Archive for the ‘History of Family Court’ Category
“What’s Money got to do with it?” (Calif. legislators & Judges at play…)
This was the original post, which got overly supplemented, shall I say, as I began to look into the corporate structures of a certain Family Justice Center, and found that it’s corporate status shows 0 income (or boards of directors) although it has one heck of a public profile.
And that the millions of $$ it got for funding (being very well-connected politically throughout) went instead to a previous nonprofit, Family VIolence Law Center, whose character, apparently, morphed to accommodate what types of activities the funding was (and was not) available for. For example, probably not anything critiquing the family law system, given that its Executive Director Cheryl N. Allison, Esq., was a former (or still?) family law attorney.
While this had been meant to simply illustrate a different example (of croynism — what else?) — I realize the tendency to want to back up posts with current information generally just gives me another project to investigate.
This post should be paired with the previous one, and the common link (how I started looking into these matters) was just simply me following up on Kids’ Turn and finding out what an amazing collection of supporters and endorsers this one nonprofit has. It’s a lesson in local government, too.
Well, perhaps there’s some good data in here also…. Happy Memorial Day Weekend. Do you know where your kids are?
What’s Money Got to do with it?
It’s MOSTLY about Money, behind the curtains.
Today on the news, we read that no, the freeze public employee salaries over $150K bill (unlike the Kids’ Turn, excuse me “parenting education program”) will not breeze through and get signed into law. Funny, there was no real problem retroactively granting immunity for double-dipping judges payments, in SBX2-11, which addressed Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles.
Retroactive Immunity is Repugnant to basic principles of the rule of law. (this article cites strong rebuke from Robert Kennedy (yes, brother of JFK) to retroactive immunity violating anti-trust law, by a six-bank merger).
When a lot of money is involved, suddenly the legal system becomes quite, er, ‘flexible.” The SBX2-11 dealt with California Judges who already received $178K salaries. It dealt with the case Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles.
End of 2008
Here’s an article that came out the day after Christmas, 2008, explaining the situation briefly:
California Judges to Lose Perks; Some May Leave State
Fri, Dec 26, 2008

(that’s the California Supreme Court, above….)
The California Supreme Court has voted unanimously not to review Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles, which means judges in the nation’s largest county may lose up to $50,000 a year in perks.
The decision lets stand a lower court ruling that could void Los Angeles County’s 20-year practice of supplementing judges’ $178,000 salaries and state-provided benefits with perks that amount to almost $50 grand a year.
The ruling by San Diego’s 4th District Court of Appeal held thatthe practice violated the state Constitution’s requirement that the Legislature “prescribe compensation for judges.” County-funded judicial perks occur in many of the state’s 58 counties, but LA’s appear to be the most lucrative.
Judicial advocates say the state already has trouble attracting judges to the bench, with salaries that often pale in comparison to those of major law firms.
The benefits package includes travel and professional development allowances that judges can take in cash, as well as additional contributions to retirement accounts.
Some California judges have threatened to leave the state if the perks are cut.
“You want my inestimable services? Gimme back my perks!”
Maybe they’ll head off to New York now (Dec. 2010)
Gov. Paterson Finally Signs the Bill that Will Raise NY Judges’ Benefits
2009
Here’s SBX 211 as chaptered in FEB 2009:
Senate Bill No. 11
CHAPTER 9
An act to add Sections 68220, 68221, and 68222 to the Government Code, relating to judges.
[Approved by Governor February 20, 2009. Filed with Secretary of State February 20, 2009.]
legislative counsel’s digest
SB 11, Steinberg. Judges: employment benefits.
The California Constitution requires the Legislature to prescribe compensation for judges of courts of record. Existing law authorizes a county to deem judges and court employees as county employees for purposes of providing employment benefits. These provisions were held unconstitutional as an impermissible delegation of the obligation of the Legislature to prescribe the compensation of judges of courts of record.
(note: no mention made of the obvious conflicts of interest when the county is a party to the case, as L.A. County tends to be) (Another situation in which it seems a County is a clearly party to the case — Child Support cases. Any parent here been to a child support hearing? Was there the other parent and a 3rd party, representing the local county child support agency? However, this bill doesn’t address conflict of interest as a reason the payments were unconstitutional….but “improper delegation” of a legislative obligation.)
This bill would provide that judges who received supplemental judicial benefits provided by a county or court, or both, as of July 1, 2008, shall continue to receive supplemental benefits from the county or court then paying the benefits on the same terms and conditions as were in effect on that date. . . . .
The bill would authorize a county to terminate its obligation to provide benefits upon providing 180 days’ [6 months..] written notice to the Administrative Director of the Courts and the impacted judges, but that termination would not be effective as to any judge during his or her current term while that judge continues to serve as a judge in that court or, at the election of the county, when that judge leaves office.
It was wrong — unconstitutional — but if a county [california has 58 counties] WANTS to stop engaging in this illegal behavior — they can’t correct the situation towards any judge while that judge is serving, including if the county calls him/her back (i.e., functioning from retirement, which judges often do) either. So, basically, only after it becomes a truly moot point can the county act to stop this (conflict of interest) unconstitutional behavior towards its own judges.
The bill also would authorize the county to elect to provide benefits for all judges in that county.
The practice is unconstitutional and is making it virtually impossible to win a case against a county? Too bad — we just legalized it!
The bill would require the Judicial Council to report to the Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, the Assembly Committee on Budget, and both the Senate and Assembly Committees on Judiciary on or before December 31, 2009, analyzing the statewide benefits inconsistencies.
Great. That’s really exciting, that the Judicial Council (which I’m sure knew about the situation anyhow) has to write some reports and doing a statewide analysis (more costs for taxpayers)
This bill would provide that no governmental entity, or officer or employee of a governmental entity, shall incur any liability or be subject to prosecution or disciplinary action because of benefits provided to a judge under the official action of a governmental entity prior to the effective date of the bill on the ground that those benefits were not authorized under law.
That’s a lot of words, so I will simply spell it out for us. “Retroactive Immunity for Unconstitutional Behavior.”
Next item of business after granting retroactive immunity was “get rid of Fine” (before he does any more damage). ….
California state salary freeze bill hits dead end — again
A bill that would freeze pay for the highest-paid state workers stalled today in the Assembly Appropriations Committee, effectively killing it.
The 15-member committee held Assembly Bill 7, a measure that Assemblyman Anthony Portantino , D-La Cañada Flintridge, puts up every session. Holding his legislation in committee killed it, since today is the deadline for fiscal committees to send bills out for chamber floor votes.
The measure would have frozen pay increases until Jan. 1, 2014, for any state employees whose base pay is more than $150,000 a year. It would have applied to workers in the executive, legislative or judicial branches of government, appointees to state boards and commissions and employees of the California State University system. It wouldn’t apply to University of California employees, although it urges the system to play along.
CalPERS, CalSTRS and the UC system have objected, saying the freeze would hurt recruiting and retaining top-flight employees.
(see my notice bottom right on “Fair Use” as to copyrights, please. This article is very relevant to my readers, some of who are having their wages garnished through custody actions, and are learning that very little accounting has been given for federal funds to state which are supposedly helping them with child support and custody actions…)
Retroactive Immunity for Unconstitutional Judicial Benefits that prejudice the court system — and jail for the whistleblower in that matter, although the whistle obviously was appropriate to blow in the situation.
No Freeze on exorbitant salaries for public employees already making $150K because we know that, obviously (see judges, legislators) that a high salary attracts the most qualified and best candidates for public positions.
Let’s back up in this Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles Case a little bit.
SBX 211 showed it was illegal, unconstitutional — but only because the state was supposed to handle the salaries not because, say, it created any conflict of interest. Richard Fine gets tossed in jail and disbarred (not the typical “handslap” some judges get for misbehavior, or attorneys. He’d seriously offended some sensibilities by taking on this case, and the child support stash scandal called “Silva v. Garcetti” (which — dropped off the map, or what?).
Now they are going to be the good guys again, summer 2009. Source, “JDJOURNAL.com”
Los Angeles County Judges Take Voluntary Pay Cut
Taking a cue from their brethren and sistren in Delaware, Los Angeles County judges have volunteered to give up one day’s pay per month, as other court employees deal with involuntary salary cuts.
The judges are each giving up around $688 each month, saving the County $3 million a year. Under the state constitution, judicial officers’ salaries cannot be reduced during their term.
All but seven of the court’s 430 judges are participating.
What’s Money got to do with it? This is about love, helping kids, protecting gender expression, right?
Yesterday, I almost got lost among AB 887 (redefining gender) and the backgrounds of its sponsor, after my recent post about the attempted (in 2002) AB 2263, suggesting that our top Judicial organization in the state (California Judicial Council) get paid — assuming it could also find other funding — to judge the mental health efficacy of Kids’ Turn, excuse me, (this is the sanitized version)”
projects or programs that provide services to assist children and their families while the parents are in the process of obtaining a divorce or legal separation... [[not mentioned -- this process can and does often take years -- like 10, 15, 18...]]
and which measures, among 5 standards, 3 which deal such hard data as “degree of conflict,” “mental health of children,” and “change in (parental) attitude”:
(1) Any decrease in conflict between the parents regarding custody issues, as reported by the parents.
(2) The mental health of the children, as measured by their attitudes before and after participating in the project or program.
(3) Any change in the attitude of the parents who participate in the project or program.
Conflict is obviously bad — this is why, the US never engages in wars abroad or at home, such as on terror, drugs, homelessness, poverty, or fatherlessness. Conflict is Bad. Having the Judicial System involved in receiving public monies to evaluate the effectiveness of behavioral modification programs (run by family law professionals and supported by millionaires and billionaires — see my posts, it’s true!) — is, per our Legislators (in 2002) Good. All they wanted was $50,000 — plus matching funds. In the cleaned up version…
Original version was more direct – but someone thought better of that and reworded it from the original, as reported May, 2002:
•AB 2263, by Assemblywoman Christine Kehoe, D-San Diego, which would require the Judicial Council to study the effectiveness of expanding the Kids’ Turn program, which assists children while their parents are in family court obtaining a divorce or legal separation. The bill was approved by the Assembly Appropriations Committee on a 23-0 vote May 15, passed the Assembly on a 72-2 vote May 23 and was sent to the Senate.
FYI, for a perspective Assemblypersons in 2011 have salaries ranging from $95,291 (most) to $109K (one) and a few $102K. Judges outrank them by ca. 50% as to salaries. Kids’ Turn is a judges project (if not slush fund..) Judge are always being so helpful, because they love kids.
One legislator (Atkins) had previous been chief staff of the other former assemblyperson, now Senator legislator (Kehoe), it turns out and both were “out” lesbians (hardly unusual for California, but sometimes even I forget). Another Sunburst Youth Housing Project has Atkins & Partner/Wife’s name on it.
January 2005, after more than 3 1/2 years of hard work, The Center announced the creation of an innovative youth supportive housing project. This cutting-edge program is one of the first projects of its kind in the United States. The Youth Housing project provides 23 units of affordable, supportive housing for youth between 18-24 years of age, with a special focus on LGBTQ+ youth. These high-risk youth were living in the streets or in public spaces after having been ejected from their homes because of their sexual orientation.
This project has been made possible by the leadership and vision of Rev. Tony Freeman, Dr. Heather Berberet, San Diego City Councilmember Toni Atkins, Jennifer LeSar, The Center and its project collaborators — YMCA Youth and Family Services, San Diego Youth and Community Services, Metropolitan Community Church, Walden Family Services and the Chadwick Center at Children’s Hospital. We opened our doors to youth at the beginning of February 2006.
Oh yes, and the AB 887 sponsor’s wife was caught — well reported — exploiting the homelessness problem in San Diego to turn a nice penny as consultant for herself ($225/hour) by farming out the work to others, while her wife (Assemblyperson Atkins) was photographed with the volunteers counting the homeless.
2011, SanDiegoReader seems to be keeping tabs on these conflicts of interest:
Why Was Toni Atkins Consulting for Developers Vying for Redevelopment Dollars After She Was Elected to State Assembly?
By historymatters | Posted January 27, 2011, 3:51 p.m.
Why was State Assembly Majority WHIP Toni Atkins working for LeSar Development Consulting firm as the Senior Principal of Housing Policy and Planning even after she was elected to State Assembly? Toni was consulting with developers and helping them lobby to get these redevelopment tax dollars for their projects. So how in the world can she vote objectively as a State Assembly member let alone State Majority WHIP to freeze this redevelopment money and return it to schools and other state resources when she has a definite financial stake in seeing that the money remain in the pockets of developers like her wife and their clients.
…
How is it that Atkins and her wife Jennifer LeSar are continually allowed to financially benefit from the affordable housing gravy train. Affordable housing is a multi million dollar issue with a multi million dollar bounty at stake to the most cunning and shrewd land developers and Atkins is voting on this issue despite her personal financial stake. LeSar served as a CCDC Board Member for years while Atkins simultaneously served on City Council and voted to approve millions in redevelopment funds.
Meanwhile, Hunting for the Homeless (2011 Feb. Press article)

State Assemblymember, 76th District, Toni Atkins uses a flashlight to look for people sleeping in a canyon as she participates in the Point in Time Count in Hillcrest. This year’s numbers were up
I’m starting to like this blogger, “historymatters” — who seems to be on top of the issues — not that anyone seems to be stopping this flagrant wearing two hats at once while selling projects (contracts to cronies — or partners (nepotism?) — which are to help the public, allegedly). San Diego is not my area — except for the reputation they have in messing with parents around family law, and the infamous “Family Justice Center Model” (Casey Gwinn retirement program), same general idea. Our public servants are I guess to busy working on (and dreaming up, or expanding) projects to help the rest of us that it slipped their minds to report who was getting the contracts for those projects. During an era of increasing unemployment, skyrocketing gas prices, closing libraries, thousands of California prisoners being released due to overcrowding, and such — it’s very important to sell educational programs to parents undergoing divorce (and measure whether they worked) — and of course SOMEBODY has to go hunt up the homeless (while, during the daytimes, they are encouraged to keep moving….)
In “I’ve Got Issues” (I’m starting to like this blogger):
Jennifer LeSar was on the Board of Directors of the Centre City Development Corp. (CCDC) from 2002 to 2009. She started her development consulting business in 2005 consulting many of the same developers she was working with on CCDC. http://lesardevelopment.com/about-us/ CCDC recently asked the City Council to approve the contract extension with redevelopment money, yes that same redevelopment money that Atkins as State Assembly WHIP will vote on in Sacramento….sound like a conflict of interest?
2009 Article stating that Kehoe is going to back her former staffer, ex-City-Councilwoman Atkins for State Assembly( which we can see, she obviously got).
2010, January — The GayandLesbianTimes protests politicking by this duo (Kehoe & Atkins) (control of a nonprofit board? stacked — under threat to the organization if it didn’t comply?)
Former board resigns, San Diego Democratic Club appointed by Kehoe to take over PrideThe reconstituted Board of Directors of San Diego LGBT Pride met Wednesday, Jan. 27. The first order of business was to accept the resignations of board members Philip Princetta, Co-chair and Mike Karim, Treasurer. According to Pride, the new board members are fully committed to transparency and will honor the duties and responsibilities of the organization and continue the mission of San Diego Pride. However, the first meeting was closed into executive session soon after it began.At a special meeting held last Saturday, attended by City Councilmember Todd Gloria and former San Diego deputy mayor Toni Atkins, State Senator Christine Kehoe demanded that San Diego LGBT Pride board members Chair Philip Princetta, Treasurer Mike Karim, Secretary Carl Worrell either resign or she would place the organization into receivership – a court action that places property under the control of a receiver during litigation – according to an anonymous source at the meeting.Kehoe, Atkins and Gloria packed the San Diego Pride Board with a crossover of supporters, donors, and endorsers of their political campaigns – appointing the San Diego Democratic Club to take over Pride.Community members are questioning if they have legal authority to take such actions under the Brown Act….In a letter, obtained by the Gay & Lesbian Times, Worrell said, “I don’t know that I have ever before found myself in a situation where every alternative solution is wrong. But, in my opinion, that is the situation now. After the unconscionable bullying we took from Christine Kehoe, Todd Gloria and Toni Atkins; it is obvious that my involvement in shaping the future of Pride must end.In addition to demanding that the three current board members resign, Kehoe also stated that all Pride board meetings would be attended by a representative from both Kehoe’s and Gloria’s offices. She ordered a hiring freeze and said all Pride business must go through her office before any actions were taken, according to the anonymous source.
One reason I steer clear from nonprofits. Another reason is that I learned the hard way that they are answerable to their funders more than the clients they serve. I would NEVER deal with a nonprofit (If I were you) anymore without knowing who is on the board of directors, and who is footing the bills. Moreover, nonprofits can have their boards taken over and start firing staff, totally change the character of any organization which may have started out well.
So, I’m interested why these people would be so interested in controlling the nonprofit here San Diego LGBT Pride and looked it up. “Year Founded:1974 Ruling Year:1995” (meaning actually showed up as a nonprofit 21 years after it started… Wow, kinda like AFCC, which took forever to incorporate properly and start reporting income and paying taxes…). Income they deal with listed at $1.47 million… Purpose:
Foster pride in and respect for all Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual,
and Transgender communities locally and globally.
(See yesterday’s post on the gender expression bill. Guess some real progress has been made there.)
Guidestar’s IRS form 990 for the year 2009 shows only the 3 ousted officer, plus Exec. Director Ron deHarte earning $113K, and the main activity rallies, festivals, etc. (and operating in the whole). The income is mostly “program service revenue.”
Whether or not this type of behavior and leadership qualities is played out in the LGBT community or not, it seems common in these combos, I have noticed:
- Legislator Connection
- City level control (Councilmen, Councilwomen), and County Level Supervisors
- Redevelopment Connections (real estate developers, or those financing it)
- Favored nonprofits controlled by one of the above to provide services
- Cronies getting the contracts, or cronies/spouses getting to be Exec. Director of the favored Nonprofit/agency (Example: “Dubious Doings by District Attorneys — Attorney General Bill Lockyer’s (3rd) wife gets coveted $90K job over a $3million-grant-initiated “Alameda County Family Justice Center” (I think was the title) whose actual benefits to the public are questioned (if ever proved). The process by which this Executive Director was appointed took the cooperation of County Supervisors, helped by the early resignation of a (as I recall) District Attorney (rather than waiting out is term to let the appointment happen normally: i.e., From Orloff to Nancy O’Malley.
Case closed: One big reason the Alameda County Board of Supervisors voted to name retiring District Attorney Tom Orloff‘s handpicked successor, Nancy O’Malley, to the plum job was her role in helping launch the Alameda County Family Justice Center – a federally funded program that helps victims of domestic violence.
Not only are Supervisors Gail Steele and Alice Lai-Bitker big supporters of the program, but its executive director is Nadia Maria Davis-Lockyer – the wife of longtime East Bay pol Bill Lockyer. Nadia is also running for supervisor.
Attorney General’s Wife. with no previous experience, Gets Top Job in Alameda County Domestic Violence Center
Steve White 14 Dec 2006 15:36 GMT
This is really changing the way the system is responding to victims.”
-Nancy O’Malley, Alameda County Chief Assistant District Attorney“We use business principles to address social problems and build lasting solutions.”
-Nadia Davis-Lockyer, Esq., Executive Director
Well, well — the Sneak Peak of ACFCJ finds out that Ms. Nadia is going to take retiring County Supervisor Gayle Steele’s place — very appropriate, because Supervisor Steele probably could have — but like Lai-Bitker, chose not to — protest the improper propelling of this woman to the head of the ACFCJ to start with (see the articles i’ve linked to). TWO county supervisors protested swishing the appointment past the public improperly. THREE County supervisors (including those two) did not. So here we are —
Congratulations and Thank You, Nadia Lockyer
On November 2, 2010, Nadia Lockyer was elected to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors to fill the seat vacated by retired County Supervisor, Gayle Steele. Nadia’s last day as the Executive Director of the ACFJC was December 31, 2010. We wish to thank Nadia for all she did for the ACFJC and we wish her well in her new position. We know she will continue advocating to ensure the safety and health of all children and families in Alameda County.
Senior Deputy District Attorney, Kim Hunter, will be the Acting Director of the ACFJC. She and Cherri Allison of FVLC will work together to provide leadership until a new director is installed.
And of course a blurb in this ACFCJ newsletter celebrates the inauguration of Nancy O’Malley, who helped get this ACFCJ started:
District Attorney, Nancy O’Malley, Sworn in at ACFJC
The Inauguration Ceremony of Nancy O’Malley, Alameda County District Attor- ney, took place at the ACFJC on January 3, 2011. Approximately 250 people gathered on the 2nd floor to hear an introduction by Chief Assistant District Attorney, Kevin Dunleavy, and the Oath of Office administered by Cali- fornia Supreme Court Associate Justice Carol Corrigan. Nancy ended the ceremony with a touching speech that thanked her mentors and family. A reception immediately followed at Z Café.
Congratulations Nancy!
Convenient for the providers, not necessarily the best for the clients.
Also Known As:
- Physical Address:
- 470 27TH St
Oakland , CA 94612
2008 IRS Form 990 (contains warning notice on potential errors in this version)EIN# 942300454This group’s budget is small fry among big fry (Grants $650,000) and its Executive Director, Marcia Blackstock has something worth hearing about this group and practices in general:
If you’ve got ears, listen up to this one:
Biography
Blackstock is the Executive Director of Bay Area Women Against Rape, which was founded in 1971 and is recognized as one of the first three victim assistance programs in the nation.
Initial Involvement in the Crime Victims’ Movement
Marcia Blackstock became involved in Bay Area Women Against Rape (BAWAR) as a volunteer in 1978. BAWAR had been formed in 1971 by an outraged foster mother whose high school-age daughter had been treated badly both by the police and the emergency room staff after she was raped.
Context of the Era
BAWAR had a “huge adversarial relationship” with law enforcement, hospital personnel, mental health professionals, and the judiciary in the early days. Blackstock remembers that BAWAR’s views were not trusted, nor did BAWAR trust anyone in the system to appropriately assist sexual assault victims. “It was a lot of upheaval, a lot of anxiety, and frustration,” Blackstock recalls. On the other hand, there was substantial community support from the local universities and other collective groups such as the Berkeley Free Clinic and the Women’s Health Collective that were also working and organizing to see that people were treated with dignity and respect and that their needs were met.
Greatest Challenge
Looking back, Blackstock believes that the greatest challenge was establishing credibility among professionals in the various fields that dealt with rape victims. The therapists, law enforcement officers, judiciary, and hospital personnel considered themselves the “experts” and maintained an adversarial relationship with BAWAR mainly because of its grassroots origins. The BAWAR advocates were not considered to be “professionals.”
“We were coming from a peer-support, community-based, grassroots organization that brought in a huge variety of people from a variety of backgrounds and education and ideas, but all coming together and focusing on a common goal. But we were considered ‘peer’ and not ‘professional’, at best paraprofessional and rarely that.”
One of the problems that BAWAR faced was that licensed counselors who felt that they were more knowledgeable had no experience at all working with sexual assault victims.
A high school student who refused to cheer on her “rapist” has been ordered to pay $45,000 for filing a “frivolous” lawsuit. Where’s the justice in this?
By Cord JeffersonPosted: 05/05/2011 02:54 PM EDT
“I didn’t want to have to say his name and I didn’t want to cheer for him,” she told reporters in 2009. “I just didn’t want to encourage anything he was doing.”
To that end, HS refused to cheer for Bolton when he stepped up to take some free throws during a game in January 2009, four months after he had pleaded guilty to the attack. When she folded her arms and stood silently, however, her school’s superintendent, Richard Bain, ordered her outside and told her she had to cheer for Bolton. When she refused again, HS was kicked off the cheerleading squad.
(How much money, fame, press does a good basketball team attract to a school?)
HS later sued the school for kicking her off the team, but the results of that lawsuit have time and again gone terrifyingly against her.
(What’s Gender got to do with THAT situation? Or, money? –or Justice? The rapist paid $2,500, and she has to pay the school district $45,000 for protesting — not with violence, but with silence?)
ALAMEDA COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER INC [EIN# 26-1141080]
Also Known As:
- Physical Address:
- 470 270TH StOakland , CA 94612
- At A Glance
- Category (NTEE):
- Human Services / (Victims’ Services)
- Year Founded:
- 2010 Ruling Year: 2010
I’m looking at a 990 signed this past February by Harold Boscovich. (You can too — it’s free). There are no officers, no income, and no officer, it says, was paid. Now THAT’s an unusual tax return! “The purpose of this corporation (not nonprofit?) it “to provide comprehensive collaborative professional services to victims of domestic violence and their children, to victims of sexual abuse, sexual assault, and sexual exploitation; to victims of elder abuse, and to victims of child abuse, at no cost.
QUALIFYING FOR PUBLIC CHARITY STATUS: The Section 170(b)(1)(A)(vi) and 509(a)(1) Test and the Section 509(a)(2) Test
Tax-exempt status under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code permits a charitable organization to pay no tax on any operating surplus it may have at the end of a year, and it permits donors to claim a charitable deduction for their contributions.
There is a further division in the world of Section 501(c)(3) organizations, classifying them into private foundations and public charities.
The private foundation laws impose a 2 percent tax on investment income, limit self-dealing and business holdings, require annual distributions, prohibit lobbying entirely, and restrict the organization’s operations in other ways. Also, large donors to a private foundation have a lower ceiling on the amount of deductible gifts they can claim each year. In most circumstances, public charity status is preferable to private foundation status.
And it appears that this Alameda County Family Justice Center (“ACFJC” as I might refer to it again), started by District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, hand-picked by the retiring one TOm Orloff as a shoo-in (or to be the incumbent shortly before he retired) whose connections I’m sure helped get the $3 million grant to start this particular ACFCJ — and who then helped get another connected individual, Nadia Davis-Lockyer, Esq. become Executive Director and at once get a 50% increase in salary, to just below what a California Legislator (Assembly) typically gets ($90,000 / $95,921)….
Well, back to our IRS stipulations / qualifications link:
To determine the charity’s support base, (we might as well look at this….)
Gifts, grants,(Footnote 3) contributions, and membership fees received.
• Gross investment income (e.g., interest, dividends, rents, royalties, but not gains from sale of capital assets).
• Taxable income from unrelated business activities,4 less the amount of any tax imposed on such income.
• Benefits from tax revenues received by the charity, and any services or facilities furnished by the government to the charity without charge, other than those generally provided to the public without charge.
{{Hmmm….Does this rule have anything to do with why a new location was needed for the Center?}}
Footnote 3 In some limited circumstances, an unexpectedly large grant may be excluded from both public support tests as an “unusual grant” described in Regulation § 1.170A-9(e)(6). These technical rules are beyond the scope of this memorandum.
Not becoming a Private Foundation — Well, if there’s a whole lot of wealth involved, this could be annoying. Also, if you want very large private donors to support you, they deductible for those donors is also lower, which may make them wish to contribute instead to 501( c)3s as “Public charities” — like the Kids’ Turns of the family law world?
A Section 501(c)(3) organization can avoid private foundation status, and thus be classified as a public charity, in any of three ways: (1) by being a certain kind of institution, such as a church, school, or hospital; (2) by meeting one of two mathematical public support tests; or (3) by qualifying as a supporting organization to another public charity. In this memo, we discuss the two mathematical public support tests.
The Public/Governmental Support Test of Sections 170(b)(1)(A)(vi) and 509(a)(1)
This public support test was designed for charities which derive a significant proportion of their revenues from donations from the public, including foundation grants, and from governmental grants. The test has two variations. If an organization can satisfy either of the two variations of this support test, it will qualify as a public charity under Sections 170(b)(1)(A)(vi) and 509(a)(1).
The first variation is known as the one-third test. A charity can satisfy this test if public support is one-third or more of the total support figure. Nothing more is needed if this mathematical fraction is attained.
The second variation, known as the 10 percent facts and circumstances test, has two requirements. First, the charity’s public support must be at least 10 percent of its total support. Second, the charity must demonstrate, with reference to facts and circumstances specified by the IRS, that it is operated more like a public charity than like a private foundation.
Income: $3,250,900
Also known as: FVLC
Oakland, CA 94623Category: I71 (Spouse Abuse, Prevention of); P43 (Family Violence Shelters and Services); P62 (Victims’ Services)Physical Address:PO Box 22009 Oakland , CA 94623Web Address:www.fvlc.org Telephone:(510) 2080220 Facsimile:(510) 2083557 Contact:Ms. Cherri N. Allison, , Esq.cherri@fvlc.orgExecutive Director(510) 2080220 x32
Mission Statement
Family Violence Law Center (FVLC) has been working to end domestic violence in Alameda County since 1978, when a small group of abuse survivors founded the agency. To advance our mission of ending domestic violence, FVLC employs a holistic approach that integrates a comprehensive service model with dedicated efforts to address and change institutional barriers for domestic violence survivors within the legal, health, education, and criminal justice systems.
Yeah, “holistic” and “comprehensive service” are definitely the keywords these days. Please notice carefully (underlined) which systems it tries to address and change “institutional barriers for domestic violence survivors” within — it specifically does NOT mention within the Judicial system, and it most definitely does not mention anything — at all – about the “FAMILY LAW SYSTEM” although it’s title says ‘Family Law Violence Center.”
Go figure, huh? And how telling. The most critical information people coming through “stage one” of leaving domestic violence, assuming kids are involved, is what is coming up next — which IS the “family law system.”.
After looking at the 990 (as usual, I often go straight to the officers’ page), and notice the Executive Director is being paid a modest (for this size of operation) salary of $90K year, and her name is:
ABOUT THE MANAGEMENT TEAM
Cherri N. Allison, Esq. is the Executive Director at FVLC. A lifetime resident of Oakland, Ms. Allison has more than 7 years of legal non-profit management experience. Ms. Allison also has over 12 years of experience as a family law attorney.
Prior to coming to FVLC, Ms. Allison was the Director of Programs at the Alameda County Bar Association. In addition to Ms. Allison’s expertise in non-profit management, she has experience in board development, program development, grant writing and investments. She currently serves as the President of the Board for the Women Lawyers of Alameda County, is a former member of the FVLC Board, and is a member of the California Alliance Against Domestic Violence and the Charles Houston Bar Association.
In 2008, she is (not inappropriately, I’m sure) awarded by the Bar Association for the work with this Community Organization, along with other judges, attorneys, etc., as it says (tickets, $125),
2008 Installation and Distinguished Service Awards Dinner
Join us on Thursday, January 17, 2008, as we swear in our Officers and Directors and honor the recipients of our Distinguished Service Awards while we enjoy a delectable dinner buffet and cool jazz. The festivities will take place at the Claremont Hills Resort & Spa, majestically resting on 22 acres of beautifully landscaped gardens in Berkeley.*
(*starting to sound like some of the wonderful AFCC, or for that matter, Kids’ Turn promoting retreats and seminars.)
(the “California Alliance Against Domestic Violence” is a grants recipient, from my understanding, through HHS and is where CPEDV went….). WELL, I guess that FAMILY LAW EXPERIENCE may tell us why this group doesn’t seem to educate its clients about the family law process, and what’s happened to it since, say, 2001 (Bush, faith-based), or even 1998, 1999 (US Congress passes resolutions on fatherhood). However, it’s clear Ms. Allison must be informed about the intersection of DV & Family Law; she has written about it:
Domestic violence remedies in California family law cases, 2008. Cherri N. Allison, et al. (CEB, 2008) KFC 115 D664 not accessible to general public, unless you are in L.A.?
Get this (2009)
Women Lawyers of Alameda County (WLAC) honors Exec Director of ACFCJ, District Attorney (who helped fund and start ACFCJ) who also honor a retired woman judge (Hon. Peggy Hora., Ret’d.) who pushed “therapeutic jurisprudence” – a VERY problemmatic practice in the judicial field, and also endorsed by AFCC.
How sweet — aren’t these professionals all close friends with each other then? (Except the women driven homeless through family law system and twice-thrice-and ongoing-abused (Legal abuse syndrome) through its practices, or while (out of state — MD — another state pushing Therapeutic Jurisprudence through Univ. of Baltimore School of Law “CFCC”) a pediatrician mother (is that professional enough?) lost 3 children, drowned in a bathtub on a scheduled visitation, although she warned, pleaded, and asked for visitation to be curtailed based on the prior mental health history and state of the father. (“Cabrillo”).
WLAC “Honor Roll”
This Issue’s Honor Roll:
Cherri N. Allison, Executive Director of the Family Violence Law Center of Alameda County, was recently named “Woman of the Year” for the Justice Category of the Alameda County Commission on Status of Women and will be inducted into the Alameda County Women’s Hall of Fame on April 25, 2009.
I think that instead of professionals honoring and decorating themselves in nice ceremonies (Sun Myung Moon and the U.S. Senate mock coronation ceremony comes to mind) instead some of the women who DIED because of stupid family law rulings, sometimes along with their children or in front of them, in scheduled exchanges with the father for co-parenting purposes — THEIR names should be honored.
I do not live in this county and so am not familiar with which is most dramatic, but how about honoring the mothers who, having left an abusive relationship (or possibly separated because of the abuse) thereafter, by complying with family court orders to fork over their children to an ex-batterer or abuser, ended up dead.
If this is too many low-income people to consider at once, then why not go for someone closer to the legal profession’s social class — Hans Reiser. Why not honor his wife, Nina. I’m not sure which county this case was in, but sounds like her body was unearthed Alameda County.
And whoever is recommending Batterers Intervention Programs gets my “dunce award of the year; here’s why from “Sagaria Law” — they don’t complete the programs anyhow! Or, (in one high-profile case) they complete the programs and then walk back and kill the woman anyhow (Scott McAlpin).
The programs draw funding — is there something too hard to spell about that?
I started this blog to warn others! after years of the rollercoaster (downhill slide, overall) of the family law system that no one who was involved warned me about when I separated from the abuser. In retrospect, it might have been better to ask for self-defense lessons, mace training, and just utilize it, so I could communicate directly to this person that was is and is not acceptable is, in marriage, a two-way street, and wives are people, too.
FVLC’s services include both protection initiatives for people currently experiencing abuse and prevention initiatives to eliminate future abuse. Today, FVLC is recognized as a leader in the community in both delivering exceptional services to abuse survivors and in advocating for long-term social change for victims.
During FY 07-08, FVLC achieved the following accomplishments [(accomplished the following)]:
- Provided legal services (representation, paperwork preparation, and advice and counsel) to 525 clients, for a total of 2,250 contact hours and 692 court orders.
- Provided crisis counseling and safety planning to 2,823 clients, for a total of 3,250 contact hours.
- FVLC’s HEAL (Healing Emotions and Loss After Domestic Violence) Program provided intensive parent/child psychotherapy to 31 children and their primary caregiver, for a total of 900 contact hours.
- FVLC’s RAP (Relationship Abuse Prevention) Program provided intensive leadership training to 56 youth and violence prevention education and outreach to 1,008 youth.
FVLC has set the following goals for the current year (FY 08-09):
- Continue to strengthen collaborative relationships with other agencies co-located at the Alameda County Family Justice Center with FVLC. This includes the Oakland Police Department, Alameda County District Attorney’s Office, and numerous other community-based agencies.
- Engage in policy work around domestic violence by playing a leadership role on several state and countywide task forces, including the American Bar Association’s Commission on Domestic Violence, California Partnership to End Domestic Violence, Alameda County Family Violence Council, Domestic Violence Advisory Council for the Social Services Administration of Alameda County, and Alameda County Teen Dating Violence Task Force (formed and led by FVLC).
(As you can see, it’s now fashionable to say the words “domestic violence” and form task forces to do something about it, allegedly. Look at the variety of groups that do: The ABA, CPEDV, and something from Alameda County itself I can’t even find (yet), as well as a SSA “Domestic Violence Advisory Council.” How many of these talk to victims they helped 5 years down the road or so?
- With our collaborative partners Youth ALIVE! and Youth Radio, expand leadership training and policy work around teen dating violence at Oakland middle schools through various classroom, after-school, and summer activities, effectively reaching approximately 1,600 adolescents. This is made possible through a generous four-year, $1 million grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
(Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is very big into funding fatherhood materials. )
This is simply taxation without representation, and totally unacceptable in my book.
And I’m not a Tea Partier.
It sheds a whole different light on the “social contract” that most of (what remains of) the middle class has bought into. If they stick to their jobs, neighborhoods, kids, and planning for leisure & retirement (and don’t ask too many questions about the top layer) — then the top layer will structure society so as to kind of leave them alone, and of course (this goes without saying) make sure the rabble doesn’t get out of control.
FAMILY JUSTICE CENTERS, per IRS search (on the name):
Name City State Country
Code ALAMEDA COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER INC. Oakland CA USA — ANAHEIM FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER INC. Anaheim CA USA — FRIENDS OF THE RIVERSIDE COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER Riverside CA USA — NATIONAL FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER ALLIANCE San Diego CA USA — SOUTH BAY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER Torrance CA USA — STANISLAUS FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER FOUNDATION Modesto CA USA — FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY INC. Tampa FL USA — FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER FOUNDATION OF IDAHO Nampa ID USA — FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER OF ST. JOSEPH COUNTY INC. South Bend IN USA — THE FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER OF BOSTON INC. Boston MA USA — ESSEX COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER INC. Roseland NJ USA — CENTER FOR FAMILY JUSTICE Albuquerque NM USA — TRI-COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER OF NORTHEAST NEW MEXICO INC. Las Vegas NM USA — FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER OF ERIE COUNTY INC. Buffalo NY USA — YOUTH AND FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER INC. New York NY USA 4 FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER OF GEORGETOWN COUNTY Georgetown SC USA — KNOXVILLE FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER Knoxville TN USA — BEXAR COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER FOUNDATION San Antonio TX USA — FRIENDS OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER San Marcos TX USA — RESTORATIVE JUSTICE MINISTRY FAMILY SERVICES CENTER Woodville TX USA —
to Be Continued…
I turn, You turn, We all (must) turn to “Kids’ Turn” (and spinoffs)…per AFCC.. [Orig. Publ. May 23, 2011, #2 of 2, same-day].
[Title, short-link, background-color, borders and some tags added Sept. 30, 2019 because I’m linking to this older post..//LGH]
Yumm….. More goodies in the search to solve this problem, including why does the SFTC (That’s SF Trial Courts) have a LIEN on Kids’ Turn, which is constantly seeking more donors so poor kids can consume its services? (Richer ones, there’s a probably no-cap? sliding scale……)
How many mental health professionals is it possible to squeeze into one court case? And how is it done?
Ideally, as many as possible — one after another, after another. There is sure to be a need for them, given that the entire concept of mental health in the family law system is an oxymoron (see the word “law”).
Of course the family law system got its jumpstart with mental health professionals in alliance with legal professionals, somewhere shortly after women go the vote (but before all states had ratified it). The longer the system exists (generation after generation) the more mental health problems there are guaranteed to occur, given the source of them is the practitioner’s cognitive dissonance with state law (for example, against child abuse, child stealing, or valiant statements that there is a rebuttable presumption against custody going to batterers. Or, for that matter, child abusers. It’s a few steps away from fingerpainting — with the paint jars being the jargon used by various fields, which end up generally speaking in one big sticky mess.
Of course, you’re not supposed to see them at play behind closed doors, but since the advent of the Internet (which helps the conferences occur, obviously — and the curricula get disseminated — I’ll show how in a bit here) it’s also fun to track ’em down and catch’em in the act. Like my last post did with AB 2263, an attempt to legislate Kids’ Turn (ONLY) for a Judicial Council sponsored (public payments, I’m sure) analysis of how effective Kids’ Turn — excuse me, “programs that provide services to children undergoing divorce” (or whatever they called it to cover up that the original meaning intended was simply a nonprofit group brainstormed by — you guessed it — family law judges, etc.– this one in particular).
Well Gray Davis vetoed even the sanitized version of let’s build a LEGISLATIVE pipeline from this group to the entire divorcing population (Parental) of California — and the world, but we can start it here — and stick someone else, like taxpayers — with the bill. That was back in 2002.
Did that stop the idea? Heck no! I found the 48th Annual AFCC conference (Kids’ Turn is self-identified as an AFCC member. I guess a nonprofit can be a member of an association of court professionals (judges, commissioners and so forth) with mental health professionals with attorneys, etc.)
So, how IS it done? (other than out of the ready earshot of a court litigant, namely, parent in a custody battle).
(1)
FIRST OF ALL: FORM RAPID DEPLOYMENT UNITS — OF ONE JD, ONE Ph.D. (mental health, what else?) and one MSW or LCSW, or LMFT. Each has a specific purpose. Right now, we find this combo in pre-game a coaching session complete with powerpoint slides and diagrams:
….Understanding the Roles of Mental Health Professionals in Collaborative Practice
Conference : 48th Annual Conference
- A major strength of collaborative practice is the work done by the family with mental health professionals. Collaborative professionals frequently work in interdisciplinary teams to facilitate peaceful resolution. The collaborative process may include one “neutral” mental health professional, or two “aligned” mental health professionals. Both of these approaches may include a child specialist to help understand and facilitate focusing on the needs of the children. In some areas, mental health professionals work as neutral facilitators and as case managers. The program will provide an overview of each role and the strengths and advantages of each.
- Diane S. Diel, J.D., ** President, International Academy of Collaborative Professionals, Milwaukee, WI Barbara E. Kelly, Ph.D., Maitland, FL Mary M. Stengel, M.S.W., LCSW, Towson, MD [PARTNER in COLLABORATION LLC: Alice Dansker Doyle]
- [**notice (Mandatory) Parent Education link on Ms. Diel’s site. This is a critical component. Unless such classes were indeed MANDATORY (even if parents have no custody dispute!) who would attend?][More on this below, @ “Children in the Middle”]
Ms. Doyle is dedicated to the concept of assisting families to civilly resolve issues involved in custody, divorce and related disputes and training dedicated professionals to join the Collaborative community. Toward that result, she and Mary McNeish Stengel, LCSW, established Collaborative Training Solutions, Inc., (CTS) a company completely separate from her law and mediation practice ….Ms. Doyle sees spreading the Collaborative word as a mission. There are many professionals and communities that have not been educated in the Collaborative model of dispute resolution. Some don’t have training available within a reasonable distance because of population and geographical challenges. In addition to reaching larger populations, Ms. Doyle enjoys traveling to communities to provide trainings where local professionals are excited and want to be trained, yet may otherwise have to travel great distances for training because their community is too small to attract a large trainee group”
Session Handouts for AFCC’s 48th Conference
….NOTE — this is an UPCOMING Conference (June, 2011) called ‘What’s Gender Got To Do With It?” See my posts of January, 2011 — when I talk about are you speaking mother, father, or mediator? Pick a conference — there’s something for everyone (but the house wins when the coins are finally tossed.. that’s “mediator” rhetoric)…
The powerpoint slides (available on-line at above link) show few photos, but there’s one — of a father with a kid on his shoulders — next to “Maintain Focus on What is In the Best Interests of the Child,” which is under “Elements of Coaching” slide. But let’s go to the diagram, the playbook:
The slide “WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE?” shows two clients in the center, surrounded by larger circles, each one inhabited by a professor. This reminds me of a child’s game, such as “Ring Around the Rosy” or “Duck-Duck-Goose”. Either way the clients (litigants, most likely, parents….) are indeed surrounded by spheres of influence with lines between them; it does remind me of a corral:
“The Suggested Playahs”:
Two per client: Coach & Lawyer
At top and bottom: “Child Specialist“** (at the top — this category reigns supreme, obviously) and bottom, “Financial Specialist” which of course has to undergird the program, or who would fund he other specialists? How can you have a family law case without ferreting who’s got the assets that are going to be soaked in this process? So, FInancial Specialists are very, very important, especially for moneyed divorcing (or separating) parents.
Alternately, if one parent is Title IV-D (welfare), then the “Financial Specialists” are the program managers, and child support administrators, etc. After all, with $4 billion enforcement fees (per year, nationally speaking) surely some of these employees can figure out who’s got the money in each case. It’s in the public’s best interest for the courts to know….
**Child Specialist: (slide) is a NEUTRAL third party who focuses exclusively on the children’s concerns and/or their interests, advocates for the children and consults to the parents and their team. (Why GALs wont work is ….)
MOST professionals like to get paid for their work. Given that this includes child specialists, I say that it’s a rare person holding demi-god (i.e., neutral and not in the least subject to temptation to skew the scale) status. (“Mea culpa, mea culpa” for bringing this up)
When any judge takes payments from any County (in addition to state salary, whether this is in the form of benefits, or anything else) that’s a conflict of interest — the County has a vested interest in certain types of cases, and LOTS of these cases involve children, and child support, sometimes foster care and adoptions as well.
One attorney (non-aligned) noticed this and wrote about it in January, 2009. (I don’t think he was an AFCC member….):
LA County Payments to LA Superior Court Judges Cost Taxpayers Almost 1 Billion Dollars and Denied Constitutional Rights to the People of LA CountyJanuary 07, 2009
Los Angeles, California –
The commencement of the of unconstitutional payments by LA County to LA Superior Court judges was “unnoticeable” to the people of LA County in the late 1980s. Yet, its effect began to permeate the Los Angeles political and judicial systems to the extent that fundamental constitutional rights were compromised.Twenty years after the commencement of the payments, the political and judicial systems of LA County are rife with conflicts of interest, lack of disclosure and the failure to enforce constitutional rights and laws.A well traveled “money trail” exists from LA County who makes payments to LA Superior Court judges [present and past] who decide cases in favor of LA County.
Seems to me it took only a few months for a Superior Court Judge to throw in in Jail and the California Bar to disbar him. After all, his emphasis was constitutional issues (California State), and individual legal rights to fair and unbiased judicial hearings — not exactly your basic mental health, custody-coaching, professional-referral-basis expanding scheme.
So, he got tossed (well, led from the courtroom in handcuffs, and it seems the arrest record also fudged somewhat) into solitary coervcie confinement, as we now know, in an attempt to break his spirit (Note: it failed. 18 months later, he was finally released, and is still at it). This is an interim report from some groups / individuals that took up this banner — about no danged conflicts of interests in our courts, dammit! You will note, Mr. Fine’s comments were from his jail cell (and he has also been disbarred).
Los Angeles, CA Full Disclosure Network® presents a 3 min video report on the November 23, 2009 remarks made by Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich at a meeting of the Los Angeles County Lincoln Club in North Hollywood. The Supervisor provided an update regarding the controversy over long-time practice of the County making payments to Los Angeles Superior Court Judges. Civic leader David R. Hernandez provides his account of the presentation in the video.
A Fourth District CA Court of Appeals decision in November of 2008 ruled the county’s payments were illegal in theSturgeon v. County of Los Angeles lawsuit that revealed Judges, who are all elected officials, were not disclosing the extra payments they received from the County to litigants in the courtroom in cases involving the county nor on the Form 700 Economic Interest statements as required by the California Fair Political Practices Act.
Antonovich responded to a question about the continuing public concern that county payments created a “conflict” for judges and if this conflict was going to be resolved?
Here are some of the points made by Supervisor Antonovich:
- Recent [FEB 11, 2009] legislation, Senate Bill SBX2 11 has now made the payments legal.
- All new judges (appointed or elected) will not be receiving payments from the county.
- Most other California counties have been paying (illegal) benefits to the judges
- This was not just a Los Angeles County practice
- L A Judges have not always ruled in favor of the County (payments started in 1988)
- Several court rulings have been in against the County and in favor of illegal aliens
Featured in the video: are two prominent critics of the illegal payments made to Judges by the County and below are comments from Richard I Fine from his L.A. County Jail cell.
Richard Fine Fires back, in an L.A. Op Ed, as to Ron George. I’m enclosing here, for contrast with the profession-mongering family law field, via AFCC, to see a contrasting view of “in the best interests” of — one based on stop wasting our tax dollars, and concealing how this is done, not to mention, undermining the US Bill of Rights, labeled:
“The Deception of California Supreme Court Justice Ron George”
REBUTTAL TO L A TIMES OP-EDBy Richard I. FineIn his September 14, 2009 Los Angeles Times Op-Ed article California Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald George stated that the Judicial Council of California decided to close the California Courts one day a month until June 2010. He acknowledged the hardship on Californian’s and praised the Superior Court Judges who volunteered to take a one day pay cut.
FAILED TO DISCLOSE AUTHORSHIP
However, he did not disclose that the same Judicial Council of California of which he admitted he is the Chairman, also wrote Senate Bill SBX2 11. This bill was introduced by Senate President Pro-Tem Daryl Steinberg on February 11, 2009 passed by the State Senate on February on 14th , 2009 and passed by the State Assembly on February 15, 2009 signed by the Governor on February 20, 2009 and became effective on May 21, 2009.EXTRA JUDICIAL BENEFITS & CRIMINAL IMMUNITY
Such bill reinstated “supplemental county benefits” to Superior Court Judges in addition to their State Salary and compensation. Such supplemental County benefits have been held to be “unconstitutional” in the case ofSturgeon vs County of Los Angeles 167 Cal Ap 4th 630 (2008) review denied 12/23/08. Such bill also gave retroactive immunity to the Judges and others from criminal prosecution, civil liability and disciplinary action.$30 MILLION MORE DURING FISCAL CRISIS?
By omitting to disclose Senate Bill SBX2 11 and it’s retroactive immunity,Chief Justice George did not inform the people that the loss to the taxpayers in L.A.County alone of these supplement payments to the Superior Court Judges in fiscal year 2009-2010 is estimated at $30 million dollars this loss is greater than the contributions of all of the Judges of one day’s pay per month over a year. In effect, under Senate Bill SBX2 11 the judges are making more money during this financial crisis while the citizens of California suffer.DUE PROCESS DENIED
Worse yet, because of the retroactive immunity the decisions of the judges receiving county payments before 05-21-09 violated the due process clauses of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution and the California Constitution.
(end of commercial break from AFCC/Family Court Fantasia. back to our regularly scheduled post subject matter, here….)
OK Gray Davis in 2002 scotched (Vetoed) the concept of legislating Kids’ Turn, the whole Kids’ Turn and basically nothing BUT Kids’ Turn** (or — OK, maybe a look-alike or spinoff, such as Kids First, or Kids in the Middle, or Children in the Middle, or . .. or . . . . . anything that would require lots of people, some of who would recommend that parents be ordered to consume social-service product of, for example, a single AFCC acolyte (or, fully fledged priest) from Tarrant County, Texas . . . . . ).
Since the Governor (not the terminator) said NO! although the legislature (with its sanitized version) clearly said “YES” and wanted him to sign it . . . . did these zealots take “No!” for a final answer? Heck, No — they are salespeople first of foremost, and educators at heart.
[[**more commonly known as:
“The Whole Truth and Nothing But the Truth! So Help Me God!“and you gotta visit the website, there…. unlike these AFCC people, the author has a sense of humor in presenting reality…..]]
All true educators need to get continual access to people who need training after all, ambulance chasers chase ambulances, right? But what’s a psychologist and M.Ed.D. to do without some governmental subsidies? (“incentives”) — compete in the free market base don the quality of the product? NO! — back to the gameboard.
All that was just (long) introduction and setting the stage. This is the juicy center of the dialogue, and why I started this post — after the last two Kids’ Turn Posts. They’re just UNbelievable…. Anyone wnat to go to Florida and take notes at this upcoming conference? Lookee here:
Here’s some “Kids in the Middle” presenters. I’ll be back tomorrow — not done yet here…
Session : AFCC1111
5. Working with High Conflict Parents: How Conflict, Personality Disorders and Gender Influence Outcomes for Children
Conference : 48th Annual Conference
Speaker(s) :
- High conflict parents are the most difficult to work with in divorce proceedings. They utilize an inordinate amount of time and patience for professionals working with them. In addition, enduring conflict between parents, both pre- and post-divorce, has the greatest negative impact on children of divorce. Attorneys, mediators and guardians are in a position to recognize and minimize parental conflict when they possess knowledge about how gender and personality disorders play a role. This workshop focuses on recognizing the key elements at play and providing strategies for ensuring positive outcomes for the entire family system.
- Judy Berkowitz, M.Ed., Executive Director, Kids In The Middle, St. Louis, MO Carol Love, M.A., SMFT, Kids In The Middle, St. Louis, MO
Kids in the Middle profits from the Court-referrals and Schools-referral clientele, and says so on its 2009 Annual Report:
Workshops at the 22nd Judicial Circuit Court, Family Court ␣ 330 parents attended mandated parent education workshops.
Yes it is a Nonprofit, and in 2009, despite over $2,000 in interest income (how many people would this house for a month?), and over $1 mil in income, it operated $55K in the hole, which seems to be a standard in some of these groups. Probably because there are simply so many young and old, and middle-aged people that need this help, a little overeager promotional spending?
Ms. Berkowitz’s KIDS IN THE MIDDLE.org site has a book list. I always find these informative, for example, a few choice ones:
- The Boys’ and Girls’ Book About Divorce
, by Richard Gardner
THE MAN’s DEAD (a vicious death involving knives. Some say suicide, some disagree….), BUT HIS SELF-PUBLISHED IDEAS LIVE ON AMONG CONVERTS…..
- Good Parenting Through Your Divorce
, by Mary Ellen Hannibal and Judge Ina Gyemant
- Parenting After Divorce: A Guide to Resolving Conflicts and Meeting your Childrens’ Needs
, by Philip Michael Stahl
PHILIP STAHL ~ highly under-reported by women’s groups protesting PAS theory — they simply don’t pay attention to the distribution systems like I started to ~ ~ CARRIES THE GARDNER TORCH, AND HE’S GOOD AT IT. HE’S PART OF THE JUICY CENTER OF MY POST HERE TODAY — ABOUT HOW HIS BOOKS (AND OTHERS) ARE PROMOTED.. THROUGH COURT-MANDATED PARENTING PROGRAMS DIRECTING EVERYONE TO CONSUME JUDGE-ORIGINATED LITERATURE PUSHED THROUGH JUDGE-ORIGINATED (OR MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONAL-ORIGINATED) NON-PROFIT, AND SOMEONE HAS TO SAY THIS — FRONT GROUPS. OR STRAIGHT OUT FOR-PROFIT COLLABORATIONS AMONG THE VARIOUS PROFESSIONALS ALL OBSESSED WITH “helping” OPK (other people’s kids) with the problems THEY perceive, from THEIR perspective (only) and with OUR (public) money, like as not…
While the parents they are coaching, already under huge financial stress often enough, are (if taxpayers and wage-earners) picking up, collectively, the slack which nonprofits — because of their wonderful public benefits to all of us, and the universe — get out of paying, i.e., funds for themselves and services like libraries, police, schools, public transportation infrastructure, and far less urgent public priorities than indoctrinating kids and parents in the right way to think about their own children, and their own situations, and of course how not to use criminal terminology in one’s thought processes, even if convictions show that it’s occurred. After all, let’s just “focus on the family” and forget about those other unpleasant matters — eech!
Let’s take a look at a slide, so we know what to expect from this “What’s GENDER Got to Do With It?” AFCC upcoming conference among mental health professionals, attorneys and judges in the family law system:
Workshop Objectives
Know how to recognize a client who may have a personality disorder.
Understand how the traits of a client with a personality disorder can lead to chronic conflict and therefore poor outcomes for their children.
Understand how gender issues can combine with some personality disorders, resulting in extreme dysfunction and poor outcomes for children.
Understand why personality disorder traits make it difficult for parents to meet their children’s needs.
Understand the increased risk for alienation when a parent has a personality disorder.
Learn strategies to manage and support the client with a personality disorder.
I don’t suppose any “personality disorders” might result from abuse, virtual POW situations in the home, or years of trying to avoid provoking a violent incident — or seeking outside protection (and not getting it) from someone molesting one’s own kids on unsupervised weekend visitations…. Or having suddenly lost one’s kids’ after trying to do something about that and having been unprepared for the impact of federal incentives to switch custody and eliminate child support arrears through access visitation funding….
But, as it’s said, Cobblers see shoes, and Mental Health professionals see Personality Disorders and not what might have CAUSED them…. To People selling hammers, the problem is a nail… To people obsessed with unmonitored contact with distressed minor children — and these often show up in M.Ed.D. forms, i.e., as educators — the problem with divorce is the parents…. both of them — and the solution is to separate the kids and coach them on how to think about their parents and themselves….This also pertains if the source of conflict may entail, say, poverty — it’s still more critical that the problemsolving money goes to nonprofits coaching Kids and Parents…..
Here’s another slide. Given the scope of the problem (neurotic divorcing parents), Kids in the Middle, Inc. and it’s 23 paid staff (some of who are, obviously getting some frequent flyer miles in, too) stand ready to stand in the gap against the bad parents, and provide services to fix their viewpoints:
About Kids In The Middle ®
Our Services: Consultation Assessments Group Therapy for Children Individual Therapy for Children Family Therapies Treatment Reviews Individual Therapy for Parents Co-Parenting Counseling Parent Groups
Diagnostic Supervised Visitation Mandated Co-Parenting Education Classes
(at least 3 of these categories come under the federal access visitation (incentive) grants to increase noncustodial parenting time. We know in practice, this rarely occurs with a mother, even though more and more mothers are being completely eliminated from contact with their children through these and similar programs. Moreover, to keep the professional straights, AFCC around the country & state chapters are also heavily promoting (supposedly to meet the grassroots demand from the general public) “Parent Coordination” as a new field. Wait til you see my post on THAT one….)
Here’s another. Notice that being “wounded” disqualifies one’s ability to co-parent (which might result in recommendation of sole custody to the other parent, logically speaking….). There is no mention of who is inflicting which wounds. THe total oblivion to the blood on the streets of women and children (and sometimes men, by suicide after killing the women, or just the children) around divorce. Those aren’t their concern, I guess. After all, dead people don’t consume mental health services….at least court-mandated; I imagine it could seriously screw up surviving relatives and witnesses….
Assessing Parental Ability to Co-Parent
What we look for:
Level of cooperation as parents in the marriage Is conflict pervasive or focused on a few issues? Level of trust Level of “woundedness” of one or both parents Level of acceptance of the separation
Ability or inability to let go of issues from the marriage Level of animosity Ability to recognize and express the other parent’s
strengths Mental Health Issues
DastardlyDads.blogspot.com reports some of these (I’m glad someone else does, I couldn’t do this consistently — too close to home!) Here’s one from May, 2011 — this month.
Dad charged with 1st-degree murder; 17-year-old daughter found in dumpster (Washington, DC)
After much public display of grief and gnashing of teeth, dad RODNEY JAMES MCINTYRE has been arrested in the stabbing murder of his 17-year-old daughter. Her body was found in a dumpster. Seems that Daddy was sexually abusing her. Not one word here about this girl’s mother….INVISIBLE MOTHER ALERT. http://dcist.com/2011/05/father_of_ebony_franklin_charged_wi.phpFather of Ebony Franklin Charged with First Degree MurderNearly 6 months ago, MPD made the gruesome discovery of the body of 17-year-old Ebony Franklin in a dumpster in the ally of the 1000 block of Fairmont Street NW. Now, they have arrested Rodney James McIntyre, Ebony Franklin’s father, for her murder. Ebony was stabbed 17 times.Sources say McIntyre was linked both by DNA and cell phone records to Franklin’s death.
Police Chief Cathy Lanier indicated in her press conference announcing McIntyre’s arrest that there was also evidence of a sexual relationship between Ebony Franklin and her father.
McIntyre had been quoted in the press saying that “The way my baby was found in the trash, it’s unacceptable. What I want to know as her father, what really took place with my child?”
Now why must parents who may have gone through some serious, criminal hell spots be exposed, unilaterally, to consume classes by professionals who blame both parents for failure to get along with each other in situations where there is a clear perpetrator? . . . . . . . . I’ll let you figure out your own answer, I have also…. The entire forced shared-parenting/ joint-parenting field ignores situations like this, and that if separation HAD been allowed by the family law system, how many children would be alive now, that aren’t? And their mothers? and their fathers? What kind of sick obsession is it to change the language of criminal law into the language of, “my mental illness — and she alienated my children — made me do it”? This IS the language of AFCC; their main site acknowledges this, and it has now become the norm….
The real motivation is greed and fear of no professional niche for people raised on education theories and psychology. .. back to this particular group:
I’m so re-assured that these mandated classes will keep us on the right track. However, if they don’t, these same ladies are also training Advanced GAL classes (from a 2010 Missouri Bar agenda):
Child-Focused Divorce Therapy & How Attorneys Can Keep Kids Out of the Middle of Divorce Disputes
Speakers: Judy Berkowitz and Carol Love, Kids In The Middle, Inc., Kirkwood [MO]*
[GEE: I wonder if the punch-line is to recommend classes/services from groups like, say, “Kids in the Middle”…]
(*Kirkwood is an affluent suburb of St. Louis)
NOW LET’S SEE ANOTHER SET OF AFCC WORKSHOPS/ MP3s on HOW TO THINK RIGHT (a.k.a., marketing seminars for court professionals)….
-
A little more “Parenting Coordination” promo, a little more “Alienation Theory” promo never hurts:
ession : AFCC1101
2. Advanced Challenges in Parenting Coordination
Conference : Pre-Conference Sessions from the 48th Annual Conference
Speaker(s) :
- Successful parenting coordination is dependent on a research-based understanding about what works and what doesn’t. This institute will help participants optimize outcomes with difficult parenting coordination cases by constructing a framework for success. Presenters will address parenting coordination from the mental health {{1st things first — Mental Health First, Legal — 2nd}} and legal {{legal rights? legal ethics? or how to expand the legal profession(and further undermine civil rights) by engaging mental health professionals?}} perspectives offering a multidimensional understanding of the process. Participants will be better prepared to address complex parent coordination cases. {{PARENTING COORDINATION EXISTS to handle the Complexity Groups like AFCC have already introduced. Apparently, this has gotten out of hand, and not parenting coordination itself has (already) gotten “complex” and needs coaches to tell coordinators how to keep it together…}}
- Debra K. Carter, Ph.D., National Cooperative Parenting Center, Bradenton, FL Hon. Hugh Starnes (ret.), Ft. Myers, FL Denise L. Baier, M.A., Ft. Myers, FL B. Kerry Brown, M.S.W., Temple Terrace, FL
Session : AFCC1102
3. Differential Responses to Alienation: Risk Factors, Indicators and AssessmentConference : Pre-Conference Sessions from the 48th Annual Conference
Speaker(s) :
- Alienation has serious consequences for children and families. Based on a differential response model, the presenters advocate for early identification of parent-child contact problems and risk factors for the occurrence of alienation, and the implementation of appropriate, targeted responses. ** This institute (“INSTITUTE”???) provides a framework (indoctrination model) for assessing and intervening with families to resolve parent child contact problems before behaviors become entrenched; and help judges, lawyers and mental health workers to effectively respond to cases of alienation.** The analytical framework presented is based on a review of literature and case law, interviews with practitioners and scholars, and clinical experiences.
- Nicholas Bala, LL.B., LL.M., Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada Barbara Jo Fidler, Ph.D., Toronto, ON, Canada Michael Saini, Ph.D., M.S.W., University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
***”Alienation” is like the headless horseman. It’s been proved scientifically unsound and rejected by the American Prosecutors (etc., etc.) — but it rides on, in places like this.
A group taking Violence Against Women funds is now in bed with the “let’s not talk about it!” AFCC, lending a false legitimacy to the discussion. I have tracked funding from this one (BWJP) and am presently p*ssed off at the alliance — although hardly surprised by it. FOr the record, attempts were made to contact Ms. Frederick about AFCC regarding mis-use of the federal program funds to pay off custody switching to batterers/molesters (as I recall Liz Richards relating this — I was the person who alerted her to BWJP hooking up with AFCC). For a number of years, HHS grants of $1.78 Million went to this organization. The mutual blindness is probably not accidental — it’s a symbiotic relationship to keep the grants coming and support the published professionals — while parents, I must say, perish, or just about….
Session : AFCC1122
16. Examining the Family Court Response to Cases Involving Domestic Violence: Findings of the Henry County Ohio Safety Audit
Conference : 48th Annual Conference
Speaker(s) :
- This workshop describes the methodology and outcomes of a recent study of the legal and social service systems used to resolve child custody matters involving allegations of domestic violence. The Safety Audit, an institutional ethnography process, generated practical recommendations for strengthening the responses of various family court practitioners to custody cases involving domestic violence. Local and national audit team members will share the findings and recommendations of this audit and discuss the challenges of the process.
- Loretta Frederick, J.D., Battered Women’s Justice Project, Winona, MN Hon. Denise McColley, Henry County Family Court, Napoleon, OH Richard L. Altman, J.D., Magistrate, Napoleon, OH PamWeaner, J.D., Legal Aid of Western Ohio, Defiance, OH
These people truly do not know what time of day it is. What they do know, however, is where their next plane ticket is coming from. The difference in perspective comes from a consciousness and quasi-religious (in some cases, less than quasi-) belief that the world is fair, and that certain types of professionals are essential to keep it balanced — if only those danged parents would be more docile when ordered to sit still and be taught at!
Here, Ms. Frederick is on a Domestic Violence Task Force (“Wingspread Conference”) with a bunch of AFCC-ers, giving their concerns about the matter a veneer of respectability.
http://www.afccnet.org/pdfs/AFCC%20Five-Year%20Report%20Web.pdf
(hover/click to see summary text on link. Looks like AFCC, bored with the US, is providing social science libraries to developing nations, to make sure they develop right — Philistines, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Mongolia. I don’t suppose any of these materials might take into account cultural differences or, for example, address family problems caused by — shari’a law, and honor killings? ??? Are we still into co-parenting issues there, too? Or is it just the ol’ bread and butter parental alienation, plus bring on the court-referred mental health professionals? Do we think that these countries are going to need fatherhood commissions to balance out the destructive feminists in developing nations who — for example — attempt to marry out of their faith, or are guilty of having been gang-raped without 4 male witnesses to testify it wasn’t consensual adultery — punishable by death, to the woman at least..?)
I really have to question AFCC’s motives in all this — what “world” do they live in? Where are their heads at?
And we are letting this PRIVATE, JUDGE~MENTAL HEALTHPROFESSIONAL-ORIGINATED, NONPROFIT(and originally, tax-dodging) PRIVATE organization basically run the family law system, which receives PUBLIC funds, from the top (California Judicial Council, Texas Supreme Court, at least, and plenty of superior court judges are members) to bottom and even let them train paraprofessionals who don’t even belong there to start with ? ??? And we then fund domestic violence organizations who don’t fess up to they’re going along with the program, pretty much, by failing to report the grants angle (i.e., how it plays into custody decisions….)
???
So, YEAH, I’m disturbed by this. Why shouldn’t I be? Did Ms. Frederick or BWJP report on, say, in 1999, how Ohio Legislature voted a Fatherhood Commission in to law, and did they warn single mothers, including single battered mothers, how this might impact their custody cases? See “5101.34 Ohio Commission on Fatherhood”
or how its membership was specifically targeted to single females? …. Or how this then, a mere 2 years later (2001) apparently, led to supreme-court appointed a TASK FORCE ON FATHERHOOD (you always need a task force, right?) I hope blog readers scan through THIS document, and search for “Philip Stahl” (an expert who testified, what else), learn how people were flown out to Maricopa County, Arizona home of Dawn Axsom – oh, I forgot — she was murdered, along with her mother, on a court-ordered visitation after pleading with a family law judges to leave, as there had been death threats — to hear AFCC presentations.
Ohio Task Force on Family Law and Children
Family Law Reform: Minimizing Conflict, Maximizing Families*
*if that sounds like your basic AFCC presentation, it is…. Experts giving testimony:
Experts and Stakeholders
Individuals who testified before the Task Force
Nancy Neylon Executive Director Ohio Domestic Violence Network
The Hon. Judith Nicely President Ohio Domestic Relations Judges Association
Kevin O’Brien President of the Board Parents And Children for Equality
Eileen Pruett, J.D. Director of the Office of Dispute Resolution Supreme Court of the State of Ohio
Nancy Rodgers, J.D. Vice Provost, Academic Administration The Ohio State University
Jeff Sherrill, Ph.D. Meers, Inc. Ohio Psychological Association
Michael Smalz, J.D. Statewide Attorney Ohio State Legal Services Association
The Hon. Leslie H. Spillane Judge, Butler County Court of Common Pleas Domestic Relations Division
Philip Stahl, Ph.D. Psychologist Author “Conducting Child Custody Evaluations: A Comprehensive Guide” and “Complex Issues in Child Custody Evaluations”
Tracy Ulstad, J.D. Ohio State Legal Services-NAPIL Equal Justice Fellow
Sanford Braver, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology Arizona State University Author “Divorced Dads: Shattering the Myths”
Gerard Clouse, J.D. Attorney, Sowald, Sowald and Clouse
Christine Coates, M.Ed., J.D. Mediator and Parent Coordinator Past President, Association of Family and Conciliation Courts
Robert Emery, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology, Director of Clinical Training Director of the Center for Children Families and the Law University of Virginia Author: “ Marriage, Divorce and Children’s Adjustment”
Judy Greenberger School Psychologist, Shaker Heights City Schools Ohio School Psychologists
Don Hubin, Ph.D. Professor of Philosophy The Ohio State University
Magistrate Eva Kessler, J.D. Chair, Domestic Relations Practice Area Ohio Association of Magistrates
Deborah Kline Association for Child Support Enforcement
Michael Lamb, Ph.D. Head of Section on Social and Emotional Development National Institute Of Child Health and Human Development
The Hon. Charles Loman III Judge, Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Relations Division Kids Turn Program
(Did someone say there is a Kids Turn Program right on a court website? Well that simplifies matters…CN find record of this one easily, or much on the judge….)
(This link is FYI amusement — although the mother in the case is not amused. She did get the expense reports, however, and out one of Judge Loman’s associates for billing taxpayers on Thanksgiving Day, after having hand-delivered a final decision. This is a PAS/Sexual abuse allegations, custody went to Daddy case, might be interesting reading….)
{2011, it looks like a ‘Parent Education Department:
“The court is led by Administrative Judge Denise L. Cross and Judge Timothy D. Wood. The Judges are assisted in performing the duties of the court by nine Magistrates, the Legal Services Department, the Court Operations Department, Bailiffs, Court Reporters, the Legal Secretary Department, the Assignment Office, the Compliance Office, the Family Relations Department, the Mediation Services Department, the Management of Information Systems Department, the Finance Department, and the Parent Education Department.”
The required seminar (3 hrs) is “Helping Children Succeed After Divorce” as a link to this 5-yr divorce case shows, interesting docket, too.
OHIO 2001 Task Force Experts — Anyone want to bet how many of the above are members of AFCC, besides those who actually admitted it?
Here (remember — back in 2001) is the preface to the final report of this task force, showing what they did:
However, given the scope and importance of the project, the General Assembly extended this deadline, to allow this research effort to be advanced more fully.
More than two dozen experts from around the state and across the country presented testimony to the Task Force over a six-month period. Representatives from a variety of parents’ organizations,** as well as a panel of teens who had experienced their parents’ divorces, brought their unique concerns to the Task Force. Staff members obtained research articles and statutes from around the nation and the globe to find the latest policies and practices. Members of the Task Force traveled to Phoenix, Arizona, to meet with staff at the Maricopa County Court system, a nationally recognized leader in court services and pro se programs, and to conferences sponsored by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, an internationally acclaimed organization which provides research and programs for professionals dealing with families in conflict.**
{**and has an official policy to change the “old” language of criminal law to the “new” language of (psychology, essentially…..) –}
{**anyone see a feminist flavor within range of the task force? Or someone willing to talk about domestic violence? . .. Note — contents highlight the access visitation conferences. I attended the BMCC (Battered mothers Custody Conferenc) in NY state this past January (2011) — and practically no one had HEARD of “access visitation” nor — naturally — was it even discussed. One reason, among others, I left there in disgust. They are no better than the fatherhood groups that don’t help fathers — it’s just about the dole, the $dollar….}
At the end of the information gathering process, the Task Force examined all of the information obtained with one goal in mind, enhancing the well being of Ohio’s children and families in a fiscally efficient and responsible way. Ideas were discussed and debated, and suggested statutory language created. The Task Force focused on the idea that Ohio’s legal and social service institutions should minimize conflict between parents and protect children from the effects of their parents’ conflicts, while providing opportunities and support to parents as they continue to be parents to their children, regardless of family structure. The following report and recommendations are the result of this extensive research effort and debate and have been unanimously approved, without any abstentions or dissents, by official action of the 17 members of the Task Force present at the final meeting on June 1, 2001.
So, given all this lead-in, I really ought to show you the Philip Stahl Promotion in the 48th annual conference (guess AFCC was only in its 30s way back then…..):
TO BE CONTINUED ON MY NEXT, HYPER-LINKED POST …
Kicking salesmanship up a notch: the nonprofit “Kids’ Turn” and my California Legislature (Sept. 2019 title update: Calif. Legislature 2001-2002 Session, A.B. 2263, 2002, C. Kehoe tries to legislate KT as a standard and order funds to study and expand it)
Post Title: Kicking salesmanship up a notch: the nonprofit “Kids’ Turn” and my California Legislature (Sept. 2019 title update: Calif. Legislature 2001-2002 Session, A.B. 2263, 2002, C. Kehoe tries to legislate KT as a standard and order funds to study and expand it) (Shortlink url: https://wp.me/psBXH-G7, published May 19, 2011, this title update added Sept. 29, 2019, about 7,661 words. Original title as seen only in bold. I added explanatory phrase, and nowadays I add “date published” to the title where possible.//LGH.
From this post (tongue in cheek, my voice, after reading about it):
…Everybody who’s anybody in the family law fields (whether attorney, judge, or psychologist/family therapist, etc.) should take a turn at running Kids’ Turn.
From that bill, before amended to ask for generic help, not specifically admitting that what was meant was “our baby, Kids’ Turn”)…operates as a franchise sold only to nonprofits (not mentioned: started and run by, see previous quote):
Kids’ Turn is a private non-profit organization that provides workshops for children and their parents that are intended to teach skills to cope with the difficulty of divorce and separation….
Fees for workshops range from $75 to $600 (on a sliding scale). Kids Turn conducts programs in San Francisco, Marin, Alameda, and Contra Costa County. The organization has sold its curriculum and licensed affiliates located in Sonoma, Napa, San Diego, Shasta, and Yolo Counties (in addition to Dayton, Ohio and Hillsboro, Oregon. Although sold only to nonprofits, the program effectively operates as a franchise. Kids’ Turn currently is conducting its own study, in consultation with the California School of Professional Psychology. This bill would require the Judicial Council to duplicate, at least in part, the current study.
Among the objections raised, and possibly why (last I looked) it wasn’t passed SPECIFICALLY naming Kids’ Turn as the California (NB: Large state!) recommended parent education curriculum:
…According to the Judiciary Committee analysis, the author states that the bill is needed so that Kids’ Turn will have state approval as evidence of credibility and will allow courts to “recommend Kids’ Turn as a resource to the community.”
[[On the organization’s website, five-year strategy, this analysis continues]]
…Specifically targeted for consideration is: “Enhanced marketing strategies in order to increase the number of Kids’ Turn affiliates and sales of Kids’ Turn Curriculum.” This bill may create the appearance that a State study and Judicial Council recommendations are part of a marketing strategy..
In fact they are. The workaround was to delete specific references to the corporation name and limit the dollar amount for the study to $50,000, from the phrase amount “necessary.”
Author’s amendments: The author proposes amendments (LCR# 0216385), which (1) delete the specific reference to Kids’ Turn and, instead, study projects or programs that provide services to parents and children undergoing divorce, 2) to delete reference to program expansion; and 3) to delete the language requiring the Judicial Council to allocate the amount “necessary” to conduct the study, to limit the State’s obligation to $50,000. The third staff recommendation to authorize, but not require the study, was rejected by the author.
Shameless! I do not know what became of the bill; I was just discovering it at the time (and my second child was turning adult around the time I discovered it). The continued use of state government positions, websites, and affiliations (especially AFCC’s) continues in the second decade of the 21st century and as we are approaching the third decade, I expect unless someone develops the means and courage to stop it, will continue to do so.//LGH
BELOW THIS LINE: AS WRITTEN May 2011 (except as I may later return here to clean up formatting, which is seriously in trouble at this point, but for a snapshot in time, you can see the basic content is still here and was then/still is now, solid on the business model in play…//LGH 9/29/2019):
I was just casually searching on “Kids’ Turn Affiliates” and even I was surprised at how far proponents would go to push this judge-originated nonprofit.
To the California Legislature?
Yep. The original version was written specifically to this one organization that is probably something of a slush fund to start with.
Makes you wonder about some of our legislators. (posted below).
It was already mentioned 2001-2002 (at a minimum) in the Calif. Judicial Council’s Report to the Legislature on Access and Visitation Fundings, as a sub-grantee. In fact, looks like it was the first one that popped to their mind:
The following are some of the parent education programs funded by the grants that help promote and encourage healthy parent-and-child relationships.
- Kids’ Turn (San Diego, Napa, and Shasta Counties): This is a nationally recognized educational program that offers workshops and counseling for families with separated or divorced parents. Kids’ Turn teaches family members the skills that can improve communication between children and parents and help parents understand their children’s experience during and after divorce.21
The San Francisco (founding org.) Kids’ Turn apparently gets some direct help from the City & County, and wants more:
We submitted our first grant to the Administrative Office (AOC) of the Court in November, 2011. This grant was submitted in a partnership with the Rally Project. If awarded, the AOC will fund low-income, noncustodial parents and their children to attend Kids’ Turn services.
6. The City and County of San Francisco initially reduced our 1011 grant award by 10%, but the amount was re-instated in September, 2010 raising our contract award to the original $50,000. This funding is for our very specialized, Nonviolent Family Skills Program for Juveniles.
If you’re actually still earning money, while in the custody process, the Sliding fee Scale does not seem to have an upper limit (?):
FEE TABLE
Pre-Tax Income Tuition with 1 Child 2 Children or More 0 — $14k $50 $60 $15k — $19k $65 $80 $20k — $24k $90 $120 $25k — $29k $175 $225 $30k — $39k $250 $300 $40k — $49k $325* $375* $50k — $59k $450* $500* $60k — $74k $625* $725* $75k — $99k $750* $850* $100k — $124k $900* $1000* $125k — $250k $1075* $1175* $251k — $500k $1400* $1550* $500k+ $1700* $1900*
For parents receiving child support (often the mother), this is counted in the “pre-tax” income to determine fees.
(I wonder if this includes child support that’s not being paid……)
Parents paying child support, however, can deduct that from the “pre-tax” income to determine fees….
WHO & WHAT IS KIDS’ TURN?
(well, see my recent post on this)…(or figure it out yourself):
- What is “Kids Turn?” — it’s a nonprofit started by a family law judge in about 1987, with help later from some family law attorneys, one of who was called a Northern California “Super attorney.”
Kids’ Turn
THE HISTORY OF KIDS’ TURN
From 1987 to 1990, Judge Ina Levin Gyemant presided over the family law department of the domestic relations court, noting that while lawyers filed motions and parents sought orders regarding custody, visitation and other diputes,[sic] children and their needs were almost completely ignored. Mediation services were mandated for parents in California in 1980, but no educational program was available for children, who are often the people most vulnerable and confused during separation or divorce.
- It’s perhaps a training ground on how to promote parental alienation and get paid for it.
- It’s a debtor to the San Francisco Superior Court (figure that one out — because somehow, we found that the “SFTC” has a lien on this group).
- It has tons of donors on its roster (many of them judges or attorneys), gets apparently some of California’s share of the Access/Visitation funding (which is $10 million per year, nationwide, and California, being so large, gets close to $1 million/year for this source of funding).
- Foundations & Associations help it continue & expand:
Foundations
2009
Linda Brandes Foundation CFLS
California Bar Foundation
Boys & Girls Foundation
Cuatrecasas Family FoundationThe Samuel I. & John Henry Fox Foundation at Union BankSempra EnergyLions Club of San DiegoStensrud FoundationJAMS FoundationLawyers Club- Fund for JusticeLeroy and Claire Hughes Family FundMary and John Grant FoundationAmerican Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers- NationalAmerican Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers2010Ellen G. & Edward G. Wong Family FoundationJAMS Foundation (This is a foundation of Mediators. Pushing Mediation is central to Family Law….)Cuatrecasas Family FoundationPrice CharitiesQualcommLinda Brandes Foundation (This wealthy couple never had any children….)(See photo of her 67 yr old ex, “Charles Brandes” with new 42 yr old wife — and Bill Clinton in between.. . )Carlsbad Charitable Foundation, an affiliate of The San Diego FoundationFieldstone FoundationWells Fargo FoundationWD-40 CompanyComerica BankThe Samuel I. & John Henry Fox Foundation at Union Bank2011Leichtag FoundationLinda Brandes FoundationHD SupplyCFLS **Cuatrecasas Family FoundationAAML- Southern California Chapter
- {{** {{CFLS, 2011 donor: Why isn’t this ACRONYM (not found on the web) specified? It apparently stands for “{Association of} Certified Family Law Specialists,” such as Linda Pabst de Leon here, speaking at a CFLS seminar and listing herself as a Kids’ Turn Board of Director (& Event Committee 2006) and “Featured guest speaker at CFLS’ Spring Seminar, “Nov-DV Restraining Orders” (2005))} “CFLS” is not an organization (I think) but a Designation that individuals can reach: }}
- {{At least 2 of the “Corporate Donors” listed on same page are the firms that a Kids Turn Board of Directors member works on… meaning, not that the project is so great, but that someone already at the firm managed to finaigle, or sell, a donation ….}}
- San Diego Foundation, 2010:
- Kids’ Turn San Diego, Expansion of Kids’ Turn Workshops into Carlsbad $20,000Kids’ Turn San Diego plans to bring no less than four, 4-week psycho-educational workshops into Carlsbad, serving 100-120 families who are divorcing or fighting over custody of their children. The workshops will show families how their conflict is negatively impacting their children and teach them to communicate more effectively, manage their anger, focus on their children and create a healthy two household environment for all involved. Furthermore, Kids’ Turn San Diego will help children make a successful adjustment to challenging family changes.
- 2008 Donations
The Southern California Chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyer supports the following organizations: . . .- Kids’ Turn – San Diego – This is the only program in San Diego County working for te whole family to achieve a child centered and healthy divorce. It provides a low cost solution for families experiencing the pain of divorce or separation no matter how great the conflict.
- A former Pro Tem Judge, Attorney Alan Edmunds, promotes Kids Turn through a link, at “SanDiegoDivorceCenter.” (services provided by The Edmunds law Firm).
- It showed up in the San Francisco list of nonprofit organizations providing services to the City and County of SF, as a vendor. From what I recall, for 3 years in a row the billing was around $45,000.
Report 1234a
Data As Of : 05/15/2011
City and County of San Francisco
Vendor Payment Summaries Website
Page 1 of 1
Search Results by Vendor, Department, Type of Goods and Services and Document
Payments Vendor Names Non
Profit Departments Types of Goods and Services Documents FY 2008-09 FY 2009-10 FY 2010-11 In
Process Remaining Balance KIDS’ TURN x CHILDREN; YOUTH & THEIR F CITY GRANT PROGRAMS DPCH1000014101 $0 $10,063 $937 $0 $0 DPCH1000014102 $0 $35,679 $3,321 $0 $0 DPCH1100003001 $0 $0 $34,926 $0 $9,574 DPCH1100003002 $0 $0 $5,500 $0 $0 Totals: $0 $45,742 $44,684 $0 $9,574
Search Results by Vendor
Payments Vendor Names Non Profit FY 2008-09 FY 2009-10 FY 2010-11 In
Process Remaining Balance x $470 $865 $740 $0 $0 Totals: $470 $865 $740 $0 $0
- It’s apparently a model judges and attorneys love, because a spinoff “Kids Turn” is in San Diego; in fact a group called “Kids First” (There are a number of “kids’ Firsts” around, but indeed there was one which claims to be modeled after Kids Turn). The beauty of these programs is that the curriculum/curricula is designed, perhaps ONCE (with maybe occasional updates) — and can be marketed endlessly to families going through divorce court who can’t agree on the custody of their children. Which is usually what brings them to divorce court to start with, so obviously the market is right.
- Everybody who’s anybody in the family law fields (whether attorney, judge, or psychologist/family therapist, etc.) should take a turn at running Kids’ Turn. Some of these people did and at least one is a Super-Attorney. Some even go on to create look-alike programs for other client sectors, such as Dr. Delisle…. PLUS, you can work there, if you have a BA (recent job listing, $35-38K/year. (Can a person who survived divorce court and a custody battle apply? Because such people include those with BA’s who are probably hurting financially… Of course, you’d have to buy parental alienation theory, which this group promotes.…)
- The Founder of Kids’ Turn San Diego in 1996, Dr. Delisle received the 2001 Peacemaker of the Year Award from the National Conflict Resolution Center. In 2005, She was honored by Channel 10 news for its Leadership Award. She was also recognized by the San Diego County Bar Association for the “Distinguished Organization Award”. In 2008, Dr. Delisle transferred responsibility for Kids’ Turn to new leadership
- In the Spring of 2010, Ms. Kalemkiarian was Adjunct Professor of Law at the University of San Diego School of Law, teaching a full semester course in Family Law. From 1993 to 1996, she served as the Supervising Attorney of the Child Advocacy Clinic at the University of San Diego School of Law. An active community leader, she has served as the President of the Kids’ Turn San Diego Board for over ten years, and is a longtime Board Member of the Environmental health Coalition. (Ms. Kalemkiarian is also an AFCC presenter) As a leading voice for children in San Diego County, she oversaw the design and implementation of a new system of care for children’s mental health, as the Director of Project Heartbeat. She is a frequent author of opinion editorial pieces regarding public policy and children. … {{CHILDREN MUST BE SPEECHLESS & NEED LOTS OF INTERPRETERS}}Honors 2007-2010 San Diego Super Lawyers®
Alexandra M. Kwoka – Attorney at Law
Alexandra M. Kwoka has been practicing law since 1974, and Family Law for 20 years. She is not only certified as a Family Law Specialist but also holds a LLM/Masters in Tax Law….Association; Certified Family Law Specialists – San Diego & North County; founding member of the Collaborative Family Law Group of San Diego; SDCBA – Carmel Valley; Kids’ Turn – Board Member. She has published a number of articles and has been nominated and selected for a number of awards, including the Ten Top Attorneys in Family Law by the Daily Transcript, San Diego in 2006 and was listed as one of the top Family Law attorneys in San Diego Super Lawyers, 2007, 2008 and 2009.
- Barbara is president of the board of directors of the Legal Marketing Association, Southern California Chapter. She is also a former member of the boards of directors of Kids Turn, San Diego, the San Diego Chapter of the Association of Legal Administrators and the Professional Women’s Roundtable. Barbara is a graduate of Coach University and has a BS in business Management with an emphasis in marketing
- Ms. Milligan is a member of the San Diego County Bar Association, and is on the Board of Directors of the Foothills Bar Association. Ms. Milligan is also on the Board of Directors of Kids’ Turn, San Diego, a non-profit organization devoted to promoting the well-being of children who are experiencing the challenges of family separation….Ms. Milligan dedicates her practice to the area of Family Law. She is a Certified Family Law Specialist, certified by the California Board of Legal Specialization.
Specialties
Mr. Renkin has focused his practice in Family Law since 1991 and is a Certified Family Law Specialist. He has expertly handled all phases of Trials, Mediation, and Negotiation in areas including Marriage Dissolution, Property Division, Spousal Support, Child Support, Child Custody & Visitation, along with the complex issues of mental health and drug and alcohol dependency. High-asset and high-conflict cases have been settled both through negotiation and litigation. Mr. Renkin has the honor of acting as a Settlement Conference Judge Pro Tem for Family Courts. Member Board of Directors Kids Turn (Present) Fundraising for Hannah’s House and Kids’ Turn
Oh Yeah — Hannah’s House, Supervised visitation place, I remember. The founder was caught operating without a license., there were unsanitary situations, and the owner is having to pay back contracts…
- Hannah’s House faces trouble
- San Diego Area Licensed Psychologist / Marriage Family Therapist Dr. Simon lists this among his professional associations:
- Professional AffiliationsMember, American Psychological Association Member, American Psi-Law Society Member, California Psychological Association Member, Ethics Committee of the California Psychological Association Editorial Board, Journal of Child Custody Member, Collaborative Family Law Group of San Diego,Board of Directors, Kid’s Turn San Diego Founding Member, San Diego Family Law Council for ChildrenMember, Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (“AFCC”)Member, Program Committee, Association of Family & Conciliation Courts Member, Awards Committee, Association of Family & Conciliation Courts Member, International Association of Collaborative Professionals Associate Member, San Diego County Bar Association; Associate Member, Los Angeles County Bar Association
You noticed that many are AFCC members? So did I. Here’s another person, a judge, being honored posthumously and Board of Directors, Kids’ Turn is among her accolades:
Judge Grant’s many years as a family law judge and a probate judge during her tenure on the San Francisco Superior Court gave her ample opportunity to pioneer judicial change. Most importantly, Judge Grant became an icon for young female externs, paralegals, attorneys and judges for nearly the entirety of her long career. …
Following her appointment to the San Francisco Municipal Court in 1979, Judge Grant dedicated her life to public service. She was appointed to the Superior Court in 1982, serving as the Presiding Judge in the Family Law Department and later as the Presiding Judge of the Probate Department. She retired from Superior Court in 1996 but continued to work with the American Arbitration Association. She is a past President of the California Chapter of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts and of the Northern California Chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. (AAML Southern chapter donated to Kids’ Turn San Diego)…
She served on the Board of Kids’ Turn Honorary Committee for many years, an organization offering assistance for children impacted by divorce, including psycho-educational workshops for children being raised in two households. She also pioneered the first Guardian Mentorship Program for children being raised in alternative homes.
JUDGES, JUDGES, JUDGES are on the Boards of this organization:
Barbara W. Moser, SF Attorney, AFCC member, (in fact, a presenter at one COlorado conference), Judge Pro Tem, Family Law Bench Bar Program, Marin County Superior Court… SEttlement Judge Pro Tem, SF Superior Court — was “former secretary, Kids Turn”
IT’s NOT NECESSARY TO EVEN BE IN THE FAMILY LAW FIELD TO BE ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS:
Mr. Semmer is also actively involved in the San Diego community. As a Board Member of the Cornell Club of San Diego, he has organized charity fundraisers to endow the Willie Jones Jr. Scholarship. He has volunteered for and assisted with fundraising efforts for Kid’s Turn San Diego, a San Diego non-profit organization helping children and parents whose lives are impacted by parental separation. He serves on the programming committee of the San Diego Receiver’s Forum and is a member of the San Diego Bankruptcy Forum.
(CLICK ON THE LINK. HE DEALS WITH COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE, ETC.)
So what IS it, anyhow?
It’s not quite Avon, Amway, or McDonalds, but basically the same idea only using legislative loopholes and opportunities to promote it, and charging clients to consume the services (court-ordered), for people to be trained to run the courses, and taking federal grants to states money (and foundational support also) — in fact, where DOES all that money go, anyhow? ….?
Such a great organization obviously deserves some extra, extra legislative help…
I searched “Kids Turn affiliates” and came up with real interesting California Assembly Bill 2263. Other than it cuts down our fresh-air exercise activity, ya gotta love this Internet, sometimes….
http://www.metnews.com/endmomay02.html (This is 2002)
•AB 2263, by Assemblywoman Christine Kehoe, D-San Diego, which would require the Judicial Council to study the effectiveness of expanding the Kids’ Turn program, which assists children while their parents are in family court obtaining a divorce or legal separation. The bill was approved by the Assembly Appropriations Committee on a 23-0 vote May 15, passed the Assembly on a 72-2 vote May 23 and was sent to the Senate.
Wow, the Assembly sure loved the concept of funneling divorce education to ONE nonprofit started by a family law judge…..
BILL ANALYSIS
Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
2263 (Kehoe)
Hearing Date: 8/22/02 Amended: 5/8/02
Consultant: Karen French Policy Vote: Judiciary
4-2
____________________________________________________________
_
BILL SUMMARY: AB 2263 requires the Judicial Council to
allocate, from funds appropriated to it in the annual
Budget Act, the amount necessary to study the Kids' Turn
projects. The bill also states that up to $50,000 shall be
allocated only if the Judicial Council receives non-state
source matching funds. The bill requires the Judicial
Council to report to the Legislature by January 12, 2004,
on the results of the study and propose guidelines for
project expansion, if Kids' Turn is found to be effective.
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05
Fund
Judicial Council
Study -- $100 --General &
Other
Court funding -- ---Significant, cost
pressure--- General
STAFF COMMENTS: SUSPENSE FILE.
Kids' Turn is a private non-profit organization that
provides workshops for children and their parents that are
intended to teach skills to cope with the difficulty of
divorce and separation. Workshops are six weeks long with
one 90-minute meeting per week. Fees for workshops range
from $75 to $600 (on a sliding scale). Kids Turn conducts
programs in San Francisco, Marin, Alameda, and Contra Costa
County. The organization has sold its curriculum and
licensed affiliates located in Sonoma, Napa, San Diego,
Shasta, and Yolo Counties (in addition to Dayton, Ohio and Hillsboro,
Oregon. Although sold only to nonprofits, the program effectively operates as a franchise. Kids' Turn
currently is conducting its own study, in consultation with
the California School of Professional Psychology. This
bill would require the Judicial Council to duplicate, at
least in part, the current study.
According to the Judiciary Committee analysis, the author
states that the bill is needed so that Kids' Turn will
have state approval as evidence of credibility
and will allow courts to "recommend Kids' Turn
as a resource to the community." On its website, the organization states that
this Fall, its Board of Directors will be planning a
five-year strategy to determine course direction of the
organization. Specifically targeted for consideration is:
"Enhanced marketing strategies in order to increase the number of Kids' Turn affiliates and sales of Kids' Turn Curriculum." This bill may create the appearance that a State study and Judicial Council recommendations are part of a marketing strategy.
(WHICH THEY ARE..... Better amend the bill so this is less obvious....)
Author's amendments: The author proposes amendments (LCR#
0216385), which (1) delete the specific reference to Kids' Turn and,
instead, study projects or programs that provide
services to parents and children undergoing divorce, 2) to
delete reference to program expansion; and 3) to delete the
language requiring the Judicial Council to allocate the
amount "necessary" to conduct the study, to limit the
State's obligation to $50,000.
The third staff recommendation to authorize, but not require the study, was rejected by the author.
.
HERE’s an AMENDED VERSION (attempting to conceal the blatant effort to legislate parents to consume this product in particular to “help” their kids deal with divorce):
AMENDED IN SENATE AUGUST 22, 2002 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MAY 8, 2002 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 1, 2002
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE—2001–02 REGULAR SESSION
ASSEMBLY BILL No. 2263
Introduced by Assembly Member Kehoe
February 20, 2002
An act relating to family courts.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST AB 2263, as amended, Kehoe. Family courts:
Kids’ Turnfamily assistance. Existing law governs the procedures for obtaining a dissolution ofmarriage or a legal separation. This bill would require the Judicial Council to allocate, from funds appropriated to the Judicial Council in the annual Budget Act, the an amount
necessarynot to exceed $50,000 to conduct a study regardingthe effectiveness of the Kids’ Turn projects, whichprojects or programs that provide services to assist children and their families while the parents are in the process of obtaining a divorce or a legal separation, as specified. The bill would provide require thatan amount not to exceed $50,000 shallthese funds be allocated only if the Judicial Council receives matching funds appropriated from sources other than the state.** The bill would require the Judicial Council to report to the Legislature by January 12, 2004, the results of the studyand to recommend guidelines for expanding the projects if the study indicates that the projects were effective.
**The California Judicial Council just so happens to be the single designated state agency receiving the access and visitation federal funds (“SAVP”) to enable programs such as (but not exclusively!) this one, as I have reported before here. Check it out at TAGG.hhs.gov — there’s a CFDA number referring exclusively to this grant series (“93597,” or similar)(marriage/fatherhood promotion is 93086)( and related ones).
In fact, a great exercise would be to go HERE: http://taggs.hhs.gov/AwardsList.cfm
You’ll have to redo the search — search by “CFDA Program Numbers” (take 2011 year) and get the 50-state list of all 93597’s. Then you’ll have a panorama of which agency, in every state, gets these funds, and can click on the other funding they get. I recommend clicking on Texas (after all, the President who put some of these policies into full swing came from there). You can see that OCSE (collecting child support) is a major expense. Then learn how to do advanced searches (with more fields) and figure out which way the wind is blowing.
Again, TAGGS is your friend, in part. Especially if you are an employee these are your taxes, right? part of each hour you work … it’s collected, assembled, and distributed later by the IRS, along with distributing favors called “tax-exempt status” to certain corporations, and of course foundations….
KIDS TURN:
It is ever so important that everyone (parents, federal government, City and State of San Francisco (I guess for the SF Kids’ Turn….) and foundational donors, plus of course individual donors focus on THIS one program to help, to measure levels of conflict, mental health and attitude change on parents . . . . well, let me just quote the leginfo record. Our state was then and is now in budget crisis, so obviously measuring parental stress levels is an urgent public need:
2)Requires that JC's study include an assessment of all of the
following:
a) Any decrease in conflict between the parents regarding
custody issues, as reported by the parents;
b) The mental health of the children, as measured by their
attitudes before and after participating in the project or
program;
c) Any change in the attitude of the parents who
participate in the project or program;
And of course, who better to help children navigate the difficult shoals of divorce than:
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill was limited in its scope to the Kids' Turn project.
Apparently these entities supported it ( Senate Floor link on “leginfo” site):
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/23/02) Kids' Turn (This link lists San Diego Bd of Dirs./SF, Here) Cope Family Center (See Kids Turn "Affiliates" list....) California Coalition for Youth Private Dispute Resolution of San Diego** (=Judge Geary D. Cortes) California Judges Association CARE Children's Counseling Center Gregory M. Caskey, Supervising Judge, Superior Court,(SEE **) County of Shasta (There's a Kids' Turn in Shasta County) Thomas Ashworth, Judge of the Superior Court San Diego County Office of Education Professor Janet Weinstein, California Western School of Law (Kids' Turn donor) ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author, this bill is needed because it is imperative for organizations to have state approval in order to provide evidence of credibility and efficacy to the community.
**I had no idea who Judge Caskey is, but linked to his 1998 Admonishment by the Commission on Judicial Performance! So he got this slap on a wrist, in part for:
STATEMENT OF FACTS AND REASONS
In November 1997, Judge Gregory M. Caskey was regularly assigned to handle juvenile dependency matters. On the morning of November 6, 1997, Judge Caskey sent a message by electronic mail to an attorney who regularly appeared before him on those matters. The e-mail message concerned a case then pending before the judge, in which the attorney was appearing. The message read in part:
I am considering summarily rejecting [the father’s attorney’s] requests. Do you want me to let [the father’s attorney] have a hearing on this, or do we cut [the attorney] off summarily and run the risk the third DCA reverses? . . . . I say screw [the father] and let’s cut [the attorney] off without a hearing. O.K.? By the way, this message will self- destruct in five seconds…
Later that morning, the attorney sent the following e-mail reply:
Your honor, I don’t feel comfortable responding ex-parte on how you should rule on a pending case.
Two hours later, the judge sent an e-mail response which read: “chicken.”
"Private Dispute Resolution" appears to be one retired San Diego Judge, although obviously working (in dispute resolution) in Southern Calif (3 offices, so I guess he still has a license). The site "noethics.com" says he made the cut of the top Judicial Misfits under this title:
Judge Geary D. Cortes – San Diego
“She deserved it! – Pugilists – p. 281
I don't know much about this Judge, although he's mentioned as being overturned on appeal on First Amendment issues here: He was overturned on appeal (I think) in an elder abuse case, and was involved in the high-profile Prop 21, trying juveniles as adults, matter, described in The Adult Boys of Rancho Penasquitos (hover cursor for relevance)...Same case as the First Amendment Issue... More likely, he's probably been on that KT Board during some of its years. Assuming I have the right Judge Thomas Ashworth, he doesn't sound much better:
Case Against Judge Should Remain in San Diego, Court Rules
January 23, 1990|ALAN ABRAHAMSON | TIMES STAFF WRITERA lawsuit that claims a San Diego family-court judge committed fraud and legal malpractice before he took the bench should be heard in San Diego County, a state appellate court ruled Monday.
The 4th District Court of Appeal ordered the case against Judge Thomas Ashworth III returned to San Diego Superior Court, saying it was improperly ordered out of the county
Judge Ashworth also ordered a mother living in Utah, whose child was born after separation, to send the 5-year old to her paternal grandparents for four, week-long visits (to San Diego). Report is from 2002:
In Harris, the Court of Appeal held that substantive due process limits a court’s authority under the state’s grandparent visitation statue to cases in which there is clear and convincing evidence that the child will suffer harm if visitation were not granted.
The panel reversed a 1999 order requiring Karen Butler, a remarried Utah resident, to send her daughter Emily, then 5 years old, to San Diego for four week-long visits with the child’s paternal grandparents. Emily was the product of Butler’s brief and stormy marriage to Charles Erik Harris and was born after the couple separated.
The order by San Diego Superior Court Judge Thomas Ashworth III was based on Family Code Sec. 3104, which allows a court to order grandparent visitation when the parents are living separate and apart or the child is not living with a parent. The statute applies a best-interest-of-the-child standard, with a rebuttable presumption that grandparent visitation is not in the child’s best interests if the custodial parent objects.
Here’s another one reversed on appeal, where the paternal grandparents of a father who died after divorce took the mother to court to force more visitation (in San Diego). Ashworth granted them (and got the girl a counsel of her own), but was reversed on appeal, citing Troxel v. Granville:
CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION (Punsly v. Ho, No. D036025 (Cal.App. Dist.4 03/16/2001) APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Thomas Ashworth, III, Judge. Petition for writ of supersedeas. Judgment reversed. Petition granted. Manwah Ho, the mother of Kathryn Punsly, appeals an order granting visitation to Kathryn’s paternal grandparents, Marilyn and Bernard Punsly under Family Code *fn1 section 3102. *fn2 Manwah contends section 3102 is unconstitutional, as applied to her, in light of the recent United States Supreme Court case of Troxel v. Granville (2000) 530 U.S. 57 [120 S.Ct. 2054] (Troxel), a case concerning the constitutionality of a nonparental visitation statute, and Troxel’s appellate progeny. Manwah also contends the court’s ancillary orders attached to the visitation order, independently, violated her constitutional due process rights. We conclude section 3102, as applied in this case, unconstitutionally infringed on Manwah’s fundamental rights. Accordingly, we reverse the order in its entirety.
There was a "Day" named after Judge Ashworth:
Honors, Memberships, and Professional Activities
- City of San Diego Proclamation of January 31st as “Thomas Ashworth III Day“
- Judicial Lifetime Achievement Award, San Diego County Bar Association’s Certified Family Law Specialists, November 2002
- Family Law Person of the Year, American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, Southern California Chapter, 2001**
(**who donated to Kids' Turn.....)
Then again, The Ashworths themselves also donated to Kids' Turn. Wish I had a year on this brochure, but readers should check out the judges & attorneys on the INdividual Donors lists. (Found at California Men's Center website...) WITH REPUTABLE PROMOTERS SUCH AS THESE, WHO COULD FORBID SIMPLY LEGISLATING A STUDY TO GIVE IT STATE CERTIFICATION AS JUST THE BEST-EST PARENTING EDUCATION COURSE (COURT-ORDERED) AROUND, IN FACT, WHY NOT HAVE IT BRANCH OUT INTO THE COMMUNITY, JUST IN CASE THEY ARE THINKING ABOUT DIVORCE? (On the other hand, with all those supporters, why does it need more promotion???? SOmething doesn't look right about this....)
THANKFULLY GRAY DAVIS VETO’ed it with this message:
BILL NUMBER: AB 2263 VETOED DATE: 09/29/2002 SEP 28 2002 To Members of the California State Assembly: I am returning Assembly Bill 2263 without my signature. This bill would require a study of projects or programs that serve children and their families while the parents are in the process of obtaining a divorce or legal separation. Under this study, the Judicial Council would be required to assess the results of, among other things, changes in the mental health of children and any change in the attitude of parents. The Judicial Council, however, may not be well suited to conduct this type of study. For this reason, I must return this bill without my signature. Sincerely, GRAY DAVIS
In 2003, the same assemblywoman comes up with a Gay Fathers' Day proposal, which met some resistance.
What normally is a legislative slam-dunk – a resolution honoring dads for Father’s Day – turned into a debate on “alternative lifestyles” in the California state Assembly.
According to a report in the Stockton Record, Republicans this week either withheld their support or voted against the resolution because it focused on “nontraditional” dads, including families with two fathers.
“It didn’t belong on the floor,” said GOP Assemblyman Alan Nakanishi. “It was a homosexual bill in the sense that they wanted to make a point out of two fathers” in a single household.
The resolution, sponsored by lesbian Democratic Assemblywoman Christine Kehoe, mentions stepfathers, foster fathers, single fathers and families headed by two fathers, the paper reports. However, it fails to cite traditional fathers who are married to the mother of their children.
Republican Assemblyman Greg Aghazarian, as a traditional father, noticed he wasn’t represented in the proposal.
” Where is the (part) talking about a husband and a wife who have kids?” he said, according to the Record. “I mean, where is the love?”
“CRISPE,” A group for Shared Parenting was pretty upset about her also, although for different reasons and supplied a photo:

However, it’s primarily a simple affiliate marketing operation — only with governmental connections.
Did I mention, “NONPROFIT”? Because of the public service it provides, obviously.
I just missed a March, 2011 conference — that’s what I get for falling behind on my FaceBook operations:
GerardKids’ Turn Spring, 2011 Retreat and Training Conference
Theme: Welcome to the Future (of Kids’ Turn)
Dates: March 4-6, 2011 Location: Asilomar Conference Grounds, Pacific Grove, California
Take a deep breath and settle in for a time of serene relaxation, reflection and rejuvenation. Celebrated as Monterey Peninsula’s “Refuge by the Sea” – Asilomar State Beach and Conference Grounds is a breathtakingly gorgeous 107 acres of ecologically diverse beachfront land. www.visitasilomar.com
Who should attend: Kids’ Turn Leaders, Staff, Board Members, Volunteers, Affiliate
RepresentativesConference Goals:
1. Familiarize participants with the future direction of Kids’ Turn
2. Broaden exposure to contemporary issues affecting Kids’ Turn families
3. Refine skills to deliver The Kids’ Turn Way
4. Eight CEU’s awarded
5. R & R in a beautiful, tranquil setting
6. Enjoy camaraderie with Kids’ Turn colleagues
7. Explore the communities of Pacific Grove and Monterey (on your own)Dr. Gladys Ato, Vice President of Academic Affairs, Argosy University
San Francisco Bay Area
Communicating the Kids’ Turn MessageDr. Allison Thorson, University of San Francisco
The Impact of Marital Infidelity on ChildrenCOST: (Must be why they need all the donors, and access to the “Access/Visitation” federal support).
Single Occupancy:
$350* (two nights, six meals, training, ECU’s, taxes, all inclusive)
$400 single occupancy AFTER 2/15/11
Double Occupancy (participants must self-select roommate):
$250* (two nights, six meals, training, ECU’s, taxes, all inclusive)
$300 double occupancy AFTER 2/15/11
Kids’ Turn is also an arts supporter, in fact partnered with an upcoming San Diego show, don’t miss:
26 MILES
by Quiara Alegria Hudes
Sept 29 – Oct 23, 2011
The time is 1986. Olivia is a half-Cuban, half-Jewish ‘zine-writing teen. Join us for our next full production written by award-winning Quiara Alegria Hudes (In the Heights), and in partnership with Kids’ Turn San Diego. (“Eight years after a Cuban mother looses [sic] custody of her Jewish daughter, she gets a second chance. At 4:30 in the morning she kidnaps the sick teenage girl and the two drive west in search of a remedy and their divergent American dreams.”)
In Washington County, Oregon, a nonprofit called YOUTH CONTACT features Kids’ Turn (and a pop-up indicates that Kids’ Turn is supporting their work also: See for yourself: )
Registration form shows it’s $230 per parent per 4-session class:
The enrollment fee for Kids’ Turn is $230.00 per adult. Children (ages 5-16) are free with a paying adult. The fee must be paid in full before a spot in the workshop can be reserved. This is done on a first-come, first served basis until each workshop is full. Acceptable methods of payment are Visa, MasterCard, debit card (with a Visa or MasterCard logo), or money order. We do NOT accept checks.
YOU MUST COMPLETE ALL FOUR SESSIONS IN ORDER TO RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION. IF YOU DO NOT ATTEND ALL FOUR SESSIONS YOU WILL HAVE TO RE-REGISTER FOR ANOTHER WORKSHOP AND RE-PAY THE $230.00 ENROLLMENT FEE. THERE ARE NO MAKE-UP SESSIONS AND THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS!
In fact, generally speaking, REALLY FAMOUS PEOPLE SEEM TO JUST LOVE “Kids’ Turn” — for example, Halsey Minor, founder of CNET:
Community programs for Children and Parents
experiencing separation or divorce. Featuring The Kids’ Turn Way© Curriculum
“Kids’ Turn has leveraged its resources*** and the progressive nature of San Francisco to become a global leader in addressing the problems children face when their parents separate.” Halsey M. Minor, Kids’ Turn Board Member; Founder, CNET
Oh, I forgot — he was on 2010 list for tax evasion, found auctioning off his art collection.
Found via LA Observed, the California Franchise Tax Board has released its list of the state’s biggest delinquent taxpayers. This year, the honor goes to Cnet co-founder Halsey Minor and his wife Shannon, who owe a whopping $13,120,479.39 in personal income tax.
They also maintained the #1 California ranking for tax evasion, for 2011 .
***resources such as connections to the legal/judicial community…..
I would love to see an audit of this organization’s books, all California operations.
The nonprofit directory “Guidestar.org” notes that Kids’ Turn San Diego started in 1996 with a grant from the “Seuss Foundation”…. 2009 form 990 lists only $151K net revenues, and Expenses include $124,424 salaries, plus $30,452 professional fees, and that they are running about one salaried position ($38K) in the hole. They ran a $50K ARt & Wine auction, but donated $36K of that, leaving revenue of $12K. Expenses, however, were $18K, so That event was a deficit, I guess…..
Lots of Directors (which my “select-copy” tool worked on the PDF) including what appears to be the infamous (or honorable) Honorable Thomas Ashworth’s wife? (also an attorney), Kathryn — in fact, eighteen (18) individuals listed, none drawing a salary. The Executive Director, however, is taking applications for a FT program director
One of these 18, “Patty Chavez-Fallon” just so happens to be (or have been) Director of Family Court Services at San Diego per this article (critical of) Supervised Visitation:
Patricia Chavez-Fallon, the director of the Superior Court’s Family Court Services in San Diego County, said people who want to be paid monitors submit documentation to the court showing they have attended a training class and meet the other state standards, which essentially require that monitors be 21 or older and free of any legal trouble in the previous 10 years. Chavez-Fallon then adds them to an alphabetical list of supervised visitation monitors that the court provides.
and she’s been there a good while (1991-2008): Kids Turn San Diego started in 1996. So did the Access Visitation Funds that help facilitate things like this (with PRWORA Welfare Reform). Must’ve been a coincidence, that timing. It was a very busy time, after all….
Patti Chavez-Fallon is an expert in alternative dispute resolution. Both as a counselor and Director of Family Court Services, she has served parents and children going through the process of defining and developing a cooperative sharing plan that benefits everyone involved. Her background includes:
- Seventeen years as Director: Family Court Services, San Diego Superior Court
- Four years as a mediator of Custody and Visitation disputes
- Ten years of other child related social work services
She is also listed on the Federal HHS/ACF site for “Access and Visitation” grants as a California “State Access Program Contact:”
9. Superior Court of California , San Diego County
Contact: Patti Chavez-Fallon (619) 557-2100
Services: counseling, parent educationSubcontractor:
Kids’ Turn, San Diego
2136 Newcastle Avenue, suite 150
Cardiff, CA 92007
(760) 634-0280
Remind me again how this is NOT a conflict of interest? She is the program contact — on behalf of the Superior Court — for the federal funds, and a nonprofit where she sits on the board of the directors is the listed subcontractor…. There’s another one in Shasta County…..
. Northern California Center for Family Awareness
Kids’ Turn Shasta Cascade PO Box 991473
Redding, CA 96099-1473
(530) 244-5749
What’s in it for them, altruism? The art & wine auction factor?
Ms. Chavez-Fallon is even quoted in a “johnnypumphandle” review of a high-profile San Diego case (Morse v. Morse) where the papers featured the abducting ex-wife, the court had transferred custody to the father after finding allegations of abuse “inclusive” and Stephen Doyne (Note: also a Kids’ Turn donor, see link to their brochure, above) played a factor. It noted:
Robert and Eugia Morse divorced in 1994 after 10 years of stormy marriage.
Robert Morse remarried almost immediately and shared custody of his three
children with his ex-wife.The battle over the children was contentious, McIntyre told jurors. In
January 1996, Robert Morse spent a night in jail after his former wife
accused him of hitting her when she came to pick up the children after a
visit. He was not allowed to see his children for two months.After a psychological evaluation, Robert Morse received full custody in
October 1996. On their children’s first weekend visit with their mother,
the older girl contended that her father had molested her.Before the custody battle even took place, we have learned that Eugia Morse was in the Family Violence Program sponsored by Children’s Hospital. Her records show a multitude of evidence of violence in the form of photos and documents detailing injuries at the hand of Robert Morse. In addition, the children had records of therapy for abuse alleged to be perpetrated by Robert Morse as well as records documenting the abuse. When the custody case went to court, this evidence was suppressed in favor of the court assigned evaluation team which recommended that custody of the children be transferred to Robert Morse.
Apparently Family COurt Services had a role in this case, one that ended up with the mother feeling she had to flee. YOu can read for yourself. While Chavez-Fallon was incidental (in this report), she was director of the same family court services that pushed a certain evaluator and psychologist on the family. Responding to the news article someone wrote:
I saw the news report about Morse v. Morse on T.V., we recognized the modus operandi, and in unison wesaid “LINDA HIRSHBERG.” Next time I was in court, I looked at the file. We
were right. It was LINDA HIRSHBERG and STEPHEN DOYNE working together again.
Later, I heard from the “victims of Family Court underground” that Eugia was
networking with others who had been exploited by these two. She was desperate
to get the evaluator changed. She was not successful. No doubt, this
evaluation was arranged by Family Court Services, because that is what FCS
does. They are brokers, not mediators.
The “Cope Family Center” (APparently = ‘Kids’ Turn Napa County) (found supporting the Legislative Action in 2002) states (falsely) that:
Kids’ Turn is supported entirely by generous contributions from individuals and foundations in the San Francisco Bay Area. Workshops are held in San Francisco, Alameda, Contra Costa, Napa and Marin counties. Kids’ Turn requests that each participating parent contribute a sliding scale fee to help cover the cost of the program. Any family wanting to help support the program to a greater extent is encouraged to make a tax-deductible contribution at any time.
This “Cope Family Center” also runs Supervised Visitation:
Cope Family Center provides
- Supervised Visitation
- Monitored Exchange
- Parent Education, including Kids’ Turn and Cooperative Co-Parenting
Coincidentally(?), the legislative purpose of the Access Visitation funding (in California), is:
Assembly Bill 673 expressed the Legislature’s intent that funding for the state of California be further limited to the following three types of programs:
- Supervised visitation and exchange services;
- Education about protecting children during family disruption; and
- Group counseling services for parents and children.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, MUCH?
Courthouse Forum (a place one can bellyache about court players) writers also noticed the phenomenon of family law judges referring business to nonprofits they sit on the board of. THis one notices a judge who was even Treasurer of Kids’ Turn. These 2006 entries are web-cached:
Contra Costa County KIDS TURN & Berkow
If this J Berkow is a Corporate Treasure of Kids Turn Inc. a organization that is often court ordered by Contra Costa County Family Law. This appears very improper to me doesn’t this violate the judicial standard to “avoid appearance of impropriety” I know in my business this would be considerd a conflict of interest, and the SEC would have a field day with a trader who was conducting there business like this judge
This is appalling I live in Contra Costa County and this judge is notoriously bad she has raped more fathers in this county then I can even list. Calling her the Monster of Martinez is not a understatement. It is common for father to be so severely financially raped by this women that they do actually end up living in a car with there children. Now she is runningKids Turn!(i.e., this is not my own comment!)
Below is the link to Kids Turn is you scroll down you will that Berkow is a Director. This is not a proper postion for Berkow she is ordering people from the bench to keep her company going. What a way to capitalize your company!
Apparently, they rotate membership in and out (of Judges, Attorneys, etc.). Here’s a 2010 new President, Greg Abel, who has been on the board a few years, and is quite active in family, appellate and other courts:
SAN FRANCISCO, CA, October 11, 2010 – Kids’ Turn, a San Francisco-based non-profit organization today announced the election of Greg Abel as president and CEO succeeding Steven Kinney, who remains on the board of directors of Kids’ Turn. Mr. Abel is a Partner with Whiting Fallon Ross & Abel, LLP, Walnut Creek, Calif., which represents parties in complex family law and matrimonial matters.
In making the announcement, Steve Kinney, outgoing president of Kids’ Turn said, “We are pleased that Greg Abel has agreed to assume the leadership mantel of Kids’ Turn. He has been a very proactive member of the board since 2008. Greg will provide important leadership as Kids’ Turn moves to the next level of service to customers in the five county region of the San Francisco Bay Area and extends Kids’ Turn curriculum reach to other parts of the U.S. and around the globe.”
Well, since they are going global, I suppose it was worth a try to get the California Legislature to pass a law standardizing this judge-initiated project, just in cases judges who sit (or sat) on the Board previously, or the Director(s?) of Family Court Services, etc. who donate to it (and sit on its board) aren’t drumming up enough business, or foundational support. As a little reminder, this has been operating IN THE HOLE according to its own 990, at least the San Diego One.
What a lesbian State Senator (in 2002, State Assemblyperson) is doing promoting that bill, Lord only knows. Guess it’s politically advantageous (do they donate to her, too?)
How can any organization with so much foundation support, a ton of volunteer Directors (with judicial, therapy, and attorney association connections) AND a guaranteed source of court-ordered referrals end up with a negative cash flow?
And what about that $45K in vendor services to the City of San Francisco, recently?
And what about that Lien that the San Francisco Superior Court has (or had) on this group?
. . . . This isn’t THE major question of the family law system, but it sure does make one go “Huh???”
What Steers Family Law Custody “Mistakes”? I’m glad you asked…
“I’m glad you asked that” is a phrase we see often in “RandiJames” writing. I’ve been posting in the form of comments, especially to the SFWeekly articles on the California Family Courts (for over a month now), and in lieu of a real post, here’s a relevant post by a fellow-blogger. At least, we cover some of the same topics.
MONEY is Helping Pedophiles and Batterers Get Child Custody in Family Courts, in California and Elsewhere
First, let me thank Peter Jamison for his extensive article California Family Courts Helping Pedophiles, Batterers Get Child Custody . Please, go read it. Understand that what he describes is not unique to the State of California.I want to point out a couple of things in Jamison’s article:
First, let’s talk about Amy Baker who works in the New York/New Jersey area. Actually, I have talked about her plenty of times:
Amy Baker and Parental Alienation Syndrome: Is This What Scientific Research Looks Like?The Ever Expanding Parental Alienation Theory: Amy J. Baker’s Research Revisited
Amy J. Baker and Parental Alienation: Behind the Veil of Ignorance
According to Jamison’s article, Baker appears to think that parental alienation syndrome has been given a bad name because it has been misused in isolated instances. But on what evidence does she have to base such an opinion? ….
Glenn Sacks, another PAS promoter quoted in Jamison’s article, states that courts are biased against fathers. Biased against fathers how? Maybe the rest of the sentence in the article was supposed to explain it:“and are overly protective of moms and punitive of dads when handling abuse allegations”
So does he mean that family courts are biased against fathers in cases involving domestic violence? Many state gender bias taskforces have consistently found that the courts were biased against women. From where does Sacks get his information? This is the deliberate misinformation that father’s rights advocates use when speaking to the public. They use general statements like, the courts always award custody to moms, to hype up their support, without specifying or clarifying that 1. most men don’t “fight” for child custody and 2. most women are still the primary caretakers of children–thus it would make perfect sense that the majority of women “win” child custody. If the mom is “the real parent” it is usually quite obvious. Sacks also supports a presumption of joint custody in child custody cases when there is often no evidence of equal or shared parenting within the intact relationships (nor is proof required, or sought). The bias isn’t in the court’s decision making in this case, the bias is in the assumption that joint custody is always good for every child.
Former judge DeAnn Salcido provides evidence of how the misogyny embedded in patriarchal thinking permeates the family court system–a system which unsurprisingly represents society’s attitudes at large:
I was basically told to be suspect of anyone claiming abuse,” she says. “I had senior judges telling me, ‘Be suspect. The dad probably has a new girlfriend, and the mom’s upset.'” The concept of parental alienation, she says, arose in private discussions “all the time” among court officials who espoused it.
And it is “professionals” like Amy Baker and spokespersons like Glen Sacks who continue to support this thinking with pseudoscience.
READ THE COMMENTS TOO:
Not to mention, how do you think all of this continues? Look at the universities and nonprofit agencies that support and employ these court players. Look at the funding of these organizations. Our dear old tax dollars. See Let’s Get Honest for a wealth of money trail information.
lso Randi, remembering your fine post on Michael Hayes and the wonderful Texas Attorney General, I discovered exactly who is getting those access/visitation SUB-grants, and to an extent, how they are being used. Source: USASpending.gov.Yes, exploring which Father’s Groups are getting how much of our (federal grants) money for which purposes is becoming REAL interesting.
^ ^ ^ ^ ^
For example, when the Indiana Child Support Services site has a direct link to Fathers & Families and is soliciting FAF to apply for grants (so they can split some of the proceeds) — why bother to open it to the competition? Just set out a red carpet for a single group: here:“Indiana Fathers & Families – http://www.in.gov/dcs/2461.htm
The Indiana Department of Child Services, Child Support Bureau, would like to welcome you to the Indiana Fathers & Families website.
Taking a cue from their 














Law 101: “Black is White Law Dictionary” and “Secret Canons of Judicial Conduct” (from “Caught.net”)
leave a comment »
People are overwhelmed with information about father’s rights, domestic violence, psychological theory and statistics. One thing to remember is that statistics are paid for and interpreted by (fill in the blank). Statistics describe a “state” of affairs — but may or may not accurately describe the cause of events, or of the state of affairs.
The state of affairs in the legal system is that — it is owned — and not by the public — they simply pay for its operations.
If the Courts are a Mighty River that has Overflown its banks — and fish are floundering and being caught in it– the narratives are not about what’s in the river, but many time’s, who’s on the shore, and what’s the bait?
For example, in a river, there may be fish, and on the banks (or wading in it), there may be flyfishers, great sport.
Also, there are times the river is just too cluttered with debris, algae, it gets stagnant. not good for salmon swimming upstream, right? Well, this field is too cluttered with INFORMATION, not well processed. With rigid points of view — or a generic, vague points of view, and no operational plans.
Suppose Richard Gardner’s theory doesn’t hold water? (which it doesn’t). What should I do to avoid losing custody when being challenged by someone with a history of abuse or criminality? Buy a book? how much reading before what I read actually affects a court case — my own?
Well, #1, get the outline (shouldn’t take half a year to do so, any more):
Johnnypumphandle.com
Typically, I will refer the basic site “Johnnypumphandle.com” about three to four times a week — although I don’t know how active it is, and many links no longer active. WHY? Because it has basic analysis pretty close, and enough case histories to show some blueprint. It also addressses the role of nonprofits in the courts. Fairly good outline, don’t you think? (you family law veterans out there).
Well, that site links to “caught.net” where I’ve been before.
By the time you get through there, you should realize that Fraud, Money Laundering, and sometimes Racketeering are significant issues. That there are things called corporation front groups. That one oif the first places to look going into a court case is at your personal judge’s 700 Disclosure — and then chec it out — by figuring out the money flow in your local county’s vendor payments, grants applications, grants distributions, and so forth.
Judges doing business with someone / some business entity in the case — have to recuse themselves, or any resulting order. Call ’em on it!
Also, any nonprofit advocacy group that doesn’t tell you this — regularly — drop ’em! (and find out who’s funding THEM!
Now here is some comic relief — but like most comedy, hits a lot of truth, right on target:
OK, from CAUGHT.net
READ THIS:
and, related:
For example:
“Legal Analysis or Legal Reasoning:1. thinking usually independent of and unaffected by objective reality 2. the process of using legal terms to alter, create or deny reality 3. process used to maintain or assist the status quo, power structure and the resourceful and effective 4. a thought process commonly raised to the level of stupidity while maintaining the appearance of brilliance 5. sometimes called inverted intelligence.”
or
“Truth:1. whatever experts say for pay 2. whatever the Judiciary decides through the use of Legal Analysis.Unenlightened:1. litigants unknowledgeable regarding our position and power.”
The real fun comes from the hyperlinks.
From the same site’s founders, a few pointers – the frame of reference is “recovery” as if from a sickness.
Actually, it’s the judicial, social (etc.) systems that are “sick” (corrupt) — like environmental toxins of our basic institutions, as I see it. However, recognizing that this is NOT all one’s imagination — and that whatever life brings, you WILL find some way (including humor, gleefully putting sand in the machinery of whoever has been railroading you (and others) in the system, etc. — or whatever — to survive and live. (For one — what’s the alternative?)
I do not seriously entertain cleaning up the entire system for all history. However, wouldn’t it be great to clean up your own area, and teach others how to do the same? What a legacy! Because time is short (we get older….), another lesson I’m learning is who to dissociate with, according to what diseased or simply useless, but soul-poisoning rhetoric they carry. Just like it’s not good to befriend gangsters (well, at least I think not!) — it’s also important not to hang out with inactive complainers, and compliant complacent parroting people.
FYI, these come both in the traditional format of devotees of certain organizations AND in the leaders (professionals) of the organizations themselves. Professionalism is great — it just tends to tunnel vision, that’s my problem. It’s more like farming than hunter/gatherer way of thinking, which requires a lot of adaptability, attention to detail and a clear eye on the horizon, changing weather — AND the ability to relocate.
Anyhow, Caught.net and the pro se way founder writes:
I would call those simple survival awarenesses.
Detox, occasionally. If you can’t change something radical today, time out and have a good mock session — Black is White Law & Secret Judicial Canons.
And remember, keep all this “stuff” in perspective! Physical & Mental/emotional… Stay flexible…
(George Carlin / YouTube)
SHARE THIS POST on...
Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
April 30, 2011 at 2:56 PM
Posted in Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions
Tagged with social commentary, Tongue in Cheek Legal Definitions