governments, did.

In other words, I’d be researching some Marriage/Fatherhood or related HHS grantee, sometimes on the HHS website over time and run across evaluations done by Abt Associates, often with a partner from the above or similar list, producing an uploaded report.

This post shares some of what I found just starting about both its founder, the company he worked for right before founding Abt Associates (Raytheon), its filings, some of its directors (some names being unique are easily searchable, leading to awareness of just how high up in the international development fields they have been), and search for a more concrete definition than the AbtAssociates.com current website — obviously –wishes to give, even in fine print at the very bottom of its own website below all the projects listed.
Read the rest of this entry »

1. ‘Really Want Systems Change?’, |2. ‘LGH. There’s STILL No Excuse. But…,’ |3. ‘To Support and Visually Upgrade,’ and, |4. ‘Technical Training and Assistance Excuse’ [Started Oct. 3, Publ. Oct. 4, 2019].

leave a comment »

This post is:

1. ‘Really Want Systems Change?’, |2. ‘LGH. There’s STILL No Excuse. But…,’ |3. ‘To Support and Visually Upgrade,’ and, |4. ‘Technical Training and Assistance Excuse’ [Started Oct. 3, Publ. Oct. 4, 2019]. (shortlink ends “-bcv”, contains short-versions of sidebar widgets named in title).  This post is complete now, Oct. 3, at under 5,000 words.  

With additional (top and footnoted) information on Wellesley Centers for Women and the Battered Mothers’ Testimony Project (BMTP’s 2002 “Speak Out” report), as published Oct. 4, about 9,500 words.  ALSO: I’ve added a sidebar widget linking here under “More Resources” section also updated to reflect its added narrative & drill-down contents.//LGH Oct. 11, 2019.

Those name four sidebar text widgets….

This post delivers a bit more than promised, which I’ll leave you to deal with until or unless I decide to split it. Right now, I feel like “speaking out” about a number of things. The Wellesley part was an afterthought to the widget off-ramps which, due to timing probably, took on a life of its own today, Friday, October 4, after I thought the post was fine “as-is” October 3 evening.//LGH.

(“SPEAK OUT” | Cover page w/ year, title and “℅” who produced it) Image and link to full ‘BMTP at WC4W’ report’s 2002 pdf shown again below on “Footnote” to this Oct., 2019 LGH|FCM post (shortlink ending “=bcv”).

I completed this post fully Oct. 3 evening, without the verbal “outburst” I just wrote.  I had intentionally postponed publishing one day til Oct. 5, then saw quickly on social media how timely the message on its footnote (itself a kind of indignant commentary on feminist “Gender Bias / Human Rights — vs. System Operations” response to domestic violence). I would consider myself feminist, except for the association with such behavior.

Below, I’d mentioned, off the top of my head (having already looked into the (websites, stated missions, financials where shown and 990s where they didn’t show but could be found anyhow) two obviously feminist-oriented US-based 501©s (tax-exempt, “nonprofit” organizations (Legal Momentum and Institute for Women’s Policy; | See Footnote) and another one which work seems central, is still often cited, but which was produced not out of a nonprofit, but out of an (elite: Ivy League I believe) New England college’s “Centers for Women” — the (2002) Battered Mothers’ Testimony Project (read the cover, above right).

This document’s publication date, project committee members (with a whole “1” woman actual survivor — the others are all JDs and a PhD (with which LundyBancroft sneaks in there, non-PhD’d as a co-author), “Contributing Authors” (actual survivor, not included; look closely), and on the bottom of the same page, the composition of its “Advisory Committee” are all helpful in understanding domestic violence advocacy today and why it seems so ineffective as applied to the family courts, IF you have some grasp of the funding and federalization of the movement, and when this began.  (Answer:  by the 1980s….)(~>Link to a pdf I made last July). BMTP FinalReport (I have been looking closely at this in its timeframe (post-PRWORA) and at involved parties who did NOT examine who or what are the Family Courts (AFCC or etc) | 2019July5

This mini-section added  Oct. 11, 2019; I could footnote but it fits in here, so didn’t

(Next light-yellow-background section with a few quotes from BMTP (above) and from there, a simultaneous (same-year) published book by two of the cited authors: Bancroft & Silverman.

Suggested Citation Format” copied & pasted from the BMTP Final Report above:

Cuthbert, C., Slote, K., Driggers, M.G., Mesh, C.J., Bancroft, L. & Silverman, J. (2002). Battered mothers speak out: A human rights report on domestic violence and child custody in the Massachusetts family courts. Wellesley, MA: Wellesley Centers for Women

Looking at this again, it occurred to me the timing coincides with two authors’ publication of a book on the topic.  “So glad” to hear that women’s trauma helped sell men’s books on our trauma.  Lundy Bancroft, along with disbarred attorney Barry Goldstein (now, see “StopAbuseCampaign” and “The Quincy Solution” as well as constant peddling of a 2010 book edited by himself and Mo Hannah (published out of NJ: CIvic Research Institute) with I see a second edition now out and about, have presented and supported the BMCC for years.  Lundy Bancroft also manages, as I’ve posted years ago (2013 and maybe also since) to continue presenting himself as a consultant at conferences sponsored with HHS fatherhood grants and run by leaders in the fathers’ rights field; Barry Goldstein like some of his (colleagues? cohorts?) continues soliciting stories and “trawling for trauma” (traumatized mothers) and their custody cases. He is married to a medical doctor; perhaps it helps keep him out of the house now that he can no longer practice law; I DNK..  It’s weird, though.

Bancroft & Sliverman’s “The Batterer As Parent” (2002, Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage) came out the same year, as any search of it shows frequent references to it from the domestic violence movement organizations, child welfare, and of course on LundyBancroft.com…  Look at the footnotes, publications and references to enough of these and find them (as I did, before I understood “AFCC”) constantly debating what are now known as AFCC members — Janet Johnston (San Jose, CA), Peter Jaffe (Toronto, Ontario, Canada), and others — without mentioning the “AFCC factor” — EVER…  Even when some of this has been published in journals run by NCJFCJ  and/or the AFCC.

Just one example here. (<~~Handout posted at PACWRC.pitt.edu, but features Winter 2002 ‘Synergy’ Newsletter (searchable on this blog), published by NCJFCJ which is now known to have mutual membership (i.e., judges) with AFCC and (since then) collaborated with them. “PA — Pennsylvania; “CWRC” – Child Welfare Resource Center).  Look at footnotes 13-19 especially (there are only 22 in total.  Acquire and maintain an awareness of who runs which publications.

In this example, for example, a cite from an AFCC journal (now called the “Family Court Review”) arguing the psychological points is sandwiched between footnotes involving “Jaffe” (known AFCC), with “Jaffe & Geffner” where “Geffner” represents the trauma-based center FVSAI (Inc. 1999; dba “IVAT”) associated now, and was by 2002, I believe also, with San Diego-based (what’s now) “Alliant International University” with a campus in San Diego.

15. Jaffe, P., & Geffner, R. (1998). Child custody disputes and domestic violence: Critical issues for mental health, social service, and legal professionals. In G. Holden, R. Geffner, & E. Jouriles (Eds.), Children exposed to marital violence: Theory, research, and applied issues (pp. 371-408). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; Dutton, M.A. (1992). Empowering and healing the battered woman. New York: Springer.

16. See for example Johnston, J., & Campbell, L. (1993b). Parent-child relationships in domestic violence families disputing custody. Family and Conciliation Courts Review, 31(3), 282-298. (Johnston & Campbell seem to overlook the implications of many of their own observations – see Bancroft & Silverman, op. cit., for an extended discussion.)

17. Hurley & Jaffe, op. cit. …

20. See review of studies in Heller, S., Larrieu, J., D’Imperio, R., & Boris, N. (1998). Research on resilience to child maltreatment: Empirical considerations. Child Abuse and Neglect, 23(4) 321-338

The editor in chief (now) of the journal in FN 20 is Robert Geffner. I have called attention to this connection on Twitter and been talking about IVAT on this blog for years.

Why all this matters, at all is its underlying contexts:  In HOW MANY WAYS and for HOW MANY YEARS is it possible to conduct formal, academically-published debates (whether sponsored by individual nonprofits, including AFCC!, or social-science oriented publishers (Sage, Springer, etc.) based in the UK (at least ownership) — without openly identifying which prominent authors’ affiliations include — along with those listed — AFCC membership?

CONTEXT:  California Protective Parents Association (Connie Valentine, now also Catherine (sp?) Campbell) in Northern California (the state capital, Sacramento, is not far from the SF Bay Area; about an hour’s drive or so), and Battered Mothers’ Custody Conferences (held typically on US East Coast) with teamwork and tag-team traffic-directions by PR consultant-originated “Center for Judicial Excellence” (Kathleen Russell) starting just a few years after this in SF Bay Area, ….

…organized ideologically parallel (in many ways**) to two small but persistently vocal nonprofits, one representing the field of law, the other of psychology also prone to presenting and receiving ongoing support and endorsements from:  CPPA, CJE (both 501©3s), and BMCC (conferences: Mo Hannah, Barry Goldstein, NOT a registered 501©3 over its decade-plus existence starting in 2003) — I’m referring to “DVLEAP” (historically associated with Professor Joan Meier, J.D. (from University of Chicago!, now also LeAnn DeReus, I think) and run out of George Washington University — and the strange, “modestly title” “The Leadership Council for Child Abuse and Interpersonal Violence” (<~website simply “leadershipcouncil.org”) historically associated when it comes to getting quoted in MSM media after custody-related “roadkill” with Joyanna Silberg, Ph.D.; shows a Pennsylvania address, is a Michigan legal domicile entity so small it files Forms 990-N (revenues $50K and under) year after year, per the IRS), and Dr. Silberg typically refers to her Maryland base of operations (“Shepard-Pratt Health Systems” or similar).

**Among the many ways, CJE from the start was promoting films by Garland Waller, who is also noted on the BMTP 2002 “Final Report” here.  This can be seen on CJE tax returns, available on the California Registry of Charitable Trusts (locate ℅ RCT.DOJ.CA.Gov) database. The commonality MIGHT be the progressive, human rights, and generally, feminist orientation.

CJE as a persistent political and social climber organization (and individual leading it, Ms. Russell) has recently teamed up, somehow, with a British MP (Louise Haigh, Twitter @LouHaigh (stands out in most crowds with her bright red hair), naming her “Champion of Children” and inviting — although she couldn’t attend — to show up at a SoCal “Protective Parents at the Beach” (or similar) conference this past summer/fall, 2019).  CJE’s tailgating of the already-obtained public visibility in media with Joan Meier is obvious to anyone following such media.  I’m wondering what’s the “Washington Post” connection to this crowd; it seems long-term.  On Twitter at least, I’ve questioned and tagged MP Haigh a few times on this, not sure how much she does or does not know about the involved organizations (or AFCC’s role over at CAFCASS and CAFCASS Cymru), how much harm this movement has done to the cause of battered mothers facing custody challenges, despite the claimed intent to help (us).  I have not yet written any formal letter of inquiry, however.*

*One complication women in my situation often face is privacy issues, as it pertains to safety issues. Others are obvious where they are in extended litigation involving the family courts and attempting to regain contact with or parent-part-time their own (still-minor) offspring.  These troubles do not always stop when one generation turns adult; mine didn’t, I know other mothers’ whose didn’t either.

While we are busy with many issues, this “crowd” is free, funded, and engaged in developing their own networks and claiming to speak for or somehow represent us — while continuing to censor known information relevant to the cause which might (would) up-end their particular brand of proposed solutions — and avoid confronting who actually developed these family courts in the first place, parts of this history I’ve already unearthed, and while this would seem to be where to start, it just seems to not be of interest to these people.

While BMCC, CPPA, CJE to the extent they can, and male “batterers’ intervention” leaders claiming sincere empathy for abused women (Evan Stark, Lundy Bancroft, AFCC’s Peter Jaffe, Connecticut’s globe-trottting David Mandel; Massachusett’s (early participant also seen on the 2002 BMPT report, advisory council as I recall), David Adams — which organization “EMERGE” also takes fatherhood programming based from the center associated with Peter Jaffe et al (CREVAWC, London Family Court Clinic — which is a private organization, not a family agency) — continue to ensure that the “stop violence against women” movement preserves certain professional niches, such as batterers’ intervention, and that their friends in BMCC (etc.) will help ensure the REAL force behind family court dysfunction, AFCC (and its position in the other more visible networked organizations) remains covered up EVEN WHEN IT GETS UP TO THE LEVEL OF “WHO — the World Health Organization — which my recent post documents it does (publ. Aug. 2019 as I recall) I have to really question what the original purposes were of the “domestic violence movement” in the first place, whether you start around 1980, or around the 1990s.

[That paragraph was all one sentence/ hope the bolding helped locate its main subjects and verbs.  Most of the paragraph — the long phrase or clause starting “While….[xyz} continue to ensure… that [more content]” modifies the final statement of my position:  “I have to really question what the original purposes were of the DV movement in the first place…”!]

As a survivor, just coming OUT of marital abuse (battering and “coercive control” to the max, both) around the time this 2002 report was published (about to be funneled– in fact, at the time BEING funneled right into the Family Court System, where all “DV” support, basically, evaporated, and where, thanks to US policy, now it was time for the ex-batterer (if male) spouses to get free legal help (under the auspices of PROWRA-rationalized “fatherhood” poverty and healthy-family theories) began, and mine as a single working mother with a protective order on, basically ended … and all this IN the SF Bay Area, I wanted then and now still want straight answers. To get them, I’ve learned over time to quit wasting time I didn’t have asking questions of the wrong people who have no intention of answering them, and find out, document, and blog it myself instead.

In doing this, I also proved it could be done; but you must be willing to stand alone, and not care about “group dynamics / maternal bonding among distressed/traumatized mothers” for a while; because too many of them are just unwilling or unable to look at the money in any detail, and willing to confront ridiculous assertions (or numbers) by advocacy groups who SOUND genuine, sincere, and a possible source of hope for reform (IN the family courts….)   [End, 10/11/2019 insert]


Wellesley College History (One of the Seven Sisters, elite, progressive for its time, famous graduates include Madeleine Korbel Albright (’59), Hillary Rodham Clinton (’69) and with an Institute named after Albright which is obviously Global in focus.


WIKIPEDIA describes the college, and another nearby image (from Wiki on Wellesley) describes its Social Science-oriented, 1974ff “Centers for Women” within this elite woman’s college which allows cross-registration with MIT, etc., and has a hefty endowment, I already showed below:

As of 2019, Wellesley was ranked the third best liberal arts college in the United States by U.S. News & World Report.[6] As of 2018, Wellesley is the highest endowed women’s college in the world, with an endowment of $2.1 billion. In the United States, Wellesley has the 50th largest endowment among institutions of higher education.[1]

(Guess where they’re NOT keeping $1 billion of that endowment?  In public-traded securities, and of that almost half the “other investments” isn’t in the US, either… See tax returns; I linked to the table on the footnote below).

The college’s robust alumnae base has been widely viewed as the “most powerful women’s network in the world.”[7] Notable alumnae include Hillary Rodham ClintonMadeleine AlbrightKatharine Lee BatesCokie RobertsDiane SawyerNora EphronPamela MelroyMarjory Stoneman DouglasSoong Mei-ling and Bing Xin.[8]

(Part of) Madeleine Albright’s biography (link provided just above (quoting from the college website, not the Wiki, which I inserted just before publishing), only next to last para. (about her books) omitted) and underneath a VERY large close-up photgraph (portrait)  Some emphases added:

Madeleine Korbel Albright ’59: Diplomat, Global Leader, Visionary 

Madeleine K. Albright is Chair of Albright Stonebridge Group,[++] a global strategy firm, and Chair of Albright Capital Management LLC, an investment advisory firm focused on emerging markets. She was the 64th Secretary of State of the United States. Dr. Albright received the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian honor, from President Obama on May 29, 2012.

In 1997, Dr. Albright was named the first female Secretary of State and became, at that time, the highest ranking woman in the history of the U.S. government. As Secretary of State, Dr. Albright reinforced America’s alliances, advocated for democracy and human rights, and promoted American trade, business, labor, and environmental standards abroad. From 1993 to 1997, Dr. Albright served as the U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations and was a member of the President’s Cabinet. From 1989 to 1992, she served as President of the Center for National Policy. Previously, she was a member of President Jimmy Carter’s National Security Council and White House staff and served as Chief Legislative Assistant to U.S. Senator Edmund S. Muskie. …

Seems to prefer Democrats for sure…

Dr. Albright is a Professor in the Practice of Diplomacy at the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service. She chairs the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs and serves as president of the Truman Scholarship Foundation. She serves on the U.S. Department of Defense’s Defense Policy Board, a group tasked with providing the Secretary of Defense with independent, informed advice and opinion concerning matters of defense policy. Dr. Albright also serves on the Board of the Aspen Institute. In 2009, Dr. Albright was asked by NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen to Chair a Group of Experts focused on developing NATO’s New Strategic Concept. …[[Para. on books omitted]]

Dr. Albright received a B.A. with Honors from Wellesley College, and Master’s and Doctorate degrees from Columbia University’s Department of Public Law and Government, as well as a Certificate from its Russian Institute. She is based in Washington, DC

[++] Link to the LLC given, why not to the “global strategy firm” also?

Albright Stonebridge Group (“ASG”) per Wiki formed through a merger in 2009), per its website, fine print under menu “Team”

The ASG family will forever be grateful for our dear friend, firm co-founder and co-chair, Samuel R. “Sandy” Berger (1945-2015).

Before co-founding Stonebridge International and later ASG, Sandy had a long and distinguished career in both the public service and the law. From 1993 – 2001, he served as White House National Security Advisor and Deputy National Security Advisor to President Bill Clinton, where he led policy efforts across a range of global issues including the Balkans, Middle East and Northern Ireland peace processes, the fight against terrorism, and strengthening U.S. relationships with India, China, and other nations.  Prior to his service in the Clinton administration, he spent 16 years at Hogan & Hartson, where he led the firm’s international practice. Earlier in his career, Sandy held advisory positions in the U.S. Senate, the U.S. Department of State, and with the mayor of New York City. He served on boards and in advisory positions of many organizations, the World Food Program USA, the International Crisis Group, and the Council on Foreign Relations.

This year, Sandy was presented with the prestigious Grand Cordon of the Order of the Rising Sun, one of the highest awards bestowed by the government of Japan, for his significant contributions to strengthening the relations between the United States and Japan. (etc.)

Here’s from the website of the LLC link to above, founded in 2005 it says, with Strategic Investment Partnerships (“SIPs”) “vintage” 2007, 2010, 2012 and 2017, and the other firm a “value-added minority shareholder.  Interesting, the first two years, anything ring a bell from those dates? (Like, 2008?).

Albright Stonebridge Group (“ASG”), a premier global strategic advisory and commercial diplomacy firm, is an active, value-add minority shareholder. Former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who serves as Chair of Albright Capital, is the co-Chair of ASG along with former U.S. Commerce Secretary and Kellogg Company CEO, Carlos Gutierrez.

Sounds like being highly positioned in the Executive branch of the United States Government is good for investment opportunities after leaving office, and good “cred” for raising and managing funds in specific places their public office may have given them key insight into that others, typically, might not have, or be able to leverage so well.

Here’s a 2006 article at NPR about Albright and (Condoleeza Rice), both mentored by her father; in the process it tells more about his founding of a school of International Relations at the University of Denver. “For Albright and Rice, Josef Korbel is Tie that Binds.”

Reminder, my overall context for this is perspective as U.S. Citizen who had to deal (domestically) with wife-battering, child-stealing/kidnapping, family court facilitated and how these courts which are SO effective at destroying families and turning parts of them (one or both parts) into fugitives, criminals, or dead people, somehow in the global scale of causes, rhetoric and purposes, got lost in the “Battered Mothers Testimony Project” at (elitist and supposedly feminist) Wellesley around the turn of this century.  Something’s seriously off when they can’t watch out for “their own” at home, or just don’t care to.  Again, more on the footnote to this post, which it looks like I might have to split anyhow.//LGH.

Dr. Albright (per UNCHR Central Europe, Aug. 2017) emigrated at age 11 with her family in 1948, her father being an international diplomat at University of Denver (which I know from my healthy marriage/responsible fatherhood studies is a dba for The Colorado Seminary and some of its professors sources of key curriculum involved in the post-PRWORA (Welfare) Marriage/Fatherhood programming) graduated from high school with honors, having been raised Catholic, married Episcopal (‘the son of newspaper publishers”) and discovered, belatedly after being appointed Secretary of State, that she had Jewish roots:

Profession: Former US Secretary of State
Country of Origin: Czech Republic
Country of Asylum: United States of America
Date of birth: 15 May 1935

She was born Marie Jana Korbelova (Madeleine is the anglicised form of Madlenka, her childhood nickname). Twice, the Korbels were forced from their homeland due to political turmoil. When the Nazis invaded Czechoslovakia during World War II, the family fled to England. They returned to Prague when Albright’s father, a diplomat, took a position with his government in the brief period between the liberation from the Germans and the Communist coup of 1948. However, because of the Communist takeover, the Korbels once again had to leave the country.

They immigrated to the United States in 1948 when Albright was 11 years old, and settled in Denver, Colorado, where her father took a teaching position in international relations at the University of Denver. In her Denver high school, Albright – then Madeleine Korbel – won a UN-sponsored competition by correctly naming all the organisation’s member states.. [etc]

Joseph Medill Patterson Albright (Albright’s husband 1959 – 1982, they had three daughters); look at his media background (although as adopted son of his mother’s second husband).  (This Wikipedia):

Albright is the scion of a media empire, the grandson and namesake of Joseph Medill Patterson, founder of the New York Daily News who had rivaled William Randolph Hearst in the 1930s. His great-great grandfather, Joseph Medill, owned the Chicago Tribune and had been elected mayor of Chicago. His aunt, Alicia Patterson, founded Newsday.

Albright attended Williams College. He met Madeleine Jana Korbel when she spent a summer working at the Denver Post. They married in 1959 after Madeleine’s graduation from Wellesley College. They had three children: twin girls, Anne and Alice (born 1961), and youngest daughter Katie. The couple divorced in 1982. Albright remarried Marcia Kunstel. Together, they own Flat Creek Ranch in Jackson Hole, Wyoming.[1]

That’s all fine, but since 2000 (on blog, since 2009), I’m working, that is, dealing, “locally” with situations internal “domestic” to the USA which are getting women battered in appropriately, sometimes for years within marriage or close relationships, which are costing them access to their own children, obviously a factor in discouraging independence and reporting of abuse in next-generations (or, intended to), we are seeing women under some of these regimes fleeing ALL countries (including developed ones:  The USA, the UK, I hear, Australia I know).  I have had some contact with mothers who fled the USA (long ago), I myself just had to flee “the Golden State” as an elder, and I lost count of how many mothers, via family courts, have been driven homeless with wages garnished to pay their children’s fathers (whom they now cannot see, thanks to family courts) and in my decade immediately after separation from my own abuse, in Northern California, and most of that decade spent “duking it out” (without the funds to do so) in its variety of family courts only recently (post-welfare reform) centralized, with AFCC professionals installed under the Administrative Office of the Courts), I was dealing with these situations, consistently dismissed, triaged, and minimized by the existing “domestic violence advocacy groups” (often under progressive leadership), and women leaving abuse, literally “dropping like flies” (i.e., being shot, stabbed or beaten to death, with or without their children; sometimes their children only (i.e., punishment for leaving him); disappearing on court-ordered overnight visitation (2006), shot to death mid-week in a church parking lot (2007); and at least two mass-murder scenarios (2008, 2011) by the “disgruntled” (to say the least!) father, both of them as it happened, occurring in or near beauty salons where — may I bring this up — typically more women then men are to be found, except those who may work there.

See nearby image/s from these links and within this quote, from https://www.wellesley.edu/about

Expected to be fully engaged while at Wellesley, students carry this sense of purposeful involvement and personal commitment throughout life. It is the signal mark of a Wellesley woman.

A Widely Envied Campus Environment

The sheer sense of scale of the breathtaking natural environment, in which buildings are thoughtfully sited, distinguish Wellesley’s physical setting in the classically New England town of Wellesley, Massachusetts, just outside of Boston.

Home to leading institutions such as the Albright Institute, the Knapp Social Science Center, the Davis MuseumThe Newhouse Center for the Humanities, and the world-renowned Wellesley Centers for Women, Wellesley’s resources are a magnet not only for the surrounding community and metropolitan area; they attract attention—and scholars—from around the world.

(“Wellesley Centers for Women” is now collecting Donations through “GiveCampus, Inc.” (A Delaware Corporation with plenty of disclaimers and warnings, including:)

3.2. Donor’s Risk.

All donations are at your own risk. Please make sure that when you donate to a given non-profit that you understand how your money will be used. When donating, only donate to those entities that you feel comfortable donating to or otherwise know and trust. GiveCampus does not warrant that funds will be used for any particular purpose and is not responsible for any misuse of the funds by the beneficiary.

The “nonprofit” in question here is the historic, $2B+ gross assets private, all-woman, elite college within range of Boston, Massachusetts.

Read the rest of this entry »

‘We Must Have a Stomach for the Details and Willingness to Look at the Numbers…’ (Orig. Jan. 2018 on LGH Front Page | Updated, Supplemented & Published Sept. 30, 2019).

leave a comment »

POST TITLE: ‘We Must Have a Stomach for the Details and Willingness to Look at the Numbers…’ (Orig. Jan. 2018 on LGH Front Page | Updated, Supplemented & Published Sept. 30, 2019). (shortlink ending “-aYW”, length:  about 7,500 words)

“…As These Situations** Continue to ‘Morph,’ ‘Evolve’ (and Expand)  Our Collective Stomach for Noticing the Details WILL Impact Our Collective Level of Freedom (LGH Front Page, Sept. 5, 2019).”

THIS POST is an OFF-RAMP with INTRO, REVIEW and INTERNAL CONNECTIONS TO EARLIER WRITINGS.  I moved a short section with details on a specific parent education/anti-parental alienation curriculum targeting parents, a section written probably in January 2018, from my Front Page to this new post.  That starts several paragraphs below, under:

“**These Situations” as referenced in post title:”

This post is also exhortation and some paragraphs are in second person: direct address, not third-person, descriptions.  The direct address tends to draw of my experience on-line (admittedly limited, but I have been blogging a long time, and Tweeting, at times more intensely, several years, commenting on others blogs, on-line journals, formerly more active in forums, etc.  So there is a basis for that subjective “grow up!” commentary).  As usual, it’s subject to further revision and I’ll likely move the “Read More” link up higher after a few days or a week. //LGH.

It shows a drill-down, related posts previously posted on the topic (and the main organization featured) and some tactics used in concealing the money trail originators were and still are so eager to access, that is, forced-consumption of behavioral modification classes as a market niche feeding off public institutions — often through judicial order to start, followed by attempts to then legislate it into practice, and involving the family courts.

Those who came up with these concepts were “insiders” obviously aware which federal funding streams were most likely to support it before it hit the public conscience, as they have continued to this day.  Family courts and anything dealing with young children (and young children’s parents) were always a target population.

Talk about reforming family courts because of their corrupt, flawed, broken, or unsafe status decision-making is beside the point until the infrastructure — basic financial details, gatekeepers, and To/From sources of revenue — is exposed.  There’s a movement and attempts to get parents (especially mothers) to self-identify as “dumb” by re-tweeting, posting, circulating references to numbers without any surrounding context on social media.  Circulating such things without fact-checking, or demanding more specifics from the source IS dumb; it shows gullibility and puts a “for-sale” sign on the promoters.

How hard it is to respond with a “Sez Who” or “When?” instead of mindlessly RT-ing or re-Posting? As a group, are “we” really so co-dependent on others’ approval that asking that is a new group dynamic? That’s cult-like behavior, and encourages more of the same.  If you’re going to engage in such behavior, then quit complaining when your kids are taken by others of similar behavior intent to program them unfairly against you, for profit or just for fun and spite.  It’s time to grow up and expect others around you, for continued associations, to start doing the same.  Adulthood can be contagious, but it’s not time-free or a free ride mentally.  If it’s not put together FOR YOU as an engaging story, then your attention wanders?  …. 

(Moving on,…): The goal of centralized control of not just the system, but also reform of the system mimicks specific business models becoming popular around the same time, but developed earlier (i.e., I call it the Harvard/Bain/Bridgespan model:  University Center (for credibility and citations), Bain (a consulting company with strong political — and Harvard/Boston connections) and “Bridgespan” representing the philanthropic (i.e., nonprofit niche) consulting. I don’t care if people call it something else, just that they get a glimpse of it by sticking their OWN heads into some of the documents which aren’t 100% spin, advertising, and vague, and quit making excuses for not doing so.  Learn to chew on the information and spit out what’s roughage, not real substance.

Look if an abuser continues to tell you you’re stupid, can’t do anything, incompetent, as an excuse for hiding his (or her) financials within a household, while engaging in theft, threats, bullying, and other forms of violence, would you know that’s wrong?  So what’s the big difference when the same behaviors occur on macro-economic and micro-economic sectors too?

Develop a stomach for the details now; it’s already late in this game, and understanding it really does help.

HERE, I wrote and inserted three inset (boxed sections with bulleted lists and hyperlinks) listing connecting to other posts to This post introduction and off-ramped section:  In order, these insets are:

  • KIDS’ TURN POSTS (in Introduction), and
  • PARENTAL KIDNAPPING posts, because they overlaps with KIDS’ TURN creators,..

…KIDS’ TURN Creators who just so happen to have strong connections to the AFCC (Association of Family and Conciliation Courts) which also has maintained throughout high interested in convening, conferencing, and coordinating internationally, at least in Commonwealth (and some European) countries how to run their own programming through what increasingly looks like a privatized court system run internationally also, parallel to the public ones, but with different standards (and more conflicts of interest built in).  While this is now more out in the open (see my Twitter threads on CAFCASS, AFCC, and NCJFCJ and the involvement of private UK famous foundations such as Nuffield, Leverhulme, etc.) it’s always been there as I was reminded in revisiting some of the earliest posts.

If you’re unfamiliar with “KIDS’ TURN” specifically as started in California, by looking at this understand that it stands in for “Parent Education Psych-Educational Re- (or De-)Programming,” was sold as an antidote or vaccination against “parental alienation” (which sold well in certain quarter obviously), it was a FRANCHISE operating through Nonprofits, and its founders being highly positioned within the state-level court systems (i.e., AFCC had staff members at the California Judicial Council AOC/CFCC as well as consulting retired judges, other judges etc. working throughout the system for many years), PARENT EDUCATION was in California one of only three limited purposes for those Access/Visitation Grants, and it in general represents a developed field, specialized, and intentionally “vertical” monopoly, self-sustaining once up and running.

Whether or not the classes successfully turned kids’ heads or immunized them against “parental alienation” isn’t the issue.  Setting up the business operations was, and still is.  Getting on the “community referrals” list at local courts, organizing it over larger geography for referrals (particularly to AFCC membership) and setting up the direct ability for donors to the private nonprofits to, potentially, bribe a judge with an open case before them also on the board (or staff) of said nonprofits. 

It has crossed my mind more than once that my coming out of nowhere as an unknown blogger in 2011 to showing some of the “Kids’ Turn” board members, court contracts, and set-up may have had something to do with its eventually going underground (as shown below on this post, which I’ve had up almost two years now in part).  I certainly don’t know for sure, but I do know my posting at the time was intentional, and that imitation operations under slightly different names can be seen in other states.

At the post bottom (short) section (tan background) comments briefly on how databases I’ve used since starting this blog at times change, or change hands.  This complicates tracking programming over time.  Generally, I find it really hard (without a letter-writing campaign or multiple subscriptions to databases which may or may not have this information) to get information pre-dating this century.  That’s a problem when so many key organizations running program started in the 1970s (some) 1980s (many more) and even 1990s (still more, especially the kind dependent on massive public grants to exist):


While that’s obvious, it’s also significant, but I don’t have much to say other than point it out, this time.

The post is exhortation and show and tell, and also that I’ve been saying this for years now, under MY banner:  “Let’s Get HONEST.” That’s a group effort, not a solo effort.  Getting honest I find more than getting “even” (unlikely), or even some form of imaginary revenge without consideration about who might already be counting on that motive to move ALL system even further away from accountability.

The stomach for details and willingness to look at the numbers are basic survival skills and essential to safeguard against, essentially, crooks who know how to play both the words and the numbers to access public resources and sell policy.  There is no substitute for the conceptual understanding of whether or not, and if not, how, books can be cooked, tales spun, and how a legitimate cause, so stated, so often masks fake advocacy by simply withholding and failing to operate “above-board” when the operations involve public funds.

Some private organizations don’t need, except enough to justify tax-exempt status and don’t directly take public funds; they are privately funded but target the public institutions we still support.  Read enough tax returns and you’ll see many of these also pay cities, counties, school districts, and/or universities (both public and private) to run pilots of their coordinated (or, proprietary) causes which eventually, most people will be subjected to and pay for through taxation.

More can always be done as there is always more to research and because organizations tend to “evolve” constantly in this sector, but my main concern is how few people seem to be even starting to look such things up, admit they exist, and after admitting they exist, speak of them in terms of what they are as much as what they’re doing.

“What they are” individually, if it’s an “entity” is going to be either public or private; if private, it may be a whether a nonprofit taking mostly government funding, mostly or only private funding, or some of both, or a part of government itself.  It is where the two sectors connect, start mimicking each other in project and purpose names that the support for them — which comes from the public “purse” in many ways, and should be taken personally if squandered, lost, or misappropriated.

When you start reading tax returns (which should happen soon if it hasn’t, including — try it on for size — some really big ones: just look at the categories, browse for general understanding) it should not take too long to run across private foundations which are, systematically, directly grantsing funds to government  entities across jurisdiction lines (i.e., in-state, out-of-state from wherever the foundation is registered) to promote or test private-purpose programming.

It’s rarely a one-way or interest-free street, the “commerce” (information, capacity-building, Social Science R&D, etc.) between private and government functions.

Read the rest of this entry »

“If Parental Kidnapping (Domestic or International) is ALWAYS Child Abuse, Where do the UN CRC and the Hague Convention fit in? (D. Huntington then ℅ AFCC-related* The (Judith Wallerstein) Center for the Family In Transition, M.W. Agopian, N. Faulkner (1999), Merle H. Weiner (2000, Fordham)” [Published** Sept. 21, 2019] 

leave a comment »

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

**This Post publicizes (a link to and) a Jan. 23, 2018 backgrounder Page I just discovered languishing in “Pending” status until now, corrected at once, and am calling to your attention, especially given ~the times we are in and ~as related to the one I just published last Friday.  Both links are now also added to my Front Page, labeled (for now): (“[LGH Frontpage Subsection #3)) as the related post’s title also reflects.

This Post “If Parental Kidnapping (Domestic or International) is ALWAYS Child Abuse, Where do the UN CRC and the Hague Convention fit in? (D. Huntington then ℅ AFCC-related* The (Judith Wallerstein) Center for the Family In Transition, M.W. Agopian, N. Faulkner (1999), Merle H. Weiner (2000, Fordham)” [Published** Sept. 21, 2019] (short-link ends: “psBXH-b8j” (exactly 777 words because it exists only to publish and link to two related subjects, some historic, some more “current events” both in system changes and in media coverage of the family court system).

…exists to publicize this PAGE, recently re-published with updates:

If Parental Kidnapping (Domestic or International) is ALWAYS Child Abuse, Where do the UN CRC and the Hague Convention fit in? (D. Huntington then ℅ AFCC-related* The (Judith Wallerstein) Center for the Family In Transition, M.W. Agopian, N. Faulkner (1999), Merle H. Weiner (2000, Fordham), published as a page Sept. 19, 2019, this PAGE’s short-link ends “PsBXH-8q5″)

Yes, the title closely resembles the one you’re now reading, intentionally.  If in doubt which is which, pick one of these two and read them, then read the other one also!

That page lays out again, extensively, several topics I’ve been discussing recently in both 2018 and 2019, particularly how international connections around the family court themes are happening. Some of this will show in other parts, but this page is about 10,000 words long and I believe the handling (display, explanations) is more thorough.  It’s good to know regardless of which side of any “Pond” (Ocean) or the USA’s Great Lakes (northern border) you might be on, including the Mediterranean Sea and the Indian Ocean.  Geography is not my long suit.  Organizations across several countries are trying to internationally align family court practices, principles, standards, legislation, and who gets to re-structure them and their infrastructures in what manner.  Familiarity helps.

That Page which I’d written around the same time, that is, January 23, 2018, but has much more background information on its topic. The top half to two-thirds of it is very timely and current, and the “backgrounder” information at the bottom relates to current players in the family court (circuses) and shows some of their behaviors.  That background information is closer to the bottom of the page.

I believe that a good drill-down (once understood) any day of the year trumps (sorry!) several years of sound-bytes + boilerplate, so-called “investigative reporting” on the Crisis in the Family Courts, including dead-kid counts citing professionals whose basic few theme attempts to get inside the head of family court decision-makers and decide what side of a deceased man’s psychological beliefs one is on — and calls that science. That it’s not even cause-and-effect reason clear enough, no matter how many times the words “empirical” “analysis” and “data” are emphasized throughout (who’s tracking that?) after a decade or so of “58,000 children a year” (year in, year out) — and no reference to nonprofits, federal funding of fatherhood, federal funding of fatherhood programming that now permeates the USA’s violence prevention powerhouses anyhow, and managing not to say “AFCC” in public while it’s not exactly deep-sea-diving to realize the entity exists, publishes a journal and what affiliations to many of that journal’s boards of directors hold.

That’s tough to do if one is on the same food chain (whether big fish or little fish hanging with some REALLY big fish) and — this is my theory — assigned a role to play such that no honest discussion of that food chain will take place.

RE: the above two links: If you’re going to pick an example, I believe being among the earlier ones around (and AFCC-connected of course), we might as  well understand who and what we’re dealing with, or the policies and operational practices they’ve mentored new professionals into. You’ll see!

Follow the funding.  Make it a habit. Then contact me, thanks! (That DONATE button ln the sidebar still works, last I checked, too! If/when I ever go non-profit, “you’ll be the first to know” (i.e., on the sidebar).

“And while I’m here,” the RELATED, SIMILAR BUT NOT IDENTICAL and ALREADY POSTED (thus showing up in the usual places, which pages don’t do automatically) post which actually has less background detail — but  a  short “MSM Current Events”  update.

Just recently posted, as an Off-ramped Section from the Front Page: Families In Transition due to Parental Kidnapping |An archaeological dig on who quotes whom (Canadian CRC, Nancy Faulkner, Dorothy Huntington, ‘Parental Alienation’): [LGH Frontpage Subsection #3 Sept. 4, 2019, Published Sept. 19](short-link ends “PsBXH-aWh”) moved here from my home page…  Originally written about Jan. 2018, but with the move includes a quick segment linking to a recent (9/17/2019) DeseretNews.com story featuring my favorite broken-record-initiative family court reformists, give or take (typically) a new name from time to time and a slight tweak in sound-bytes.  Which accounts for some of my particular sarcasm just above.

And which sound-byte approach offends me deeply, as it has from the start of this blog, knowing as an domestic violence survivor and mother what I discovered without being “on-salary” or under contract for doing so (except a personal contract with my conscience and my concern for future generations.  //LGH

Families In Transition due to Parental Kidnapping | An archaeological dig on who quotes whom (Canadian CRC, Nancy Faulkner, Dorothy Huntington, ‘Parental Alienation’): [LGH Frontpage Subsection #3 Sept. 4, 2019, Publ. Sept. 19].

leave a comment »

This post holds a section from my Front Page* September, 2019, I’ve called:

Families In Transition due to Parental Kidnapping |An archaeological dig on who quotes whom (Canadian CRC, Nancy Faulkner, Dorothy Huntington, ‘Parental Alienation’): [LGH Frontpage Subsection #3 Sept. 4, 2019, Published Sept. 19]. (short-link ends “-aWh,” as off-ramped, under 4,000 words written, probably between January and December 2018; with lead-in, about twice that). Some of my lead-in comments were made earlier, some are made just before (I expect) publishing September 19, 2019.

*That section is far down on the front page (see nearby image):

After publishing this, I found the related page which may have more substantial drill-down on the topic.  Both should be read together (or in sequence!).  I now have added that link to the front page also.  The Page (which I posted to alert readers to also, making now three different links on the overlapping topics) is called:

Title: If Parental Kidnapping (Domestic or International) is ALWAYS Child Abuse, Where do the UN CRC and the Hague Convention fit in? (D. Huntington then ℅ AFCC-related* The (Judith Wallerstein) Center for the Family In Transition, M.W. Agopian, N. Faulkner (1999), Merle H. Weiner (2000, Fordham) (moved here Jan. 18, 2018, from my then-new home page…, published as a page Sept. 19, 2019, and a new post, Sept. 20) PAGE short-link (now published) ends “PsBXH-8q5″)

Subtitle:  Do these international agreements effectively help OBSTRUCT attempted international escape from DV, while domestically in the USA, both AFCC-driven family court policy and post-PRWORA (1996), in fact, at least since “Moynihan” (1965)  federal social policy also obstruct such escape?

“LGH|FCM Jan 2018 One Post, One Page (Section3 offramp Sept. 2019)…| D Huntington, N Faulkner, AFCC 54th, Canadian CRC etc ~~Screen Shot 2019-Sept. “

Besides the “archeological dig” I’ve added to the top half reference to yet another “family court crisis” media posting; it came up in the context of information I did not have, timely, at the time this happened to my family line.

It comes up year after year while others are not writing about the: operations, practices, and particularly not (accurately) about the history of the family courts themselves (or, their blueprints and builders)….It’s extremely frustrating over time to see the level of comprehension and reporting has barely edged forward.   But otherwise it’s basically on-topic with the post title.

This post shows drill-downs, but was written in more than one installment, is informal, and some paragraphs repeat content.  Until it gets to the text originally off-ramped, it may not flow smoothly. It’s not designed as any “heavyweight” post, but I think some of the links are worth considering.

This time, that’s OK (for purposes here). It’s not my best writing, but it’s information I decided to re-post as a re-minder to do drill-downs, ‘question authority,’ question standard explanations, and just ask more questions: to pay more attention to seemingly minor details, presentation formats, and from this perspective, re-consider the overall landscape. We should exercise every right and opportunity to ask “on what basis”? and then critically examine any stated basis.  It’s especially important to ask this to oneself when reading, as well as aloud and (with discretion) to others.

I’m just making a few points in hindsight, in case it may help others, and to say, I can relate to how it felt to be reading that laws exist to protect against child abduction, essays have been written about how harmful it is, and then the courts ignore it, ignore domestic violence, risk and more; and you’re there in the state of “what-the-_____??!!”  and “why?”

And in this re-traumatized // indignant or outraged state, and in the fight of your life, others looking collected, organized, and with websites to match the come-on, offer suggestions why the family court professionals just don’t “get” this and why you should, with them, push for more oversight, trainings, and to hire specially qualified consultants about domestic violence IN the family courts (etc.) to make ’em better….

And tell your story (anonymously or with actual name attached) to the local investigative news reporter wanting to make a name for him or herself and/or the related media.  Or send them in to the advocacy group who will then present the case on your behalf to Congress or state legislatures for better laws (when the existing ones aren’t even enforced), etc. — and pitch it to media also, making sure they are building brand awareness and personal name recognition as if genuinely concerned about the murdered and abducted children.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

September 19, 2019 at 4:19 pm

Health Systems Still Flushing Cash into — WHERE is it going again? (About 20 Years AFTER Tobacco Master Settlement Agreements, Other Tobacco Tax Revenues like Prop 10 in California Propping Up Public/Private “First 5” Circuitry) [May-June, 2019, Publ. Sept. 18].

leave a comment »

Another post held in draft now being released… From its contents below:

This post punctuates the overall message with the vastness of systems change 1999-2019 IN ADDITION TO major changes mid-1990s due to Welfare Reform + VAWA (also especially advancing public relations consultants and media owners), both …set up two decades ago.

Sure, it takes some concentration to follow, but no apologies offered!  Concentration is a helpful quality in life, as well as judgment on what to focus on and for how long!

Another choice quote from this post:

This fills in some of the billion-dollar-background context which sheds light on what the intense focus on “Zero to Three” “First 5” and “Early Childhood Education” special interest group coalition leaders know well that probably has escaped substantial notice of the paying public.

The coalitions happen at university and state leadership area backed by philanthropies (tax-exempt foundations) that often just do not even post their own financials, let alone post them in both legible and functional formats.

I wouldn’t dare make that last sentence if I hadn’t found it, repeatedly.  Really, the situation is shocking.

One foundation associated with a center listed below, at some point during recent drill-downs, I found claiming to have donated over a four-year period a total of one million dollars to an organization which actual organization (by its name) was at the time IRS-revoked status in Florida, while the foundation tax return recorded a Massachusetts address, as I recall, directly associated with this center, i.e., with Harvard. (Foundation: Alliance for Early Success, which is listed as an investor in the center).  Not posted here; that’s just my comment. If you want to see this, start looking for and looking up tax returns, then looking up among their larger grantees! I do not recall offhand whether I actually published any post containing that drill down, but probably have provided some links to it within the last three months)

Why posting this now, a bit out of sequence from recent themes?  Take a look at it below!  Would YOU go to all that trouble and detail and not publish? It also contains summary (first) and many valuable points of reference, I feel, below that.

It helps provide an overview of a system which the originators of the system so far have not and do not seem inclined to offer the public, from the perspective of expecting systems for fiscal accountability to exist within the United States, even in the tax-exempt sector, which we all know is interacting significantly with the public sector, which we fund every time we work and receive a paycheck, and in countless other ways when receiving or seeking services or accessing ANY of the vast infrastructure privately owned by the federal and state governments (as to USA) which frame our lives continually.

I see on reviewing this one just before publishing that in addition to the topic referenced, I’d also just recently run across “Harvard Center on the Developing Child” which intersects with subject matter of the family courts because of the psychology/education/early-childhood subject matter and professions organized, generally, into private societies by geography or special interests, so often accessing U.S. Health and Human Services grants and contracts.

THIS POST’s TITLE:  Health Systems Still Flushing Cash into — WHERE is it going again? (About 20 Years AFTER Tobacco Master Settlement Agreements + Other Tobacco Tax Revenues like Prop 10 in California Propping Up Public/Private “First 5” Circuitry) [May-June, 2019, Published Sept. 18].  (Shortlink ending “-aaH,” and (unbelievably) under 5,000 words)

SUBJECT MATTER CONTEXT: The most closely related post was published August 7, 2019 (which no longer shows on the “Last Ten Posts” widgets shown below as images or on the blog sidebar): A Health System Flush With Cash — because ‘Smoking Causes Cancer’ (1998 Tobacco Class Action Litigation MSA Payments, and Tobacco-Related Taxes Impact ‘in perpetuity’ on Systems Affecting Family Courts) ((Begun Early June; Publ. Aug. 7, 2019) post short-link ends “-a6m.”  Currently 5,200 words, having just been shortened (split), but this one is still a bit complex. Following the funds has been made complex. Last update, Sunday, August 11, 2019.

I’ve been trying to get out a “By Now We Should Know” post for almost two months now, while trying to deftly knit together some complex information as a backdrop to that basically simple post.

LGH|FCM post (pre-publict’n) Admin, ‘Health Systems Still Flushing w Cash’ Last Revs 3 months ~|~ 3 wks ago (June vs Aug 2019) (see June22 published post) ~~SShot 2019-09-18

LGH|FCM Sidebar ‘Last Ten Posts’ viewed in 2 images ~~>Screen Shot 2019-09-18 (Image #1 of 2)

[Sept. 19, 2019 Pre-Publication UPDATE: “By Now We Should Know” was published June 22, 2019.]

Meanwhile, I’ve also been working on blog front-page and trying to stay current with developing (family court legislative reform and government restructuring) events. (See small image, below-right)

I could just show here an image of the top of “By Now We Should Know” but feel it’s more helpful to provide it in-post, with active links.  So this post (otherwise complete at under 5,000 words) starts below with an updated section, added Sept. 18, 2019, after which I have published it basically “as-is” meaning, as it was, as written (last previous edit) August 28, 2019).

LGH|FCM Sidebar ‘Last Ten Posts’ viewed in 2 images ~~>Screen Shot 2019-09-18 (Image #2 of 2)

I’m also posting FYI here from the blog sidebar (as of today) annotated images to show the last ten posts reflecting some of the current content and (back through Aug. 15, 2019) the one most recently dealing with this Health System Flush With Cash” (see nearby, one on the left, the other on the right)…

This information is of course easy to see now (without annotation) under that sidebar widget; I’m including here only for future reference,  for anyone including myself who may be reading this post possibly months or a year or more from now). That situation comes up from time to time, as you’ll see below where I reference the “Harvard/Bain/Bridgespan topic” I posted on earlier, and how large an impact it had on the US economy (for starters) in the 1980s and 1990s.  Basic concepts to keep in mind and timeframes to remember (i.e., those LBO leveraged buyout years, major players, and more)…//LGH Sept. 19, 2019.

TOP SECTION, “BY NOW WE SHOULD KNOW” (encased in red borders, cream-colored background, with “Two Helpful Links” configuration also shown (as on that post)), published June 22, 2019:

“By Now We Should Know!” (Impromptu Re-cap of Key Players addressing [how to handle] Domestic Violence especially as it impacts Family Courts) (Apr 28 ~> June 22, 2019).  (short-link ending “-9NU,” post drafted as insert to “More Perspectives” in late April, under 4,000 words, for starters…). (now exactly 6,000 words; latest revisions for clarity and extra links, 6/23/2019).
Read the rest of this entry »

%d bloggers like this: