Archive for the ‘Psychology & Law = an AFCC tactical lobbying unit’ Category
My Posts, Just the List (June 29, 2014..back to Sept. 24, 2012. From Jan. 23, 2016 forward now available @ “Table of Contents 2016 ONLY” Post)
Full post title with shortlink: My Posts, Just the List (June 29, 2014..back to Sept. 24, 2012. From Jan. 23, 2016 forward now available @ “Table of Contents 2016 ONLY” Post)
Table of Contents
(June 29, 2014..back to Sept. 24, 2012)
I started this blog in spring 2009. It is my continuous show-and-tell learning curve exposing, as the motto says, Family –and Conciliation — Court Operations, Practices, and History from the early 1990s and earlier.
Nothing was posted or added to this table of contents from June 29, 2014 (Broken Courts, Flawed Practices, Parade of Fools) throughout 2015. On January 23, 2016 (2016 More Business As Usual in MN? (Criminalizing, Terrorizing, Jailing Mothers)) I resumed publishing posts. My personal situation wasn’t particularly better at this time, it had just progressed, and I felt it urgent to continue this line of reporting, as I had not stopped investigating (or writing it up off-blog) meanwhile.
This BLOG has two separate Tables of Contents in two different posts, both near the very top of the blog: [Update: as of 1/8/2017, I’m starting one for the new year also…]
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
Eavesdropping into an Indoctrination Center, Hindsight from a Pilot Project Outpost (First publ. Dec. 22, 2013; Updated (format) Aug. 3, 2019).
THIS POST IS, with title lengthened to show when first published (Dec. 2013) and when last updated (Aug. 2019):
Eavesdropping into an Indoctrination Center, Hindsight from a Pilot Project Outpost (First publ. Dec. 22, 2013; Updated (format) Aug. 3, 2019). (short-link ends -2cI, about 12,700 words)
A nearby post I just updated Aug. 3, 201, and referenced on the top sticky post on the blog (created recently to post all my PAGES (vs.POSTS like these) titles + links full-width, vs. tightly wrapped on a narrow sidebar widget) (click on next link for why) was and still is called:
Bypassing the Legal Process in Baltimore: HOW and for WHOM Maryland got its “Family Divisions” in 1998. (Short-link ending “-2cT” and at about 9,200 words, not including this update. First published, I believe, on or about Dec. 24, 2013; this update with a bit of preview & Why the Update section, August 3, 2019).
Also recommended, if you can handle the indignant tone as I was at the time discovering and processing all this information:
Eavesdropping into an Indoctrination Center, Hindsight from a Pilot Project Outpost (short-link ends -2cI)
Once the process becomes clear, it’s easy to see in operation. AGAIN — the NONPROFIT and CENTERS (clearinghouses, you name it) system of communications — laterally — is replacing the jurisdiction-related representative government, if it hasn’t already.
The Indoctrination Center is at UBaltimore School of Law, where concepts like Therapeutic Jurisprudence Promotion and Unified Family Courts are being taught to new law students (Student Fellows) (year, 2013).
Unbelievable. Listen in to the fake conversations…
The Hindsight from a Pilot Project — assistance obtained in this project ca. 2002 — is (to date still in motion) at an economically depressed and, it turns out, educationally disadvantaged region of Pennsylvania, Lackawanna County. They are related.
So, you might want to read post one, and see how one tax-evading GAL was spat out, and got a settlement agreeing their own tax fraud wasn’t over $80,000 [leaving the program enabling fraudsters intact, from what we can tell]. I am showing you portions of the manufacturing and of the product delivery sections of this UFC family-relations-assembly line. I added material (1/1/2014) on inspiration — probably not the best idea – but showing the progressive encroachment from the Supreme Court level and the Presiding Family Court Judge level, of private business interests sold as “in the best interests” of the children.
I find it empowering –and wise — to see the process of having these destructive systems set in place. It’s very easy to see once you become familiar with the HOW, the WHO, and the WHERE. For the end goal? Usually, profit, but also, the undermining of the rule of law and substituting for it, the rulings of mental health experts. AFCC told each other this back in the 1970s, and the public, safely confident that most people were NOT paying close attention to the civil servant-nonprofit sector. I want that to change!
SHARE THIS POST on...
Comments Conservation on The Washington Times/Communities CT Court Employees article
My regular email is definitely blocked from commenting. This gets old — but here’s the content:
Only 40+ comments? That seems unnaturally low. It has taken me this WEEK to even be able to access the comments fields; my device has been going bonkers; I contacted the head of this forum about it (and was given the brush-off), and believe that I’m probably not the only person around experiencing sudden and strange “technical problems” while trying to participate in this discussion. We know who we network with; this is a live issue for both mothers and fathers. This is a one-shot at commenting; it it doesn’t go through, back to work and back to blogging separately.
Hi. I’m one of those California parents (mother) that allegedly didn’t go get information on the AFCC, or connect the dots. My children have now aged out, one has been well rewarded for staying alienated, the other pulled something like an Alanna Krause, only as a young adult, and has recently made contact from a safer state, literally; she had to sacrifice college. I am left to still fight the people who did this, and to, literally if necessary, dis-assemble any system which dared to do this to my children (and my work life) and is doing it to so many.
In about the past 10-12 years of this, the prominent leaders of prominent nonprofits who are all concerned about children, or stopping violence against women, or about custody going to batterers, or about (yada, yada) have proved almost immune to conversations like this exact one here. Better people than I have attempted to get through to them. I finally deduced that the “deaf, dumb, and blind” aspect comes from these groups wanting to be seen as caring about kids — but not relinquish their status in life (social position), or (if the shoe fits) nonprofit salary, plus travel perks for the conference circuit. While I can’t stop them, one thing I CAN do is post the tax returns of some of these groups, and show how they are doing this on the public dole, or through whose private funding. An entirely different viewpoint on the field of “fix the courts.”
I am both disappointed and angry with these groups, but had to face the fact that I (not they) was the one who didn’t figure out that, when business is business — it’s the business aspect we should be looking at. Nonprofits cease to exist if the problems they were formed to address are actually solved. Hence the natural tendency is to silence the most direct solutions, and come up with creatively stupid ones to prolong it. Of course, not with their own personal money — or kids — at risk.
—————-
Because what we study is multi-state, I’ve somehow spent a lot of time involved in Connecticut-based cases, and organizations.
It’s interesting and illuminating to just look at the nonprofits doing business with the courts…. (and make sure they’re legit)..
For example, when you see a Children’s Law Center (notice affiliations of the Executive Director) http://www.clcct.org/ed it often may have a connection to the AFCC and/or the Colorado-based NACC which helps put more GALs in kids’ lives, and oversee the trainings, of course. Then just look ’em up. The Children’s Law Center I see registered in Connecticut in 1993 as a nonprofit.
OK, so it has a tax return, right? EIN#06-1381700. I can look this up and at a glance see that while many parents are losing housing, income, children — this nonprofit designed to help poor people is steadily increasing its assets, and revenue. Looking at a tax return tells us where it comes from: Contrib & grants, Program Service Rev (services provided for pay — sometimes maybe government funded), investment income (who has that any more, individually?), and a substantial category “other.”). Then, as a nonprofit, they get to spend this on: Salaries and Expenses. ($594K on legal services attorney/caseworker, almost no details given). Officers: “List available on request” — Why wouldn’t they just include the llist? However, the Exec Director gets $86K, not bad..
This particular organization started when a little girl was shot and killed by her father DURING A SUPERVISED VISITATION in 1993! The decision was not made to question whether supervised visitation should’ve been taking place in that case, but rather to add an attorney for the child (especially a concept from “NACC”).
SHARE THIS POST on...
A Few FAQs on Major Family Court Programs (NYEve 2012 Reflex on the Gender Gap)
I am, to tell the truth, having an awful day, struggling with computer issues, web access, and, apart from the electronic struggles, with grief.
Also the long-term effects of chronic, for lack of a better term, Family Violence — in its ugly, needless, heartless, dishonest, deceitful and extortionist self. People reach a limit, and because I am NOT of the inclination to behave like those who have a conflict with me — i.e., my faith doesn’t endorse the criminal behavior part — I am finding it just this much family violence, all this just too much.
Normally this article wouldn’t be much of my concern — it’s talking about “Wage Gaps in MBA Programs” — I mean, a woman that has got through an MBA program is not likely facing the same issues I have been.
But from my perspective (year after year, there has been a return to literally begging status around the court fiascos, which is hardly unintentional from a systems, or my ex’s part; I’d been promised before separation that he knew how to get out of paying child support (wonder where learned it from….), but well, I just didn’t know at the outset of the program how many other parties profit from this. In fact I didn’t know til I revisited Liz Richards’ NAFCJ.net site and worked through the basics — almost no one else at the time was talking about the grants incentives…..
So what happens when WAGE GAP is multiplied by REPEATED WAGE DISRUPTIONS AND DECREASES (when an employee has to miss too much work, move for safety, return to court to try to contact one’s kids — often — deals with stalking and has to re-arrange work life for protection from it, has to take into account client/employer safety in future business dealings, and word gets around that the individual has “family problems” which interfere with work problems, and that’s chronic? The main concept behind having a sustainable work life is that it’s sustained. Or moves are strategic, or for exploring different options?
So, look at this from SFGATE.com (San Francisco on-line, it was also in the print edition, page A1):
“MBA Wage Gap between Men, Women Grows” Dec. 29, 2012
[Alison Damast is a Bloomberg Businessweek reporter. E-mail: adamast@bloomberg.net] Ten years ago, the wage gap between men and women graduating from top MBA programs appeared to have been nearly erased. {{that’s astounding, considering the rest of society..}} That suggested that women would launch their careers on an equal footing with men and then experience a gender-blind sprint up the corporate ranks. A decade later [i.e., NOW], a far more sober picture is emerging: The pay gap among graduates of elite business schools is widening, according to new research from Businessweek’s biennial survey of MBA graduates. On average, female grads from top MBA programs now earn 93 cents for every dollar paid their male classmates.
{{that still didn’t grab my attention. At least they are working!!}}
At about a third of the top 30 U.S. business schools, women earn less than men – sometimes considerably less. Female MBA graduates from the class of 2012 at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, for instance, earned 86 percent of male wages, while those at Stanford Graduate School of Business earned 79 percent.
{{Now, that has my attention. (I’m also remembering that Catherine Austin Fitts attended Wharton. Of course she had a lot of other things going for her personally as well, I saw some MIT in the background, time in China — she’s no slouch…)…Two more short sections of this article here:}}
“The gap numbers at the beginning are not very large and can be mostly accounted for by differences in grades, course selection and the fields people are starting in,” says Marianne Bertrand, an economics professor at University of Chicago Booth School of Business, citing results of studies on compensation among female MBA graduates from her school.
“What is much more striking is how much that gap grows over time.” The pay gap is especially wide for women heading to finance jobs.
A study of 2010 census data by Bloomberg found that among the six categories with the largest gender gap in pay were insurance agents, personal advisers and securities sales agents.
Women in those jobs earned 55 to 62 cents for every $1 men pulled in, the census data showed.
In 2010, research from Catalyst, a nonprofit group that focuses on expanding opportunities for women in business, found that female MBAs were being paid, on average, $4,600 less in their first job than men, a disparity that grows to $30,000 by mid-career, says Anna Beninger, a senior associate in Catalyst’s research department.
{{Add to this the fact that the dollar is hardly stable, you can imagine it makes an increasing difference!}}
Even women placed in high-potential leadership development programs often miss out on what are considered hot jobs, or projects most critical to career advancement, Catalyst found. Says Beninger: “Women’s careers lag behind men from day one.” . . . .
[Alison Damast is a Bloomberg Businessweek reporter. E-mail: adamast@bloomberg.net]
SHARE THIS POST on...
America’s Unified Family Courts (UFCs)– forget! due process, this is about “Treating” the Whole Family
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation + ABA + HHS/DOJ (+Monsanto, CIGNA + Ford) = Unified Family Courts = Treat the Whole Family
This post is three of (my) comments from the “(Kids for Cash)” topic at Scranton Political Times… Those who teach about “abuse” should be teaching about this — because how these courts were set up DOES rather explain why they have spawned (comparison intentional), literally, protest movements across the country, from their horrid treatment of litigants, particularly ignoring facts, law, and due process in individual cases). They are horrible wastes of time and mind (a mind is a terrible thing to waste, is it not?) — and exist to dominate and intimidate, literally, the human spirit and eliminate the “unalienable rights” that SOME believe are innate (“unalienable”) to every man. . . . .And now that “every man” is to include more men – -and women . . . . those crying out for “Children’s Rights” don’t even endorse what’s right to start with — the REPUBLIC (representative government under rule of law) of the United States (plural) of America — not the Oligarchy, the Aristocracy, or the THEocracy of the USA!! — and turning the entire country, starting with children, adding youth, and expanding upwards into adults — into a treatable-at-will population — is hardly a Republic!
I was checking NAFCJ.net for a link to “the money trail” and happened across an unexplored link on there to grants by this Robert Wood Johnson Foundation to help the ABA create Unified Courts. These grants spanned the period 1996-1999; my attention was hooked, and this is what developed:
It is worth processing if you are concerned about these topics. I believe we need to FULLY understand who’s running the Justice and Legal Systems of the country, particularly if we are in the situation of attempting to squeeze some water out of a stone in those halls. . . . . . .
I AM WRITING as a single woman who could never have anticipated, as a 20, 30, or 40 year old how dangerous this country has become for ethical, moral, working, and competent women who are also mothers, and value that role as they also value pulling their own weight. Such women are horrors to this system — as they don’t need treatment, nor do their kids — but after a few years in it, ALL will!
So this is, literally, HOW the ABA (incl. AFCC) and others USED the family law system to turn “divorce” into a disease and treat every one for it, as collateral in treating for substance abuse and of course mental health problems. That divorce is NOT a disease hardly matters in the face of such a policy backed by such power.
PART I (first comment on the topic from Scranton PT):
Since the idea sucks,
WHOSE IDEA WAS “UNIFIED FAMILY COURTS,”
ANYHOW, and WHY?
Hey, remember “unified family courts” and “drug courts” (I believe there have been some complaint about Lackawanna County’s right?) and so forth? – – – I just found an old article detailing how the ABA and specific funders were pushing “treating the whole family” and “changing the justice systems” to address substance abuse by youth. An unexplored link over at NAFCJ.net, and the timing of 1996 with welfare reform.
The goal, and the whole point, was to change the justice system — from the outside, not the inside. Foundations pushing a concept and working through the ABA & Judges, plus money didn’t hurt either. HHS/ACF happened to agree — so once that door was open (that it’s OK to revise the courts based on somebody in power’s got a bright idea) — it stayed open.
This is a link from the ROBERT WOOD FOUNDATION grants page. They also helped AFCC, I believe:
Liz Richards (NAFCJ.net) had linked to it long ago from:
which leads to:
Grants
$$$
How our money is misused to discriminate against women and children
http://www.statejustice.org/grantinfo/chifam.htm [broken link]
http://www.rwjf.org/reports/grr/029319s.htm [UFC link]
And here we can read:
Unified Family Courts: Treating the Whole Family, Not Just the Young Drug Offender
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is powerful one, focused exclusively on health fields (and the largest philanthropy with this focus; been doing this for 40 years; influences medical education field, etc.)and Unified Family Courts (for substance abuse treatment) were one of their projects
SUMMARY
From November 1996 through June 1999, the American Bar Association (ABA) developed six Unified Family Court (UFC) systems in three U.S. states and one territory and created a network of national groups to help educate the public about Unified Family Courts.
UFCs combine the functions of family and juvenile courts to provide a comprehensive approach to treating and educating young drug offenders and their families. This approach recognizes that substance abuse results from a combination of problems related to health, family structure, economics and community support. UFCs offer an effective alternative to a justice system that frequently treats substance abuse solely as a legal problem.
Key Results
- See Grant Detail & Contact Information Notice the Baltimore Connection (I have — it’s an AFCC stronghold) — this group helped Chester Harhut & Lackawanna County set up ITS “UFC”, remember?
- In Baltimore, Md., a pilot UFC was established in September 1998. The state legislature approved $1 million for the Baltimore pilot UFC project and $4 million to create Family Divisions in four other judicial districts. For each case, judges can order social services, including substance abuse and mental health counseling, and diversion programs. The Baltimore Family Court has also developed an assessment/evaluation procedure that the project director believes provides a replicable model for evaluation at other UFC sites.
I blogged this (with some sarcasm) in March 2012:
- Marylands Family Court Expansion, AFCC Model, takes Unifying Symbols to a New Level: Paper, Cotton, Leather, Fruit, Wood, Iron . . .”First of all, they are about as unbelievingly condescending and patronizing (move over, let us experts handle your family give us your kid, etc.) as it is possible for any human relationship to be, apart from some truly unhealthy (i.e., violent/abusive) ones. They deal in force, and subterfuge when it comes to proliferating the program, and like any good, truly disaster capitalism enterprise, they deal with distressed populations, exploit them, and call that service.” [My blog connects Barbara Babb of Baltimore to Lackawanna County pilot program in UFC]
After the Grant
The ABA continues to work with the six sites and has provided technical assistance to eight other states. It also is involved in a project funded by the Scripps-Howard Foundation to examine literacy as a way to address substance abuse in four family courts.
The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) launched a national program, called Reclaiming Futures: Communities Helping Teens Overcome Drugs, Alcohol & Crime®. It is building community solutions to substance abuse and delinquency by developing the systems infrastructure necessary to deliver comprehensive care within the juvenile justice system. See the program’s Web site for more information. . . .Funding
RWJF provided a $481,605 grant to the ABA for its work on UCF systems..(they mean “UFC — Unified Family Courts”)
In 1994, ABA adopted a resolution calling for the promotion and implementation of UFC systems to make the courts more responsive to family problems. {{??}} By 1996, six states had established versions of UFCs statewide, and four states had some UFCs operating on the county level.
[That, friends, is how the ABA operates…] [NOW for the FUNDING]:
Other Funding The ABA solicited and obtained additional project funding from the private sector and government, including:
- the US Department of Justice ($100,000),
- the ABA’s Standing Committee on Substance Abuse ($90,000),
- CIGNA Corporation ($30,000),**
- Monsanto ($10,000),** and
- Ford Motor Company ($5,000). [Ford is into most govermental things, and in the 1970s had helped from MDRC, which runs demonstration programs onw elfare and the courts, etc.]]
Those names should ring a few bells. Look at some of them!
* *”Grrreat” — Monsanto is “only” the food giant that’s trying to put non-GMO and organic farmers out of business and basically co-opt the US Food supply. (Ya gotta read this one) Monsanto, Wikipedia:
… multinational agricultural biotechnology corporation. It is the world’s leading producer of the herbicide glyphosate, marketed in the Roundup brand, and in other brands. Monsanto is also the second largest producer of genetically engineered (GE) seed; it provides the technology in 49% of the genetically engineered seeds used in the US market.”. . .Monsanto’s development and marketing of genetically engineered seed and bovine growth hormone, as well as its aggressive litigation, political lobbying practices, seed commercialization practices and “strong-arming” of the seed industry[4…
In 2009 Monsanto came under scrutiny from the U.S. Justice Department, which began investigating whether the company’s activities in the soybean markets were breaking anti-trust rules.[4][5]
What better corporation to contribute to an ANTI-Drug Abuse program which creates genetically modified seeds, bovine growth hormone, and strong arm tactics + lobbying to maintain it — and financial clout to help create an alternate justice system (treatment versus accountability….)!!
Monsanto’s Harvest of Fear (Vanity Fair Article):
[Starting to sound like the Unified Family Court “treatment Gestapo police” now in place? Birds of a feather..]
With an agenda like this, it’s understandable why Monsanto may want a role in dismantling the US legal system! !!! (Other Monsanto Gov’t ties) http://www.organicconsumers.org/monsanto/index.cfm
CIGNA’s quite a player also:
Gee, I “can’t imagine” why — right around the time of “block grants to the states” welfare reform — CIGNA, being a global “health service” company might want to help the ABA turn large parts of the US Justice system into a treatment-philosophy-based system, including treat the whole family for one member’s substance abuse!
So, here’s the ABA creating all these Unified Family Courts (hint: The ABA membership includes subset no doubt of AFCC membership, who also are into unified courts = more business for the mental health membership..)
“Other in-kind support was provided by the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT) of the federal Department of HHS, the Administrative Office of the Courts in Maryland (AOC), and ABA volunteers. “
In short — have to watch out for these outfits… (that’s the UBaltimore one — see blog post)
Here’s how the ABA overcame opposition to UFC in Washington DC:
In Washington, D.C., the ABA worked on a strategy to establish a UFC. Judicial opposition to family court reform, based chiefly on economic concerns, blocked significant progress toward the UFC model. The ABA met with the Chief Judge, the primary opponent, and worked with UFC proponents in the District. Family and Child Services, a branch of the District of Columbia’s Child Protection Agency, and an ad hoc group of representatives from the judicial leadership and social service providers, have assumed the lead in efforts to explore the feasibility of a UFC approach in the District.
Does this part of the ABA seem like it’s going to take “No thanks!” as an answer?
Publicizing by ABA:
The ABA developed a network of national organizations to support UFCs. The American Judges Association, the Conference of Chief Justices, the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, {{OBVIOUSLY this group would be in favor of UFC’s – gets its membership more customers!!}} the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, [NCJFCJ] and Join Together (a national organization created by RWJF that provides technical assistance and information** to communities on issues involving substance abuse and gun violence) distributed information and/or collaborated with the ABA on UFC programs
– – – – -**The phrase “technical assistance and information” ANYwhere should be better read “indoctrination — do it OUR way; but if anyone asks, we’re just “helping” (and not responsible if it backfires).- – – – – – –
Apparently in 2006, “Join Together” was phased out by RWJF to be replaced by a “VULNERABLE POPULATIONS” project:
”
The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF), which for two decades has been the most generous and visible private funder of addiction treatment and prevention programs in the U.S., has announced that it will no longer have a separate program area for funding addiction-related programs.
“Instead, any new grantmaking related to addiction will take place under the foundation’s Vulnerable Populations portfolio, said foundation president and CEO Risa Lavizzo-Mourey, M.D., in a recent letter to RWJF grantees. Often the neediest populations such as the chronically homeless, new immigrants, victims of domestic abuse** are faced with multiple health and social issues, including addiction, that must be addressed in an integrated way for these individuals to succeed. The Vulnerable Populations grantmaking effort focuses mainly on these populations.
**the substance abuse is often related to other kinds of abuse, which is already known (acestudy.org) from other longitudinal studies. Perhaps if someone could focus on stopping the INJUSTiCE (including violence towards family members) instead of constantly TREATING it (both victm and perp as if both were responsible) there’d be less substance abuse! (who knows?)
So now they’re going for “supportive housing” to keep kids out of the foster care system. Guess who’s helping with THAT project?
The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) has partnered with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families (ACF) and three private foundations to jointly fund a $35 million initiative to further test how supportive housing can help stabilize highly vulnerable families and keep children out of the foster care system. . . .Collaborating foundations include the Annie E. Casey Foundation, Casey Family Programs, and the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation
This groundbreaking initiative is based on a successful pilot effort in New York City, known as Keeping Families Together (KFT) that took place between October 2007 and July 2009
This is actually an upcoming grant opportunity, $5 million available, per HHS. It’s under CAPTA (child abuse prevention).
What’s Wrong with this Picture? (coming….)
Interesting: AFCC cite to the foundation: see note at bottom of the page: http://afcc.crinfo.org/action/search-profile.jsp?key=14482&type=web
This beta-test, demonstration gateway has been developed to demonstrate the structure of the Conflict Research Consortium’s joint gateway program to the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.
This test site has not, in any way, been approved by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.
Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess, Co-Directors and Editors
c/o Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado
Campus Box 580, Boulder, CO 80309
Phone: (303) 492-1635; Contac
— Edited by Outlaw_Wild_DoubleBill-KickbackCourts on Wednesday 4th of July 2012 11:06:09 PM— on Wednesday 4th of July 2012 11:23:37 PM
PARTS II & III:
The powers that be (like ABA, foundations, HHS, etc.) determined among themselves that treatment is better than justice. That some of them happened be in the treatment business must just be coincidence.
From November 1996 through June 1999, the American Bar Association (ABA) developed six Unified Family Court (UFC) systems in three U.S. states and one territory and created a network of national groups to help educate the public about Unified Family CourtsUFCs offer an effective alternative to a justice system that frequently treats substance abuse solely as a legal problem
Notice: justice system — or treatment system. Which would you rather have when walking into a courtroom? Would you like to know which one you’re up for when it says “court” on the outside?
So, here comes that Robt Wood Johnson Foundation:
The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) launched a national program, called Reclaiming Futures: Communities Helping Teens Overcome Drugs, Alcohol & Crime®.
… USPTO and trademarking social service reform (see that “®”?)
- pick “Basic Word Mark Search” and fill it in
- Search . .Reclaiming Futures: Communities Helping Teens Overcome Drugs, Alcohol & Crime and get:
Sure ‘nuf that’s a robert wood johnson trademark:
| Serial Number | Reg. Number | Word Mark | Check Status | Live/Dead | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 76117473 | 2592702 | RECLAIMING FUTURES | TARR | LIVE |
| 2 | 75627894 | 2540943 | PROTECTING OUR FUTURE BY RECLAIMING OUR PAST | TARR | LIVE |
They trademarked the act of giving grants!
IC 036. US 100 101 102. G & S: Charitable services, namely, providing grants to programs to combat substance abuse and delinquency. FIRST USE: 2001/01/25. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20010125
{interesting, executive order GWBush establishing faith-based office was 2001/01/29…}{Filed for opposition: August 24, 2000}
| Owner | (REGISTRANT) Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, The NON-PROFIT CORPORATION NEW JERSEY Route One & College Road East P.O. Box 2316 Princeton NEW JERSEY 085432316 |
| Attorney of Record | Richard C. Woodbridge |
(the logo is also a hyperlink)
In 2001, with a $21 million investment from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 10 founding communities located throughout the United States began reinventing the way police, courts, detention facilities, treatment providers, and the community work together to meet this urgent need
Amazing what a $21 million investment can do . . ..
“Reclaiming Futures has been evaluated by The Urban Institute in Washington, D.C., in collaboration with the Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago.” (RWJF helped pay for the evaluation also)
Now there are six partners, including from OJJDP, HHS (SAMSHA), another foundation, Portland State, and a research institute at Portland state.
“Re-engineer the justice system in your state” (how-to manual):
Bring Reclaiming Futures to Your State or Tribal Lands »
Re-engineer the juvenile justice system in your state or region to avoid unnecessary costs and cut recidivism. Here’s how to get started.
RWJF + ABA = UFCs + Drug Courts (cont’d.)
For the Record, American Bar Association is listed at HHS as “Private Profit (large) Business.”
HHS has donated over $20.6 million of grants to the ABA per TAGGS.hhs.gov. So taxpayers are supporting it, too, even if they’re not engaged in litigation.
ABA activism (from site below about Unified Family Courts):
From 1992 to 1996, RWJF funded the ABA Standing Committee on Substance Abuse’s Community Anti-Drug Coalition Initiative to mobilize lawyers, judges, and justice system leaders to help create new justice systems and structures to solve the substance abuse problem (see Grant Results [] on ID#s 019838 and 023195).
The ABA was also instrumental in persuading legal community leaders to support drug courts for juveniles, which link juvenile justice and community treatment resources to juvenile drug offenders and their legal caretakers.
OK, get JUVENILES into treatment, what next?
The ABA then helped cities nationwide set up drug courts for adultoffenders, which offer defendants who have been charged with a drug offense (typically first-time, non-violent offenders) court supervised substance abuse treatment in lieu of incarceration. Drug courts can motivate drug users to enter rehabilitation programs and reestablish productive lifestyles. These courts have dramatically decreased recidivism rates and drug use among participants. [have they?]
UFC’s complement the work of the drug courts. UFCs combine the functions of family courts (which handle family-related legal issues) and juvenile courts (which handle [criminal or status offence, they should’ve said] cases in which minors are involved) into one entity and provide a comprehensive approach to helping “families in crisis.“ UFCs incorporate treatment for young substance abuse offenders into the wide range of cases heard in civil court involving family matters.
– – – – -OK, what’s that mean?
– – – – Basically, where family court would’ve been perhaps about custody and divorce primarily, UFC’s tempt the judges to order more services, and treat the entire family — although the case may be as simple as a custody/visitation plan or a divorce, NEITHER of which are criminal matters. Also omitted — juvenile courts are not just for people of a certain age — they are for juveniles who’ve caused (or allegedly caused) some problems, committing a legitimate crime (breaking and entering, robbery, rape/sexual assault, etc.) OR “status offence,” i.e. violated some rules that wouldn’t apply to adults, like a curfew, or attendance at school (truancy violations).
Changed the entire climate, definitely affecting people with straightforward business in the FAMILY court who may not be sick or criminal. This was less for the families than for the court’s convenience, and for its liaisons with treatment-providing organizations.
You can look up ABA HHS grants around this time and see:
| #90CW1087 | |
| Award Title: | CHILD WELFARE RESEARCH AND DEMONSTRATIONS |
| OPDIV: | ADMINISTRATION FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES (ACF) |
| Organization: | CHILDREN’S BUREAU (CB) |
| Award Class: | DISCRETIONARY |
| FY | Recipient | City | State | CFDA | Budget Year of Support | Award Code | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1998 | AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | WASHINGTON | DC | 93608 | 5 | 0 | ACF | 09-17-1998 | $ 700,000 |
| 1998 | AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | WASHINGTON | DC | 93608 | 4 | 1 | ACF | 09-30-1997 | $ 80,000 |
| 1998 | AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | WASHINGTON | DC | 93608 | 4 | 2 | ACF | 04-15-1998 | $ 26,004 |
| 1998 | AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | WASHINGTON | DC | 93608 | 4 | 3 | ACF | 06-24-1998 | $ 21,276 |
| Fiscal Year 1998 Total: | $ 827,280 | ||||||||
| FY | Recipient | City | State | CFDA | Budget Year of Support | Award Code | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1997 | AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | WASHINGTON | DC | 93608 | 4 | 0 | ACF | 09-10-1997 | $ 450,000 |
| 1997 | AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | WASHINGTON | DC | 93608 | 3 | 1 | ACF | 12-19-1996 | $ 0 |
| 1997 | AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | WASHINGTON | DC | 93608 | 3 | 2 | ACF | 03-29-1997 | $ 0 |
| 1997 | AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | WASHINGTON | DC | 93608 | 3 | 3 | ACF | 08-20-1997 | $ 3,369 |
| Fiscal Year 1997 Total: | $ 453,369 | ||||||||
| FY | Recipient | City | State | CFDA | Budget Year of Support | Award Code | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1996 | AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | WASHINGTON | DC | 93608 | 03 | 000 | ACF | 09-25-1996 | $ 400,000 |
| 1996 | AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | WASHINGTON | DC | 93608 | 03 | 001 | ACF | 12-19-1996 | $ 0 |
| 1996 | AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | WASHINGTON | DC | 93608 | 03 | 002 | ACF | 03-29-1997 | $ 0 |
| Fiscal Year 1996 Total: | $ 400,000 | ||||||||
| FY | Recipient | City | State | CFDA | Budget Yr of Support | Award Code | Agency | ActionIssue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1995 | AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | WASHINGTON | DC | 93608 | 02 | 000 | ACF | 09-29-1995 | $ 400,000 |
| 1995 | AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | WASHINGTON | DC | 93608 | 02 | 001 | ACF | 09-29-1995 | $ 38,947 |
| 1995 | AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | WASHINGTON | DC | 93608 | 02 | 002 | ACF | 09-30-1995 | $ 3,310 |
| 1995 | AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | WASHINGTON | DC | 93608 | 02 | 003 | ACF | 01-22-1996 | $ 0 |
| 1995 | AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | WASHINGTON | DC | 93608 | 02 | 004 | ACF | 07-15-1996 | $ 55,125 |
| Fiscal Year 1995 Total: | $ 497,382 | ||||||||
| Total of all award actions: | $ 2,178,031 |
AND:
| Award Number: | MCU11A301 |
| Award Title: | PARTNERS IN PGRM PLANNING FOR ADOLESCENT HEALTH |
| OPDIV: | HEALTH RESOURCES AND SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (HRSA) |
| Organization: | MATERNAL CHILD HEALTH / SYSTEMS EDUCATION AND SCIENCE (MCHB) |
| Award Class: | COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT |
Showing: 1 – 2 of 2 Award Actions
| FY | Recipient | City | State | CFDA | Budget Year of Support | Award Code | Agency | Action Issue Date | Amount This Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1997 | AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | CHICAGO | IL | 93110 | 02 | 000 | HRSA | 09-02-1997 | $ 100,000 |
| Fiscal Year 1997 Total: | $ 100,000 | ||||||||
| Fiscal Year 1996 Total: | $ 100,000 | ||||||||
| Total of all award actions: | $ 200,000 |
Showing: 1 – 2 of 2 Award Actions
| NON-COMPETING CONTINUATN |
| KATHI GRASSO | 7 | $ 100,000 |
So, ABA is a partner in “HEALTH SERVICES.” Principal Investigator “Kathi Grasso”:
Ms. Grasso worked for the ABA Center for Children and the Law, OJJDP atsome point and is a member of NACC based in WDC. She has a degree from Catholic University. .She’s very active around the country and publishing on these matters:
- (footnote to an NACC publication) A Judges Guide to Improving Legal Representation of Children, edited by Kathi Grasso, ABA Center on Children and the Law, © ABA May 1998.
-
Kathi Grasso [From OJJDP “staff” list]
Senior Juvenile Justice Policy and Legal Advisor
202-xxx-xxxx
kathi.grasso@usdoj.gov
Video 2: Keynote: Effectuating Reform in Juvenile Justice
Presenters: Kathi Grasso, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention with the U.S. Department of Justice
Link to handout and Juvenile Ten Core Principles
| Award Number | Budg Yr | Action Issue Date | CFDA | Principal Investigator | Sum of Actions |
| 90CW1087 | 02 | 09/29/1995 | 93608 | MARK HARDIN | $ 438,947 |
| 90CW1087 | 02 | 09/30/1995 | 93608 | $ 3,310 | |
| 90CW1087 | 02 | 01/22/1996 | 93608 | $ 0 | |
| 90CW1087 | 02 | 07/15/1996 | 93608 | $ 55,125 | |
| 90CW1087 | 03 | 09/25/1996 | 93608 | $ 400,000 | |
| 03 | 12/19/1996 | 93608 | $ 0 | ||
| 03 | 03/29/1997 | 93608 | $ 0 | ||
| 3 | 12/19/1996 | 93608 | $ 0 | ||
| 3 | 03/29/1997 | 93608 | $ 0 | ||
| 90CW1087 | 3 | 08/20/1997 | 93608 | $ 3,369 | |
| 90CW1087 | 4 | 09/10/1997 | 93608 | $ 450,000 | |
| 90CW1087 | 4 | 09/30/1997 | 93608 | (etc.) | $ 80,000 |
| 90CW1087 | 4 | 04/15/1998 | 93608 | $ 26,004 | |
| 90CW1087 | 4 | 06/24/1998 | 93608 | $ 21,276 | |
| 4 | 03/24/1999 | 93608 | $ 0 | ||
| 4 | 04/26/1999 | 93608 | $ 0 | ||
| 90CW1087 | 5 | 09/17/1998 | 93608 | MARK HARDIN | $ 700,000 |
| 5 | 04/26/1999 | 93608 | MARK HARDIN | $ 0 |
Mark Hardin, National Child Welfare Law Authority, Retires
WASHINGTON, D.C., Oct. 13, 2009 — The American Bar Association is announcing the retirement of Mark Hardin, director of child welfare at the ABA Center on Children and the Law and an Oregon attorney. A legal pioneer in the field of foster care and the role of the courts in aiding abused and neglected children and their families, Hardin spent 35 years utilizing his legal skills and knowledge to improve the plight of children removed from their homes due to child maltreatment.
Beginning as a legal aid lawyer in Portland, Ore., Hardin handled family, juvenile and welfare cases, giving him practical insight into the lives of vulnerable children and families. In the late 70’s, during two years at Portland State University, Hardin forged development of the law on “permanency planning” for abused and neglected children and wrote several early publications helping social workers and policy analysts understand the legal aspects of a child’s placement in foster care. He was among the country’s first trainers of lawyers and child welfare agency staff, educating them in their legal responsibilities relative to children removed from their homes due to abuse or neglect.
Hardin joined the Center on Children and the Law in 1980 where, according to ABA President Carolyn B. Lamm, he became “the country’s foremost legal scholar on foster care legal and judicial reforms.”
Hardin’s experience includes having directed the ABA’s National Child Welfare Resource Center on Legal and Judicial Issues, a program of the Children’s Bureau, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
- Wait a minute. is this “child welfare resource center on legal and judicial issues” something belonging to the ABA (a large, private, FOR-PROFIT BUSINESS) or the HHS (a dept. of the US Federal government, Executive Branch, of, by and for the people? How can it be an ABA thing AND a program of the Children’s Bureau? Conflict of interest, much?
. . .With nearly 400,000 members, the American Bar Association is the largest voluntary professional membership organization in the world. As the national voice of the legal profession, the ABA works to improve the administration of justice, promotes programs that assist lawyers and judges in their work, accredits law schools, provides continuing legal education, and works to build public understanding around the world of the importance of the rule of law.”
[Was that supposed to be a JOKE? We are having frequent issues with lawyers BREAKING the law!]
AN AWARD NAMED AFTER MARK HARDIN:
First Annual
Mark Hardin Award for Child Welfare Legal Scholarship and Systems Change
The Mark Hardin Award for Child Welfare Legal Scholarship and Systems Change, created by the ABA Center on Children and the Law in 2011 with approval from the ABA Board of Governors, honors the work of Mark Hardin. Before his retirement, Mark served for almost 30 years on the staff of the ABA Center on Children and the Law as director of child welfare. Mark has long been recognized by those who work in this area of law as an early innovator in the child welfare legal field. He is recipient of the “Adoption Excellence Award” bestowed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; an award for “extraordinary contributions to children” from the administrators of the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children; the prestigious “Outstanding Legal Advocacy Award” from the National Association of Counsel for Children; and an award for interdisciplinary collaboration between law and social work.
This is understandable, given common interests in these goups
ANYHOW, now there is a MARK HARDIN AWARD, and the FIRST (2012) recipient of it is the Director of CALIFORNIA’s “AOC” “Center for Families & Children in the Courts,” — which is part of the Judicial Council — DIANE NUNN.
… {{“multidisciplinary” is code word referring to AFCC many times. It’s their hallmark. Why just have the rule of law when you could have social workers and psychologists as well?}}
SHARE THIS POST on...
Maryland’s Family Court Expansion, AFCC Model, takes Unifying Symbols to a New Level: Paper, Cotton, Leather, Fruit, Wood, Iron…[Publ. Mar. 27, 2012, Reformatted Jan. 19, 2022..]
Maryland’s Family Court Expansion, AFCC Model, takes Unifying Symbols to a New Level: Paper, Cotton, Leather, Fruit, Wood, Iron…[Publ. Mar. 27, 2012, Reformatted Jan. 19, 2022..] (short-link added 2022, ends “/psBXH-13l”)(<~to differentiate “I, 1, and l” characters, as you can see, last three characters are two numbers (one, three) [as in “1,2,3,4,5..”) and a lower-case “L” as in the word “lower” in this sentence).
This post has some tags which I’ll post up here.
2012 text begins below the next two text boxes (Preface/Previews in this color and this color) (basically two sections for me to explain and complain a bit why it’s still necessary to promote and re-publish this information, i.e., why you should still read this and other very early posts, especially one dated Oct. 1, 2012).
Except for adding some structure (boxes, etc.) to the post, or removing large images with now-broken links (i.e., to condense it), the text is as when I first wrote it, cleaned up somewhat and if any added text, I’ve marked it.
This post’s tags (also visible at the bottom of the post) and I see also “categories”:
Written by Let’s Get Honest, March 27, 2012 at 6:38 pm:
Posted in (blog categories): 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011), AFCC, Business Enterprise, Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Child Support, Designer Families, History of Family Court, Lackawanna County PA Corruption Protests, My Takes, and Favorite Takes, OCSE – Child Support, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids, Parent Education promotion, Parenting Coordination promotion, Psychology & Law = an AFCC tactical lobbying unit
Tagged with AFCC, AFCC’s agenda, Barbara Babb, Biblical Metaphors (Daniel’s Statue), Child Support, Child SUpport Incentive Grants, Dept of Family Admin, domestic violence, Education, Families Matter, family law, Fatherhood in OCSE grant priorities, Gloria Danziger, HHS influence on Judiciary, high-conflict, Jaycee Dugard, Kids’ Turn, Maryanne Godboldo, mediation, Mixed Metaphors, Parenting Coordination, Phil Garrido, social commentary, Supervised Visitation, therapeutic jurisprudence,Trayvon Martin,UBaltimore School of Law CFCC,Unified Family Courts
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
CONTEXT / TIMELINE of THIS REFORMATTING UPDATE, JAN. 2022:
If you detect some sarcasm (and very long sentences), that’s an indicator I’ve been recently exposed to some stunning levels of silence on the infrastructure and key players of the court as well as anything approaching tools to look for the funding, or remember what kind of Constitution we have in the United States of America, and what it’s goals are: NOT centralized control by an elite, self-anointed few who plan all in private and where possible seek to undermine rule of law and separation of powers between federal and state governments, and between the various branches of government. I’m also, upset by my own limitations in getting messages out while managing basic life responsibilities (even without young children still in the home), even after having fled “the scene of the crime” that is, the remains of my connections to my own family — and of course career — in California, after summer 2018…
Someone needs to stand up to the mis-information, not just “stand by” while it slides by and continues gathering momentum. Selling false hope ought to be, but isn’t a crime. It’s just unethical — but I believe that where good ethics fail to show up in the moral category, they’re not particularly likely to be present in legal ones either.
Withholding key information that would shed a different light than the one being sold on a situation, and which might lead to more sensible solutions — or at least refusal to waste time on ones with built-in failures and which refuse to look at the foundations of institutions (such as the family courts as parts of governments) is an indicator that the goal isn’t helping the public, it’s something FAR different, and far less altruistic.
This isn’t the place to identify which nonprofits or social media activity has “gotten to me” the past month or so. I will elsewhere, though..
I recently had cause to quote my October 1, 2012, post called:
Family Courts: Crippled, Incompetent and Corrupt — or just “Broken”? [Published Oct. 1, 2012..] (short-link ends “-1a4”]
Looking on my blog dashboard to locate and label (short-link), reformat it, I mis-remembered the month saw this published (and a few more draft) posts from March, 2012 which might also be worth re-posting. After all, anecodotal information tends to repeat and endure. While survivors come and go, somehow those saying the same types of things about the same systems they survived tend to have a longer “tenure” on publicity — for obvious reasons, i.e., their lives weren’t so disrupted ,devastated, and they didn’t, most of them, abruptly lose work, have to relocate in a hurry, and weren’t stranded a decade or a more in “high-conflict” (sic) divorces in a corrupt (not “broken”) family court system, USA, systems set in place by specific, identified tax-exempt organizations: two more high-profile than the third, but the third had the most vested interest in keeping the corruption in place. (The ABA, NCJFCJ and AFCC, in case you were wondering which ones).
Family Court “Reform” has been on a certain trajectory for two decades now (observed from the USA, but I also see the globe-trotting program reproduction and attempts to get similar legislation (can you spell “Coercive Control”?) legislated throughout the USA now that it’s been sold to the UK (2015ff).
I also think I’m going to re-post the Oct. 1, 2012 essay. It’s been over ten years and it’s time, altnough no lack of new developments to report on…
So, the globe-trotting and conferencing (without actual physical travel still possible) is even more intense recently, especially some of us “formerly-battered mothers/”family court guantlet survivors” haven’t forgotten what it’s like to see an entire sector (the domestic violence sector and self-appointed thought-leaders (as they’ve called themselves, on-line, on website, often for years) year after year spewing a combination of erroneous, undocumented on incomplete information to the unsuspecting, carried under advanced-degree and academic institution association status (i.e., as “experts” and all that goes with the common understanding of that word, in addition to legal definitions of it when testifying in court), and commending and giving air-time and in-hindsight sympathy to any mothers (target niche for carrying pre-fabricated messaging forward) so badly traumatized or devastated in the family courts trying to move on, protect themselves, protect their children, function independently from an impossible dynamic, they’ll go on “auto-pilot” without screening for truth, logic, reliability, and completeness of that which they’ve been fed, or screening what those who’ve been feeding it have been routinely, almost ritually, withholding, because it conflicts with the media messaging and the particular policy goals of such groups.
WHY this Update: To make it more readable while I’m in the vicinity of this post as blog administrator (and only contributor). I now include date and year published, borders, width-limits, and post title with visible short-links (in the opening body of each post). Also a blog format update (to two front pages, allowing one stationary front page and another for “Current Posts”) somehow turned all former posts into a sort of sickly-pale-green background — not pleasant to look at!).
Even though I doubt my older posts are re-read much; they are a record of what I was saying when — and a witness to FOR HOW LONG so much of tis information has been covered-up by people simply with SO much to say, SO many people willing to say it for them, mostly (so it seems) for free, and for a little attention and sense of purpose.
The cover up is just as effective by social “excommunication” from close-knit and in-synched messaging by certain people who’ve been driving the “family court reform” sector as if it were an owned turf — when it’s not. Others live in this country too, and what we have to say matters, whether it’s popular or not. Unfortunately, some us have had to also say — often — that dishonesty and withholding IS the character of cults, abusers, sociopaths, and people with an ulterior motive than truth-telling, or fixing government (for the better, that is). I didn’t ask for that role. Finding enough truth and having a conscience basically has obligated me to speaking it.
Preface to Formatting a VERY OLD (nearly ten years ago) but what I was saying then might as well still be news, given the typical “Family Court Reform” rhetoric, including of known survivor mothers who channel certain nonprofits intent on NOT saying what I’ve been saying — unlike most of these — since the time I first heard of it.
There’s a need to keep at least ONE voice continuing to say this alive. I’m still alive, so I’m intent to keep this voice out there, although it takes longer to put together and document with links (and/or uploaded images) post using reason and proof, than it does to repeat the mantras, incantations, catechisms so people go into trance mode and, like any good cult members, groomed personalities (or, are possibly being paid in more than just moral support and retweets, “honorable mentions” on-line for their collective silence on key elements and more probable causes of the family court custody crises), continue speaking the same ‘details-devoid, proof-absent, omitting the elephant organizations in the room rhetoric.
Meanwhile, periodically and privately, I’ll get messages (either on this blog or Twitter) saying how the information I post (i.e.. here and/or on-Twitter) or shared (privately as I have publically when it came up) has validated what they sensed, and were feeling really isolated about for not going along with the crowds who don’t like to talk specifics or keep “survivors” honest (keeping certain other organizations honest isn’t about to happen, I found out the hard way)…//LGH Jan. 19, 2022.
ORIGINAL (2012) TEXT BEGINS HERE:
This post is PR on something I just discovered recently and, to be honest, am distressed enough about to follow up by phone with the leadership of some of the groups involved, asking they why these things should be happening statewide.
The dialogue illustrates what’s going on, but is a little complex, and unless you have an interest in monitoring the expansion and methods of expansion of the family law bureaucracy WITHIN or as an ADJUNCT to our court system, you may not want to go through it all.
I think there is some legitimacy — however widespread, commonplace, and entrenched this system currently is, and however expensive and status quo it has become — to a theory that the “Family Court Services” if not the “Family Courts” themselves (as it pertains to divorce and custody) — are illegitimate. They are private enterprises posing as public ones, and servicing their funders, who as it happens, tend to occupy high places in (1) the Executive Branch of the United States Government (I’m talking HHS, DOJ in particular) and (2) the corporate /tax-exempt foundation stratosphere — almost none of which is truly accessible to individuals who are coming through these courts, unless they already have prior involvement.
First of all, they are about as unbelievingly condescending and patronizing (‘move over, let us experts handle your family — give us your kid, etc.’) as it is possible for any human relationship to be, apart from some truly unhealthy (i.e., violent/abusive) ones. They deal in force, and subterfuge when it comes to proliferating the program, and like any good, truly “disaster capitalism” enterprise, they deal with distressed populations, exploit them, and call that service. I come from California, and preliminary expose on this was done courtesy one of the oldest and (not exactly being updated) sites around — but it still is up and still serves a purpose — Johnnypumphandle.com. [[FYI, that website is still up I’ve linked to it in the title.//LGH 2022]]
Dedicated to Exposing Illegal and Immoral Practices in The Courts
… Particularly the Family Law System which includes the Courts, Attorneys, Family Services, Psychologists and Therapists,Visitation Monitors, Ad-Litems, Social Workers, Child Protection Agencies and all of the agencies that support these so-called professionals.
Collusion among individuals within the family law system takes place to extract assets from troubled parents. The system is designed to increase the wealth of the family law professionals at the expense and heartbreak of families. Corrupt practices abound. [EndQuote]
For example, why does the “Los Angeles County Superior Court Judges Association” change its name to simply “Los Angeles County Superior Court” in its IRS filings? and what are they actually doing at their special events, including sporting events, and how do they manage to have (year 2010) a net loss of $10,000, being such smart judges (only revenue — membership dues, totaling $50K that year)?
….. (This is a table from the Foundation Center; its format looks different, but I’ve posted tax returns from this source throughout the blog for years. //LGH 2022)…….>> Look under “Candid.org/research-and-verify-nonprofits/990-finder” to re-run this search (use the EIN# below, “95-4663773” NOT entity name!), or go to the IRS (apps.irs.gov/app/eos/ for, these days, probably a more current return. Or check the Secretary of State (businessSearch.sos.ca.gov) if this entity is still registered, which it probably is. The adress in 2019 still read 111 Hill Street (#204)…
ORGANIZATION NAME |
STATE |
YEAR |
TOTAL ASSETS |
FORM |
PAGES |
EIN |
| Los Angeles Superior Court | CA | 2010 | $120,654 | 990EO | 10 | 95-4663773 |
| Los Angeles Superior Court | CA | 2009 | $95,314 | 990EO | 12 | 95-4663773 |
| Los Angeles Superior Court | CA | 2008 | $102,801 | 990EO | 11 | 95-4663773 |
| Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Association | CA | 2007 | $87,134 | 990EO | 9 | 95-4663773 |
| Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Association | CA | 2006 | $90,509 | 990EO | 9 | 95-4663773 |
| Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Association | CA | 2005 | $70,106 | 990EO | 8 | 95-4663773 |
| Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Association | CA | 2004 | $55,818 | 990EO | 5 | 95-4663773 |
per “Johnny” (at ‘JohnnyPumphandle.com’)
The Los Angeles Superior Court Judges Association is a good example of one of the latter Non-Profit organizations whose stated purpose is “promotion of judicial profession pursuant to section 501(c)(6)”. (see form 3500 – Exemption application). The Association boasts a budget of over $100,000 – none of which will be received from members dues {?} – and most of which will be funded by “Professional Education programs for the legal community”. Unlike most professional organizations, this organization was granted(?) the use of County premises, complete with facilities for it’s [sic] office space and management of it’s business within the County Court facilities at 111 North Hill Street.”
They call it collaboration, or cooperation, or “interdisciplinary.” This person calls it, more correctly, “collusion” and states the purpose as accurately as anyone else . .. to extract assets from troubled parents. Like I said, disaster capitalism. Ambulance chasers. Sometimes they (family law professionals) get impatient and take control of the wheel, cause accidents, and then show up to help solve the resulting “Family conflict,” at public and/or parent expense. How philanthropic.
REGARDING THE TITLE OF THIS POST:
I called up Liz Richards of NAFCJ.net (who I think I’ve made it clear, has provided the skeleton which started my years of investigative reporting here on this blog and off it — not the motivation, but enough clues to grab onto, validate, and develop as now my own material).
She declared (I would like to see) that any family law judge in the state of Maryland must be an AFCC member to take office. That’s an INexact quote, but I was very shocked to hear that possibly membership is a pre-requisite to the practice statewide. Whether or not that’s so, it’s absolutely clear that this state is pretty well sewn up by those interests.
I have blogged before (herein) on UBaltimore’s School of Law “CFCC” in context of therapeutic jurisprudence.
This time, let’s talk about whose idea was it to create a system of family courts in the state? Perhaps you should forward questions to this person about what analogies of Paper, Cotton, Leather, FRUIT, etc. say about the Department of Family Administration’s disturbing (in)ability to sort, label, categorize and prioritize information.
Barbara A. Babb
Director and Associate Professor of Law
B.S., Pennsylvania State University (interesting — does she keep up with the Penn State, Luzerne County or Lackawanna County scandals?)
M.S., Cornell University
J.D., Cornell Law SchoolUB faculty member since 1989. Member, New York and Maryland bars. National leader in family justice system reform, focusing on creation of unified family courts. Spearheaded Maryland’s efforts to create a family court in 1998. Advisory Board Member, ABA Standing Committee on Substance Abuse. Member, ABA Unified Family Court Coordinating Council and the AFCC Family Court Review Editorial Board. Past chair, Family/Juvenile Law Section, Association of American Law Schools.
Telephone: 410-837-5661
E-mail Barbara Babb
This professional is clearly AFCC-friendly (so is the ABA, it seems), and heads up this Center at a Law School. Notice the bolded part. This is what AFCC professionals, who can do this — do. They Unify Family Courts (then preside over them, and appoint cronies). I’ve seen it in state after state. The Hon. Chester Harhut did this in Lackawanna County (as I recall) and the parents are already picketing outside the courthouse. Or, were, until some of the protesters got manhandled (so to speak) by a local judge’s sheriff’s, resulting in a federal lawsuit on the civil rights violation, and a second one on the inappropriate pushing of the GAL system on the county without running it by the public!
I’m only including the next individual to show that she hails from London! (see “three cities that rule the world”) in a country from which, allegedly, the United States fought a war of independence, in part to establish a DIFFERENT form of government …
Gloria Danziger
Senior Fellow
B.A., London University
M.Phil., Oxford University
J.D., Georgetown University Law CenterFormer staff director, ABA Standing Committee on Substance Abuse, focusing on how substance abuse/truancy are addressed in the justice system. Former director, Communities, Families and the Justice System, an ABA unified family court initiative. Former public policy consultant, reporter and editor.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
The Families Matter Symposium: Working Toward a More Therapeutic Family Justice System
The invitation-only “Families Matter” Symposium was held last Thursday and Friday, June 24 and 25, at the University of Baltimore. Co-sponsored by CFCC** and the American Bar Association Section of Family Law, the symposium promises to be a powerful catalyst for change. It was exhiliarating to participate in the exchange of groundbreaking ideas that emerge when you put together some of the leading professionals from a range disciplines to discuss how to improve the experience of children and families in the family justice system. More exciting, however, is the fact that this group of high-powered experts is committed to move from theory to action by implementing many of their recommendations for changing the family law system.
[[IN HINDSIGHT: Jan. 19, 2022, update: re-formatting and re-reading this post nine-plus years later,]] I notice that “CFCC” is not an entity and so cannot co-sponsor anything. This is part of a sales pitch (I’m currently struggling to get out — again — several posts detailing and showing how awareness of exact ENTITY names involved is key to following any funding. When it comes to the “CFCC” at the University of Baltimore School of Law, know that this School of Law along with the University of Baltimore is part of the Maryland University system — it’s a PUBLIC UNIVERSITY. Hence this symposing was in effect a public/private “invitation-only” symposium held at public expense. Also (I’m blogging this as I speak), the ABA Section of Family Law isn’t a separate entity. So the real sponsors here (at least as labeled) were too huge established institutions pursuing what seems like a private agenda for “Families.” How does that fit with the established ways to represent the will of the people and get laws passed? This group of “HIGH-POWERED EXPERTS” intended to CHANGE THE FAMILY LAW SYSTEM.
The irony of it, the ABA and AFCC (obvious primary connection Babb, and likely also Danziger at the CFCC) were, along with (per a 1997 Ohio Supreme Court document which I blogged, probably under the post titled “Blueprints” or a nearby one) the NCJFCJ, the ones who spearheaded establishments of family courts around the country — and by the turn of this century, hadn’t even got them in all fifty states. So, apparently if you established a thing, you’re also in charge of reforming the thing. No matter what the public does or doesn’t know about its origins, its financing and the private cult-like behaviors and allegiances of those administering it — and no matter that the public pays for it collectively AND, as parents going through it, individually. //LGH 2022.
Most definitely, if laws, and law systems are to be seriously changed, it should be through closed-door conferences of high-powered experts excited about their collective clout, at law schools –and absolutely not through the legislative process involving the general public voting on bills they had some say in, or (God forbid) perhaps even initiated.
A Dec. follow-up specifically acknowledges AFCC leadership in this, and gives a detailed plan, which I gather has been followed, and we might as well read about for a retrospective!
Thursday, December 2, 2010 Families Matter: Reforming the Family Law Process
It is hard to believe it already has been almost six months since CFCC and the ABA Section of Family Law co-sponsored the Families Matter Symposium. We at CFCC are excited about the work that has been done since the symposium to expand the Families Matter initiative. Because of the partnerships that this initiative created – among CFCC, the ABA, the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC), and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ), to name a few – we are able to tackle the issue of family law reform from every angle, something that has been a struggle in the past.In the coming months and years, we will work together with our partners to ensure that therapeutic reform touches legal and court structures, relevant service providers from across disciplines, and the lawyers and other legal actors who work so closely with families.
“and other legal actors”???
The 2008 newsletter I quoted is titled” Families Matter.” Now that we know where that came from, let’s go back to this 2008 piece of ?? listing marketable commodities to connect with court reform years….
“. . .Paper, Cotton, Leather, Fruit, Wood, Iron…”
SERIOUSLY?
Yes, apparently. Look for yourself:
Newsletter of the Department of Family Administration
…and this is now nearly four years ago! Shame!!! on those who did NOT blog the AFCC when they blogged against “PAS,” subconsciously? taking cues from leadership who, while knowing quite well about this, chose not to mention it in their press releases, news letters, or triumphantly mainstream on-lines, leaving the job up to volunteer bloggers, commenters (on those on-lines) and other “lone wolf investigators” who were honest enough to recognize something was missing in the protective mothers AND in the domestic violence rhetoric.
These people — and they still exist, generation after generation — should expect something a little better than to have the same groups simply sell out the mothers for profit, for professional respectability, for the ability to publish, for public platforms in setting agenda, and for nice websites.
To better understand this, also see the site “MDJustice.com” (I have a draft post explaining the presence of Parenting Coordination right next to Domestic Violence in a Family Law Task Force. This is relevant because the training and resources are intended for PRO BONO service providers. However, it would make this post too long….
I was very upset (and tweeted this) to discover HOW inbred the Women’s Law Center, and a spiffy website resource (MDJustice.com) focusing on pro bono legal services — not only are they sharing language of “parenting coordination” right next to “domestic violence” talks in the family law task force, (a clear indication of AFCC’s fathers’ rights agenda. You can talk about domestic violence, or even child abuse, so long as you don’t seriously believe this should affect how much contact the offender has with the victim, and act on that belief to protect the child or (often as not) his/her mother.
Newsletter of the Department of Family Administration
Maryland Administrative Office of the Courts (“AOC”)
Vol. 8, No. 1 summer 2008
What’s going on when a system of progressive reform and expansion of the family law system (with a token nod towards protecting people) chooses to name each year of reform after a COMMODITY? Subliminal message, much?
-
PAPER
-
COTTON
-
LEATHER
-
FRUIT
-
WOOD
-
IRON
-
WOOL
-
BRONZE
(See newsletter). These are collective labels to conveniently (and privately to those who get the newsletter) describe an 8-year agenda for family court reform. The use of these unifying symbols is specific to this court (from what I can tell) and is just — to tell the truth — weird. I am remembering about this time how Hitler was adept at using symbols, flags, mottos, gestures, and of course music & staged events to get his point across. So are the Boy Scouts. So were are certain religious cults. Is this what we’re heading for, again?
What do these commodities (which they are) have to do with the situations they are hooked to, except to, in the minds of the readers, signify some collective progress achieved in a collective goal?
Even little kids are often taught as youngsters, sorting shapes, and being tested on their ability to categorize various common objects. But look at this order — is it by durability? Is it by function? Is it by value? No – it’s a hodgepodge:
-
PAPER COTTON LEATHER FRUIT WOOD IRON WOOL BRONZE
By the most obvious (to me, at least) functions of the material, it would go:
- Writing, clothing & linens, clothing & bookbinding, FOOD, building & fuel, Building & tools, Clothing, Statuary-sculptures.
- very, very less, Huh?, yes, with some tinder, no – must be smelted, yes, no unless you have a serious furnace.
The book of Daniel (Daniel 2), (Old Testament) Nebuchadnezzar’s dream , at least stuck to one material, and stuck them in some sort of order, from precious, to common, showing the ability to (1) sort and (2) prioritize.
1And in the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams, wherewith his spirit was troubled, and his sleep brake from him. 2Then the king commanded to call the magicians, and the astrologers, and the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans, for to shew the king his dreams. So they came and stood before the king. 3And the king said unto them, I have dreamed a dream, and my spirit was troubled to know the dream.
In some ways, reminds me of our current Republican (?) system, complete with task forces, commissions, institutes, and initiatives.
4Then spake the Chaldeans to the king in Syriack, O king, live for ever: tell thy servants the dream, and we will shew the interpretation.
5The king answered and said to the Chaldeans, The thing is gone from me: if ye will not make known unto me the dream, with the interpretation thereof, ye shall be cut in pieces, and your houses shall be made a dunghill.6But if ye shew the dream, and the interpretation thereof, ye shall receive of me gifts and rewards and great honour: therefore shew me the dream, and the interpretation thereof.
31Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible.
32This image’s head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass, 33His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay.
Perhaps our current leaders should take a lesson from history — and learn to sort and select: The statue was described in general — and then in particular, from the HEAD to the FEET. Each part, in order, was described as to what it was made of. Then, stage set, the action was described:
34Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces.35Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.
36This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king
To begin with, the four empires with their metals and beasts [different part of “Daniel”] fall into a simple pattern: they are listed in order of decreasing splendor and increasing strength and cruelty to symbolize their moral degeneration from one to the next (cf. Daniel 2:39).
In the vision of the statue in Daniel 2, the four empires are symbolized by four metals: viz., the golden head of Babylonia, the silver chest of Media, the bronze loins of Persia, the iron legs of Greece, and the iron-and-clay feet of the successor states of Greece. The metals decrease in monetary value yet increase in strength from the top to the bottom of the statue.
Our author probably got the idea of the four ages from Hesiod, an eighth-century BC Greek poet. Hesiod taught that the world has gone through four ages, each one morally inferior to its predecessor: viz., the ages of gold, silver, bronze, and iron (Works and Days 106-201).[8] Our author need not have read Hesiod; he and his fellow Jews probably picked up the idea from Greeks living in that part of the world.
SO, What, exactly, is the organizing and ordering principle behind this Department of Family Administration Newsletters’ selection of:
PAPER COTTON LEATHER FRUIT WOOD IRON WOOL BRONZE
IS THE TRUE MESSAGE BEHIND THE METAPHOR ITS INHERENT MEANINGLESSNESS?
BASED ON THE CONTEXTS, POSSIBLY THE CONTENTS AND WORDS ARE, INDEED MEANINGLESS, ESPECIALLY GIVEN WHICH IS NEXT TO WHAT….
Here’s the cute description provided in newsletter, after which on to more serious matters, for example, what is the DFA doing, anyhow? Why are there DFAs? WHY are courts adding divisions to their regular courts, and doing so in particular “flavor”??
Scroll past my indented summary in this color font, to get to that discussion. The choice of metaphors is basically frivolous and meaningless — the real agenda has already been identified years earlier and is in operation nationwide, anyhow. The newsletter simply makes it sound more legitimate….
PAPER – Year 1 — “we have produced a lot of paper in ten years!” ~ COTTON – Year 2 — “Courts have found creative and powerful ways to make connections with their communities. In 2006, Carroll County Circuit Court participated with a network of community providers to create a guide that provides survivors of violence with a roadmap to recovery.” (Cotton refers to a “Clothesline Project” The word “Cotton” is as arbitrary as Paper in usage). LEATHER – Year 3 — “Over the past decade, the public “purse” that supports the family justice system has been strength-ened thanks to the advocacy of Chief Judge Robert M. Bell and State Court Administrator Frank Broccolina and the support of the Maryland General Assembly. Family divisions and family services programs are supported by jurisdictional grants given annually to each Circuit Court. In Fiscal Year 2008, courts received $11.2 million to support case management innovations and services to families involved indomestic and juvenile case types.” (LEATHER — the Purse Strings. The State Legislature, obviously, opens and closes that purse, and for its own reasons, opened it towards the establishment of more programs and services). FRUIT – YEAR 4 — “We profoundly hope that the efforts of the last ten years have borne “fruit” in the experiences of Maryland families and children. {{for that level of grants, it had better be more than just “hope”}} One measure maybe the level of involvement parents have in their children’s lives post-litigation. {{translation: access/visitation grant systems, plus some.}} WOOD – Year 5 — “The Maryland “bench” has been innovative in the last ten years,{{and produced a lot of paperwork}} and courts have shown a willingness to try new approaches. Administrative judges have adopted case management strategies to ensure family and juvenile cases are handled effectively”
(Currently in Pennsylvania, those administrative orders, for example, to hire a certain guardian ad litem, are coming under FBI fire (Lackawanna County, Stefanov case, Pilchesky case, see my other blog http://lackawannafamilycourtfederal.blogspot.com and recent local news coverage)
WOOD is for “The Bench.” Cute. etc. For example, WOOL – Year 7 — “Families entering the justice system are wrapped in the “mantle” of services that enable courts to make more effective decisions and that aid and guide families in transition. All Maryland courts offer co-parenting education, Family Law Self-Help Centers, child access mediation, and custody evaluations. Some courts offer psychoeducational programs for children and specialized parenting courses; others are experimenting with parenting coordination, employment programs for child support payors, and special dispute resolution services for high-conflict families.”*(*IN OTHER WORDS, BUSINESS AS AFCC/CRC/WELFARE REFORM USUAL). BRONZE – YEAR 8 — “The Judiciary’s family court reform efforts have brought attention to bear on the special needs of victims of domestic violence.” (It seems very appropriate that the concern for domestic violence should be limited to their “special needs” not their protection — and come last.)
The Administrative Offices of the Courts (nationwide) are enough of an issue themselves (and the various “CFCC’s underneath some of them, like in California). Yet under this Maryland one is a Department of Family Administration. I guess we all one big happy family, then? Or if not — and there are some unhappy upstarts, this can be administered? (reminds me of the Texas Office of Attorney General’s “Office of Family Initiatives” associated with, at least recently, Michael Hayes).
NOTICE THE DETAILS:
Family Administration – Maryland state court system (http://mdcourts.gov/family/index.html)
Notice of Funding for Family Division/Family Services Grants: Grant Documents
http://mdcourts.gov/family/grantadmin.html
Yes, please do click on the “notice of Funding” link above. You’ll see about 9 different categories of funding. I looked at “Child Support Incentives.” These are programs that bring money to the courts, if these services are utilized (the $2/1 ratio, I believe) and while it’s labeled sometimes Welfare, there is a way to get non-welfare cases involved as well. For example (and this is a CURRENT, 2013, OPEN (well, just closed 2/2012) grant solicitation):
“NOTICE OF FUNDING AVAILABILITY — CHILD SUPPORT INCENTIVE FUNDS GRANTS — ISSUED 1/3/2012, APPLICATIONS DUE 2/15/2012″
(Hover cursor over link or click on it to read description of the grant’s purpose — this is important, because it shows the HHS/Maryland Judiciary financial connection, in a Cooperative Reimbursement Agreement (CRA) according to performance incentives — i.e., how many child support orders did you establish, etc.
(update note: The link is broken, but the text showing if you “hover over link” is housed on this blog and can still be read (a magnifying glass might help.. or “zoom” function).
Given that, Funding Priorities, Category “A” actually seem to relate to — child support enforcement. Such as: “Privatizing and outsourcing of child support enforcement services; Improving automation capabilities; Creating public awareness projects; Developing programs and special projects;
But Category “B” may sound familiar to some parents with the toughest custody cases around, that are behaving very oddly, given the circumstances of the case: And this includes (notice order of Priorities here).
Other categories of programs that are considered “non-Title IV-D” that may still be eligible for funding upon the receipt of a written exception by the federal Office of Child Support Enforcement are set forth in OCSE-AT-01-04** and include, but are not limited to:
Fatherhood programs; Education and job programs for non-custodial parents; Programs targeting incarcerated or putative fathers; Teen pregnancy programs; Parenting programs; (in CALIF, this would be a “KIDS TURN” or KY or PA, a “KIDS FIRST” get it?) Mediation or couples counseling (including as provided by faith-based grantees, no doubt), and Visitation issue resolution when linked to non-payment of support.**
**WTH does that mean? When a noncustodial parent actually says, “I’d be more willing to pay my child support ORDER if I were given more ACCESS to my KID(s)??” In practice, this may possibly include supervised visitation, it may also include abatement of child support arrears in exchange for more time with the other parent.
These programs must also demonstrate a clear connection and collaboration with the Maryland Child Support Enforcement program.
**”OCSE-AT-01-04” refers to an “Action Transmittal.” Overall, this shows us that (no matter what a parent may have been told while filing for custody, or its modification up front) the judiciary is deeply hooked into the HHS financing and its incentives to do this, or that, regarding something as essential to life (in many cases) as child support. . . . . . And I believe this particular grant notice demonstrates that the OCSE/Child support Incentives ARE indeed in good deal about fatherhood programs” and parenting education (etc.).
Supporting Children Through the Judiciary Conference
(Broken link/Image removed/ description read simply “Photo of children and families.” The url reads: http://mdcourts.gov/family/conferences.html)
The Department of Family Administration is responsible for assisting Maryland’s courts in developing a comprehensive family law system. Family Administration has overseen the creation of family divisions in Anne Arundel County, Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Montgomery County and Prince George’s County, and family services programs in the remaining 19 counties. We work with judges, masters, court administrators and family support services coordinators to develop family law policy and to identify and promote best practices in the handling of domestic and juvenile cases.(1*)
“The mission of family divisions is to provide a fair and efficient forum to resolve family legal matters in a problem-solving manner, with the goal of improving the lives of families and children who appear before the court. To that end, the court shall make appropriate services available for families who need them. The court also shall provide an environment that supports judges, court staff and attorneys so that they can respond effectively to the many legal and nonlegal issues of families in the justice system.”
Connie Kratovil-Lavelle, Esq.
(*1) The sentence “we work with judges, (etc.) . . . to develop family law policy to . .. identify and promote best practices…..” indicates a different identity, a distinction between (1) “WE” (meaning the Dept. of Family Administration/”DFA”) and (2) said judges, masters, etc. . . . . . .
As I can see below, the Executive Director of this DFA is promoting AFCC policy, hook, line and “sink-it.”
There’s a long, colorful newsletter above, which mixes talk of in order, page 1, Civil Protective Orders (DV issues) & Parent Coordination Promotion.
(An AFCC created profession, hostile to mothers in practice, which does an end run around legal protections and due process (as it was intended to) and to date already has brought up serious objections from parents and issues of billing, in PA at least (I blogged this over at http://thefamilycourtmoneymachine.blogspot.com, including the underlying case Yates v. Yates, where a father protested the parenting coordinator, and the family law div. of PA Bar Case Notes (newsletter 2009), exulting in how they shot down all his arguments. Some of the casework I read showed a custody evaluator appointed in 2002 or 2003, who I looked up. It turns out that in 2004-2005 (per 2006 Winter Psychology Board newsletter), this same man was cited for discipline and subjected to supervision of his practice!
NEWSLETTER, PAGE 1, TOPIC 1 — “SEE, WE ARE HELPING STOP DOMESTIC VIOLENCE!”
Statewide Civil Domestic Violence Database to be Launched this Summer
By Clifton Files, Esq., Domestic Violence Specialist, Administrative Office of the Courts, Department of Family Administration
The Maryland Judiciary will be one of the first states with a comprehensive database of civil orders of protection when it launches the Domestic Violence Central Repository this summer. In September 2006, the Department of Family Administration was awarded a grant by the Office of Violence Against Women from the Grants To Encourage Arrest Policies Program (GTEAP). The focus of the grant was to develop a Statewide Civil Domestic Violence Database. The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) and the Maryland Network Against Domestic Violence (MNADV) coordinated with an advisory committee and held six regional focus groups to discuss and consider recommendations on policies, procedures, and uses for the database.
The end result of these efforts is a central database for District and Circuit Court judges and staff that will store all domestic violence orders, produce statistics, and enhance enforcement (cont’d on page 23….)
PAGE 1, TOPIC 2 — “BUT DON’T WORRY, DADS & AFCC PROFESSIONALS — WE REMEMBERED YOUR AGENDA TOO”*
Refining Emerging Practices Proposed Parenting Coordination Rule Completed
By Pamela Cardullo Ortiz, Esq., Executive Director, Department of Family Administration
Innovation always happens on the ground.*** In their efforts to better serve families, courts have experimented with emerging practice models, especially those with promise for assisting high conflict families who often require a great deal of court intervention. Over the last several years, a number of Maryland Circuit Courts have begun to refer high conflict families with child access issues to “parent coordinators.”
As practiced in other states, and defined by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC): Parenting coordination is a child-focused alternative dispute resolution process in which a mental health or legal. . .(Cont’d on page 24)
..professional with mediation training and experience assists high conflict parents to implement their parenting plan by facilitating the resolution of their disputes in a timely manner, educating parents about children’s needs, and with prior approval of the parties and/or the court, making decisions within the scope of the court order or appointment contract. (Guidelines for Parenting Coordination, Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.)
A Maryland Version of Parenting Coordination
To ensure that Maryland courts have the requisite authority to order parties to work with a parenting coordinator, and to guide courts and define the practice in light of Maryland law, the Custody Subcommittee of the Judicial Conference Committee on Family Law has developed a proposed parenting coordination rule. The subcommittee, chaired by Judge Deborah S. Eyler of the Court of Special Appeals, worked for two years with judges, court professionals, parenting coordinators, attorneys, and others to devise a draft rule and proposed application for parenting coordinators. Those documents were reviewed and approved by the Committee on Family Law at their meeting this April. The proposed documents have been approved by the Conference of Circuit Judges and will be forwarded to the Rules Committee for consideration.
The proposed rule defines the practice for Maryland courts and addresses issues relating to the appointment of a parenting coordinator, qualifica- tions, selection, term of service, removal and withdrawal of a parenting coordinator, fees, and the powers and scope of appointment.
Innovation always happens on the ground.*** In their efforts to better serve families, courts have experimented with emerging practice models, especially those with promise for assisting high conflict families who often require a great deal of court intervention. Over the last several years, a number of Maryland Circuit Courts have begun to refer high conflict families with child access issues to “parent coordinators.”
by Diane Bukowski (photo from http://justice4maryanne.com/) August 12, 2011
DETROIT – Despite testimony that Mia Wenk, a “social services specialist” with a bachelor’s degree in criminal justice, authorized the psychiatric hospitalization of Ariana Godboldo-Hakim, 13, and the administration of four dangerous psychotropic drugs, without reviewing the child’s medical records, a jury found Aug. 9 that it was Ariana’s mother Maryanne Godboldo who had neglected her.
Godboldo, who obtained alternative holistic treatment for her daughter from a medical doctor, testified earlier that she was suffering from a reaction to immunizations administered in Sept. 2009. She said Ariana had been diagnosed with encephalitis, not a psychiatric disorder. Neither she nor Ariana’s father Mubarak Hakim authorized their daughter’s treatment at Hawthorn Children’s Psychiatric facility after an army of police seized her from her home on Blaine near Linwood in Detroit March 24, 2011.
Sometime the silence is religious, but not always.
So, when these mothers then figure out there are more activist, feminist women’s groups who really do say NO! !!! to sexual assault (including in relationships) and violence — and seek some help or leadership in navigating their legal and civil rights in the matter, and/or the police force, reporting, district attorney’s office, or as it may be, nonprofit domestic violence support groups which might help them file a pleading to protect their lives (and/or their kids), when they couldn’t safely flee or separate on their own — we should expect to be treated as equals and intelligent adults in knowing who has a seat at the roundtable deciding our future, and the future of others in our shoes.
In Maryland, it’s crystal clear — the women’s law groups and pro bono service providers — do not see fit to check back with these mothers after years after in the court, and to perhaps courageously revamp whether the Parenting Coordination Pushers deserve a seat at the round table.
FIRST, mothers, being women, tend to look for women’s groups for leadership when it comes to defense against severe violence in the home, or in attempting to terminate a relationship. I know that’s all who helped me out — no patriarchal institution around did squat to stop, report, intervene with, or refer me to anyone who could intervene with, my ex’s nasty habit of assault & battery when offended, or when simply ornery, plus all the other things that I later learned compromised domestic violence (but knew at the time were simply terrorism).
Such mothers in these situations KNOW we could be killed, and after separation, are sometimes being stalked, threatened, have suffered serious injuries, major setbacks to maintaining stable employment and social involvements outside the home — or only such social involvements as will NOT intervene with the family situation and tell the batterer to stop!!! or suffer at least social consequences.
We also know (by now) that while the domestic violence groups have developed a language to describe and “unify” such situations, the domestic violence groups have lumped women WITHOUT children together with women WITH children (i.e., mothers), and focused their efforts on tactics and issues that assist the former — while failing to report in a timely and transparent manner about their dealings with the “fatherhood” (men’s supremacy) groups. They do not even report that these groups exist, what their names are, and how their influence affects custody hearings.
They do not even name the groups, do not name the primary groups running the family law system; they do not warn mothers about what lies ahead in enough time to protect themselves, or to build some sort of “ark” to keep from being financially and psychologically drowned in the legal system after the DV group got its warm body, a protective order, a ## to put on a report, and enough to justify next year’s funding.
In short, they do not report what they know because it’s simply not a transparent situation.
Mothers are not told that they are fighting a contest which is funded on the opposing side by the welfare institution that perhaps may be providing them with housing, food initially. That this institution literally has been diverting millions of dollars to assist “noncustodial fathers” in regaining contact with their kids, based on the theory that these same mothers are the serious risk to their own kids’ futures by the fact of not having a man in the home who is that kids’ Dad even when that kids’ Dad was assaulting her and/or them (or molesting them) is as such not a fit parent.
SHARE THIS POST on...
For Further Info — and Reflection
See also (next-gen blog, at least for me)
The Family Court Franchise System
Blog author in need of redecoration, has set up shop elsewhere. This doesn’t mean NO more posts over here, but perhaps better organization over there. I tangled one too many times with the gigantic “quotes” function & disappearing paragraphs here; I like the more flexible fonts available on the other platform. You probably will too.
Besides which, anyone who hasn’t figured out yet that the family court system IS a franchise system, I feel sincerely sorry for them. Last attempt to convince you of this? (just a sample)
PENNSYLVANIA-GEORGIA CONNECTIONS
For sale, on the site:
DIVORCE RESOURCES
For more information click on product page
The Psychotherapist As Parent Coordinator in High- Conflict Divorce: Strategies and Techniques
|
Parenting Coordination:Creating a Window of HopeMarketing Power Point
This power point presentation has been created in 30 and 60 minute versions as a way to educate the legal and mental health professionals regarding the process of parenting coordination. This is an ideal way to educate and market parenting coordination to your community. |
| To learn more and order click here $34.95 | To learn more and order click here $75 |
Parenting Coordination Assessment FormsEach assessment includes eighteen pages that include the following:
Forms are sold in sets of twenty. |
Parenting Coordination Forms: DISK A
|
|
click here. $75 |
To learn more and order |
Develop a parenting coordination program and minimize high stress for children of divorce! With this guide, you will be able to effectively help co-parents develop a collaborative relationship and child-focused parenting plans during or after their divorce through parenting coordination..jpg)
click here $50
Parenting Coordination Supplimental Forms: DISK B
Disk B includes electronic files in word and word perfect formats include supplemental forms for the parent coordinator. These forms include
- step-parent assessment
- abuse assessment
- child forms
- marketing forms
- standards vs licensing code
- agreement forms
- feedback forms
- communication agreement
- impasse assessment
- court contracts, and much more.
- For more detailed information click here.
Cooperative Parenting and Divorce: A Parent Guide to Effective Co-Parenting
An easy-to-read parent workbook that provides vital information and gives real-life examples and worksheets so parent may practice new skills that shield their child from parental conflict.
Available also in Spainish text see below
To view the table of contents click here
click here. $75 To learn more and order
click here. $19.95
Cooperative Parenting and Divorce Group Kit
Cooperative Parenting and Divorce is a 8-week, 16 – 20 hour program that is part video and part group discussion recommended for groups of 10-16 parents. The group kit consists of video/DVD, leader’s guide, parent guide and marketing disk. It is designed for use by therapists, parent educators, churches and schools.
Cooperative Parenting and Divorce GroupCertificates $6.00 per 15
ooperative Parenting and Divorce LeaderTransparencies
Cooperative Parenting and Divorce Group Quizzes $29.95
Leader’s Guide replacement $49.99
DVD replacement $99.00
click here. $349.00To learn more and order click here
Collaborative Law Assessments
These comprehensive assessments help the professionals determine the appropriateness of each family for the collaborative process and which members of the team will be neces-sary for success. They are also invaluable for use with divorce coaches and child specialists.
- Self Assessment
- Co-Parent Assessment
- Conflict Assessment
- Communication Assessment
- Child Assessment
Sold in sets of 20
Show and Tell Cards for Play Therapists
This simple flip book provides 29 pages of activity sheets that may be reproduced by play therapists working with young children ages 3-10 years. In addition each section provides information regarding different ways in which each sheet may be used with young children
Temporarily Out of Stock
To learn more and to order click here. $75To learn more and to order click here. $15
Crossroads of Parenting & Divorce 5 Steps to Prevent Divorce Abuse
Handbook
Crossroads of Parenting & Divorce 5 Steps to Prevent Divorce Abuse
Divorce Seminar Kit
Sold as part of a four hour video based divorce seminar or sold as a stand alone. Parents are often surprised to learn that some of the actions they take inadvertently harm their children. This parent guide provides parents with five steps to prevent unnecessary damage to their child.
“It is not the divorce that will harm your child but rather the decisions and the actions you take.”
$9.95 (Bulk rates available)
To learn more or to purchase click here.
This four hour divorce seminar is intended for use as part of the mandated divorce seminar requirements. It may also be provided separately or done as a six hour seminar for divorcing or divorced parents.
Kit includes Leader’s Guide, One Parent’s Guide, 25 minute DVD, Marketing Materials, handouts and more.
To learn more or to purchase click here
NEW SPANISH EDITION
Cooperative Parenting and Divorce Group Kit
Cooperative Parenting and Divorce is a 8-week, 16 – 20 hour program that is part video and part group discussion recommended for groups of 10-16 parents. The group kit consists of video/DVD, leader’s guide, parent guide and marketing disk. It is designed for use by therapists, parent educators, churches and schools.
NEW SPANISH EDITION
Cooperative Parenting and Divorce: A Parent Guide to Effective Co-Parenting
An easy-to-read parent workbook that provides vital information and gives real-life examples and worksheets so parent may practice new skills that shield their child from parental
$349 To order click here$19.95 To order click here
Here’s a brief trying to push the hybrid model, more:
|
||
Ms. Termini (of Pennsylvania) coordinates the GAL program at Lackawanna County, and Mr. Joe Pilchesky, as part of his public service, this WAS a public service; more people should do it!) posted her receipts to the Scranton Political Times on or about Oct. 3, 2011 as follows (a few months before he was himself thrown off the site by Joanne, who apparently got tired of certain behaviors, including cheating on him, dissing her (with a few threats implied) on the forum, and continuing to operate out of a home she owned, literally. No child victims for the local courts in that situation, but they are going to duke it out anyhow). BUT — here it is, Ms. Termini’s SS# redacted….
|
||||||
The hotel stay image, here, 8/22/09 — coincides with a presentation Termini, Harhut & Ross were doing at the National Association of Counsel for Children (“NACC”), only $215.43 for one night. It’s Danielle Ross (not Termini) who is the NACC member (per their lists, at least).
And some more:
|
||||||
and some more, for 2011:
|
||||||
(I sure hope those links continue to function….)
And he summarizes what he did, which doesn’t sound to me like rocket science. Posted 10/3/2011. Maybe it was rocket science, but somehow, I don’t think so:
All these were, and as of today (2/24/2012) are at Scranton Political Times under the co-parenting thread, which is under the topic “Doherty Deceit”
@@
|
||
NACC seems like another networking opp for the same sorts of AFCC personnel, only focused around child support and abuse:
32nd National Juvenile and Family Law Conference – Marriott at the Brooklyn Bridge, NY
8/19/2009
When: August 19-22, 2009 Where: Marriott at the Brooklyn Bridge
333 Adams Street
Brooklyn, New York 11201
United StatesContact: Daniel Trujillo (trujillo.daniel@tchden.org)
>>>Title of Conference is typically modest of these professionals, modeled after the parent organization, AFCC:
STANDING AT THE FOREFRONT: EFFECTIVE ADVOCACY IN TODAY’S WORLD
This was the “32nd National Juvenile and Family Law Conference of the National Association of Counsel for Children”
These organizations (at least one who is an affiliate of NACC) sponsored:
Co-SpoNSorS
-
Barry University School of Law
-
Ciccolella Family Law, P.C.
-
Colorado Office of the Child’s Representative
-
Georgia Association of Counsel for Children (NONprofit group started 8/26/2003, admin. dissolved involuntarily 5/2008 for ‘failure to file,” paid up and reinstated about a year later (4/2009) and now is back and running, though a little late on their 2011 filing also, it says)….would be nice to find an EIN# but the search site re-routes users to a licensure site instead. Hmm.
-
Legal Aid Society, Juvenile Rights Practice
-
Legal Aid Society, New York City
-
NACC Megan Louise Furth Youth Empowerment Fund
-
Northern California Association of Counsel for Children
CALIFORNIA *Northern California Association of Counsel for Children (NCACC)
Christopher Wu Phone: 415/865-7721 AOC/ Center for Children, Families and the Courts 455 Golden Gate Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102
Christopher.Wu@jud.ca.gov (this links shows you the OTHER members on that blue-ribbon commission)
Mr. Christopher Wu
Executive Director
California Blue Ribbon Commission on Children in Foster Care
One member (notice affiliations) incl.
|
|
These “cooperated”:
-
ABA Center on Children and the Law
-
ABA Section of Litigation, Children’s Rights Litigation Committee
-
Association of Family and Conciliation Courts
-
Connecticut Commission on Child Protection
-
First Star
-
National Center for State Courts
-
National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges
-
National Court Appointed Special Advocate Association
-
National Institute for Trial Advocacy
- Judicial Council of California Center for Families, Children, and the Courts
(SPEAKING OF ‘INTERLOCKING DIRECTORATES” — WHICH MY “FOR FURTHER INFO” BLOG ALSO DOES — ):
The California Child Welfare Co-Investment Partnership . .
is a collaborative group of state agencies, foundations and other nonprofit organizations whose purpose is improving the lives of children and families who are in or are at risk of entering the state’s child welfare system. Founded in 2006. . . .“Our public-private
partnership includes
eight partners that
collectively invest
more than $2 billion
in the state’s child
welfare system.”SOUNDS LIKE IT’S A PAY-TO-PLAY OPERATION…..
Partner organizations and representatives include:
- Administrative Office of the Courts
Chris Wu, Supervising Attorney, Center for Families, Children and the Courts- California Department of Social Services
Gregory E. Rose, Deputy Director, Children and Family Services Division- County Welfare Directors Association of California
Frank Mecca, Executive Director- Philanthropy:
- Annie E. Casey Foundation
Elisha Gilliam, Site Leader, Pacific Region- Casey Family Programs
Miryam Choca, Director of California State Strategies- Stuart Foundation
Teri Kook, Director of Child Welfare- Walter S. Johnson Foundation
Amy Freeman, Interim Program Officer- Zellerbach Family Foundation
Ellen Walker, Program Executive
Advisory CommitteeThe Partnership’s Advisory Committee is made up of nearly 40 diverse organizations that inform and advise the Partnership about its work and priorities.
sometimes I wonder where they are getting all these abused children FROM — and if the money were put into supporting the parents, PERIOD, there wouldn’t be such a need for CPS, welfare, and foster care to start with. in other words, MOST parents, just ordinary people, are paying these organizations to craft policies that drive their lives, and MOST ordinary wage-earners are NOT forming nonprofits to avoid paying excess taxes — because they can’t, or don’t know how to.This is how wealth is centralized, and this is who is driving our government. I suppose I should give the run-of-the-mill crooks a break, after all, they are just following the examples of the wealthy philanthropic elites of the country, which they hope to (obviously) join the ranks of — or possibly have, by now. (by comparison AFCC is starting to look like Kid Stuff, not that I forgive them their agenda (I’m female….) . . . .All they want to do get their piece of the coming utopia, which will likely eliminate the “useless eaters” once their purposes have been served.Do NOT kid yourself this agenda has changed, whether or not the rank-and-file have picked up on it yet. Another use of the term occurs HERE: The question is, what are you going to do about it?The Drug Story By Morris A. Bealle
“To teach the Rockefeller drug ideology, it is necessary to teach that Nature didn’t know what she was doing when she made the human body. But statistics issued by the Children’s Bureau of the Federal Security Agency show that since the all-out drive of the Drug Trust for drugging, vaccinating and serumizing the human system, the health of the American nation has sharply declined, especially among children. Children are now given ‘shots’ for this and ‘shots’ for that, when the only safeguard known to science is a pure bloodstream, which can be obtained only with clean air and wholesome food. Meaning by natural and inexpensive means. Just what the Drug Trust most objects to.“
This book was written in the late 1940s and is valuable reading in these perilous times. Read about this important book at http://educate-yourself.org/drugstory.html.
I take the drugging issue up a little more in the blog mentioned at the top. When a woman protecting her child from home invasion is handled with swat team and HELIcopters, over the issue of adverse responses to vaccinations + refusal to continue “Risperdal” after its dangers to her child became obvious (and an M.D. apparently verified), then we are simply in the situation of sitting ducks.“UNFREEZE – CHANGE — REFREEZE” has already happened. now, we need to apply the same theory and change things — not back — but to a different setup than this ‘partners in change” that see abused children deserving of foster care where they do NOT exist, and fail to see them where they DO exist. Perhaps if they weren’t spending half their time preparing for conferences, presenting at them, poring over each other’s research (and billing hotel costs to their local counties), this information might have surfaced earlier. Who knows….ANYHOW, apparently Ms. Termini DID show up (per brochure) in 2009, Brooklyn — with cohorts a judge and a GAL — and you can search the name in the brochure.
SHARE THIS POST on...
For Scrantonians — To Assert is Fine, but To Prove is Best. Study How Kentucky Got Its 70 Judicial Center Projects, 9 Court Programs (including 11 Divorce Ed. courses so far). You’re Next!
This post sounds more state-specific than it is. When pilot programs and model courts are being coordinated with help from outside the state to within any state, there’s little state-specific about the courts taking place these days. Remember also the influence of federal funding, and the speed of change facilitated by our lovely internet technology (think, approximately 1980s becoming more popularly accessible — but governments (especially military, who of course need great communications and data processing), academia, and lawyers will generally be further ahead than most of the public).
Original Post Published 12/21/2011. I had occasion to refer to it, and began updating 9/8/2015, in part because the Kentucky State Court had re-arranged its website, creating broken-link-syndrome. On noticing they, too, unified the court system, and by “Judicial Article” in 1976 created an “AOC” with a Chief Justice (i.e., centralized operations), I immediately remembered the NYS Unified Court System and its “Public/private partnership” with the under-reported “Fund for the City of New York,” (first funded 1968) which was labeled at some point, possibly post-1993, the Center for Court Innovation.
The Center for Court Innovation being often mischaracterized in print, I decided it was time to talk about how the system is set for privatization, and of course, global alignment internationally. This would be hard to achieve directly and get past most voters — but it’s already been arranged to do it INdirectly, under the lable just improving systems, and helping families, communities, and in the public interest.
Tax-exempt, tax (and privately) funded, and WHERE did your famous legal rights go?? Perhaps a better question to ask is where did the money go, which might help answer the former questions.
I added a substantial section (light-green background) to my 2011 commentary and word-battles (at a few points) with a now-defunct forum in Scranton, PA. It will become a separate post soon, I hope. If so, this one will be shortened, with a referral link. Maybe. (Catch it while you can…)
🙂
Righteous Indignation, Determination to do something, and a Healthy Sarcasm — admirable, I love it.
Also one has to love anyone who can file enough Right To Knows, get information sufficient to file a CIVIL suit against a FAMILY court racket(eering set of individuals), have (I believe as a result of that and related) suit, the FBI come charging in to haul off evidence (for what purpose, remains to be seen) and post it for all to see. And keep posting. Again, I came here from Kentucky — after I found some dude from this area (Dunmore, PA) getting his product marketed through the Kentucky Family Court System, which has a ridiculous number dof “Divorce Education” programs and one that clearly uses extortion to get Dads in arrears into fatherhood program probably aimed at about 6th grade (maybe tops, 8th) level of intellect. And that is called a “Court of Justice”!
Judicial Center Projects **
Since 1998 the Kentucky Court of Justice has completed, authorized or begun construction on 70 new judicial centers.
These new facilities have given Kentucky citizens safe, efficient, cost-effective buildings in which to exercise their legal and constitutional rights
[**Original Post was 12/21/2011; Updates, Link Correction (different background color) @ 9/8/2015]:
The Courts.ky.gov web pages have changed since this post, and no longer so clearly display the 11 divorce education programs below. More info at. Notice the AOC was put in place in 1976 by “the Judicial Article.” Their summary provides no link to that article, or description of who issued it, was there a referendum, did the judges come together in decide, or what.
Kentucky Administrative Office of the Courts
The Administrative Office of the Courts is the operational arm of the Judicial Branch. The AOC supports court facilities and programs in all 120 counties, with its main campus in Frankfort.
The AOC was established in 1976 as a result of the Judicial Article. The Judicial Article created Kentucky’s unified court system and made the chief justice head of the state court system, also known as the Kentucky Court of Justice.
SHARE THIS POST on...
Substance-Poor, Repetition-Rich: Parsing ~ Parent Coordination ~ Rhetoric ~ and some Organizations..(Publ. Dec. 14, 2011, updated (format) Oct. 30, 2017)
Substance-Poor, Repetition-Rich: Parsing ~ Parent Coordination ~ Rhetoric ~ and some Organizations..(Publ. Dec. 14, 2011, updated (format) Oct. 30, 2017) (WordPress-generated, case-sensitive shortlink ends “-WN”
My practice of adding borders and listing the post title with shortlink is more recent.
Currently this post is NOT listed on any Table of Contents (my lists only go as far back as Sept. 2012)…I see that many of the logos will not display, and that this post as written was about 10,000 words long. This update made only because a basic search on the blog for an organization I’m writing about again brought it up. (Update this time is only minimal format changes for easier reading; is not in detail and doesn’t include fixing broken links/missing logos, or more recent information on the organizations referenced).//LGH Oct. 30, 2017.
INTRO:
Overall, I seriously doubt that it’s possible to clean up or straighten up the family law system — at all, and I am utterly serious in saying this. There is too much incentive for fraud, and too much need to “pay the mortgages” in the courthouses by ordering more services, and too little oversight and tracking of the funding. There are too many public employees forming nonprofit corporations to franchise for-profit curricula (marriage, parent education, etc.) — in the old NonProfit/ForProfit combo.
There are too few tools in many states to track WHO is repeatedly forming corporations that go belly-up, only to have a partner or other person formerly on one board just go forth and from another one — in another state. Many of these groups, as my last post showed, are membership organizations — membership is charged, conferences run, and we have some evidence from county payrolls or vouchers from court-connected professionals, that the public is billed to fund attendance at nonprofits whose ONE purpose is to expand their services. Child support is one of the worst of these, but they come in all flavors.
Despite the bleak outlook — I still report and I am going to finish reporting on this field of Parent Coordination until it is CLEAR what the AFCC professionals’ intent is in establishing this field and, if possible, having it legitimized at the state level by establishing standards, or by mandate.
The Association for Family and Conciliation Courts runs many task forces at a time, as part of its strategic plan to expand (itself) and transform the “old” language of criminal law into more friendly-to-its-practitioners concepts. One of them which they are taking VERY seriously in promoting — and I take VERY seriously in protesting — is Parenting Coordination.
Parents didn’t ask for this — it’s no grassroots movement, and from what I can tell how it’s been (1) advertised (2) pushed and (3) practiced — there’s no genuine NEED for it either. For that matter, I see no historical record that parents as a sector (both male and female) asked for the family law system, either.
Why I’m addressing it — again:
(1) AFCC PROMOTED IT – NOT PARENTS. NO REAL NEED EXISTED, and SERIOUS ISSUES & OBJECTIONS AS THEY DID.
The LizLibrary lists a page of them, and towards the bottom, some legal opinions, too: Parenting Coordination: A Bad Idea
Here’s less than half the list — and so far I agree with ALL of them. Thank you, Liz (Kates, the FL Family Law attorney, not Richards, of NAFCJ.net)
© 1996-2011 argate.net frcp:
- Parenting coordination is an inappropriate delegation of the judicial function
- Parenting coordination is an impediment to court access
- Parenting coordination is a denial of due process
- Parenting coordination violates privacy
- The parenting coordinator concept encroaches on family liberty interests
- Parenting coordination represents arbitrary dictate by a person, in denigration of rule of law
- Parenting coordination is a make-work role newly invented by psychology trade promotion groups
- No studies indicate parenting coordinators make good decisions
- No studies indicate parenting coordination improves families’ lives or child wellbeing.
- Nothing qualifies a stranger to make family decisions for other people
- Nothing qualifies a mental health professional to interpret a court order or legal document
- Nothing qualifies a lawyer to play at being an unlicensed, unregulated therapist for hire
- Nothing qualifies any third party to “fill in the gaps” in someone else’s contract
- There is no definition of what constitutes a successful parenting coordination
- Parenting coordination does not, in the long run, alleviate court docket congestion
- It creates additional issues and leaves the door open for return trips to resolve them
- Parenting coordination provides a new forum for squabbling over petty disputes
- Parenting coordination is an additional expense that many can ill afford
- Parenting coordination enables one parent to spend the other’s funds
- Parenting coordination is time-consuming and tedious
- Parenting coordination is not confidential
- Parenting coordination constitutes continuous government discovery, 4th Amendment
- Parenting coordination constitutes continuous discovery by each parent into the affairs of the other
- Parenting coordination can never be “voluntary” because it implements unwanted court orders
- Parenting coordinators demand that the parties sign “consents” that give up constitutional rights
- Some have demanded that parties give up the right to go to court, contact police, or involve their lawyers
- They are hired or appointed under shadow of the threat of court sanctions or loss of custody
- They are agreed to by parties ignorant of the repercussions, in fear, out of funds, or overwhelmed
- Parenting coordination does not result in increased family well-being
- Parenting coordination does not make children happier, healthier, or better adjusted
- Parenting coordination is not therapy but coercion backed by the state’s police power
- Parenting coordinators tend to be hostile to, and at odds with attorney-client relationships
- They align with GALs and other court appointees in a pretext of “focus on the children”
- They encroach on parental-child relationships and decision-making
- They undermine the parental authority children require for a sense of security and well-being
- Instead of at least one authoritative parent, children have no authoritative parent
- Petty tyrants place a premium on the perception of who is cooperating with them
- Cooperation with the parenting coordinator is court-ordered and
- They alone decide if a parent is “cooperating” with them
From the same page, a case “Parenting Coordinator Out of Control” — and I have to note that it’s an appeal from an order at the FL (presumably 20th) Circuit Court Level bearing Judge Hugh Starnes‘ name!
- DVLeap brief in 2010 case (Washington, DC) arguing some of the constitutional issues More from DVLeap
“The Court’s parenting coordinator orders unconsitutionally delegate judicial power and violate due process… The Special Master Order’s requirement that Appellant pay for the parenting coordinators to whom she objects violates law and public policy… The Special Master Order requiring Appellant to waive her medical privilege violates her statutory and constitutional rights to privacy…”
AFCC could care less. They DEMANDED it and are still finishing up trying to get this mandated in every single United State.
- Even the brother of the Marriage Promotion President, the “Family” family, George Bush — as Governor of Florida, Jeb Bush, FL (2004) had the sense to object based on sound principles. A newly formed (probably for this purpose) chapter of AFCC strategized, lobbied, publicized, practiced, and finally managed to ram it through, over his veto. It only slowed them down slightly.
June 18, 2004
Ms. Glenda E. Hood Secretary of State Florida Department of State
By the authority vested in me as Governor of Florida, under the provisions of Article III, Section 8, of the Constitution of Florida, I do hereby withhold my approval of and transmit to you with my objections, Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 2640, enacted during the 36th session of the Legislature, convened under the Constitution of 1968, during the Regular Session of 2004, and entitled:
An act relating to Parenting Coordination. . .
Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 2640 authorizes courts to appoint a parenting coordinator when the court finds the parties have not implemented the court-ordered parenting plan, mediation has not been successful, and the court finds the appointment is in the best interest of the children involved.
- He lists 5 objections, two of which clearly recognize that it in effect allows a parent coordinator to function as both judge and jury of parents’ or children’s rights, and one of which is that it fails to protect victims of domestic violence. I also note from the language that it looks like a Committee (not the general legislature) attempted to have this substitute for an existing Senate Bill. . . . .
(2) The “Termini/Boyan Factor” —
- The People fixed on training parent coordinators have a terrible track record when it comes to staying incorporated(I found another one today — Seminars for Advanced Interdisciplinary Family Professionals, or “SAIF.” Formed in 2006, it’s already behind in its filings, in the state of Indiana. And it appears that, again, a nonprofit/for-profit combo, originating not with litigants, but with the professionals, was set up to give (again) some family law attorneys the right to crow about their own parent coordination training seminars they helped run themselves. By and large, that seems to be the situation in Indiana — which it seems New Hampshire liked a lot, too. Termini/Boyan are Georgia/Pennsylvania — but same general idea.
(3) The language of “parent coordination” is impoverished and repetitive.
Here’s an example, from a family law attorney, a bona-fide certified one (although the nonprofit membership she cites all over is anything but “bona-fide” when it comes to filing charitable returns in the home state!)
It’s even from an Amicus Brief (I THINK it got filed, although this isn’t the stamped version). Actually, this is where the title to my post came from:
CASE NO. C064475
SUPERIOR COURT CASE NO. 34-3009-80000359
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
__________________
RANDY RAND, ED.D. Plaintiff and Appellant, v. BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY, Defendant and Respondent. __________________
ASSOCIATION OF CERTIFIED FAMILY LAW SPECIALISTS __________________
Face sheet as posted at CaliforniaParentingCoordinator.com (using link from this 12/14/2011 post).
[Three images, inside blue borders, added in 2017 update. See also their list Table of Authorities].
In the statute of authorities for this brief, bearing the name “Leslie Ellen Shear” and “Stephen Temko” (although the certificate of interested parties form bears the name Shear, and is dated 1/27/2011), after the legal and rules of court list, comes:
Table of Contents from Amicus Brief (source url shown on gray window-frame at top of image).
“Treatises, Law Reviews and Other Authorities” – and on reading it, I see it quotes, among others:
- The nonprofit ACFLS (which she’s head of Amicus Brief Committee on, or was)
- AFCC itself (at least twice)
- A host of people, known to be AFCC professionals anyhow, for those who pay attention — such as Ahrons, Coates, Deutch, Greenberg, Kelly, and who knows about some of the others. These quotations include those from the AFCC publication, Family Court Review (joint with “Hofstra Univ. School of Law”) and AFCC newsletters, etc.
- Herself, like 3 times, in:
- Shear (2008) In Search of Statutory Authority for Parenting Coordinator Orders in California: Using a Grass-roots, Hybrid Model Without an Enabling Statute 5 Journal of Child Custody 88…………………………………………..5, 18, 25 (cited on page 5, 18 & 25).
(I’m also adding this quote in 2017 update, from the Amicus Brief):
ACFLS’s purposes in appearing as amicus are to protect and perfect the parenting coordination service model in California family courts, discuss the implications of the issues raised in this case for the future of parent coordination in California, and address the implications of those issues for other family court appointed neutrals including but not limited to child custody evaluators4, minors’ counsel appointed per Fam. Code §3150 et seq., mediators, therapists, members of collaborative family law teams, and other court appointed or connected quasi-judicial dispute resolution professionals.
In other words, to protect her own kind….
Note title — trying to legislate parenting coordination.
Another set of professionals tried to write “Kids Turn” into law around 2002, right? (see my “Kicking Salesmanship Up a Notch post.”) then-Governor Gray Davis (properly!) vetoed even the version of it put out which didn’t overtly say “Kids’ Turn” on its face.
So here’s a sample section of this Amicus:
On page 4, quoting AFCC person Greenberg (whose writing I also ran across) cites who came up with the idea, vaguely characterized as:
In 1994, the concept of parenting coordination was spawned by a concerned group of professionals in California and Colorado who realized that some high conflict families remained chronically mired in conflict and required something different. . . For these families, the traditional tried and true approaches to containing familial conflict such as litigation, mediation, forensics, and therapy had not worked. Thus, the concept of parenting coordination was conceived as a different and needed dispute resolution intervention.
(Tried and True? [is that really an appropriate phrase for use in an amicus brief?]
Try “Tried and found seriously wanting.” Don’t believe me? Look here. I’ve already mentioned the Seal Beach (CA) massacre enough times, so here’s one fresh off the press — like YESTERDAY, in Florida. Actually, it seems there’s an acquiescent mother in this one: even after Dad murdered the son, the surviving children (including one witness to that murder) miss their Daddy. And they shouldn’t even be supervised, but be able to go to events like church, sports, etc.
Sounds like perhaps this is a stepfather (or second family) situation here, judging by age of the children. And the shooter was a retired police officer!
Dad accused of killing son wants custody rights to surviving kids; judge lets him have unsupervised contact (Orlando, Florida)
POSTED: 5:56 pm EST December 13, 2011
UPDATED: 6:45 pm EST December 13, 2011ORLANDO, Fla. — A former Orlando police officer accused of killing his son was back in court, arguing for custody rights to his other children.
Timothy Davis Sr. won a victory of sorts Tuesday when a judge granted him the ability to pick up his younger children from school, including his 9-year-old daughter who authorities said witnessed the killing.
The retired police officer is accused of shooting his son, 22-year-old Timothy Davis Jr., to death at their Apopka home in what he said was self-defense after his son attacked him, injuring his knee in October.
Here’s another involving 3 children, and a custody hearing, plus prior assaults on the child and wife.
Dad managed to get himself shot (to death) after apparently attacking a state trooper. I do not call this ‘tried and true.” This was an American military, married in Germany, but the divorce action appears to be HERE. He also was Marine Corps.
Here’s one from Texas; 40 year old father, who apparently had custody? (or certainly unsupervised visitation), emails nude pictures of his 12 year old daughter. This man was living with his mother who, thankfully, was honest enough to do something about her pervert son, although somehow the courts weren’t alert to this in custody decisions:
by KHOU.com staff
khou.com
Posted on December 8, 2011 at 8:58 PMKATY, Texas – A 40-year-old father is facing charges for allegedly distributing nude photos of his 12-year-old daughter online.
According to court documents, the suspect was living with his daughter at his mother’s house in Katy when the offenses occurred.
Investigators said that in August of 2011, the suspect’s mother found emails sent from the suspect’s gmail account that contained nude images of children. Some of those images were of the suspect’s daughter, the grandmother said.
Sorry to bring up this very unpleasant reality-check, but when in Amicus Brief a parent-coordinator pusher talks about previously tried methods that work — the definition of “works” or “tried and true” apparently / generally just means “tried, sometimes resulting in death, physical or sexual abuse of minors post-separation, or having minor children showing up in child pornography in father’s possession.” All of these were from December 2011 news articles, only.
Keep these incidents for a point of reference while I quote from p.12, a whole chapter on how parent coordinators have such difficult parents to deal with, “poor them”:
… cases are usually referred to parenting coordination because they are chronically litigious and difficult to manage.** These parents have often had several attorneys, evaluators, and mediators — professional hopping and shopping is rampant. Their court files are thick with motions, court appearances, and allegations of wrongdoing by the parents.
Coates, Deutsch et al. (2004) Parenting Coordination for High-Conflict Families 42 Fam. Ct. Rev. 246, 252
**Difficult-to manage parents are the bread and butter of the family court. They are the income producers. Assigning them to parent coordination is yet one more source of income for the professionals, taken from either the parents, or (looks like there’s some effort to make even broke parents participate in this too — AFCC-CA has a workshop or presentation, on the 2012 hearing on this).
Perhaps the professionals in question should re-think the business of “managing parents” to start with.
So, the opening quote to this chapter is from two long-time AFCC professionals (Coates/Deutsch) in an AFCC publication?, although it’s only 2004, using an AFCC-originated concept and term, “high-conflict families” (although I hear Bill Eddy now says they are high-conflict individuals — see my post on “yet another AFCC wet dream.” and his High-conflict Institute….)
The child custody cases referred to parenting coordinators are the most complex, acrimonious, difficult and demanding cases. Most parents regain their perspective and bearings within two years of separation, and do not need this kind of intensive and ongoing service model. Parents who continue to re- turn to court with enforcement and modification requests after completing co- parenting educational programs,* and after a child custody evaluation are can- didates for parenting coordination,
* perhaps this speaks to the quality of the co-parenting educational programs, more than the parents.
* or perhaps they are pissed at being forced to take co-parenting classes to start with, not mentioning affected if they also have to pay.
Parents who need a PC intervention are typically a special group for whom the passage of time has not reduced the rage and angry behaviors of at least one if not both parents.
A casual dismissal of whether it’s just one — or both — parents here. We KNOW that many of these cases — not just some — are in fact cases involving danger, abuse, and etc. These cases do NOT belong in family court at all — but they are there because of greed of professionals, and because of the fatherhood movement (backlash to feminism) that incentivizes and insists that single motherhood is bad for kids. For that matter, even if Mom remarries happily, it’s still supposedly bad for the world if biological father isn’t in his kids’ life.
In short — Ms. Shear and Mr. Temko (whoever drafted this) — are, with their colleagues — unable to literally distinguish between one parent and another when discussing “parents” in front of others who have some privilege (like a statutory justification) or grant to give them.
BUT — their own handbooks, and some appellate cases already involving parenting coordination, show clearly that they are QUITE able to distinguish one parent from another, and not only do, but literally plan how to, target mothers, specifically, for badmouthing and possible intervention in the form of getting the kids away from her. (I have two links to parent coordination handbooks on this post, you can check them out.).
The 10–20% of parents who remain in entrenched and high conflict two to three years after separation/divorce are significantly more likely to have severe personality disorders and/or mental illness (Johnston & Roseby, 1997).
You can’t see it here, but on the pdf it shows: in this quote, we have a triple-layer AFCC site. I believe Johnston is probably Janet Johnston (AFCC Board, or was). Kelly, (below) who’s being quoted in the section, if it’s Joan B. Kelly, has been called the “grande dame” of AFCC and mediation promotion in the family law courts. She runs a Northern California Mediation Center, and obviously publishes too. And Shear is AFCC. So — if so — that represents:
AFCC Shear quotes AFCC Kelly quoting AFCC Johnston, as to parent coordination, which is an AFCC idea. (this is FAR more common than most people — who are less obsessive about looking things up than me — realize. I have labored through some pretty detailed writings (NYState) where when they ran out of ideas, they simply restated them, and I literally read ALL the footnotes too, most of which were “ibid.”
Understanding the characteristics of parents with severe borderline, dependent, narcissistic, and antisocial personality disorders, why these parents react so strongly to rejection and loss, how the child is used in attempts to re-stabilize their functioning and punish the other parent, and how personality disorders are exacerbated by stress, conflict and the adversarial system will facilitate more effective work with these difficult clients.
Kelly (2008) Preparing for the Parenting Coordination Role: Training Needs for Mental Health and Legal Professionals 5 Journal of Child Custody 140,149-150
I don’t know how to state this clearly enough. The difficulty any professional has — who by definition holds an option to quit the profession (which they chose) in dealing with a ‘difficult client” is no comparison with the difficulty of dealing — year after year thanks to policies — with an “ex” who has threatened to kidnap or kill, who has beaten one before, or who may be and/or has molested children, possibly one’s own (dep. on the case) before. Suppose the shoe was on the other foot? Again, if professionals don’t like the difficulty they have an option — find another line of work.
But thanks to their insistence on THIS line of work, i.e., at public AND private expense, and explicit danger to the communities — almost no parent — and I’m going to say mother, specifically– can actually get free from real criminals they’ve had children with, even when he’s already in jail.
I know of one case where the person has already done time in an unbelievably severe situation, and this mother/daughter who already went through hell — is being stalked again. Until she’s safe, I’m not naming names, but once she is/they are, I will – because this case was high-profile and has been in the news.
One point of view is dealing with comfort, and potential burnout, in the performance of one’s duties that have internationally networked, federally-funded, county-judicial-level endorsed, and more — support groups. The other is of staying alive, housed, and after that, functional and employed at all.
If one continues to read the Amicus, it continues to complain and blame. The next quote by Shear is of Shear. Here’s a little further on in the Amicus:
Parenting coordination is a very intrusive model, inserting state authority into the daily family lives of parents and children. With those intrusive powers comes a duty to exercise restraint, discretion and wisdom.
This work often creates the perfect storm. Parenting coordinators struggle to avoid being triangulated into the family’s conflicts.
Well, they triangulated themselves in there to start with, intentionally! Which shows a lack of: “restraint, discretion, and wisdom” per se.
From page 18 (“just one more”!) – This chapter complains that California hasn’t legislated parenting coordination by stipulation (i.e., authorizing it by force) yet:
The only thing that is clear about appointment of parenting coordinators in California is that family courts are without jurisdiction to make them without a stipulation. Moreover, no published case has upheld orders resulting from a stipulated appointment of a parenting coordinator.
The quote from Greenberg in this Amicus acknowledges that professionals in California & Colorado (two hotspots of family law leadership; Center for Policy Research/Jessica Pearson et al. are in Denver) “spawned” the concept. Or rather, it “was spawned” — we can’t name an individual father, so perhaps it was a sort of psychological gang-rape that produced the idea (just kidding). Unlike “collaborative law” which actually names a father, “Stu Webb” out of MN. . .. And that this began in the 1990s.
We are now in 2011. Perhaps it’s time to admit that it’s a bad idea to start with; if even in California — where AFCC originated — they can’t get it into law!
The text continues — and understanding that I don’t know the underlying case, have not read the entire brief and am not an attorney, I’m to add a comment to the next section:
Of course, courts have no power to modify statutes. Statutes prescribe and proscribe what courts may do.
Damn right they do! On the other hand, has that really slowed down AFCC initiatives, has it? I think there’s been a track record of resounding success, if getting around constitutional and statutory limits pending changing the statutes to accommodate more income streams to court-connected (or formerly court-connected, like retired judges) professionals… is what’s intended.
The California Constitution (art. VI, § 22) prohibits the delegation of judicial power except for the performance of subordinate judicial duties. A trial court lacks either statutory or inherent power to require the parties to bear the cost of a special master’s services, even where it may have the authority to make the appointment. (People v. Superior Court (Laff) (2001) 25 Cal.4th 703)
The Court of Appeal reversed trial court orders delegating authority over the visitation schedule to a child custody evaluator, requiring one of the parents to participate in psychotherapy and requiring that all future custody mat- ters be heard before the same bench officer in In re Marriage of Matthews (1980) 101 Cal.App.3d 811, 816–817 because there was no statutory authority supporting such a delegation.
Just GUESSING here, but perhaps if over a 21-year period (in one state), it’s still being stated that there are Constitutional limits on delegating Judicial power, and three years later the Governor of Florida (Jeb Bush) brings it up in a reason for vetoing a parent coordination stipulation — there just MIGHT be a good reason! Parent Coordination is hardly an Occupy San Francisco (or anywhere else in California) grassroots protest or demand, is it, either?
We’re third generation fatherhood programs out here, we are also probably at least second-generation post-TANF (1996), post fatherhood (i.e., about 15-16 years since they passed), and perhaps– just perhaps — the last thing this state needs is more ideas originating from this nonprofit and all its collaborators in therapeutic jurisprudence great ideas.
Perhaps — just perhaps — it’s a good thing if constitutional and statutory limits on out-sourcing the judicial function mean something around here, for a change! Be content with what you got so far, as authorized by access/visitation (three categories of potential program fraud enabled) and all the marriage promotion money too, plus lots of the nonprofits — like ACFLS — not even bothering to report into the state Registry of Charitable Trusts (OAG) anyhow!
(REASON 4)
(4)
Moreover — like most AFCC promotions — the language promoting parent coordination continues to refuse to think or talk in terms of legal rights to INDIVIDUALS as the Declaration of Independence asserted, which helped kickstart the USA, claims they are. The language of parent coordination is continually pluralized, or group-talk. It does not, really, acknowledge that a person could be a member of a family (like “parent” “father” or “mother”) and yet really have — and deserve — equal standing as an individual in any matter, before the law.
Here’s an example from ParentCoordinationCentral.com (Termini/Boyan site). These are the supposed GOALS OF PARENT COORDINATION:
-
Educate parents regarding the impact of their behaviors on their child(ren)’s development.
[supports my thesis that AFCC members are often frustrated teachers. They want to teach EVERYONE, and if people don’t agree, they are clever about figuring out ways to force this, and be paid for it, too.] -
Reduce parental conflict through anger management, communication and conflict resolutions skills.[increasing the expense of divorce, treating parents like kids, undermining judicial authority, & due process, and invading one’s privacy sure will “reduce parental conflict”!! . .. And I haven’t even got (this post anyhow) to the training manual which has an openly hostile attitude towards mothers, it’s unbelievable).
-
Decrease inappropriate parental behaviors to reduce stress for the child.[goes with AFCC goal of switching from a legally defined set of prohibited behaviors to an arbitrary, subjective, and personalized version of what is appropriate or inappropriate parental behavior. Instead, how about just accept the basic definitions in the law, and as to court orders, compliance with them?]
-
Work with parents in developing a detailed plan for issues such as discipline, decision-making, communication, etc.[Good Grief! — Go have your own children, and raise them — well. Let’s see what fine examples they are, then parents can judge FREELY whether Mr. , Ms. & Mrs. Parent Coordinators are competent to make these plans. I mean — the concept is ridiculous! What about various cultures and family values, so long as they are not child abuse, domestic violence, or otherwise illegal?] [Even then it probably wouldn’t be a comparable situation, because the psychologists involved with the court, and AFCC professionals can usually drum up plenty of high-paying business, whereas a lot of the parents they are dealing with probably, by the time they are on the scene, absolutely cannot.]
-
Create a more relaxed home atmosphere allowing the child to adjust more effectively with the new family structure.[You want to have a more relaxed home atmosphere with children/ Again, go have your own and show it to us. Then we can, awestruck by your competence – – and if we want to — copy it!]
-
Collaborate with professionals involved with the family in order to offer coordinated service.[that’s closer to the real reason for it — more business referrals to colleagues]
-
Monitor parental behaviors to ensure that parents are fulfilling their obligations to their child while complying with the recommendations of the Court.[Children need due process, and they need an active, and respected Bill of Rights, for when they grow up. One purpose of the Bill of Rights was to keep snoops out of one’s private business, so long as that business didn’t ramble over into the criminal arena. It’s called LIFE, LIBERTY and PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. How can one pursue anything with the thought police on one’s heels?. . . . .Anyone who’s trying to function as a parent coordinator, and talking about children’s needs constantly (to justify it) apparently doesn’t comprehend what long-term dedication to one’s family AND country entails. It entails respecting its laws. I have before blogged an SF-area parent coordinator and family law attorney, who posted on his own site that the Constitution needs to be scrapped and rewritten, why revere it like Christians revere their Bible (guess he’s not one, and doesn’t understand how few Christians actually practice what’s in their Bible — or Constitution — to start with…)]
- The NH “Parent Coordinators” Association of 2009 “FAQs” suggest a benefit is:
- Q. What are the benefits of Parenting Coordination?
Parenting Coordination offers a much better way of resolving parenting plan issues than returning to court. And the resolution comes much faster than waiting for a court date and then the court decision. The Parenting Coordinator educates the parents about the harm to the children of hostility between parents, mediates issues as they arise, and if the parents are unable to resolve minor issues, makes the decision.
As ever, when selling their services, AFCC professionals see themselves as the mature adults on the scene, and the parents as a “plural,” and refuse to assign responsibility where it’s perhaps due. They seem to utterly lack curiosity in fact-finding as to that matter. This is understandable, because they deal in “psychology” more than law– which is the culture of the association. While two individual parents are often involved, in the marketing prose, it’s always “the parents” v. “the helping professionals”
However, once in the door, and in practice — then they are quick to blame ONE parent, often the mother, and recommend severe intervention, often removing of contact with the children to counter supposed “alienation.” In other words, they are hypocrites — professing neutrality and to be helping, but planning in advance (in this case) to do harm to one gender — the female, should she as a parent (mother) counter them.
I blogged this earlier, but again (from the same site) — here is their “sample” report from the handbook:
A handbook for the purpose and practice of parenting coordination prepared by PCANH.
Parts of this were credited (fn1 inside) to “Families Moving Forward, Inc.” in Indiana. This is a nonprofit formed in 2005, EIN# 432074631 with principal listed c/o “Gloria K. Mitchell.”
So of course I looked this person up — she is a Rising Star Super Attorney, member of National Association of Counsel for Children, and works in a four-woman firm. The nonprofit, however, is categorized as “exempt — earning under $25,000). website’s “Divorce and Parenting Research Links” is typical, plus a direct link to the Children’s Rights Council” (hover URL). CRC is pretty big in Indiana… Six years after passing the bar, Ms. Mitchell was on the Executive Committee of Family Law Section of Indiana Bar Assoc., and chaired it in 2005. The articles of incorporation show it’s a 501(c)4 (not “3”) and by address its place of business is another law firm in Noblesville, Indiana: Holt, Fleck & Romini. If the image (showing org.’s purpose) doesn’t show, it’s viewable for free on the site below.
| Entity Name | Type | Entity Type | City / State |
|---|---|---|---|
| FAMILIES MOVING FORWARD, INC. | Legal | Non-Profit Domestic Corporation | INDIANAPOLIS, IN |
Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum
3rd Annual Family Law Summer Institute
and Family ICO Training Session July 28-29, 2005*
Amy concentrates her practice in matrimonial and family law matters. She was one of the first Indiana attorneys trained in collaborative law, and she has been instrumental in introducing the approach in Indiana. She has practiced collaborative law since 2007, has attended several conferences of the International Association of Collaborative Professionals,* and has been trained by collaborative law founder Stuart Webb. In addition, Amy also practices traditional litigation.
*Readers probably may not remember, so I’ll remind us. the “IACP” is another incarnation, membership association — out of many — formed by AFCC-type professionals, as you can see by the description:
ACP is the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals, an international community of legal, mental health and financial professionals working in concert to create client-centered processes for resolving conflict.
In May of 1999, the first annual AICP [=American Institute of Collaborative Professionals] networking forum was held in Oakland, California. The following year, a meeting was held in Chicago to discuss the state of Collaborative legal practice across the country. The nearly 50 practitioners who attended this meeting agreed that AICP should serve as the umbrella organization for our rapidly-growing movement. At the same time, they recognized that since Collaborative Practice was also developing exponentially across Canada, the organization needed a broader, more inclusive name and mission. Thus the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals was born in late 2000, officially changing its name in 2001.
The Collaborative Review has been published continuously since May, 1999. The work begun by initial editors Jennifer Jackson and Pauline Tesler. . .
Jennifer Jackson (FYI, I’ve never met, spoken to, or dealt with her in court) is kind of branded in my mind as having helped start up Kids’ Turn (SF):
FYI — here is another Super Lawyer, high-profile, longstanding success. Her “about” page lists many accomplishments. Notice which comes first; notice also the variety of terms which are basic to the field: I’ll bold them:
About Jennifer Jackson
Before becoming a family lawyer in 1985, Jennifer Jackson was an illustrator and photographer, raising three children.
A LITTLE LOCAL COMMENTARY relating to this Super-Productive/Super Attorney and her many Nonprofits:
I know artists, including photographers and illustrators. It’s not that easy to make a living at; this speaks of either a good prior divorce settlement, (or not marrying) or some substantial education somewhere along the line, undergrad plus law school. That’s quite a set of accomplishments, but I don’t think represents an indigence. See Resume:
- BA with Honors in 1966, became family lawyer (passed bar?)
- 1985, with Professor’s Assistanceships (in law school) on child-related and mediation topics. Maybe I can assume that almost 20 year gap is called “Mom” and “Wife” time.
- In 1987, she helped found Kids’ Turn and was simultaneously involved in PTA Board at “Campolindo High School” where her kids probably attended. Campolindo is — well, its site describes it well:
“Located in the hills east of the University of California, Berkeley, Campolindo serves the professionally-oriented and well-educated suburban communities of Moraga and Lafayette. Students, teachers and parents work together to provide a positive climate for learning where mutual respect, trust and esteem are valued. ” . . .”In statewide API (Academic Performance Index) ratings, for the fifth year in a row, both the Acalanes District and Campolindo are ranked in the very top percentiles of all public high schools in California with an API score of 919. Nationally, Campolindo is recognized regularly in Newsweek magazine as one of the “Best High Schools in America”. The Association of Californa School Administrators honored Campolindo’s Principal, Carol Kitchens, as the Secondary Principal of the Year in 2009
Blending this background of creativity, caring and flexibility with her legal training enhances her practice of family law and expands the options for her clients.
Jennifer believes that a lawyer must be actively involved in her professional community, and that life is about making a difference. Jennifer is one of the founders of Kids’ Turn, a program for separating families begun in San Francisco which has expanded exponentially in size and in quality of service to children and families.
(If you know my blog, you know EXACTLY why and how Kids’ Turn “expanded exponentially in size” — see family law attorneys, evaluators & judges on the board, see access/visitation funds “facilitating” parent education programs. . . . .As to the quality of service? That’s debatable, but as I haven’t sat through any of the classes — except to note they use the word “parental alienation” a lot in stating benefits, i.e., “reduces parental alienation” type claims. I’ll withhold judgment on this, as should others who haven’t !!)
She is one of the founders of the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals and served for eight years as co-editor of its journal, The Collaborative Review. She has had leadership roles in her professional organizations at local, state national and international levels, and is a past president of the Northern California chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.
Within five years of passing the bar, she is serving as a judge pro tem– how common is that? Or this?
Standing Committee on Custody, North: Chair 1988-1990
San Francisco Bar Association
Executive Committee, Family Law Section: Chair, 1992; Member: 1987-present
Fee Arbitration Panel: 1988-1990
Barristers Club, Co-Chair, Family Law Committee: 1988-1990
BASF Delegate to the State Bar Convention: 1989, 1990
Volunteer Legal Services Program Volunteer Attorney: 1986-2000[[This is almost another topic — I’ve footnoted it [VLSP* at bottom of post, a section in itself….]
Expert: Temporary Restraining Order Clinic
Jennifer has been given an “AV” rating by Martindale-Hubbell and has been named one of the top 50 female lawyers (“Super Lawyers”) in Northern California in all areas of practice by Law and Politics Publications for the past five years in a row. Jennifer practices alternative dispute resolution exclusively; she has trained extensively in mediation and collaboration, and is committed to keeping clients out of court and at the negotiating table.
| The IACP has created Standards for practitioners, trainers and collaborative practice trainings. It has promulgated Ethical Guidelines for Practitioners, and continues to support excellence in collaborative practice through resources, training curriculum, practice tools, mentoring and a comprehensive website, allowing collaborative practitioners to continue our tradition of sharing and learning from one another. |
Where we are going…
Today, the IACP has over 4,000 members from twenty four countries around the world. We are dedicated to educating the public about the Collaborative alternative. We are committed to fostering professional excellence in conflict resolution through Collaborative Practice. We invite you to peruse this site to learn more about IACP, our services and initiatives.
Amy is the past-chair of the Family Law Section of the Indianapolis Bar Association (2003) and is president of Families Moving Forward, Inc., a multi-disciplinary non-profit organization devoted to developing healthy approaches to family transitions.. . .[Law Degree summa cum laude Indiana Univ. School of Law, 1999; admitted to IN bar same year, graduate “with high distinction” in 1986. ]
5 years of work and/or law school, and within 4 more years she’s charing the Family Law Section of Indianapolis (that’s one city, not the whole state’s) Bar Assocation. What a nice nonprofit and what accomplished professionals, and how successful they are. As such, we should believe what they say, especially as the nonprofit “Families Moving Forward, Inc.” is DEVOTED to a HEALTHY APPROACH to “Family transitions.” (typically called divorces or custody matters).
FAMILIES MOVING FORWARD, INC., is an interdisciplinary organization of attorneys, mental health providers, accountants, and other professionals committed to improving the process of family transition in Indiana, by reducing conflict and cost, creating healthier outcomes for children, and enhancing the satisfaction of professionals serving families.
Seminars For Advanced Interdisciplinary Family Professionals
| Date | Name (Type) |
| 7/27/2006 | SEMINARS FOR ADVANCED INTERDISCIPLINARY FAMILY PROFESSIONALS, INC. D/B/A SAIF (Assumed)) |
Segments from the Indiana 2005 Sample PC report (handbook):
The sample report begins with a situation between father and stepfather which was hostile. Both wanted to coach on Little (10) Joey’s baseball team.
Therapy for both TOGETHER is recommended:
5. Mr. Smith and Mr. Doe should attend counseling sessions together to attempt to resolve their(For example, the mother did not want the father to volunteer on Fridays at school any longer. She maintained that the children were emotional and upset on those mornings and did not want to go to school. The teachers were contacted and reported that the children looked forward to and enjoyed their father’s presence.
AFCC CLAIMS CREDIT FOR HAVING DEVELOPING PARENT COORDINATION:
From their 5-year prospectus:
AFCC Guidelines for Parenting Coordination
In 2003, AFCC President George Czutrin appointed a Task Force to develop Model Standards of Practice for Parenting Coordination, following the first Task Force on Parenting
Coordination that conducted research and published the 2003 Report on Parenting Coordination Implementation Issues. The Task Force determined that the Parenting Coordination process was too new to use the term “Model Standards” and, in May 2005, proposed to the Board of Directors the AFCC Guidelines for Parenting Coordination. The Guidelines passed unanimously and are available on the AFCC Web site at http://www.afccnet.org/resources/standards_practice.asp.
AFCC Parenting Coordination Task Force: Christie Coates, J.D., M.Ed. (Chair), Linda Fieldstone, M.Ed., (Secretary), Barbara Ann Bartlett, J.D., Robin Deutsch, Ph.D., Billie Lee Dunford-Jackson, J.D. , Philip Epstein, Q.C., Barbara Fidler, Ph.D., Jonathan Gould, Ph.D., Hon. William Jones (ret.), Joan Kelly, Ph.D., Matthew J. Sullivan, Ph.D., Robert N. Wistner, J.D
. . . .
The following new publications have been developed since 2002 while dated products were been eliminated:
• Parenting Coordination: Implementation Issues
There are scholarly articles galore about this. One by matthew Sullivan, Ph.D. (and a parent coordinator) uses the phrase repeatedly in the abstract — but to access the article one-time costs $34 and permanently $155. Needless to say, not many people who have parent coordinators in their lives can afford to read up on it….
“In 1994 the concept of parent coordination was spawned by a concerned group of professionals in California and Colorado who
WHILE PROMOTION EFFORTS TEND TO PHRASE PARENT COORDINATION PASSIVELY (as if a natural development), IN PRIVATE PUBLICATIONS, IT TAKES RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PROMOTION OF THE FIELD:
AFCC STAYS FOCUSED ON IMPLEMENTING AND PROMOTING PARENT COORDINATION:
And I am going to show you what apparent frauds some of the prime “trainers” are in this field too. But first, let’s look at the upcoming 2012 conference called:
The New Frontier
Exploring the Challenges and Possibilities of the Changed Landscape for Children and the Courts:
This is an upcoming (Feb. 2012) meeting of the California Chapter of the AFCC. An entire day is dedicated to a workshop on Parenting Coordination, and a secondary one talks about how to get it in there — even if parents are indigent.
Here are the presenters’ bios (please scroll through). Some are more than a page, others short. Notice the types of professionals involved (typical), Judges, Attorneys and Psychologists, Mediators, etc. Some have been around forever (Joan B. Kelly, Dianna Gould-Saltzmann) others seem newer:
Graduate of Tehran University School of Law and Harvard…
Abbas Hadjian, Esquire devotes a substantial part of his family law practice to educating the Farsi‐speaking community on the comparisons between the American and Iranian legal system and recently published “Divorce in California,” which is written in Farsi. He is an expert on Iranian culture and laws.
(from his website, partial description of an amazing background):
Mr. Hadjian was born, educated and lived in Iran until 1980. Between 1959 and 1968 Mr. Hadjian was a professional journalist in Iran, with positions including editor, writer, reporter, translator and commentator in major Iranian publications and news agencies. His profession a journalist required and helped Mr. Hadjian’s foundational understanding of the Iranian legal, social, economical and political structure. Between 1962 and 1966, Mr. Hadjian attended the School of Law, Political Science and Economics in Tehran University. Among others, he received courses in Iranian Constitution, Civil, Family and Probate law, furthering his understanding of the legal, social, economic and political infrastructure of his native country.
Upon graduation. Mr. Hadjian became a political appointee in the Office of the Governor General, Iranian Southern Ports and Islands (Persian Gulf), where he acted as a ranking civil officer in the region until 1978, the year of the Iranian Revolution. As deputy to the Governor General in social and economic affairs, Mr. Hadjian relied heavily on his legal studies and implemented them in real life situations. In 1975, Harvard University accepted him to the renowned Edward S. Mason Program for Public Development on full scholarship, acknowledging five years of Mr. Hadjian’s services in developing the Persian Gulf region as one year of post-graduate studies. He was awarded a Masters Degree in Public Administration
A related site from “Culture Counts.net” (site has three diverse professionals) has a page about fatherhood, the new normal, which “surprisingly” reminds readers about:
Positive Effects of Father Involvement on Children
- Children display increased self-confidence.
- Better able to deal with frustration and other feelings.
- Higher grade point averages.
- More likely to mature into compassionate adults.
- Paternal emotional responses to sons were associated with a 50% decrease in sons’ expressions of sadness and anxiety from preschool to early school age
Positive Effects of Father Involvement on Men
- Helps men reevaluate their priorities and become more caring human beings who are concerned about future generations.
- May reduce health-risk behaviors.
- Decreases psychological distress as emotional involvement with children acts as a buffer against work-related stress.
- Happiness and increased physical activity.
- Sense of accomplishment, well-being, and contentment.
- Men tend to be more involved with extended family and others in the community.
- Over time, fatherhood increases marital stability.
Leslie Ellen Shear, JD, CFLS, CALS
Ms. Shear is a graduate of UCLA School of Law and admitted to the California Bar in 1976 and maintains her practice in Encino, California. A frequent lecturer in custody matters, she has been involved in a number of high-profile custody cases over the years – most recently, Marriage of LaMusga and Marriage of Seagondollar.
9:00am – 5:15pm
All Day Institute (2)
(I2) Inside Parenting Coordination Practice in California: Managing Roles, Responsibilities, and Risks
- Lyn Greenberg, Ph D
- Alexandra Leichtner, JD
- Leslie Ellen Shear, JD, CFLS, CALS
- W1 Establishing a Local Parenting Coordination Program Including Pro Bono PC Services to Indigent FamiliesHonorable Lorna Alksne// Charlene S. Baron, JD, MA // Shirley Ann Higuchi, JD // Lori Love, Ph D
http://www.link.cs.cmu.edu/link/submit-sentence-4.html
III. Parenting Coordinators Work With the Most Difficult Family Court Population – Those Most Prone to Assert Grievances and Challenge Decisionmakers
… cases are usually referred to parenting coordination because they are chronically litigious and difficult to manage. These parents have often had several attorneys, evaluators, and mediators — professional hopping and shopping is rampant. Their court files are thick with motions, court appearances, and allegations of wrongdoing by the parents.
Coates, Deutsch et al. (2004) Parenting Coordination for High-Conflict Fami- lies 42 Fam. Ct. Rev. 246, 252The child custody cases referred to parenting coordinators are the most complex, acrimonious, difficult and demanding cases. Most parents regain their perspective and bearings within two years of separation, and do not need this kind of intensive and ongoing service model. Parents who continue to return to court with enforcement and modification requests after completing co- parenting educational programs, and after a child custody evaluation are can- didates for parenting coordination,
Parents who need a PC intervention are typically a special group for whom the passage of time has not reduced the rage and angry behaviors of at least one if not both parents. The 10–20% of parents who remain in entrenched and high conflict two to three years after separation/divorce are significantly more likely to have severe personality disorders and/or mental illness (Johnston & Roseby, 1997). Understanding the characteristics of parents with severe borderline, dependent, narcissistic, and antisocial personality disorders, why these parents react so strongly to rejection and loss, how the child is used in attempts to re-stabilize their functioning and punish the other parent, and how personality disorders are exacerbated by stress, conflict and the adversarial system will facilitate more effective work with these difficult clients.
Kelly (2008) Preparing for the Parenting Coordination Role: Training Needs for Mental Health and Legal Professionals 5 Journal of Child Custody 140,149-150
+ + + + = = = + + + = = =
[VSLP*]. This footnote comes from a fragment of attorney Jennifer Jackson’s resume, which itself came from a bio of another nonprofit, Families Moving Forward, Inc. in Indiana. I was following up in another nonprofit, “International Association Collaborative Professionals” and I guess you can see about how curious I am about the inter-relationships of various nonprofits.
I looked at the staff. This one caught my attention — because of the specialties, not him personally:
Chris Emley (in 2011, or at least now on the website.)
Chris is a certified family law specialist and a Fellow of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, with 41 years of experience focusing on child custody litigation. He has been included in Best Lawyers in America since 1991. He has helped to govern VLSP since its inception in 1979. He received the State Bar President’s Pro Bono Service Award in 1983, the Legal Assistance Association of California’s Award of Merit in 1989, and two Awards of Merit from The Bar Association of San Francisco (1977 and 2004). He was a BASF board member from 1979 through 1981, and chaired the Lawyer Referral Service Committee. Chris was Vice President of the San Francisco Child Abuse Council, Chairman of the Board of Legal Assistance to the Elderly, and Chairman of the Board of Legal Services for Children, Inc.
There happens to be one pro bono group in the SF Bay area which used to help women leaving violence and eventually in the news (and had I known at the time to check all these 990s, I’d have seen the notation that it specialized in helping NONCustodial, low-income fathers, I’d have realized why this group refused to help so many mothers stuck in the family law system.). The presence of a Certified Family Law Practitioner on the board of VSLP, with his emphasis being on children’s rights, and without question, children in ANY institutional system these days need help and representation, does make me wonder who is helping with women’s rights when it comes to actual mothers who aren’t in jail for killing their batterers (which have some groups advocating) — but actually dealing with the horrors of year after year in a custody battle with a violent or abusive ex, and doing so without even a grasp of how it works, or who pays its bills.
General Comments:
I don’t see anything in VSLP which remotely deals with the situation, and was able to get no actual help (legal representation of any sort, pro bono) in my case either, not past the initial restraining order, and a perfunctory (and NOT in court) attempt to renew it, which I was told would be a non-issue, it’s often granted automatically! No one came to court where I, like many, many other “custodial” mothers after leaving abuse, was blindsided by a prior ex parte movement consolidating renewal with a divorce and custody matter, thus shifting the case into the family law system, where it remained, and where the actual topic of ongoing DV was drowned by the type of talk we see in these realms — psychological states, not literal deeds!
The moral is, every program and every nonprofit has its target clientele. As the target clientele (for keeping in their proper place) in so many federal grants to the states are fathers (when it comes to custody matters), it would make no “sense” for the government to also pay the opposing side, the protective mothers!
[[Interesting program, project of SF Bar: its family law person Chris Emley also on Board of “Legal Services for Children” which (as of 2001) got funding from City & County of SF, SF Dept. of Public Health, and SF Dept. of Children, Youth & Their Families.
Its address seems to be a few doors down from Kids Turn: 1254 Market vs. 1242 Market Street. “Legal Services for Children” (2010) shows no Chris Emley on the Board, but its main purposes are: 1. Guardianship for children wanting it; 2. Helping kids dealing with expulsion and school-related issues; 3. Immigration. . ..It also represents children in foster care and helps support LGBT youth. 200 Volunteer attorneys gave over $1mil worth of their help. The group received over $1 mill. of contrib& grants, and gave $65,000 to a DC nonprofit, National Juvenile Defender Center (EIN# 02060456. On “Foundation Finder” this EIN doesn’t pull up a tax return…..for any year. Nor does a name search! However from NCCSdataweb, I see that it was incorporated in 2002 (legal services for children, in 1975). This “National Juvenile Defender Center” interests me: 2002 income, 0. A 2007 letter from Andrea Weisman, signed DC Dept of Youth Rehab. Services (“DYRS”) (shares address with a Board member of NJDC, Mark Soler, 2002) expresses the serious problems of Youth in Adult Facilities. Weisman and Soler (again, board member of the group which got $65K grant from the West-Coast “Legal Services for Children,” which takes funding from various depts. of SF and its city & county) worked together (1999?) on “No Minor Matter: Children in Maryland’s Jails.” Weisman notes she got a $1.6mil grant from OJJDP. ]]
National Juvenile Defender Center:
2002– income is zero. By 2009 — they are into Technical Training and Assistance. And ExDir. Patricia Puritz as only paid director, gets $134K salary) — and have landed over $5 million of grants, and earning $10K from investment income and have some serious program income in 2010 ($119K= almost (but not quite) enough to pay their own Exec. Director:. Check it out. So why, in the following year (revenues down to $405K — but probably some leftovers, wanna bet?) did a group in SF just grant them $65,000? Or was that a sort of tax equalization between them both. I live in the same state as “Legal Service for Children, Inc.” and we know that our K-12 schools are taking a serious hit? Why should enough money to feed, clothe and house three families in this area for a year, be given to a nonprofit out of DC that just got $5 million the year before?
The National Juvenile Defender Center (NJDC) was created in 1999 to respond to the critical need to build the capacity of the juvenile defense bar and to improve access to counsel and quality of representation for children in the justice system. In 2005, the National Juvenile Defender Center separated from the American Bar Association to become an independent organization. NJDC gives juvenile defense attorneys a more permanent capacity to address practice issues, improve advocacy skills, build partnerships, exchange information, and participate in the national debate over juvenile crime.
They operate 9 US Regional Centers; the California one is in SF and among its projects is:
MacArthur Juvenile Indigent Defense Action Network (JIDAN)
In 2008, California was selected by the the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation as one of four sites in the nation to participate in the foundation’s Juvenile Indigent Defense Action Network (JIDAN). The four JIDAN sites, Massachusetts, Florida, New Jersey and California, join the four MacArthur Models for Change “core” states of Illinois, Louisiana, Pennsylvania and Washington to form an eight-state network.
The California team is led by the Youth Law Center, and includes members from the Center for Families, Children and the Courts of the California Administrative Office of the Courts; the Loyola Law School Center for Juvenile Law & Policy; the Los Angeles County Public Defender’s Office; theSan Francisco Public Defender’s Office; the Contra Costa County Public Defender’s Office; andHuman Rights Watch.
The eight-state network is coordinated through the National Juvenile Defender Center (NJDC), and engages juvenile defenders, policymakers, judges and other key stakeholders in designing strategies to improve juvenile indigent defense policy and practice. California was chosen as a result of its demonstrated ability to achieve measurable reform on juvenile indigent defense issues. California’s JIDAN work will be centered in the Pacific Juvenile Defender Center.
The Exec. Director of this “NJDC.INFO” nonprofit (inc. 2002) was in 2003 appointed by the Governor of Virginia to a Board of Juvenile Justice:
This bio/blurb places Ms. Puritz Professionally, prior to here, she was ABA Juvenile Justice Center, etc.
Much of this relates to the “OJJDP” and the Juvenile Justice Delinquency Prevention Act. This is an entirely different category than “Parenting Coordination” through the family law center; it is dealing with things such as the US being the world largest per-capita jailor, that those in jail are disproprotionately minority, that horrible things are happening to youth while in confinement, etc. By comparison, the “Parent Coordinator” issue seems like kids’ play unless one begins to wonder how many of the youth in detention had parents stuck in the family law system, which definitely cuts down on actual parenting time and focus!
p://www.americanbar.org/groups/child_law/policy/juvenile_justice.html
SHARE THIS POST on...
An Interlocking Directorate of Associations and Foundations, AFCC forward….[Publ. Dec. 12, 2011]
This post came up in my own 3/25/2018 blog search for Open Society Foundations. It wasn’t the top search result but because this post’s contents from 2011 are still so relevant I decided to add some formatting to make for better viewing.
The blog appearance (background color especially, border, and width limits especially) changed years later during an upgrade, so I am adding those formatting changes to this older post for better viewing. Another habit I also developed later was adding complete post title with “shortlink” to it at the top of posts, and including for clarity, the publication date in the actual title itself. The shortlink is for convenience of blog administrator and anyone else who might be copying a link to the post for use elsewhere under full (or shortened) title.
This is not a complete post review for broken links or images that don’t display (If image was provided by a link to an on-line url, that link has probably changed since. I now do this differently so it happens less often…//LGH 3/25/2018.
Post formats now (March 2018) look more like this, including full title with link, date published and approximate length typically at or very close to the top:
An Interlocking Directorate of Associations and Foundations, AFCC forward….[Publ. Dec. 12, 2011] about 9,900 words; case-sensitive, WordPress-generated shortlink ends “-WA”
Readers (such as you be) no doubt realize I’m pretty jaundiced about how many associations are simply duplicates of each other, and how many of the same types of associations were, somewhere in their murky origins, related to Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Children’s Rights Council (or both), associations for mediators, dispute resolution practitioners, and now– (association for) conflict resolution.
(The terms have to be refreshed periodically to reflect the expanding purposes of the same basic set of people). Parent coordinators obviously fits in here somewhere (it’s an AFCC project) and because it takes money to do all this — and not all money going THROUGH the courts comes FROM the courts — we can see today where a particular foundation played a role in expanding AFCC.
For this post, I’d meant to fill in some of the background for this ACFLS (see yesterday’s post) and relate it to AFCC. Then I felt it would be appropriate to look at the AFCC tax returns, in general — and next thing you know, in explaning Peter Salem’s $130K salary, I ended up looking more at — first the AFCC/Peter Salem / Andrew Schepard Hofstra University Connection.
After which a simple look at the elements of the AFCC description of Mr. Salem’s credits revealed a certain award (John M. Hayne) from the “Association for Conflict Resolution.” . . .. Because I read so (damn) much, I picked up that “ACR” is the new “ADR”. And that organization appears to have been following true AFCC style –issuing awards to people on its own board, and sho ’nuff at least one of them was in trouble with the state for nonfiling of tax returns. (Kenneth Cloke, below).
And we take a look also at one of the (many) corporations funding the field of “Conflict Resolution” (plus fatherhood promotion), who happen to be SF Bay ARea based — and pack a lot of clout, too — the Hewlitt Foundation.
All in all, I find it fascinating, and like to engage in conversations with — the material. However, the format of this blog is less than fascinating. I’m actually very tired of looking at it and dealing with its idiosyncrasies (plus techniques I don’t know yet to how to handle — for example, around issues of pasting information from other sites, and the ever-disappearing paragraph spacing.
SO — FamilyCourtMatters is not about to get a facelift — it’s about to get pre-empted by another blog platform, or simply dropped. I have a mental deadline of the end of January 2012, just to handle what comes up at the next BMCC conference.
I am much (MUCH) more interested in the “hard sciences,” than social sciences! The social science shepherds have a pretty limited vocabulary, which is continually elaborated — but not that solid to start with. This vocabulary and mindset are at odds — at “high-conflict” as it were — with the language of the US Constitution, concepts of freedom of choice, liberty and justice as a process. They do not deal with the spiritual matters central to humanity, but instead set up more and more demonstration projects to test their theories, forcibly, on others, and at public and corporate expense.
It’s not NATURE:
This is absolutely not true when one begins to examine the sky, the ground, the water, or things with a microscope. Those things become more fascinating. The closer I look at these “corporations” and nonprofits, the more they behave similarly — and crooked. This is also true with the writing — it’s not even good writing, but mostly rhetoric borrowed from each other. Then, as if to give it more merit, citing each other. I don’t know when the last individual in the whole field had an original idea. It’s mostly groupthink. Where the real creativity comes in is ways to hide the flow of finances among and between the different corporations.
It’s not ART:
It’s also for the most part, not that true when one deals with (the best of) the arts: music, literature, drama, architecture, dance, etc. There is enough interest and genuine expression in there for a lifetime of experience, study,and participation.
Even the study of MONEY is more interesting, when viewed as how it circulates and affects others over time, and in different forms There’s something of a mathematical principle to this.
it uses Technology, but it’s not Technology:
But the Family Courts + Federal Funds + Faith-Based Pooh-Bahs + various Institutes (etc.) are Basically CROWD CONTROL, Population Management from Afar. It reminds me of the Nazis discussing what to do with the inferiors, and this comes through in the language also. The one thing that is NOT taking place in the multiple conferences, and tax-evasion and supposed public benefit operations — is a fair and real engagement with any of the public supposedly benefitted.
Those talking conciliation, conciliation, are actually engaged in a hierarchical manipulation — they wish to rule and change the world, they promise heaven (and demand support to bring it to pass) while delivering — as to the family courts at least, plus the squandering of public funds — hell and in justice. And I know men and women both will agree on this.
One Promise of “Heaven” as follows, and grandiose aspirations:
NATIONAL PEACEMAKER MUSEUM:
Not to be confused with the B36 Peacemaker Museum in Ft. Worth Texas (a 501(c)3) which concept is about maintaining a balance of powers
National Peacemaker Museum |
||
Mission Statement (Approved June 29, 2009)The National Peacemaker Museum Constellation will encourage peaceful conflict resolution between human beings in every corner of the world. It will honor those courageous and innovative individuals and institutions who work toward peace rather than conflict, foster harmony amongst humanity rather than division, and embrace the rich tapestry of human difference while building bridges upon our commonalities. The National Peacemaker Museum will challenge, inspire, educate, and enable visitors from around the world to be peacemakers themselves, to contribute as they can to the ability of the human race to solve our problems creatively and collaboratively, and to craft solutions that are fair, compassionate, and wise. National Peacemaker Museum will accomplish this mission through a diverse array of partnerships and outreach techniques, both virtual and tangible, in an ongoing effort to reach the full diversity of humanity, speaking in a way that each listening ear can hear. The Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR) is supporting a coalition of organizations to establish a National Peacemaker Museum. In November 2007, ACR Immediate Past President, Marilyn S. McKnight established a Taskforce to launch this effort and appointed Forrest (Woody) Mosten to serve as Chair. This Taskforce recognizes that there is an exciting, vibrant peace community comprised of a diverse array of organizations and individuals. The Taskforce is committed to reaching out to these organizations and individuals and to exploring the possibilities building a coalition comprised of a broad array of partners. Since its inception, the Task Force has established dialogue with the United States Institute of Peace which is building a Peace Educational Center on the Mall in Washington D.C currently in construction (opening scheduled for 2010-2011) and is exploring funding for on-line exhibits as a first step to a web-based museum as well as regional and traveling exhibits. |
The Goals of the National Peacemaker Museum Taskforce (of the organization, Association for Conflict Resolution — see below) shall be to (partial list):
- Support Development of Model Peace Education Courses, Modules, Writing Contests and Other Public Peace Education Activities
- Support ACR Conference Keynote or Plenary Program for ACR 2010 ACR Annual Meeting in Chicago. Keynote/Plenary with following workshops would be a call to action and formation of a concrete agenda by the field for increased Public Education on Peacemaking.
- Identify Potential Partner Organizations
- Build a Coalition of Museum Partners and Supporters
- Identify and Cultivate Potential Funding Sources
The Task Force:
Who is on this Task Force? here’s the list of 23 individuals. Notice most of the affililations. Number 23, I ran across below and it turns out while his organization “Mediators Beyond Borders” seems legitimate, his own “Center for Dispute Resolution” — incorporated in California in 1987 (per Secretary of State) has NEVER filed — til threatened in the year about 2011 — its annual returns, either with the state or with the IRS. When threatened with a hefty fine by the states’ Office of Attorney General/ Charitable Trusts Registry, it appears he forked over a bunch of RRF (state-level returns) stating the organization made absolutely nothing — 0 – since its inception. It has no assets or income.
This didn’t stop (Mr. Cloke) from referencing his “Center for Dispute Resolution” all over the place, and having a website up that is advertising, in the year 2011, some expensive trainings he is to be holding through its website registration and contact. Moreover, in the year 2010, this organization (that’s sponsoring the Peacemakers Museum) ACR gave him an award, in a series of awards since 2001 designed to puff up the groups’ credibility and public image.
Quite frankly, as a “commoner” watching all this, I’m getting real tired of it. Anyhow, here are the 23 “taskforce” members:
- Michael Aloi, ACR President
- Doug Kleine, ACR Executive Director
- Forrest Mosten, Chair, Task Force
- Jerome Barrett, Author and ACR Archivist
- Mark Bramford, Public Policy Mediator
- Guy and Heidi Burgess, Co-Directors, Colorado Conflict Research Consortium
- Rita Callahan, ACR Board Member
- Marci DuPraw, Facilitator and Mediator
- Katrina Everhart, Museum Consultant
- Fernaunda Ferguson, ACR Board Member
- Francisco Laguna, International Legal and Business Mediator
- David Matz, Professor of Dispute Resolution, University of Massachusetts, Boston
- Marilyn McKnight, Past President, ACR (see immediately below here**)
- Josh Moore, Associate Director, International Education at Beloit College in Beloit, Wisconsin
- Catherine Morris, Director, Peacemakers Trust, Canada
- June O’Connor, Professor of Religious Studies, University of California, Riverside
- Jim Rosenstein, Immediate Past ACR President
- Jocylen Wurtzburg, Mediator, Memphis, Tennesee
- Lela Love, Liaison, ABA Dispute Resolution Section
- Ronald Supancic, Liaison, International Academy of Collaborative Professionals
- Andrew Schepard, Liaison, Association of Family and Conciliation Courts
- Ken Cloke, Liaison, Mediators Beyond Borders
**Marilyn McKnight, I just found: (missing image. <==Broken link updated to “Mediators & Staff” submenu March 2018, but the quote is from earlier website)
Marilyn S. McKnight, M.A.
Marilyn S. McKnight, M.A., director and co-founder
Marilyn is a mediator, trainer, parent coordinator and author who has practiced exclusively in the field of mediation since 1977 after an extensive career in public social work.
In the early 1980s Marilyn began workshops on mediating divorces where there is domestic violence. She received a Bush Leadership Fellowship Award in 1987. In 1988 Marilyn was elected to the Board of the Academy of Family Mediators where she began work toward the voluntary certification of mediators and later, served as President of the Academy.
{{Timing: In 1994 the VAWA, Violence Against Women Act, was passed, and around this time it was becoming clear that medation is NOT advisable (due to power imbalance) when there’s been assault and battery, in effect, domestic violence. IT was fought hard against, and made mandatory in certain areas, as partially enabled by access/visitation grants during welfare reform. It was identified as a way to get more NONcustodial parenting time — when other means, such as the legal process, or the fact that one parent may have been a criminal, which possibly caused separation — wouldn’t get the same result. In short, Mediation was viewed and funded as a PAID SOURCE to turn justice into an OUT-COME BASED proceedings, with one party (the custodial parent) not knowing what hit (her) in the proceedings! It also turned anyone who’d been on TANF and involved in this, into an at-risk for supply social science material for the head of HHS — and what litigants even thinks about checking a federal agency for information on WTF happened to their due process rights, or other Constitutionally provided Bill of Rights!}}
In 1996 she and her partner Steve Erickson were awarded the Distinguished Mediator Award by the Academy for their outstanding contributions to the field of mediation.
Marilyn has been an adjunct professor teaching divorce mediation at the University of Minnesota Graduate School of Social Work, and at the William Mitchell College of Law.
In May 2006 Marilyn was elected to the Board of Directors of the Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR)._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
UPDATE/2018 INSERT: Images of other “Mediators & Staff” at this Minnesota-based organization shows McKnight, Steve Erickson (his daughter?), Solveig Erickson, two other (male) mediators, and an office manager/client services specialists (scheduling and taking calls mentioned) who is a woman: The font size is uneven in the home page, and Steven McKnight’s (though listed second) has larger font and longer bio blurb. Viewing: Click any image to enlarge, and navigate from one to another with arrows or (I think) another click. This is a four-part “image gallery.”
-
- Erickson Mediation (MN) image update for 12/11/2011 post “Interlocking Directorate…” /FamilyPeacemakers Museum task force, ACR, etc.
[[Returning to 2011 post text:]] Apparently the Task Force (above) was her idea too (see description). A little more:
Articles and Video:
Marilyn McKnight: Belief that Mediation Needs to be Separate from Courts – Video
Marilyn McKnight discusses how court-connected mediators’ first duty is to the court, not the client.
{{Clients go in unawares, believing that their first duty is to the truth — facts of the case, rules of civil procedure pertaining to them, and honesty. Usually, we are sorely disappointed. I’ve yet to run across a mother whose custody mediator showed evidence of having even read the case file…. Mine even admitted he didn-t — but still made recommendation to the courts.}}
McKnight, Marilyn: Mediate.com Interview
This is the complete interview with Marilyn McKnight, former President of the Academy of Family Mediators and Association for Conflict Resolution, filmed as part of Mediate.com’s “The Mediators: Views from the Eye of the Storm” Series.
(Interesting; “a Vibrant Community of Peacemakers.” )
So that’s where this Mother, Woman, and Person is, in my almost 20th years since the first blows started landing on me pregnant, all the way through to fighting the second half of my kids’ minority through this system, only to find, partly through, that almost every group and professional I stood before, hired, or dealt with, has been a liar, and simply perpetuating their own particular job in their own particular system — while this same system destroyed lives and jobs for those it was supposedly helping.
Give me an honest enemy any time than such a system of helpful people and institutes! I will respect the enemy for honesty in his/her/its position and then engage (and ideally, defeat).
To go into a family courtroom and confuse what’s supposed to happen in there (you think) with LAW, or that it somehow relates to whether one was a good or not so good parent — is a serious mistake. These seem far less relevant that which programs the practitioners are jacked up on, these days, and which rhetoric.
I accept there are plenty of cases where mediation — real mediation, not what we see in the family law racket — is important and useful. But until one recognizes WHO has been pushing this, and just how much most of their talk is about each other (in glowing terms, complete with awards and honors, and long lists of professional accomplishments), but when it comes to the parents, their clients (without whose distress and troubles, the fields wouldn’t even exist), then the terminology switches (when talking to each other) about “managing difficult parents in the court system” or similar phrases.
Of course it helps the speciality of family law if one of your promoters long ago was a legislator, then a judge (or vice versa) (Pfaff), not to mention sizeable donations in THIS century from the William and Flora Hewitt Foundation to increase membership, as a Five-Year Retrospective of the AFCC claims (2002-2007 years).
FIVE-YEAR REPORT
| Association of Family & Conciliation Courts | WI | 2005 | $929,894 | 990 | 17 | 95-2597407 |
| Association of Family & Conciliation Courts | WI | 2004 | $636,483 | 990 | 17 | 95-2597407 |
| Association of Family and Conciliation Courts | WI | 2010 | $2,192,367 | 990 | 28 | 95-2597407 |
| Association of Family and Conciliation Courts | WI | 2009 | $1,720,844 | 990 | 27 | 95-2597407 |
| Association of Family and Conciliation Courts | WI | 2008 | $1,743,428 | 990 | 26 | 95-2597407 |
| Association of Family and Conciliation Courts | WI | 2007 | $1,403,917 | 990 | 25 | 95-2597407 |
| Association of Family and Conciliation Courts | WI | 2006 | $1,158,339 | 990 | 20 | 95-2597407 |
| Association of Family and Conciliation Courts | WI | 2003 | $467,421 | 990 | 16 | 95-2597407 |
| Association of Family and Conciliation Courts | AZ | 2005 | $19,149.31 | 990EZ | 9 | 86-0578107 |
2018 UPDATES/INSERT: A search on the bottom row above’s EIN# 86-0578107 shows this is the Arizona Chapter of AFCC (AZAFCC.org), with last three tax returns showing its very small size. This happens to have been over time, however, a very active chapter (it seems) and with its proximity to California, well, interesting. For example Philip Stahl (formerly of Northern California and well known for his promotion of “parental alienation” remedies — i.e., standard AFCC purposes) at some point had moved to Arizona. I DNK where he presently is, but probably still an active member):
Total results: 3. Search Again.
| ORGANIZATION NAME | ST | YR | FORM | PP | TOTAL ASSETS | EIN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARIZONA CHAPTER-ASSOC OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS | AZ | 2016 | 990 | 32 | $4,273.00 | 86-0578107 |
| ARIZONA CHAPTER-ASSOC OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS | AZ | 2015 | 990 | 25 | $38,378.00 | 86-0578107 |
| ARIZONA CHAPTER-ASSOC OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS | AZ | 2014 | 990 | 26 | $54,867.00 | 86-0578107 |
(Below: exact same search results, but in image form (I provided copy & paste above table so interactive links could be clicked on) as it shows in actual search results. The database provider changed its color scheme years ago, but because I’d already manually (boilerplate copied into each example) maintained the above color scheme to represent Form 990 tables in this blog (which now has 769 posts and over 50 pages!) as opposed to charity registration (California) tables which have similarly light-blue, gray, white colors, I maintained the color scheme from earlier…). (Back in 2011 I obviously didn’t know how to “paint” background colors into tables).
Search of EIN# associated with AZAFCC.org, done 3-25-2018 by blog author LGH
Don’t let the small size of top row (FYE2016) mislead you. It still received $73K revenues, claims to have spent over $111K on “Other expenses” (mostly conferences), despite having only 3 independent board members (all unpaid, and some of the with the title “Hon.,” i.e., likely judges), and “0” employees, it (a) left page III (which is not optional to leave blank) blank — except to say “Program Services” this year — none. However, under “functional expenses” page, it listed a grant of $1,500, which should be reported on that Part III (page 2). Under “Board Members” section, despite only three independently voting, it said “see additional table” thus keeping the existence of judges (and current AFCC — parent organization — President? Annette Burns) further away from the top of the tax return (i.e., less visible) and not on any IRS form, pre-printed or electronic. (click any image to enlarge. I annotated but did not “caption” the next three from AZAFCC.org.
I should probably blog this in a current year; have other posts since (use “SEARCH function on the blog to find, enter the word “AFCC chapters” to find) have more detail on these chapters than I listed here in just December 2011.//LGH 3/25/2018
[Back to Dec. 2011 texts, and referring to the table above showing the same organization name but different EIN#s in that columne, not the one on Arizona I just provided].
(from the Foundation Center. I always wonder why some years don’t show in chrono order, does it relate to when the organization filed?)
Something was prospering: 2003__$467K;
2004 __$636K
2005___$929K
2006___$1158K 9 ($1.158 mil)
2007_ _ _ $1.403 mil;
2008___ $1.743 mil, …2010____$2.192 mil, and so forth. And that’s income that IS reported…..
Tidbits from the tax returns (one really should browse some of these — very informative). For year 2007: Two of the Board members are judges. The Exec Director Peter Salem makes $130K.
- $790,306 = Program service revenue, including government fees and contracts
- $512,473 = Membership fees.
- $65K = dividend interest from securities;
Under Parts VII & VIII, Analysis of income-producing activities, & Relationship of Activities to the Accomplishment of Exempt Purposes
- (lines 93a, 93B, 93C & 94 on the tax return)
- REVENUE FROM THE SALE OF PUBLICATIONS ON DIVORCE, SEPERATION AND FAMILY DISPUTE RESOLUTION ($74,970)
- REGISTRATION FEES TO ATTEND CONFERENCES AND TRAINING SEMINARS TO SHARE IDEAS ON RESOLUTION OF FAMILY DISPUTES AND TRAININGS TO ASSIST CURRENT PROFESSIONALS ($703,976)
- MISCELLANEOUS FEES AND CHARGES FOR SHIPPING AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS ($11.400)
- MEMBER DUES RECEIVED IN EXCHANGE FOR DISCOUNTS ON CONFERENCE REGISTRATION, MEMBER NEWSLETTERS AND OTHER MEMBER BENEFITS ($512,473)
Judges on the board (that year) included the Hons. William Fee *(IN), Emile Kruzick (Ontario, Canada), Hugh Starnes (FL), and Graham Mullane (Australia, ret. 2008, now consulting) — all listed at the WI address, although, not their home courts.
INDIANA AFCC 2007 Board Member Judge Wm. Fee — Positioning:
*The Hon Wm. C. Fee happens to currently chair the Domestic Relations Committee of the Indiana Judiciary. “The Domestic Relations Committee is working on revisions to Indiana’s Child Support Guidelines. They previously completed a Domestic Relations Benchbook and child-centered Parenting Time guidelines. They also established recommended standards for countywide domestic relations ADR plans.” Let’s hope (?) He kept his AFCC agenda and motivations (to help families resolve disputes by selling them — or other government entitities — products & services) separate from the oath of office, which I presume has something to do with uphold and preserving the state constitution. As AFCC has openly stated its intent is to change the language of criminal law, there would seem to be a built-in conflict of interest. But I have noticed that when money, and children, are involved, concerns about conflict of interest tend to go out the window.
For a glimpse at types of inbound grants to courts, see “Grant Programs Administered by State Court Administration and the Indiana Judicial Center“
FLORIDA AFCC Board Member 2007 Judge Hugh Starnes — 2010, 2011:
Judge Starnes (among many other things, such as forming a nonprofit group Association of Family Law Professionals with local lawyer, and being infamously involved in Foreclosure Rocket Dockets, where some judgments were signed before the hearings, and so many hearings scheduled in one day that it was foregone that they’d not all be heard: ” More Perverse Procedures in Ft. Myers” This article talks about over-scheduling of dockets, fully knowing they won’t all be tried, in a “total lakc of respect for the parties and their lawyers . . . These judges have elevated their own desire to clear the dockets a bove all else…Judge Starnes likes to talk about how the foreclosure crisis has forced courts to employe procedures like this. ” (but only his county does it){{Same reasoning — and results — used in the family law arena also.}} “
LEE COUNTY (FL)— For the past few years, Lee County’s busiest court docket has also been the most notorious in the state. Dubbed the ‘rocket docket’, the county’s foreclosure track cruises through several hundred cases daily, many ending in judgments for the lender and the subsequent scheduling of a foreclosure sale.
In the process, critics say, the docket tramples basic rules of civil procedure and due process. They point to the speed with which judges move cases along, and the emphasis on an expedited trial or summary judgment versus discovery. “It’s just a lack of, I don’t know, respect for the defendant by the court,” Naples attorney Todd Allen said.
His case turned heads last year after a clever order drafted by Allen made local news and several foreclosure blogs. Frustrated when Lee (Lee County, FL) Senior Judge James Thompson rejected a motion in December to toss what Allen considered a flawed affidavit by a bank employee, the attorney drafted the resulting order to explicitly state what he says Thompson told him — that Lee County does not comply with Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. The attorney for lender HSBC signed off on the draft, Allen said, and it went to Thompson’s office.
“I knew one of two things was going to happen,” Allen said. “Either he was going to read it and sign it, which is bad because it means it was policy, or he wasn’t going to read it and sign it, which is even worse.” Instead, the other senior judge on the docket, Hugh E. Starnes, signed the order. “Blown away,” is how Allen described his reaction.
(further anecdotal shows the traffic there. In family law hearings (those that aren’t ex parte) a custody decision could be switched in 20 minutes or less; the child goes to the other household, stamped, ordered. signed & sealed. THat is not justice, and the other parent (til broke or defeated in spirit not just in the issue at hand) is going to come back for another attempt at it — that’s another reason the dockets get crowded!)
Around 11:40 a.m., Starnes completed the docket, more than 100 cases by his count. With another 104 slated for the afternoon session and little time for lunch, he postponed Shinneman’s trial. “I’ve got to object,” Allen protested. “That’s completely prejudicing my client.” “I understand,” Starnes replied.
Here’s another nonprofit this Judge was involved with, which a mother in a custody battle from Florida (not Linda Marie Sacks — not her line of approach!) asked me to research: (link provided, image updated, by text search + memory of having been asked to look this up, plus specific participating professionals (Judge Starnes, Shelly Finman, etc.) I know it’s the same one. (2011 post originally had a large blank image here, and no link):
http://aflpnetwork.com/history/
Association of Family Law Professionals website (viewed 3/25/2018)
History of the above group:
“We are Judges, lawyers, mental health and financial professionals, Judicial Assistants and Court staff members, mediators, school counselors, educators, and other professionals working to help families through the maze of marital and family law matters.”
YES — and many of you are already public employees. So why form more nonprofits than AFCC — which already meets this definition — to do your jobs? Did the families ask your help in navigating the custody maze (your groups helped create by trying to put psychology on a par with law)?
Well, the motive was obviously helping and public service:
- A committee formed {{spontaneously?}} in the mid-1980’s with a diverse membership, co-chaired by Mary Robinson, Solomon Agin and (Family attorney) Shelly Finman, tasked {{by whom?}} with determining whether or not our community was in need of Court sponsored mediation. After 2 years of regular morning meetings at the old Snack House Restaurant at the Collier Arcade, it was decided we did. {{ANY OTHER COMMUNITY MEMBERS INVOLVED?}} However, there was no budget. Therefore, with the support of a “shoe string” budget from the office of Court Administration (Doug Wilkinson) and Judge Hugh Starnes, we began training volunteer mediators at the HRS offices in the evenings.
- A committee, called the “cooperation committee” consisting of Judge Lynn Gerald, Judge Starnes, Steve Helgemo, George Kluttz, Gail Markham, and Shelly Finman met at the Veranda Restaurant in the mid to late 80’s, discussing ways to change some of the adversarial methods, resulting in local orders and posturing the Bench and Bar with non-adversarial, more conciliatory methods of practicing in Court
Gee golly ding, gosh darn, gee whiz — where did they get THAT radical concept from (and how long were the members also AFCC members??) etc.
(One can search Starnes & Finman @ Florida’s sunbiz.org — I did — for more info. Probably blogged it here somewhere, too. Groups like RESTORATIVE JUVENILE JUSTICE PROJECT, INC. (never got an EIN, dissolved for failure to file), the family law association in question (shelly finman shows on earliest on-line report, 1995). Clearly restorative justice is an ongoing field, to be countered, however, with awareness of places like Luzerne County, PA in which kickbacks were involved, violation of due process extreme, and finally some judges caught in RICO over the matter, — or 2008 Congressional Oversight of the HEAD of the OJJDP (Flores) because of grants-steering to faith-based professionals. In this context, forming a nonprofit to get a grant is like — pretty much what they do.
Or, in the case (TBA _- I haven’t checked all 50 states, only some of the states in which they are advertising trainings..) institutes, like “Cooperative Parenting Institute” etc. simply post the website references, with glorious self-referential credits & titles, and skip the incorporating part entirely, which would require filing tax returns somewhere along the way, and conceivably letting the public look at them, without the subpoena, FOIA and all that.
RE: Peter Salem – the Hofstra Connection:
2007 Exec Director of AFCC — Peter Salem, and his ($130K) = $10,00+/month salary in that capacity:
He has many accomplishments, including teaching mediation at a law school — but he is not an attorney; he has an M.A. Lets review this again: the head of the AFCC is not an attorney, his specialty is NOT law.
Before I go into this too much, let’s look at the “Hofstra Connection” which I feel too few people notice, when it comes to AFCC. Of course, most people complaining about problems with family law – – – – – – – – – – are so busy with that narrative they completely ignore the existence of organizations where the people running it plan their Standard Operating Procedure. In otherwords, they completely ignore the AFCC as well.
However, when I found out it was publishing most of the materials in local courthouses (self-help centers, etc.), not to mention that as an organization, it began in a corrupt manner, and many of its members continue in that corruption — I got fairly more interested!
Hofstra University in NY has a School of Law and as of 2001, it also has a CCFL, similar idea to UBaltimore’s School of Law “CFCC” (which I blogged):
The Center for Children, Families and the Law was established in 2001 in response to the urgent need for more effective representation for children and families in crisis.
Its unique interdisciplinary program of education, community service and research is designed to encourage professionals from law and mental health to work together for the benefit of children and families involved in the legal system.The Center’s training program is one of the most comprehensive child and family advocacy curricula offered in the United States. Its interdisciplinary approach is designed to better prepare a new generation of legal and mental health professionals to promote appropriate and effective justice in both the juvenile and family court systems. The Center’s community service programs provide direct assistance to New York area children and families in need and serve as models for states across the country.
To carry out its mission, the Center partners with the University’s Department of Psychology, and health and human service agencies and law associations, including the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC), the American Bar Association (ABA), the National Institute for Trial Advocacy (NITA), and the New York Permanent Judicial Commission on Justice for Children.
AFCC cannot be considered a “law association,” given its membership and its stated intent to change the language of criminal law into a more “therapeutic” framework. But where does Peter Salem & AFCC fit in? Which came first — the (AFCC) chicken, or the (Family Court Review joint-published with AFCC) the egg?
Welcome
Family Court Review (FCR) is a peer-reviewed, quarterly journal published under the auspices of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC). Family Court Review is an international, interdisciplinary family law journal — a forum for the exchange of ideas, programs, research, legislation, case law and reforms. The journal’s editorial staff, under the direction of Faculty Editor-in-Chief Andrew Schepard*, is based at the Law School. Its fundamental premise is that productive discussion of family law is facilitated by a dialogue between the judiciary, lawyers, mediators, mental health and social services communities. AFCC is an interdisciplinary, international association of judges, counselors, evaluators, mediators, attorneys and others concerned with the constructive resolution of family conflict.
Schepard, Parent Education Promoter, AFCC-approved.
| Professor Schepard is a founder and project director for Parent Education and Custody Effectiveness (P.E.A.C.E.), an interdisciplinary, court-affiliated education program for parents to help them reduce the difficulties their children experience during divorce and separation. P.E.A.C.E. has produced an award-winning video for parents, and has been recognized by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts for its “ongoing contribution to improving the lives of parents and children. |
He and Mr. Salem are on an AFCC Task Force together.
After all, if one wishes to entirely develop and steer the field of family law, one must definitely get to the education of family lawyers. One cannot change practices from the outcome end only; obviously one has to get a the new, fresh-faced graduating class of attorneys, in fact get to them before they graduate and are faced with the bedrock of experience, which may counter some of that theory before it’s solidifies.
Well, so does this group: from the AFCC site:
Task Forces and Initiatives Family Law Education Reform Project (“FLER”)
Co-sponsored by the Hofstra Law School
Center for Children, Families and the LawAndrew Schepard, J.D., Co-Chair
Andrew SchepardPeter Salem, M.A., Co-Chair
Peter SalemProject Information: Family Law Education Reform Project Final Report (PDF)
They work together. Apparently he joined AFCC as staff in 1994; two founders (Meyer Elkin, 1994 and Stanley Cohen 1995) died around this time. It seems Mr. Salem was working in Wisconsin in the same fields. This summary from AFCC History seems so relevant. In maroon font:
1993—AFCC’s 30th Anniversary
AFCC celebrated its 30th Anniversary in New Orleans in May 1993. The conference theme and opening night videotape, “The Economic Impact of Divorce,” provided an opportunity for more than 700 delegates to look at the big-picture impact of divorce and celebrate the largest conference attendance to date.
In 1993, the association received a major grant from the Hewlett Foundation that enabled AFCC to add additional staff and absorb some of the work of AFCC’s many hard-working volunteer members. In 1994, Peter Salem joined the AFCC staff to become AFCC’s associate director. Conference planning was centralized in the administrative office and AFCC began to offer additional training and consulting services.
Database records from usual sources don’t go back that far. But obviously the Hewlett Foundation has some similar interests in family matters. Their history page can be read; sons managed it until 1981, In 1974 that they hired an executive director, and this gives a scope of the influence (like, having the President of the University of California as President of the Foundation, etc.) (section here in BLUE)
By the time Roger Heyns retired in 1992, the Foundation’s assets had increased more than thirtyfold – to more than $800 million, and the Hewlett Foundation was highly respected for its work in the fields of conflict resolution, education, environment, performing arts, and population, and was a key source of funding to a host of institutions that provide vital services to disadvantaged Bay Area communities.
In 1993, former University of California President David P. Gardner succeeded Roger Heyns as president of the Foundation, and served for six years, during which time the Foundation’s assets increased to more than $2 billion, and annual grantmaking rose from $35 million in 1993 to $84 million in 1998
Sooner or later we all have to ‘fess up to (admit, to ourselves and each other) how great an influence foundations (personal corporate wealth transferred into foundations) have upon this country and what its government and nongovernment programs and culture looks like.
This foundation was interested in conflict resolution and helped develop it as a field, and (in AFCC’s 5 year retrospective, 2002-2007, below, it acknowledged their help. Sounds like they got in on the last round of Hewlit Foundation grants in this field):
The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation played a major role in developing and supporting the conflict resolution field for nearly two decades. During that time, the field grew and matured and achieved considerable acceptance and self-sufficiency across various areas of practice. While recognizing the continuing value of conflict resolution and peacemaking in the United States and internationally, the Foundation decided to wind down its support for this area and to deploy its resources to other pressing social issues. The Conflict Resolution Program made its final grants in 2004
They are also big on promoting and enabling fatherhood involvement, as is AFCC also:
Responsible Fatherhood and Male Involvement. The Foundation supported programs that enabled fathers to participate actively in the emotional and financial support {{CHILD SUPPORT, got it?}} of the family and that promote adult male involvement in teh lives of children and youth from father-absent environments.
Someone has to deal with the domestic violence issue sooner or later. This organization did so by funding Family Violence Prevention Fund (already deep into fatherhood as a tool to prevent violence, sure, that’ll work) and funded a report on preventing teen violence, with phraseology like this:
Other gaps must be closed as well. More attention and resources should be focused on men, on the low-income communities that have disproportionate experience with abuse, on promoting economic independence, and on ending the exclusive reliance on punitive responses such as incarceration, which is intolerable to many communities of color and immigrant communities.
With characteristic “modesty” FVPF introduces its 2003 report:
Foreword
The Family Violence Prevention Fund is proud to issue this unprecedented Report, which provides the most comprehensive analysis to date of the status of domestic violence prevention efforts. This Report does more than examine our nation’s considerable progress in understanding and stopping domestic violence. It takes a close look at what strategies have and have not worked, identi- fying the most promising approaches and making recommendations for how to expend energies and allocate resources in years ahead.
(I just searched. There is zero mention of family law, custody, visitation, fatherhood barely, and/or access visitation, even though many teens have children, as mothers or fathers. The word “fatherhood” (incl. programs) shows up 5 times, and it’s somehow suggested that Child Support Enforcement is a means to provide opportunities and incentives for DV prevention. (p. 19). I have already blogged on this group (see “About this Blog”), but as I have been living and working in the same general area, am more aware than most of just how much they are (deliberately) ignoring; actually the more people drop like flies in the immediate neighborhood (and often this is around the divorce issue or a custody battle), the better it looks for justifying more grants of this sort. )
Back to AFCC describing itself:
Second World Congress on Family Law and the Rights of Children and Youth
In 1997, AFCC partnered with Australia’s World Congress, Inc. to host the Second World Congress on Family Law and the Rights of Children and Youth. Chaired by AFCC’s first non-North American president, Hon. Alastair Nicholson, Chief Justice of the Family Court of Australia, the three-year planning effort involved hundreds of AFCC volunteers and culminated with more than 1,500 delegates from more than 50 countries participating in the five-day extravaganza. The lengthy list of luminaries included First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, who served as honorary chairperson; renowned pediatrician Dr. T. Barry Brazelton; San Francisco Mayor Hon. Willie Brown; Nobel Peace Prize Recipient Dr. Jose Ramos-Horta; and former U.S. Congresswoman Hon. Patricia Schroeder.
By 1998, mediation had established itself as a professional field of practice.
NO field of practice establishes itself. Fields of practice have people promoting them, through membership associations (very often) which then solicit funding. As I showed above, the Hewlitt Foundation was one promoter of “conflict resolution” (which includes mediation) as a field of practice and takes credit for it. This is so typical of AFCC prose — they like to claim that some field established itself, like the flowers come out in spring, just naturally. There’s nothing further from the truth!!
Executive Director
Peter Salem, M.A.
Peter Salem has served as Executive Director since 2002 and was Associate Director from 1994-2002.
I’m guessing he didn’t join AFCC and immediately become Executive Director; i.e., the involvement is longstanding (1994-2011 is 17 years), and either he has influence it, or its agenda and operations– including emphasis on mediation — are in agreement with his life’s work.
He taught mediation at Marquette University Law School for ten years and served as mediator and director of Mediation and Family Court Services in Rock County, Wisconsin. Mr. Salem is a former president of the Wisconsin Association for Mediators and is co-editor of Divorce Mediation: Models, Techniques and Applications. He has provided training and technical assistance to family court service agencies throughout the United States since 1990. {{Probably also for free. . …}}
He is author of numerous articles and videos on mediation, domestic violence and divorce. He received the [[1]] John M. Haynes Distinguished Mediator Award presented by the Association for Conflict Resolution** [[2]] in 2008 and received a William T. Grant Foundation Distinguished Fellows award in 2009. He holds an M.A. in Communication and Mediation Management from Emerson College in Boston [[3]] and a B.A. in Political Science from McGill University in Montreal. [[4]]
I decided to look these up. Fnotes in order in text, but below, out of order, they are filed in chrono order, i.e., undergraduate comes before graduate references. The biggest “find” is the (ridiculous) Association for Conflict Resolution. I’ll back up the “ridiculous” under that footnote. I have found that when AFCC (and related organizations) begin to pile on the titles and awards, well-earned though they may be, it pays to look up who’s awarding what, to see if it has some significance. Most people know awards like Nobel Price, Fullbright or Rhodes Scholarship, etc. — but as almost every new nonprofit in the courts (schools, etc.) mediation fields tries to pump up its credibility by setting up awards, they need more scrutiny.
[[4]] McGill (see link) is more wide-ranging; it’s undergraduates (now) are 417 women/164 men). Apparently Mr. Salem is from Canada? which may explain AFCC’s large Canadian component? Looks like a well-respected university, with a variety of programs, but my point is, Mr. Salem’s interest was political science, i.e., interest in how society works and potentially changing it. See next degree:
[[3]] Emerson College in Boston:
Emerson College, located in the heart of Boston, Massachusetts, is the nation’s premiere institution in higher education devoted to communication and the arts in a liberal arts context.
Emerson is internationally recognized in its fields of specialization, which are communication studies; marketing communication; journalism; communication sciences and disorders; visual and media arts; the performing arts; and writing, literature and publishing.
I don’t see any legal, or any really “hard sciences” study — here’s the list of science course minors for “communication sciences” majors.
Here’s a typical “Political Communication” UNDERgraduate coursework (understanding it must have changed over time, I wonder what year Peter Salem got his M.A. in….):
A major in Leadership, Politics, and Social Advocacy will prepare you for such careers as communication advisor, press secretary, governmental relations officer, nonprofit leader, and cultural affairs advocate, among many others. The program’s core curriculum balances the theory and the practical skills necessary for effective, ethical communication in a changing and complex media environment.
And GRADUATE coursework:
Communication Management
The Master of Arts in Communication Management provides students with the knowledge, theory, and skills necessary to design and execute strategic, integrated communication plans for public and private organizations. In addition to honing your speaking, writing, listening, and negotiating skills, you will develop expertise in web-based communication and learn how to adapt to and utilize new media to the advantage of your future employers or clients. The program is divided into two academic tracks:
- Human Resources & Employee Communication
- Public Relations & Stakeholder Communication
Our graduates have achieved professional success in a variety of industries including pharmaceuticals, political communication, event planning, travel and tourism, public advocacy, health care, among many others.
And this is the current Emerson graduate program director’s background, with degrees from Texas and North Carolina, heavily into social science, and mediation.
[[1]] John M. Haynes Distinguished Mediator Award :
The John M. Haynes Distinguished Mediator Award is presented annually to a prominent and internationally recognized leader in mediation who demonstrates personal and professional commitment to finding mediation solutions to conflict while balancing therapeutic and legal perspectives. John M. Haynes was a pioneer in the field of family mediation, a respected author and practitioner, an international trainer, and the first president of the Academy of Family Mediators.
(sigh). Mediation, having a problem with “conflict” and trying to balance therapy (outcome based, analysis = psychology, pathological emphasis) with law (process based, with reference to written standards voted into law by citizens in various states, to protect them from EXACTLY what happens when institutionalizing and labeling/medicating are used to oppress and control unruly reformers or those who challenge the status quo, i.e., Archipelago. In short, these characteristics basically define AFCC to start with.)
The list of recipients speaks loudly, lots of them are simply AFCC hotshots:
- 2011: Christine Coates, J.D. [[AFCC]]
- 2010: Kenneth Cloke [[Santa Monica, Center for Dispute Resolution, Pepperdine, you name it]] SEE ~**~, I looked this one up
Why should this one get an award when the state of California OAG/Trusts had to chase him down over zero income, or filings, for the past 24 years? After they threatened him with $800 fine and more, he responded. …. Yet the nonprofit website is still advertising some very pricey trainings! ($200, $1,000, etc.)
- 2009: Robert D. Benjamin [[Currently in Portland. Pepperdine. Mediation etc. since 1979, and he practiced law. Columnist and advanced practitioner in ACR]]
- 2008: Peter Salem [[AFCC]]
- 2007: Jim Melamed, J.D. [[Oregon Mediation Center, which he founded in 1983, he is CEO of “Mediate.com,” ADR, etc. See “history” at N2N, here — shows they borrowed the idea from SF, and eventually got funding]]
- 2006: Arnie Shienvold, Ph.D. [[AFCC. Scranton, PA parents had this name on posters recently protesting family court corruption. I blogged it recently, see tags]]
- 2005: Nina R. Meierding, MS., J.D. [[FT private mediation since 1986, former family law attorney, Certificate in Dispute Resolution from Pepperdine (like others on the list) and — get this — yet another who is per mediate.com now, past board member of ACR!
- 2004: Zena D. Zumeta, J.D. [[From Michigan, since 1981, ADR, and get this — she gets the award from ACR and “She is currently on the Association for Conflict Resolution’s Membership Committee, and sat on the Advisory Council to its Family Section.” Works from a Dispute Resolution Center (one of several in state) that takes business from courts, gov’t, social service etc., and has two judges on its advisory board and is a trainer]]
- 2003: Barbara Landau, Ph.D., LL.B., LL.M. [[Worked in Toronto Court, has a business, ADR, Mediator, Trainer, etc. “Dr. Barbara Landau’s company “Cooperative Solutions” continues to expand. Please see information below on our two Associates, Daryl Landau, and Mary-Anne Popescu.”]]
- 2002: Donald T. Saposnek, Ph.D. {{since 1983, appears to have made a good living off the family courts as mediator & trainer, typical}}
- 2001: Larry S. Fong, Ph.D. (2005 AFCC conference on Solving the Family Court Puzzle shows him as President of the ACR, and Canadian, another conference in 2011 on Advanced Mediation Issues — when one parent is Gay))
DIVERSION: A Nonprofit around since 1987, high-profile speaker, zero income reported?
~**~ re: Kenneth Cloke, Center for Dispute Resolution (How many more fit this description? It was Calif, so I looked it up quickly. “Center for Dispute Resolution” search brought up 5 corporations, only 2 of which were active. This one, b. 1987, was active. Its title includes the word “foundation.” I hopped over and looked up the charity and found it hadn’t been filing IRS forms and its Dissolution is “Pending” — an usual situation. EIN# 546565246
(FYI, Santa Monica is within Los Angeles County)
After a particularly stern letter from the OAG (Kamala Harris, Jan. 2011), Kenneth writes in response:
This is a request to obtain a dissolution waiver and to dissolve a California nonprofit corporation, the Center for Dispute Resolution Foundation, #C1583109.
The corporation was never operational, and neither raised, received or spent any money at any time. There are no assets to be distributed. There are no financial statements, and the corporation never had any income or assets since incorporating.
If you have any questions or 1 need to do anything further, please contact me at. . .
I just looked up the address at the bottom of the letterhead — which is “Kenneth Cloke Law Offices.” His DisputeResolutionCenter claims to be very much up and operating (perhaps it’s just not getting any takers, any customers?) It lists Training for FALL 2011:
http://www.kennethcloke.com/training.htm
Kenneth Cloke will conduct a four day training for beginning, intermediate and advanced mediators who are interested in improving their conflict resolution skills. Please see the printable course description, registration form and book list here.
Classes begin at 9 am and end at 4:30 pm
Classes are held at the Center for Dispute Resolution, 2411 18th St., Santa Monica, CA 90405
Phone: (310) 399-4426 | FAX (310) 399-5906
Each participant will receive a Mediation Certificate on completion of the training, along with a Training Manual that includes basic forms that are useful in starting a mediation practice.
Cost is $250.00 per class or $1000.00 for the series.
Click here to print the Registration Form with Course Description and Book List
For a group that began with several people on the board in 1987, that’s quite an accomplishment!! to earn absolutely nothing while having such a fine website. Kind of reminds me of the Termini/Boyan combo — only it looks like they actually had some takers.
What does it say about ACR to give this person its 2010 award? Yet in January 2011, the OAG got on their case. Perhaps the award is what drew its attention — who knows? Note: this 2009 speaker engagement as co-founder of “Mediators Beyond Borders” lists the above outfit first in his credits. I wonder how many of the other fantastic credits below check out. Either he is doing that all — and earning no money at it, so not filing taxes– or he’s doing all those things, making a living and too busy to comply with state charitable registration laws, while promoting himself and his work & books.
Join us as Kenneth Cloke discusses his most recent publication titled “Conflict Revolution: Mediating Evil, War, Injustice and Terrorism.”
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
12:00 PM
Public Affairs Room 2355
Los Angeles, CA 90095As Director of the Center for Dispute Revolution, Kenneth Cloke has served as a mediator, arbitrator, attorney, coach, consultant and trainer.
Mediators Beyond Borders incorporated in PA in Oct. 2006, per Corporations search:
Name Name Type Mediators Beyond Borders International Current Name MEDIATORS WITHOUT BORDERS Prior Name Mediators Beyond Borders Prior Name
Non-Profit (Non Stock) – Domestic – Information Entity Number: 3686096 Status: Active Entity Creation Date: 10/19/2006 State of Business.: PA
ORGANIZATION NAME |
STATE |
YEAR |
TOTAL ASSETS |
FORM |
PAGES |
EIN |
| Mediators Beyond Borders | PA | 2009 | $40,949 | 990EZ | 18 | 20-5716275 |
| Mediators Beyond Borders | PA | 2008 | $38,013 | 990EZ | 30 | 20-5716275 |
| Mediators Beyond Borders | PA | 2007 | $13,946 | 990EZ | 16 | 20-5716275 |
Robert A. Creo (attorney) (hover cursor over link for a sample) seems the professional heavy-lifter in this relationship, and business is registered out of his law offices. MBB International has a project to rehabilitate child soldiers of Liberia. . . . Creo and associate McKay operate “Mastermediators.com” and of course a Master Mediator Institute to go with it, much of which deals with training. It says, he has an ability to “create, organize and lead” ADR organizations (which seems obvious). Mediators Beyond Borders and Master Mediators Institute both show his office address, i.e., he’s operating a number of nonprofits out of his own offiice:
About MMI
A belief that conflict resolution requires an integrated knowledge of law, neuroscience, neurobiology, psychology, economics, communications and other disciplines led to the creation of the Master Mediator Institute. MMI offers Immersion Courses to allow mediators, advocates and other professionals to connect with leading scientists and academics to explore cutting edge knowledge about the mind, the brain and the science of decision making.
The website looks great (both websites); better than average and easy to negotiate, and professional in design and color. MMI has only been around for two and a half years; it was incorporated in 6/2009. I wonder what nonprofit is next!
The Master Mediator Institute 3889281 Non-Profit (Non Stock) Active 6/22/2009 R
Colleague Monique MacKay (I found through linkedin) shows up in Virginia — so the corresponding LLC to the nonprofit is in a different state and was incorporated the same month, 6/3/2009. So let’s say they had a plan up front, and the websites plus testimonials show it as (unlike Mr. Cloke’s) a going concern:
The Master Mediators LLC
| SCC ID: | S2941864 | |
| Business Entity Type: | Limited Liability Company | |
| Jurisdiction of Formation: | VA | |
| Date of Formation/Registration: | 6/3/2009 | |
| Status: | Active |
He seems less interested in family law, which means I’m less interested in this case, other than what it says about the Association for Conflict Resolution.
[[3]]Association for Conflict Resolution:
**”Association for Conflict Resolution” is an expansion of, &/or where “Alternate Dispute Resolution” went, linguistically. That’s a planned language shift, necessary because periodically people start to catch up faster with what groups named after the prior AFCC-linguistic-labels have actually been doing. Including with their money.
The Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR) is a professional organization enhancing the practice and public understanding of conflict resolution.
We are the nation’s largest professional association for mediators, arbitrators, educators and other conflict resolution practitioners. ACR works in a wide range of settings throughout the United States and around the world. . . .Our multicultural and multidisciplinary organization offers a broad umbrella under which all forms of dispute resolution practice find a home.
This group maintains a “special interest section” called ADR, which reads the typical fashion and like AFCC, and the ADR groups, seeks to promote their own interests and profession, including to judges and legislators:
ACR Court Section
The Court Section provides information and best practice information for resolution of court disputes ranging from small claims to family.
MISSION STATEMENT
The mission of this section is to foster and facilitate the development and implementation of quality court-annexed ADR programs throughout the country and to provide support to all individuals interested and involved in Court ADR programs such as Court ADR administrators, judges and dispute resolution practitioners working in a court setting by providing a forum that addresses issues concerning court-annexed ADR programs through information sharing, networking, identification of resources, development of model practices, and training programs.
Kind of a run-on, redundant sentence, much? But of course let’s focus on COURT-annexed programs, because this is guaranteed income. if not from the parents themselves (etc.) — from a federal program. MUCH better chance of selling this as in the public’s interest. But in reality – -it’s in the profession’s interest.
OBJECTIVES
- To promote the development of court-annexed dispute resolution programs around the country, at all levels of court.
- To serve as a clearinghouse of relevant information and resources for court administrators, dispute resolution practitioners, and judges.
- To assist in educating the public, attorneys, judges, legislators and other constituencies about the value of court-annexed dispute resolution programs.
- To provide a venue for communication and networking opportunities [[AWAY FROM THE PARTIES MOST AFFECTED BY THE PRACTICE!!]] among court ADR administrators, dispute resolution practitioners and judges.
- To identify policy issues important to court-annexed programs and provide guidance/best practices with respect to those issues.
This organization wants to feed information direct to judges. They want to be a “clearinghouse.” They want to facilitate the communication with judges. Flattery will probably facilitate the process, accordingly AFCC’s Peter Salem gets a 2008 award from this group. AFCC (which already does this – -not to mention has plenty of judges IN it and some running it, too) then proudly adds another credit to it’s director’s cap, which is a win-win situation for those involved.
The ACR “Family Mediation” special interest section looks all up and running, and has avery detailed, neatly tabbed, web presence with the same types of activities the AFCC does — publication, training, conferences, budget, member committees, plus facebook page, etc. And Marketing Mediation Training
So — let’s go to Virginia and look up the corporationSo — let’s go to Virginia and look up the corporation (it lists a virginia address). OK, here we go:
SCC ID Business Entity Name Entity Type Entity Status 05660642 ASSOCIATION FOR CONFLICT RESOLUTION – VIRGINIACHAPTER, THE Corporation Terminated
(none with just the name alone — vs. “Virginia Chapter” — shows up. Last registered agent, 2007. Don’t see any filing history(i.e., annual reports) beyond the initial filing, and there are no “efiling” transactions registered.
The Association for Conflict Resolution -Virginia Chapter
| SCC ID: | 05660642 | |
| Business Entity Type: | Corporation | |
| Jurisdiction of Formation: | VA | |
| Date of Formation/Registration: | 10/11/2001 | |
| Status: | Terminated |
A 990-finder (i.e., nationwide search for a nonprofit) search shows it in several states, as well as the same EIN in two states and name, in more than two.
| Association for Conflict Resolution | VA | 2009 | $336,780 | 990 | 51 | 23-7251385 |
| Association for Conflict Resolution | DC | 2008 | $503,647 | 990 | 21 | 23-7251385 |
same name, different states and separate EIN#s:
| Association for Conflict Resolution | TX | 2008 | $0 | 990ER | 5 | 20-2124912 |
| Association for Conflict Resolution | MA | 2007 | $24,629 | 990EZ | 13 | 04-3465101 |
| Assoc… |
After click on dropdown option just above orange section, more fields (like EIN#) and ZIP now display [“990 Finder Widget This (pretty precisely) dates URL redirect by FoundationCenter to Diff’t User Interface….]“WHY IT MATTERS: Names are so often wrong on this database! Use EIN#, although occasionally even a filing entity will get it wrong by a # also.
New look and URL, click on dropdown just above orange section for more fields (like EIN#)!! [“990 Finder Widget This (pretty precisely) dates URL redirect by FoundationCenter to Diff’t User Interface. Must use DropDown menu to access other options (such as EIN#)]“
{{2018 UPDATE: NOTICE THE DIFFERENT EIN#s. THIS TIME, I HADN’T CAUGHT UP TO JUST HOW OFTEN THE DATABASE PROVIDER (nonprofit now called simply “Foundation Center”) search results get entity names wrong. I don’t know how these odd results continue to show so often, and whether it’s a matter of software, or human error/data entry (unlikely…). A letter should be written them; I just haven’t yet. (See nearby added images with orange-background captions):User interface field for this now looks different and to get to the (more accurate) EIN# searches requires use of a drop-down (“more fields”) indicator. Name search ONLY on this website can’t be trusted. (“990finder.foundationcenter.org” which I’ve used for years, currently redirects to their new site..)Tbe Virginia one, above, “ACR EMBRACES AND ACKNOWLEDGES THE FULL SPECTRUM OF PEACEFUL CONFLICT RESOLUTION AND RECOGNIZES THE VALUE OF CROSS-DISCIPLINARY AND CROSS-CULTURAL CONNECTIONS TO ENHANCE CONFLICT CHOICES UNIVERSALLY.”(and with just a few grants, over 700 volunteers, and 13 employees, has over $1 million of revenues yearly. Executive Director Douglas M. Kleine (address WDC) gets $95K salary (moderate) and I think — but don’t know without more checking– this is him, too: Worked in HUD, Train the trainer activities, Virginia Legislature Congressional Agency (staff positions), plus Democratic Precinct caption. Expert nonprofit management experience, highly placed.Here we go — the ACR wants to erect a National Peacemaker Museum and nominated Family Law Collaborative Professional Woody Mosten (who?) to chair that taskforce. Maybe Futures without Violence (ca. 2010 formerly family violence prevention fund) was simply competing with this group for THE most grandiose, pretentious and let’s not forget, nonprofit,noble purpose around — and so practical, too!
Mission Statement (Approved June 29, 2009)
The National Peacemaker Museum Constellation will encourage peaceful conflict resolution between human beings in every corner of the world. It will honor those courageous and innovative individuals and institutions who work toward peace rather than conflict, foster harmony amongst humanity rather than division, and embrace the rich tapestry of human difference while building bridges upon our commonalities. The National Peacemaker Museum will challenge, inspire, educate, and enable visitors from around the world to be peacemakers themselves, to contribute as they can to the ability of the human race to solve our problems creatively and collaboratively, and to craft solutions that are fair, compassionate, and wise. National Peacemaker Museum will accomplish this mission through a diverse array of partnerships and outreach techniques, both virtual and tangible, in an ongoing effort to reach the full diversity of humanity, speaking in a way that each listening ear can hear.
The Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR) is supporting a coalition of organizations to establish a National Peacemaker Museum. In November 2007, ACR Immediate Past President, Marilyn S. McKnight established a Taskforce to launch this effort and appointed Forrest (Woody) Mosten to serve as Chair.
🙂 Just felt we should get a picture of some of the influence that our AFCC Board Member Judges (the US ones) wield, and some local feedback.
So what is this membership trade nonprofit private nonprofit group AFCC — with many of its influential members holding public office, like judgeships and county-level work such as custody evaluators, mediators, and of course Parenting Coordinators, doing with this income? . . . .
Besides inventing new terms and providing an on-going membership role model for how to form lots ‘n lots of nonprofits, while on public payroll or getting referral business from the courts, and lobbying legistors to do things like running Justice Initiatives to “Change the Culture of Custody“** (Pennsylvania) and trying to get states to mandate parenting coordination appointment — lots of it. In Pennsylvania, they are Initiating, but I guess here, they are describing the “New Frontier” as if it just developed and showed up all by its wild-west lonesome, see 2012 AFCC-California Conference images for: “The New Frontier: Exploring the Possibilities and Challenges of the Changed Landscape for Children and the Courts“***
[[**in which the AFCC is only directly cited a few times, but “parenting coordination” 14 times, “parent education” 10 times, “high-conflict” (with hyphen) 4 times, “high conflict” (no hyphen) 11 times, “dispute resolution” 63 times, a plug for a parent education “Kids First,” (used in 8 PA counties at the time, and already likely part of an FBI of investigation financial abuse in billing & multiple service referrals by a GAL in one of those counties) and the first person mentioned in the “Chairman’s Introduction” just happens to be (now) President-elect of AFCC]]
[[***Gee, who changed it?]][[check out item 12, presenter. Same individual from ACFLS — yesterday– who declared that a few hours on-line would qualify someone to write a great appellate brief about domestic violence, and maybe even save a client’s life. Tell that to Michelle Fournier’s son when he grows up, without her. Tell that to the relatives of the 7 other people that died as collateral damage in her “custody dispute” this past fall. On the other hand, when the boy grows up, maybe he could do a speech on what such violence is like OFF-line….]]
Well, read on, to see some of the strategic planning from 2002-2007:
FIVE-YEAR REPORT
{{This is most of the first page of the report, for reference:}}
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report chronicles the development of AFCC for the fiscal years 2002-03 through 2006-07, the first five years of the current administration. It addresses AFCC initiatives and special projects, organization- al development, membership, conferences, resource development, publications, administration and finance, Web site, technology and collaborating organizations. Comparative data and narrative are offered to provide historical context.
AFCC Initiatives and Special Projects
Between 2002 and 2007, AFCC initiatives and special projects played a growing role in the day to day activities of the association. Eight special projects were initiated between 2002 and 2007, funded through a mix of contracts, small grants, the operating budgets of AFCC and its collaborating organizations and participating individuals and organizations.
(1) Connecticut Family Civil Intake Assessment Screen (2) Guidelines for Parenting Coordination (3) Court Services Task Force (4) Model Standards of Practice for Child Custody Evaluation (5) Family Law Education Reform (FLER) Project
(6) Educator’s Guide to Working with Separated and Divorcing Parents
(7) Domestic Violence and Family Courts Project (8) Developing Nations Libraries Project
The Family Law Education Reform Project and Domestic Violence and Family Court Project were anchored by the first two AFCC-sponsored conferences at the Johnson Foundation’s prestigious Wingspread Conference Center.
Organizational Development
AFCC completed three major projects in the area of organizational development:
• • •
A five-year strategic plan An organizational effectiveness project, funded by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation Identity branding
And from a little further in the report:
Web Site and Technology
• Redesigned Web site to enhance usability and member benefits.
• Google grant increased average monthly Web visits from 16,500 to 42,700.
• The bi-monthly AFCC eNEWS debuted in February 2006 and now has more than 10,000 subscribers.
• Parenting Coordination Network (group email) implemented.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
And so on, and so forth. . .
Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History 
For the year 2011