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

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?…' (posted 3/23 & 3/5/2014). Over 680 posts, Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Archive for the ‘Metaphors for Family Law’ Category

New Here? A Roadmap with some Chronology, Links, Issues (Sidebar-Plus) originally published Feb 24, 2014

with one comment

Read the rest of this entry »

Ten Posts, Plus One, of nearly 600 published, Covering Basic Issues (+ abstracts)

with 2 comments

[I’m “unsticking” ten posts formerly held near the top of blog, a.k.a., redecorating..for functionality  ..and out of boredom looking at the same thing every day..This post is “sticky” and stays on top.  New posts are beneath the ones marked “This post is sticky.” Also note, I often revise or expand (alas) after (at times long after) publishing. WYSIWYG..] First, the “Plus One.”  Regarding biotech, pharmaceutical, and gene-tinkering disruptive technology corporations — don’t mistakenly think they have nothing to do with the family courts, or kids in foster care and other vulnerable populations.  SOMEbody has to fund studies, and someone has to become the subject matter of them; we are all interrelated — in our various assigned sectors. Read the rest of this entry »

LackaCommonSense in Lackawanna County (forum’s Admin v. Admin) detracts from Exposing “Kid$ 4 Cash”

with 3 comments

<><><><><>

Psst!  The “Kids 4 Cash” thread (all 165 pages of commentary, and an unknown ratio of real people to usernames) is now somehow back up.  I’d grab it while you can — who knows where it’s going next and in what version!  Then again, you can figure out, the same basic information is available, probably, through other sources (if you’re not into wading through dialogue on a forum).

TOPIC: (Kids 4 Kash, Lack. Cty) Is the FBI digging for facts or burying them? Taking a long time.

Lackawanna County has a certain demographic (See http://lackawannafamilycourtfederal.blogspot.com, there’s a post on it) which may (or may not) make a difference in whether it’s possible to have an ongoing dialogue with people able to stick on topic.  Judge for yourself….

Anyone around here old enough to remember “SPY v. SPY”?

(image found here)

Wikipedia:

Publication history

Prohías was a prolific cartoonist in Cuba and known for political satire. Prohías’ parodies of newly-installed Cuban dictator Fidel Castro attracted criticism, and faced with the loss of work, possible arrest and threats of execution, he fled to the United States on May 1, 1960 – 3 days before Castro took over the last of the Cubanfree press. Prohías sought work in his profession and travelled to the offices of MAD Magazine in New York Cityon July 12, 1960. After a successful showing of his work and a prototype cartoon for Spy vs. Spy, Prohías was hired.[1]

Prohías completed a total of 241 strips for MAD Magazine, the last appearing in Issue #269 (March 1987). During an interview with the Miami Herald in 1983, Prohías reflected on his career, stating “The sweetest revenge has been to turn Fidel’s accusation of me as a spy into a moneymaking venture.”[1] Ironically, Prohías was censored by MAD Magazine publisher William Gaines on at least one occasion. The strip that eventually appeared in MAD Magazine #84 (Jan. 1964) was altered as the Spies were depicted as drinking and smoking, and Gaines had a strong anti-smoking stance.[1]

Prohías eventually retired due to ill health, and died aged 77 on February 24, 1998.[1] The strips continued, with writer Duck Edwing and artist Bob Clarke creating the majority. As of MAD Magazine #356 (April 1997), Peter Kuper took over as writer and artist for the strip.

Pulitzer Prize-winning author Art Spiegelman noted that “Getting published is very important to a young cartoonist, and I somehow have Antonio Prohias to thank for helping kick off my career.”[1]

[edit]

WELL, THIS IS A GOOD VERSION OF IT. . . . No wonder it’s so easy to fleece parents in the family courts, too.  Divide & Conquer.  Waste time.  Turn the legitimate discussion into a circus.  

Read the rest of this entry »

Evaluate, Coordinate, call “Alienator!” Pt. 4– Three AFCC Ph.D.’s on ONE case & “PAS” = 2011 NH Supreme Court custody reversal. And what’s Warshak got to do with it?

with 10 comments

LGH UPDATE NOTE:  My current table of contents only goes back to Sept., 2012; this is a June 15, 2011 post (early on in this blogger’s learning curve!) so  would only be found by search, some other link reference to it, or by Year/Month/Date through the “Archives” (by month) on this blog.  I added some quick (not thorough) updates on Overcoming Barriers at the bottom in response to a comment submitted March, 2016…including tax returns, California corporate registration (Massachusetts could also be searched). 

I was just going to add a very short update, but instead added a section on renewed Parental Alienation discussions, and the socialist “re-education camps” in Viet Nam after South fell to the North, in 1975.  Similar in other countries.   Major quality and scope difference — but force is force, and at some levels, it’s also a form of psychological, personal violence. In my opinion.  So, the original (written/published in 2011) post begins in maroon font and below a double-line after the following paragraphs and a few quotes:

Speaking of how to continue keeping “Parental Alienation” conversation going — and ordering services to undo it through the family courts — I recently noticed that a “Dr. Craig Childress” (Craig A. Childress, Psy.D.)is resurrecting parental alienation under a different theory; I have some comments on it over at Red Herring Alert (a wordpress blog).  “Same old, same old” with new window dressing and tactics (Childress recommends pressuring providers who do NOT recommend IMMEDIATE, safety-for-the-child total separation from the alienating parent (i.e., “mom” typically) through their licensing board, if this could be categorized under some existing DSM-defined disorder.  

You cannot really argue with self-referencing, self-congratulating circles of experts on this matter which is why I recommend a more interesting angle of approach:  If they incorporate, find tax returns and corporate records; if they get contracts with the courts, or government grants to run “reunification camps” and similar therapy for parental alienation (in its old or new classifications), pay attention to the details!

The technique and ability to re-indoctrinate people in groups, as well as children, was also in common use in socialist countries; I believe the term used was “re-education camps,” referring to those in South Viet Nam after the fall of Saigon in 1975:   Search “Vietnamese Re-Education Camps: A Brief History” (that’s supplemental reading, from a man’s father’s oral history — he lived through such camps — from “Choices” program at Brown; see website) or  “Vietnamese Re-Education Camps” from “VietNamWar.info.”

The second link introduces and describes the various levels.  I wonder, in the USA, why the country is so heavily invested in a class of professionals whose purpose seems to be behavioral change and keeping up-to-date with tactics and strategies for re-indoctrinating children, women and men into their proper social relationships with each other and particularly after one or more of the same has spoken out about some prior injustice, or sought to escape being subjected to abuse by a family member.  These camps apparently went on from 1975 – 1986 until people still being held were allowed to emigrate to the US.

 “Vietnamese Re-Education Camps” from “VietNamWar.info.” Posted 4/17/2014 by “kubia”

Following the fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975, Vietnamese Communist government began to open hundreds of “re-education” camps throughout the country. Those camps, as Hanoi officially claimed, were places where individuals could “learn about the ways of the new government” through education and socially constructive labor. In 1975, it was estimated that around 1 to 2.5 million people1, including former officers, religious leaders, intellectuals, merchants, employees of the old regime, and even some Communists, entered the camps in the hope that they could quickly reconcile with the new government and continued their peaceful life. However, their time in those camps did not last for ten days or two weeks as the government had claimed – See more at: http://thevietnamwar.info/vietnamese-re-education-camps/#sthash.6e7f03S8.dpuf

Re-education Camps Levels

The re-education camps were organized into five levels. The level-one camps which were called as study camps or day-study centers located mainly in major urban centers, often in public parks, and allowed attendees to return home each night. In those camps, some 500,000 people2 were instructed about socialism, new government policy in order to unlearn their old ways of thinking. The level-two camps had a similar purpose as the level-one, but attendees were not allowed to return home for three to six months. During the 1970s, at least 200,000 inmates entered more than three hundred level–two camps2.

The level-three re-education camps, known as the socialist-reform camps, could be found in almost every Southern Vietnam province containing at least 50,000 inmates2. Most of them were educated people and thus less susceptible to manipulation than most South Vietnamese in the level-one and two camps. Therefore, the inmates (or prisoners) in these camps had to suffer poorer living conditions, forced labor and daily communist indoctrination.

The last two types of camps were used to incarcerate more “dangerous” southern individuals – including writers, legislator teachers, supreme court judges, province chiefs – until the South was stable to permit their release. By separating members of certain social classes of the old regime, Hanoi wanted to prevent them from conducting joint resistances and forced them to conform to the new social norms. In 1987, at least 15,000 “dangerous” persons were still incarcerated level-four and level-five camps2.

Camp Conditions and Deaths

In most of the re-education camps, living conditions were inhumane. Prisoners were treated with little food, poor sanitation, and no medical care3. They were also assigned to do hard and risky work such as clearing the jungle, constructing barracks, digging wells, cutting trees and even mine field sweeping without necessary working equipments.

Although those hard work required a lot of energy, their provided food portions were extremely small. As a prisoner recall, the experience of hunger dominated every man in his camp. Food was the only thing they talked about. Even when they were quiet, food still haunted their thoughts, their sleep and their dreams. Worse still, various diseases such as malaria, beriberi and dysentery were widespread in some of the camps. As many prisoners were weakened by the lack of food, those diseases could now easily take away their lives.

Starvation diet, overwork, diseases and harshly punishment resulted in a high death rate of the prisoners. According to academic studies of American researchers, a total of 165,000 Vietnamese people died in those camps4.

The End of “Re-education” Period

Most of the re-education camps were operated until 1986 when Nguyen Van Linh became the General Secretary of the Communist Party. He began to close the harsher camps and reformed the others5. Two year later, Washington and Hanoi reached an agreement that Vietnam would free all former soldiers and officials of the old regime who were still held in re-education camps across the country and allowed them to emigrate to the United States under the Orderly Departure Program (ODP). As of August 1995, around 405,000 Vietnamese prisoners and their families were resettled in the U.S6.

– See more at: http://thevietnamwar.info/vietnamese-re-education-camps/#sthash.6e7f03S8.dpuf

The forced “Reunification Camps” (far less harsh, but still forced, and still designed to produce an attitude change) have their professionals willing to engage in these practices.  I think it must take a certain kind of mentality, if not personality aberrancy, to believe in this and what’s more preach about it and take in business to engage in it.  For some reason, those “Re-education camps” remind me of, though lesser in degree, the same idea as, for example, “overcoming barriers.”  It’s still based on force — and who knows how many similar programs are operating around the country.  As I write this, the Grazzini-Rucki runaway teens were reported (in 2016) to being re-indoctrinated to like their father (who they’d run away from as young teens), while the mother, until recently, was incarcerated for parental interference.  See my more recent 2016 posts).

Here’s a sample.  I see he’s from Pasadena, California (Los Angeles area).  To see it in better formatting (the “copy” function sometimes removes all spaces between words!) click on link:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/165394444/Dr-Craig-Childress-DSM-5-Diagnosis-of-Parental-Alienation-Processes#scribd.

C. A. CHILDRESS, Psy.D.LICENSED CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST, PSY 18857

 547 S. MARENGO DR., STE 105 • PASADENA, CA 91101 • (909) 821-5398
Page 1 of 10
DSM-5 Diagnosisof“ParentalAlienation”ProcessesParentalPsychopatholo
gyThefamilyrelationshipprocessesthathaveclassicallybeendescribedas“parentalalienation”representtheartificiallyinducedsuppressionofthenormal-rangefunctioningofthechild’sattachmentsystem(aneuro-biologicallyembeddedprimarymotivationalsystem)towardoneparent(i.e.,thetargeted/rejectedparent)asaconsequenceofaberrantanddistortedparentingpracticesemanatingfromtheotherparent(i.e.,thefavored/alliedparent).The abera nt anddistortedparentingpracticesofthefavored/alliedparentfalselydefineforthechildthattheparentingpracticesoftheotherparent,thetargeted/rejectedparent,representathreattothechild.Typicallythealleged“threat”ischaracterizedasbeingoneofemotionalorpsychological“abuse”ofthechild,supposedlyasaconsequenceofthefundamentalparentalinadequacyofthetargeted/rejectedparent,althoughoccasionallythecharacterizationofpotential“threat”iselevatedtooneofpossiblephysicalorsexualabuseofthechildbythetargeted/rejectedparent.Theoriginofthefavored/alliedparent’sfalseperceptionofthreatisthemisattributionofmeaning(Bowlby,1980) bythefavored/alliedparentregardinganauthenticallyexperiencedintenseanxietythatistheproductofinsecure,severelyanxious-disorganized/anxious-preoccupiedattachmentpatternsrepresentingtheinternalworkingmodelsofthefavored/alliedparent’sattachmentsystemorganization.Theseverelyanxious-disorganized/anxious-preoccupiedinternalworkingmodelsofthefavored/alliedparent’sattachmentsystemcoalescedduringchildhooddevelopmentintopathologicalpersonalitystructures(Bowlby,1973)involvingaself-experienceofprimalinadequacyandanexperienceofothersasabandoning(Batholomew,1990;Jellema,2000).

Nice to know he’s referring to resources that ALMOST predate the women’s movement, including the movement to protect battered women through development of shelters and laws, of the 1970s,

What is the personality disorder of individuals who need to develop specialized jargon for labeling all other individuals?  Someone needs to develop this taxonomy (make it sound academic; this shouldn’t be to hard with a little practice; make sure to adopt a detached, objective tone before letting loose with a string of names to describe people who may not see the world as you do…).

Anyhow, this is evidently making the rounds, and being promoted on family law and other blogs, for example, this is in March, 2014 from a wordpress blog called “Wallin Family Law Group” (two attorneys are mentioned):

Dr. Craig Childress

I want to be clear that 95% of this blog post will be the thoughts, ideas, and words of Dr. Craig Childress.   He is a licensed clinical psychiatrist who specializes in Parental Alienation. He explains how and why Parental Alienation occurs through explaining the Attachment System.   You can find Dr. Craig Childress at by clicking here.   If this blog post inspires you, I encourage you to go to Dr. Childress’ site to learn more.


 

The last post hopefully eradicated any questions about the neutrality of the Parenting Coordination Profession, let alone idea.  It’s part over the overall business-producing racket; the heady & VERY profitable business of messing with families and calling it serving them.

And how it’s made a mockery of the concepts of law. Out-come based custody hearings?  Then what’s the point of the farce?  They become kangaroo courts.

I may not feel too responsible after this to continue posting the truth about the AFCC, they are tearing up the place as far as I am concerned.  What to do about this is another matter.  I do know that crying “domestic violence” or “abuse” or even “incest” while this system exists is interpreted as crying “wolf!”  The heavy hand of intervention will reach your neck of the woods sooner or later, more likely sooner.

Anyhow . . …  the New Hampshire case, Miller (father) v. Todd (mother).  It also spans Michigan and New York as we’ll see.

Father-oriented groups and PAS-promoting groups were really crowing over this particular decision, so I decided to read it:

FATHERS & FAMILIES, REJOICING:

Here’s Fathers and Families all excited about it:

http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/?p=14489

NH Supreme Court: Parental Alienation Inimical to Child’s Best Interests

April 4th, 2011 by Robert Franklin, Esq.

This case is excellent, not only because of its result, but mostly because of its sound analysis.  It should serve as a template for courts not only here in the U.S. but in other countries as well.

It comes to us from the Supreme Court of New Hampshire and analyzes a situation in which false allegations of child sexual abuse were used by a mother to deprive a father of contact with his children.  It’s a familiar pattern of facts and altogether too rare an outcome.

In 1999, James Miller met Janet Todd online.  They developed a relationship and, although they never married, had two daughters.  Laurel was born in 2002 and Lindsey in 2003.  Ultimately, a New Hampshire court awarded joint custody with Todd as primary custodian and Miller with visitation rights.

WARSHAK, REJOICING:

Here’s Richard Warshak all excited about it.  He should be.  He sells products coaching how to get a father’s attorney to coach a mother’s attorney to threaten her with custody loss if she’s not, er, submissive enough.  And he runs Reunification seminars (not exactly for free, either; hey, it’s a business….).

NH Supreme Court on Parental Alienation

Posted on April 5, 2011 by Dr. Richard A. Warshak In a stunning ruling, of interest to all those concerned with parental alienation, the Supreme Court of New Hampshire overturned a lower court’s award of custody to a mother who was found to be alienating her children from their father.After effectively interfering with the father-child relationship, the trial court awarded custody to the mother primarily because the children had spent the majority of their lives with her and that is where they feel most comfortable. This is typical in cases where one parent has effectively interfered in the children’s relationship with the other parent. The absence of contact establishes a status quo that the court then feels bound to honor in order to spare the children a drastic change in their lives.

“Warshak who???”

Warshak is both AFCC and CRC active  Browse the google search.  He presents at AFCC and sells his stuff through them.  It is quite clear from his website that he endorses threat therapy for anyone who alienates and reunification programs to counter it.   So do others.   He markets “FAMILY BRIDGES” ™.

Family Bridges is an innovative educational and experiential program that helps severely and unreasonably alienated children and adolescents adjust to living with a parent they claim to hate or fear.

In some cases the court has determined that a child’s best interests are served by placing the child in the custody of a rejected parent and suspending contact for a period of time with the other parent. *** In other cases, the favored parent is no longer available to care for the child. This may occur, for instance, if an abducted child is found and returned to the rejected parent, and the abducting parent is either in jail, prohibited from seeing the child, or remains underground or out of the country in order to avoid capture.

{{**keeping in mind that many courts have AFCC judges who have swallowed “alienation” theory hook, line & sinker — or who may profit from asserting they do.  If someone can name me several (not just one or two) cases where this happened when the alienated parent was a mother (biological), let me know, I’m all ears…}}

Sidebar:

Our program teaches children how to stay out of the middle of adult conflicts, and how to maintain a compassionate view toward each parent. We teach children to think critically. When children learn how to see a problem from different perspectives they usually begin to heal their relationship without having to acknowledge that they had been treating the parent with contempt and without having to apologize for it. They begin relating in a more positive way.”

AFCC coaches its own members how to be critical of one gender more than the other in a custody hearing, or where in doubt, order more of their services.  Why not teach the children instead how to start and run a profitable business (information downloadable for the greatest profit)  by befriending judges who can order others into therapy?  Or review “How to Win Friends and INfluence People, in the Family Law & Mental Health professions.”  After all, this is primarily what Warshak has demonstrated mastery of…..  Or, teach them web design, so they can get a government contract  to help set up a resource center, or design its logo to lend it more legitimacy….

I advocate people to be critical of those eager to tell their own offspring how to “think.” and instead, go hunt down the EIN# , if it’s a nonprofit, and look at their books.  I think it’s more helpful…..

Here’s a more NAFCJ commentary on Warshak vis a vis Richard Gardner (dating to 2004)

FamilyCourt Reform 2004 yahoo groupmail notes:” 

This is the latest PAS custody switching case in London, England. Note that transfers of custody in cases like this, are being done in directly in accordance with Richard Gardner’s threat therapy recommendations:

Click here: FAMILY THERAPY OF THE MODERATE TYPE OF PAS

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DEALING WITH PARENTS WHO INDUCE PAS IN THEIR CHILDREN

Before he stabbed himself to death last year, Richard Gardner apparently was in England for a conference on PAS with an AFCC affiliated group, along with David Levy of the Children’s Rights Council. Right afterward, there was a conference on PAS in Germany, with Richard Warshak, also of AFCC/CRC.

People should be aware that CRC and AFCC are connected to numerous pro-pedophilia and incest advocates and sexologists, including Gardner, Ralph Underwager, Warren Farrell and John Money. Since Gardner and Underwager are dead, other CRC and AFCC members are continuing to promote the PAS agenda via reformulating PAS into PA and “alienated children”, or merely by saying that mothers routinely deny access by making false allegations, in association with other (bogus) fathers’, children’s and family rights organizations:

Family Court Corruption, Part 2: FR and Conciliation Court Law

WARSHAK @ Massachusetts AFCC:

This past April 15, 2011, Warshak was a keynote speaker at a state (Massachusetts) chapter of AFCC.  I though that ironic, given that AFCC got its start as a tax-dodging nonprofit run out of the L.A. County Courthouse, from what I can tell, and (USA) taxes are due April 15th.

April 15, 2011 – MA AFCC Parental Alienation: Not Just Another Custody Case Keynote Speaker: Richard Warshak, Ph.D. Friday, April 15, 2011 Regis College, Wellesley Street, Weston, MA – To view or print a conference brochure, click here.  To register for the conference, please print a conference brochure and mail it to:

Here’s another blog supporting a NY State ruling by Judge Ross, who incarcerated a mother for contempt, i.e., “alienating” and referencing how much work needs to be done in this area (NB:  does it ever include the same treatment of fathers who alienate?) and referencing a Denver conference on the topic.  It gets almost comical:

I recently attended the Association of Family and Conciliation Court’s annual conference in Denver, Colorado which focused on parental alienation.  The conference included all the players in assessing, treating and adjudging alienation, which included psychologists, social workers, therapists, parent coordinators, parent educators, judges, lawyers and everything in between.  And although it was refreshing to see that attention to this issue is gaining momentum, there is still a lot to be done.**  Judges, court personnel, etc. need to be made aware of the reality of parental alienation.  Educating the key players is the only way the courts will take Justice Ross’s stoic position and affect change

Judge Ross “stoic”??  More like vitriolic himself (see my post).  I don’t know how much more could possibly be done to promote the concept of punishing bad alienating mothers other than insist that no non-AFCC member may hold public office in any family or domestic relations court.  Alternately, you could tell mothers leaving or reporting abuse upfront that if they keep up the nasty habit (of truth-telling, or allowing their children to, either) they could just be tossed in jail at the BEGINNING of the court process, and then only one set of public monies would be wasted, which is the cost of incarcerating a woman for a year, or however many months til she kneels and confesses to the right theology.  Stronger mothers may take longer (Richard Fine, Esq. — not on this issue, obviously — lasted 18 months in solitary coercive confinement, so budgets should be thought through in advance if this is the method).

The OPINION:

 Good grief…HERE IS THE OPINION FROM NH (see qualifier at the top) MARCH, 2011

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE___________________________Portsmouth Family Division No. 2009-806

IN THE MATTER OF JAMES J. MILLER AND JANET S. TODD

Argued: November 17, 2010 Opinion Issued: March 31, 2011

Law Office of Joshua L. Gordon, of Concord (Joshua L. Gordon on the brief and orally), for the petitioner.John P. Carr, of Hingham, Massachusetts, and Elizabeth B. Olcott, of Concord, on the brief, and Mr. Carr orally, for the respondent.HICKS, J.

The petitioner, James J. Miller, currently a resident of New York, appeals an order of the Portsmouth Family Division (DeVries, J.), recommended by the Master (Cross, M.), requiring the parties’ two minor daughters to continue to live primarily with the respondent, Janet S. Todd, in New Hampshire.We vacate and remand.

We have reviewed the extensive record in this case and set forth the facts most relevant to the issues on appeal. Miller and Todd met in 1999 over the internet and established a relationship. At that time, Miller lived in Michigan and Todd lived in New Hampshire. Although they never married, their relationship produced two daughters, Laurel born in 2002 and Lindsay born in 2003. During 2002 and 2003, the parties spent some time living together in Michigan, Todd and the children spent some time alone in New Hampshire

This is not your typical marriage . . . .

On December 23, 2003, Miller obtained an ex parte order in the circuit court in Michigan granting him sole temporary legal and physical custody of his daughters.

Of THEIR daughters (they have a biological father AND a biological mother, obviously).2 days before Christmas, he seeks to remove the children completely from the mother.  Hmmm.  Now how (and on what basis) would he have gotten an EX PARTE custody order at this time.  Surely courts know that holidays are tough times for families.

That same day, Todd took the children to her parents’ home in Hampton, New Hampshire.

On January 6, 2004, Todd was served with the Michigan custody order. On January 15, the Rockingham County Superior Court,** in response to Miller’s petition for enforcement of the Michigan custody decree, ordered Todd to appear at a hearing and on January 26, the trial court ordered Todd to bring the children to Miller within twenty-four hours for the purpose of transferring custody to him.Sometime in January, Todd’s mother told her that, four months earlier, she saw Miller molest Laurel by inserting his forefinger into her.

So mother “in law” was involved here.  However, wouldn’t you like to see that original ex parte give me my kids order? And who issued it?  There has to be SOME basis of change in circumstances (supposedly) for change of custody.  At least in theory….(**just a note, the sample “parenting coordinator” report was out of this county…)I don’t want to drag through all the detail, but the relevant point is when an AFCC alienation-proponent Psycholgist gets in the picture.  And that is in 2006, and AFTER DCYF.

DCYF stated that “[t]here has been a concern that Laurel has been coached with the information that she has been disclosing. Please understand that this . . . type of coaching, if proven, is equally as abusive to a child as if the abuse had actually occurred.” The matter was also referred to the Manchester Police Department, which investigated but did not pursue charges.In July 2006, the parties agreed to be evaluated by psychologist Peggie Ward “to investigate and make recommendations . . . on the issues of a parenting/custody assess[ment], abuse allegations by both parties, parental alienation issues, scripting issue[s] and any and all other issues . . . which she deems relevant.” On December 18, 2007, Dr. Ward issued an eighty-eight page report in which she considered several hypotheses.

NEW PLAYER:  Now the ballgame is in an AFCC court..

PEGGIE WARD

(about 3 spellings of “Peggy/Pegge/Peggie” show up.  “ie” is the correct one, evidently)

Please understand, I am not judging this case in detail, although I looked at some of its details.  Rather,  I am calling attention to who are the professionals called in to judge it, and how.  There are agencies (not just individuals) also involved which I’m not investigating, such as a Child Advocacy Center, and so forth.  I reviewed it earlier, and perceiving the three Ph.D.s, began looking them up.  Then the pieces fell into place — ALL are AFCC bigwigs (or at least presenters) and as such, are not as independent as they may have looked in one custody case.

PEGGIE WARD found among this company or authors (on a Parental Alienation blog):

The American Journal of Family Therapy, 28:229-241, 2000

REMARRIAGE AS A TRIGGER OF PARENTAL ALIENATION SYNDROME Richard A. Warshak University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, Dallas, Texas, USA

Three Types of Alienators  Provided by Douglas Darnell, Ph.D

.Family Wars: The Alienation of Children   Dr. Peggy Ward
Denial of the Parental Alienation Syndrome Also Harms Women Richard A. Gardner;  Columbia University, New York, New York, USA  

Warshak, Gardner, and whoever Darnell is….  Here’s a clue, though:

http://www.cspas.ca/program_times.shtml

ATURDAY, MAY 28th – PROGRAM


Registration – Check InContinential Breakfast

Keynote Speaker Introduction

William Bernet M.D

Intermission

2nd Intro – William Bernet, M.D.

Q&A with William Bernet, M.D.

Speaker Introduction

Douglas Darnell, Ph.D.

Announcements

Lunch Break

2nd Intro – Douglas Darnell, Ph.D.

Q&A with Douglas Darnell, Ph.D.

Intermission

Speaker Introduction

S. Richard Sauber, Ph.D.

Intermission

2nd Intro – S. Richard Sauber, Ph.D.

Q&A with S. Richard Sauber, Ph.D.

Closing Remarks

7:30 – 8:30 am7:30 – 8:30 am

8:30 – 8:40 am

8:40 – 9:40 am

9:40 – 10:00 am

10:00 – 10:05 am

10:05 – 10:45 am

10:45 – 10:55 am

10:55 – 11:55 am

11:55 am – 12:00 pm

12:00 – 1:30 pm

1:30 – 1:35 pm

1:35 – 2:15 pm

2:15 – 2:30 pm

2:30 – 2:40 pm

2:40 – 3:40 pm

3:40 – 4:00 pm

4:00 – 4:05 pm

4:05 – 4:45 pm

4:45 – 5:00 pm

Speaker Profiles:

Sauber, I see, is on the Advisory Board of CRC and is picking up where Richard Gardner left off, with the help of a certain Lorandros, Ph.D.

He also serves on the Advisory Board of the Children’s Rights Council in Washington, D.C. Since 1976, Dr. Sauber has been the Editor-in-Chief of The American Journal of Family Therapy. His most recent book with Richard Gardner, M.D. and Demosthenes Lorandos, J.D., Ph.D.is entitled The International Handbook of PAS: Conceptual, Clinical and Legal Considerations (2006) is now being written in its second edition with Demosthenes Lorandos, J.D.,Ph.D., William Bernet, M.D., and S. Richard Sauber, Ph.D. entitled The Handbook of Parental Alienation for Mental Health and Legal Professionals.

Wm. Bernet is famous (among mothers at least) for bringing in the “Warrior Gene” excuse for a man who slaughtered & hacked his wife and girlfriend, blood everywhere, on an obviously UNsupervised exchange of the children.  Someone was shot, the other person was hacked, and children were on the scene.  Don’t quote me on who was who.  The father was a Bible-toter? and Bernet wants PAS — which is obviously a worse crime — in the next version of the DSM.

This is Darnell, about par for this PAS proliferation set of professionals. Notice that he is BOTh AFCC & CRC, or at least has presented for them.

 He has been a practicing Psychologist for 32 years and previous[ly] worked twenty years for the Trumbull County Family Court. He has testified in twelve states and has serviced [??] over 1000 families. He has appeared on the Montel show and Court TV and numerous radio shows. He has authored and coauthored numerous peer review journal articles on Parental Alienation and Spontaneous Reunification.
He has authored and coauthored numerous peer review journal articles on Parental Alienation and Spontaneous Reunification. Dr. Darnall is on the editorial board for the American Journal of Family Therapy. Reference to his work has been written up in over 50 newspaper articles. Dr. Darnall has given presentations at both State and National Conferences including the Missouri State Bar and North Dakota State Bar Associations, AFCC, Children’s Rights Council, and Local and State Bar Associations on Parental Alienation and Parental Alienation Syndrome. He has gained international recognition for his work with divorced families.

Demosthenes Lorandros, while I”m here, reminds me in some ways of Benjamin Garber (about to come up).  I wouldn’t like to face off with him in court, and there is an extensive commentary by a woman who attempted to get his help at courthouseforum.com.  The guy is highly educated, BOTH JD & Psychology, and also very busy.

Demosthenes Lorandos, J.D., Ph.D.

www.lorandoslaw.com/lorandos-cv.php

Biography:
Dr. Lorandos received his B.A. in Psychology from San Francisco State University. He attended the New School for Social Research in New York City, studying the principles and methodology of science. He earned the Graduate Faculty of Political and Social Sciences scholarship award.

He spent the next four years studying the philosophy of science at an experimental university, earning a Ph.D. in 1976. He served two clinical internships and completed his doctorate in Clinical Psychology with Union Graduate School in Cincinnati.

Dr. Lorandos taught as an assistant, then associate, professor at Indiana University, Saginaw Valley State College, and Central Michigan University.

He created the largest private Vietnam veterans treatment program in the United States, which won national recognition from the Vietnam Veterans of America.

As a research scientist, he has published both commentary and original scientific research in many scientific journals.

He has also published three books: Cross-Examining Experts in the Behavioral Sciences (co-authored with Dr. Terence Campbell); Benchbook in the Behavioral Sciences: Psychiatry – Psychology – Social Work (co-authored with Dr. Terence Campbell); and The International Handbook of Parental Alienation Syndrome – Conceptual, clinical and Legal Perspectives which brings contributors from all over the world together to discuss this important phenomena.

Dr. Lorandos retired from the active practice of clinical psychology to attend the University of Detroit Law School, where he graduated with honors in 1991. He is licensed in New York, California and Michigan an attorney, and in California and Michigan as a psychologist.

There was a well-known case where he defended a child-care provider from allegations of sexual abuse of the children, and won.  I can’t imagine his time would be wasted on any Title IV-D cases (who could afford?), but even if a mother has some wealth, what are the chances of coming up against this one in court?  Which is the judge likely to respect more?


Well, back to Dr. Peggie Ward:

Here’s where she’s practicing, apparently, with AFCC Board Member Robin Deutch and Matt Sullivan.
Self-explanatory:  “This Overcoming Barriers” team even runs a camp to counter alienation….

Picture(The link is to a basic wordpress blog.  No image remains See bottom of post (and website) for information since this post was published (in 2011) on “OCB”).

About this camp:  in 2008, 5 families attended, 4 of them with court orders:  [

After struggling for years with some of the most difficult and heartbreaking post-divorce family situations – where a child has rejected one of their parents – three AFCC members designed, funded and conducted an innovative and intensive clinical approach to work with families called “Breaking Barriers Camp”. Five families participated in three and a half days of psycho-educational groups, strategic interventions, and enjoyable family camp activities this summer at Common Ground Center in Starksboro, Vermont. Families (including both the parent(s) the children live with, the “rejected parent and all children) came from Arizona, Florida, Massachusetts, Minnesota,  and Toronto, Canada.


One challenge that emerged was the difficulty in obtaining commitments from those families who did not have a court order to attend.   {{This is a clear indication that without it being forced by a judge, there is no legitimate demand for this camp and procedure}}

 

After, interviewing 25 families, four of the five families who attended did so with a court order.  While not all family members referred were accepted, conversations with the AFCC custody evaluators and Parenting Coordinators helped our decision making process.

Many of these families would not have had the opportunity to attend had it not been for the terrific support of AFCC members who not only provided informed and thoughtful referrals, but also provided individually donated initial funding that allowed this program to proceed.  This was very much an AFCC supported project.

Well, investment capital. I’m sure that if judges order families to attend (and it’s a nonprofit), there will be some later cash flow, plus prestige from the process.

About us

Peggie Ward, PhD, is a psychologist and Co-Founder of the Co-Parenting Assessment Center in Natick, MA.***  She previously held an appointment at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Ward has helped develop GAL Standards in MA and serves as Co-Chair of the MA Parenting Plan Committee. She lectures on topics inlcuding alientation [sic], parenting coordination, and advanced issues in GAL work.  Dr. Ward practices as a therapist, consultant, family systems evaluator, and parenting coordinator and is a member of the AFCC MA Board of Directors.

The Co-Parenting Assessment Center in Natick, MA is same street address as Overcoming Barriers nonprofit. The text showing currently (post minor editing after comment on the post 3/14/2016) as posted from Divorcesource.com on “New Hampshire Divorce Counseling,” looks like a list of contacts, reads:

The Co-Parenting Assessment Center
10 Union Street
Natick, Massachusetts 01760
Contact: Peggie Ward, Ph.D. / Mira Levitt, Ph.D.
Phone: (508) 655-1775
Fax: (978) 443-2961
E-mail: peggieward@comcast.net
Areas of Expertise: Providing Mental Health Evaluations, Interventions, Guardian Ad Litem Services. Evaluations of, custody disputes, visitation arrangements, children, sibling group and family units. Clinical services to, children of divorce & separation, pre-divorce marital mediation, mediation in the process of separation and divorce, and post-divorce parenting.

Articles: “Family Wars: The Alienation of Children” by Dr. Peggie Ward [active link on divorcresource page).

Matt Sullivan, PhD, is a psychologist who has written articles, presented and done trainings at numerous national and international venues on topics such as high-conflict divorce, Parent Coordination and child alienation and mental health consultation in family law cases. He has served on the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts [AFCC] Task Force on Parenting Coordination and the American Psychological and American Bar Association multi-year working group on legal and psychological interventions with children and families.***

Robin M. Deutsch, PhD, is a psychologist and the Director of Forensic Services of the Children and the Law Program in the Department of Psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital and an Assistant Professor of Psychology at Harvard Medical School.  She practices as a therapist, consultant, custody evaluator, mediator and parent coordinator.  She is the past president of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC), former Chair of the American Psychological Association(APA) Ethics Committee and the co-author of  7 Things Your Teenager Can’t Tell You (And How to Talk to Them Anyway).  Dr. Deutsch lectures widely throughout North America and Europe on Parenting Coordination, and complex issues related to family conflict, including parent alienation, attachment, abuse and neglect, and trauma.

They are psychologists getting court-ordered business. 

**speaking of "psychological interventions":
(THe FAMILY Camp):

Announcement

Peggie Ward, Matt Sullivan and Robin Deutsch are pleased to announce that we are expanding opportunities for families where a child has rejected a parent.  We will spend this summer developing a range of programs including psychoeducational workshops, weekend interventions and camps on both the east and west coasts.
i.e., just like Warshak.

Here, she lists “parenting coordination” as a solution the court’s inability to introduce enough therapy to “binuclear families”

 

Massachusetts has long been AFCC-friendly at the courts level:

I forgot to mention that in nearby Massachusetts (See US map, Northeast/  New England states, etc.) the Massachusetts Courts themselves have a link right to AFCC.  This brochure came off it:  http://www.mass.gov/courts/courtsandjudges/courts/probateandfamilycourt/afccsharedparenting.pdf

Planning for Shared Parenting: A Guide for Parents Living Apart, sponsored by the Massachusetts Chapter of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) with the encouragement and support of the Honorable Sean M. Dunphy, Chief Justice of the Probate and Family Court, is acollaborative effort of the legal and mental health communities

Legal & Mental Health Communities basically = AFCC.  Wonder if Hon. Sean M. Dunphy is also..... 
"At home with Dunphy" interview, Boston Globe 2002, says:

In 1978, Michael Dukakis appointed Dunphy as a Probate and Family Court judge. One of his proudest achievements in that post, and one he has worked to replicate statewide, was to institute a mandatory education program for parents going through a divorce. Participants must pay $50 each for two sessions in which they learn about such basics as not using their children as messengers between each other. “People lose sight of the needs of their children in the process of separating themselves from each other,” said Dunphy.He got the idea for the course from an article in Parade magazineabout a program in Cobb County, Georgia.  {Also found in Indiana — I wonder whose curriculum it is}

 

A bit of a Digression, but I wanted to know WHICH Cobb County, GA parent education program, if I could find out.  Good pickings — it originated from a Texas transplant, I think….

(A little searching, possibly it was exported from San Antonio, Texas, from a Robin Walton Brown I’ll highlight:)
Here’s HER paragraphs.  As we will also see below, the AFCC and “parenting coordination” connection exists here)

Robin Brown Walton graduated Magna Cum Laude from The University of Texas in San Antonio in 1989 with a Bachelor’s degree in Psychology.  In May 1992, she received a Master’s of Science Degree in Counseling Psychology from Our Lady of the Lake University in San Antonio, Texas and again, graduated Summa Cum Laude.  Robin was licensed as a Professional Counselor by the State of Texas in 1994.  {Just in time for the National Fatherhood Initiative to get its foothold in the HHS business — see Ron Haskins…}}

(Is she Catholic?)

In June 1992, Robin founded KidShare, the first Neutral Child-Exchange and Supervised Visitation facility ever established in San Antonio, Texas.  In 1993, she created a Cooperative Parenting program with Anne Marie Termini, who moved to Atlanta, Georgia after their first case and developed a recognized national program with Susan Boyan.   Robin was instrumental in bringing the Helping Children Cope with Divorce seminar to Bexar County (TX — back from Georgia?) and in 1996, this four-hour educational program for divorcing parents became a mandate in San Antonio due to her work with Jewish Family Service, the Women’s and Children’s Resource Center, Family Service Association and the Bexar County Judges.

this woman was already connected with the courts, probably.  Welfare Reform (PRWORA) of 1996 freed up money to the states to start supervised visitation centers, and in general encouraged increased noncustodial parenting access by “facilitating” this help.  In Texas, right now, it’s BIG, and probably has been.  Not to trouble us now with this information, but in looking up Access Visitation funding in Texas, which is very overt (on the Office of Attorney General page) it develops that the person (judge) who brought it in (or to her county?) is now on the Texas Supreme Court.  She’s AFCC.  (Tarrant County connection?).  Here is a 2010 AFCC announcement that member Debra Lehrman was appointed by the (republican) Governor to the Supreme Court:

Debra Lehrman, AFCC member from Fort Worth, TX, was appointed by Texas Governor Rick Perry as Justice to the Supreme Court of Texas. Judge Lehrman is a previous president of the AFCC Texas Chapter.

 

Let’s talk about spheres of influence.  I’m talking so much about AFCC, and how it basically IS family law.  This is not idle chatter.  Here’s an example from Texas:

(more on The HOn. Debra Lehrman here:)

The caseload of the Texas Supreme Court involves large numbers of children and families who are the subjects of litigation. The election of Judge Lehrmann fulfills the need for a jurist experienced with the intricacies of these cases. Judge Lehrmann has been involved with the creation and implementation of the Texas Supreme Court’s Permanent Commission for Children, Youth and Families for the past several years. She currently serves on a committee dealing with the court‐appointed representation of children in abuse and neglect cases through the commission.

 

I’m sure she’s highly qualified.  And how great, she’s a woman on the State Supreme Court.  But somehow it’s less than assuring that someone on a committee which deals with child abuse and neglect has such close ties to an organization known for covering it up with cries of parental alienation, and prescribing anti-PAS programming for those who report, including the children themselves….  Here she is with a list of articles, including on  “Therapeutic Jurisprudence,” Texas Chapter of AFCC Fall Conference, 2003” again, “Therapeutic Jurisprudence—A New Paradigm,” Texas Association of Mediators, Fort Worth, 2007″ {{yes, it IS a new paradigm!!! is it a GOOD one??}} and “Problem Solving Courts,” Alternative Dispute Resolution Symposium, Texas Wesleyan School of Law, February 2009” and of course “Parenting Coordinators & Parenting Plans—the Proposed Statute,” Texas Association of Domestic Relations Offices (TADRO) Annual Convention, Austin, 2004” ir “Domestic Violence in Family Law Cases,” Texas Wesleyan University School of Law, Spring, 2004″ or:  (see code words?):  ”

Problem Solving Courts & Access Facilitation,” Association of Family & Conciliation Courts (AFCC) Annual Convention, Ottawa, Canada, 2003″

(as it says on the site, “Frequent Author and Lecturer”)

Judge Lehrmann has been an active leader within the legal profession for many years. She is a past president of the Texas Chapter of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC), is a past president of the Tarrant County Young Lawyers Association, is a master member of the Eldon B. Mahon Inn of Court, served on the Advisory Board of Tarrant County Dispute Resolution Services, is a fellow of the Texas Bar Foundation and the American Bar Foundation, and is a charter member of the Tarrant County Bar Foundation.

Judge Lehrmann actively participates in the national legal community as well. She currently serves as the Chair‐Elect the Family Law Section of the American Bar Association (ABA/FLS)….

 

not to mention Dr. Marsha-Kline Pruett (see last post, I think)

Marsha Kline Pruett, AFCC member from Northampton, MA, has been awarded the 2010 Men-in-Families Best Research Article Award for an article she co-authored, “Promoting Fathers’ Engagement With Children: Preventive Interventions for Low-Income Families,” that appeared last year in Journal of Marriage and the Family

Back to WHICH Parenting Education program in Cobb County Georgia, and why a Massachusetts Judge thought it was such a great idea….

In September 1997, Robin licensed Family Service Association to run the KidShare (supervised visitation services) program and went into private practice.  Since that time, Robin has been appointed in thousands of cases by Family Law Attorneys and Judges in Bexar and surrounding counties to work in divorce cases that oftentimes involve a child custody dispute and/or a high conflict divorce situation.  Robin has been appointed to act as a Social Study investigator, Forensic Interviewer/Evaluator, Co-Parenting Coordinator/Coach, Child Advocate, Mediator, Arbitrator, Divorce Coach, Consultant and Counselor.

This page from the San Antonio Bar CONFIRMS that both Bexar County Shared Parenting receives federal HHS funding help and is associated with welfare (Title IV-D) work, i.e. (see link)  *This program is supported with federal funds provided by the Administration for Children and Families – Department of Health and Human Services as a part of the Texas Office of the Attorney General Access and Visitation Program.   Family Service Association/KidShare & one other provider are listed above it, in case anyone might voluntarily? opt for:

FUNCTION: The Domestic Relations Office (DRO) provides social and mental health services support and a visitation enforcement program to the Civil District Courts in matters before them pertaining to custody and access in Suits Affecting Parent-Child Relationships.

CURRENT SERVICES

Consultation and Referral
Mr. Tony Neugebauer, DRO Director, is available to the individual Civil District Court Judges and at Presiding Court to consult or provide immediate intervention in complex family law matters. Referrals for mental health services related to custody and access issues, such as Social Studies, Psychological Evaluations, Parent Coordination, Counseling and Parenting Classes, are available upon request.

 

Hardly surprising, then, that:

Professionally, Robin is a member of the following national and international  organizations; The Association of Family and Conciliatory Courts (AFCC); International Academy of Collaborative Professionals (IACP). the Collaborative Law Institute (CLI); Collaborative Professionals of San Antonio (CPOSA);

 

Back to Massachusetts Family & Probate Courts/AFCC and why they are so closely linked, literally:

Self Help

Other Helpful Links

(under Domestic Violence — only one link called “Resources”
and that is not to any source of help for a family)
Oh?  Plus, The Hon. Dunphy is also AFCC.  From the 2002 AFCC newsletter:

AFCC Members Travel to Cubaby Hon. Arline S. Rotman (ret.), AFCC Past President, Boston, MA

What excitement! A group of intrepid travelers met at Logan Airport in the wee hours of the morning of November 5, 2001 ready for our Cuban adventure. A Cuban American judge had organized a judicial exchange with members of the Cuban legal community interested in family law. We traveled via Jamaica (since direct flights to Cuba are not allowed) on a permit issued by the Treasury Department. Arriving in Havana only hours before the hurricane, we transferred directly to the famous Hotel Nacional. Our group included AFCC members Hon. Sean Dunphy, Chief Justice of the Massachusetts Probate and Family Court and Linda Cavallero, Ph.D., Director of the Worcester Family Court Clinic at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center. Guide books in hand, we ignored the hurricane winds for as long as we could and set out to explore the old city of Havana. Looking at the 1950’s vintage automobiles we felt as if we were in a time warp. …Is this where the idea to have AFCC develop the “shared parenting” brochure germinated?  (I guess that must have been earlier).

See the world.  Join AFCC, after you have a basic JD, Psy.D. or have completed mediator, or coordinator, training....

Post-conference New Zealand/Australia Trip AFCC is pleased to announce plans for the post-conference trip to New Zealand and Australia…The trip will depart (from) Honolulu on June 8, 2002, the final day of the AFCC 39th Annual Conference and return from Australia on June 18. The itinerary for this trip will keep even the most active travelers busy.”

Incidentally, in this newsletter some of our other favorite personnel.  Getting the general idea yet?:

AFCC Member News

Connie J. A. Beck, AFCC member from Tucson, AZ, is co-author of the recently published book Family Mediation: Facts, Myths, and Future Prospects. Dr. Beck and co-author Bruce D. Sales trace the development of the field as well as current mediation practices and take a look at the consequences for families and the legal system.

Hon. Thomas Bishop, former AFCC President from Connecticut, has been appointed to the Connecticut Court of Appeals. AFCC sends its congratulations on this outstanding achievement.

Isolina Ricci, AFCC member from Tiburon, California is now the Director of The New Family Center, an organization she founded in 1978. The main focus of the Center is on consulting with courts, communities and government on programs, policies and adminis- trative structures that serve or impact children and families. You can contact Dr. Ricci at The New Family Center, P. O. Box 711, Tiburon, CA 94920-0711. Her telephone number is 415-435-7648 and her email address is IsolinaRicci@NewFamilyCenter.com.

(NOTE above — far above (two posts ago) — she was also formerly (or simultaneously?) on the California Judicial Council/AOC/CFCC as director, or assistant director.  )

Pauline H. Tesler, AFCC member from Mill Valley, CA, has writ- ten a new book entitled, Collaborative Law: Achieving Effective Resolution in Divorce without Litigation. Ms. Tesler has been a fre- quent AFCC presenter on the topic of Collaborative Law. The book is published by the American Bar Association Section of Family Law and may be obtained by calling (800) 285-2221.

Richard A. Warshak, AFCC member from Dallas, Texas, recently published Divorce Poison: Protecting the Parent-Child Bond from a Vindictive Ex. {{Rest assured, the Vindictive Ex is going to be female…}}The book is published by Regen Books and it provides advice for families when divorce poison is in danger of destroying relationships forever

 

WELL, I am getting a little distracted from the NH case.  But truly if you do NOT understand, or “get” AFCC, you do NOT understand family law.  They are almost the same.

 

DAVID MEDOFF:

From the NH opinion, we now pull in another player — who “just happens” to be Massachusetts-AFCC leadership:  David Medoff, Ph.D.His opinion reads like a blow-by-blow play from the parenting coordinator handbook.  The mom is delusional, and here’s how.   I could call it, “In which AFCC Pegge Ward hands off to AFCC Dr. Medoff:

That is, that Ms. Todd, after experiencing her parent’s concerns about Mr. Miller and after having experienced her own negative interactions with Mr. Miller, became increasingly convinced that Mr. Miller was harming Laurel.” Referring to a psychological report on Todd that was prepared in August 2007 by Dr. David Medoff, Dr. Ward noted that[p]sychological testing shows that Ms. Todd has a “serious impairment in her ability to accurately process the information she takes in from her surroundings and the degree of misperception she demonstrates has major implications for her adaptive functioning. Ms. Todd’s level of distortion is substantial and predisposes her to misunderstanding and misconstruing intentions, motivations and actions of other people. This places her at great risk for faulty judgment, for errors in decision-making, and for behaving in ways that are based on inaccurate information. These data indicate that Ms. Todd will not only fail to recognize or foresee the consequences of her actions at times, but that she will also become confused at times in separating fantasy from reality.”As Dr. Ward explained,Ms. Todd has the liability of distortion of information and failure to accurately identify intentions, motivations and behavior of others. Ms. Todd’s emotional state placed her at risk for misinterpreting information that she gained from her environment, adamantly believing that Laurel was sexually abused, and acting with full force on this information.

In making her recommendations, Dr. Ward cautioned that “[w]hile it is unlikely that Mr. Miller has sexually abused Laurel, it is not possible to say with an absolute certainty that he did not.

 
Now, I am going to inflict on the readers the rundown on Dr. Medoff.  This site doesn't mention his role at AFCC, probably wisely:

http://dmedoff.com/

Forensic Psychological Assessment Services by David Medoff, Ph.D.

David Medoff, Ph.D. is a licensed psychologist and tenured Associate Professor in private practice specializing in forensic psychological assessment. He is the former Co-Director of the Children and the Law Program at the Massachusetts General Hospital and holds dual academic appointments as an Associate Professor at Suffolk University and as an Instructor at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Medoff is the Director of the Mental Health Counseling Program at Suffolk University and is a Designated Forensic Psychologist. He is also a Certified Juvenile Court Clinician Mentor I and II. He performs a wide variety of forensic evaluations with specialization in forensic psychological testing, psychodiagnostic evaluations, high conflict custody disputes** and the assessment of sexual offenders. Dr. Medoff regularly presents at international, national and regional conferences, writing, teaching and lecturing on a wide variety of forensic and clinical topics.

((**that's your AFCC flag -- we'll see later what the involvement is))

Dr. Medoff has published numerous articles on a wide variety of clinical and forensic matters including the scientific basis of psychological testing, theuse of psychological testing in the forensic domain, juvenile sexual offenders and the major psychoses. He has presented at numerous professional workshops and seminars on a variety of subject matters including expert testimony, the use of psychological expert consultants, risk assessment, psychodiagnostic evaluations, child abuse and neglect, adolescent and adult psychopathology and legal risk management for clinical practice.He obtained his Bachelor’s Degree in Psychology from Boston University in 1986 and his Master’s and Doctoral degrees from Fairleigh Dickinson University in 1993 and 1995, respectively. {{in PSYCHOLGY?}} Following his academic training, Dr. Medoff completed his Pre-Doctoral Internship at the Children’s Hospital – Boston, Harvard Medical School and his Post-Doctoral Fellowship at the Children and the Law Program at the Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School.

He sounds highly academic with a genuine interest in the professional fields of both medicine AND the law — however, his expertise and emphasis has been primarily psychology, it would seem.

As such an avid student, certainly he might also be quite interested in teaching, and is doing so….What a huge spectrum of services to do while also being an associate professor:  http://dmedoff.com/spectrum.htmHere is his AFCC connection — President of the Massachusetts Chapter (reminder — it has a direct connection to the courts through Sean Dunphy, etc. in MA) and this  is a member interview, Spring 2010.If Ward & Medoff represent two independent professionals, it coulda fooled me.

Here they are BOTH on faculty of an April 2011 (Note — This decision was im March, 2011) at a keynote meeting featuring Warshak, i.e., “Parental Alienation:  Not just Another Custody Case.”   The lineup went approximatelyh like this:

FRIDAY, April 15, 20118:00 AM Registration and Continental Breakfast8:20 AM Introductory remarks David Medoff, Ph.D. President Massachusetts Chapter of AFCCPeggie Ward, Ph.D. Conference Chair8:30 – 10:15 AM Parental Alienation Richard Warshak Ph.D.10:15 – 10:30 AM Break with refreshments10:30 AM – 12:00 PM Parental Alienation (cont.) Richard Warshak, Ph.D.12:00-1:00 PM Lunch is providedComments: David Medoff, Ph.D., President Lesley Goldsmith, J.D., President-Elect Massachusetts Chapter of AFCC

Now,no matter what the facts of the Todd & Miller case, just what do you think (Gentle Reader) the odds are that it wouldn’t be labeled “Parental Alienation”?and punishment of some sort be recommended to counter the alienation?  This was a couple who met over the internet (for Pete’s sake!) and in which Dad’s move when the kids were real little was to attempt on Christmas 2003 to completely take them from the mother– sole legal and physical custody order, ex parte — and he GOT it.. (Another therapist also had to be demoted in this process).  Now for reunification therapy…(New Hampshire opinion, again):

The court noted that although Miller had already identified a reunification therapist, Todd had “made no such effort whatsoever.” The court ordered that the parties immediately contact Kelly Khachadourian to begin the therapeutic reunification process, that Todd immediately reenroll in counseling, and that her therapist be given a copy of Dr. Ward’s evaluation and Todd’s own psychological evaluation.

Ms. Todd's interest in the financial background of all this therapy, etc. had to also be dismissed and ridiculed....

The January 7, 2008 order setting forth a plan for restoring the relationship “failed in relatively short order.” The court attributed responsibility for its failure to both parties: “[Miller] because of his insistence and belligerence with the reunification therapist” and Todd “because of her fanciful concern about the therapist’s ‘fraudulent billing’ of insurance.” 

(probably therefore an area to investigate IF data could be gotten; fraudulent billing is a HALLMARK of these professions. and has been documented as far back as 1999 (Karen Anderson case, Amador County; Viola Stroud in Shockome case, Dutchess County, NY, etc.)And she’s not to consider a former therapist that DID say, abuse:

Further, the court denied Todd’s request to depose the children’s former therapist, stating that Todd’s “representation that [the therapist] is the source for her conviction that the children were sexually abused is, at this point, irrelevant; whatever the source of her belief, the fact is that she continues to hold to it no matter the evidence to the contrary.”

Though I wasn’t there, this sure sounds like Ms. Todd feeling that there might actually BE some “evidence to the contrary” and the omitted therapist’s name might a source of it…. which the court was not interested in making public…Now more problems — a little girl discloses fears in school, bringing retaliation:

In April 2009, the guardian ad litem filed a statement with the court indicating that Laurel’s first grade teacher had reported that on April 20 Laurel began to cry in class and disclosed that during her most recent visit with her father he said that he was going to hurt her mother and there was nothing she could do to stop him. In response, Miller (father) filed a motion to modify custody ofthe children due to new acts of child abuse. Following a hearing, the court denied the motion. The court noted that it understood that [Miller] fears that this new allegation, when combined with previous ones and the recent one in March, is a “slippery slope” spiraling into new and more serious ones.

The appeal had a unique twist in that the couple was unmarried, this appears to have helped the result also:  "

Third, he (Miller) argues that Supreme Court Rule 3 providing for mandatory review of appeals involving married parents but discretionary review of appeals involving non-married parents is unconstitutional.

And — in my MOST obnoxiously long post of the year, probably, we finally come full circle to the 3rd mental health professional brought in on this case.  Seeing the stacking of 1, 2, 3, professionals (all AFCC, all PAS-oriented) led me eventually to the PCANH.org site and the title of this post.  And that is

Dr. Benjamin Garber:

(I am getting truly tired of this — probably you have by now a sense of who AFCC is and what types of activities its members are engaged in, mostly keeping custody matters swirling, business humming and the referrals coming — by writing it into legislation, if necessary.  And that’s not including starting “CFCC’s at the University levels (law schools), in order to keep the Paradigm Shift coming a little faster, if possible.

Dr. Garber — who incidentally (see last post) is co-foundoer of PARENTAL COORDINATION ASSOCIATION OF NEW HAMPSHIRE (which I treated us samples ofto last post) — has a VERY full website, last I checked, called HealthyParent.com

 

HealthyParent.com

His CV on this lists:

  • Psychologist New Hampshire License 475
  • Parenting Coordinator
  • Guardian ad litem New Hampshire Certificate 2005

and the email is “papaben@healthyparent.com”

I think the number of links on the site speak for themselves — about 5 streams of income and practice:

 

Can Dr. Garber speak to my group?Is Dr. Garber accepting new patients?Can Dr. Garber help me in court?
Order Dr. Garber's books and HealthyParent resourcesInformation for referring family law professionals

 

Naturally I clicked on the side link with “Court-related services” bringing up this:

Dr. Garber works with the courts
in several distinct roles to educate, evaluate
and intervene in the best interests of children.


For referring family law professionals

Dr. Garber enters family law matters as a child advocate
providing:

Click here to learn more Guardian ad litem services
Click here to learn more Parenting Coordinator services
Click here to learn more Child-centered expert opinion
Click here to learn more Responding to “alienation” 
Click here to learn more Developmental evaluation
Click here to learn more Termination (TPR)  “social study”
Systems (“custody”) evaluation Click here to leran more
Education to the court Click here to leran more
“Reunification” facilitation Click here to leran more
Co-parenting facilitation Click here to leran more
Parenting capacity evaluation Click here to leran more
Child and family therapies Click here to leran more

Frequently Asked QuestionsWhat is alienation?What is a CCFE?
Dr. Garber's professional publicationsWhich hat to wear?American Psychological Association custody guidelines
Association of Family and Concilaition CourtsNH Board Mental Health PracticeNH Family Courts

 

 

Keeping Kids Out Of The Middle (Garber, 2008)

I rest my case that, whether in Massachusetts, Indiana, California, New Hampshire, Canada, Pennsylvania, Ohio — or Texas,

it’s “Houston, we have a problem” regarding the undue influence and intent to shift legal paradigms in

 

AFCC

i.e., this association of expert, PAS-spouting (does it ever save a mother‘s custody status?) professionals running the family law field.

So, how many experts does it take to screw in a _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ?

 

Not everyone can be an “expert” — they are going to run out of people to practice on.  This is why the FIRST step was to pass a law, or set of laws, giving the STATE jurisdiction WHENEVER there was a custody dispute, and coaching and training everyone to follow this.  Or lose your kids.

And the organization didn’t even start paying taxes til they were caught evading them.  Another practice that probably hasn’t changed, since.



Overcoming Barriers in Natick Massachusetts filed its first tax return only in 2011 and seems like a REAL “minimalist” organization.  They were, however, as recently as November 2015 (still on the website) advertising an training for clinicians to learn the “OBC” method — for only, just about, $2,000 (or a little less for early bird registration).  Compare that to the size of their latest tax return posted to “990finder.foundationcenter.org” (which was for year 2014):

Building Family Resilience From The Ground Up

As Overcoming Barriers (OCB) has grown from an original program prototype to a national organization working to expand and deliver programs throughout the US and Canada, we have recognized the critical importance of training to the success of OCB’s mission. While expanding the scope of programming is ultimate goal, maintaining the quality and integrity of the program delivery is essential to positive outcomes for families and long-term success.

OCB provides programs for for post-divorce/separation families caught in intractable parental conflict, bringing the entire family together in a positive, fun, clinically supported, natural environment, to practice skills as a reorganized family. The OCB Approach is unlike the prevailing adversarial court paradigm that engenders distrust and conflict engagement, while consuming public resources with little resolution of parental conflict. OCB has developed and refined a “whole family” intervention, a creative alternative to the ineffective adversarial court process or conventional therapeutic interventions. OCB has run High-Conflict Family Camps annually since 2008, working with the most entrenched families in the country, largely court-ordered to attend.

Sharon Ryan Montgomery, Psy.D., and Marcy Pasternak, Ph.D., had both been doing family forensic work in New Jersey in private practice for many years, including child custody & parenting time evaluations, therapy for individuals and families, mediation, and parenting coordination. They were both finding cases involving child alienation to be the most tragic as well as difficult to treat, and that the common treatment of weekly family/reunification therapy was generally inadequate to shift the family dynamics in a meaningful way.

They began to hear about intensive family treatments, including residential family programs such as the OCB camp conducted by leading experts in the field. Resultantly, Sharon had referred some entrenched families to the camp, and Marcy served as an after-care therapist for one OCB family. Encouraged by their experience with OCB, they reached out to see if they could visit the camp and observe the treatment model for themselves.

Sharon and Marcy attended an OCB outreach event in NYC in the fall of 2012. Robin Deutsch, Ph.D., was present and they discussed their desire to observe camp. Shortly thereafter, OCB announced that there would be opportunity for clinical trainees to attend and observe the Family Camp in summer 2013. They both applied and were accepted.

In the summer 2013, Sharon and Marcy participated in OCB’s first clinical training at camp, learning the model, observing the families and interventions remotely, and participating in the team discussions and the camp milieu. “We found it to be a powerful and amazing experience.” *

As a continuation of the OCB training model, Sharon and Marcy were invited to attend camp the following summer as clinical fellows, to co-lead one of the parent groups and assist clinical staff in family interventions.

Make a “wild” guess — does it sound like “Sharon and Marcy” might have already been AFCC groupie-professionals before coming to this training and writing rave-review testimonials of their (AFCC) colleagues methods?

How does such a wildly successful camp barely raise any money, and not break $100K assets after four years in operation (NOTE:  They said, camps started in 2008, so that’s only counting years for which revenues were actually reported under this name.  Click through to bottom row tax return, and it does indeed have “Initial return” checked and state that starting cash balance (bottom of page 1) was “0” and ending, around $55K.    Just take a look! (Click Organization name for any year to see the return):

Search Again

ORGANIZATION NAME ST YR FORM PP TOTAL ASSETS EIN
OVERCOMING BARRIERS INC MA 2014 990EZ 13 $29,286.00 01-0909327
OVERCOMING BARRIERS INC MA 2013 990EZ 13 $22,740.00 01-0909327
OVERCOMING BARRIERS INC MA 2012 990EZ 11 $15,311.00 01-0909327
Overcoming Barriers Inc. MA 2012 990EZ 11 $55,356.00 01-0909327

Here’s the California Secretary of State (http://kepler.sos.ca.gov to look) Registration (checked in 2016) stating this “Massachusetts” entity has a Palo Alto, California address.  What changed when? (normally this would display in brown/tan hues on the site.

Entity Name: OVERCOMING BARRIERS, INC.
Entity Number: C3423429
Date Filed: 10/21/2011
Status: ACTIVE
Jurisdiction: MASSACHUSETTS
Entity Address: 417 TASSO STREET
Entity City, State, Zip: PALO ALTO CA 94301
Agent for Service of Process: SHERROL CASSEDY
Agent Address: 417 TASSO STREET
Agent City, State, Zip: PALO ALTO CA 94301
Their 2015 “Intensive Training” took place at Dallas International Airport and was co-sponsored by “Calvert Partners, PLLC” (in Texas), with the “Calvert” representing one of the first 50 prescribing psychopharmacologists in the US — but send the checks to 417 Tasso Street in Palo Alto….there is a $200 nonrefundable “administration fee,” etc.

Immersion Training took place in December 2015

Family Intensive Intervention

A specialized and unique program for clinicians working with post-separation problems where children resist contact with a parent.  Legal professionals who are interested in attending this training, please contact Dr. Peggie Ward at peggiewardphd@gmail.com for more information.

December 3 & 4, 2015

Dex Media Hotel and Conference Center

(Conveniently located on the grounds of the Dallas, Texas airport)

Details

Follow a family role-play throughout two days of an intensive family intervention with real time guiding narrative provided by the training director. Training also includes small group discussions with the Overcoming Barriers training team that includes the Overcoming Barriers founders and innovators:

Robin M. Deutsch, Ph.D., ABPP (scroll down to bottom of page for bio)

Barbara Jo Fidler, Ph.D., C.Psych (scroll down to bottom of page for bio)

Peggie Ward, Ph.D. (scroll down to bottom of page for bio)

Mental health professionals face significant challenges trying to assist families when a child is resisting contact with a parent after separation/divorce.

This 20 hour immersion training offers an exciting and innovative training experience using actors role playing a typical family. Through a unique combination of advance webinars, both prior to and after the live training, observation of the live intervention with the “family” and debriefing time with the training team, trainees will learn the nuts and bolts of the intensive whole family intervention from intake and contracting, through multiple clinical interventions to aftercare planning.

The training team, all members of the Overcoming Barriers Board, are experienced Clinical Psychologists and educators with decades of experience working with High Conflict families and present and publish nationally and internationally.

Continuing Education

Calvert Partners LogoContinuing education will be offered to participants through our training co-sponsor Calvert Partners, PLLC.

Calvert Partners, PLLC is approved by the American Psychological Association to sponsor continuing education for psychologists. Calvert Partners, PLLC maintains responsibility for this program and its content.  More info on Calvert Partners here at their website.  <=<=<=

CALVERT PARTNERS and ADVISORY STAFF (notice the “Southern Connection”):

Who We Are

Principals

James D. Calvert, Ph.D., MSCP – Jim is the president of Calvert Partners, PLLC.  He is a licensed psychologist and lecturer at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, TX.  He has spent over 20 years in healthcare as a psychologist, program director, training director, clinical director, and executive director at community mental health agencies, hospitals, and private practices.  He also taught psychology and organizational development at numerous universities.  Jim obtained his bachelor’s degree from Clemson University and his Ph.D. in clinical psychology from Louisiana State University.  He obtained a postdoctoral Master’s degree in psychopharmacology from Fairleigh Dickinson University and was one of the first 50 psychologists in the U.S. to be licensed as a prescribing psychologist.  He is currently the CE Director for APA Division 55 (Pharmacotherapy) publication.

Caitlin Schraufnagel, Ph.D. – Caitlin is senior principal at Calvert Partners.  She is a licensed psychologist specializing in assessment, behavioral neurology, and wellness.  She has lived in Australia, New Zealand, and France and brings a multicultural perspective to her work.  She has worked in community agencies, hospitals, and private practice.  She has been a clinical training director and supervisor, and has taught at the University of North Texas.  She obtained her undergraduate and doctoral degrees from the University of North Texas.

Consultants:

Terri Bauer, LCSW, LSOTP – Terri is on our advisory council for education and training.

Michaeleen Burns, Ph.D. – Micki is on our advisory council for education and training.

PhD in what? LSOTP?  Readers might want to realize that “LSOTP” stands for “Licensed Sex Offender Treatment Provider…”

Licensed Mental Health Professionals in Texas-A Fact Sheet

http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/…/lmh_fa&#8230;

Texas Department of State Health Services

The LCSW has also completed at least two years of professional, supervised … A licensed sex offender treatment provider (LSOTP) is a mental health …

Terri L. Bauer, L.C.S.W., L.S.O.T.P.

Board Member (Sex Offender Treatment, Council on)

Term Ends: 02-01-2019

General Information

Home Town: McKinney

Personal Information

Bauer is a licensed clinical social worker, licensed sex offender treatment provider, and director of the Collin County Juvenile Probation Department Juvenile Sex Offender program. She is a member of the National Association of Social Workers, and a trainer and guest speaker for the Collin County Child Advocacy Center. Bauer received a bachelor’s degree and master’s degree in social work from The University of Texas at Arlington. Reappointed 3/12/13

Wow.  That’s “re-assuring” when it comes to training people for reunification camp clinical work.  Check out the board chairman of this Texas council (has an MDiv from Reformed Theological Seminary, self-employed in Plano, Texas…).
Someone should review Overcoming Barrier’s charitable registration status in California and if they are reporting any government income (likely, not).  In the 990 Form-EZ, this doesn’t have to be reported but on a state “RRF” form, it does.  It’s not my blogging priority at this point — and it takes no advanced degrees, or even a bachelors’,  to do.  See “How to look up a nonprofit” or google “Search California Charitable Registry,” pick a search field to fill in, and start clicking and reading.
I’d keep an eye on that group’s activities, especially with the abnormally low revenues being reported.

How in heck can a non-expert understand these systems? Well, Behold, the humble Human….

leave a comment »

??  Some friends of mine asked for a visual on how to keep the players AND organizations AND associations AND fundings straight.  Well, at least they asked me for some diagrams of what I’ve written here.   I’m graphically challenged, but we can visualize systems we do know, to get a grasp on the complex goings on in the courts (and around them) we don’t, so well.

The best way to understand something strange is in terms of something else familiar.  So here we go:

Imagine the human body.  To get from the head to the extremities there are a variety of networked systems, such as for Blood (old, & new)  and muscular activity of course helps.  We know that the heart pumps and that movement of the legs help also.  Also that blood is oxygen rich or oxygen depleted — going through the lungs changes this.

I guess the “heart” of the Family Law System might be called two basic private, nonprofit organizations, (left ventricle, right ventricle — whatever), let’s say for example, Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) & the Children’s Rights Council (CRC).   Both these organizations have:

  • Founding members, with often two agendas:  One, declared to the public, Another, which their actions show
  • For example, AFCC is often positioned IN government, i.e., membership includes judges and/or those who train judges.
  • A financial history for these nonprofit corporations.
  • A FUNDING history for these nonprofit corporations — where is the income stream?
  • A chronological growth & expansion history — how did they grow, where are members positioned in society?
  • Areas of special emphasis and a courtesy respect not to overlap too much.
  • Relationships to certain branches of the US Government
  • International / Global aspirations which they are fulfilling
  • A common desire to get access to certain kinds of traumatized children for coaching or rescuing purposes
  • Complementary functions  — for example, getting a contract  (with Government) & fulfilling a contract.
  • Seemingly/allegedly separate organizations with members in common.  This is telltale.
  • A mouthpiece in the firm of professional publication
  • Tend to hang out and self-refers with related associations of professionals in the fields, for example, APA, ABA,AAML, etc.
For example AFCC might be lobbying, teaching, and policy-setting, including pushing for access/visitation centers.   CRC is among the network of Access/Visitation center providers (and the originator of the term).
Another set of related organizations (with some members) may include, for example:
Center for Policy Research (CPR) a NONprofit in Denver — a small, but real influential group, a  Policy Studies Inc.  (PSI) a FOR profit in Denver, also in Oklahoma, where it facilitates the Healthy Marriage project.    If CPR is the brain , PSI is nervous system  CPR is positioned to and gets the contracts (and apparently suggests, evaluates, etc.) PSI fulfils them.  PSI terms itself “Health and Human Services Outsourcing and Consulting.”  Obviously, they are getting contracts with the (US) Dept. of “HHS.”  So the “squeeze” comes from federal funding [and the IRS/Office of Child Support Enforcement (US Gov’t, under HHS), for example, would be the muscles.]
A few different types of circulating body systems:

Arterial:

  or if you will or

http://www.nutrientgarden.com/cardiovascularsupport.aspx

But as we know, human bodies have a nervous system, for example, and a lymphsystem.  The lymph system has no pump.   It’s a very important system, though:  “

The lymphatic system is an extensive drainage network that helps keep bodily fluid levels in balance and defends the body against infections. It is made up of a network of lymphatic vessels that carry lymph — a clear, watery fluid that contains protein molecules, salts, glucose, urea, and other substances — throughout the body.

The spleen, which is located in the upper left part of the abdomen under the ribcage, works as part of the lymphatic system to protect the body, clearing worn out red blood cells and other foreign bodies from the bloodstream to help fight off infection.

About the Spleen and Lymphatic System

One of the lymphatic system’s major jobs is to collect extra lymph fluid from body tissues and return it to the blood. This process is crucial because water, proteins, and other substances are continuously leaking out of tiny blood capillaries into the surrounding body tissues. If the lymphatic system didn’t drain the excess fluid from the tissues, the lymph fluid would build up in the body’s tissues, and they would swell.”

{{BEST THING I HEARD TO HELP — Rebounding.  Jump up and down a lot, there’s something about this.  }}

The Human Nervous System. Red is CNS and blue is PNS.

And of course respiratory & digestive systems, i.e, the alimentary canal has sometimes been called the second “brain”.    All of these have to work together, and when one is overstressed, it affects the others, and requires compensation.   The skeletal system. . . . .  Muscular system, etc.

And the organs to go with various systems, i.e., lungs, brain, heart, liver, etc.  Unbelievably detailed, complex and functional, but with similarity of origin (we all started with ovum & sperm.  All that power and those systems from such a tiny start).

(Psalmist, psalm 139, reflecting on this:  “O LORD, You have searched me and known me.. . . Where can I go from Your Spirit?
Or where can I flee from Your presence?
For You formed my inward parts;
You covered me in my mother’s womb.
14 I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made;[b]
Marvelous are Your works,
And 
that my soul knows very well.

Like the human body, the court system (etc., etc.) not only has a static diagram of its various components (like the dry drawings above, as if no movement happened), but it most certainly also has a history.  A moment of conception, when a gleam in the eye happened, and then took action.

However, the family law system, the courts in which family law is practices, is actually a graft.  It grafted in the marriage counselors, the “fixers” the psychologists, psychiatrists, therapists, mental health professionals, resulting in the HYBRID form called “Therapeutic Jurisprudence”  — where Mental Health Vocabulary meets written statutes,  and after years of association, neither is itself again, or remembers what previously existed.  Unlike, say, basic human reproduction, this set of systems, associations, networks, and laws, was NOT a natural development. It was absolutely sold, promoted, and lobbied for by the very people whose professions depend on the forcing of counseling (and other consumption of products & services) upon parents who separate and disagree on who does what.  And many of its origins can be identified.

  to   

(Drawing of single fetus URL = Wikipedia on “fetal movement”)

(Fetal Growth image URL)

(“The statue of David was started by a different artist, Agostino di Duccio, in 1463. He picked out a rather narrow piece of stone, which was customary for artists of his denomination. If you are an art expert, you can see from the side that this is not a piece that Michelangelo would have picked. It is too thin. The front [not shown] however, did not come out too bad…”)

(This bronze resin sculpture:  woman standing, back may be for sale, see link:  “Zhang Yaxi” )

DIFFERENCES between these system and the Family Law system:

Living things, with nourishment, tend to grow to the point of no return, and have a sort of “set point” beyond which they don’t expand, with certain exceptions.  For example, there are all heights of human beings, but so far, the range doesn’t go beyond 10 feet tall, does it?   There seem to be some inherent limits.  While affected by various things, they have a certain common DNA, overall, and are not going to stray TOO far from this, I believe.

Unnatural, but networking and growing fauna & flora, continue to take over the landscape, strangling previous or healthier indigenous plants.

Unlike human life, which can either reach its term limit through old age, or be shortened any number of artifical ways, Family Law seems to have no inherent “term limit” but is continually expanding; children are born daily.  Many of these children will have divorcing or separating parents.   It doesn’t run into natural boundaries, like skin, or the force of gravity, or lack of balance, in which a too-obese person simply cannot stand up.  It grows by conferences, internet-disseminated information, watered by grants and foundations and institutes, and populated by trainers, professors, and promoters.   While some of these may grow old, they at least replace themselves by coaching from the University level up, (at a minimum).  It will NOT likely run out of clients (barring a boycott — possibly a good idea) unless enough mothers and fathers get smart enough (couple by couple) and simply don’t go through its doors to start with.  The way a family generally “terms out” of the family law system is the children age out, or someone gives up, or someone is killed, or they simply run out of energy & money — in which case, if the children haven’t been removed into foster care yet (for which federal incentives exist), no more use for the family.

By law, any time a couple (married or unmarried) has a custody dispute — my understanding is, the COURT has jurisdiction.  If there are married couples NOT fighting or separating — but a grandparent is upset about visitation, or the couple is not mainstream enough, there’s always the possibility of engaging CPS, which has happened both when parents seek alternate treatment for, say cancer or asthma — or when their children are not in the local public school, and they aren’t rich.

This is likely why one writer (quoted below) titled a piece “Court Cancer Metastasizes.”  Something changed, and began rapidly reproducing.

FAMILY LAW VERSUS REAL FAMILIES / HUMAN BODY:

Thinking about this, there’s a history, an origin, a conception.   Just like a child could be started with a number of motives, or excuses for (insert birds & bees discussion) — the fact is, sperm, egg, fertilized, happens SOMEWHERE (in vitro, out of vitro) and growth.

You cannot understand this system unless you understand at least a few things about the AFCC (as it’s now called):

  • Someone passed a law to enable it.  See “Roger & Meyer,” section, below….
  • The goal included getting people in front of counselors.
  • Mental health perspective was in from the START and has really gotten out of hand now.
  • No matter how I look at this, or others, several people understand quite clearly that what is now the world-famous and highly positioned “AFCC” began:
  • as a private, nonprofit, judges’ association hiding in the Los Angeles County Courthouse and using its EIN# (Tax ID) without accounting for funds properly.  As such it was an insult to the integrity of the judicial system.
  • Seemed to have little conscience about shape-shifting, incorporating in state, out of state, name-changing, and FINALLY getting caught up with and becoming “legitimate” as a nonprofit, supposedly a “new” one.
  • From what I read, no sooner did it finally register legally as a “new” nonprofit (outside California) than the original founder, Meyer Elkin, took over the leadership.  Review at:  “Beware AFCC” from “stopcourtorderedchildabuse.org — or read my post, “Beware AFCC and Reform the Courts? What an oxymoron“.  As late as 1979 (one source says) the one form (“Conference of Conciliation Courts”) got suspended by the Franchise Tax Board.
  • AFCC members of course do not see it this way; as I saw yesterday, a woman in Minnesota attended a conference called “Solomon’s Surrogates”

Roger (Alton Pfaff) and Meyer (Elkin):  Dynamic Duo in Family Law

(searched..outside the mutual-adoration of the AFCC circles…)

I found a 1966 TIME article, revealing . . . . . .    it reads:

What the U.S. really needs is something far more drastic: a complete new approach that totally banishes “fault” and all its sleazy consequences. The most sensible solution would be a system that readily grants divorce only after skilled clinicians confirm that a marriage is beyond repair. In many cases, divorce might be harder to get; in all, it would be far more humane.

(Marriage as a sick puppy needing a good vet…..)

While insisting that divorce be made a more rational process, most marriage experts also believe that many of the divorces that now take place can be prevented. One of the most effective, though not yet widespread, ways of helping to prevent divorce is the conciliation court. Eighteen states have already set up more than three dozen such courts, many of which try to mend marriages with the aid of full-time staff psychologists and social workers. The courts have an overall record of intact marriages in 33% of the cases voluntarily brought before them. They try to get the couple to communicate with each other once more, to concentrate on what they have in common rather than what separates them and to analyze for themselves the problems that are interfering with their marriage.

hence the name “Conciliation” as in “REconciliation.”  So much for “irreconciliable differences”!

Psychologists and Social workers still doing this today.

In Toledo, [Ohio] Judge Paul W. Alexander’s much-admired conciliation court averts divorce in 44% of the cases it tackles. In Los Angeles, Judge Roger A. Pfaff’s conciliation court gets 50% of its business from lawyers who refer unhappy spouses even before they file divorce suits. With the aid of eleven highly trained counselors who must have at least ten years’ experience, Pfaff’s court helps more than 4,000 volunteer couples a year, gets 60% of them to make up and sign detailed “husband-wife” agreements that have the force of law. “Divorce courts throughout America are burying marriages that are still alive,” says Meyer Elkin, Pfaff’s supervising counselor. The success of conciliation courts proves that it is perfectly possible to create a rational divorce system that saves as well as severs—if the U.S. wants it

Conciliation court as receiving referral business from divorce attorneys.

Pfaff was the Judge, Elkin the counselor.  Get it?  Oh yes, the 1966 comments:

Mating at Random

Another reason for a more realistic appraisal of divorce laws is a deeper understanding of what causes marital breakups. While sex, money and incompatibility are the traditional reasons for divorce, a mobile and changing urban society has loosened many of the bonds that once held marriage together, depriving men of their absolute dominance, giving women a large measure of economic independence and weakening the sense of kinship (i.e., men’s absolute dominance + women’s utter economic dependence = stronger kinship = good?)

and a nice religious reference (TIME, 1966…)

“The divorce rate is a social symptom of increased respect for personal freedom and for genuine marriage commitment.”

That is a far cry from Christ’s unequivocal condemnation of the Mosaic right of Jewish husbands to banish their wives at will: “What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,842452,00.html#ixzz1P1f1mSR1

Marv Byer (“Johnnypumphandle.com”) had quite a different opinion of Elkin & Pfaff, especially after spending $100K to help his daughter retain custody.  In his 1998 Tort claim, he calls (the ring of judges) an “underground mafia posing as the City of Los Angeles.”  He says …

and of Elkin & Pfaff:  

CONCLUSION: My family and myself have been robbed of our money and our rights by a conspiracy that has operated since 1962. In 1962 a JUDGE NAMED ROGER ALTON PFAFF and his cohort – MEYER ELKIN. The association was called the CONFERENCE OF CONCILIATION COURTS. This association routed money through the LOS ANGELES COUNTY CONCILIATION COURT -111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles California, 90012, ROOM 241. In 1969 – the association incorporated and has NEVER PAID taxes. Assuming they used EIN 95-6000927 – then duping the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT was easy. In 1979 the corporation was suspended. There is no record that they surrendered their bank account or the EIN  (paras. in reverse order)

The ACCUSED are part of an underground of white collar criminals who are involved in the theft of CITY, COUNTY, STATE, and FEDERAL money. The scheme started before their time as an organization known as the CONFERENCE OF CONCILIATION COURTS. That organization changed its identity and assumed the name ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY CONCILIATION COURTS. Using various identity changes, the organization was listed in the LOS ANGELES SUPERVISORS DIRECTORY in 1993 as JUDGES TRUST FUND ACCOUNTING.

But for general purposes the typical “Mutt & Jeff” combo in the family law arena is going to have — at a minimum

  • One Judge or representative from the legal profession
  • One Social Worker, Mental Health Professional, Psychiatrist, etc.
  • At least ONE nonprofit with some typically shady origins, or which the Judge, Social worker (or close cohorts) just happen to have started.

ALSO, (by the way) as Liz Richards of NAFCJ.net describes this dynamic duo:

  • Meyer Elkin, co-founder of AFCC, was also a CRC co-founder. Both organizations are heavily cross-affiliated. 
  • The AFCC runs front companies which develop, implement and evaluate federal facade programallegedly assisting troubled families and children

here is a 1982 Article by Meyer; the abstract shows he wants a complete change to the system.  Note:  His buddy was a judge, but he was a counselor.

Abstract

Challenging the traditional and outmoded approach to divorce, the author, using a systems approach, proposes interrelated changes (the missing links) in the divorce process and related legal practices. {{INTENT TO CHANGE LEGAL PRACTICES}}
The resulting new and interprofessional structure for the divorce experience would provide for a more humanistic approach to divorce,  {{i.e., Elkin & his ilk, not being in the legal field, could thereby get in there…}}
create a system of non-adversarial practices that would enable the law itself to become a more effective support system, maximize client self-determination, redefine the role of the judge and attorney in divorce, and would recognize that parents are forever and families are forever.
The new structure is designed to enable divorcing families to grow with the divorce experience {???} rather than be defeated by it. In his presentation, the author stresses the need for greater interprofessional cooperation between the law and the helping professions, as well as the, need for judges and attorneys to recognize that, in divorce, feelings are also facts and that the search for truth involves both the objective facts and the feeling facts.

That was 1982.  This is 2011.  Would you say that theory has changed yet?    No.  And it’s not going to, either. Because the STRUCTURE and INTENT of this type of court is what it says it is — a search for “feeling facts” and the “parents forever, families forever” being forced.

2004 Summary lists names, organizations, and intersections:

Another summary (from an on-line family law discussion group) dating to 2004.  “Custody Corruption Summary/Liz Richards”

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FAMILYCOURTREFORM/message/16472

This is a pretty good read because at the bottom it lists many of the “Associations” (as in of Family Mediators, or of Matrimonial Lawyers, or of Family & Conciliation courts, etc.).  There are some weird characters in the text.  In case the link ever breaks, I’ll also copy it into my url (so it could be read by a “hover” over the link).  This version also begins to incorporate various nonprofit leaders’ government connections, and mentions Fathers Rights.

Now that there is a little introduction here (from same source)

see if you can read 3 paras here, with some of my comments, and understand a few connections of WHO was in various nonprofits, associations, and connected with which arm of the U.S. state of Federal Government.  It will also bring in the “grants” theme:

PARAGRAPH 1:

The A/V Program, began in 1988, with grants to Iowa CRC Iowa Chapter Director and Fathers for Equal Rights, Dick Woods, through the backing of Sen. Harkin, then Senate Chairman for Appropriations Subcommittee for HHS, and Bonnie Campbell, then IA Attorney General, currently Director of DoJ Office for Violence Against Women.

Now, isn’t that interesting!

While the stated objective of the program has been to assist visitation enforcement for non-custodial parents, in practice, the program acts as a kick-back scheme for CRC litigating members and their AFCC affiliated court professionals.

And once one gets in the door, like dust, or fleas, or other not-natural-to-the-habitat flora — they multiply.   We have identified the practice now — and this is how AFCC started — as an UNDER the radar, tax-evading nonprofit slush fund — from what I can tell..  Not to mince words…..

A/V grants are steered {{Grants / Steered}}  to CRC chapter members or their allies. AFCC affiliated judges, attorneys, psychologists and given financial incentive to favor the CRC litigating members who get their civil litigation attorney fees paid from A/V funds.  Gardner, Underwager and other members of the pro-pedophilia psychological movement are used as expert witness for custody and child abuse evaluations.

So far in this post, I didn’t bring up Gardner, or pedophilia or any of that.  However, it’s at the center of the strife along with the money incentive.

PARAGRAPH 2:

Center for Policy Research (CPR), officials, Jessica Pearson (also an original incorporating officer of the AFCC) and Nancy Thoennes, did the evaluations for the (A/V)  and Child Access demo project, developed in associated with Dick Woods, IA – a state chapter director for the CRC.  Wood’s material relies heavily on Gardner’s work and he is known to refer cases to Gardner.

Notice next sentence — this is the CPR/PSI connection and that dynamic duo is Jessica Pearson & Nancy Theonnes (both CPR).  Theya re going to come to one conclusion in their evaluation — but practice the opposite:

While CPR’s Nancy Thoennes, was the author of the federal granted study which discredited PAS and Gardner, both Thoennes and Pearson have been actively involved in the CRC’s promotion of the A/V programs.  CPR conceals all their pro-CRC, pro-Gardner affiliation when making public statements about custody and child sex abuse.  Policy Studies, Inc. (the for-profit arm of CPR) has also been involved in these programs since inception.

{{I believe at one time I saw another CPR member (or founder), “Jane Venohr, Ph.D.” working at PSI.  Here is one link:

Jane Venohr
Dr.
Policy Studies Inc., Denver, CO

Jane C. Venohr, Ph.D.

Since 1984 PSI has conducted cutting edge research in the area of child support. An economist with years of experience dealing exclusively with child support issues, Dr. Venohr will discuss the economic basis of the “income shares formula” and will discuss the assumptions made in guidelines across the nation. She will also discuss the details of the Nebraska guidelines and engage in a panel discussion on joint custody and provide us with better understanding of the joint custody calculation. Jane C. Venohr, Ph.D. Over the past 10 years at PSI, Venohr has provided technical assistance on the development and revision of child support guidelines for over 30 states. Since completing her doctorate in economics in 1997, Venohr has assumed primary responsibility for all PSI guideline projects.

Well, she “just so happens” to also be CPR.   See?

Jessica Pearson, Ph.D., Director                         jspearson@centerforpolicyresearch.org

Dr. Pearson has 30 years of experience conducting demonstration and evaluation projects dealing with a wide range of social issues including divorce mediation, responsible fatherhood, access and visitation, educational reform, child support enforcement, and self sufficiency. Dr. Pearson has authored many reports and publications on these topics and is a regular presenter at local, state and national conferences for practitioners and policy makers.

Nancy Thoennes, Ph.D., Associate Director         nthoennes@centerforpolicyresearch.org

Dr. Thoennes has more than 30 years experience in the design of surveys and data collection forms and conducts large-scale statistical analyses using SPSS. She is a leading expert on child protection and the courts, as well as in the field of child support.

Jane Venohr, Ph.D., Research Associate      jvenohr@centerforpolicyresearch.org

 Dr. Venohr has over 20 years of experience assessing and researching Medicaid, child care, child support, and other health and human services and workforce programs. She is the nation’s leading expert on child support guidelines and has worked with over 25 states to develop and update guidelines and present them to legislatures.

(Back to “Paragraph 2” from the FamilyCourtReform group post):

Joan Kelly’s Northern California Mediation Center conducts training courses in PAS, and is a past President of the Academy of Family Mediators (AFM) another AFCC affiliate.  A/V grants are administered primarily by DHHS-Office of Child Support Enforcement.  Current Director of that Office (since 1993) is David Gray Ross, former Prince George MD judge and CRC regular speaker.  Friends of  Judge Ross say he became an early CRC participant as a result of his own divorce/child support problems and may be a CRC member.

PARAGRAPH 3:  {NOW, it gets interesting — the HHS, Federal Government, gets involved)

The A/V demo project was turned into a mandatory program in 1996, when Ron Haskins, an original CRC official (mis)used his authority as Ways & Means Subcommittee Staff Director, slipped the program  into the final language of the Welfare Reform Bill without the knowledge of most members – even of his Subcommittee. 

Besides the “conflict of interest” theme, how about “abuse of privilege”??  This is what established a $10 million per year program which inserts a “desired outcome” to the family law process, and in the process, some of the means by which this is accomplished will include (in CALIF, for example), can you say Mediation (AFCC is heavily pushing mediation, and many of its members are mediators), can you say “Parent Education” — can you say “Kids’ Turn, Kids First, Children in the Middle, For the Kids’ Sake (Canada)” and so on (and on, and on…..) ???

NOTE:  The A/V program is administered through the Federal Child Support Enforcement agency, “OCSE.”   CPR & PSI real active in child support arenas too (see their sites) and if you google Jane Venohr, she is all over the US presenting on the topic, or has been at least.     Now, here is Ron Haskins  in 2001— no longer HHS, but ovrer at “Brookings Institution,” showing his funding (Annie E. Casey Foundation) and expounding to the Committee he used to be on, about Child Support and this same program… “Hearing on Child Support and Fatherhood   June, 2001”  It has charts, and lots of text.  Just for a looksee….

Besides the A/V program – Judge Gray’s federal OCSE has created multiple clone programs for assistance of non-custodial parents, usually labeled as assistance for family with domestic violence, or disputing families.  Most of these programs are steered to AFCC ring allies in state social services agencies or state courts.  Other information shows the Clinton Administration issued a directive in 1995 ordering all departments of the government to establish fatherhood programs, which also are misused for protecting bad fathers.  CRC leaders solicit membership with promises to obtain custody before judges who are guaranteed to rule in their favor.  The CRC member cases are referred to AFCC judges, who in turn appoint court professionals who are also members of the extended ring.   Lawyers are frequently members of The American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers (AAML) while evaluators, counselors, mediators and supervisors belong to other affiliated groups such as Academy of Family Mediators (AFM) or Supervised Visitation Network.  [“Hence, the word “ring” is appropriate.]

OK, that’s enough for now.  Understanding that there will be:

  • Certain Influential People
  • Purpose — Parents Forever, Y’all need counseling…
  • Generally, a Nonprofit
  • Associations that work with each other often in individual cases.
  • The stage is often set OUTSIDE the courtroom in the Child SUpport offices, or elsewhere..  The 20 minutes of fame in a custody hearing (my state at least) will leave an individual who does not understand some basics of this system distraught, betrayed, immobilized with shock, perhaps, or caught in endless rings of trying to “explain” to a judge (or mediator, etc.)  that they just don’t understand the facts of the case.  (Who said the facts were relevant?  Where’d THAT idea sneak into the counseling agenda?)
What results, collectively, is either a SEMBLANCE of a real court (see Toronto experience, my last post), or a kangaroo court.  This is serious, it’s problemmatic — it’s a lack of an impartial judiciary AND lack of accountability as to whose money went where.  Legislation, and legislators absolutely DO get involved.

GOING BACK TO THE HUMAN BODY ANALOGY:

For what it’s worth — notice that the various diagrams may be about different systems, with different colored diagrams, and different labels — but some things are similar.  Let’s talk about that:

  1. The “vessels” carry fluids.  What are the vessels themselves, and what is the fluid?
  2. The network is continually growing and expanding (consider blood vessels, for example).
  3. What’s pumping the information through and through?
  4. What are the fluids?
A few suggestions — mine, just ways of thinking about it.  First of all, understand that the people involved are taught to think of it as a system, so we might as well, also…. Because it is.
  1. Vessels include:    Associations, Nonprofit Corporations.  Vessels include the INTERNET (by which communications and downloadable information is circulated).  These connections are sometimes funded by “Technical Assistance” grants.  The “Technical Assistance,” from what I can tell, is to set up the structures to carry certain information (fluids).  For example, websites with links and information on them.  For example hiring staff, making connections, and so forth.
  1. Another “Vessel” is a publication.  Can be on-line.  For example, the voice of the AFCC appears to be the Family COurt Review, among other things.
  2. Another “vessel” is established curricula which can then be marketed, i.e.  “Kids Turn” is the nonprofit, but the classes themselves are the material.
  • By “Train the Trainer” sessions, things are disseminated.  The funding is deductible sometimes as Continuing Education (MCLE, etc.).
  • The HeartBeat of the Family Law — AFCC conferences and trainings (associated, state, and annual).  And others
  • WHAT ARE THE “FLUIDS?”
I feel its very helpful to think in terms of ideas — and monies — as substances flowing.  I”m going to say some of the “fluids” are the rhetoric, the terminology of family law.  Other things that obviously flow are funds, finances. and so forth. Grants systems.
This is enough for one post.  If this has been helpful, please comment.     Obviously several elements are missing BUT if you can get a good system of labeling — THIS is an association, THAT is a nonprofit, THIS nonprofit is taking federal grants and foundation monies, and so forth — it will help.
After a time, I noticed the personnel talk so similar that you can just about predict — this is a highly-placed AFCC member.  THAT idea came from San Francisco, THIS one from Los Angeles, THAT one from washington, D.C. — HHS, or the Office of Faith-Based Initiatives, Bush Presidency.
I also forgot to mention the role of the universities and institutes in all this.  An “institute” is likely to be a portion of a university that certain “foundations” said, “study this, I”m going to fund it, we want this policy to be set in motion.”
Really, mastering any field — or language — has a lot to do with mastering the basic jargon.  Then it’s a matter of application.
To cut to the point,. given what I’ve seen (or looked up) in the last few months about the Domestic Violence Field, I believe that people should simply not mention it. Why? any time you burp, f*rt, or drool the word “DV” — it’s going to end up somehow or other being handled by an organization that has been centralized, diluted, and may LOOK like a battered women’s advocacy group — but probably no longer is.  They’ve become large.  It’s going to be about the money somehow, some way and the thing (individually) is to get a grasp of where it is in YOUR case and YOUR county/jurisdiction.
I have often wondered  why the good, decent, ethical, honest judges don’t just “out” the AFCC-CRC Mafia.  I’m not sure whether they’re too busy to understand, or too smart to speak up.  Or they forgot what it meant to have a nontherapeutic judicial proceeding.  Or they have threats on their lives for doing so, which is not inconceivable.
PS.  In a human body, if one set of pipes ruptures and leaks its contents out into another area of the body — particularly an area without its own drainage — serious problems can result.  Consider:  Hernia, or Hemorrhage.    Consider if you gut leaks (“Leaky Gut Syndrome”).  The contents of the alimentary canal shouldn’t be in your body cavities.  If a lung has a puncture, how can you breathe?  If an AORTA has a puncture, you’ll die, pretty much, right?
Well guess what — the US, IRS-enforced currency has cancer — to start with, let alone when more money is being printed.  It’s a permanent debt situation, and Obama is still, like preceding Presidents, recommending more money to areas that few people report on, while talking scarcity in other areas.
But as to the family law system, it began off-center, and it’s has sprung a serious “language” leak.   The language of law is important — it echoes the language of the constitution.  It’s part of the container of the ideas, including the Liberty idea.  If practices undermine the ideas, then the liberty goes.  
If the courts are to dispense therapy and “help” couples so misled as to actually wish to separate  — and this is the case, at least so the professionals imply in the conferences, for example, in how to deal with ‘flawed parents..”  — then they are desiring to function as the HEAD (without taking responsibility for it).
They take charge of the problem-children, i.e., the adults & parents coming to the courts.  They seek to counsel, guide, lead, reform, advise, and therapize.  Right?
That’s the function of the brain.  So here’s what I have to say about this type of attempt to Train others Brains:
(Soundoff:)First of all, it helps to understand the elitism behind the introduction of a multitude of “experts” into the divorce arena.  The language one hears is of a helpless populace, helpless parents, helpless children, and justice that isn’t streamlined and centralized enough.  Baloney!  Phooey!   That’s the wet dream of an underemployed therapist concerned about retirement.  People are not all idiots, helpless, numb, dumb, and so forth — except for those with a membership in a certain set of professional associations that sit in the family court oak tree.   People (both parents & kids) are human beings that are born and raised in a variety of institutions, and now SOME of these have been around long enough that its’ quite possible that the family law itself contributed to major, ongoing, generationallytransmitted problems that will continue to bring the next set of fighting over kids parents into these halls again.(end, soundoff:)
After this, we can go through some basic AFCC Vocabulary.  Another day.  Probably starting with this one:

AFCC Vocabulary, Pt. 1:  “High-Conflict”

Family Law Modeling Behavior — In which Toronto Copies USA.  Why, again?

Ms. O’Malley goes to Washington, selling SB 557 (Legislating the “One-Stop-Justice-Shop”)

with 3 comments

This post title:  Ms. O’Malley goes to Washington, selling SB 557 (Legislating the “One-Stop-Justice-Shop”) with case-sensitive short-link ending “-Hy,” published 5/29/2011 (May 29). 

Memorial Day Weekend.  Let’s remember that people who started out an organization pulling a fast one on the public -successfully – are likely to try the same thing, again.

Keep an Eye on our Public Servants: District Attorney’s Offices

Always.

Take for example (1), Los Angeles County‘s:

(By way of finding out WHY one better watch one’s local DA’s office..and make sure they know you are.)

For a clue what may happen when one doesn’t, see Gil Garcetti, L.A. D.A. (retired?)

BIOGRAPHY

Although Gil spent 32 years in the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office, eight years as the elected District Attorney, much of his life has been spent as an urban photographer. His first photo book, IRON: ERECTING THE WALT DISNEY CONCERT HALL, (November 2002, Balcony Press), received much critical praise in the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and other publications. The photographs emphasize the contribution of the ironworkers to the building of America, but they also document the beauty of the curved, angled, and bent raw steel of this building before being covered by its exterior skin.

Photographs from his second book, FROZEN MUSIC, (November 2003, Balcony Press), have been featured in multi page features in the Los Angeles Times Sunday Magazine, American Photo, Newsweek, Time, Harvard Design Magazine, California Lawyer and other magazines. Gil’s second book is his interpretation of the abstract art created by the finished building. The book is a portfolio of 45 panorama lithographs.

How Nice.

I’d love to resume arts, leisure, writing activities like this, too — or even the concept that I might have some sort of “retirement” whatsoever.  HOWEVER, thanks to this system, a lot of time is spent reconstructing where my kids, time, legal rights and finances went.  Why does it keep leading back to these offices, in particular — whose function is to prosecute crime AFTER it happens fairly, and do it right & without corruption, to the extent of their budget.  Just imagine in a world where crimes to & by men, women, and minors actually received prompt punishment as a deterrent and a message to others….

While Mr. Garcetti’s retirement plan includes urban photography and some book royalties, up here (and in San Diego), the retirement plan, I figure probably includes selling and letting someone else run, FAMILY JUSTICE CENTERS — which is why this post.  If the demand isn’t great enough for a family justice center, it helps to have a nice District Attorney well-positioned to get funds to start one anyhow, and with connections to staff it — and it appears also even connections enough to then legislate it into a business model for all times (and counties).

But this is the Los Angeles District Attorney’s legacy, here:

Pre-Retirement (from the office):

WIKIPEDIA describes — clearly from a bit of a disgruntled fathers’ perspective (and with good cause — ) his “Life as (Los Angeles) District Attorney” – First and Second Terms, 1992-2000  starting right after Rodney King riots, prosecution of O.J. Simpson, Ramparts scandal, and, as it mentions:

In the late 1990s, Garcetti’s use of default judgments in child support cases were considered by many to be particularly heinous. Garcetti openly refused to rescind judgments against men who later proved through DNA evidence that they were not the fathers in question. By 2000, 79% of paternity judgements in Los Angeles County were assigned by default.

Which is why I bring him up, as representing a Southern California leading District Attorney’s legacy…

Wikipedia (voice of the people, or at least people who write Wikipedia articles) goes on about the child support issue, a bit of heartfelt passion enters into the narrative…

Gil Garcetti created so much chaos and heartache that even diehard feminist attorney Gloria Allred protested.

Gloria Allred was a single mother in need of child support — which she went after.  As this was before the invention of the post-feminist (?) “fatherhood” movement to keep people like her in place, and also became pregnant because of a rape, possibly part of how she became a “protester” activist lawyer:  “During her years in practice, she has successfully sued Los Angeles County to stop the practice of shackling and chaining pregnant inmates during labor and delivery; put a halt on the city of El Segundo from quizzing job applicants about their sexual histories, …”

Allred, who has perhaps done more than anybody to promote the phrase and concept of ‘deadbeat dads,’ called Garcetti’s office ‘an organization without a heart, without any compassion, and without a sense of priorities…[it’s] a system run amok’… Jackie Myers, a former Deputy District Attorney under Garcetti, said that she quit her job because ‘we were being told to do unethical, very unethical things.’

Allred didn’t find out about the $14 million of collected child support cooling its heels (and earning interest) in Garcetti’s office, instead of going straight to its recipients, the children.  Richard Fine did.  The law said, if they couldn’t find the mother (parent) within 6 months, it goes back to the father.  Narrated briefly here:  When Fine saw them dismiss the Silva v. Garcetti case, it led to the discovery of payments to judges in the County (Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles).  Funny the upset for fathers wikipedia guy didn’t mention this — but MSM silence on certain cases can be effective.

This was an unbelievable mess.  Child Support collections was eventually (in CA at least) specifically removed from the province of the District Attorney’s Office, probably because of this, and now the practice of  holding onto child support collections while they collect interest (at least 30 days before anything is considered “late”) and attempt to divert them for private crony use, or otherwise seriously mess with mothers (and fathers) — is in the hands of a different centralized agency in California — and “Local CSA’s” (child support agencies) by county, for the most part.     They’re doing approximately as well when it comes to conflict of interest and honesty, but at lest someone else had a crack at screwing families financially for a change.

See?  CA.Gov

Welcome to the Department of Child Support Services Website!

California’s Child Support Services Program works with* parents – custodial and noncustodial – and guardians to ensure children and families receive court-ordered financial and medical support. Child support services are available to the general public through a network of 52 county and regional child support agencies (LCSAs).

* this must be why it’s “Child Support SERVICES” not collections, or enforcements.  How ‘holistic.’

and (from same website, different tab) a note about the administrative costs:

The May 2011 Revision updates the DCSS local assistance budget for State Fiscal Year (SFY) 2010-11 and SFY 2011-12. It provides the estimates of the administrative costs for the local child support agencies, as well as the detailed methodology for each estimate. The total administrative costs for local assistance are estimated to be $906.3 million ($277.7 million State General fund (SGF)) for SFY 2010-11 and $866.6 million ($270.8 million SGF) for SFY 2011-12.

and such financial concepts as:

Federal Performance Basic Incentives

DESCRIPTION:

This premise reflects the Federal Performance Basic Incentives. Pursuant to the Child Support Performance and Incentive Act of 1998, the federal incentives passed onto local child support agencies (LCSAs) are to be based on the five performance measures and Data Reliability Audit compliance. California’s historical performance is displayed in the Auxiliary Tables section of this document on the Historical Incentive Performance Measures chart (Chart A-10).

IMPLEMENTATION DATE:

The federal performance incentive methodology was implemented October 1, 1999 and phased in over three years.

OR, say, a measly almost $100,000 to keep the pipelines open to Strengthening Families and other Cross-Collaborations which many child support recipients (meaning payees/ payors) would be hard-pressed to comprehend, or track (if they even knew these existed).  No doubt this is far better than having ONE corrupt District Attorney’s Office simply sitting on the stuff, Los Angeles Style, until caught at it and sued to stop it:

Partnership to Strengthen Families Grant

DESCRIPTION:

This premise reflects the funds for the Partnership to Strengthen Families Federal Grant. The project will support partnerships among state child support program and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) agencies and university scholars and researchers. Research and data analysis will be performed to improve coordination between the state child support program and TANF agencies.

The child support program and TANF program serve many of the same customers and share a program goal of family self sufficiency. Cross organizational partnerships can support improved efficiency and effectiveness by bringing together program experts to evaluate policy making and to assess processes that cross both organizations. The policy choices of each program can have a significant impact on the other. Isolated decision making is not in the best interest of the child support program nor the TANF program. This demonstration grant will serve as the foundation for an integrated and more effective communication between programs.

This partnership will benefit both the child support and TANF programs with the help of university faculty and scholars to design and support data exchanges, store and analyze data, and conduct special studies or evaluations of program policies or practices. Additionally, the steering committee for the partnership will also involve local child support and TANF welfare directors so that all elements of the program leadership are included. A collaborative effort is expected to add substantial value to otherwise independent planning and actions by these organizations in isolation.

IMPLEMENTATION DATE:

This premise was implemented September 30, 2009.

KEY DATA/ASSUMPTIONS:

• Authorizing statute: Section 1115(a)(2), 1115(b) and 1115(b)(3) of the Social Security Act [42 United States Code 1315].

• This grant is effective from September 30, 2009 through February 28, 2011.

• The total project cost consists of Section 1115 grant funds, a required 5 percent state match, and federal financial participation. The 5 percent state match will be funded through redirection of existing resources.  [from Childsup.ca.gov, various links]

Now, instead, they can figure out what to do with approximately $4 billion (per year) of federal funds to states intended to enforce child & family support (or, promote marriage, a.k.a. fatherhood), including Compromising Arrears (that they ran up to start with), jailing fathers for nonsupport of outrageous amounts — then letting them out into classes about “How to be a father” (including abstinence education — go figure) run by court-affiliated program promoters.

But that’s another topic.

Take for example (2), Alameda County’s:

Now, for ALAMEDA COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE

I casually noticed that the Alameda County District Attorney actually had an Annual Report 2010, I figured, why not take a look? (note:  I also look other places – so should we — such as vendor payments for this one, contracts, payrolls, etc.)

For Annual Report, read “Sales Promotion” for receiving more money for more programs.  It’s basically going to be a Business Plan, or part of one, right.

Being the smart woman that I am, I went straight to “LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES.”

I’ve been around the block a few times, and know what the word “initiatives” means

I find it odd that the law enforcement is so eager to write the law also.  Kind of like the Executive Branch of the US changing the legal system (and adding a faith-based office to help the separation of church and state just a little more) and the Judicial Element forming nonprofits and directing traffic to them.  Or the Legislative Element getting press for helping the homeless, while their wives are busy charging $225 an hour to subcontract work that probably should’ve been done by a public agency (which the public pays for) to start with.

Makes you kind of wonder where the criminal element of society really is, sometimes.  I mean, what’s truly causing the level of poverty and street crime and disrespect for authority seen throughout this county (home to the 4th and 5th highest homicide cities in the country, last I heard — Oakland, and Richmond, California).  Does no responsibility ever rest with this department?  

So, here’s “Nancy (O’Malley) goes to Washington” — What a Wonderful Life it must be.

Once there she has some nice chats, by mutual request it seems, with Dianne, about SB 557 – instead of having this chat first with the citizens that actually live in this state and who don’t always have our U.S. Senators’ ear.   They’re lucky, many times, if they can get law enforcement’s ear, if it’s just a “family matter” (aka domestic dispute), even though these matters can get both family and officers killed, and have.

And here’s SB 557.  Glad I happened to hear about it.   And guess who proposed it (sponsor, co-sponsor):

CORRECTED APRIL 27, 2011
AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 25, 2011
AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 05, 2011

CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE— 2011–2012 REGULAR SESSION

SENATE BILL No. 557
________________________________________

Introduced by Senator Kehoe
(Coauthor(s): Assembly Member Atkins, Fletcher)

Wow —Senator(SB117) Kehoe (SB747)  & Assemblyperson Atkins (SB 887):  the Dynamic Duo strikes again

  • This time, to help their cohorts get proprietary language to promote a certain concept promising “justice”  coach parents  suffering from domestic violence and separation, including with their kids, from abusers.
  • This is not to say the same people don’t also propose better bills — like adding “strangulation” to the definition of “traumatic injury.”  However, this still ain’t gonna change how little family law judges care about it, as opposed to pushing co-parenting, therapy and marriage & fatherhood to people who are, er, divorcing (etc.).  Generally, they fall under the category of “special interests” it seems, including:
  • SB 117 (Kehoe)
    Public contracts: prohibitions: discrimination based on gender or sexual orientation. (see my last 2 posts on how Atkins’ partner got San Diego business…)

While this may be a good concept, common sense says to take it up with the California Healthy Marriage and the Bush-originator and perpetuators of National Fatherhood In Aeternum.  Isn’t there some way we could lock the different factions into a single room  — like is done with a sequestered jury — and duke it out while the rest of us get about our own business, and sex lives?  Note:  no minor children should be allowed into the room for any purpose during this time.

Actually, it was Kehoe sponsoring SB 2263 nine years ago, trying to one-stop shop an all-expense-paid (i.e., public funding through California Judicial Council) assessment of (Kids’ Turn).   Has she had children?  Has her partner had children?  So what’s with this fascination with coaching others about how children feel about divorce, and what parents should tell them during the process?

Somehow I”m starting to wonder how these types of bills relate to each other.

So long as family court judges continue to exercise “wide discretion” and retain immunity for screw-ups, and so long as parents are too busy on on-line forums (arguing PAS or anti-PAS) and going to rallies to Washington, D.C. to plead for mercy — it doesn’t matter that Governor Gray Davis vetoed that one, saying gently that perhaps the highest judicial body in the state wasn’t, er, qualified to measure mental health (i.e., attitude adjustments that certain mental health professionals wish to see).

Family Law already makes just about any other law a moot point, no matter what gender you express this in — it’s possible to get permanently screwed in 2o minutes, or ex parte, and with or without a $$ to spare.

We, the People of California (insert your state, but this state has a well-earned reputation for being off the charts sometimes, it seems) should instead actually investigate who’s married to, in business with, or on the board of directors with whom, and we’d better keep our eyes peeled about whassup in the legislature, and whassup in Washington, too.  And start respecting bloggers that do (historymatters of Sandiegooneline, or Ronkayeinlaw, etc.), rather than on-line weekly reporters (Mr. Peter Jamison of SFWeekly) that don’t.

February 17, 2011

________________________________________
An act to add Title 5.3 (commencing with Section 13750) to Part 4 of the Penal Code, relating to family justice centers. **

**the last suggestion (see my recent posts) was to simply amend Civil Labor Educational Insurance and Penal codes to clarify that gender expression is a civil right (as I understood it).  This one simply adds a Title subdivision, i.e. 5.3.

While AFCC is busy legitimizing and legalizing “Parenting Coordinators” to further undermine due process (and confidentiality) a.k.a. legal rights, the DA’s office itself is trying to legitimize and hallow “family justice centers” that shouldn’t even be necessary IF the DA’s office (law enforcement and prosecution) had been doing their jobs right to start with, including taking criminal activity committed by one parent against the other without respect to gender.  Same general idea — exploiting prior screwups by the same people to add another layer of bureaucracy to “coordinate” all the services needed.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL DIGEST
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

SB 557, as amended, Kehoe. Family justice centers.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1.
Title 5.3 (commencing with Section 13750) is added to Part 4 of the Penal Code, to read:
TITLE 5.3. Family Justice Centers

13750.
(a) A city, county, or city and county may establish a multiagency, multidisciplinary family justice center to assist victims of domestic violence, officer-involved domestic violence, sexual assault, elder abuse, stalking, cyberstalking, cyberbullying, and human trafficking to ensure that victims of abuse are able to access all needed services in one location in order to enhance victim safety, increase offender accountability, and improve access to services for victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, elder abuse, and human trafficking. Family justice centers, if established in a city, county, or city and county, may include community-based domestic violence, officer-involved domestic violence, sexual assault, elder abuse, stalking, cyberstalking, cyberbullying, and human trafficking agencies in partnership with survivors of violence and abuse in the planning and operations process of a family justice center, and may establish procedures for the ongoing input, feedback, and evaluation of the family justice center by survivors of violence and abuse and community-based crime victim service providers.
(b) For purposes of this title, the following terms have the following meanings:

(1) “Abuse” has the same meaning as set forth in Section 6203 of the Family Code.
(2) “Domestic violence” has the same meaning as set forth in Section 6211 of the Family Code.
(3) “Sexual assault” means an act or attempt made punishable by Section 220, 261, 261.5, 262, 264.1, 266c, 269, 285, 286, 288, 288.5, 288a, 289, or 647.6.
(4) “Elder abuse” means an act made punishable by Section 368.
(5) “Human trafficking” has the same meaning as set forth in Section 236.1.

(6) “Victim of crime,” “crime victim,” or “victim” means a victim of domestic violence, officer-involved domestic violence, sexual assault, elder abuse, stalking, cyberstalking, cyberbullying, or human trafficking.

(c) For purposes of this title, family justice centers shall be defined as multiagency, multidisciplinary service centers where public and private agencies assign staff members on a full-time or part-time basis in order to provide services to victims crime from one location in order to reduce the number of times victims must tell their story, reduce the number of places victims must go for help, and increase access to services and support for victims and their children. Staff members at a family justice center may be comprised of, but are not limited to, the following:

(1) Law enforcement personnel.
(2) Medical personnel.
(3) District attorneys and city attorneys.
(4) Victim-witness program personnel.
(5) Domestic violence shelter service staff.
(6) Community-based rape crisis, domestic violence, and human trafficking advocates.
(7) Social service agency staff members.
(8) Child welfare agency social workers.
(9) County health department staff.
(10) City or county welfare and public assistance workers.
(11) Nonprofit agency counseling professionals.
(12) Civil legal service providers.
(13) Supervised volunteers from partner agencies.
(14) Other professionals providing services.

Text found at Survivors in Action (which addresses stalking — not parenting — issues)

Wow.  I felt SO o o o o distracted by investigating the Nonprofit Filings of the “Alameda County Family Justice Center” which I already knew was itself a Dubious District Attorney Doing.  San Diego (where the model started) also reported on their Doubts as to why a retiring City? attorney should simply move functions that belonged to government over to the Y, later to become what I like to call Casey Gwinn’s Retirement Plan Model.

I found out that after getting a $3 million grant, producing a nonprofit structure (channel?) that has 0 $$ and 0 boards of directors (if one looks at the paperwork) yet suddenly a subsidiary group, “Family Violence Law Center” is getting flush with $millions of education & prevention programs under a different EIN.

Having wondered why none of these groups actually tell us how Family Law Operates (which is through AFCC/CRC and a host of nonprofit groups to receive federal funds to fix families, even though the fix is getting some of them killed from the resulting mix of turmoil & entitlements) — I see that the Executive Director of this Family Violence Law Center, has a background in Family Law.

Together, while they do not talk honestly about each other (or their relationships), they comprise an assembly line that shuffles families from separation through dissolution to destitution, getting grants along the way to “prevent family violence” at the top of the chute (abandoning those halfway down).

Wait a minute — don’t we deserve some better accounting of the EXISTING family justice Centers before they become the model of how to (not) help Victims of Crime navigate the family law system?)

FROM THE ANNUAL REPORT:

D.A. Nancy E. O’Malley and U.S. Senator Diane Feinstein

In May 2010, Alameda County D.A. Nancy O’Malley led a team from the District Attorney’s Office to Washington D.C. to honor fallen officers at the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial and meet with legislators.

The team met with many officials to discuss the Office’s nationally recognized programs and initiatives. Highlights included presentations on the Restitution Unit, the H.E.A.T. Watch program, and the Alameda County Family Justice Center

(A Nancy O’Malley/Davis-Lockyer, affiliate of the San Diego Family Justice Center model, founded by someone who was personally sued by one of his own staff for ignoring severe domestic violence and what appears to be death threats to one of his own employees, to which it seems he (Casey Gwinn) responded by moving the situation to a different floor, and thereafter ignoring it.   Which I have blogged.  Guess they don’t read my lovely, graphics-intensive, professionally organized posts.) 

. Also overviewed was the Alameda County Juvenile Justice Center and the innovative and successful partnerships between the D.A.’s Office, Probation Department, Alameda County Office of Education and Alameda County Health Care.

In a briefing with the White House Advisor on Violence Against Women, D.A. O’Malley spoke about the Family Justice Center’s concept of collaborative comprehensive services.

Time to review (From FIRST AMENDMENT PROJECT), “The Brown Act.”

THE BASICS

Meetings of public bodies must be “open and public,” actions may not be secret, and action taken in violation of open meetings laws may be voided. (§§ 54953(a), 54953(c), 54960.1(d))

WHO’S COVERED

  • Local agencies, including counties, cities, school and special districts. (§ 54951)
  • Legislative bodies” of each agency–the agency’s governing body plus “covered boards,” that is, any board, commission, committee, task force or other advisory body created by the agency, whether permanent or temporary. (§ 54952(b))
  • Any standing committee of a covered board, regardless of number of members. (§ 54952(b))
  • Governing Bodies of Non-profit corporations formed by a public agency or which includes a member of a covered board and receives public money from that board. (§ 54952(c))

This is my HOLIDAY (or the Sunday before it) and catching up with a Northern California District Attorneys’ latest Dubious Doings and proposed legislations wasn’t on it.  Can I — like Kehoe recommended that Kids’ Turn (initially) — get some public funding to study the effectiveness (or rather, lack of it) of both kids’ Turn AND all spinoffs functioning in my area — AND of the local Family Justice Center closest to me?  (I posted others, from an IRS lookup of charities with the name, yesterday, bottom of the post).

In other words, we can either work, and trust our local representatives and elected officials to do their jobs at least as well as we do our own — OR, we can scale back on work (and thus fewer taxes for them to waste) and take time to divert some of the slush funds to our scrutinizing the rest of the slush fund activity.

Having a family law attorney running FVLC is a conflict of interest, as shown (last I heard) on the total SILENCE on the characters, traits, and habits of the family law system and the nonprofits surrounding it, like

NAUCRATES DUCTOR (pilot fish):

(no, the term is not familiar to me, but isn’t the image appropriate?  Because what they are escorting is indeed a shark.  And the nonprofits surrounding the family law system, which may or may not be smaller than it (who knows?  WHo is tracking) — are feeding off a fish which itself is paid for by the public to start with.  At some level, this is starting to resemble family COURT systems, not just FAMILY courts. And I’m not the only person that seems to think this way — I have a photo on here of a bunch of judges (SF area) dressing up as royalty at an AAML meeting.  They composed a cute song based on “Camelot” (itself a reference to the Kennedy White House as royalty) to go along with this and seemed to think it was funny.  )

From the Legislative Initiatives section of the Annual Report.   

Legislative Initiatives

Under the leadership of District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, members of our staff frequently consult on, testify about and assist in drafting new legislation at a state- wide and national level. Working with lawmakers, we propose and support legislation that fits with our mission to champion the rights of victims and to keep our community safe.

In 2010, we were instrumental in writing numerous pieces of legislation, including:

SB 557: to define family justice centers in California law, thereby acknowledging the trend towards multi-disciplinary, multi-agency service delivery models for victims of domestic violence, sexual assault and human trafficking. This legislation is currently pending.

As with “fatherhood” programs — this “trend” is hardly a grassroots demand for justice centers.  No, certain people have a vested interest in continuing to “initiate” them.

I have a motto to counteract this trend:

JUST SAY NO!

Meanwhile…

Anyone willing to do some legwork and track the nonprofit status and get some verified results from any of the existing family justice centers — please do so.  Are they all set up like this one? Are they obtaining public & private monies and funneling them to a favored nonprofit and changing the character of a nonprofit which used to simply help its clients?

How many of the board members are actually public servants — and let’s get some payroll records.

A reminder — someone who walked through the doors — in fact even someone who got a restraining order (already proven to have a good risk of getting him/her (a) dead or (b) eventually completely eliminated from (her) kids’ lives — when the people who should be instead supporting court order enforcement are those collaborating instead to “educate” and “train” others inside new centers…

McDonalds is hugely successful — it serves a lot of people.  That doesn’t mean everyone should buy all their food form fast-food franchises…..

This “trend” is going to increase the number of DISenfranchised citizens, whose real needs don’t fit neatly into such expensive and unproven collaborations.

Just Say No. Then get on-line, and get involved demanding a better explanation of why we should put up with this.

Take time from TV and do some FOIA requests under the Sunshine Ordinance.  Each one teach one — we can do this!

What’s Love — I mean Gender — I mean Gender Expression Discrimination– got to do with it? (Calif AB 887 & AFCC June 2011)

leave a comment »

“What’s Love Got to do with it?”

A film about the singer Tina Turner and how she rose to stardom with her abusive husband Ike Turner and how she gained the courage to break free.

[Yeah — how is beating a woman up related to loving her?  And what’s using her got to, either?]

I recommend seeing this (if you somehow haven’t, yet).  If not, at least hear the song:

This is a review of the movie.  If somehow, you are unfamiliar with the story/film, you might as well read it, to get a grip on how AFCC — a group renowned for minimizing and reframing exactly what this woman endured as a “high-conflict” and prescribing their coaches to coach victims of this type of brutality to learn now to get along with perpetrators of it [Or, we will take your children and give them to the other parent — or the state]– parodied the title  in a twisted perversion of the original reference — which is of a woman escaping brutal poverty and violence, a role model of success possible after confronting it.

This is hardly the first time AFCC did this, as I blogged earlier in “Clear and Present Danger — fuzzy usage by AFCC“, when a conference indicating that the “Clear and Present Danger” was not (as the California Penal Code stated it was) batterers, but lack of funding for their services.

Actually, that wasn’t fuzzy usage, but targeted usage — directly targeting legal language that addressed domestic violence, and switching usage.   Totally in accord with the organization’s stated purpose, which is the transformation of language — including the language of the criminal codes from state to state.  If, in the process, this also totally transforms the legal process, the courts (from judging law to dispensing therapy and counseling services, “Problem-solving courts” etc.) certainly (as defined by these helpful professionals), it was a worthy end to justify the means, right?

So o o o . . .. they next ask:

What’s Gender Got To Do With It?”

( a search of the phrase without “AFCC” shows how Tina Turna’s story has permeated the language…)

Many of the conference handouts I’ve been mocking and “outing”recently  (for the marketing schemes they truly are) are from this upcoming (like, next week) AFCC conference in Orlando, Florida.  I mean, what’s not to mock? including that it seems they take themselves seriously.

For example:  ”

This session examines the complex mental health challenges in some child custody litigants and the dilemmas they present for attorneys and mental health professionals working with flawed parents.

Yeah, for the superior professions, it’s sure hard to deal with flawed parents.  It’s ever so irksome dealing with inferior human beings and their flaws.  Perhaps they can commiserate with God in this matter… or seek counsel with Him (oh I forgot — it appears they already did..which is why we have to be subjected to the trainings…these conferences intend to fix us flawed parents (“been there, done that — I confess!  I’m not flawless!”). At our own expense, when it hits the courtroom.

Perhaps flawed parents, on the next go-round, should be sterilized and make life easier for judges, mental health professionals, and attorneys to ply their trades.

Plus, besides the troubles of dealing with flawed parents, the professionals have some of their own friction to work out (these family law professionals at least know not to display their conflicts  in front of the “kids” — i.e., mean, the troublesome parents that need to be educated on how to parent, and divorce, etc.):

 Implications of various professional roles will be explored as will the inherent friction between the roles of attorneys and mental health professionals.    …  Ethical implications of this work will be reviewed….

Wow — in private, among themselves, they actually admit there is an “inherent friction” in mental health professionals & the representatives of law?   And that ethical implications exist? — amazing.   I caught no hint of this in any court proceedings I was in for the past (xx years), most of them lasting 20 minutes and set to review a mediator’s report we’d just received in the courtroom minutes prior to the hearing.  This is called “due process” in action.  (or “inaction,” should I say).

This workshop was run — typical AFCC combo — by a Judge, two Attorneys, and a Ph.D.:

Mary Ferriter, J.D., Esdaile, Barrett & Esdaile, Boston,

MA David Medoff, Ph.D., Suffolk University, Boston, MA

Hon. Edward Donnelly, Middlesex Probate and Family Court, Cambridge, MA

Kelly Leighton, J.D., Barens & Leighton, Salem, MA

OK, so apparently Gender has something to do with it.  So let’s talk about Gender.  Or, eavesdrop on our Legislators trying to talk about it.

What’s Pacific Justice Institute Got to do it?

(with the Gender Debate?)

Who??? — Well,

Pacific Justice Institute for one has lots of love.  They provide services for free to “those” they serve according the the blurb at the bottom of my email alerts:

About The Pacific Justice Institute:  Pacific Justice Institute is a non-profit 501(c)(3) legal defense organization specializing in the defense of religious freedom, parental rights, and other civil liberties. Pacific Justice Institute works diligently, without charge, to provide their clients with all the legal support they need.  Pacific Justice Institute’s strategy is to coordinate and oversee large numbers of concurrent court actions through a network of over 1,000 affiliate attorneys nationwide. And, according to former US Attorney General Edwin Meese, “The Institute fills a critical need for those whose civil liberties are threatened.” “Through our dedicated attorneys and supporters, we defend the rights of countless* individuals, families and churches… without charge.”

What gender individuals.  Does this include the right gender individuals involved in the destructive jaws of the family law system, and spat out by it when there is neither wealth, nor children under 18, to suck the life out of?

(No.  While PJI tangles repeatedly with the Public Educational system (public), they’re not so foolish as to consistently engage in the family law system, or those entangled in such “family matters.”  Doing so on the behalf of women like me might jeopardize some of the financial support, I suspect….)

**Well, being a nonprofit, they’d better keep some books, like something resembling a headcount at least of their own clients….

AS TO CHURCHES NEEDING TO HAVE THEIR CIVIL RIGHTS PROTECTED, BECAUSE NO ONE ELSE CARES:

Churches and church-affiliated charities / organizations have received governmental support a decade by Executive Order.  This means that even tax-paying atheists may be supporting them, unawares, and are, because then-President Bush thought it was a great idea and ordered it.  “Let there be an office of faith-based and community initiatives.”  Lightbulbs went off in religious institutions across the land about access to grants…..  [see intro to google book “Godly Republic:  A Centrist Blueprint for America’s Faith-based Future”

or a (positive, probably) Georgetown 2004 Master’s Thesis submission(search “Eberly”) ?  Don Eberly, a founder of the National Fatherhood Institute, whose agenda was obviously to protect the civil rights of fathers — all fathers — nationwide, who had been attacked by welfare Moms and anti-domestic-violence feminists and the child support system. “

Don Eberly, deputy director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives noted that he believes that the efforts are “’The Ultimate Third Way’” in the renegotiating of ways to approach social philosophy.25 The recent enthusiasm for the new method of social analysis is shared by President Bush as a result of his personal experiences.  The faith-based initiatives stems from his belief that prayer has a transformative power to combat social ills.

About Don Eberly” (Positive).  Note the sections “Influence Domestically” and “Movement Founder and Scholar”:

  • His career includes a decade serving in senior policy positions in the Congress and in the White House under two Presidents, and another decade advocating for and creating non-profit organizations to strengthen community and civic life.
  • Don spent much of the 1990s as a social entrepreneur, founding several nationally recognized non-profit organizations, including the Civil Society Project, which promotes innovation in community development and offers technical assistance for new non-profit start ups. In 1994, he founded the National Fatherhood Initiative, a national non-partisan civic organization whose mission is to improve the well-being of children by increasing the number of children raised by committed, engaged fathers.
GWB had faith in him, for sure:
  • George W. Bush

Thank you all very much for that warm welcome. It’s an honor to be introduced by Tommy Thompson, who not only was an outstanding Governor but, I can assure you, is going to be an outstanding Secretary of Health and Human Services. He is bright, capable, smart, and does everything the President tells him. [Laughter

(We are less than amused….)

He’s my buddy. But thank you, Tommy, very much.

I am so honored Members of the United States Congress are here. I appreciate you all being here, Senator Carper, Senator Bayh, Congressman J.C. Watts. If there are other Members of the Congress here, thank you all for coming, as well. Roland Warren, it’s good to meet you, sir. I appreciate your focus and effort. I’ve got something to say about the other two characters up here in a minute. [Laughter]

For 7 years, the National Fatherhood Initiative has been a powerful voice for responsible fatherhood [programs.& funding…] [as defined by the NFI…] . And for those of you involved, on behalf of our Nation, I say thanks from the bottom of our collective hearts.

  • [Ha, ha, ha….How many restraining orders were in effect that year? ….How many femicides of women who tried to leave abuse?  Was this detail somewhere, in a dark corner of the conglomerate heart?]
Most States now have initiatives that promote responsible fatherhood, and more than 50 mayors are involved in the National Fatherhood Initiative’s bipartisan Mayors Task Force on Fatherhood Promotion. The fatherhood movement is diverse, but it is united by one belief: Fathers have a unique and irreplaceable role in the lives of children.
Two people who have been a central part of the National Fatherhood Initiative are now a valuable part of my administration, . . . . 
the Deputy Director of the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, Don Eberly, and the Acting Assistant Secretary of Health and Human Services—and, we hope, a man confirmed soon—Wade Horn. [Applause] I was pleased to see Senator Carper leading the applause. [Laughter] Thank you guys for your service, and thank you for your willingness to work on behalf of the American people.
Sounds to me like our former President, and the Congressmen with him, had VERY little confusion about gender, and which one it was most important to support intellectually, morally, and financially…  and this was, obviously, love.  It also sounds to me like the civil rights, if not privileges, of “parents families and churches” had serious support from above, and I don’t mean only their god.  This was 10 years ago.
(This included to highlight the Federal support of Faith, Fathers, and Bush-buddy Don Eberly).
This has affected custody hearings, obviously, and issues surrounding child support, child abuse protection, and violence against women (GENDER-based violence, that is) obviously.

About Don Eberly” (skeptical) (By: Bill Berkowitz / Published: Feb 7, 2005 at 06:38)

  • An advocate of shrinking government, Don Eberly, the head of the Civil Society Project promotes faith-based organizations, private philanthropic initiatives, traditional families, volunteerism and the building of a ‘values’ society. Whose ‘values’ is the question.You won’t find him on many of television’s talking head programs, you wouldn’t be able to pick him out of a line-up, and his essays aren’t sexed-up or buzz-worthy, but for more than 15 years, Don Eberly has been one of the leading advocates of a strain of conservative advocacy known as “civil society.”Although vague and often ambiguous, “civil society” advocates intend to shrink government by handing over responsibility for maintaining and administering what’s left of the social safety net to faith-based organizations, corporate and community groups, families and philanthropic initiatives. As neoconservative cultural critic Gertrude Himmelfarb has written, “When we speak of the restoration of civil society it is a moral restoration we should seek.”

The Teacher in me (forgetting Tina Turner for a few minutes here) believes that we should have a nice link to ath Executive Order of January 29, 2001).  (George W. Bush of Texas having been President 2001-2009, this appears to be one of the first things he did in Office):

For Immediate Release January 29, 2001

EXECUTIVE ORDER

– – – – – – –

ESTABLISHMENT OF WHITE HOUSE OFFICE

OF FAITH-BASED AND COMMUNITY INITIATIVES

By the authority vested in me as President of the United States by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to help the Federal Government coordinate a national effort to expand opportunities for faith-based and other community organizations and to strengthen their capacity to better meet social needs in America’s communities, it is hereby ordered as follows: ….   (Recommended reading!  For example, ”

d) All executive departments and agencies (agencies) shall cooperate with the White House OFBCI and provide such information, support, and assistance to the White House OFBCI as it may request, to the extent permitted by law.”)

BARACK OBAMA 2010 UPDATE, incl.  “(e)  Administration of the Initiative.  The Department of Health and Human Services shall provide funding and administrative support for the Working Group (which we can see (click on URL) includes the panorama of departments & agencies) to the extent permitted by law and within existing appropriations.”

As we know, from Whitehouse.gov, there’s the:

And then, to get the jobs done, to execute the policies of the other two branches which the Constitution supports, there are for the Executive Branch

  • Federal Agencies & Commissions, too many to list on this site…

    “There are hundreds of federal agencies and commissions charged with handling such responsibilities as managing America’s space program, protecting its forests, and gathering intelligence. For a full listing of Federal Agencies, Departments, and Commissions, visit USA.gov.

(complete with Czars, etc.)  The first one of hundreds — alphabetically — is the
Administration for Children and Families (ACF) where Fatherhood.gov, and Child Support Enforcement, Child Protective Services, Head Start, and many of the issues that this blog deals with, resides.  Not to mention The President’s Committee for People with Intellectual Disabilities, 

I’m not sure if I come under this category or not, yet.  Academically, no.  As to work history, no, or health — probably not.  But if the highest levels of the US government itself cannot figure out whether gender does, or does not, matter how can I be expected to?

Again, how can “PJI” possibly supplement all this  Faith & Fatherhood-laced Federal Endorsements of NFI and OFBCI?   What ongoing attacks on fatherhood and faith is it addressing?  (actually, I do know — I keep my eye on their email alerts..)

Well, for once, it earned its keep, in my eyes:

The conservative legal advocacy group (not that they ever helped me, a female with family law issues) for once earned its free place in my inbox by alerting me to another move by my state legislature to help deconfuse us about how to respond to people who are confused about gender, or at least express it differently.

They write :

CA Legislators to Consider “Refining” Definition of Gender

Sacramento, CA – Lawmakers in the golden state are considering changes to thirty-four statutes “by redefining the definition of gender to also include a person’s… gender expression.” The Legislative Counsel’s Digest explains that under the proposed amendments “gender expression would be defined as meaning a person’s gender-related appearance and behavior whether or not stereotypically associated with the person’s assigned sex at birth.” The bill, AB 988, amends the Civil, Education, Government, Labor, and Penal Codes

Well, who’s complying with most of those codes anyhow?  If they are violated, what prison cell is anyone going to go to?  Last I heard the recommendation from our “head of state” was to go build prisons in Mexico.

Consider what’s been poured into the “California Healthy Marriages Coalition” from HHS, enaabled years earlier by GWB as President, this sounds as though California forgot where it’s money comes from — haven’t they been listening?  Or does California(‘s legislature) have some confusion about states rights, still?

Mission & Purpose

The California Healthy Marriages Coalition (CHMC) is a pioneering non-profit organization that works throughout California to improve the well-being of children by strengthening the relationship of parents through Marriage Education and Relationship Skills classes.

In 2006, CHMC received a five-year, $2.4 million per year grant from Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families (HHS/ACF), the largest grant ever awarded by HHS/ACF in support of Healthy Marriages.

Correct me if I”m wrong, but the main thing they were pioneers in was size of federal funding and scope of potential clientele (i.e., the entire married, or divorced, or separating but parents, or marriageable, potentially fertile population of California from age 15 up. male & female..).  How courageous, to surge forth on behalf of “Family” with only $2.4 million/year backing….)

Through this funding, CHMC partners with a network of 23 faith- and community-based organizations (FBCOs) throughout California.  Each of CHMC’s funded partner organizations is a coalition consisting of many other FBCOs ** through which they deliver Marriage Education and Relationship Skills classes, enabling CHMC to reach California’s diverse population by traversing the key demographic dimensions of geography, ethnic/cultural differences, and agency-type FBCOs.

Just a little reminder, ‘FBCO’ means “Faith-Based Community Organization.”  Any faithless, secular, agnostic or atheist organizations that may have already been doing marriage counseling need not apply to join THIS marketing group…….  You can be faith-based and counsel the unbelieving (perchance, they’ll be converted by imitation and association) but your leadership cannot be godless….  $2.4 million per year –shared websites — technical and marketing support —  wanna reconsider the category of your org, wanna be transformed to a FBCO?

Well I suppose I better get to the point of this post, which began HERE, which at first blush looks to be a “what’s anatomy got to do with gender?  And what’s my gender expression preference got to do with my employability?”

 

 

California Assembly Bill (“AB”) 887,

In bill text the following has special meaning
underline denotes added text
struck out text denotes deleted text

BILL NUMBER: AB 887 INTRODUCED

BILL TEXT

INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Atkins

FEBRUARY 17, 2011

An act to amend Section 51 of the Civil Code, to amend Sections 200, 210.2, 210.7, 220, 32228, 47605.6, 51007, 66260.6, 66260.7, and 66270 of the Education Code, to amend Sections 12920, 12921, 12926, 12930, 12931, 12935, 12940, 12944, 12949, 12955, 12955.8, 12956.1, and 12956.2 of the Government Code, to amend Sections 676.10, 10140, 10140.2, and 12693.28 of the Insurance Code, to amend Section 3600 of the Labor Code, and to amend Sections 186.21, 422.56, 422.85, 3053.4, and 11410 of the Penal Code, relating to gender.

 

I don’t know Assembly Member Atkins, but it turns out that through redistricting, San Diego voters were able to (and did) elect an “openly Queer Councilmember,” some of which is detailed (when I simply searched on the Assembly person’s name) here.  Lo and behold, Assemblyperson Atkins was the former staff chair of a similarly “out” lesbian, [current Senator] Christine Kehoe –– whose name I know from her attempt to sneak a thinly disguised attempt at legislating Kids’ Turn as THE state-approved parent education plan by having the Judicial Council conduct effectiveness studies.  (Yeah, that’s a mouthful– but see post  on Kicking salemanship up a notch.”).  Amazing what you can do with some great redistricting….

While Atkins was addressing the San Diego Democrats about the horrible budget cuts, it appears a little GLBT (“L” to be specific) nepotism — caught by the San Diego Reader — was going on between her wife’s contract on tehcnical assistance to help San Diego’s homeless by counting them  — yes, counting them — to the tune of $464,750  (Details at “Is Assembly Leader Toni Atkins Cashing in on Homelessness?

By historymatters | Posted March 8, 2011, 9:07 p.m.

There is an enormous amount of money to be made solving the problem: so more homeless equals more money for State Assembly Leader Toni Atkins and her wife’s private business contracted to do a study.

The article boasts a photo of State Assembly Leader Toni Atkins leading the charge of more than 550 volunteers searching for homeless people with her flashlight.

I have actually heard (in a different county) certain homeless people at a soup kitchen joking about, could they get a county job counting themselves?  After all, who would better know where to look?   

To understand why certain politicians get all excited at the prospects of helping vulnerable populations (kids of divorcing parents, homeless, battered women, etc. . . . ) one must first understand what’s in it for them, or their associates  = contracts.  This sounds like a fairly typical situation.  Do the math.  I’m sure Assemblyperson Atkins’ wife Jennifer did.  $225 per hour, hire an $175/hr expert, a $90/hr former reporter, and some volunteers.  Lots of them.

(Welcome to My State….)  Here are legislators supporting mandatory positive portrayals of LGBT as role models for children in public schools.  Ah well…..

California wants lesbians as mandatory ‘role’ models ~ Family advocates call plan ‘worst school sexual indoctrination ever’

The Rebel~PWCM~JLAFebruary 12, 2011

{actually not just lesbians, interesting choice of lables to highlight)

“Equality California, an organization that advocates for homosexuality, said others sponsoring the plan include Sen. Christine Kehoe, D-San Diego; Assembly member Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco; Assembly member Toni Atkins, D-San Diego; Assembly member Rich Gordon, D-San Mateo; and Assembly member Ricardo Lara, D-East Los Angeles.

Lawmakers in the state of California are proposing a law that would require schools to portray lesbians, homosexuals, transsexuals and those who have chosen other alternative sexual lifestyles as positive role models to children in all public schools there.

“SB 48: The worst school sexual indoctrination ever” is how officials with the Campaign for Children and Families describe the proposal, SB 48, sponsored by state Sen. Mark Leno.

Openly homosexual, Leno boasts on his website of founding a business with his “life partner, Douglas Jackson,” who later died of AIDS complications.

 

(Leno is known among some circles to be closely connected with a certain self-promoting judicial excellence nonprofit reporting on the “crisis in the courts” locally.  This group was for years (the few years it’s been involved) refusing to report in the fatherhood funding, and still doesn’t, when it comes to feeding information to local on-lines.  So, I do….)

 

To me, sounds like a very expensive Legislative WAR on Gender Definitions!  However, when I hear about any assemblyperson or senator (LGBT, not LGBT, or redneck) involved in corrupt financial practices while yakkin’ about our broke state, I’ll blog the practices.  Toni Atkins trained under Christine Kehoe and BOTH of them apparently were trying to pull a fast one on voters who can’t keep up with the ideologies (or are focusing on them, rather than on the payrolls)

BUT, MEANWHILE, if we are going to transform society, 

AFCC I think has a simpler, more honest way.  They force us all to pay them to force indoctrinations  on as many people as possible which help make the Civil & Penal Codes, and the language of them, a moot point, and for that matter, the laws.   They do this by getting paraprofessionals into private matters, causing chaos, then running off to hold conferences and trainings with themselves on how to best profit from the mess, and try to exclude non-AFCC-trained professionals (however qualified) from getting a piece of the action.

Jurisdiction was set decades ago, as the chink in the door — any couple having a custody conflict.

It’s clear when you read their conference materials and compare it to actions, that they are simply fulfilling the goal of transforming language — and with it government.  And when you read, you can understand that this is the scheme.     I think it’s a bit roundabout to undo our Bushwhacked Country by rounding up all damages done and starting a States/Federal fight here.

 

Why should I pay, in any form, for politicians’ gender wars?

I’m an adult without, to my awareness, gender confusion.

Is it OK if I get out from the middle of this ‘high-conflict” relationship?   I’ll even take a “Kids in the Middle“(r), Children in the Middle(r), KidsFirst (though mine have aged out) or even Kids Turn(r) course at my own expense and not ask which foundation also sponsored my participation, or which government grant ALSO sponsored my participation because someone, somehow, somewhere, actually got their paws on my kids’, my, and my ex-husband’s social security numbers and truly understood they were worth more than their (virtual, I guess) weight in gold.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

AB 887, as introduced, Atkins. Gender.

(1) Existing law contains various provisions that define sex as including gender and define gender as including a person’s gender identity and gender related appearance and behavior whether or not stereotypically associated with the person’s assigned sex at birth.

This bill would make technical changes to those provisions by refining the definition of gender to also mean a person’s gender identity and gender expression and would define gender expression as meaning a person’s gender-related appearance and behavior whether or not stereotypically associated with the person’s assigned sex at birth. The bill would also replace cross-references to definitions of gender with the referenced definitions refined in the same manner as specified above.

“THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Section 51 of the Civil Code is amended to read:

51. (a) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the Unruh Civil Rights Act…

….

(e) For purposes of this section: …

4) “Sex” has the same meaning as defined in subdivision (p) of Section 12926 of the Government Code includes, but is not limited to, pregnancy, childbirth, or medical conditions related to pregnancy or childbirth. “Sex” also includes, but is not limited to, a person’s gender. “Gender” means sex, and includes a person’s gender identity and gender expression. “Gender expression” means a person’s gender- related appearance and behavior whether or not stereotypically associated with the person’s assigned sex at birth .

Copyright 2011 State Net. All Rights Reserved.

What about sex as the direct object of a verb, references to (or promises of) which activity fuels so much of our state’s economy?  And Bush’s intentions to have us abstain from has cost in “abstinence education programs,” as in “Having Sex,”  commonly known as (well, this is wordpress, so fill in the blank after a trip to the local school’s girls — or boys’ — rooms and reading the graffiti, in case your language hasn’t kept up.)

What about sex as a recreational — or procreational –activity, which occasionally and sometimes accidentally, results in human life which can and often is terminated in a variety of ways before or after childbirth, legally or illegally, throughout the lifespan?

 

Is it really possible to categorize and make legal (or, illegal) all the varieties of human behavior by VOTE?

Note:  Bill was posted at the Network of Care for Behavioral Health with the seal of the City and County of San Francisco up top.  I think their business will be booming shortly, if it isn’t already.  What expressions of healthy behavior are permissible, and who is going to pay if I violate them?

 

Or feel that my right to, say, indecent exposure might be civilly protected on the basis that I was just engaging in gender expression, and wanted a response as to what others thought mine was…

Well, you tell me — what’s up NEXT in the Legislature that’s likely to affect the bottom line of, for example:

 

?

martinplaut

Journalist specialising in the Horn of Africa and Southern Africa

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

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?...' (posted 3/23 & 3/5/2014). Over 680 posts, Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Red Herring Alert

There's something fishy going on!

The American Spring Network

News. by the people, for the people. The #1 source for independent investigative journalism in the Show-Me State, serving Missouri since 2011.

Family Court Injustice

It Takes "Just Us" to Fight Family Court Injustice

The Espresso Stalinist

Wake Up to the Smell of Class Struggle ☭

Spiritual Side of Domestic Violence

Finally! The Truth About Domestic Violence and The Church

%d bloggers like this: