Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!
From this post as first published:
This post is about advocacy group supporters and followers failing to set standards and keep their own leaders ethical. In a larger sense, the same goes for all of us as citizens, supporting by personal energy and labor (i.e., government revenues) — how can we keep leaders honest or ethical if we don’t have a grasp of what they are doing, what they are paid to do, and how the system is organized? ….
It is a natural continuation of the recent (and from May 2012) “Parades, Charades and Facades,” and my posting this is keeping a personal promise (to myself) for the year 2014, to expose what’s underneath the rhetoric.
I had no way of knowing at the time, but this became my last post of 2014, and I didn’t post anything for the entirety of 2015, for another round in the court system and while handling (yet) another round of family-generated problems putting my housing at risk through previous rounds which destroyed a sustainable profession (through the family courts) which was then used, apparently behind my back, to take control of an inheritance, and all but “dare” me to challenge the current status quo.I tend to challenge any current status quo which forces competent individuals onto food stamps needlessly, and continues to harass and interfere, cyclically, as I am noticed to be engaging in obtaining replacement work. This was coming to a head in summer 2014, which also may have prompted my desire here to lay out the elements clearly, naming names, as to which organizations occupied what status on the family court reform (and associated “domestic violence prevention” food chains, and how I came to understand where they were on that food chain.
In late 2019 I am coming back to review this post along with a few others which engaged in the “Our Broken Family Courts Initiative” (i.e., the Cummings Foundations, legal domicile Nevada, field of operations it seems, they’d chosen for some reason nearby Arizona.
I noticed it lacked my usual “Title & Shortlink” format, so came here to add one, to add the date published to the title itself, and these comments. It’s clear I considered this even in 2014 an important point to make by the next update section.//LGH Dec. 7, 2019. Here’s that Title now:
(short-link ends “-2ug”). Having also now noticed this post is an obnoxious 25.4K words long, I’ll see if/when I might get to an abbreviation and/or re-posting of key parts. That’s not a promise, just a recognition of the need! NOTE: This post has comments (some dialogue with readers) and more helpful links. Most posts don’t have comments; these are worth reading (and found at the bottom) as are I still believe its extensive list of tags.
//LGH.
[Published June 29, 2014; Post in edit mode late July-Aug. 2014; expanded to almost double the size,nearly 24,000 words; with background info….In most posts, a lot of the length is simply quotes, my style is not just tell, but “show and tell.”]
February 2016 Personal Update:
Without changing the contents here (except one paragraph or so, cleaning up some formatting and adding tags), I’ll mention that the MAJOR break in posting anything between June 29, 2014 and early 2016 came because my personal situation heated up so much after I went public on fiduciary abuse by an older sister — who’d played a crucial role in supporting/enabling (if not inciting) our original “custody war,” after playing a negligible, passive, codependent, domestic-violence-enabling role the previous decade, after learning that I was a battered wife and mother and seeking intervention.
From summer 2014 – early 2015, the situation went into probate court — lasting in total, nearly a year, to finish transition. Throughout 2015 I was working with and renegotiating standards with personnel in control of my resources, and continuing to withhold access to evidence of the paper trail….From summer 2014 – 2016, I was still writing things up, investigating, communicating privately with some individuals — but also had to spend major time, that’s writing time, and to lawyer, sister, starting with unearthing a written commitment on her part, yes/no — are you resigning or not? Then, requesting to settle out of court (which is possible under California code and the individual trust), which (of course) was rejected, stringing the process out, adding more professionals (not that I had some for protection on this end).
In 2015, a major transition dealing with new people — major negotiation time, and now as the year 2015 closed out and so far in 2016– I find myself again fighting for housing, and to obtain financial records, which certain people don’t want found. Both my (so to speak — father no longer involved, and I was prevented from continued involvement years earlier) young adult children now being out of the state, I had hoped to move on with life, and promptly move out of present housing. I found — “not so” from certain personnel, and that “not so” is in one of the most effective forms of messing with other human beings — litigation absent the supporting facts (and here, even proof of standing) as a form of extortion, which like some of the other things this blog talks about (child-stealing, wife-beating, stalking, terroristic threats on individuals, statements under penalty of perjury which are, well, known to be falsehoods by those speaking, these are criminal issues.
In these conditions, struggling with wordpress HTML and getting out a post, wasn’t going to happen. I’ve been working at a different format to start uploading what did, still, continue learning during the non-posting time. We shall see…. Anyhow, that’s why no follow-up parts to this post occurred, much as I would’ve liked to complete them. There are plenty in draft, and I am posting again. There are still plenty of survival-level challenges, which means that about the only relief or “down-time” still involves this kind of blogging anyhow —
––and in continuing to blog I am still thinking about the next generation, particularly of those who may have been trafficked, traded and repeatedly disrupted (UNLESS they come into an abusive home, it seems — then the “don’t disrupt” theme seems to prevail) like commodities between and among parent/non-parent caretakers — all rationalized and presided over in the institutions run by privately-networked in organizations & with those in government positions people (judges, experts, and social science research & demo projects building their resumes and journaling their findings) “IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST” and in the name of “NON-ADVERSARIAL COURT PROCEEDINGS,” “REDUCING CONFLICT” and of course Treating and Healing the scourges of wife-battering and child abuse [“SUPERVISED VISITATION / BATTERERS INTERVENTION”], for “Futures without Violence” “Safe Horizons” “Justice” (a common label on oh so many organizations), FAMILY reunification, preservation, (…. Responsible Fatherhood, Healthy Marriages, Access and Visitation — all such good, wonderful, noble things…) and my favorite term when applied to what allegedly MUST happen between perps and those perpetrated-upon: “CONCILIATION.” Unless parental alienation was perpetrated upon someone in a high-conflict relationship, in which case cold-turkey quarantining of the offender with de-programming for the alienated minor children.
Maybe we should call these courts something more appropriate to what takes place in them — like virtual auction blocks, or stock markets in human lives, with some able to profit so well in the field, they can as majority shareholders, demand changes in management, streamlined efficiency and increased return to shareholders, futures, options, the whole deal, on the profits of churning individual human beings’ relationships under the banner of helping society — and of course anyone “low-income” adjust to business as usual.
// Thanks for Readers’ Patience, including with some of the formatting in reading through existing posts, or if you were expecting new ones that didn’t come timely…., LGH (“Let’s Get Honest) 2/6/2016.
Between “Pts.1” [1a and 1b] and “Pt.2” I expect to post more material on the Family Court Enhancement Project (“FCEP”), which I understand is all the talk about town (i.e., on the internet in these circles (use your search function to find some of it…). So the title of this blog refers to a series. It is a natural continuation of the recent (and from May 2012) “Parades, Charades and Facades,” and my posting this is keeping a personal promise (to myself) for the year 2014, to expose what’s underneath the rhetoric.
These parades, charades, and facades have become a problem for the people who match the profile of what they claim to represent, “Protective Parents” and/or “Battered Mothers,” specifically. I am among that class and a witness of the practices, tactics, and censorships of dialogues involved. I believe collectively the groups involved comprise a cult, and exhibit all primary cult practices.
Before a few mental circuits of distressed parents disconnect, or melt from the heat of their own righteous indignation, (“But my children were abused; I am an incest survivor” etc.), this post is not about whether or not incest or abuse took place in those cases, or children are being placed in the care of batterers or dangerous parents. I’m a survivor, and I know that plenty of times, abuse, sometimes incest did take place and children ARE being placed in the care of batterers. Mine were….
This post is about what kind of parents are taking a road trip (real, or virtually) with ANY advocacy organizations whose articles of incorporation (if any) boards of directors on their tax returns and patterns of incorporation, charitable filings they have not yet even identified (let alone read and understood), and what’s worse to a destination they have not evaluated as sensible, based on analyses of those organizations in the larger context.
It’s about the dangers of tunnel vision. Focus is one thing, but tunnel vision, an entirely different thing. it’s about how even spending days, weeks and months on a combination of social media, group -emails, individual emails, and even supplemented by various published articles on a certain topic can still be like eating white bread and peanut butter only, and wondering why you can’t make it through the marathon.
It’s so easy to get a sense of TIME (date of origin of a group), PLACE (where did it originally incorporated, and if it’s one of those state-skipping chameleon corporations, make a note of it, and find out where it’s been before), SIZE (for that, see the financials), and POSITIONING (who else is it interlocking agenda with; and — this is important — is it talking from a religious-exempt institution, or from a law school, or center/institute (etc.) at a university, or individually. Universities, hospitals, government represent considerable clout, prestige and authority, and lesser accountability for said “Center” or Institute” when it comes to tracking the funding = tracking the influence. Is it a regular HHS grantee? On which federal funding streams?
How much does anyone involved really know, as an abuse survivor or simply as a taxpayer, about the USDOJ/OVW (Office of Violence Against Women) funding streams proceeding from passage and subsequent re-authorizations of the Violence Against Women Act (1994ff) and who’s on them, who’s advising them? What about the people who have been directors of that Office? (Two — Bea Hanson and the Hon. Susan B. Carbon — in this post). What are their affiliations, where did they come from policy-wise and professionally?
I am in the process of clearing up and cleaning up (which may mean simply POSTING) information on my blog. the format is often largely Soundoff, but will at least show that I’ve looked up before I laughed out loud, and have taken time to come to my own conclusions, over the years — and as a person meanwhile dealing with both the aftereffects of and various other forms of ongoing trauma, and some threats (such as stalking) such as happens to people who are bounced from DV protection into Custody Battles (which, FYI, is the business plan)…..
This text used to be on the sidebar, meaning it was written in one long chain of paragraphs, viewed three vertical inches at a time. It has now been replaced by almost as much sidebar material (oh well). It does cover significant topics of the blog, as a boat trip down a river will reveal many aspects of the countryside as you pass by — for an overview. However it’s only when someone gets off (reads in the links, considers, or processes) the information, that it will start to make some sense). I am intentionally covering plenty of territory, with periodic links — to introduce the concepts. While this may seem like a meandering trip down a river, in fact, it should demonstrate which Creek we are up, and without a paddle, either. Or should I say, with not enough people paddling forcefully in the direction of land, or even against the current.
Position statement.
Jump in somewhere, or consider it a two-inch wallpaper border to the posts. I write on (and on, and on), am opinionated, but post links to some basis for those opinons, and am consistently sowing certain information on-line that certain groups chose (and I also can back up that evaluation) to cover up. Reason demanded a reason for (and a short history of) how these courts came to be, and from under which rock did they crawl?
Most of us don’t have $139 to spare for an ebook of “Problem-Solving Courts, Therapeutic Jurisprudence and Mainstreaming,” (preview of the 13 chapters here) apparently this wasn’t intended for the parents, themselves, many of who are struggling in the courts, or to feed and raise kids, or continue to house themselves simultaneous with family court cases which refuse to close until all the family and extended family assets are drained, and enough problem-solvers have got a piece of the pie… They publish while we perish…
The book grows out of a live conference where legal, social science, and philosophical dimensions of problem-solving courts—and of the ‘new judging’—were grappled with by an impressive and accomplished group of scholars. [published by two from UNL dept. of psychology/Sept. 2012, Puerto Rico].
Back up 20 years, and hear Meyer Elkin (interviewed Feb. 1994) (short version: obituary 1994) describe how he got involved with the Conciliation Court model in Los Angeles, after time doing group therapy modeled in Alcoholics Anonymous in a Tucson? or at least Arizona prison. Or quoted by the organization he helped (it wasn’t a solo job) found saying in 1975 that the language of criminal law needed to go, and be replaced by the language of behavioral health; after all, aren’t we all on the same page?).
[This post is “sticky” and stays on top. New posts are beneath . ..Some additions, March 2013…(As I learn more, it shows up on the blog). ~ Or see “The Last Seven Let’s Get Honest Posts” links, on sidebar ~ better yet, See also my other blog Cold,Hard.Fact$];
This blog has VALUABLE INSIGHT on the family courts money trail (a trail of tears), and about many crisis intervention groups who are in on it (and hence, won’t blog it), and from some of whom I sought help, solace, or actionable information — and got NONE.
Question: WHY would any group which truly wants to save lives withhold relevant information, tools to find that information, and prior ground-breaking conversations about that information — in the amounts of billions of dollars of federal incentives to the statesaffecting — custody outcomes (as to the child support system, HHS/OCSE) while feeding less helpful information to their clients?Another Question: You should also ask why — where is that money coming from, and why does our government always want to raise taxes when they can’t keep track of what they already collected (MUCH more than is commonly realized) and when a lot of that is simply fed to fraudulent or evanescent corporations that don’t stay registered at the state level?
When it’s a matter of eminent domain and someone gets sued over bribery, then it makes headlines and people get indignant. Daily News 2001, Los Angeles Area.
Here’s a yet more detailed one (best: read the series; see “related articles”):
GILDING THE GAVEL? SUPERIOR COURT PAYMENTS DEPOSITED IN JUDGES’ PRIVATE ‘COFFEE’ FUND.
(Now that you’ve read it, naturally, with attention…..)
Another POV on “The Center for the Family in Transition” (and its funders) (Publ. 9/22/2012) (WordPress- generated shortlink ends in “-190” which is all numbers, no alpha character for the “0” which otherwise would look like this: “O”).
Excerpt from this post pulled to top, in the form of a screenprint (image) in 2016. This sticky post originally published 9/22/2012. It should be put in bold print, large letters and stuck on a refrigerator IF one is stuck in divorce drama at this time, as a reminder of the resonance of the rooms it will be taking place in!
This image is simply a quote in image form from my own post, Another POV on “The Center for the Family in Transition” (and its funders) (Publ. 9/22/2012) (shortlink ends in “-190,” all numbers)
(The text in the image is repeated below in the post. Link from the image/quote): For more, see March 5, 2014 post “Suppose I’m Right Here ….What Would You Do When the Lights go on?” Read the rest of this entry »
Our relationship to “government” needs to be looked at. Particularly, why so many people put up with it and haven’t figured out something better than putting lawyers and judges in charge of the place, as facilitated by a Congress which has plenty of people who used to be lawyers in it, no doubt.
A glance at this post should clarify that, by and large, we don’t know what the US Government (I mean, “federal”) is doing — although who’s helping fund it? Wake the hell up and start looking up some CAFR‘s – -it’s the worlds largest contractor, and there are these other issues about Jurisdiction which keep cropping up also. You cannot SUE this government, really (11th Amendment) unless it consents to. while we had this Constitution, it appears to me that under Bankruptcy (which the US has never been out of, to date, to my awareness) it no longer applies. If it did, and one engaged in commerce with the USA (which it’s almost impossible not to), you just became a contractor (u.S. Citizen = no unalienable rights) and shareholder in that thing in Washington, D.C.
WOMEN IN PARTICULAR should be cautious about citizenship. A woman in our area called police for help “domestic dispute” which ended up in a vigorous chase, the other day, the guy fled. They didn’t know an toddler was in the car. He was killed in a hail of gunfire, after which it was reported that this was actually a woman’s BROTHER, not the perp, and he had been I think helping her get his niece (her child) away from the aggressor. Now, he’s dead. Did I mention, he’s also Hispanic? (Wikipedia informal list of people, mostly men, some during domestic disputes, killed by officers. It’s a very very long list…)
Or you could go to a divorce, and have a judge over the domestic violence court (long-term presiding) and the judge tell your young self, a mother (about 23 yrs old, this one), to “go work it out” and no restraining order. Finally they were in judge’s chambers, and the judge informed the father (a Marine) he would have to pay child support. The young man (age 29) stepped outside the door, walked back in again, and cold-cocked the mother of his kids, knocking her unconscious immediately on the floor, some black eyes, a broken jaw. He was finally tasered into submission, and THEN the judge believed that the guy was dangerous. That apparently didn’t stop him from assigning shared parenting, though (along with jail and $1million bail). THAT is our country (and it was in 2011 Florida: (see comments for links to the story, another blog “AmericanAmnesia”
I mentioned FEDMINE.com to an acquaintance the other day, and have on the blog before. Its access is more timely (and probably far more accurate) than what is given the average person who looks things up on some free site which isn’t even proofread, but is designed for public consumption, like, say, “http://TAGGS.hhs.gov”
It think this figure is worth posting, without too much commentary. Per FEDMINE.com, the top agency obtaining contracts today was — hardly surprising — HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES.
WITHOUT HUMANS THERE WOULD BE NO MONEY TO FUND THESE STUDIES SO WHAT, PRECISELY, ABOUT HUMANS IS SO FASCINATING THAT THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY, ON A GIVEN DAY, WOULD BE DEDICATED TO A BUREAUCRACY STUDYING THEM?
ALSO, SEE HIGHLIGHTS FOR SOME ONES SIGNIFICANT (at least that I’m aware of) in this Family Law Field.
If you see I have linked the company name (other links probably not valid) there may be a brief description if you hover the cursor.
| COMPANY NAME | POSTED TODAY 08/30/2012 |
YTD FOR AGENCY | ||
| 049508120 – WESTAT INCORPORATED | $ 230,376 | $ 9,710,743 | ||
| 019121586 – DELOITTE CONSULTING L.L.P. | $ 1,593,527 | $ 32,298,506 | ||
| 072654999 – VANTAGE HUMAN RESOURCE SERVICES INCORPORATED | $ 511,792 | $ 511,792 | ||
| 091500090 – JOHN SNOW, INCORPORATED (out of all of them, this one actually seems involved in HEALTH. Founded 1978, internationally 106 offices, see “In Memoriam” link) | $ 626,838 | $ 5,654,941 | ||
| 021873740 – HUMAN TECHNOLOGY, INC | $ 511,792 | $ 547,006 | ||
| 009399247 – UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF MARYLAND | $ 85,082 | $ 122,852 | ||
| 623214020 – CONCEPT SYSTEMS INCORPORATED (3796) | $ -4,941 | $ -8,221 | ||
| 947300372 – CLIFTON GUNDERSON LLP | $ -102,382 | $ -102,382 | ||
| 152149191 – MC DONALD WALTER R AND ASSOCIATES INCORPORATED | $ 0 | $ 2,789,442 | ||
825229318 – MCKINSEY&COMPANY, INC. WASHINGTON D.C.
|
$ 631,181 | $ 9,499,045 | ||
| 154308522 – MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEARCH INC | $ 364,999 | $ 14,398,928 | ||
| 088656512 – IMPAQ INTERNATIONAL LLC(founded 2001 by a couple with govt background, Social Science Research, in MD. He’s economist,she’s History/Educ, he used to work for “Abt”) | $ 415,623 | $ 5,197,316 | ||
| 146014373 – ARSERVICES, LTD | $ 650,102 | $ 650,102 | ||
| 183818145 – CAPITAL CONSULTING CORP | $ 64,557 | $ 961,723 | ||
| 197325277 – LEWIN GROUP, INC., THE**(link is to someone from this group presenting at a 2007 AFCC conference. Since 1970, they are Health and Human Services consultant; you can look it up). | $ 630,811 | $ 4,396,810 | ||
| 127687093 – CHILD TRENDS INC | $ 1,011,927 | $ 1,686,523 | ||
| 072648579 – ICF INCORPORATED, L.L.C. {{see below}} | $ 500,000 | $ 13,942,449 | ||
| 622811847 – STRATEGIC HEALTH SOLUTIONS, L.L.C. [woman-owned, Omaha, services Medicare & Medicaid] | $ 3,198,739 | $ 8,861,059 | ||
| 127149784 – HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS, LLC | $ 1,281,472 | $ 3,970,432 | ||
| 929125818 – C2C SOLUTIONS INC | $ 6,323,200 | $ 18,091,004 | ||
| 611835203 – TEYA TECHNOLOGIES, LLC | $ 178,013 | $ 894,928 | ||
| 781844808 – SEAMON CORPORATION | $ 197,200 | $ 885,831 | ||
| 143208069 – FRONTLINE HEALTHCARE WORKERS SAFETY FOUNDATION, LTD | $ 81,697 | $ 245,090 | ||
| 803935261 – PROFESSIONAL TESTING, INC. | $ 363,302 | $ 361,395 | ||
| 136201493 – CONSUMMATE COMPUTER CONSULTANTS SYSTEMS LLC | $ -56,190 | $ 0 | ||
| 929219772 – CONTRACT SUPPORT SOLUTIONS INC. | $ -32,171 | $ 164,690 | ||
| 175291061 – THE KEVRIC COMPANY INC | $ 100,871 | $ 2,428,892 |
Not starting with the largest one in “the Lewin Group,” but it does run close to the subject matter of this blog — the marriage/fatherhood movement through federal funding:
(FROM USASPENDING.GOV — THEY GOT (FROM ABOUT 2000 forward I think on this database):
Ranked by $$, the largest shows up as about $4+million (in 2005), “Marijuana Cultivation Study.” They seem to have plenty in the $2 and $3 million ranges as well. Fairfax, VA -close to the source, right).
Lewin Group, Insurer-Owned Consulting Firm, Often Cited in Health Reform Debate
By David S. HilzenrathWashington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 23, 2009
The political battle over health-care reform is waged largely with numbers, and few number-crunchers have shaped the debate as much as the Lewin Group, a consulting firm whose research has been widely cited by opponents of a public insurance option.To Rep. Eric Cantor (Va.), the House Republican whip, it is “the nonpartisan Lewin Group.” To Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee, it is an “independent research firm.” To Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (Utah), the second-ranking Republican on the pivotal Finance Committee, it is “well known as one of the most nonpartisan groups in the country.”Generally left unsaid amid all the citations is that the Lewin Group is wholly owned by UnitedHealth Group, one of the nation’s largest insurers.
An Evaluability Assessment of Responsible Fatherhood Programs
August 1997
DHHS, Office of the Assistant Secretaryf or Planning and Evaluation (ASPE)
Analysis of site visits to five newly formed responsible fatherhood programs find a series of steps can be taken to improve their viability and evaluability. Program managers can develop core definitions of what constitutes a responsible fatherhood program; conduct process evaluations to define program objectives, activities and best practices; building basic MIS capacity; and stabilizing and enhancing funding.
(This one combines what looks like an HHS? grant to the Lewin group (97FM0122) with an HHS Contract to . . . . combined with a Ford Foundation Grant headed up by Ronald Mincy, wich name is significant (look it up). Lewin were simply the enablers and to make it look (or be) more scientific and respectable. This being only 1997, it shows just how much intention and planning to completely continue expanding “FATHERHOOD” as a field (regardless of results) was made — and this of course depended on major foundations like FORD working with WELFARE money. FYI, Ford Foundation are not the good guys here in the US …)
This gives me a very squirrely feeling (esp. knowing that by 1998 somehow Congress passed a “fatherhood resolution.”)
But on ca. page 110 of this report (link is the title) you see a list of “Experts Consulted” (Two are from Child Trends, the others are also significant). Johns Hopkins involved also. The whole thing makes me a little ill, given the impact of this trend on my life, personally, and my (DAUGHTERS’, not son’s) futures! ! ! I made it pink just for “spite,” given the subject matter is the opposite gender…
***II. Purpose of this Report
The increased interest in programs that promote responsible fatherhood and the limited information currently available on the services provided and effectiveness of these programs has generated interest in the systematic evaluation of responsible fatherhood programs. For this reason, the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Ford Foundation funded The Lewin Group and Johns Hopkins University to conduct an evaluability assessment of responsible fatherhood programs.
Fatherhood programs and emphasis on male parenting are relatively recent phenomena in the social service sector. Many of the programs currently in place are either very new or, if established, have been experimenting with new interventions or changing the program focus over time to meet the interests and objectives of funders. It is generally the case that fatherhood programs have not adequately documented their performance. This may be because of limited resources, a lack of experience with methods of measuring performance, or simply because the focus of program staff has been on serving fathers rather than proving that methods are effective. While program staff may believe that their activities are helping fathers and resulting in positive impacts on society, others, particularly funders, may be skeptical of evidence of program effectiveness that is limited to anecdotes.
Evaluations of responsible fatherhood programs can serve two important functions:
• provide information to outside agencies and organizations regarding the objectives and the effectiveness of their interventions, which may be used to attract and justify fundingfrom these outside sources; and• provide information to program staff that may be used to modify program design to more efficiently and effectively serve the fathers who use their services.
{{Interesting how “ATTRACT AND JUSTIFY FUNDING” COMES FIRST… AND IT DOESN’T EVEN SAY, HELP THE PROGRAMS REACH THEIR STATED SERVCE, BUT “PROVIDE INFORMATION TO PROGRAM STAFF.”}}
Systematic evaluation of fatherhood program outcomes is crucial to both program design and funding. Conducting rigorous evaluations using standard scientific methods . . .[[will provide continued income for the Lewin Group, the Fatherhood practitioners and organizations, and many other people, not including the children that these program are supposed to help by encouraging and enabling their Daddies to “man up” and support their offspring]]
Some of these groups hang together at times.
the Lewin Group at a 2007 AFCC conference:42. Healthy Marriage Projects: The Influence of Marriage on Child Support Enforcement
The Administration for Children and Families’ top goal in the last few years has been to encourage marriage for unwed low income families through marriage education, community outreach and demonstrations. This panel will discuss the status of Community Healthy Marriage Projects being financed by the Office of Child Support Enforcement, “Building Strong Families” marriage demonstrations being financed by the Administration of Children and Families and the importance of former marriage status or unmarried status on subsequent child support enforcement out- comes.
(this presentation for sale — only $15.00)
One reason they may be interested to conference at AFCC — AFCC has judges. Some Family Law judges get to mandate parenting education, etc. Dr. Fishman is now with MEF, and his bio shows a close connection to welfare matters, and HHS. I’m sure the personal connections didn’t hurt either. He has a masters in “organizational psychology” which is probably the way to go if you want a government career these days, and an MPA from USC.. Hardly suprising, the new company is also into (among other things) and is in Alexandria, VA.
Marriage and relationship education
State Policies to Promote Marriage
This report inventories state policies directly focused on promoting or supporting marriage. Using secondary data sources, the authors compiled information across states documenting the presence of marriage-related activities in a variety of areas such as campaigns and commissions; divorce laws and procedures; marriage and relationship preparation and education; tax and transfer policies; marriage support and promotion programs.
- State Policies to Promote Marriage, Karen N. Gardiner, Michael E. Fishman, Plamen Nikolov, Asaph Glosser, and Stephanie Laud. With the assistance of Theodora Ooms, September, 2002
I googled “The Lewin Group, AFCC, Fatherhood” but apparently I’m one of the few people catching on to it, per Google anyhow. One association with the Abstinence Group, “WAIT” (Joneen Krauth — plenty on that on this blog too, I actually looked up their corporate records history in Colorado. What a group — associated with NARME, etc. What a racket, too!): This showed up under “pipl.” The site AAHMI is African American Healthy Marriage Initiative which is, by any other name, HHS… Basically… DNR if this was at Hampton Univ. or where.
The Lewin Group is pleased to share these materials developed for the …Joneen Krauth RN, BSN — NEW. Executive Director of The Abstinence and …[ Speakers List – www.aahmi.net ]
“Reference in this web site to any specific commercial product, process, service, manufacturer, organization, or company does not constitute its endorsement or recommendation by the U.S. Government, the Department of Health and Human Services, or the Administration for Children and Families (ACF). ACF is not responsible for the contents of any “off-site” web page referenced from this server or from private, third-party, pop-up, or browser-integrated software or applications.”
NOTE: A long while ago, I remember this particular AAHMI and some closely associated nonprofits I was looking up, was one key to understanding just how much the HHS is reaching out with money to set up “mouthpiece” nonprofits or groups (including with key speakers) around the country. I figure HHS at this point is about as criminally-run a US Dept. as HUD is alleged to be, by someone who knows well enough as she used to be near its top.(C.A. Fitts, late 1980/1990s).
[[2016 updated material from LewinGroup.com]]
Viewed at “lewin.com” 4/11/2016 during blog update
(Their “About Us” page, main content):
The Lewin Group is a premier national health care and human services consulting firm. We understand the industry and provide our clients with high-quality products and insightful support.
Why Choose The Lewin Group?
Proven History
We have nearly 50 years’ experience finding answers and solving problems for leading organizations in the public, nonprofit, and private sectors.
Objective Viewpoint
The Lewin Group is committed to independence and integrity in our work. We combine professional expertise with extensive knowledge and a rigorous approach to analyzing and solving problems to deliver value to each of our clients and to the larger community as well.
Real-World Experience
Our strategic and analytical services help clients:
- Improve policy and expand knowledge of health care and human services systems
- Enact, run, and evaluate programs to enhance delivery and financing of health care and human services
- Deal with shifts in health care practice, technology, and regulation
- Optimize performance, quality, coverage, and health outcomes
- Create strategies for institutions, communities, governments, and people to make health care and human services systems more effective
Who We Are
The Lewin Group employs more than 140 consultants drawn from industry, government, academia, and the health professions. Many are national authorities whose strategies for health and human services system improvements come from their personal experience with imperatives for change. The Lewin Group is an Optum company, a wholly owned subsidiary of UnitedHealth Group. We’re editorially independent, but through partnerships with Optum, we can tap into a vast body of data and resources. Optum is an analytics, technology, and consulting services firm that enables better decisions throughout the health system.
The Lewin Group provides its clients with the very best expert and impartial health care and human services policy research and consulting services.
OTHER 2016 observations on The Lewin Group: Street address: 3130 Fairview Park Drive #500, Falls Church, VA — is right near “Acentia, a Maximus Company” which is same street address #800. Maximus, we may remember, contractor to manage child support, Medicaid, other health-care related record-keeping, collections & distributions in a number of states (and at least one other country).
(3130 Fairview Dr #800, Falls Church, VA. Viewed 4/11/2016 during blog update)
Acentia, a MAXIMUS Company, is a premier employer who provides software, information technology, and management solutions that produce successful programs of national significance, while consistently demonstrating a partnership of trust and value to our federal customers and the American taxpayer.
[Holistic Data Analytics….]
“Centers of Excellence” (options: Analytics / Cloud / Mobility)
“Acentia offers a holistic approach to Big Data and Analytics. Traditional analytics can tell you what happened and why, but leading organizations are using predictive analytics to understand what could happen and prescriptive analytics to choose the next best action.”…..
(SEE LINK in chart above; Wikipedia gives the history. Started in 1969 by a former Tuskeegee Airman as inner city venture capital, but it changed direction, bought and sold various companies and now is like, LARGE).
| Recipient Name | City | State | ZIP Code | County | DUNS Number | Sum of Awards |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I C F, INC | FAIRFAX | VA | 22031-6050 | FAIRFAX | 072648579 | $ 2,477,256 |
| Award Title | Sum of Actions | |||
| 2011 | ACF | I C F, INC | NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTER FOR STRATEGIES TO PROMOTE HEALTHY MARRIAGE | $ 1,500,000 |
(NRCSPHM — what did you think it sood for? 🙂 )
(PJ Media — Dr. Phyllis Chesler writes or wrote on there — was kind enough to print my comments here; the 2nd comment mentions ICF).
I profiled this company before, particularly when TAGGS.hhs.gov decided to bastardize its name on the database. It’s in Fairfax VA with background in Defense, Energy and in 1988 it acquired a division of Kaiser (engineering) and got REALLY large. It’s currently #64 of Forbes top 100 companies, is traded on the NYSE, and etc. HHS hired to to do even more (stuff) to promote marriage, whch is the acronym. ON this blog somewhere, no doubt:
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/news/press/2011/Grantawards2011.html
| ICF Incorporated, LLC (NRCSPHM) | Fairfax |
VA
|
$1,500,000
|
Why?
Well, I have one line of reasoning — that there is a family court around basically creates an immense loophole; any police officer anywhere can just about get out of arresting domestic violence perpetrators (they could anyway) by, when children exist, simply failing to arrest, and letting it land in the family venue. Ditto with CPS. But even if they didn’t, they still have immense discretion to simply not arrest. If they DO arrest, the DA’s have immense discretion not to prosecute also.
WOMEN’s JUSTICE CENTER /CENTRO de JUSTICIA PARA MUJERES
Santa Rosa, California
(a site I quote below, and refer to often enough) I see has written an October 2011 letter to:
I’m a women’s rights advocate who has been working for the last 20 years in the exasperating struggle to end violence against women. I’m writing because we’re stumped, and we need your help.
My opinion: these feminist law professors and women, in many respects, have for over a decade completely ignored the role of the family courts, and their relationship to the criminal prosecution of (see title) real-time crimes play in simply invalidating domestic violence law, child abuse law, in fact most criminal laws of any sort for women who have given birth. And women who give birth, aka MOTHERS, represents a significant portion of women against whom violence is routine.
In this current climate, and while that off-ramp from the criminal justice system (if the reporting and prosecution even gets there), it is next to impossible for these women to get free from an abuser – with children — and stay free unless HE simply chooses not to sue for custody or further bother her. And, if there’s a Title IV-D child support order around, even if he doesn’t want to bother her, the county can and will go after that family and those kids anyhow. That’s My take on it. So I would not be asking a feminist law professor for help, based on the track record and under-reporting of this scandal. And I’ve talked to some of them (including in my area). However, this writer has a point:
The problem is this: Modern violence-against-women laws are in place throughout most of the U.S., as are crisis centers, hotlines, counselors, and shelters. But a critical piece is missing. We don’t have anywhere near adequate enforcement of the laws. Nor do women have any legal right to enforcement of the laws, nor any legal remedy or redress when police and prosecutors fail to enforce the laws.
As such, the laws are meaningless to us. However, it takes a while — and sometimes costs a life — to recognize this.
. . . But the daunting and particular problem for women is that these absolute discretionary powers are in the hands of law enforcement agencies that are rife with anti-women biases, structures, and traditions. Violence-against-women cases are the cases these officials are most overwhelmingly prone to ignore, ditch, dismiss, under-investigate, under-prosecute, and give sundry other forms of disregard. This disparate impact and denial of equal protection is undermining all the other monumental efforts to end violence against women.
Despite all the high flying official rhetoric to the contrary, way too many police and prosecutors don’t want to do these cases. They know they don’t have to do these cases. They know a million ways to get rid of these cases. They know nobody can hold them to account. And the Supreme Court keeps driving this impunity deeper into the heart of American law. Not surprisingly, the violence against women rages on.
We can social work these cases endlessly, but when police and prosecutors don’t do their part and put the violent perpetrators in check, the perpetrators easily turn around and undo any stability and safety we and the women have attempted to secure. The freer she gets, the angrier he becomes. Without adequate law enforcement, victims of violence against women are doomed. And then they are double doomed by the void of any legal cause to hold unresponsive police and prosecutors to account. And then, all too often, she is dead
Notice that at the end of this eloquent (and I believe, truthful) letter, she refers to the “Judicial Ghetto of Family Law.” It is this Ghetto that has to be addressed if “violence against women” is to stop. To date, we are still the gender that produces children, gives birth to them, no matter how nurturing Dad is. As such, this arena, that ghetto, ALSO has to be addressed, or as an obstacle to life itself for those in it, removed:
We urgently need your help. Not in the judicial ghetto of family law where victims of violence against women are too often shunted to fend for themselves.
Why NOT? Why should women have to fend for themselves in a biased system — because thats where it typically goes after any civil restraining order (see VAWA, below) is put in place. Perhaps if there’d been more “feminist law professors” who’d gone through leaving DV AS MOTHERS, this might have been handled by now. Not saying that it wasn’t a tough uphill battle to start with. But we mothers are certainly not ballast in this journey; just treated like it in these circles!
But in criminal law where the state itself must take responsibility for securing justice for these heinous crimes. We can’t solve this problem without you.
As a first step, please pass this on to colleagues you think would most fervently fight to create a women’s right to justice. And then consider joining in yourself.
Thank you for your concern.
Marie De Santis, Director Women’s Justice Center Centro de Justicia para Mujeres
mariecdesantis@gmail.com www.justicewomen.org
We like to believe that criminal law always applies when crimes are committed (the title lists some of the crimes which comprise “Domestic violence” and “Child abuse” and characterize the lives of people who sometimes, after years enduring these things, end up dead, or paying their abuser, which is a form of institutionalized extortion).
BUT — when a case is labeled “high-conflict” or “custody dispute” of any sort, BY LAW (apparently) it comes under the jurisdiction of a different court — which is not a real court, it’s a business enterprise. (See this blog. See other NON-federally-supported blogs or articles.
For example get this (“johnnypumphandle, re: Los Angeles “Public Benefit Corporations Supported by Taxpayers” Not only ALL the people walking through the halls — but the real estate — the halls themselves, apparently are often part of this enterprise! Why this never occurred to me before reading these matters, I don’t know. The family court is in a separate building from the main (Criminal) courthouse in MANY towns and cities across the county. That alone should have caught our attention. Now (same general idea), they are building, sometimes, “Family Justice Centers” as part of a National Alliance movement (see “One-Stop Justice Shop” posts, mine).
I reviewed this material carefully before, it takes a while to sink in. It will NOT sink in if all you see mentally is the visual of the building and its inhabitants. In order to “See” straight, one needs to see and be willing to think in terms of corporations, tax returns, and cash flow. And something relating the words “taxpayer” with “tax-exempt.” As the site says:
We have again reminded the IRS of the same scheme being perpetrated by the Private Corporation – Los Angeles County Courthouse Corporation – with the same bond guarantees by the law firm of O’Melveny & Myers. Taxpayers are still getting stiffed by this scam, since there is no accountability for the money and NO TAX FORMS HAVE EVER BEEN FILED!
Key in this EIN#
|
||||||||||||||||||
to This Charitable Search Site (for California) — and tell me why the Relationship Training Institute — which does business with and takes business FROM the court, evidently — is still marked “current” when no (zero, nada, zilch, nothing at all) has been filed (and uploaded) by this organization for the state of California as a charity -EVER; even though it’s filed with the IRS? Is that cheating the citizens of California, or what? Here they are (and here goes continuity in my post today):
Relationship Development and Domestic Violence Prevention, Training, and Consultation
The Relationship Training Institute (RTI) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, established in 1986* by David B. Wexler, Ph.D. to provide training, consultation, treatment, and research in the field of relationship development and relationship enhancement.
| Entity Number | Date Filed | Status | Entity Name | Agent for Service of Process |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C2583174 | 05/17/2004* | ACTIVE | RELATIONSHIP TRAINING INSTITUTE | DAVID B WEXLER |
Because — in the 7 years (at least) it’s been operating in California, David B. Wexler, Ph.D.’s group has not bothered to file it’s (by law) annually required tax return with the state (NOTE — which provides the California Attorney General with a Schedule B showing names and addresses of contributors, and has to list government funding) and because the CA Corporations search site is so limited, I can’t see from there OR its founding articles if this is a domestic (Ca originated) or “foreign” (out of state) corporation.
On the other hand, the group California Coalition for Families and Children which incorporated in 2010 (per same site) — and is critical of the San Diego Family Court Practices — has twice received a “file your dues” letter, which you can search at the same charities link, above. It has no EIN# because it hasn’t registered yet.
| Entity Number | Date Filed | Status | Entity Name | Agent for Service of Process |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C3284403 | 03/09/2010 | ACTIVE | CALIFORNIA COALITION FOR FAMILIES AND CHILDREN | CORPORATION SERVICE COMPANY WHICH WILL DO BUSINESS IN CALIFORNIA AS CSC – LAWYERS INCORPORATING SERVICE |
I believe any group that calls itself a 501(c)3 (or “4”) should fulfil the requirements of it. However, there seems a bit of favoritism (OR, This group has no bribe to pay — below the table — for the regulatory agencies, including the OAG?); Emad G. Tadros, Ph.D., checked out the suspicious credentials of a custody evaluator, discovered a custody Mill (plus that a house cat got a diploma from the same place) and put up a website about all this, plus filed a suit, which was simply the right thing to do. In retaliation for challenging the right of the courts to continue their fraud up on the public he was fined $86K in fees, and an attempt has been made at obtaining interest, too. Apparently, this group has not cut a deal with anyone, and so the OAG WILL go after their nonprofit status. Here’s the link to “San Diego Court Corruption.”
So, as to The Relationship Training Institute, I guess not filing with the state is “close enough for jazz The Office of Attorney General.” And also close enough for an NIMH sponsored grant on Domestic Violence in the Navy, too. If our Navy was run this way, we’d be losing a lot more wars.
RTI offers an on-going series of informative workshops and state-of-the-art training programs for mental health professionals and for the public, bringing innovative leaders and teachers to the San Diego community. RTI staff also travel throughout the world training professionals in the treatment models that we have been developing and publishing for over 25 years
So, don’t try to tell me the courts and attorney general are unaware — see its website, and see the detail on its charitable registration. A letter has been sent to this charity, and its site claims it’s approved by the Judicial Council of California to provide CLE credits for its trainings!
(the logos of approving organizations).
Approving Organizations
By the way, Dr. Wexler is listed under another one, IABMCP or something:
| David B. Wexler , Ph.D., Diplomate IABMCP | |
| Director, Relationship Training Institute, San Diego, California | |
International Academy of Behavioral Medicine, Counseling and Psychotherapy (group registered in Dallas, TX in 1979, EIN has 11 numbers # 17523304719. Usually it’s 9 or 12):
| Name | Taxpayer ID# | Zip |
|---|---|---|
| INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY OF BEHAVIORAL MEDICINE COUNS | 17523304719 | 75225 |
The actual EIN# is 751726710 and it’s registered in Colorado as a 501(c)6 ” Business leagues, chambers of commerce, real estate boards, etc. formed to improve conditions..” It has a tiny budget and apparently exists to distribute a newsletter, per 990 (2010 ruling.), registered as a foreign nonprofit (citing the Texas org.) since 1999 and apparently is filing its reports in Colorado OK.
| 2010 | 751726710 | International Academy of Behavioral Medicine Counseling and Psychother | CO | 1980 | 06 | 31,455 | 1,402 | 990 |
Dr. Wexler anyhow, is on its Advisory Council, along with a long list of mostly but not all male personages, including Deepak Chopra…
I also note that this domestic violence training is very man-friendly… But RTI is apparently the group that does the trainings OUTSIDE the courthouse, which makes them part of the personnel bill. The earlier article was about who pays rents on the real estate, who owns the real estate, of the courthouses themselves? Reading on:
August 25, 2001 – Los Angeles County Courthouse Corporation and others. e.g. Los Angeles County Law Enforcement-Public Facilities Corporation and (too many to name or to discover). The Crusaders think that there are over a dozen of these ‘Public Benefit’ Corporations hiding in LA County. If you are aware of any of the others, drop us a line.
These companies are established as Tax exempt ‘charitable trusts’ under the Federal Statute – 501(c)(4). They direct millions of dollars but are basically unaudited. The Los Angeles County Courthouse Corporation (LACCC), for example, controls projects for $632 million, but as yet has not registered with the California Department of Corporations even though they have issued outstanding securities for this amount.
They have established trust agreements with banks, lease and leaseback agreements with developers, securities agreements with underwriters, legal assistance from high powered law firms, yet they have no employees. All work is done ‘outside’ on authorization from an officer of the Company. e.g. bills are paid, rents are collected, legal services are performed by outsiders through agreements. As an example, O’Melveny & Myers pays the fees for this Corporation.
Is this a donation? Somehow, I think O’Melveny & Myers are not providing legal services for free.
The company has offices in the LA County facilities, claims no employees, but has all of its utilities, telephone, rent, etc. paid by the County.
Who answers the phone? A county employee, doing ‘part time’ work but receiving no pay. At least the Corporation claims to have no employees.
How are bills paid? We have a letter to Henry P. Eng, an auditor , who is told that he will receive a check for $4,730 and a like amount will be charged to the rent due to the corporation in order to balance the books. You see, the Corporation has issued bonds (Certificates of Participation) recently for $115 Million to build the Antelope Valley Courthouse. The Banc of America and four other underwriters have guaranteed the purchase of all of these certificates.
So WHY do I make those claims in the Title of this post today? Well, for one, I research TAGGS grants, and read conference brochures, and pay attention to what groups do – -and don’t — report on, including the various elephants in the room…
I’m not the only one, either, questioning what VAWA is for, except to inspire a lot of anti-feminist backlash, give Fathers & Families (GlennSacks hounds) something to complain about, and a source of funds to set up websites and conferences (ad nauseam) to perpetuate the illusion that whatever a civil — or even criminal — domestic violence action DOES, Family Courts will not quickly UNDO, even if neither parent asks them to!
You might want to look at this article:
VAWA Critique
In Which a Little-Known Legal Brief Plows into Hallowed Terrain
I almost felt like a traitor (though I was sure in my opinion) with this round of requests I write someone to reauthorize VAWA. WHY? I thought. I already know who’s collaborating with these other courts. Well, another (non-federally funded, intentionally so) site – I like this site, too — explains:
Ever since the U.S. Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) was passed in 1994, women’s advocates have rallied again and again to assure that VAWA stays authorized and funded. The steady torrent of threats against the act from antagonist men’s groups has left advocates with little inclination to question whether VAWA is truly delivering what’s needed to end the violence and secure justice for women. But a little-disseminated legal brief we came across recently rips along the fault lines and suggests that giving VAWA a thorough critique may be one of the most important steps we should be taking to advance the struggle.
“The legal brief, signed by a dozen domestic violence scholars from around the country and submitted in 2007 to the Inter-American Human Rights Commission, emphatically makes the case that VAWA not only is failing to protect women, but that this failure is rooted in fundamental flaws in VAWA’s structure and administration. “VAWA is a limited remedy,” the document states, “That fails to protect women or to discharge the United State’s obligations under international law.”
(it’s going to talk about the Jessica Gonzales case, and the IACHR. However, NO — I say that these DV scholars have simply fallen asleep at the switch, or decided to look the other way, to keep their publications, etc. coming. )
In summarizing their analysis, the brief states, “VAWA fails to accomplish four crucial things: 1) It does not provide any remedy when abuser’s or police officer’s violate victims’ rights, 2) it does not require participation of all states or monitor their progress, 3) it does not fully or adequately fund all the services that are needed, 4) it does not require states to pass or strengthen legislation around civil protective orders or the housing rights of domestic violence victims.” . . .
VAWA: “primarily a source of grants” which has not reduced domestic violence
The brief goes on to characterize VAWA as “primarily a source of grants” with non-binding terms, voluntary participation, unmonitored compliance, and which mandates nothing. And the funding is paltry. According to the brief, in 2007, the median total of VAWA grants to individual states was 4.5 million dollars. That’s less than the cost of one wing of a fighter jet allotted per state to combat violence against women.
If the core of this brief is accurate, despite the services VAWA has provided to tens of thousands of women, the message VAWA delivers to law enforcement and other public officials throughout America is disastrous. ‘You can prevent, investigate, and punish violence against women – if you feel like it. But if you’d rather not, don’t worry about it. VAWA doesn’t mandate that you do anything. And if women are upset by that, rest assured, VAWA and the courts have also made sure there’s not a darn thing women can do about it to hold you to account.‘
Most troubling of all, the brief finds that in the time from VAWA’s passage in 1994 to 2007 when the brief was filed, VAWA has not reduced domestic violence in the U.S., despite the U.S. government’s claims to the contrary. As stated in the brief, “Since the passage of VAWA, domestic violence rates have not been reduced in proportion to other violent crimes
This site writes their rationale:
And perhaps worse, these fundamental flaws in VAWA are not even a matter of discussion, debate, or protest among frontline women’s advocates. It’s critical for progress in ending violence against women that that discussion begin.
The Tie that Binds
VAWA requires that shelters and rape crisis centers that receive VAWA funding must demonstrate their cooperation with their local law enforcement agencies.
Individual states that administer the VAWA grants have implemented this requirement in various ways. But typically the shelters and crisis centers seeking VAWA grants must obtain signed operational agreements with their local law enforcement agencies. This has given law enforcement veto power over the survival of the violence against women centers, a controlling power law enforcement has not hesitated to use.
VAWA is a Federal Act of Congress first passed in 1994. By Contrast (and to oppose its premises), the National Fatherhood Initiative is a NONPROFIT started by someone with close connections to HHS, and Washington, and now many legislators — and is not only still funded, but has permeated the structure and purpose of violence prevention, child welfare, and child abuse prevention areas of goverment. While VAWA (which at least went past Congress initially — the NFI did not) promotes one kind of training, NFI promotes the opposite theories.
Then the two groups get together, for example, The Greenbook Initiative and congratulation their federally-paid-behinds for being able to get along, while women continue to die after breeding and leaving abuse. And etc.
The DOJ Defending Children Initiative: even has an “Engaging Fathers” link:
The ILLUSION that there is protection for women and children through groups such as “Child Protection Services” is fatuous. That’s not what they’re there for, apparently. Nor, apparently, are the civil restraining order issuers (typically a domestic violence nonprofit of some sort, or possibly a parent might get one on his/her own) there to prosecute or punish any crime.
I heard this from a woman (grandparent) in an unidentified urban area, regarding her grandchildren’s being in the sole custody of an abusing father AFTER CPS and police had confirmed sodomy and forced copulation with the (young boy):
Hearsay #1:
There are no laws or penal codes against child abuse by a parent. Child abuse by a parent comes under the Welfare and Institution Code (WIC).
The welfare and institution code does ONE thing — offers reunification services to the abuser. The one and ony law mandated by legislators (in such cases) is reunification.
Since the theme is “reunification” (and really, let’s get honest — “supervised visitation” concept comes from this field, reunification), no family court has any interest in re-unifying a protective mother with her child once that child has been completely (and physically) “reunified” with the abuser father. There are no fatherhood-promotion services for this (access/visitation concept is actually a fatherhood concept). Supervised visitation with a sex offender (young) father and mother has resulted in child-rape INSIDE a supervised visitation facility in Trumbull County, Ohio, recently. It has resulted in financial fraud on East and West Coast both (Genia Shockome/Karen Anderson of Amador County, PA), it has resulted in a child literally being supervised by a woman who had criminally sexually assaulted a DOG in Contra Costa County California courts (Welch v. Tippe), and — the commissioner? who made that order, as recommended by her court-crony, is I believe still on the bench — and has been, while we’re at it, on the Board of Kids’ Turn, too. After all, it’s all about the “Kids” and what’s best for them, right? How often do women whose children have been abused get put on supervised visitation for “alienating” the father by reporting — or allowing their kids to even report to someone else unsolicited, like a schoolteacher — real live criminal activity upon themselves?
Hearsay #2:
Child Protective Services labeled our case high-conflict which put it in custody court. Neither the father or I had even mentioned divorce at the time.
This mother says she saw it on their report. I’d like to see that report. Assuming it’s true, this means that CPS knows quite well that they don’t have to prosecute anything against a parent when it comes to abuse of children; they can shunt it off to family court.
Hearsay #3 (to you — this is my case):
When my children were being stolen (abducted), and I was protesting on the basis of a valid court order giving me physical custody, an attempt was made to bring CPS in — although no abuse was being alleged! When I pointed this out, the officers supervising the exchange — which I’d requested for personal safety — refused to enforce the court order, mocked me, and when I realized there was no recourse from this crew, I had to let my “ex-batterer” and the children’s father, drive off into the sunset with children I’d raised, and from this point forward (til today) not ONE single court order was consistently obeyed for more than a month, including visitation or phone contact with me, alternating holidays, or the children with the mother on mother’s day, all of which remained in the CUSTODY order.
In short, if I wasn’t going to voluntarily justify bringing on more (paid, public employee) professionals AFTER existing paid, public employee professionals simply refused to do their job (which I later learned — they don’t have to, even if not doing their job results in someone’s, or even three children’s, deaths. See Castle Rock v. Gonzales).
Talk about “interlocking directorate” – – – – I also heard from a savvy investigator (mother) (noncustodial) in another state how that, literally, when a father is accused AND found guilty of abuse in one sector (for example, criminally, or child support services) this literally causes the father to be declared “incapacitated” or incompetent — making the child a “dependency” case. The court that the mother then walks into is, in effect, a “dependency court.” The state owns her child, and if she can’t ransom it back, too bad. The ransom process is simply this: the hearings go on, and on, and on and as much money is extracted from the mother, who WILL fight back, until she’s broke too, if not in spirit. That’s the plan. That’s not an anomaly or “burp” of the system — that IS the plan.
We have heard also of horrendous situations, and I’ve reported this, of dual electronic docketing. (“Computerized or Con-puterized?” Janet Phelan on Joseph Zernik reporting. One week after she published the layperson’s explanation of this, he was picked up by police without cause and held). We’ve heard of collected but intentionally not distributed child support, in the millions of $$ (Silva v. Garcetti (who was Los Angeles D.A., involving Richard Fine). Even a brief look at what happened to Mr. Fine (besides getting incarcerated and disbarred) and how the California Legislature handled the fact that the entire judiciary was subject to bribery at the county level by payments to judges — from the county — in cases where — the county — was a party. It retroactively granted immunity, and did this quickly, lest the entire judicial system get shut down. (SBX-211) — that brief look should say, what we are dealing with is XX % crooks, and X% enablers or people who can’t themselves get out of the system because by participation, they’d be prosecuted too. Talk about “gangs” . . . that’s a Gang. Sometimes deals go between one jurisdiction and another, making them a little harder to catch (Gregory Pentoney)
Two other things which I’ve heard of from a non-BMCC “let’s ask the expert source” in recent times — and again, I present this as Hearsay, but it’s entirely in character for the venue — of more than one physical case file being kept. One is shown to the litigant when she can afford it (which ain’t always), or qualifies as low-income enough to be shown it. The other is shown and hauled out when it comes to justifying program billing — that one or both parents may be totally unaware of, occurring in their case, under their or their kids’ social security #s, and in their name.
Again, my plan is to curtail posting on this blog (I believe I’ve “said my piece” on most major points) at the end of January, and get about other aspects of life. Oh yes, and I signed the blog up for Twitter, which should curtail the length some, like by ca. (10,000 to 14,000) – 140 characters!
I realize that conversational style isn’t communication, yet the information is urgent to present and get out. The “end of January” date was in honor of the BMCC conference, which I plan to comment on every day it’s in session. Ideally, you will see one post a day from here til 1/31, however, some of the material does cause vicarious trauma to report, which may affect quality of post, or my getting one out on a certain day. While I know what I know, from study, research observation, reflection, and synthesis, expressing it is another matter.
Also, the conversing with the material style is laborious, and takes hours. Whereas in a personal conversation, say, by phone, with interaction, I know I could convey the key FAQs, overall, in 10 minutes or less, and tell people where to find more information, should they be motivated.
Some people I know are headed up again to the Battered Mothers Custody Conference IX in Albany, New York again this year, where the same basic information will be presented by experts, while mothers are welcome to participate from the floor and by adding their square to the quilt, by buying books which the presenters will be selling (last year’s hot-off-the-press available in softcover and at a discount – only $59 — for conference attendees) and donate, too. This is addressed to mothers who are probably being fleeced in the courts, have tortuous situations to handle, and some are paying child support to their child’s or their abuser, which is why they pull it together to come to this conference, seeking help and answers — from the experts.
One difference — a positive one — THIS year is the attendance of Dr. Phyllis Chesler, who also will be selling her newly revised “Mothers on Trial” which I know incorporates some new stories, and I plan to order it on-line.
However, I also know that it’s not about to contain the information on this blog, on NAFCJ.net, or much on the AFCC, Welfare Reform (1996), and the role of the Child Support $4 billion industry in prolonging custody conflicts, for profit. However, it will be a new presenter, and an experienced feminist who I’ll bet is not afraid to address some of the issues of Gender Apartheid (which also results in “Battered Mothers”) in front of this audience, and on which she is an expert. Perhaps she will — as I don’t think others have — bring up the impact of religion on this situation in the family courts. It’s there – -not talking about it would hardly make sense.
At the bottom of this post, I am going to list the Presenters, and brief comments or links on the ones I know. The ones I don’t, I’ll look up. Perhaps in the next post (as this one expanded into handling a few other items).
And in this post, I’m going to charge pretty hard into the entire concept behind this conference, as I did last January, afterwards.
NB: I attended one conference in all its years, but primarily to meet mothers I’d been blogging with; I’d already realized that it was a marketing conference. That’s responsible behavior for people shelling out travel, hotel, and conference fees, not to mention in general. You find out who’s saying what and evaluate it.
That’s why I believe that it’s the “experts” that should be sitting around the tables in the conference and taking notes, and the women themselves that should be up on stage giving testimony, ideas — and controlling the microphones. Then some of the questions they have might get some answers, through collective wisdom, as women tend to do — when not co-opted into the hierarchical model of relating to each other which is more characteristic of males, and of this society we live in.
The structure of this type of conference is didactic — from presenter to participant. They are the dispensers of wisdom, women & mothers attending, the recipients. Go forth and deliver the expert wisdom to your areas, (seek to hire us as expert witnesses in your court cases) and if it doesn’t work — next year we are going to do the same basic routine anyhow, and your feedback will NOT be front and center, if it is allowed at all.
Seriously — that’s how it goes. And anyone with a child in a custody case has a ticking clock, if not time bomb, which is running. We do not have time to beat around the bush and fail to address things in PRIORITY order.
So anyhow, “is what we (?) are doing working?”
Somehow this is going to be stretched out into a weekend’s worth of material? Is there a better question to ask, such as — what can we do to either clean up or shut down the family law courts if they refuse to clean themselves out, which is unlikely? How many experts does it take to distract a mother’s attention from who is paying her abuser and the judges that gave that kid to the abuser? Why doesn’t this conference ever bring up child support, welfare reform, or mathematical issues, such as economics?
Or, for that matters, why are not the people who experienced abuse considered THE experts, and why are the true experts (the battered mothers) not as informed as the presenting experts on things that others figured out over 15 years ago in this field?
This is, among other things, a marketing conference, and a chance for women to sit with each other and have company in their distress. It is NOT a place for them to actually reform the courts, or learn the most direct possible ways (if any ways are possible) to get their children back, or a crooked judge off their case. That I can tell.
*A comment on the site says women can contribute to a quilt for missing children. (Which somehow reminds me of a church situation — you may attend, women: Here — serve some cookies, greet perhaps, and of course work child care, the sermon and other important things will be piped in from our (male) minister). . . . . now, there are presenters who are mothers on the platform, some of who I know by name, and I know those mothers are not about to rock the boat — by reporting on what you’ll find here, NAFCJ.net, Cindy Ross, Richard Fine (Emil Tadros either, for that matter) and other places. Somehow that information isn’t worth informing Moms of, which results in Uninformed Moms, wondering why things aren’t changing.
Moreover, once a case — or person — moves out of their area of “expertise” — meaning, case in point for mothers, into the family law system — it becomes “not my problem” and they can, I suppose, somehow sleep with themselves at night (those who actually have functional consciences) without drugs or sedatives, by saying – it’s out of my hands now, I did my part!
Ay, there’s the rub. It’s a win-win for the civil restraining order (DV agency) field AND for the Family Law Field, because no one “out-ed” either field’s collaboration and centralization over the years. No one has done this much to date because so few people follow the funding, particularly experts protesting “Child abuse, Domestic Violence” and so forth.
RE: “IS What We’re Doing Working”
Here’s a short answer: “ExcUUse me? You * #$!- ing (kidding) me, right?”
Slightly Longer answer, Fresh kill, two children (10 & 14) into someone else’s care (foster? relatives?) this week in California. The woman showed up, obediently, for a family court hearing, and was murdered in cold blood, in her car.
Authorities say the man shot his wife, gave chase to police, then shot himself; they were scheduled to appear in family court for a hearing
BY JOHN ASBURY AND KEVIN PEARSON
STAFF WRITERS
kpearson@pe.com | jasbury@pe.com
Published: 04 January 2012 08:42 AM
A man at the Hemet courthouse for a child-support hearing calmly walked up to his wife’s car and fired two fatal shots, then led police on a car chase before killing himself Wednesday morning, according to witnesses and police
. . . .
Costales had no criminal record in Riverside County, and the couple had no history of domestic violence with each other, nor was there a restraining order in the case. However, Costales was accused of domestic violence in a previous divorce.
The two children now aged 10 and 14, we don’t know who their biological mother was –whether the woman slumped over in her car that day, or the former Ms. Costales: However, they were born (do the math, see article) prior to this marriage: 2012 January minus ten, minus fourteen years. Mr. Costales prior marriage had mutual restraining orders as of the year 2000.
‘A HORRIBLE SIGHT’
Kimberly Jones, 45, of Hemet, said she was in her car when she heard the first gunshot, which she thought was a firecracker. She looked back to see Schulz back away quickly.
Jones ducked as additional shots were fired, then ran over to find Schulz bleeding and slumped over in the driver’s seat. Jones, who is a nurse, said she tried to resuscitate the woman in the parking lot as Costales casually walked back to his car.
. . . She moved out, not him….
Schulz told the court in September that she was unemployed and receiving $550 in monthly aid. She asked for Costales to be required to make child and spousal payments and to make payments on their Honda Pilot until she could afford to get her own vehicle.
“I need hearing because of no income but aid,” Schulz wrote in court documents. “Living on my brother’s couch, looking for work daily, been unsuccessful. Children need their own home and stability.”
The age difference: Him vs. Her — was 17 years. We don’t know this situation, but here’s a woman who never apparently even SAID “domestic violence” — and yet still died asking for something reasonable. Did she bring children into the relationship (was he their father?). Did he seek a needy woman with children to make up for loss of his first wife and two sons (now adults)?
Do second wives EVER believe the record on the first wives’ court docket?
I went to look this one up at the Riverside Court, but found out that it’s not even free to view the images, and in doing so, they will know who is looking. So much for public oversight from a safe distance!
Police closed off a portion of the courthouse parking lot, stranding about 50 people who were unable to get to their cars to leave, but the courthouse remained open. The Hemet branch of the Riverside County courts handles family law cases in addition to civil, small claims and traffic issues.
Why did she leave? Who knows? Was this unreported violence, nonsupport, or what? Where are the children going to live now? Who HAS them now?
This was a TANF case. She was on aid — that means that only if there has been violence, or some severe extenuating systems, is she allowed some sort of diversion away from seeking child support from the father. The county wants its programs funded. If “aid” goes out, the County controls the collection of child support. This was likely an administrative hearing — there seems not to be any discussion over custody or visitation. This woman didn’t know, and now never will, what receiving welfare from anywhere in California puts one at risk of. Had it not ended this way, it might have stretched out for years in the courts as well.
Suppose this man had not been just Mr. Costales, but Mr. DeKraii, and been in a real bad mood that day? Who else might have died?
Hence, we have to re-think this phrase: “Clear and Present Danger.” It has 3 usages.
1. In the law, unless it’s been rescinded by now — in California, a Batterer is a “Clear and present danger to the mental and physical health of the citizens of California.” If one continues reading the law, they then talk about something like a task force at the District Attorney level.
2. In Usage by AFCC, “Lack of Resources” to the family courts is the “Clear and Present Danger.”
3. I feel it’s safe to say now, clearly, and quite presently, that “the family courts are a clear and present danger to the citizens (not just parents) of the state of California.”
So much for the domestic violence industry. It doesn’t hold water once it’s in “conciliation court.” They just forgot to tell the mothers this, evidently.
I fully realize that’s “heresy” (but the courts themselves are based on psychological theory and clear intent to undermine the meaning of criminal law and drive business to therapists, etc.) but anyone concerned about my POST-battering relationship, POST-family law custody matters (like we say, it goes, so long as minors and two parties are all alive, until the children reach majority) — I have no criminal record and no criminal intents either. I showed up to court hearings no matter how scared I was, and was forced to sit at the table with my ex, and from this close range, somehow “negotiate.”
People want to “reform” Family Court. That’s crazy thinking. It doesn’t account for the roadkill.
Although I can’t blame the average citizen, who thinks that his /her taxes are going to support something noble or good when it pays these salaries for family courts throughout the land, and more. When the situation hits them, personally (evidence is that not all close relatives or friends figure it out, either), perhaps the 2 + 2 will = 4. Who has it helped, and what’s the ratio of helped to roadkill, to children being tortured, children sent into foster care, parents experiencing MIA children, etc.? That’s a system someone can supposedly MANAGE?
Here’s a summary, a post from long ago (about 1.5 years ago) which I’m amazed it still gets attention, and was today:
| 2012 PRESENTERS Bios to be added shortly
Jennifer Collins Carly Singer Michael Bassett, J.D. Carol Pennington Liora Farkovitz Lundy Bancroft- author Barry Goldstein – author, former attorney Joan Zorza – DVLeap, doesn’t blog family law matters Kathleen Russell* — *of Center for Judicial Excellence. Won’t report on AFCC, barely reports on fatherhood funding, but loves high profiles. Not a mother. Connie Valentine (CPPA) Karen Anderson (CPPA and her case is detailed in Johnnypumpandle — but this crowd simply ain’t interested.) Phyllis Chesler (if there were better company I’d try and get there this year, to meet her) Gabby Davis Loretta Fredericks Loretta Fredericks in my opinion should not be allowed to present. She should be put on the spot and have women fire questions about her. Unfortunately, so few women know ANYTHING about MPDI, Duluth Abuse Intervention Programs, Battered Women’s Justice Project, how much TAGGS says the MPDI (etc.) got (HHS funding) — or the infamous collaboration with the AFCC in “Explicating Domestic Abuse in Custody” (or similar title) which was also public funding. She also is featured in AFCC as a presenter, i.e., on the conference circuit? Has she influenced them to understand abuse — or vice versa. This situation (not her personally — we’ve never spoken) PERFECTLy represents what Liz Richards of NAFCJnet has correctly (my research validates this) calls a DV expert functioning as a “heat shield” for fatherhood providers. They lend legitimacy where there is non. Michele Jeker Maralee Mclean Angela Shelton Wendy Murphy Jennifer Hoult Sandy Bromley Renee Beeker (advocates court watch) Joshua Pampreen Nancy Erickson Karin Huffer Jason Huffer Crystal Huffer* *Huffers talk about and help women deal with Legal Abuse Syndrome). Holly Collins Jennifer Collins Zachary Collins Garland Waller **Collins and Waller are central to the conference and high-profile, I believe people know about them.
Dara Carlin* *Formerly DV advocate from Hawaii, then it happened to her. Didn’t notice that the legislator she was sure was on women’s side actually had close ties to a Fatherhood Commission in Hawaii (a What?). This was how I learned about Fatherhood Commissions, actually. She didn’t “Get” it. Also hadn’t noticed that AFCC was presenting — in Hawaii — on PAS, etc. Toby Kleinman Linda Marie Sacks (mentioned in my 2nd “About This Blog” — how to get to the Supreme COurt citing Dr. Phil, Oprah, and a Radio show onesself was interviewed on, thereby giving the rest of mothers protesting abuse a nice reputation for not being too bright. Seriously!) Rita Smith* (NCADV Leadership. NCADV is atop the pile of statewide Coalitions Against Domestic Violence which are state-funded, although not too much funding. It takes fees from these organizations and sells things, has conferences, etc. Was cited positively by Women in Fatherhood, Inc. which I find interesting …..) Eileen King (“Justice for Children” also I think on Linda Marie Sacks case, which Supreme Court refused to hear). Mo Therese Hannah (self-explanatory — and running the conference, with help It says from Ms. Miller. I don’t recoqnize the other names). Liliane Miller Raquel Singh Tammy Gagnon Louise Monroe Chrys Ballerano |
This post came up in my own 3/25/2018 blog search for Open Society Foundations. It wasn’t the top search result but because this post’s contents from 2011 are still so relevant I decided to add some formatting to make for better viewing.
The blog appearance (background color especially, border, and width limits especially) changed years later during an upgrade, so I am adding those formatting changes to this older post for better viewing. Another habit I also developed later was adding complete post title with “shortlink” to it at the top of posts, and including for clarity, the publication date in the actual title itself. The shortlink is for convenience of blog administrator and anyone else who might be copying a link to the post for use elsewhere under full (or shortened) title.
This is not a complete post review for broken links or images that don’t display (If image was provided by a link to an on-line url, that link has probably changed since. I now do this differently so it happens less often…//LGH 3/25/2018.
Post formats now (March 2018) look more like this, including full title with link, date published and approximate length typically at or very close to the top:
An Interlocking Directorate of Associations and Foundations, AFCC forward….[Publ. Dec. 12, 2011] about 9,900 words; case-sensitive, WordPress-generated shortlink ends “-WA”
Readers (such as you be) no doubt realize I’m pretty jaundiced about how many associations are simply duplicates of each other, and how many of the same types of associations were, somewhere in their murky origins, related to Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Children’s Rights Council (or both), associations for mediators, dispute resolution practitioners, and now– (association for) conflict resolution.
(The terms have to be refreshed periodically to reflect the expanding purposes of the same basic set of people). Parent coordinators obviously fits in here somewhere (it’s an AFCC project) and because it takes money to do all this — and not all money going THROUGH the courts comes FROM the courts — we can see today where a particular foundation played a role in expanding AFCC.
For this post, I’d meant to fill in some of the background for this ACFLS (see yesterday’s post) and relate it to AFCC. Then I felt it would be appropriate to look at the AFCC tax returns, in general — and next thing you know, in explaning Peter Salem’s $130K salary, I ended up looking more at — first the AFCC/Peter Salem / Andrew Schepard Hofstra University Connection.
After which a simple look at the elements of the AFCC description of Mr. Salem’s credits revealed a certain award (John M. Hayne) from the “Association for Conflict Resolution.” . . .. Because I read so (damn) much, I picked up that “ACR” is the new “ADR”. And that organization appears to have been following true AFCC style –issuing awards to people on its own board, and sho ’nuff at least one of them was in trouble with the state for nonfiling of tax returns. (Kenneth Cloke, below).
And we take a look also at one of the (many) corporations funding the field of “Conflict Resolution” (plus fatherhood promotion), who happen to be SF Bay ARea based — and pack a lot of clout, too — the Hewlitt Foundation.
All in all, I find it fascinating, and like to engage in conversations with — the material. However, the format of this blog is less than fascinating. I’m actually very tired of looking at it and dealing with its idiosyncrasies (plus techniques I don’t know yet to how to handle — for example, around issues of pasting information from other sites, and the ever-disappearing paragraph spacing.
SO — FamilyCourtMatters is not about to get a facelift — it’s about to get pre-empted by another blog platform, or simply dropped. I have a mental deadline of the end of January 2012, just to handle what comes up at the next BMCC conference.
I am much (MUCH) more interested in the “hard sciences,” than social sciences! The social science shepherds have a pretty limited vocabulary, which is continually elaborated — but not that solid to start with. This vocabulary and mindset are at odds — at “high-conflict” as it were — with the language of the US Constitution, concepts of freedom of choice, liberty and justice as a process. They do not deal with the spiritual matters central to humanity, but instead set up more and more demonstration projects to test their theories, forcibly, on others, and at public and corporate expense.
It’s not NATURE:
This is absolutely not true when one begins to examine the sky, the ground, the water, or things with a microscope. Those things become more fascinating. The closer I look at these “corporations” and nonprofits, the more they behave similarly — and crooked. This is also true with the writing — it’s not even good writing, but mostly rhetoric borrowed from each other. Then, as if to give it more merit, citing each other. I don’t know when the last individual in the whole field had an original idea. It’s mostly groupthink. Where the real creativity comes in is ways to hide the flow of finances among and between the different corporations.
It’s not ART:
It’s also for the most part, not that true when one deals with (the best of) the arts: music, literature, drama, architecture, dance, etc. There is enough interest and genuine expression in there for a lifetime of experience, study,and participation.
Even the study of MONEY is more interesting, when viewed as how it circulates and affects others over time, and in different forms There’s something of a mathematical principle to this.
it uses Technology, but it’s not Technology:
But the Family Courts + Federal Funds + Faith-Based Pooh-Bahs + various Institutes (etc.) are Basically CROWD CONTROL, Population Management from Afar. It reminds me of the Nazis discussing what to do with the inferiors, and this comes through in the language also. The one thing that is NOT taking place in the multiple conferences, and tax-evasion and supposed public benefit operations — is a fair and real engagement with any of the public supposedly benefitted.
Those talking conciliation, conciliation, are actually engaged in a hierarchical manipulation — they wish to rule and change the world, they promise heaven (and demand support to bring it to pass) while delivering — as to the family courts at least, plus the squandering of public funds — hell and in justice. And I know men and women both will agree on this.
One Promise of “Heaven” as follows, and grandiose aspirations:
NATIONAL PEACEMAKER MUSEUM:
Not to be confused with the B36 Peacemaker Museum in Ft. Worth Texas (a 501(c)3) which concept is about maintaining a balance of powers
National Peacemaker Museum |
||
Mission Statement (Approved June 29, 2009)The National Peacemaker Museum Constellation will encourage peaceful conflict resolution between human beings in every corner of the world. It will honor those courageous and innovative individuals and institutions who work toward peace rather than conflict, foster harmony amongst humanity rather than division, and embrace the rich tapestry of human difference while building bridges upon our commonalities. The National Peacemaker Museum will challenge, inspire, educate, and enable visitors from around the world to be peacemakers themselves, to contribute as they can to the ability of the human race to solve our problems creatively and collaboratively, and to craft solutions that are fair, compassionate, and wise. National Peacemaker Museum will accomplish this mission through a diverse array of partnerships and outreach techniques, both virtual and tangible, in an ongoing effort to reach the full diversity of humanity, speaking in a way that each listening ear can hear. The Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR) is supporting a coalition of organizations to establish a National Peacemaker Museum. In November 2007, ACR Immediate Past President, Marilyn S. McKnight established a Taskforce to launch this effort and appointed Forrest (Woody) Mosten to serve as Chair. This Taskforce recognizes that there is an exciting, vibrant peace community comprised of a diverse array of organizations and individuals. The Taskforce is committed to reaching out to these organizations and individuals and to exploring the possibilities building a coalition comprised of a broad array of partners. Since its inception, the Task Force has established dialogue with the United States Institute of Peace which is building a Peace Educational Center on the Mall in Washington D.C currently in construction (opening scheduled for 2010-2011) and is exploring funding for on-line exhibits as a first step to a web-based museum as well as regional and traveling exhibits. |
- Support Development of Model Peace Education Courses, Modules, Writing Contests and Other Public Peace Education Activities
- Support ACR Conference Keynote or Plenary Program for ACR 2010 ACR Annual Meeting in Chicago. Keynote/Plenary with following workshops would be a call to action and formation of a concrete agenda by the field for increased Public Education on Peacemaking.
- Identify Potential Partner Organizations
- Build a Coalition of Museum Partners and Supporters
- Identify and Cultivate Potential Funding Sources
The Task Force:
Who is on this Task Force? here’s the list of 23 individuals. Notice most of the affililations. Number 23, I ran across below and it turns out while his organization “Mediators Beyond Borders” seems legitimate, his own “Center for Dispute Resolution” — incorporated in California in 1987 (per Secretary of State) has NEVER filed — til threatened in the year about 2011 — its annual returns, either with the state or with the IRS. When threatened with a hefty fine by the states’ Office of Attorney General/ Charitable Trusts Registry, it appears he forked over a bunch of RRF (state-level returns) stating the organization made absolutely nothing — 0 – since its inception. It has no assets or income.
This didn’t stop (Mr. Cloke) from referencing his “Center for Dispute Resolution” all over the place, and having a website up that is advertising, in the year 2011, some expensive trainings he is to be holding through its website registration and contact. Moreover, in the year 2010, this organization (that’s sponsoring the Peacemakers Museum) ACR gave him an award, in a series of awards since 2001 designed to puff up the groups’ credibility and public image.
Quite frankly, as a “commoner” watching all this, I’m getting real tired of it. Anyhow, here are the 23 “taskforce” members:
**Marilyn McKnight, I just found: (missing image. <==Broken link updated to “Mediators & Staff” submenu March 2018, but the quote is from earlier website)
Marilyn S. McKnight, M.A.
Marilyn S. McKnight, M.A., director and co-founder
Marilyn is a mediator, trainer, parent coordinator and author who has practiced exclusively in the field of mediation since 1977 after an extensive career in public social work.
In the early 1980s Marilyn began workshops on mediating divorces where there is domestic violence. She received a Bush Leadership Fellowship Award in 1987. In 1988 Marilyn was elected to the Board of the Academy of Family Mediators where she began work toward the voluntary certification of mediators and later, served as President of the Academy.
{{Timing: In 1994 the VAWA, Violence Against Women Act, was passed, and around this time it was becoming clear that medation is NOT advisable (due to power imbalance) when there’s been assault and battery, in effect, domestic violence. IT was fought hard against, and made mandatory in certain areas, as partially enabled by access/visitation grants during welfare reform. It was identified as a way to get more NONcustodial parenting time — when other means, such as the legal process, or the fact that one parent may have been a criminal, which possibly caused separation — wouldn’t get the same result. In short, Mediation was viewed and funded as a PAID SOURCE to turn justice into an OUT-COME BASED proceedings, with one party (the custodial parent) not knowing what hit (her) in the proceedings! It also turned anyone who’d been on TANF and involved in this, into an at-risk for supply social science material for the head of HHS — and what litigants even thinks about checking a federal agency for information on WTF happened to their due process rights, or other Constitutionally provided Bill of Rights!}}
In 1996 she and her partner Steve Erickson were awarded the Distinguished Mediator Award by the Academy for their outstanding contributions to the field of mediation.
Marilyn has been an adjunct professor teaching divorce mediation at the University of Minnesota Graduate School of Social Work, and at the William Mitchell College of Law.
In May 2006 Marilyn was elected to the Board of Directors of the Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR)._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
UPDATE/2018 INSERT: Images of other “Mediators & Staff” at this Minnesota-based organization shows McKnight, Steve Erickson (his daughter?), Solveig Erickson, two other (male) mediators, and an office manager/client services specialists (scheduling and taking calls mentioned) who is a woman: The font size is uneven in the home page, and Steven McKnight’s (though listed second) has larger font and longer bio blurb. Viewing: Click any image to enlarge, and navigate from one to another with arrows or (I think) another click. This is a four-part “image gallery.”
[[Returning to 2011 post text:]] Apparently the Task Force (above) was her idea too (see description). A little more:
Marilyn McKnight: Belief that Mediation Needs to be Separate from Courts – Video
Marilyn McKnight discusses how court-connected mediators’ first duty is to the court, not the client.
{{Clients go in unawares, believing that their first duty is to the truth — facts of the case, rules of civil procedure pertaining to them, and honesty. Usually, we are sorely disappointed. I’ve yet to run across a mother whose custody mediator showed evidence of having even read the case file…. Mine even admitted he didn-t — but still made recommendation to the courts.}}
McKnight, Marilyn: Mediate.com Interview
This is the complete interview with Marilyn McKnight, former President of the Academy of Family Mediators and Association for Conflict Resolution, filmed as part of Mediate.com’s “The Mediators: Views from the Eye of the Storm” Series.
(Interesting; “a Vibrant Community of Peacemakers.” )
So that’s where this Mother, Woman, and Person is, in my almost 20th years since the first blows started landing on me pregnant, all the way through to fighting the second half of my kids’ minority through this system, only to find, partly through, that almost every group and professional I stood before, hired, or dealt with, has been a liar, and simply perpetuating their own particular job in their own particular system — while this same system destroyed lives and jobs for those it was supposedly helping.
Give me an honest enemy any time than such a system of helpful people and institutes! I will respect the enemy for honesty in his/her/its position and then engage (and ideally, defeat).
To go into a family courtroom and confuse what’s supposed to happen in there (you think) with LAW, or that it somehow relates to whether one was a good or not so good parent — is a serious mistake. These seem far less relevant that which programs the practitioners are jacked up on, these days, and which rhetoric.
I accept there are plenty of cases where mediation — real mediation, not what we see in the family law racket — is important and useful. But until one recognizes WHO has been pushing this, and just how much most of their talk is about each other (in glowing terms, complete with awards and honors, and long lists of professional accomplishments), but when it comes to the parents, their clients (without whose distress and troubles, the fields wouldn’t even exist), then the terminology switches (when talking to each other) about “managing difficult parents in the court system” or similar phrases.
Of course it helps the speciality of family law if one of your promoters long ago was a legislator, then a judge (or vice versa) (Pfaff), not to mention sizeable donations in THIS century from the William and Flora Hewitt Foundation to increase membership, as a Five-Year Retrospective of the AFCC claims (2002-2007 years).
| Association of Family & Conciliation Courts | WI | 2005 | $929,894 | 990 | 17 | 95-2597407 |
| Association of Family & Conciliation Courts | WI | 2004 | $636,483 | 990 | 17 | 95-2597407 |
| Association of Family and Conciliation Courts | WI | 2010 | $2,192,367 | 990 | 28 | 95-2597407 |
| Association of Family and Conciliation Courts | WI | 2009 | $1,720,844 | 990 | 27 | 95-2597407 |
| Association of Family and Conciliation Courts | WI | 2008 | $1,743,428 | 990 | 26 | 95-2597407 |
| Association of Family and Conciliation Courts | WI | 2007 | $1,403,917 | 990 | 25 | 95-2597407 |
| Association of Family and Conciliation Courts | WI | 2006 | $1,158,339 | 990 | 20 | 95-2597407 |
| Association of Family and Conciliation Courts | WI | 2003 | $467,421 | 990 | 16 | 95-2597407 |
| Association of Family and Conciliation Courts | AZ | 2005 | $19,149.31 | 990EZ | 9 | 86-0578107 |
2018 UPDATES/INSERT: A search on the bottom row above’s EIN# 86-0578107 shows this is the Arizona Chapter of AFCC (AZAFCC.org), with last three tax returns showing its very small size. This happens to have been over time, however, a very active chapter (it seems) and with its proximity to California, well, interesting. For example Philip Stahl (formerly of Northern California and well known for his promotion of “parental alienation” remedies — i.e., standard AFCC purposes) at some point had moved to Arizona. I DNK where he presently is, but probably still an active member):
Total results: 3. Search Again.
| ORGANIZATION NAME | ST | YR | FORM | PP | TOTAL ASSETS | EIN |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARIZONA CHAPTER-ASSOC OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS | AZ | 2016 | 990 | 32 | $4,273.00 | 86-0578107 |
| ARIZONA CHAPTER-ASSOC OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS | AZ | 2015 | 990 | 25 | $38,378.00 | 86-0578107 |
| ARIZONA CHAPTER-ASSOC OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS | AZ | 2014 | 990 | 26 | $54,867.00 | 86-0578107 |
(Below: exact same search results, but in image form (I provided copy & paste above table so interactive links could be clicked on) as it shows in actual search results. The database provider changed its color scheme years ago, but because I’d already manually (boilerplate copied into each example) maintained the above color scheme to represent Form 990 tables in this blog (which now has 769 posts and over 50 pages!) as opposed to charity registration (California) tables which have similarly light-blue, gray, white colors, I maintained the color scheme from earlier…). (Back in 2011 I obviously didn’t know how to “paint” background colors into tables).
Search of EIN# associated with AZAFCC.org, done 3-25-2018 by blog author LGH
Don’t let the small size of top row (FYE2016) mislead you. It still received $73K revenues, claims to have spent over $111K on “Other expenses” (mostly conferences), despite having only 3 independent board members (all unpaid, and some of the with the title “Hon.,” i.e., likely judges), and “0” employees, it (a) left page III (which is not optional to leave blank) blank — except to say “Program Services” this year — none. However, under “functional expenses” page, it listed a grant of $1,500, which should be reported on that Part III (page 2). Under “Board Members” section, despite only three independently voting, it said “see additional table” thus keeping the existence of judges (and current AFCC — parent organization — President? Annette Burns) further away from the top of the tax return (i.e., less visible) and not on any IRS form, pre-printed or electronic. (click any image to enlarge. I annotated but did not “caption” the next three from AZAFCC.org.
I should probably blog this in a current year; have other posts since (use “SEARCH function on the blog to find, enter the word “AFCC chapters” to find) have more detail on these chapters than I listed here in just December 2011.//LGH 3/25/2018
[Back to Dec. 2011 texts, and referring to the table above showing the same organization name but different EIN#s in that columne, not the one on Arizona I just provided].
(from the Foundation Center. I always wonder why some years don’t show in chrono order, does it relate to when the organization filed?)
Something was prospering: 2003__$467K;
2004 __$636K
2005___$929K
2006___$1158K 9 ($1.158 mil)
2007_ _ _ $1.403 mil;
2008___ $1.743 mil, …2010____$2.192 mil, and so forth. And that’s income that IS reported…..
Tidbits from the tax returns (one really should browse some of these — very informative). For year 2007: Two of the Board members are judges. The Exec Director Peter Salem makes $130K.
Under Parts VII & VIII, Analysis of income-producing activities, & Relationship of Activities to the Accomplishment of Exempt Purposes
Judges on the board (that year) included the Hons. William Fee *(IN), Emile Kruzick (Ontario, Canada), Hugh Starnes (FL), and Graham Mullane (Australia, ret. 2008, now consulting) — all listed at the WI address, although, not their home courts.
INDIANA AFCC 2007 Board Member Judge Wm. Fee — Positioning:
*The Hon Wm. C. Fee happens to currently chair the Domestic Relations Committee of the Indiana Judiciary. “The Domestic Relations Committee is working on revisions to Indiana’s Child Support Guidelines. They previously completed a Domestic Relations Benchbook and child-centered Parenting Time guidelines. They also established recommended standards for countywide domestic relations ADR plans.” Let’s hope (?) He kept his AFCC agenda and motivations (to help families resolve disputes by selling them — or other government entitities — products & services) separate from the oath of office, which I presume has something to do with uphold and preserving the state constitution. As AFCC has openly stated its intent is to change the language of criminal law, there would seem to be a built-in conflict of interest. But I have noticed that when money, and children, are involved, concerns about conflict of interest tend to go out the window.
For a glimpse at types of inbound grants to courts, see “Grant Programs Administered by State Court Administration and the Indiana Judicial Center“
FLORIDA AFCC Board Member 2007 Judge Hugh Starnes — 2010, 2011:
Judge Starnes (among many other things, such as forming a nonprofit group Association of Family Law Professionals with local lawyer, and being infamously involved in Foreclosure Rocket Dockets, where some judgments were signed before the hearings, and so many hearings scheduled in one day that it was foregone that they’d not all be heard: ” More Perverse Procedures in Ft. Myers” This article talks about over-scheduling of dockets, fully knowing they won’t all be tried, in a “total lakc of respect for the parties and their lawyers . . . These judges have elevated their own desire to clear the dockets a bove all else…Judge Starnes likes to talk about how the foreclosure crisis has forced courts to employe procedures like this. ” (but only his county does it){{Same reasoning — and results — used in the family law arena also.}} “
LEE COUNTY (FL)— For the past few years, Lee County’s busiest court docket has also been the most notorious in the state. Dubbed the ‘rocket docket’, the county’s foreclosure track cruises through several hundred cases daily, many ending in judgments for the lender and the subsequent scheduling of a foreclosure sale.
In the process, critics say, the docket tramples basic rules of civil procedure and due process. They point to the speed with which judges move cases along, and the emphasis on an expedited trial or summary judgment versus discovery. “It’s just a lack of, I don’t know, respect for the defendant by the court,” Naples attorney Todd Allen said.
His case turned heads last year after a clever order drafted by Allen made local news and several foreclosure blogs. Frustrated when Lee (Lee County, FL) Senior Judge James Thompson rejected a motion in December to toss what Allen considered a flawed affidavit by a bank employee, the attorney drafted the resulting order to explicitly state what he says Thompson told him — that Lee County does not comply with Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. The attorney for lender HSBC signed off on the draft, Allen said, and it went to Thompson’s office.
“I knew one of two things was going to happen,” Allen said. “Either he was going to read it and sign it, which is bad because it means it was policy, or he wasn’t going to read it and sign it, which is even worse.” Instead, the other senior judge on the docket, Hugh E. Starnes, signed the order. “Blown away,” is how Allen described his reaction.
(further anecdotal shows the traffic there. In family law hearings (those that aren’t ex parte) a custody decision could be switched in 20 minutes or less; the child goes to the other household, stamped, ordered. signed & sealed. THat is not justice, and the other parent (til broke or defeated in spirit not just in the issue at hand) is going to come back for another attempt at it — that’s another reason the dockets get crowded!)
Around 11:40 a.m., Starnes completed the docket, more than 100 cases by his count. With another 104 slated for the afternoon session and little time for lunch, he postponed Shinneman’s trial. “I’ve got to object,” Allen protested. “That’s completely prejudicing my client.” “I understand,” Starnes replied.
Here’s another nonprofit this Judge was involved with, which a mother in a custody battle from Florida (not Linda Marie Sacks — not her line of approach!) asked me to research: (link provided, image updated, by text search + memory of having been asked to look this up, plus specific participating professionals (Judge Starnes, Shelly Finman, etc.) I know it’s the same one. (2011 post originally had a large blank image here, and no link):
http://aflpnetwork.com/history/
Association of Family Law Professionals website (viewed 3/25/2018)
History of the above group:
“We are Judges, lawyers, mental health and financial professionals, Judicial Assistants and Court staff members, mediators, school counselors, educators, and other professionals working to help families through the maze of marital and family law matters.”
YES — and many of you are already public employees. So why form more nonprofits than AFCC — which already meets this definition — to do your jobs? Did the families ask your help in navigating the custody maze (your groups helped create by trying to put psychology on a par with law)?
Well, the motive was obviously helping and public service:
- A committee formed {{spontaneously?}} in the mid-1980’s with a diverse membership, co-chaired by Mary Robinson, Solomon Agin and (Family attorney) Shelly Finman, tasked {{by whom?}} with determining whether or not our community was in need of Court sponsored mediation. After 2 years of regular morning meetings at the old Snack House Restaurant at the Collier Arcade, it was decided we did. {{ANY OTHER COMMUNITY MEMBERS INVOLVED?}} However, there was no budget. Therefore, with the support of a “shoe string” budget from the office of Court Administration (Doug Wilkinson) and Judge Hugh Starnes, we began training volunteer mediators at the HRS offices in the evenings.
- A committee, called the “cooperation committee” consisting of Judge Lynn Gerald, Judge Starnes, Steve Helgemo, George Kluttz, Gail Markham, and Shelly Finman met at the Veranda Restaurant in the mid to late 80’s, discussing ways to change some of the adversarial methods, resulting in local orders and posturing the Bench and Bar with non-adversarial, more conciliatory methods of practicing in Court
Gee golly ding, gosh darn, gee whiz — where did they get THAT radical concept from (and how long were the members also AFCC members??) etc.
(One can search Starnes & Finman @ Florida’s sunbiz.org — I did — for more info. Probably blogged it here somewhere, too. Groups like RESTORATIVE JUVENILE JUSTICE PROJECT, INC. (never got an EIN, dissolved for failure to file), the family law association in question (shelly finman shows on earliest on-line report, 1995). Clearly restorative justice is an ongoing field, to be countered, however, with awareness of places like Luzerne County, PA in which kickbacks were involved, violation of due process extreme, and finally some judges caught in RICO over the matter, — or 2008 Congressional Oversight of the HEAD of the OJJDP (Flores) because of grants-steering to faith-based professionals. In this context, forming a nonprofit to get a grant is like — pretty much what they do.
Or, in the case (TBA _- I haven’t checked all 50 states, only some of the states in which they are advertising trainings..) institutes, like “Cooperative Parenting Institute” etc. simply post the website references, with glorious self-referential credits & titles, and skip the incorporating part entirely, which would require filing tax returns somewhere along the way, and conceivably letting the public look at them, without the subpoena, FOIA and all that.
2007 Exec Director of AFCC — Peter Salem, and his ($130K) = $10,00+/month salary in that capacity:
He has many accomplishments, including teaching mediation at a law school — but he is not an attorney; he has an M.A. Lets review this again: the head of the AFCC is not an attorney, his specialty is NOT law.
Before I go into this too much, let’s look at the “Hofstra Connection” which I feel too few people notice, when it comes to AFCC. Of course, most people complaining about problems with family law – – – – – – – – – – are so busy with that narrative they completely ignore the existence of organizations where the people running it plan their Standard Operating Procedure. In otherwords, they completely ignore the AFCC as well.
However, when I found out it was publishing most of the materials in local courthouses (self-help centers, etc.), not to mention that as an organization, it began in a corrupt manner, and many of its members continue in that corruption — I got fairly more interested!
Hofstra University in NY has a School of Law and as of 2001, it also has a CCFL, similar idea to UBaltimore’s School of Law “CFCC” (which I blogged):
The Center for Children, Families and the Law was established in 2001 in response to the urgent need for more effective representation for children and families in crisis.
Its unique interdisciplinary program of education, community service and research is designed to encourage professionals from law and mental health to work together for the benefit of children and families involved in the legal system.The Center’s training program is one of the most comprehensive child and family advocacy curricula offered in the United States. Its interdisciplinary approach is designed to better prepare a new generation of legal and mental health professionals to promote appropriate and effective justice in both the juvenile and family court systems. The Center’s community service programs provide direct assistance to New York area children and families in need and serve as models for states across the country.
To carry out its mission, the Center partners with the University’s Department of Psychology, and health and human service agencies and law associations, including the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC), the American Bar Association (ABA), the National Institute for Trial Advocacy (NITA), and the New York Permanent Judicial Commission on Justice for Children.
AFCC cannot be considered a “law association,” given its membership and its stated intent to change the language of criminal law into a more “therapeutic” framework. But where does Peter Salem & AFCC fit in? Which came first — the (AFCC) chicken, or the (Family Court Review joint-published with AFCC) the egg?
Welcome
Family Court Review (FCR) is a peer-reviewed, quarterly journal published under the auspices of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC). Family Court Review is an international, interdisciplinary family law journal — a forum for the exchange of ideas, programs, research, legislation, case law and reforms. The journal’s editorial staff, under the direction of Faculty Editor-in-Chief Andrew Schepard*, is based at the Law School. Its fundamental premise is that productive discussion of family law is facilitated by a dialogue between the judiciary, lawyers, mediators, mental health and social services communities. AFCC is an interdisciplinary, international association of judges, counselors, evaluators, mediators, attorneys and others concerned with the constructive resolution of family conflict.
Schepard, Parent Education Promoter, AFCC-approved.
| Professor Schepard is a founder and project director for Parent Education and Custody Effectiveness (P.E.A.C.E.), an interdisciplinary, court-affiliated education program for parents to help them reduce the difficulties their children experience during divorce and separation. P.E.A.C.E. has produced an award-winning video for parents, and has been recognized by the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts for its “ongoing contribution to improving the lives of parents and children. |
He and Mr. Salem are on an AFCC Task Force together.
After all, if one wishes to entirely develop and steer the field of family law, one must definitely get to the education of family lawyers. One cannot change practices from the outcome end only; obviously one has to get a the new, fresh-faced graduating class of attorneys, in fact get to them before they graduate and are faced with the bedrock of experience, which may counter some of that theory before it’s solidifies.
Well, so does this group: from the AFCC site:
Task Forces and Initiatives Family Law Education Reform Project (“FLER”)
Co-sponsored by the Hofstra Law School
Center for Children, Families and the LawAndrew Schepard, J.D., Co-Chair
Andrew SchepardPeter Salem, M.A., Co-Chair
Peter SalemProject Information: Family Law Education Reform Project Final Report (PDF)
They work together. Apparently he joined AFCC as staff in 1994; two founders (Meyer Elkin, 1994 and Stanley Cohen 1995) died around this time. It seems Mr. Salem was working in Wisconsin in the same fields. This summary from AFCC History seems so relevant. In maroon font:
1993—AFCC’s 30th Anniversary
AFCC celebrated its 30th Anniversary in New Orleans in May 1993. The conference theme and opening night videotape, “The Economic Impact of Divorce,” provided an opportunity for more than 700 delegates to look at the big-picture impact of divorce and celebrate the largest conference attendance to date.
In 1993, the association received a major grant from the Hewlett Foundation that enabled AFCC to add additional staff and absorb some of the work of AFCC’s many hard-working volunteer members. In 1994, Peter Salem joined the AFCC staff to become AFCC’s associate director. Conference planning was centralized in the administrative office and AFCC began to offer additional training and consulting services.
Database records from usual sources don’t go back that far. But obviously the Hewlett Foundation has some similar interests in family matters. Their history page can be read; sons managed it until 1981, In 1974 that they hired an executive director, and this gives a scope of the influence (like, having the President of the University of California as President of the Foundation, etc.) (section here in BLUE)
By the time Roger Heyns retired in 1992, the Foundation’s assets had increased more than thirtyfold – to more than $800 million, and the Hewlett Foundation was highly respected for its work in the fields of conflict resolution, education, environment, performing arts, and population, and was a key source of funding to a host of institutions that provide vital services to disadvantaged Bay Area communities.
In 1993, former University of California President David P. Gardner succeeded Roger Heyns as president of the Foundation, and served for six years, during which time the Foundation’s assets increased to more than $2 billion, and annual grantmaking rose from $35 million in 1993 to $84 million in 1998
Sooner or later we all have to ‘fess up to (admit, to ourselves and each other) how great an influence foundations (personal corporate wealth transferred into foundations) have upon this country and what its government and nongovernment programs and culture looks like.
This foundation was interested in conflict resolution and helped develop it as a field, and (in AFCC’s 5 year retrospective, 2002-2007, below, it acknowledged their help. Sounds like they got in on the last round of Hewlit Foundation grants in this field):
The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation played a major role in developing and supporting the conflict resolution field for nearly two decades. During that time, the field grew and matured and achieved considerable acceptance and self-sufficiency across various areas of practice. While recognizing the continuing value of conflict resolution and peacemaking in the United States and internationally, the Foundation decided to wind down its support for this area and to deploy its resources to other pressing social issues. The Conflict Resolution Program made its final grants in 2004
They are also big on promoting and enabling fatherhood involvement, as is AFCC also:
Responsible Fatherhood and Male Involvement. The Foundation supported programs that enabled fathers to participate actively in the emotional and financial support {{CHILD SUPPORT, got it?}} of the family and that promote adult male involvement in teh lives of children and youth from father-absent environments.
Someone has to deal with the domestic violence issue sooner or later. This organization did so by funding Family Violence Prevention Fund (already deep into fatherhood as a tool to prevent violence, sure, that’ll work) and funded a report on preventing teen violence, with phraseology like this:
Other gaps must be closed as well. More attention and resources should be focused on men, on the low-income communities that have disproportionate experience with abuse, on promoting economic independence, and on ending the exclusive reliance on punitive responses such as incarceration, which is intolerable to many communities of color and immigrant communities.
With characteristic “modesty” FVPF introduces its 2003 report:
Foreword
The Family Violence Prevention Fund is proud to issue this unprecedented Report, which provides the most comprehensive analysis to date of the status of domestic violence prevention efforts. This Report does more than examine our nation’s considerable progress in understanding and stopping domestic violence. It takes a close look at what strategies have and have not worked, identi- fying the most promising approaches and making recommendations for how to expend energies and allocate resources in years ahead.
(I just searched. There is zero mention of family law, custody, visitation, fatherhood barely, and/or access visitation, even though many teens have children, as mothers or fathers. The word “fatherhood” (incl. programs) shows up 5 times, and it’s somehow suggested that Child Support Enforcement is a means to provide opportunities and incentives for DV prevention. (p. 19). I have already blogged on this group (see “About this Blog”), but as I have been living and working in the same general area, am more aware than most of just how much they are (deliberately) ignoring; actually the more people drop like flies in the immediate neighborhood (and often this is around the divorce issue or a custody battle), the better it looks for justifying more grants of this sort. )
Second World Congress on Family Law and the Rights of Children and Youth
In 1997, AFCC partnered with Australia’s World Congress, Inc. to host the Second World Congress on Family Law and the Rights of Children and Youth. Chaired by AFCC’s first non-North American president, Hon. Alastair Nicholson, Chief Justice of the Family Court of Australia, the three-year planning effort involved hundreds of AFCC volunteers and culminated with more than 1,500 delegates from more than 50 countries participating in the five-day extravaganza. The lengthy list of luminaries included First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, who served as honorary chairperson; renowned pediatrician Dr. T. Barry Brazelton; San Francisco Mayor Hon. Willie Brown; Nobel Peace Prize Recipient Dr. Jose Ramos-Horta; and former U.S. Congresswoman Hon. Patricia Schroeder.
By 1998, mediation had established itself as a professional field of practice.
NO field of practice establishes itself. Fields of practice have people promoting them, through membership associations (very often) which then solicit funding. As I showed above, the Hewlitt Foundation was one promoter of “conflict resolution” (which includes mediation) as a field of practice and takes credit for it. This is so typical of AFCC prose — they like to claim that some field established itself, like the flowers come out in spring, just naturally. There’s nothing further from the truth!!
Executive Director
Peter Salem, M.A.
Peter Salem has served as Executive Director since 2002 and was Associate Director from 1994-2002.
I’m guessing he didn’t join AFCC and immediately become Executive Director; i.e., the involvement is longstanding (1994-2011 is 17 years), and either he has influence it, or its agenda and operations– including emphasis on mediation — are in agreement with his life’s work.
He taught mediation at Marquette University Law School for ten years and served as mediator and director of Mediation and Family Court Services in Rock County, Wisconsin. Mr. Salem is a former president of the Wisconsin Association for Mediators and is co-editor of Divorce Mediation: Models, Techniques and Applications. He has provided training and technical assistance to family court service agencies throughout the United States since 1990. {{Probably also for free. . …}}
He is author of numerous articles and videos on mediation, domestic violence and divorce. He received the [[1]] John M. Haynes Distinguished Mediator Award presented by the Association for Conflict Resolution** [[2]] in 2008 and received a William T. Grant Foundation Distinguished Fellows award in 2009. He holds an M.A. in Communication and Mediation Management from Emerson College in Boston [[3]] and a B.A. in Political Science from McGill University in Montreal. [[4]]
I decided to look these up. Fnotes in order in text, but below, out of order, they are filed in chrono order, i.e., undergraduate comes before graduate references. The biggest “find” is the (ridiculous) Association for Conflict Resolution. I’ll back up the “ridiculous” under that footnote. I have found that when AFCC (and related organizations) begin to pile on the titles and awards, well-earned though they may be, it pays to look up who’s awarding what, to see if it has some significance. Most people know awards like Nobel Price, Fullbright or Rhodes Scholarship, etc. — but as almost every new nonprofit in the courts (schools, etc.) mediation fields tries to pump up its credibility by setting up awards, they need more scrutiny.
[[4]] McGill (see link) is more wide-ranging; it’s undergraduates (now) are 417 women/164 men). Apparently Mr. Salem is from Canada? which may explain AFCC’s large Canadian component? Looks like a well-respected university, with a variety of programs, but my point is, Mr. Salem’s interest was political science, i.e., interest in how society works and potentially changing it. See next degree:
[[3]] Emerson College in Boston:
Emerson College, located in the heart of Boston, Massachusetts, is the nation’s premiere institution in higher education devoted to communication and the arts in a liberal arts context.
Emerson is internationally recognized in its fields of specialization, which are communication studies; marketing communication; journalism; communication sciences and disorders; visual and media arts; the performing arts; and writing, literature and publishing.
I don’t see any legal, or any really “hard sciences” study — here’s the list of science course minors for “communication sciences” majors.
Here’s a typical “Political Communication” UNDERgraduate coursework (understanding it must have changed over time, I wonder what year Peter Salem got his M.A. in….):
A major in Leadership, Politics, and Social Advocacy will prepare you for such careers as communication advisor, press secretary, governmental relations officer, nonprofit leader, and cultural affairs advocate, among many others. The program’s core curriculum balances the theory and the practical skills necessary for effective, ethical communication in a changing and complex media environment.
And GRADUATE coursework:
Communication Management
The Master of Arts in Communication Management provides students with the knowledge, theory, and skills necessary to design and execute strategic, integrated communication plans for public and private organizations. In addition to honing your speaking, writing, listening, and negotiating skills, you will develop expertise in web-based communication and learn how to adapt to and utilize new media to the advantage of your future employers or clients. The program is divided into two academic tracks:
- Human Resources & Employee Communication
- Public Relations & Stakeholder Communication
Our graduates have achieved professional success in a variety of industries including pharmaceuticals, political communication, event planning, travel and tourism, public advocacy, health care, among many others.
And this is the current Emerson graduate program director’s background, with degrees from Texas and North Carolina, heavily into social science, and mediation.
The John M. Haynes Distinguished Mediator Award is presented annually to a prominent and internationally recognized leader in mediation who demonstrates personal and professional commitment to finding mediation solutions to conflict while balancing therapeutic and legal perspectives. John M. Haynes was a pioneer in the field of family mediation, a respected author and practitioner, an international trainer, and the first president of the Academy of Family Mediators.
(sigh). Mediation, having a problem with “conflict” and trying to balance therapy (outcome based, analysis = psychology, pathological emphasis) with law (process based, with reference to written standards voted into law by citizens in various states, to protect them from EXACTLY what happens when institutionalizing and labeling/medicating are used to oppress and control unruly reformers or those who challenge the status quo, i.e., Archipelago. In short, these characteristics basically define AFCC to start with.)
The list of recipients speaks loudly, lots of them are simply AFCC hotshots:
- 2011: Christine Coates, J.D. [[AFCC]]
- 2010: Kenneth Cloke [[Santa Monica, Center for Dispute Resolution, Pepperdine, you name it]] SEE ~**~, I looked this one up
Why should this one get an award when the state of California OAG/Trusts had to chase him down over zero income, or filings, for the past 24 years? After they threatened him with $800 fine and more, he responded. …. Yet the nonprofit website is still advertising some very pricey trainings! ($200, $1,000, etc.)
- 2009: Robert D. Benjamin [[Currently in Portland. Pepperdine. Mediation etc. since 1979, and he practiced law. Columnist and advanced practitioner in ACR]]
- 2008: Peter Salem [[AFCC]]
- 2007: Jim Melamed, J.D. [[Oregon Mediation Center, which he founded in 1983, he is CEO of “Mediate.com,” ADR, etc. See “history” at N2N, here — shows they borrowed the idea from SF, and eventually got funding]]
- 2006: Arnie Shienvold, Ph.D. [[AFCC. Scranton, PA parents had this name on posters recently protesting family court corruption. I blogged it recently, see tags]]
- 2005: Nina R. Meierding, MS., J.D. [[FT private mediation since 1986, former family law attorney, Certificate in Dispute Resolution from Pepperdine (like others on the list) and — get this — yet another who is per mediate.com now, past board member of ACR!
- 2004: Zena D. Zumeta, J.D. [[From Michigan, since 1981, ADR, and get this — she gets the award from ACR and “She is currently on the Association for Conflict Resolution’s Membership Committee, and sat on the Advisory Council to its Family Section.” Works from a Dispute Resolution Center (one of several in state) that takes business from courts, gov’t, social service etc., and has two judges on its advisory board and is a trainer]]
- 2003: Barbara Landau, Ph.D., LL.B., LL.M. [[Worked in Toronto Court, has a business, ADR, Mediator, Trainer, etc. “Dr. Barbara Landau’s company “Cooperative Solutions” continues to expand. Please see information below on our two Associates, Daryl Landau, and Mary-Anne Popescu.”]]
- 2002: Donald T. Saposnek, Ph.D. {{since 1983, appears to have made a good living off the family courts as mediator & trainer, typical}}
- 2001: Larry S. Fong, Ph.D. (2005 AFCC conference on Solving the Family Court Puzzle shows him as President of the ACR, and Canadian, another conference in 2011 on Advanced Mediation Issues — when one parent is Gay))
DIVERSION: A Nonprofit around since 1987, high-profile speaker, zero income reported?
~**~ re: Kenneth Cloke, Center for Dispute Resolution (How many more fit this description? It was Calif, so I looked it up quickly. “Center for Dispute Resolution” search brought up 5 corporations, only 2 of which were active. This one, b. 1987, was active. Its title includes the word “foundation.” I hopped over and looked up the charity and found it hadn’t been filing IRS forms and its Dissolution is “Pending” — an usual situation. EIN# 546565246
(FYI, Santa Monica is within Los Angeles County)
After a particularly stern letter from the OAG (Kamala Harris, Jan. 2011), Kenneth writes in response:
This is a request to obtain a dissolution waiver and to dissolve a California nonprofit corporation, the Center for Dispute Resolution Foundation, #C1583109.
The corporation was never operational, and neither raised, received or spent any money at any time. There are no assets to be distributed. There are no financial statements, and the corporation never had any income or assets since incorporating.
If you have any questions or 1 need to do anything further, please contact me at. . .
I just looked up the address at the bottom of the letterhead — which is “Kenneth Cloke Law Offices.” His DisputeResolutionCenter claims to be very much up and operating (perhaps it’s just not getting any takers, any customers?) It lists Training for FALL 2011:
http://www.kennethcloke.com/training.htm
Kenneth Cloke will conduct a four day training for beginning, intermediate and advanced mediators who are interested in improving their conflict resolution skills. Please see the printable course description, registration form and book list here.
Classes begin at 9 am and end at 4:30 pm
Classes are held at the Center for Dispute Resolution, 2411 18th St., Santa Monica, CA 90405
Phone: (310) 399-4426 | FAX (310) 399-5906
Each participant will receive a Mediation Certificate on completion of the training, along with a Training Manual that includes basic forms that are useful in starting a mediation practice.
Cost is $250.00 per class or $1000.00 for the series.
Click here to print the Registration Form with Course Description and Book List
For a group that began with several people on the board in 1987, that’s quite an accomplishment!! to earn absolutely nothing while having such a fine website. Kind of reminds me of the Termini/Boyan combo — only it looks like they actually had some takers.
What does it say about ACR to give this person its 2010 award? Yet in January 2011, the OAG got on their case. Perhaps the award is what drew its attention — who knows? Note: this 2009 speaker engagement as co-founder of “Mediators Beyond Borders” lists the above outfit first in his credits. I wonder how many of the other fantastic credits below check out. Either he is doing that all — and earning no money at it, so not filing taxes– or he’s doing all those things, making a living and too busy to comply with state charitable registration laws, while promoting himself and his work & books.
Join us as Kenneth Cloke discusses his most recent publication titled “Conflict Revolution: Mediating Evil, War, Injustice and Terrorism.”
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
12:00 PM
Public Affairs Room 2355
Los Angeles, CA 90095As Director of the Center for Dispute Revolution, Kenneth Cloke has served as a mediator, arbitrator, attorney, coach, consultant and trainer.
Mediators Beyond Borders incorporated in PA in Oct. 2006, per Corporations search:
Name Name Type Mediators Beyond Borders International Current Name MEDIATORS WITHOUT BORDERS Prior Name Mediators Beyond Borders Prior Name
Non-Profit (Non Stock) – Domestic – Information Entity Number: 3686096 Status: Active Entity Creation Date: 10/19/2006 State of Business.: PA
ORGANIZATION NAME |
STATE |
YEAR |
TOTAL ASSETS |
FORM |
PAGES |
EIN |
| Mediators Beyond Borders | PA | 2009 | $40,949 | 990EZ | 18 | 20-5716275 |
| Mediators Beyond Borders | PA | 2008 | $38,013 | 990EZ | 30 | 20-5716275 |
| Mediators Beyond Borders | PA | 2007 | $13,946 | 990EZ | 16 | 20-5716275 |
Robert A. Creo (attorney) (hover cursor over link for a sample) seems the professional heavy-lifter in this relationship, and business is registered out of his law offices. MBB International has a project to rehabilitate child soldiers of Liberia. . . . Creo and associate McKay operate “Mastermediators.com” and of course a Master Mediator Institute to go with it, much of which deals with training. It says, he has an ability to “create, organize and lead” ADR organizations (which seems obvious). Mediators Beyond Borders and Master Mediators Institute both show his office address, i.e., he’s operating a number of nonprofits out of his own offiice:
About MMI
A belief that conflict resolution requires an integrated knowledge of law, neuroscience, neurobiology, psychology, economics, communications and other disciplines led to the creation of the Master Mediator Institute. MMI offers Immersion Courses to allow mediators, advocates and other professionals to connect with leading scientists and academics to explore cutting edge knowledge about the mind, the brain and the science of decision making.
The website looks great (both websites); better than average and easy to negotiate, and professional in design and color. MMI has only been around for two and a half years; it was incorporated in 6/2009. I wonder what nonprofit is next!
The Master Mediator Institute 3889281 Non-Profit (Non Stock) Active 6/22/2009 R
Colleague Monique MacKay (I found through linkedin) shows up in Virginia — so the corresponding LLC to the nonprofit is in a different state and was incorporated the same month, 6/3/2009. So let’s say they had a plan up front, and the websites plus testimonials show it as (unlike Mr. Cloke’s) a going concern:
| SCC ID: | S2941864 | |
| Business Entity Type: | Limited Liability Company | |
| Jurisdiction of Formation: | VA | |
| Date of Formation/Registration: | 6/3/2009 | |
| Status: | Active |
He seems less interested in family law, which means I’m less interested in this case, other than what it says about the Association for Conflict Resolution.
**”Association for Conflict Resolution” is an expansion of, &/or where “Alternate Dispute Resolution” went, linguistically. That’s a planned language shift, necessary because periodically people start to catch up faster with what groups named after the prior AFCC-linguistic-labels have actually been doing. Including with their money.
The Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR) is a professional organization enhancing the practice and public understanding of conflict resolution.
We are the nation’s largest professional association for mediators, arbitrators, educators and other conflict resolution practitioners. ACR works in a wide range of settings throughout the United States and around the world. . . .Our multicultural and multidisciplinary organization offers a broad umbrella under which all forms of dispute resolution practice find a home.
This group maintains a “special interest section” called ADR, which reads the typical fashion and like AFCC, and the ADR groups, seeks to promote their own interests and profession, including to judges and legislators:
ACR Court Section
The Court Section provides information and best practice information for resolution of court disputes ranging from small claims to family.
MISSION STATEMENT
The mission of this section is to foster and facilitate the development and implementation of quality court-annexed ADR programs throughout the country and to provide support to all individuals interested and involved in Court ADR programs such as Court ADR administrators, judges and dispute resolution practitioners working in a court setting by providing a forum that addresses issues concerning court-annexed ADR programs through information sharing, networking, identification of resources, development of model practices, and training programs.
Kind of a run-on, redundant sentence, much? But of course let’s focus on COURT-annexed programs, because this is guaranteed income. if not from the parents themselves (etc.) — from a federal program. MUCH better chance of selling this as in the public’s interest. But in reality – -it’s in the profession’s interest.
OBJECTIVES
- To promote the development of court-annexed dispute resolution programs around the country, at all levels of court.
- To serve as a clearinghouse of relevant information and resources for court administrators, dispute resolution practitioners, and judges.
- To assist in educating the public, attorneys, judges, legislators and other constituencies about the value of court-annexed dispute resolution programs.
- To provide a venue for communication and networking opportunities [[AWAY FROM THE PARTIES MOST AFFECTED BY THE PRACTICE!!]] among court ADR administrators, dispute resolution practitioners and judges.
- To identify policy issues important to court-annexed programs and provide guidance/best practices with respect to those issues.
This organization wants to feed information direct to judges. They want to be a “clearinghouse.” They want to facilitate the communication with judges. Flattery will probably facilitate the process, accordingly AFCC’s Peter Salem gets a 2008 award from this group. AFCC (which already does this – -not to mention has plenty of judges IN it and some running it, too) then proudly adds another credit to it’s director’s cap, which is a win-win situation for those involved.
The ACR “Family Mediation” special interest section looks all up and running, and has avery detailed, neatly tabbed, web presence with the same types of activities the AFCC does — publication, training, conferences, budget, member committees, plus facebook page, etc. And Marketing Mediation Training
So — let’s go to Virginia and look up the corporationSo — let’s go to Virginia and look up the corporation (it lists a virginia address). OK, here we go:
SCC ID Business Entity Name Entity Type Entity Status 05660642 ASSOCIATION FOR CONFLICT RESOLUTION – VIRGINIACHAPTER, THE Corporation Terminated
(none with just the name alone — vs. “Virginia Chapter” — shows up. Last registered agent, 2007. Don’t see any filing history(i.e., annual reports) beyond the initial filing, and there are no “efiling” transactions registered.
| SCC ID: | 05660642 | |
| Business Entity Type: | Corporation | |
| Jurisdiction of Formation: | VA | |
| Date of Formation/Registration: | 10/11/2001 | |
| Status: | Terminated |
A 990-finder (i.e., nationwide search for a nonprofit) search shows it in several states, as well as the same EIN in two states and name, in more than two.
| Association for Conflict Resolution | VA | 2009 | $336,780 | 990 | 51 | 23-7251385 |
| Association for Conflict Resolution | DC | 2008 | $503,647 | 990 | 21 | 23-7251385 |
same name, different states and separate EIN#s:
| Association for Conflict Resolution | TX | 2008 | $0 | 990ER | 5 | 20-2124912 |
| Association for Conflict Resolution | MA | 2007 | $24,629 | 990EZ | 13 | 04-3465101 |
| Assoc… |
After click on dropdown option just above orange section, more fields (like EIN#) and ZIP now display [“990 Finder Widget This (pretty precisely) dates URL redirect by FoundationCenter to Diff’t User Interface….]“WHY IT MATTERS: Names are so often wrong on this database! Use EIN#, although occasionally even a filing entity will get it wrong by a # also.
New look and URL, click on dropdown just above orange section for more fields (like EIN#)!! [“990 Finder Widget This (pretty precisely) dates URL redirect by FoundationCenter to Diff’t User Interface. Must use DropDown menu to access other options (such as EIN#)]“
{{2018 UPDATE: NOTICE THE DIFFERENT EIN#s. THIS TIME, I HADN’T CAUGHT UP TO JUST HOW OFTEN THE DATABASE PROVIDER (nonprofit now called simply “Foundation Center”) search results get entity names wrong. I don’t know how these odd results continue to show so often, and whether it’s a matter of software, or human error/data entry (unlikely…). A letter should be written them; I just haven’t yet. (See nearby added images with orange-background captions):User interface field for this now looks different and to get to the (more accurate) EIN# searches requires use of a drop-down (“more fields”) indicator. Name search ONLY on this website can’t be trusted. (“990finder.foundationcenter.org” which I’ve used for years, currently redirects to their new site..)Tbe Virginia one, above, “ACR EMBRACES AND ACKNOWLEDGES THE FULL SPECTRUM OF PEACEFUL CONFLICT RESOLUTION AND RECOGNIZES THE VALUE OF CROSS-DISCIPLINARY AND CROSS-CULTURAL CONNECTIONS TO ENHANCE CONFLICT CHOICES UNIVERSALLY.”(and with just a few grants, over 700 volunteers, and 13 employees, has over $1 million of revenues yearly. Executive Director Douglas M. Kleine (address WDC) gets $95K salary (moderate) and I think — but don’t know without more checking– this is him, too: Worked in HUD, Train the trainer activities, Virginia Legislature Congressional Agency (staff positions), plus Democratic Precinct caption. Expert nonprofit management experience, highly placed.Here we go — the ACR wants to erect a National Peacemaker Museum and nominated Family Law Collaborative Professional Woody Mosten (who?) to chair that taskforce. Maybe Futures without Violence (ca. 2010 formerly family violence prevention fund) was simply competing with this group for THE most grandiose, pretentious and let’s not forget, nonprofit,noble purpose around — and so practical, too!
Mission Statement (Approved June 29, 2009)
The National Peacemaker Museum Constellation will encourage peaceful conflict resolution between human beings in every corner of the world. It will honor those courageous and innovative individuals and institutions who work toward peace rather than conflict, foster harmony amongst humanity rather than division, and embrace the rich tapestry of human difference while building bridges upon our commonalities. The National Peacemaker Museum will challenge, inspire, educate, and enable visitors from around the world to be peacemakers themselves, to contribute as they can to the ability of the human race to solve our problems creatively and collaboratively, and to craft solutions that are fair, compassionate, and wise. National Peacemaker Museum will accomplish this mission through a diverse array of partnerships and outreach techniques, both virtual and tangible, in an ongoing effort to reach the full diversity of humanity, speaking in a way that each listening ear can hear.
The Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR) is supporting a coalition of organizations to establish a National Peacemaker Museum. In November 2007, ACR Immediate Past President, Marilyn S. McKnight established a Taskforce to launch this effort and appointed Forrest (Woody) Mosten to serve as Chair.
🙂 Just felt we should get a picture of some of the influence that our AFCC Board Member Judges (the US ones) wield, and some local feedback.
So what is this membership trade nonprofit private nonprofit group AFCC — with many of its influential members holding public office, like judgeships and county-level work such as custody evaluators, mediators, and of course Parenting Coordinators, doing with this income? . . . .
Besides inventing new terms and providing an on-going membership role model for how to form lots ‘n lots of nonprofits, while on public payroll or getting referral business from the courts, and lobbying legistors to do things like running Justice Initiatives to “Change the Culture of Custody“** (Pennsylvania) and trying to get states to mandate parenting coordination appointment — lots of it. In Pennsylvania, they are Initiating, but I guess here, they are describing the “New Frontier” as if it just developed and showed up all by its wild-west lonesome, see 2012 AFCC-California Conference images for: “The New Frontier: Exploring the Possibilities and Challenges of the Changed Landscape for Children and the Courts“***
[[**in which the AFCC is only directly cited a few times, but “parenting coordination” 14 times, “parent education” 10 times, “high-conflict” (with hyphen) 4 times, “high conflict” (no hyphen) 11 times, “dispute resolution” 63 times, a plug for a parent education “Kids First,” (used in 8 PA counties at the time, and already likely part of an FBI of investigation financial abuse in billing & multiple service referrals by a GAL in one of those counties) and the first person mentioned in the “Chairman’s Introduction” just happens to be (now) President-elect of AFCC]]
[[***Gee, who changed it?]][[check out item 12, presenter. Same individual from ACFLS — yesterday– who declared that a few hours on-line would qualify someone to write a great appellate brief about domestic violence, and maybe even save a client’s life. Tell that to Michelle Fournier’s son when he grows up, without her. Tell that to the relatives of the 7 other people that died as collateral damage in her “custody dispute” this past fall. On the other hand, when the boy grows up, maybe he could do a speech on what such violence is like OFF-line….]]
Well, read on, to see some of the strategic planning from 2002-2007:
FIVE-YEAR REPORT
{{This is most of the first page of the report, for reference:}}
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report chronicles the development of AFCC for the fiscal years 2002-03 through 2006-07, the first five years of the current administration. It addresses AFCC initiatives and special projects, organization- al development, membership, conferences, resource development, publications, administration and finance, Web site, technology and collaborating organizations. Comparative data and narrative are offered to provide historical context.
AFCC Initiatives and Special Projects
Between 2002 and 2007, AFCC initiatives and special projects played a growing role in the day to day activities of the association. Eight special projects were initiated between 2002 and 2007, funded through a mix of contracts, small grants, the operating budgets of AFCC and its collaborating organizations and participating individuals and organizations.
(1) Connecticut Family Civil Intake Assessment Screen (2) Guidelines for Parenting Coordination (3) Court Services Task Force (4) Model Standards of Practice for Child Custody Evaluation (5) Family Law Education Reform (FLER) Project
(6) Educator’s Guide to Working with Separated and Divorcing Parents
(7) Domestic Violence and Family Courts Project (8) Developing Nations Libraries Project
The Family Law Education Reform Project and Domestic Violence and Family Court Project were anchored by the first two AFCC-sponsored conferences at the Johnson Foundation’s prestigious Wingspread Conference Center.
Organizational Development
AFCC completed three major projects in the area of organizational development:
• • •
A five-year strategic plan An organizational effectiveness project, funded by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation Identity branding
And from a little further in the report:
Web Site and Technology
• Redesigned Web site to enhance usability and member benefits.
• Google grant increased average monthly Web visits from 16,500 to 42,700.
• The bi-monthly AFCC eNEWS debuted in February 2006 and now has more than 10,000 subscribers.
• Parenting Coordination Network (group email) implemented.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
And so on, and so forth. . .
This information is on a public forum, so I took the liberty of copying it here — from a thread from “Scranton Political Times” “Doherty Deceit Forum”
It’s a quick post, but covers topics I’ve been blogging for a long time:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
PRESS RELEASE SENT OUT AT NOON TODAY
Second Lackawanna County Family Court Kids 4Kash Protest Set For December 2, 2011
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Scranton, Pa
The second in a series of demonstrations in what The Protesters have labeled The Lackawanna County KIDS 4 KASH Corruption Scheme will begin at 9am this Friday in front of the Family Court Building at 200 Adams Avenue. The protesters, many of whom are family court litigants, are in disbelief and outraged that President Judge Thomas Munley has not taken any action against the Court Appointed Guardian ad Litem, Attorney Danielle Ross. Unbelievably, Ross who is currently under investigation by the FBI and the Administrative Office of the Pennsylvania Court (AOPC) is still being assigned new cases every week.
{{WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF PARENTS SIMPLY REFUSED TO PARTICIPATE? REFUSED TO PAY? AND THE JUDGE THEN TRIED TO INCARCERATE? }}
Their investigation of Ms. Ross was set in motion when a parent named Bruce Levine contacted Detective Michelle Mancuso from the Lackawanna County District Attorneys Office about discrepancies he found on Ross invoices for the services she claimed she provided as Guardian. As fate would have it, right about the same time, a thread directed against Ross called Kids 4 Kash was started by political activist Joseph Pilchesky on his contentious website, http://www.dohertydeceit.com. Fundamental to Pilchesky’s website is The First Amendment Right to Freedom of Speech.
The site encourages antagonistic dialogue about current local and global issues that is often times abrasive. Users that post comments on topics typically remain anonymous; therefore, it provides a safe venue for other parents and litigants to share their family court horror stories and eventually their identities with one another. Several of those parents that connected with each other on the website began to turn over Ross’ invoices to the authorities, which eventually lead to the involvement of the United States Attorney General’s Office.
The FBI began their investigation with a subpoena requesting all documents involving each and every case to which Attorney Ross was appointed and a Grand Jury was convened. In days to follow, many additional subpoenas were served upon court employees including the Lackawanna Count Court Administrator, Ron MacKay. When federal agents showed up at MacKay’s office located inside the county’s main Courthouse, he was sequestered and forced to remain in the hallway while agents searched his office. After about an hour, the agents left the Court Administrator’s Office with several boxes of documents.
It is unknown at this time what the FBI confiscated from MacKay’s office. As to why they raided his office, those close to the case strongly believe that the scope of the federal investigation has broadened well beyond the alleged fraudulent billing practices of Attorney Ross. Rumors of case steering and monetary kickbacks are out there.
The status of the AOPC investigation into the Guardian ad Litem Program, as well as Home Evaluation and supervised visitation payments, is unclear at this time despite the fact that on November 2, 2011, AOPC Attorney, Michael Daley, stated in open court that it would be available two weeks ago. To date, a RTK letter that was sent to the Court requesting the report has gone unanswered. Reliable sources within Family Court speculate that there are at least two plausible reasons for the delay. On one hand, there are many who are convinced that the AOPC investigation amounts to little more than a smoke screen used to give the Court a few months to cover its tracks and get its act together. While others believe that public pressure has forced AOPC investigator, Joseph Mittleman, to hold off on finalizing the report. He states that the AOPC is obligated to look into alleged acts of attorney misconduct as well as to conducting interviews with alleged victims of Family Court corruption.
Protests will be held every Friday starting at 9am in front of Family Court. The goal is to bring forth public awareness and gain support in the effort to expose what appears to be a moneymaking racket devised by the members of the Judiciary and several Child Custody/Divorce Professionals who do business with Family Court. The individuals with whom the Court most frequently Orders Family Court litigants to consult are Guardians Danielle Ross and Brenda Kobal, Lackawanna County’s sole co-parenting coordinator, Anne Marie Termini, Kids First presenter, Chet Muklewicz, Court mediator, AnthonyLibassi, Psychologists Drs. Ronald Refice and Arnold Shivenhold, and various child visitation supervisors affiliated with the Scranton Counseling Center.
The Parties who have been forced by Order of the Court to see these providers, attend numerous appointments, whether they need to or not, and pay enormous fees (if they are not declared indigent) have a lot of unanswered questions. Until those questions are answered, the only logical conclusion is that the Court and these providers are unjustly enriching themselves not only with the millions of Federal and State Grant dollars allocated for indigent Lackawanna County Children and Families but also money from private-pay litigants.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
“SHIVENHOLD” I’m fairly sure means “SCHIENVOLD” who is AFCC leadership:
Here’s one filing in which Mr. Shienvold was called as Expert Witness for the Father, who wants primary physical custody of the children, and after the mother submitted to custody reports preceding a “Custody Trial” the mother then, of course, had to make special motions to actually read what was reported about her, and apparently planned to call him up and interview or cross-examine him. The father then protest — aw heck, look at it yourself.
http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/Superior/out/a29038_05.pdf (his name is apparently mis-spelled here, too).
I have already posted on the forum that Mr. Scheinvold is a primary player in the Pennsylvania Commission for Justice Initiatives, and a key AFCC person, as was at least one of their judges, and that Harhut, Termini, and (was it Ross?) were presenting in Brooklyn, 2009 together at an “NACC” association meeting on matters related to Guardianship and Domestic Violence.
He is ALSO the “President-Elect” of AFCC, meaning his influence will be upon more parents than just those in this area. I hope they figure this out quickly in time for the next generation of children, that an international association with a checkered history is helping run the courthouses, but right now, most don’t seem too interested in this, they are scrambling to survive, and have not looked up to the horizons. In other words, for control to operate freely, it’s connections to other control must remain subterranean. AFCC is hardly “subterranean” when it’s publishing statewide model custody evaluation standards, inventing new fields of practice faster than the previous ones can be caught and complained about (Parenting Coordination) and with personnel (over 3,000 membership) including, for example, at least a few on the California Judicial Council Administrative Office of the Courts.
[AFCC]
President Elect
Arnold T. Shienvold, Ph.D.
Harrisburg, PA
Arnold Shienvold is the founding partner of Riegler, Shienvold & Associates. Dr. Shienvold received his Master of Arts and Doctor of Philosophy degrees in clinical psychology from the University of Alabama and has specialized in dealing with high-conflict families since he began his practice in 1980. Dr. Shienvold is a member of the American Psychological Association and is a fellow of the Pennsylvania Psychological Association where he also serves on the custody evaluation task force. Dr. Shienvold is a past president of the Academy of Family Mediators and a past president of the Association for Conflict Resolution. He is also a member of the Pennsylvania Council of Mediators.
The PA Adminsitrative Office of the Courts and FBI are supposedly investigating the Lackawanna County parents’ complaints, so I hope they take it upon themselves to figure out — quickly — who the Pennsylvania Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) is comprised of, paid by, and answerable to.
Commission for Justice Initiatives in Pennsylvania Changing the …
www15.brinkster.com/ncfcpgh/Report.pdfFile Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – View as HTML
Arnold Shienvold, Ph.D., brought great understanding of the dynamics of separation, ….. 3 Site visit by Judy Shopp April 5, 2006; Dr. Arnold Sheinvold provides …You’ve visited this page 5 times. Last visit: 11/30/11
I don’t know that these parents have yet accepted that a State-Level “commission for Justice Initiatives” report (2007) called “Changing the Culture of Custody” with Mr. Shienvold listed front and center as a consultant actually relates to problems they are having at the county level
Arnold Shienvold, Ph.D.
Dr. Shienvold is the founding partner of Riegler • Shienvold and Associates.Education
Master of Arts and Doctor of Philosophy degrees in clinical psychology from the University of Alabama. He specialized in child clinical psychology and completed his internship at the Ohio State University Hospital.Area of Emphasis
Dr. Shienvold has specialized in dealing with high conflict families since he began his practice. He is recognized locally and nationally as an expert in the areas of custody evaluations and family mediation. In addition to his direct clinical practice in those areas, Dr. Shienvold has consulted to public and private agencies, taught and lectured at a multitude of professional conferences and schools and published papers on these topics. Dr. Shienvold continues to see individuals and couples in therapy and he has an active forensic practice. Additionally, Dr. Shienvold has served as a professional facilitator for group meetings.
Yep. High-conflict families. Here’s a website I found in Australia (where AFCC has active membership, FYI) which calls “High Conflict” what it is, if I may quote them. As an added bonus, I stuck two or three comments on this post, which is a year old now. I hope that by the time 2012 is halfpast, the people in Scranton area will figure out (accept) what they are dealing with in the Unified Family Courts per se — which is an expense-paid (by txpayers) largely immune from responsibility, self-referring, self-propagating multiple income stream and often tax-exempt cash machine for paid membership of about 5 different organizations (all playing at monitoring each other, instead of, more commonly, referring each other and providing business referrals to make them look more expert than they really are. If “expert” means, learning a business-specific jargon, and to have a greater conscience about one’s cohorts than one’s clients — then a 12 year old, for example, has already learned to speak his or her own cultural language among peers, and probably knows as much about bullying, gangs, exclusion and arbitrary standards for who is IN and who is OUT.
In order for this field to continue until each generation of Family Court professionals retires (and eventually some will die of old age, though many of the originals are still collecting royalties, probably through Kids’First type operations nationwide), it MUST continue the lie (that’s L.I.E.) that adult parents are by and large to be treated like misbehaving children, or punished until they play along.
This has been going on SO LONG that what they are studying and conferencing about now is basically a contaminated sample (of people and personalities). In addition to the many factors of society contributing to any parent’s “psychological profile,” is probably such things as motherless children, children in foster care because there’s an incentive to put them there, kids who run away from abuse because there was no other safe option (they do not all turn out as well as Alanna Krause of Northern California, whose father, once he got custody, sent her away at age 13 to some kind of reform camp), and a series of protective mothers who feel it necessary to flee the US, or the state — although they, too, are quite likely to be hunted down and incarcerated.
Here’s a 3-page outline from a 2007 Texas Meeting of the AAML ( a group which initials anyone with a family law case should look up themselves!)
DEALING WITH CLIENTS WHICH ARE TOO HARD TO LOVE
The presenters gratefully acknowledge the work of Arnold T. Sheinvold, Ph.D. Dr. Sheinvold is the managing partner of Riegler, Shienvold & Associates, a comprehensive psychological practice in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. The materials in this presentation were developed and presented by Dr. Sheinvold {{that’s SHIENVOLD}} at the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers’ 2007 Midyear Meeting. The presenters appreciate Dr. Sheinvold’s generosity in sharing his materials with the Texas family law community.
(and lists the personality types — borderline, narcissistic, histrionic, antisocial, etc.)
Here’s a 2006 article (abstract, I guess) from the FAMILY COURT REVIEW — which is a publication jointly published by AFCC & Hofstra Univ. in New York, listing this psychologists among others the parents are protesting, a number of AFCC personnel, including Philip Stahl, Ph.D. which virtually guarantees there will be (more) conversation about parental alienation (one of Dr. Stahl’s favorite topics), etc.
Article first published online: 7 DEC 2006
DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-1617.2007.129_3.x
Additional Information(Show All)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
Ronald Refice
“A Bit About How It’s Done” (familycourtmatters Sept. 2011 post)
Here’s one of my former posts showing people samples of how to look things up — corporations, associations, just stay persistent!
Today’s Post is “all over the place” but provides a sampler of how — with as clumsy tools as various states give, the habit of searching for corporations and people who incorporate them, and then comparing boards of directors, whether they actually file tax returns or not, and whether while the press is all about justice, children, and helping resolve conflicts, a view at the nonprofit characterization many times simply categorizes the group as “Board of Trade” “Business Promotion” — which is what it is.
Too bad Thomas Szasz professor took up with a cult that’s been literally booted out of a country, the Church of Scientology — but think about what’s being said here:
Thomas Stephen Szasz (
/ˈsɑːs/sahss; born April 15, 1920) is a psychiatrist and academic. Since 1990[1] he has been Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry at the State University of New York Health Science Center in Syracuse, New York. He is a well-known social critic of the moral and scientific foundations of psychiatry, and of the social control aims of medicine in modern society, as well as of scientism. His books The Myth of Mental Illness (1960) and The Manufacture of Madness: A Comparative Study of the Inquisition and the Mental Health Movement (1970) set out some of the arguments with which he is most associated.
I wonder how the book compares to Phyllis Chesler’s “Women & Madness”
His views on special treatment follow from classical liberal roots which are based on the principles that each person has the right to bodily and mental self-ownership and the right to be free from violence from others, although he criticized the “Free World” as well as the communist states for their use of psychiatry and “drogophobia”. He believes that suicide {{!??!}}, the practice of medicine, use and sale of drugs and sexual relations should be private, contractual, and outside of state jurisdiction.
In 1973, the American Humanist Association named him Humanist of the Year and in 1979 he was honored with an honorary doctorate[2] at Universidad Francisco Marroquín.
Who wants a CONFLICT-FREE SOCIETY? Is this some sort of death-wish, or a wish for a sedated society? Or a managed society, as opposed to one where leadership is not shut down (because most leaders are going to cause some conflict; in fact some of the most significant leaders around — Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., Nelson Mandela, Lincoln, John F. Kennedy, and others – (may I say Jesus Christ in this context?) — end up getting assassinated — yet their work lives on. Most particularly, Gandhi was assassinated, but through NONViolent protest and understanding the economic system, helped get the British Empire out of India. Maybe all of us should re-read his “moment of truth” and get to ours, quicker, building upon what others before have actually learned — and not continually recreating from scratch as if the world has no history.
These groups are causing the conflict themselves by a number of habits:
I hope that protesters, besides correcting the spelling of “SHIENVOLD” (for credibility reasons), also feel free to search my site reporting on LibassiMediation being built by revising rules of court, into the custody modification form, my comparison of KIDS FIRST to KIDS TURN (California)*
And come to realize that a fifth column of psychologists, psychiatrists (adult, child, whatever) and mental health experts is basically a “Family Court Archipelago.” Even physicists have to examine their fundamental assumptions from time to time (cf. Newton, Galileo, and the recently publicized “String Theory”) not the least by at least examining evidence. in this field — ONE NEVER HAS TO; It’s just about become THE primary field of the US Government (world’s largest contractor, and debtor) — and there are no right answers. There is only a caste system: Paid Expert v. Humble Subject matter).
*which is virtually a training ground for the California Family Court personnel (almost everyone has been on its boards, not to mention a person who was “most-wanted” or close to it as a Tax Evador — Halsey Minor (I think he’s on the Board too), plus the defenders of the high priestess of Satan against the High Priest (LaVey, and I”m using the terms loosely), operating at the time out of the same address were, it seems, Kids Turn was operating (2nd floor, 1242 market Street) and I posted that link also.
with thanks to its author for presenting another outlook on the “experts” causing the trouble above.
The evidence-based revolution in psychology.
Copyright © 2011, Paul Lutus
For decades there has been increasing evidence that psychologists can’t reliably diagnose or treat mental illnesses, or mental illnesses aren’t objective illnesses as that term is understood, or that psychology has no testable scientific content. Psychologists’ reaction to this long-term trend has been to add more human behaviors to the “mental illness” category, in order not to lose more ground to medicine.
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)5, what many call the “Bible” of psychology and its single most important guide to practice, shows this trend clearly — each new edition contains more conditions thought to merit the label “mental illness.” Here is a count of “mental illnesses” included in the DSM by year:*
Year Number of mental illnesses 1952 112 1968 163 1980 224 1987 253 1994 374 Obviously this trend might reflect an increase in our understanding of mental illness, and there might really be hundreds of legitimate mental illnesses. But let’s take a closer look at some conditions listed in the current DSM, conditions thought to require intervention by a mental health professional:
- Stuttering
- Spelling Disorder
- Written Expression Disorder
- Mathematics Disorder
- Caffeine Intoxication/Withdrawal
- Nicotine use/Withdrawal
- Sibling Rivalry Disorder
- Phase of Life Problem
Hmm. It seems if you don’t like your older brother, or can’t spell or do math very well, you aren’t just growing up, you’re suffering from a mental illness and need help from a professional. But I favor another explanation — as time passed and psychiatrists and psychologists realized they couldn’t reliably diagnose or cure real mental illnesses, they decided to repurpose themselves as academic tutors, babysitters and hired friends for wealthy patrons.*** For this strategy to work, the DSM needed to include ordinary states of being that could only justify the help of a teacher or sympathetic friend. In other words, in rewriting their profession’s guidebook, for self-serving reasons psychologists deliberately blurred the distinction between everyday problems and mental illness.
This Image from Oct. 2011 AFCC Regional Training Conference“ (“Pdf” of full conference brochure from AFCCnet.org website~~>)Working with Violent and High-Conflict Families: A Race with No Winners” in Indianapolis added during May 2018 post update. The phrase “high conflict” (no hyphen, only) used 18 times in the brochure. For a change, the word “alienation” was used only twice…
Yet another AFCC-style wet dream… Someone needs to mop up around here. [‘Conflict Happens'[like in the Seal Beach massacre?]/High-Conflict Institute’, Publ. Nov. 16, 2011] (Case-sensitive shortlink here ends “-UD”)
(Some format & minor amount of content updates (such as the image to the right and some others and post title extension starting at the ‘[” added May 14, 2018: I had occasion to reference this post on Twitter). Almost 24,000 words, but still important basic reading though originally written barely two years into this blog:
From the “High Conflict Institute”
No longer are DIVORCEs or FAMILIES “high-conflict” but “People” are. In fact, the issues are not the issues either.
When someone comes up to you with an issue — he or she (<=the usual application) doesn’t really mean what s/he says and is not to be taken at face value (ask the forensic psychologists). The REAL problem with family courts isn’t the family courts, and it isn’t even high-conflict families, or high conflict all by its rocky-mountain-high* self. The REAL problem is high-conflict people. Buy this book [“Splitting”] to know if you’re dealing with one:
AFCC 47th Annual (2010, Denver), Traversing the Trail of Alienation
<=**AFCC 47th Conference, Denver, CO, June 2010 (“Traversing the Trail of Alienation,” a trail with “Mile-High Conflict and Mountains of Emotions”)
Promo for “Splitting” from New Harbinger Publications
Bill Eddy image from publications page, Click image to enlarge. Note his affiliations.
Randi Krieger, from publications page (for “Splitting” book out 2011)
|
Splitting
Protecting Yourself While Divorcing Someone with Borderline or Narcissistic Personality Disorder
By authors: Bill Eddy LCSW, JD, Randi Kreger
|
This book is advertised with others on alienation at the NCRC (more, below), as they are in the same professional circles. In fact, it appears he’s on the payroll here (2018 comments: link was to Canadian Bar Association. Search of “high-conflict” brought up just 3 articles, but not accessible without sign-up, which I didn’t at this point). (or is “Senior Family Mediator”) as well as his own split-off “High conflict institute” (see last sentence at the link I just provided).
Books by William Eddy, LCSW, Esq.
Bill Eddy provides Divorce and Family Law Mediation at NCRC as well as training for family law attorneys and other professionals at the High Conflict Institute. Please visit HCI atwww.highconflictinstitute.com for more information on Mr. Eddy’s trainings. He has written numerous books on the subjects of families and high conflict personalities, listed below.
Bill sure was ahead of his AFCC time. While others were simply developing and lobbying for more parenting coordinator rights in Florida, Texas, and wherever — he was writing this book explaining that the Issue is not the Issue, and all the conflict in the family law venue really comes from disordered personalities in the court system.
Protect Yourself from Manipulation, False Accusations, and Abuse
Divorce is difficult under the best of circumstances. When your spouse has borderline personality disorder (BPD), narcissistic personality disorder (NPD), or is manipulative, divorcing can be especially complicated. While people with these tendencies may initially appear convincing and even charming to lawyers and judges, you know better—many of these “persuasive blamers” leverage false accusations, attempt to manipulate others, launch verbal and physical attacks, and do everything they can to get their way.
Splitting is your legal and psychological guide to safely navigating a high-conflict divorce from an unpredictable spouse. Written by Bill Eddy, a family lawyer, therapist, and divorce mediator, and Randi Kreger, coauthor of the BPD classic Stop Walking on Eggshells, this book includes all of the critical information you need to work through the process of divorce in an emotionally balanced, productive way.
I find it odd that he’s working with the author of “Stop walking on Eggshells” which someone gave me about halfway through the divorce fiasco, post-restraining order. They meant well, but like Lundy Bancroft’s “Why Does He DO That” — and regardless of some truths it may have held, neither one (conveniently) mentions the custody racket, financial incentive, fatherhood funding, welfare reform or in short anything which would give me a concise narrative of why the courts don’t take death threats followed by family suicide, or a stalking combined with previous death threats and violence, seriously — and insisted on psychologizing all terms.
People who have lived with this (and I acknowledge it exists) don’t need guides — they need out of the relationship.
Which is precisely what people working with the organization Mr. Eddy helps market through, are not going to let happen. Nope. If we wish to detach from a borderline personality, abuser, or simply an ex (and birth happened in there somewhere), we WILL be forced, most likely, to deal with an AFCC-devotee somewhere along the way — or most of the way along the way.
I have the book “Stop Walking on Eggshells” and it didn’t take to long to recognize it was an updated rebuttal of a 1970s feminist classic, (shown in 2005 version) Women and Madness (by Phyllis Chesler, PhD)
(Link expired: but see 12/31/1972 Review by Adrienne Rich. Reading it again now (2018) with my perspective, both experientially in the American family courts (post-battering interventions, 21st century) and having read so much anti-woman, anti-mother, values-driven (garbage) from the same sources she critiqued originally in this book, I have to basically agree. (I also FYI had this book as a young woman).
It asks:
Why are so many women in therapy, on psychiatric medication, or in mental hospitals? Who decides these women are mad? Why do therapists have the power to deem a woman mentally ill when she asserts herself sexually, economically, or intellectually? Why are women pathologized, but not treated, when they exhibit a normal human response to abuse and stress – including the lifelong stress of second-class citizenship?
Phyllis Chesler confronts questions like these and persuasively argues that double standards of mental health and illness exist and that women are often punitively labeled as a function of gender, race, class, or sexual preference. Based on in-depth interviews with patients and an analysis of women’s roles in myths and history, Women and Madness is an incomparable work.
Originally published in 1972, this classic has sold over two-and-a-half million copies. Passionate and informative, with a new introduction that examines the trauma of psychiatric labeling and envisions a psychology of liberation for the ages, this special twenty-fifth anniversary edition of Women and Madness remains frighteningly up-to-date.
By now there should also be one called “Children and Madness,” for the labeling children get when they report abuse, when they are active and assertive, and when they need to be controlled after any of the above. That’s been documented elsewhere, and comes under
Psychotropic Drug Abuse in Foster Care Costs Government Billions :
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | |
________________
________________
(Blog Navigation Links):
________________
________________
Ten Most Recent Posts, ‘Display Content’ added 27 April, 2022. (For some, that only shows my typically long post title + shortlink, but in the future I’ll move that part further down in post body for better results on this widget).
______________________________________
|
This Absolutely Uncommon Analysis shouldn't be!
What I do here: I expose the Systems Design, and the Designers, so Y.O.U. can Show Others, and to notify those playing certain games, "you've been flagged." Heard of "disruptive technologies?" Disruptive innovations? Despite the blog's appearance, I know what I'm doing! You're looking at long-term leverage, in the hands of the "non-experts," in the public interest, not public funded propaganda to drive business to private pockets. Hence, I'm not afraid to ask: The formula for this public/private business model isn't really that complex, but the concept itself was just so devious, insidious, parasitic, grandiose, and by now, so baked into the economic, institutional infrastructure, people either don't notice, or, in a common, cowardly, but all too human response they see, and just start denying, or looking for nicer explanations of an ugly truth -- where it's heading. For lack of nicer, but still honest terms, it's heading towards yet more slavery (and tolerating it) and genocide (and tolerating it). [[2019 comments: and the ability to drive the U.S., in particular, into even more, bigger, and more costly/dangerous wars, discrediting us (further) internationally. But I wrote this sidebar many years ago..]] As a woman, mother, a family court and domestic violence survivor [yes, he was a hitter, and more], who has already 'faced the music' in more ways than I can count, to the best of my ability, I do not do "denial." I also ask the public, what's left of it, to just not go down that Denial Road, and with it lose more of their innate humanity, perception, and ethics. There is another way out, one with a conscience: Really want system change? Make up your mind to understand government financing -- change yourself first. Find and read your local "CAFR" (government's Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports), a wonderful source of information, with flow chart, descriptions of component or blended government units it's reporting on, and reporting the balances in each fund -- ever heard of a "Balance Sheet"? Looking for this also reveals just how many governmental business entities ARE there? Find them. Read. Think about what you see. What does it mean? Governments tend to pool their investments, for example, "CALPERS" (essentially created ca. 1931) is the largest "public pension" investing platform around, or at least in the country. Getting started earlier sure helped, then adding players (subscribers) over time ALSO did. In 1985, add "CII" Council on Institutional Investors (members: in 31states and D.C.) (LA Times 1985 article on Calif. Politician (state treasurer, assembly speaker) Unruh whose idea it was for the Council so institutional funds could "flex their muscle"; and push for corporate governance reform. CII members now control $3 trillion of assets)-- my point being, government holdings are invested and when pooled like this, are major clout, but the average person never reads even a single government entity's annual financial reports to take a look. (I wasn't aware of them til 2012!) Governments not only invest their funds in business, they also by legislation, patenting, and protections, set them up to win, or lose. So, "know thy government" is a great place to start. (See blog/see links in the blog). 2019 updates: This widget's (text box) full contents, along with others', now can be viewed (better -- full-page-width) at: Many of My Sidebar Widgets Now Live Here...[Published July 9, 2019]Published short (url short-link ends "-abt") (and may eventually replace current sidebar contents, or most of them). I also published a second, similar post with other sidebar widget contents(url short-link ends '-ahh') on July 19, 2019. Thanks for your patience (and any NOT-tax-exempt donations) meanwhile.//LGH |
ColdHardFact$ PostsDoorways to Key Parts of This Blog (I split the long Dec. 2019 Widgets. Added 27 Apr. 2022).
Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History 
“Strong Field Project” caters to DV industry’s networks, enabled by ?? “Three Cities that Rule the World”
leave a comment »
This post to be read alongside a page added to the other blog, which explains the “Strong Field Project” reference.
*What does doing THAT have to do with ending domestic violence, pray tell?
That article was posted at http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=106799.0 by user May 21, 2009.
We think in terms of within our state (or perhaps as far as the federal level) when seeking justice from the bottom up. However, the top down doesn’t think that way at all — and from what I can see these days, it doesn’t think in terms of the US Constitution either. Consider nonprofit associations that help run our justice system, including particularly the one I blog on….
International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution > Home
http://www.cpradr.org/ The CPR Institute is an independent, nonprofit think tank that promotes innovation in commercial dispute prevention and resolution. By harnessing the collective …
this nonprofit (founded 1979) is also listed on the New York State
. . .
The “Strong Field Project” is just another sapling off the DV as industry Tree, and not the main point here (see first link, above). My point is, were it not for centralized wealth — and alongside that wealth, centralized decision-making (taxation without representation) these things would not exist. And so long as our medium of exchange is “fiat money” owned by private bankers, who lend to the U.S. Treasury at interest dumped upon the entire US Population, while talks about “stimulating the economy” “balancing the budget” etc. continue to roil the electorate — they rule that world, and it’s true — they do.
Maybe Jesus was right, in the wilderness -it takes one to know one and maybe whoever wrote the gospels of Matthew and Luke, describing his temptation, were absolutely correct (Mark, probably earlier than either, skims over the time in the wilderness). As it goes in Matthew 4 (KJV), three temptations, which I’ll summarize as: Do Magic Tricks (Stones into bread) to satisfy his empty stomach; Suicide (jump off the temple to test God’s safety net), and finally, Sellout (bow down, and be receive the kingdoms (plural) of the world, with their glory).
Luke 4 has it in a different order (suicide last, after getting Jesus’ worship fails), and adds detail on how the devil got the power over the entire world:
“Power and Glory are mine,” boasts the devil. “I have the kingdoms of this world.” Well, were kingdoms around when this was written? “And I say who gets them, and who does not get them; I am the boss.”
It seems to hold true today, doesn’t it? Only different terminology is used. For example, the word “GRANT.” A grant is a gift, but with the gift goes a little piece of the recipient’s independence in the form of strings attached — does it serve a particular agenda set by the grantOR? Absolutely! This is basically the buying and selling of kingdoms, power, and etc. Whatever happens within them, that’s the umbrella over them.
Characterizing this as coming from “the devil” (invisible spiritual influence), i.e. bad — well, is this type of influence bad, and is it often exercised in hidden (invisible) ways? I’d say, yes…..
Looking at these “kingdoms of the world” (as opposed to looking at, for example, “Nature” and things that grow, against the zoology, biology, anatomy, astromony,etc. that show more and more amazing details) I have to agree, that the greater the power, the greater the damage. And that the lifeblood/energy is being sucked out of the some sectors of the world, along with money, and being centralized into who says who lives and dies; and who says who gets to keep their earnings and who doesn’t, however paltry they may be – and for what social good? For doing good?
No, not really — only good within limits of “I get to control what’s done with the world,” the song of the tax-exempt foundation run (or funded) by some great philanthropists, whose names are usally put on it too (good for PR), and in accompaniment with the corporations (businesses) that helped make that wealth. The tax-exempt foundation, by being tax-exempt, serves as a drainage ditch to reduce the taxes that would otherwise be paid on the FOR-profit.
Why else do we think so many of them are running around all over (look at the civic works, PBS shows, “Models for Change” programs calculating how to mobilize swift transformation of chosen areas of reform, such as “Juvenile Justice” or other areas. Go review MDRC again (I’ve blogged it) for an example of how inbred US Gov’t and Corporate wealth/tax-exempt foundations really are. Even AFCC is getting some help these days.
RATHER THAN WORK TO ELIMINATE THE VERY TAXATION SYSTEM WHICH PRODUCE THIS LEVEL OF WEALTH TO START WITH (ALONG WITH THE WISDOM TO KNOW HOW TO UTILIZE THAT LEVERAGE), INSTEAD, THE OWNERS OF THIS WEALTH FLY AROUND AND COLLABORATE ON A BETTER JUSTICE SYSTEM THAN THEIR LOWER COUNTERPARTS – WHO HAPPEN TO BE IN POSITIONS LIKE GOVERNORS, OF STATES, JUDGESHIPS, ATTORNEY GENERALS, ETC. — THE TRULY ALTRUISTIC BENEFICIAL COLLABORATION WOULD BE TO UNDO THIS INCOME TAX, SWITCH OFF THE “FIAT CURRENCY” AND DEFANG THE FEDERAL RESERVE. BUT HOW LIKELY IS THAT TO HAPPEN?
We’ve been hooked on it for 100 years next year (1913 – 2013) think about it. What an addiction.
The greatest goods would be protecting unalienable rights is LIFE, and LIBERTY and PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS, and having enough self-respect and self-restraint to allow others to do the same — how many golden yachts does one really need? You can’t take it with you, even if you have a golden voice (like Whitney Houston, recently: global success, gone age 48, leaving one motherless child. Well, young adult. A wealthy one for sure, but one absent her mother).
So, here’s the Biblical worldview, at least in the book of Revelation. Followers are encouraged to keep it in mind that this kingdom is temporal and is going to be judged (by fire) — so choose your allegiances well. Without my interpreting whether that’s smart or not to endorse, here’s the description of that buying and selling of kingdoms, Revelations 18. As before, spiritual agents (angels, this time) are involved and judgment is swift, expressing indignation and vindication:
The kingdom that rules the world is characterized as “Babylon,” which was a kingdom, earlier. And, naturally, as a woman:
That is indeed what the traffic is in. It pretty much describes most areas of commerce, including transport of goods:
So many enterprises were hooked into the sales that took place in “the city;” but (she) was hell on the apostles and prophets, who were typically exiled, or killed in various gruesome ways, etc. ….there message wasn’t good for business. (Quite a contrast from some of today’s “apostles and prophets” –see recent post on the bankruptcy of the Crystal Cathedral (Garden Grove, CA) and its founding family’s squabbles with the board, i.e., Robert Schuller et al. I blogged it over at thefamilycourtmoneymachine.blogspot.com
It takes a caste of slaves to produce certain levels of wealth, and even the best of major constructions (The Hoover Dam, the Brooklyn Bridge, Grand Central Station in NY) have been associated with human deaths of workers. What about the pyramids? What about the former practice of burying concubines and wives with the death of a ruler?
The lines have to be drawn and crowds have to be kept within their kind, and within their places. “The great men of the earth” are actually merchants, and there’s no question — is there? — that with slavery and slavehood comes untimely death, too often. So, look around — where are the deaths happening, where is the blood flowing, and then track the trail of money. Religion WILL be associated, and it’s not too hard to locate –except perhaps at the very top levels.
Whoever gave what to whom, and how (Adam, Eve, Israel in the Promised Land, whoever ….) there is no question that there is desire still circulating to rule the world, and that there are layers of collaborators — and the closer to the grants, and wealth (to fly, conference, buy and sell real estate under nonprofit umbrella, even “front groups” to launder the money at times) — the closer to the power, and the deafer the ears become to the cries of those they took the power to (allegedly) help, save, or whatever.
Anyone who’s lived with a certain level of abuse (and knew, by contrast, freedom) knows about this. Many times, supposedly there is some purpose to all the tyranny — but there never is. It’s just enforced because they can get away with doing this, and get off on it. Anything else is pretty much a lie.
WELL, let’s get down to the main show here:
I have been talking, briefly, about the analogy of “The Matrix’ (picked up from someone else who wrote about this) as an artificially created reality which, once you become aware of it, you have to either deal with (mentally, emotionally, psychologically) and determine where to stand regarding it — or take another sedative and go back to sleep.
The Internet is a great, addicting perhaps, but effective way to spread that net; it fishes and sets out bait both. But, it’s here, and must be dealt with, as a whole lotta money is traveling along that net (being tracked as it goes), and this technology, this tool — like many technological advances — is often used for warfare, to kill. The question is just, who.
To be read alongside a page added to the other blog:
More references for the curious, here (I haven’t reviewed, just put up one or two):http://www.bible.ca/b-canon-disputed-books.htm and (better narration here) http://freethought.mbdojo.com/canon.html
Wolverine/Michigan-ian:
Those who fight back — confronting illegal home invasions fraudulently ordered (NOT even legitimately court-ordered) for purposes of kidnapping, for purpose of institutionalizing, for the purpose of then administering dangerous drugs to minor children — can, and will, be treated as felons and stripped of their kids, and months/years of their lives in the fight. That’s the Michigan reference, above. Testimony (at the rally) of those on Risperdal:
Posted on 04/08/2011 by Diane Bukowski
Charges have been dropped, she has her daughter back, but they are considering re-instating. This story deserves follow-up: Voice of Detroit did good investigative reporting. The same CPS worker that did this in 2011 was, in 2010, facing a civil lawsuit for pulling a similar stunt to a related (married) couple, only five (5) children were nabbed and put into three different foster homes for 4o months; the amount of deceit involved is simply stunning. (Brent family, look it up at “justice4maryanne” site).
The community rallied, and it seems the family was targeted from a number of angles: single mother, intelligent and insisting on choice (not “the program”), she homeschooled, she was also African-American and in (I remember seeing, can’t find link) the community was poor. How dare this community not fork over their kids to the Title IV-driven systems for Rx profits?
While people like these have to fight — with whatever they got — to keep their kids, another one DID fall between the cracks, in N. California (I also have a page on this — to right), and at least one post; an alert UC Berkeley campus security guard (mother) was alert, and followed up, leading to the YOUNG mother below’s release, along with the two kids. After 18 years in captivity!
Jaycee Dugard Files Lawsuit Against U.S. Government
Rebecca Bailey, PhD – Psy 18732
ANYHOW . . . The Three Cities and Fiat Currency . . . .
The Moneylenders Take Over England
In the 19th century, the Rothchild banking family’s Nathan Rothchild said it well:
{{2012 is an election year. Americans (USA) would do well to keep this in mind also.}}
Centuries early, moneylender power was absent. But after the 1666 Coinage Act, money-issuing authority, once the sole right of kings, was transferred into private hands. “Bankers now had the power to cause inflations and depressions at will by issuing or withholding their gold coins.”
King William III (1672 – 1702), a Dutch aristocrat, financed his war against France by borrowing 1.2 million pounds in gold in a secret transaction with moneylenders, the arrangement being a permanent loan on which debt would be serviced and its principle [“principal”] never repaid. It came with other strings as well:
— lenders got a charter to establish the Bank of England (in 1694) with monopoly power to issue banknotes as national paper currency;
— it created them out of nothing, with only a fraction of them as reserves;
— loans to the government were to be backed by government IOUs to serve as reserves for creating additional loans to private borrowers; and
— lenders could consolidate the national debt on their government loan to secure payment through people-extracted taxes.
{{sound familiar yet?}}
It was a prescription for huge profits and “substantial political leverage. The Bank’s charter gave the force of law to the ‘fractional reserve’ banking scheme that put control of the country’s money” in private hands. It let the Bank of England create money out of nothing and charge interest for loans to the government and others – the same practice central banks now employ.
{{{“TALLIES”}}
For the next century, banknotes and tallies circulated interchangeably even though they weren’t a compatible means of exchange. Banker money expanded when “credit expanded and contracted when loans were canceled or ‘called,’ producing cycles of ‘tight’ money and depression alternating with ‘easy’ money and inflation.” In contrast, tallies were permanent, stable, fixed money, making banknotes look bad so they had to go.
For another reason as well – because of King William’s disputed throne and fear if he were deposed, moneylenders again might be banned. They used their influence to legalize banknotes as the money of the realm called “funded” debt with tallies referred to as “unfunded,” what historians see as the beginning of a “Financial Revolution.” In the end, “tallies met the same fate as witches – death by fire.”
{{ACTUALLY– SOUNDS LIKE THE REVERSE WAS TRUE. TALLIES WERE FUNDED, AND THE BANKNOTES, WERE NOT}}
They were money of the people competing with moneylending bankers. After 1834 monetary reform, “tally sticks went up in flames in a huge bonfire started in a House of Lords stove.” Ironically, it got out of control and burned down Westminster Palace and both Houses of Parliament, symbolically ending “an equitable era of trade (by transferring power) from the government to the” central bank.
{{simple explanation:on the terms, and this burning: terms “tally” “stocks” “broker” (Stockade) and “Exchequer”, Charles Dickens quoted}}
(MY INSERT — more on TALLY STICKS:
Original Wooden Tally Sticks (2)
[England, Westminster, c. 1250-1275]
hickory wood, the larger end cut diagonally, edges roughly squared off leaving traces of bark, each inscribed along one side with the name of the payer and the upper and lower edges cut with notches (“v”-shaped for pounds, broad grooves for shillings, sharp cuts for pence), each piece then split with a knife by cutting diagonally across the thicker end of the reverse side and pulling away a length which would be retained separately by the payer as proof of payment, written in thirteenth-century charter hands. c. 175-200 mm. long (each).
Rare survival of a medieval form of financial record-keeping, the tally stick provides the origin of many words used in modern money markets: stock, foil, stockholder, bank stock, and check. The vast majority were destroyed in the nineteenth century in the fire of the Palace of Westminster and the Houses of Parliament.
INTERESTING:
Tallies provide the earliest form of bookkeeping. They were used in England by the Royal Exchequer from about the twelfth century onward. Since the notches for the sums were cut right through both pieces and since no stick splits in an even manner, the method was virtually foolproof against forgery. They were used by the sheriff to collect taxes and to remit them to the king. They were also used by private individuals and institutions, to register debts, record fines, collect rents, enter payments for services rendered, and so forth. By the thirteenth century, the financial market for tallies was sufficiently sophisticated that they could be bought, sold, or discounted.
“Tallies were … a sophisticated and practical record of numbers. They were more convenient to keep and store than parchments, less complex to make, and no easier to forge…. Of the millions of medieval tallies made, only a few hundred survive.” (Clanchy, p. 96; see also p. 95, n. 28, pl. VIII). In 1724, treasury officials commanded that tallies no longer be used, but it was not until 1834, with the reform acts and the abolition of the office of the Receipt of the Exchequer, that a huge bonfire of the then-obsolete medieval tally sticks was held. Started in a stove stuffed full of sticks in the House of Lords, the fire quickly got out of control, spreading to the paneling, and burning down both the Palace of Westminster and the Houses of Parliament.
In 1911, Sir Hilary Jenkinson knew of only three Exchequer tally sticks in private hands (pp. 292-3, 330, and 350).
The evolution of money technologies originates with the tally stick. From tally stick comes the modern word “stock,” meaning a financial certificate and deriving from the use of the Middle English for the stick. The piece retained by the bank was called the “foil.” The holder of the stock was said to be the “stockholder” and owned “bank stock.” A written certificate presented for remittance and checked against its security later became a “check.”
According to legend, Wall Street was founded in its present location because of the presence there of an enormous chestnut tree, said to be plentiful enough to supply enough tally sticks for the emerging American stock market.
LITERATURE
Clanchy, M. T. From Memory to Written Record, England 1066-1307, Cambridge, Mass., 1979.
Jenkinson, Hilary C. “Exchequer Tallies,” Archaeologia, second series, 12 (1911), pp. 292 ff.
ONLINE RESOURCES
Tallies and Technologies, by Dave Birch, Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce
http://www.arraydev.com/commerce/JIBC/9811-11.htm
The Origins of Mathematics
http://www.math.tamu.edu~don.allen/history/origins/origins.html
[[The other source cited is the link, above to definitions]]
forum.prisonplanet. . . cont’d….
Henceforth {{1834ff?}}, private bankers kept government in debt, never demanding the return of principle [“principal”], and profiting by extracting interest, a very lucrative system always paying off “like a slot machine” rigged to benefit its operators. It became the basis for modern central banking, lending its “own notes (printed paper money), which the government swaps for bonds (its promises to pay) and circulates as a national currency.”
{{BONDS — hold that thought}}
Government debt is never repaid. It’s continually rolled over and serviced, today with no gold in reserve to back it. Though gone, tallies left their mark. The word “stock” comes from the tally stick. Much of the original Bank of England stock was bought with these sticks. In addition, stock issuance began during the Middle Ages as a way to finance businesses when no interest-bearing loans were allowed.
This is not “archaic” information and irrelevant — it’s VERY current. I am still digesting — but it makes sense. Here’s a Brit (I gather) relating the Monarchy’s relationship to the Corporation of London (which holds the crown — the one you’ve seen on TV perhaps, loaned out for state occasions) and correlating to a May, 2011 meeting with the British Prime Minister Cameron with Eurozone personnel, re: ESM (Hey, it’s new term to me….). I just saw Cameron sitting next to President Obama watching a basketball game, on TV….
He is thinking in terms of the Corporation that holds the (moulah) versus the “State” which is subject to it. It’s a BIG deal!
That meeting, the ESM and the Crown – why Cameron said NO
SHARE THIS POST on...
Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
March 14, 2012 at 5:03 pm
Posted in Bush Influence & Appointees (Cat added 11/2011), Business Enterprise, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids, Parenting Coordination promotion, PhDs in Psychology-Psychiatry etc (& AFCC), Vocabulary Lessons, warfare: strategic
Tagged with "Bush 2002 Exec Order -New Freedom Commission", "Strong Field Project", 3 Cities That Rule the World, Brave Young Adults, Child Molestation, CPRADR, CPS Child-stealing, DV, DV industry, England, Evolving Canon of Bible, fatherhood, fighting back, Godboldo case, Handwriting On the Wall from Bible-Read it Now, Humantrafficking, incest, Intimate partner violence, JAYC, Jaycee Dugard, London, mediation, men's rights, Motherhood, obelisk, Parenting Coordination, Pharma, Phil Garrido, Rebecca Bailey PhD, retaliation for reporting, social commentary, Social Issues from Religious Viewpoints, State vs Corporation, Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution, Supervised Visitation, the Secular Web, Thomas J Stipanovich, TMAP/PennMAP, Transitioning Families, trauma, Vatican, VOD, WDC, Who Owns America?