Archive for the ‘Vocabulary Lessons’ Category
“Why does he DO that?” A walk on the wild side…. [with some 2013 updates]
I am speaking as an owner and long-time appreciator of the book. “Why Does He Do That? Inside the Minds of Angry & Controlling Men.”.. which showed up like a savior, emotionally, right as my case plummeted from stablized position under protection of a restraining order, into the volatile, “mandatory-mediation” arena of Family Court, which reminded me of “Chutes and Ladders”, with more chutes than ladders.
You take one false step (or have your family placed at the top of a chute through being hauled into this venue) and are on a chute.
Kind of like life WITH the abusive guy (or woman) to start with, anyhow, huh? Hmm… Wonder why they function similarly!

(The post on “Family Court Matters a la board-games” is in pre-development stage, meaning, a little gleam in the blogger’s eye still. Paper, Scissors Stone (last post) got me thinking for sure…..)
If you haven’t read Lundy Bancroft’s material AND/OR you are not yourself a victim or being forced to co-parent with a batterer, you’re not fully informed in the domestic violence field, period.
(2013 Update, In Hindsight):
Then again, if we’d all been talking about something besides “batterers” perhaps neither Batterers Intervention Programs nor “domestic violence” would have developed into “fields,” coalitions, or industries.
And the conversation about those fields and how THEY operate is the conversation that no one seems to want to talk about, even as updates to “The Batterer As Parent” have been published and being circulated in various circles.
I mean, think about it (why didn’t we earlier??) There is a crime called “assault and battery” — but by the time someone has become a “batter-er” that means, it’s habitual — which means someone else is experiencing “domestic violence.” How can you domesticate “violence” and what’s domestic about it? (Well, you can tame down its labeling and call it domestic “abuse” — which has been done…
In fact, as it turns out, “BIPs” are actually diversionary programs to criminal prosecution for the beating up on others. Some people figured out, along with programs like, “moral reconation therapy(tm)” and Psychoeducational classes for kids undergoing divorce — that the more programs the merrier. I guess… The money is made upfront in the trainings, yours truly (The United States Government, which is essentially “yours truly” — the taxpayers) set up the policies and the corporations and then runs the population through them every time someone shows up actually needing some realtime social service — or justice — or help.
I can’t explain it too well in a single post, but this conflict was staged and manipulated in order to obtain more and more central control (literally, an economic stranglehold) on most of us through those of us that are willing to sell out for collaboration, sales, and the conference circuit. As sincere or genuine as these individuals may be, I do know they are playing on empathy to increase sales. I do not know whether or not they see the endgame, after their own use has expired in the long-range plan of bankrupting Americans so we are left as a human resource without other options than begging or slavery, at a sheer subsistence level.
Some of us have been their in marriage, we have been there AFTER filing restraining orders, which were intended to protect us (allegedly), but we were NOT there after even a year or two in the family court Archipelago.
Somehow, in this destitute and distressed state, we grasp at straws of empathy and keep referring friends and neighbors to explain our own situation to the same types of information — such as if only someone would JUST UNDERSTAND batterers’ psyches, our kids would be safer, and life would be better.
Anyhow, what follows was from very early in this blog (October 2009) and shows my understanding at that time. Even then, I was questioning the logic of the question.
Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
October 8, 2009 at 7:59 PM
Posted in After She Speaks Up - Reporting Child Sexual Abuse, After She Speaks Up - Reporting Domestic Violence and/or Suicide Threats, Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, compulsory schooling, Context of Custody Switch, Designer Families, Domestic Violence vs Family Law, Funding Fathers - literally, History of Family Court, Lethality Indicators - in News, Mandatory Mediation, My Takes, and Favorite Takes, public education, Split Personality Court Orders, Vocabulary Lessons
Tagged with Bancroft, custody, Declaration of Independence/Bill of Rights, domestic violence, Due process, DV, Education, fatherhood, Grammar of Male Violence, HHS-TAGGS grants database, mediation, PASSIVE tense for AGGRESSIVE deeds, Self-Defense from DV, social commentary, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work.., Why Does He Do That?
911 + 1 + a bit about boxes from a woman who spent years in one.
My situation continues to unfold at its own rate.
unrelated to anything appropriate for honoring 911. I have been thinking about the times I called 911 and didn’t get help, or of the times the police RACED to the scene of an incident and did everything right, but still were unable to save. Or when they (as so many did on this 9/11/01) were there and gave their lives to help as many as possible escape the two huge boxes called the World Trade Towers.
As this blog is on family court matters, I still think the theme of boxes is appropriate, and particularly in regards situations of a child-stealing, kidnapping, or such. To be stuck in a relationship is one thing, to lose one’s kids is totally another.
The first article tells some more aspects of the Dugard case, but the second one, so well written I thought, is in the voice of Colleen who was kidnapped, stored in a box, renamed, tortured (etc.) She is alive, she escaped, has had help and healing and looks, today, beautiful from what I can see. (this photo is not most current — see end of post). Thank God. (Luke 4).

Colleen (NOT Jaycee or her daughters), shortly post-escape. Her escape was not from a 911 call, but when one of her captors opened a mental bar, revealed that one of the threats against her leaving was in fact a lie. She then got on a bus and went home. An amazing story.
FIRST story is about recent rescue, SECOND story (far, far below….) is about what this woman, Colleen, has to say to Jaycee Dugard, about recovery, and to the rest of us, about the types of prisons that keep kidnapped women in place. I believe much of this information is transferable to other situations.
Fasten your seat belts, this one has some unexpected twists and turns. . . . and little stylistic consistency (readers have been warned already) as I quoted within quotes, and pasted from WOrd perfect, dragged article information from the web, and added my commentary and tried to piece at least the more recent case together from the Web.
Police: Kidnap suspect fathered victim’s kids
Demian Bulwa, Jaxon Van Derbeken, Henry K. Lee,Kevin Fagan, Chronicle Staff Writers
Friday, August 28, 2009
(08-27) 19:56 PDT ANTIOCH —
Phillip Craig Garrido was already known as an oddball who said he could channel the voice of God through a makeshift box, but on Thursday, the eccentricity took on an aura of horror.
Eighteen years ago, authorities said, he kidnapped 11–year–old Jaycee Lee Dugard on her way to catch a school bus in South Lake Tahoe. Ever since then, they said, he kept her prisoner in a squalid backyard compound near Antioch, raping her and fathering two daughters by her – the elder of whom is now 15.
Those girls also were housed in sheds and other outbuildings in the backyard, which had been walled off so it couldn‘t easily be seen by neighbors or other outsiders, authorities said.
One of the sheds where Dugard and the girls were living could only be opened from the outside, Kollar said, and rudimentary toilets and electrical hookups were set up nearby.
“None of the children have ever been to school; they‘ve never been to a doctor,” the undersheriff said at a press conference in Placerville. “They were kept in complete isolation in this compound.”
Neighbors‘ suspicions
Neighbors in the unincorporated, semi–rural area outside Antioch where the Garridos live say they always thought he was bizarre, and even suspected something fishy was going on with the girls he called his daughters – but they thought authorities were keeping tabs on it all.
So much for THAT line of thinking. Compartmentalization, delegation of authorities to the authorities so the rest of us don’t have to really get to know our neighbors, watch out for them, hold them to a standard so much, and can focus on our own business. Protection and monitoring is not our job, it’s someone else’s.
Phillip Garrido is a registered sex offender, and authorities inspected his house several times over the years but never discovered the backyard compound.
The neighbors and other acquaintances said Garrido conducted religious revivals in a tent, claimed to hear the voices of angels and God, and said he had developed a device through which he could control sound with his mind. He propounded this all in a business he called “God‘s Desire.“
Apparently he himself wasn’t confined to a box.
In a telephone interview from jail with Sacramento TV station KCRA, Garrido said, “In the end, this is going to be a powerful, heartwarming story.”
Again, HOW heartwarming depends on whether one’s perspective is from outside, or inside the box. And whose voice we are hearing.
One article says that the first phone call a prisoner normally makes is for the attorney, but this man called the TV station instead.
Suspect did time
Officials said Garrido served time in Nevada on kidnapping and rape convictions in the 1970s, ‘80s and ‘90s and was paroled after one stint in 1988 and another in June 1999. It was not immediately clear where Dugard may have been while Garrido was in custody.
One of the rapes he was caught at, that sent him to prison, took place in a storage unit. This man seems to be an expert at boxes, and putting women in them.
It appears that after Garrido was “BOXED” up for this, he was sprung though, after marrying Nancy Garrido while incarcerated. Nancy was appropriate — she had a religious background (Jehovah’s Witness) and an uncle in the box as well, apparently. Kidnappers and rapers need love, too, right?
Neighbors of the Garridos on Walnut Avenue – and even some of his own family – considered Phillip Garrido strange as he proselytized to them about his messages from God and kept the females at his house from contact with outsiders.
The House Box.
Erika Pratt, 25, who stayed next door two years ago, said she was continuously “freaked out” by Garrido‘s behavior and that when she popped her head over the fence she saw his secret compound. There were tents, sheds and pit bulls, she said, and water hoses leading from her house next door.
‘They never talked‘
“He had little girls and women living in that backyard, and they all looked kind of the same,” Pratt said. “They never talked, and they kept to themselves.”
Pratt said people came and went from the property, but the core group consisted of two girls about 4 years old, one girl about 11, another girl about 15 and a young woman about 25. They were all blond, she said.
Pratt said she had called Contra Costa County sheriff‘s deputies to investigate, but that officers “told me they couldn‘t go inside because they didn‘t have a warrant. So they just told him they‘d keep an eye on him.”
So like a well-trained citizen — or, like a woman who didn’t want to offend a freaky neighbor with pit bulls — she dropped it there. Leave it to the county sheriffs.
My message to any future 23-years old, especially women, who see things like this going on with their neighbors — it’s OK to seek information; please care enough to follow up beyond the Sheriff’s Office and/or WITH the Sheriff’s Office if you see anything like this, or which sets of an internal alarm. Keep seeking until some answer is found.
I would LOVE to see any records or hear any tapes of those calls. Let’s all start keeping recording devices handy and, if calling the police, inform them that we, too, are recording our calls.
You can’t just go barging in on someone’s boxes without a warrant.
Police said Thursday that the only people living in the yard when the Garridos were arrested were Dugard and her daughters.
Has anyone on-line followed up on who those about-4 year old girls were, and what year it was that Ms. Pratt saw them? Mr. Bulwa, Vanderbeken, Lee, or Fagan, who wrote this article? Who is this Erika Pratt, she seems observant where others weren’t?
. Time’s Person of the Week on 7/26/02? Of Wikipedia fame, an African-American 7 year old who, kidnapped from Philadelphia — in an attempt to extort money from her grandmother, on the belief that she’d received life insurance from the shooting of an uncle:
No, that Erica is now only 14 years old.
The story: Erica was held for one long night and day in the basement of an empty house, her hands and feet bound with duct tape. She chewed through the tape, kicked open a basement door and made her way to a window where she screamed until someone heard her and came to her rescue. The little girl was plucky, but also lucky. The motive for the kidnapping was not sexual but financial; her abductors asked for a $150,000 ransom, perhaps believing a false neighborhood rumor that Erica’s family had received that sum as a life insurance payment after her uncle was shot and killed last month. Police Thursday arrested James Burns and Edward Johnson in connection with the kidnapping.
EXTORTION OF ELDERS IS ANOTHER ‘CLUE’ AND WAS A PREDECESSOR IN THE GARRIDO CASE AS WELL.
THIS ADVICE STILL APPLIES, and is why I also suggest Mace & Self-defense classes, not Restraining Order Suggestions after Domestic Violence, which externalizes the source of safety and in practice, really consists of “hope-mongering,” at some level…
For parents wondering if it’s safe to let their kids even leave the living room without supervision, the most reassuring part of Erica’s story is that, faced with a situation in which many adults would panic, she kept her head and saved herself. In the end, maybe the best defense you can give your kids is not a blind fear of strangers but rather instilling self-assurance and presence of mind. “I have 21 years in the Police Department,” said Philadelphia Police Inspector William Colarulo, “and I have never seen this kind of heroic act of bravery committed by a 7-year-old.” Neither have we.
re: “911” —
This other Erika Pratt was taken from Southwestern Phillie, and it’s a moot point whether, had she had a cell phone, 911 would’ve stopped the event. Once you’re gone, most kidnappers are smart enough to cut off telephone and other contacts from the outside, so when being taken hostage in ANY manner, the key is to respond like this inner-city African American young girl, whose uncle had already died (or so rumor had it) in the streets, to fight Hard, til free, and RIGHT AWAY. She hadn’t been indoctrinated into passivity yet, I guess. Do we REALLY want to breed out “rebel” from society? ??
This Erika is the ex-girlfriend of Garrido neighbor Damon Robinson, per this article:
The house is in a ramshackle neighborhood of modest single-family homes in an unincorporated area of Antioch hit by the foreclosure crisis and job losses.
Garrido’s next door neighbor Damon Robinson was interviewed several times by the AP, Los Angeles Times and other media. During those conversations, he revealed his ex-girlfriend, Erika Pratt, had called police in 2006 to report Garrido had children living in tents in his backyard.
While Robinson was being interviewed by the AP and others, three members of a British media group walked onto his property without his permission.
When Robinson asked what they were doing, a British reporter told Robinson his deadline was coming quickly and offered him $2,000 if he would quit talking to everyone else and provide them an exclusive showing of his backyard.
The reporter flashed $100 as an apparent sign of good faith. Robinson, who acknowledged that another British outlet had also paid him, agreed. Robinson, who is unemployed, did not disclose what outlets paid him and it was not clear from the interaction.
Robinson led the crew deep into his backyard, where a hole in his fence provided a glimpse of the shambled compound next door.
Robinson said he would use the money for his two children and might also give some to Dugard’s daughters.
If this story, also from neighbor Mike Rogers, holds water, perhaps Erika Pratt was right to get her behind OUT of there. Perhaps (?) this also may relate to why CC Sherriffs were not so aggressive in follow-up? Or if Ms. Pratt was, like at least two of the Erika Pratt’s I saw on-line, African-American, this may be why her reports didn’t hold weight? Or was it her gender?
(ROGERS) The Antioch builder told theDaily Mail that Garrido made crystal meth using household utensils and frequently invited “perverts” to his home to regale in drugs, sex and drinking. Rogers went so far as to call the Garrido home a brothel.
He said he discussed the matter with his brother, Dean, who also lives in the neighborhood. Rogers said they agreed not to contact police explaining, “People don’t even waive to each other or say hello here. You just pay no attention to what is going on with other people. That way, you don’t get shot.”
He now agonizes (in public) over that decision and worries that Garrido may have been pimping out Jaycee and her young daughters to strangers. “I hope to God not,” said Dean Rogers.
(**Mr. Dean Rogers is also re-filing this information (at least acc. to report) in HIS brain as to agonizing, whereas earlier, acc. to the Rogers brother Mike, not getting shot for ratting to the police was the priority, and hence pimping out someone NOT a kidnap victim or one’s own daughters, alternatively, MIGHT be OK….)
‘A blank stare‘
Haydee Perry, 35, who lives next door, said that when Phillip Garrido helped her jump–start her car a month ago, he had a young girl clinging to him in a manner that struck her as strange.
“She stayed close to him at all times,” Perry said. “It wasn‘t normal behavior. She had a blank stare on her face. ***Now it seems like a cry out for help.”
i.e., according to Ms. Perry (age 35 now) the fact was first filed in a box in her mind (face it, we all have these, or we couldn’t function in life. WE would have to become not just ill-literate, but basically a wordless society. One of the first things “Adam” is credited with doing in the Bible is naming all the animals. Then here comes a woman, and he named her, too, “Eve.” The process of calling women names has continued to this day; it’s part of how one masters any situation, is by naming it.
A fascinating book on humans vs. animals, and how they interpret situations, is called “Animals in Translation.” Humans specialize in interpreting situations, animals that are other animal’s food are more prone to notice more detail and interpret less. The author, who is/was autistic, tries to describe her differences between these two extremes from the perspective of autism.
This book helped me become more aware of how people who had not undergone a battering relationships of many years, or post-traumatic-stress-“disorder” (actually a pretty normal response to life-threatening situations, it’s only “disorder” once the life-threatening aspects are out of the picture and there has been time to heal and deal….) just didn’t notice fluctuations in patterns of behavior, or things that others might. What they notice, and then wish action to be taken on (OR, wish to themselves take action on) then becomes a point of conflict with self-appointed experts on the situation, sometimes with lethal consequences. So understanding this becomes vitally important when a person leaving the abuse is forced to continually interact and negotiate with former abusers, or people who colluded with or enabled it.
The public MUST balance its desire to deny that abuse — or women in boxes, or kidnappers who start another generation of captives and get away with this in suburban California — or their neighbor/friend/business supplier, or someone in their religious organization — might be in another context, an insane sadist and unbelievable criminal, with women helping in the process, or participating. No matter how many “out there” headlines are read, I’d say that generally speaking, public behavior as a whole is not going to change radically. Why? It would — and face it, it really would — disrupt the economy severely, if citizens took policing or child protection into their own hands. Women have been thrown in jail for doing this when the abuser was related to the children; they overstepped their authority when it came to sticking up for their kids’ right not to be traumatized, and their own, through that. THAT is one of the most closely-sealed boxes in the family court arena, although certain groups are starting to pry some of it open in some counties, with some (although how much is yet unclear) result.
How I myself got out of a battering relationship involved calling it what it was, also. Without the vocabulary, including legal vocabulary, I believe, I’d still be in there, or in a box several feet under. Naming and filing is a VITAL human activity; and it’s important to put what we observe OUTSIDE us in a proper place in the thinking INSIDE.
This is important as a community also. What Ms. Perry >then< saw as “strange” and filed it away, she >now< has refiled under as a “cry for help.”
In another scenario, and the one which led to the girls and Jaycee being freed, Officer Allison Jacobs, another woman, recounted that one of Jaycee’s daughters blue eyes seemed to be trying to burn a hole in her. (See my post on police initution~mother’s instinct, or that article for quote). Both women in two situations noticed the girls’ eyes.. . . . GUYS — do men do this?
This whole process, in the press, may be also seen as an attempt to help the public also “file” this whole incident in its communal (?) databank for future reference (as well as a surefire way to increase readership/ratings).
I think that book and topic deserves another post, and will leave it for now.
(QUOTING NEWS ARTICLE, CONT’D.) A Web site containing statements from Garrido and others called “Voices Revealed” talks about a turnaround that allowed him “to open doors that will honor the creator and his eternal purpose for mankind.”
A PANDORA’s BOX, Oh No!
In which Let’s Get Honest laments that she has herein just opened the PANDORA’S BOX of what GARRIDO WAS SAYING BEFORE ARREST, WHERE HE GOT THOSE IDEAS FROM, and SOME OF HIS BUSINESS ASSOCIATES. On the other hand, I’m a mother who lost my daughters — to the courts, and their father — on an overnight visitation. Many things already make no sense to those who think that police police, judges judge, and laws are, well, upheld, who wonders why public indignation just takes a hike when a husband & wife are involved, even YEARS AFTER THEY SEPARATED!
LET’S GET HONEST COMMENTARY: There are times (added to post 09-13-09) I truly wish I weren’t as curious as I am. I just “HAD” to go and open another “Pandora’s Box,” in other words, I wanted to know what the heck “Voices Revealed” was.
I know that PART of my curiosity stems from simply wanting to find out WHY in this culture it took so many years for my local communities to “wake up” (if they ever did) to the fact that a husband was assaulting his wife in the home, and only ONE of them, a family violence law center, actually took action to legally put a stop to it. I was functioning as well as most people could as a mother, worker, and amazingly, teacher & musician and quite a bit more of professional involvements, without the tools MANY people can take for granted, for example, any possibility that I would have legitimate control over how the income earned was used, or my own access to bank, transportation, credit, and free association with people in my profession, without either sabotage or punishment for doing so. . . . . . . . So afterwards, what seemed REAL simple to me – — the fact we needed a LITTLE help didn’t mean that we needed to be placed in the back seat of life, permanently, and moreover told where the car was going. WHen one is on the bottom, the clear place to go is UP. FAST!
The other part is probably innate. I don’t remember NOT being curious, or something of a girl, young woman, or older woman, who just wanted to know WHY, and noticed things. When I say “innate,” I am not the first individual in the family line to either be subject to or witness, or both, beatings of a Mom in the home, and who knows whether this habit came from that environment or not? And, at a certain point, who cares? The question is, what to do with it.
Anyhow, here is that “Voices Revealed” website, and one part of it that happens to make some SENSE (and has a “not affiliated” comment at the end, please note) goes as follows (quote is shown by the font & typestyle change).
I wouldn’t quote it if there weren’t a few important lessons to learn from it (I know I did), including pay attention, if you’re going to be gullible enough to actually read newspapers about headline stories (which, obviously, I am) to be curious enough to want to know what they were talking about. I guess one UPside of being involved in this system and periodic, sometimes long-term unemployment, along with the desire to STOp the periodic, and sometimes long-term unemployment that comes with domestic violence by exploring ways to stop it, most of which don’t work, is finding out how a lot of systems DO work. ANYHOW, Voices Revealed, quoting another “private educational group” in Washington, pastes on its site:
CULTURAL TRANCE
Is a condition that exists when large bodies of people have accepted something as truth.
In the days of Columbus everyone knew the earth was “flat.” Today everyone knows it is not possible to produce voices for others to hear as experience clearly marked it as not possible.
The reason I have taken the time to qualify my findings through the legal system is obvious.
When you hear of my findings you will be experiencing a “flat world concept”
Because everything we know is based on our past personal and educational experiences in life thus we have all been conditioned in a variety of ways that can build “blind spots.” It is a sensory locking out of the environment that builds a Scotoma to the truth about the world and ourselves because of our preconceived ideas.
This causes us to:
SEE what we EXPECT to SEE
HEAR what we EXPECT to HEAR
THINK what we EXPECT to THINK
The result is we often develop scotomas to the “TRUTH.”
This awareness is also about to be apply to an age old book
That will be reading in a powerfully unique way
It will allow us to hear what we
Have never heard before.
(Isaiah 6:9)
9He said, “Go and tell this people: `Be ever hearing, but never understanding;
be ever seeing, but never perceiving.’ N.I.V.
The preceding information in its basic form** is from a private educational corporation
(THE PACIFIC INSTITUTE, INC. Seattle, Washington)
And is not affiliated with this project in any capacity
Re; “in its basic form”** I looked. While I didn’t find this section (yet), I did see, below, The Pacific Institute’s fields of enterprise, and the phrase about the human mind as software which needs periodic “upgrading,”:
However, the basic knowledge of how the mind works is constant from individual to individual, continent to continent. “The hardware is pretty much the same; what we are dealing with is the human software – and that, my friends, can and should be upgraded on a regular basis.” says Tice.
If my mind is software, well, I’m constantly in a learning curve. What frightens me as much, if not more than, the middle-aged, white-boy Phillip Garridos of this world, with their religiously compliant women in tow, trying to prove that the mind can channel external voices of this world through boxes in public, and kidnapping, imprisoning, repeatedly raping (possibly also pimping) and fathering little girls in private — and believe me, this DOES frighten me, I have daughters, and their father that parentally abducted them is a middle-aged, religious white-boy also — is ANY aged ANY color people in positions of responsibility believing that human minds should be (note passive tense) “upgraded” in time.
Whenever you see passive tense in a sentence (“Minds . . . . should be upgraded”) and there is no “by whom” or adverbial “HOW” in the same sentence, be afraid. Be very afraid. Especially when it appears on the mission page of any company which does business with jails, educational institutions, and other agencies.
Upgraded By WHOM? There was a Dr. Who mightmare TV program about this very upgrade process. It’s the stuff of science fiction.
1709 Harbor Ave SW
Seattle, WA 98126-2073(Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA Metro Area)
(The Tall man on the left needs no introduction. The two on the right are the co-founders of this Pacific Institute, Inc., which Phillip Garrido’s site quotes, and which in many ways resembles at least two organizations RUNNING (and I do mean that) the court system nationwide, if not internationally. I am going to blog on these now for sure. One is Public Strategies, Inc. and another (similar) is “MCDRC” (I will look up proper initials in a bit here); their BUSINESS, and it is a very prosperous one, is outsourcing, evaluating, and reporting back on the many “demonstration” projects across a spectrum of government policy initiatives and arms, i.e., courts, child support, child abuse, law enforcement, jails (yes, jails), and helping low-income people (makes one wonder how some of us GOT to be low-income people, or why some communities and ethnicities, overall, tend to stay that way, with some escaping the cycle, and others not). These are where socialization takes place by one part of society upon the other parts of society not lucky (or in some senses, immoral?) enough to be engaged in these professions, until eventually society viewed from the perspective of, say, outside itself, might start to look from a few feet above (or below) like THIS:

THE PACIFIC INSTITUTE (AND NOW MY POST IS GETTING TOO LONG..)
Global Vision
From the beginning, The Pacific Institute’s co-founders, Lou and Diane Tice, have held to the vision that the education they assembled would be beneficial to people all over the world. Yes, cultural differences do exist. However, the basic knowledge of how the mind works is constant from individual to individual, continent to continent. “The hardware is pretty much the same; what we are dealing with is the human software – and that, my friends, can and should be upgraded on a regular basis.” says Tice. {{SEE MY COMMENT ABOVE}}
1980 marked the beginning of a rapid expansion of The Pacific Institute beyond North America.
Like the “fatherhood” movement, it wasn’t marketed or promoted, it just naturally “expanded.”
Today, the Institute’s varied curricula have been translated and adapted to serve organizations in Europe, Africa, Asia, Latin America and the South Pacific, as well as North America. It is an honor for The Pacific Institute to be able to serve {{to serve WHOM, exactly??}}
as an agent for positive transformation in the world.
{{Transforming, or upgrading the human mind’s software? Transformation can be good, or bad. It’s not always good! Who defines which way “positive” is, anyhow?}}
Our Mission
As we continue to expand our reach around the world, {{IS this Marketing, or Colonialism? I’m a little uncertain which..}} our mission {{which as yet remains undentified…}} continues as a standard of excellence:
{{It continues “AS” a standard? Spoken like a true educator, in other words, in vague, noble-sounding, garbled -grammar, proclamation style. . . Thanks for explaining HOW (although not in much detail, here) your mission serves its unidentified master (servant/master, right?), but what I’m really concerned about is what IS your “mission,” kindly The Pacific Institute, sir/ma’am?}}{{If your mission is being adopted, or at least interpreted “in its basic form,” by rapist kidnappers, I definitely want to know what it is.}}
“We affirm the right of all individuals to achieve their God-given potential. The application of our education (BY WHOM?? TO WHOM??) empowers people to recognize their ability to choose growth, personal freedom and personal excellence.
As opposed to, say, Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness, which in the US at least, are (supposedly) considered unalienable rights, and the fact that ALL men are endowed with these rights is considered “self-evident,” along with several other “self-evident truths.” . . . . Suppose all individuals are not interested in “growth, personal freedom and personal excellence” but simply want to stay Alive, Free, and go for “happiness” instead? Do they get to NOT choose to change the Color of their Parachute? ???
(i.e., compare, Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, among which are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.”)
We commit ourselves to providing this education, all over the world, through all means that are just and appropriate.”
Indeed, this institute, which began with a high school football coach and art teacher (Note: sports and arts are typically areas cut when budgets are tight) who just wanted to help — everybody, of course. Now, it preaches to the world, capturing also the imagination of men like Phillip Garrido. But its clients most definitely include government entitites, acc. to the website, under “social solutions.” {{I shudder!}}
Government entities, from federal agencies to local municipalities; law enforcement agencies and correctional institutions; and the full spectrum of social service agencies all benefit from the wide range of The Pacific Institute’s services.
With so many differing, and sometimes competing, agencies working from different angles – yet committed to helping those at the margins of society – it helps to be speaking the same language.
i.e., The language of the educators, of Mr. & Mrs. Tice and people who think that their purpose in life truly IS, teaching the rest of the world to think, and have forgotten “all the world’s a stage” and a good deal of great literature, and instead see all the world as one Big, Fat, Market Niche. LOOK, for “all the world’s a stage” there is the medium of the BLOG. When it comes to captive audiences, literally in many cases, I protest!
Law enforcement agencies successfully implementCommand, Control & Choice™ into their officer training academies, Thought Patterns for High Performance™ for staff and non-badged personnel, as well as Investment in Excellence®
New for 2008 is Discovering the Power in Me™, a program focused on the suddenly disabled – those individuals, their families and caregivers, whose lives have been affected by sudden, permanent injury. The Institute’s effective thinking skills education is targeted to move these individuals from recovery and rehabilitation to contribution and achievement.
I have studied several languages, and also “speak” the language of music, which is a language. I am not in favor of Esperanto or any other form of one-world government, and I think that George Orwell and Aldous Huxley made some good points in their works of fiction, which I wish were more fiction than, as it turns out, prophesy. A good deal of some versions of “prophecy” is simply observation of the obvious, and then speaking it aloud. I like hanging out with people that are not “just like me.” If I wanted someone “just like me,” what would we talk about? Where would the growth come from? What would life be about?
I do not think THIS is a good idea. The metaphor of the Tower of Babel is appropriate here.
Does this language include the “old” language of the Constitution, Bill of Rights, Declaration of Independence, and a sense of modesty about the capacities within human nature that need restraint when it comes to “ruling” one’s fellow man? I don’t think so. Rather, we would all soon be playing God, or at least working for or the client of a business that is.
SCOTOMA (from “Cultural Trance” excerpt, above), unraveled:
The word “scotoma” (new to me, too, eh?):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotoma
A scotoma (Greek for darkness; plural: “scotomas” or “scotomata“) is an area or island of loss or impairment of visual acuity surrounded by a field of normal or relatively well-preserved vision.
Every normal mammalian eye has a scotoma in its field of vision, usually termed its blind spot. This is a location with nophotoreceptors, where the retinal ganglion cell axons that comprise the optic nerve exit the retina. This location is called the optic disc. When both eyes are open, visual signals that are absent in the blind spot of one eye are provided from the opposite visual cortex for the other eye, even when the other eye is closed. The absence of visual imagery from the blindspot does not intrude intoconsciousness with one eye closed, because the corresponding visual field locations of the optic discs in the two eyes differ.The term scotoma is also used metaphorically in psychology to refer to an individual’s inability to perceive personality traits in themselves that are obvious to others.
Translation, that he has special and remarkable powers….
(per:
My Blogs |
Team Members |
| Charging the angels with error. | |
|---|---|
| The Truth Will Set You Free | |
| Voices Revealed | |
| Exposed | |
| Voices Revealed
|
JEREMIAH 9:24 “But let him who boasts boast about this: that he understands and knows me, that I am the LORD, who exercises kindness, justice and righteousness on earth, for in these I delight,” 2 CORINTHIANS12:1 I must go on boasting. Although there is nothing to be gained, I will go on to visions and revelations from the Lord. 2I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know–God knows. 3And I know that this man–whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, but God knows– 4was caught up to paradise. He heard inexpressible things, things that man is not permitted to tell. 5I will boast about a man like that, but I will not boast about myself, except about my weaknesses.
young females boxed in there, by fear, locks, trauma, rapes and lies, if the alleged charges are an indicator.
It may be that between the activity there, and if the “meth” and drunken parties neighbors allege took place, the MEN in the situation may have indeed had some “out of body” experiences, while (well, I won’t be crude here, but a turn of phrase comes to mind). And yes, Garrido DID have a weakness, apparently — for dominating young girls and having sex with them. See his compulsion to explain “the origins of schizophrenia” to the world, starting in Berkeley, below…(and on one of the blogs above). I wonder if the 330,000 visitors since 2007 relates (let’s hope) to the recent press in 2009…..And we’ll probably never know what “errors” he was going to charge the angels with.
April 4, 2006 12:20 PM PDT
MIT group develops ‘mind-reading’ device
By Candace Lombardi
Staff Writer, CNET NewsEl Kaliouby is developing the ESP device for her postdoctoral project as part of the Affective Computing research group at the MIT Media Lab under Rosalind Picard. Alea Teeters, also a member of the group and the ESP project, demonstrated the device.
The project stems from El Kaliouby’s doctoral work at the University of Cambridge, in which she developed the computational model on which the device is based. Like humans, the system determines emotional states by analyzing hierarchical combinations of subtle facial movements and gestures, such as eyebrow raising, lip pursing and head nodding.
The ESP consists of an OQO handheld, a tiny wearable video camera, an earphone and a small vibrating device that can be worn on a belt. The camera can be attached to a baseball hat, or worn around the neck on a stand akin to a harmonica holder. . . .
The ESP camera can be worn facing outward by the speaker, or as a self-cam by the listener. As conversation ensues, the device “mind-reads” for the wearer. When the listener, whom the camera is focused on, begins to exhibit signs of boredom, the speaker is signaled so that she can readjust her behavior to bring the listener back into the conversation.
The device is especially useful to those with Autism Spectrum Condition (ASC). people with ASC often lack the ability to evaluate others’ emotions on their own. The result is that high-functioning autistics, who might otherwise fair reasonably well in the world on their own, are hampered by a tendency toward misunderstanding and boring others.
Yes, “Boring others” (case in point!) is a social detriment, unless one is in government, or has taken hostages in some form or another, in which case it’s a moot point. Literally, “captive audiences” HAVE to take orders, including, to listen. Blog readers, on the other hand, can bore easily and simply click out of this triple-sized post….
The ESP device can prompt autistic people, who are prone to monologues or repetitive behavior, to ask questions, or give the listener a chance to participate in conversation. The hope is that with long-term use of the device as a self-teaching tool, ASC patients will eventually learn how to read for themselves the emotional responses in others.
According to Picard, the Affective Computing group has received human subject approval . . .
The ESP is exciting in that the technology has multiple possibilities in terms of use. (YES IT DOES. (shudder). Imagine it in the hands of a kidnapper, helping him detect the emotional state of his victim should she, say, be planning to escape! Then it seems to me, such people would already be adept at reading such things)
When one starts mixing MIT with religion, it gets a little hairy. . . . .
While I don’ t think that the concept of a “cultural trance” is anything too radical a concept, for example, to people in PR, marketing, or who has survived The Holocaust, or lived through a genocide, snake charmers, street preachers, drug users, self-improvement gurus, or for that matter, those who pay high prices to attend a concert (rock, opera, whatever). We all need some help to get through this life. In fact, this is also where the expressive arts begin, I believe, as far back as cave paintings on a wall in France. The expressive and performing arts are often associated with spirituality and/or religion, and serve a similar purpose.
The site also indicates that he gave a demonstration in Pittsburg last month with a homemade box to prove “the creator has given me the ability to speak in the tongue of angels in order to provide a wake–up call that will in time include the salvation of the entire world.”
Mary Thomas, accountant at J&M auto dismantlers in Pittsburg, near where Garrido set up his revival tent, said he “was always very professional and spoke the word of God whenever he talked.”
Reader alert: The use of the phrase “the word of God” indicates a belief in it. How many of you caught this? At the top of the article, it says neighbors (of whom Erika Pratt appears to be a sample) “proselytized to them about his messages from God.” The word “proselytized” indicates a non-belief in (whatever is being preached).
Note, the background of Nancy Garrido is Jehovah’s Witnesses, who go door to door and in public proselytizing, as part of their faith and (as I understand it), righteousness. Proselytizing is not illegal. Certain other activities, like boxing up women and repeatedly raping them, is. Not all people who proselytize rape and imprison women. Not all people who rape and imprison proselytize. What’s Joe Public and Jane I Dont Know Which Way is Up to think? . . . . .
I can’t answer that last statement for anyone else, but my point is simply to pay attention to language, and when things this horrible are at stake, and are reported afterwards, pay attention to who’s speaking. The woman who called him very professional may have been part of a similar religious belief system, so to her, Garrido was one of people of this mindset.
That said, incidentally, I”m of the “word of God” mindset, but I do not take it to criminal lengths and I tend to keep my internal radar in the ON position in general, and seek variety of input when in this arena. I don’t think I could ever join a “church” again.
Garrido had a printing business, making business cards for J&M and others in the area. Tiffany Tran, who runs Furniture Gallery in Brentwood, said she had seen and done business with “Phil the printer” for six years, as recently as last week.
We live in an interesting age, you can do business with people you basically don’t know very well. OR DID SHE?
Added 09-13-09 at 10a.m. “Oh dear.” (See below, where I actually looked up Garrido’s site, and posted from it. Ms. Tran, per this site, apparently signed a declaration about Mr. Garrido (better comprehended, if comprehension of such stuff is actually possible, by clicking on this link):
02/24/08, Tiffany Tran, born on 7-26-73, contacted in person at her place of business named Furniture Gallery, located at 50 Snad Creek Rd., Brentwood, CA 94513, phone #(925) 516-3554. Note- When I previously attempted two separate personal contacts there I spoke with her sister Stephanie Tran, showed herthe Declaration in question, and she said that she was present when her sister signed it. She also added that she too witnessed Mr. Garrido’s demonstration and had the same to say about it as her sister did in her Declaration.
Respectfully submitted,
Ralph A. Hernandez.This document is to affirm that I Phillip Garrido have clearly demonstrated the ability to control sound with my mind and have developed a device for others to witness this phenomena. by using a sound generator to provide the sound, and a headphone amplification system, ( a device to focuc your hearing so as to increase the sensitivity of what one is listening to) I have produced a set of voices by effectively controlling the sound to pronounce words through my own mental powers
FROM THE SITE “VOICESREVEALED.BLOGSPOT.COM”
Also from this site: Ms. Tran’s affidavit as to Mr. Garrido’s demonstration.
Affidavit
Dated 5/1/08Included in this package are six Declarations as Affirmations confirming several private demonstrations have taken place that allowed others to witness my freedom to speak in a tongue unknown to the medical field, scientific world and the public in general. The signatures that are located in the middle and at the bottom of each page are to confirm the statements of the entire document. Please note: many other people in the Greater Bay Area are also witnesses to this freedom generating a continued list of growth that in time will clearly become public knowledge.
In order to allow others the freedom to know and accept this ability does exist so they too may confirm it upon request a confidential investigation has been contracted with the following firm;
Aardvark Investigations & Consulting
Ralph A. Hernandez
(Retired career Peace Officer, 33+ years of Investigations experience)
Ralph A. Hernandez in not affiliated with this project in any other capacity
‘A little different‘
She recalled Garrido as being “a little different” and said he constantly talked about religion and showed her a device through which he claimed he could control sound with his mind.
Which appeared to have an odd set of boxes with in itself — one for rape, kidnapping, false imprisonment (felony crimes, which he obviously knew, having been in jail for them before), another for telling people about God; no apparent contradiction there. Detachment. Commiting crimes in one arena didn’t cause trouble, evidently, to the other. They were boxed up. Many people in the field of domestic violence talk about “crimes of passion” and recommend “anger management. My experience with (abuse) wasn’t that it was always a rage out of control thing. Far from this, many times it appeared to be calculated, to keep (me) within my mental/emotional/psychological “box” of behaviors and places and things that were either permitted or, off-limits, i.e., outside MY particular box. To keep one on edge, the limits often shifted, meaning, one was frequently on guard when engaging in something that MIGHT provoke, MIGHT be “off-limits” or so forth. This man not only controlled women, but also sound, including the voice of God.
In other words, detachment CAN be dangerous.
The concept of mental control is not THAT radical, I’ve seen a recent article from MIT on this, but you’ll have to look it up yourself..
“Some people have a story behind their smile, some don‘t – he did,” Tran said. “He was happy–go–lucky, but you knew there was a story behind it.”
Ms. Tran, if you are there, are you aware that your business card is pasted on this site as having given an affidavit as to Mr. Garrido’s special powers, and endorsed by Aardvark Private Investigations, above?
http://voicesrevealed.blogspot.com/2008/04/report-jan-20-2008.html
Attorney, University, & Law Enforcement Copy
This presentation contains six signed & notarized Declarations verifying there is new evidence concerning Schizophrenia that will affect the courts, the medical field and our institutions of higher learning worldwide.IN AUGUST OF 2008 AT U. C. BERKELEY’S FREE SPEECH PARK I PUBLICLY DISCLOSED NEW INFORMATION CONCERNING THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS AND PROVIDED A LIVE DEMONSTRATION.
THE LECTURE WAS DESIGNED TO RAISE THE AWARENESS OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC IN ORDER TO PREPARE A PLATFORM CAPABLE OF DISTRIBUTING A KNOWLEDGEABLE AWARENESS THAT WILL IN TIME PROVIDE A FOUNDATION POWERFUL ENOUGH TO UNDERMINE THE IGNORANCE THAT PREVAILS CONCERNING VOICES AND BEGIN SAVING LIVES
This indeed sounds like a kind of garbled version of something The Pacific Institute, Inc., whose own mission statement sounds as garbled and not too much less grandiose; Mr. Garrido’s just a little more upfront that he (or his truth) is the salvation of the world, forget about Jesus, although borrowing heavily from scriptures is of course helpful in the matter.
(I went to elementary school when they still diagrammed sentences, in earnest. Then I went through a violent marriage and now half my post sentences are incomplete, and the post has no style sheet either. But still . . . . . I pay attention to word “anomalies.” ).
The words “Voices Revealed” plus his attempts to prove sound can come out of nowhere reads like an attempt to show that what were thought by us “flat-earth, culturally entranced, unbelievers” to be craziness (schizophrenia) might just actually be possible. I think that MAYBE this was what he was obsessed with proving. Somewhere, he mentions a woman who threw 3 children into the SF Bay in this context of saving lives. I’m thinking, MAYBE, he was getting to the conclusion that actual voices (cf. “the box”) got her to do it. As opposed to, say, “the devil made me do it.” And the Secretary of State actually signed the articles of Incorporation for his organization.
What we deserve an answer for: Why was this dude released? and, why did they “drop” the comment that there were people in the back yard, when a sex offender was the person accused of this? They had no problem (once this all came to light) searching the Molino’s home in a different city, and confiscating some items:
Cheyvonne Molino, 35, who runs the JM Enterprises yard with her husband, Jim Molino, told the Contra Costa Times that 15 officers entered their Pleasant Hill home around 11 a.m. and searched through their personal belongings, seizing a Macintosh desktop computer as well as DVDs and VHS tapes.
“They just came in and violated our privacy,” Molino told the newspaper. “I don’t understand why we’re now the bad guys. I mean, they never asked to see if maybe we can help them instead of coming in on me and my tenants. What about my rights?”
Under the Fourth Amendment, law enforcement agencies are not required to obtain a search warrant when conducting a search of a person on probation.
>>SO, then this statement (above) to Erika Pratt was false?
Pratt said she had called Contra Costa County sheriff‘s deputies to investigate,
but that officers “told me they couldn‘t go insidebecause they didn‘t have a warrant.
So they just told him they‘d keep an eye on him.”
I mean, Garrido WAS on “probation” right? So they could’ve searched without a warrant, and I’m SURE they knew it.
Molino said that her husband Jim — who turned 60 on Wednesday — is on court probation, but that it is unrelated to the Garrido case. She told the Contra Costa Times they are “vicitms by association.”
Lee said the Molinos are not suspects.
The Molinos did printing business with Garrido, who sometimes visited their wrecking yard with the two daughters police say he fathered with Dugard.
MORAL: Always run criminal background checks on businesses you do business with. Then again, apparently JM auto wouldn’t have passed that, either.
Mr. Garrido wants to tell the world something about the origins of Schizophrenia. If there is truth to the charges against him, he would definitely qualify in that category. He is also quoted as being unable to get sexual satisfaction without dominating a woman (told to the arresting officer in about 1976), and I also note, an interview with, I believe a father or brother spoke of motorcycle accident with head injury (i.e., brain trauma) and experimentation with drugs in his (Phillip’s) youth, and that “transforming” him as well. Head injury can indeed do this.
So can going through a governmental institution serviced by groups concerned with upgrading the human software as part of a worldwide positive transformation of, well, everyone. Perhaps some of the gentlemen below could take a lookat some of the neighbors interviewed, or what’s up with Garrido & Garrido, Inc.. Again, “schizo-phrenia” refers to “split-thinking.”
I talk in this blog about “split personality court orders,” and they are this. One cannot take them always both seriously. The court says, a restraining order is just a piece of paper, make your own safey plan; then (or simultaneously) another arm of the courts says, but the children need frequent contact with their batterer parent no matter what, and parents shouldn’t have “high conflict” about this, or whatever takes place.
It also tells the custodial mothers, and clearly/repeatedly so, that visitation is not tied to child support, and no parent (especially mother) can literally withhold visitation because of unpaid child support. Then, through groups like Pacific Institute, above, here, and others I post about, and which are receiving federal grants to promote healthy marriages and responsible fatherhood, and through child support offices working with incarcerated fathers, etc., they bargain to reduce child support by getting a custody order modified. Who’s enriched? The organizations doing this, not the kids. . . . . That’s itself “schizo” (or, simply dishonest) so no wonder people after eyars in this system, or possibly in jails also, they come out totally wired and fired up to get even and prove a point, even if it means stuff like THIS, or worse. (Yes, when people are killed, that IS worse, although this is surely scraping the bottom of the barrel here).
I DIDN’T withhold visitation. MY KIDS WERE STOLEN, WHEN HE WAS THOUSANDS IN ARREARS! Then the child support arrears was retro-actively wiped out (leaving me childless AND penniless, and them without a source of child support from either parent — from him, because he owes me, and from me, because the back was broken economically in the process of custody switch). Another thing I can definitely say is, from afar, it appears that at least ONE is confused, quite understandably so, and this comes out as anger — towards the absent parent. When sense is lacking, because, being deprived of accurate information on the situation, it seems anger will do. What a waste of time, and talent.
So, Language is a key, and an indicator. I am a “bear” {which causes the forbidden “conflict” at times} about language when interacting, as I’m forced to, with people who cooperated in removing the restraining order (temporary respite) situation from me, and it really does matter, folks!
Perhaps later Jaycee may recover and tell us some of the truths of her experience, if she chooses to, and ONLY if she chooses to.
Chronicle staff writers Matthew Yi and Matthew B. Stannard contributed to this report. E-mail the writers at dbulwa@sfchronicle.com, jvanderbeken@sfchronicle.com, hlee@sfchronicle.com and kfagan@sfchronicle.com
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/08/27/BA4N19EJ35.DTL#ixzz0QwwPOIS1
POSTED 9-12-09 (hence “911+1” ),
and really this was the original main point.
I simply had included the article on the Dugard case as part 1 of 2.
This woman explains how the mental limits can be just as strong and confining as the physical. Once a person is conditioned (first, usually by trauma, drama, threat, shock, as in kidnapping), then they can be made to believe that limits exist which are unreal. This is then easier for the kidnapper.
Colleen got out the moment someone told her that the ominpresent “Company” didn’t exist. Once she realized that fear was gone, she got on a bus and went home. however, while she believed it was still there, she was even able to visit home, and go back to horror.
I hope that this article will be read with appreciation and understanding by those who have NOT been abused, threatened, falsely imprisoned, or anything like it. Try to understand how things work. It may help you to help others, including to forgive captives for not getting free sooner, and help them when they do. It might also help you to listen to your instinct and find out HOW to act, the next time something looks “off” in a situation. Observation plus instinct. We live in a world when we’re taught to let others be our instinct and give us permission to listen or not listen, judge or not judge. These cases should help us overcome that where necessary. At the bottom are some photos of this woman, who is beautiful and poised now, and able to help others who have been through the situation.
September 2, 2009 6:30 AM
Exclusive: Woman Imprisoned in Coffin for 7 Years Has Special Message for Jaycee Dugard
Posted by Paul LaRosa
NEW YORK (CBS) Whenever I hear about a story like Jaycee Lee Dugard’s – kidnapped at age 11 and held captive for 18 years, bearing two children with her kidnapper – I inevitably think of Colleen Stan because if anyone knows what Jaycee went through and is about to go through, it’s Colleen.
Photos: The Search For Jaycee
Photos: Jaycee Lee Dugard Found Alive
Photos: Inside Jaycee’s Terror Tent
Colleen is not as well-known as Elizabeth Smart or Patty Hearst but, if anything, her story is even more incredible. Everyone wants to know why someone like Jaycee or Elizabeth or Patty, all of whom had some apparent freedom, did not flee their kidnappers. Well, Colleen can tell them why. Her story is horrible but instructive.
I met Colleen in 2003 when Elizabeth Smart was found alive, and I’ve never been able to stop thinking about her. Colleen was held by a husband and wife for seven years as a slave for sex and just about anything else the couple desired but here’s the kicker – for much of that time, she lived in a coffin-sized box underneath the couple’s bed!!
A book was written about Colleen by a prosecutor in the case and its title fittingly is “Perfect Victim.”
When I met Colleen, she seemed well-adjusted. She came to the interview with her daughter, a young woman, and then calmly but articulately spun out her incredible tale.
Colleen was a 20-year-old hitchhiker in 1977 when she was picked up by a young couple with a child in the back seat of their car. What could be safer, she thought? But the husband, Cameron Hooker, was a sexual sadist who took Colleen to the family’s isolated trailer and raped her. The abuse got worse and worse.
“He liked to whip me with whips,” she told CBS News. “He had electro-shocked me. He had burned me. He had done many things.”
Colleen explained that Hooker had warned her that, if she said a word about what was going on, his “men” would storm into the house and kill her parents and her and anyone inside the instant she opened her mouth.
“Because of the threats that people would come right in the house and people would be hurt,” she told Van Sant.
“And you believed him?”
“Yes, I did.”
Hooker’s control over Colleen was that complete. She went back to the box, and it was only because of Hooker’s wife that she was eventually rescued. Hooker’s wife went to the authorities at the behest of her minister. Hooker was eventually tried and sentenced to life in prison. His wife was never prosecuted under the theory that she too was abused and scared to death of her husband.
Sounds like that might have been understandable.
Photos: The Search For Jaycee
Photos: Jaycee Lee Dugard Found Alive
Photos: Inside Jaycee’s Terror Tent
Colleen recovered after years of therapy. She is now an office manager in Northern California. I caught up with her Monday and asked her about Jaycee Dugard. Colleen said she’d been trying with no luck to get in touch with Jaycee’s mother, and had met her mother on a talk show some years ago.
Colleen was of course concerned about Jaycee’s state of mind. “I read that she felt guilty but she should not feel that way,” Collen said. “You can’t be with someone 18 years and not have an attachment. I hope I get the opportunity to talk to her and tell her she did nothing wrong. She did everything right. She’s alive.
“I want to work with these women (Jaycee, her mother and her daughters) and help them readjust,” Colleen said. “It is not easy. After being away from the world for 7 1/2 years and all of a sudden you’re thrown back in the world and it’s hard, very overwhelming. My heart just goes out to these women who come out of these situations. It’s hard to adjust to your family situation.”
Hooker renamed Colleen “K” and constructed a coffin-sized box with holes in it and instructed her to climb in. He then shoved the box under the couple’s bed every night and kept her as his slave for the next 7 years.
Colleen felt she had no control of anything. She said he told her, “I’m in control and Colleen no longer exists. You are now K. You are my slave.”
Hooker wrote up a contract for Colleen that “basically said that he owned me body and soul.”
At one point, Hooker handed Colleen a gun. “I didn’t know if it was loaded or not and he told me ‘this is to see if you’ll do what I say,’ and he told me to put the gun in my mouth and pull the trigger, and I did,” she said.
Everything about this story is shocking and you might think that Colleen would do anything in her power to escape, and that is where her story intersects with Jaycee’s because people who are totally under someone else’s control – even given the opportunity to escape – do not. The brainwashing is complete. We as free individuals cannot understand it because we’ve never been in their situation.
Some 3 1/2 years into Colleen’s captivity – living in a box, being raped repeatedly – her abductor Cameron Hooker took her home for a visit with her family and left them with her overnight. She never said a word about what was going on with Hooker, and in fact went back with him the next day to live in the box again for another 3 ½ years.
CBS News Correspondent Peter Van Sant was incredulous: “Why then didn’t you tell them ‘I’ve been kidnapped, tortured?’ Why didn’t you pick up the phone and call the police and say, ‘Get here immediately. I need your help, I need your protection?’”
{{I have been many years outside the battering relationship I was in formerly. I still get, from people that did nothing to intervene, and probably to make themselves feel better, and more innocent for not helping, blaming for not leaving earlier. It is minimized, and I am supposedly “over it” even when many aspects of the abuse, in this case (no one ever went to prison in my case, unfortunately, I say) were continuing. I try to understand their point of view, but the converse is not always true. Victim-blaming is actually a self-solacing activity.
I used to try to become “normal” again and to a degree this is desirable. But there is no “past” to go back to before which one has undergone certain things. The brain also begins to work somewhat differently at times, which is biologically normal; for example, if PTSD comes up, that can be difficult, and is disheartening, but there are things I am going to notice, and possibly respond to, that people who have not been mugged (by an intimate), stalked, or repeatedly traumatized, etc., might not. When we are then discussing a similar situation, for example, something may be characterized as “over-reacting” but for that person, it isn’t. . . . There are some pros and cons to aspects of how one is changed by certain experiences. At times, I have learned to “translate” or try and understand why people may not “understand.” Would it be ideally normal to go totally back to normal for Colleen and Jaycee, if that were possible?
Maybe not — for one, while “normal” both of them were kidnapped. I imagine they are a little more cautious, as are their friends and relatives, than before. }}
What most shocked Colleen when she came out of captivity was something you might not expect. She was surprised at how ungrateful everyone was. “I was shocked,” she said. “People had nice jobs and houses and had plenty but they seemed so unhappy. They wanted more. I was coming out of a situation where I had nothing, and being exposed to these people who had so much and were unappreciative of it and complaining, I thought ‘My God why don’t they see how blessed they are?’
“It was overwhelming at first that people don’t take advantage of what they have. All I came home with were the clothes on my back. I had nothing. I was blessed with family and friends.
She received therapy from Doctor Christopher Hatcher from San Francisco, who has since died. Colleen considers him her savior. “He helped me to understand that I didn’t do anything wrong. I did everything right. People will ask you why you didn’t do this or that and they don’t know. They were not in that situation.
“I had a lot of support from my family but they didn’t know what to tell me so Dr. Hatcher helped me understand that people in this situation switch to survival mode. You have to do what you have to do and say to get through this situation and you shut down your emotions. I had to learn how to turn those emotions back on.
{{That’s beautifully said, and it’s true, too. As we run through life and notice people whose emotions ARE shut down, it might be something to also keep in mind. Perhaps there’s a reason they are. Anecdotal: Initially (and also at other times), when I would protest a form of abuse, there would be a punishment, to dominate, retaliate and establish that protesting abuse was UNacceptable. There were other times (this is talking DV in a marital situation) when I purposely stayed calm, flat-faced, did not react, or express what I think. My “me” went into hiding, for safety. Then I was criticized for being emotionless. When I say “Criticized” that means, namecalling, etc., some of it pretty nasty. I guess he needed someone reactive in there to get a feeling of power from the abuse.
There is a term for this (I think more re: childhood abuse) called “DID” — Dissociating, and literature around it. It’s a survival thing. I did not go through anything close to what this woman did — but she survived, and looks wonderful now and is able to speak out to someone else and help (see photos, below).
One book (person’s story) I read (reading other’s stories at one point — this is AFTER leaving the in-house abuse situation — seemed to gave me hope), she describes and attack and said, “immediately my mind split in two.” I remember this from one of the first most severe ones. The attack was happening, and part of my brain was compareing the two: “THIS — husband — THIS — husband” and trying to connect the two concepts. They didn’t connect. (I’d already hauled back in for trying to to out the front door and wrestled to the ground, pregnant, was being sat on and slapped across the face. It all happened very fast. I remember so much of it, even from many years ago).
}}
“I would like Jaycee to understand that (her recovery) will not happen overnight. She’ll carry around guilt, shame, anger and it will take years. I never got angry until long after (Cameron Hooker) was arrested. I did not feel safe until he was convicted because I was still afraid he would get off.
“It’s perfectly normal to go through these emotions.”
I asked her the question everyone always wants to know: why didn’t you escape when you had the chance?
“People don’t understand all the threats made against me, my family. There’s a lot more to it than just walking away. When you’re sexually abused, these things solidify the fact that if you don’t do what I say, I can take your life. I thought, ‘What if he catches me when I try to escape?’ It wasn’t like I never thought about these things. I did but I never felt safe to act out on them until his wife came to me and said, ‘We have to get out of here.’”
Colleen is 52 years old now, and on August 9th, she celebrated the 25th anniversary of the day she was set free, enjoying a cake and celebration with her recovery group. The cake, she said, was as sweet as life is now.
==========
One of the worst things people can do to someone coming out of trauma is judge them harshly for not getting over it fast enough. If it’s dramatic and awful enough, news headlines, mercy seems to come. But there is so much in just daily life, “routine” assault, battery, and long-term domestic violence. I still have family members scolding me for being “stuck in the past” (this happens to be actually a dodge attempting to derail a different conversation). Generally speaking, if you haven’t been through it, you’re just not in a position to judge.
Another thing not to do is go with the sympathy plus patronizing, i.e, making decisions for the person on the basis that because of her EXPERIENCE of domination and abuse, she just needs someone else to “take control” and dominate how she recovers, leaves, gets out, proiritizes WHAT area of life is most important, etc. What happened to me was that after years of negligence, it seems (at least) that the same people who weren’t competent to name and act on “danger” when it slapped THEM in the face metaphorically (as it did me, literally), and it wasn’t just hands, there were indeed weapons, which was also known – – the experts moved on in because I happened to be in a weakened state initially. Then I began to assert some boundaries and found this recovery resented. Kind of like a codependent need to know the person that was needy and in abuse. The, “She has a backbone and is utilizing it” wasn’t in the vocabulary. This saddens me, to have to fight a similar fight, again, and with different people.
The “experts” who aren’t can be every bit as abusive as the captors. It is necessary for others involved to “think outside the box” also.
I rejoice that these women got out.
=========
Photo: Colleen Stan today.

Colleen Stan at age 29, shortly after she was released.

Photo: Colleen Stan’s 20th birthday. She was abducted soon after.

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
September 12, 2009 at 8:41 PM
Posted in After She Speaks Up - Reporting Child Sexual Abuse, After She Speaks Up - Reporting Domestic Violence and/or Suicide Threats, Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Designer Families, Split Personality Court Orders, Vocabulary Lessons
Tagged with "We had no idea!", Declaration of Independence/Bill of Rights, Jaycee Dugard, Phil Garrido, social commentary, Social Issues from Religious Viewpoints, Studying Humans, trauma, Women in Boxes
Finding a Firm Place to Stand, Prying Loose Violence and Abuse
http://www.sddvc.com/pdf/2008finalwithsignatures.pdf
This is out of San Diego: Law Enforcement Protocol:
“The California State Legislature has declared that:
(1) “[S]pousal abusers present a clear and present danger to the mental and
physical well-being of the citizens of the State of California.” (California
Penal Code section 273.8.)
(2) “A substantial body of research demonstrates a strong connection between
Domestic Violence and Child Abuse.” (California Penal Code section
13732(a)).
“The decision to prosecute a batterer lies within the discretion of the District Attorney
and the City Attorney. Victims do not “press charges”, “drop charges” or
“prosecute” their batterers.
Ay, there’s the rub. So, they go get civil or family court restraining orders, which are less respected. Or, they go to their family, friends, faith institution, etc. Then they find out what their: family, friends, faith institution, etc., are about. And the years go by, the kids grow up. . . . . .
Ay, there’s the rub.** So, they go get civil or family court restraining orders, which are less respected. Or, they go to their family, friends, faith institution, etc. Then they find out what their: family, friends, faith institution, etc., are about. And the years go by, the kids grow up. . . . . .
**”To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there’s the rub”Origin From the celebrated ‘to be, or not to be‘ speech in Shakespeare’s Hamlet, 1603:
HAMLET:
To be, or not to be: that is the question:
Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep;
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to, ’tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish’d. To die, to sleep;
To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there’s the rub;
3. How it feels (reflect, describe, (OK, complain)):
2. Paradigms, Tools to Pry Loose, Places to stand and the Lever of Language
2A. Dude, it’s about the money. That’s the paradigm to understand in understanding the family law system. This means child support and federal grants have to be examined as well, as well as job referrals, and private conflicts of interest among professionals on the same case.
2B. Anything that is obviously, over time, a moot point, then this is not the reigning paradigm, even if you wish it were or thought it should be. Another one is actually primary. is the goal to change the system or win your case
(and which first? Because one timeframe is shorter than the other. This is where many organizations, with a cash flow, employees, business offices, and a little momentum, have a different world view than mothers, who have fast-growing children and fast-changing situations personally.)
2C. GENGHIS KHAN: Who was he? Who was his army? How did they conquer so much territory?

“The Devil’s Horsemen.”
The conquering Mongols were most feared by their victims as “the devil’s horsemen” who carried everything before them and left nothing behind.” (Genghis Khan & the Mongol Conquests, 1190-1400 [page 8]) The “invincible” Mongolian Army faced little opposition, physical, nor mental, until they began campaigning in areas outside of the steppe regions.
. . .
The first problem that the Mongols and their current leader Genghis Khan overcame, was the complex planning needed in order for them to defeat their more organized, and better equipped foes. “New military technologies therefore had to be learned and relearned
. . .
At Xiangyang in 1272 Khubilai Khan was forced to send to his kinsmen in the west for counterweight trebuchets, the latest thing in siege catapults, to breach its walls.” (Genghis Khan & the Mongol Conquests, 1190-1400 [page 9]) The need for a more strategic way of fighting allowed the Mongols to evolve. Without that evolution, the Mongols would never have been able to stand up to their well-trained, well-organized enemies. This extraordinary skill to adapt, and thus survive, helped the Mongols not only in the physical aspects of warfare, but the psychological. Becoming an enemy that has the ability to adapt and thrive in any situation and on any terrain earned the Mongols the title of “the Devil’s horsemen”.
The Mongols
by antonio2godoy</a>” href=”http://socyberty.com/author/antonio2godoy/” mce_href=”http://socyberty.com/author/antonio2godoy/”>antonio2godoy in History, March 29, 2009
This is an a little description of what the Mongols were like under Genghis Khan’s rule.
(I put it in very fine print, because it’s not central to this post, just related:)
The Mongols were amazing herders and horse back riders. Within time they dominated China and Eastern Europe. Who would have envisioned that these nomads, herders that relied on animal and natural resources for survival, would reign over a great deal of territory belonging to the Chinese and Eastern Europeans?! But with the leadership of Genghis Khan, the Mongols conquered all who opposed them and ruled with an iron fist earning a reputation for extreme cruelty. Then, after a hundred years the Mongol empire disappeared. After reading this you’ll learn how the Mongols put effective leadership first and then effectively manage it with discipline.
. . . Genghis Khan changed his name from Temujin after numerous victories. Temujin was born in 1162 and was part of the Kiyad tribe close to the Burhan Khaldun Mountains. He had three younger brothers and his father, Yesugei, was the tribe leader. Yesugei arranged Khan’s marriage to Borte at a young age. Yesugei was poisoned at a dinner of a neighboring tribe. Although Temujin was next in line, he still had to prove that he was the strongest to before he can lead over the tribe. At the young age of 13 he killed his brother while hunting. Age 17 Temujin married Borte and united two tribes. Borte was then kidnapped by an enemy tribe. Legend says that Timujin sent an army of 40,000 to rescue his wife which may have led him to his destiny. After Temujin conquered and united numerous tribes, as well Mongolia his name was well known throughout the land as Genghis Khan, Ruler of the world.
{{establish dominance. A “name” is very important to leadership}}
Many historians consider Khan ahead of his time because his army was well structured, trained and equipped. He organized his 80,000 soldiers into divisions of 10,000, with 1000 in each regiment, 100 in each company and 10 in a squad. In 1206 all of Mongolia was conquered. {{HE WAS 44 years old}}
Khan made all of his soldiers from different tribes pledge loyalty to him. He won his victories with his skilled horse warriors and archers. He required his soldiers to wear light leather and metal tunics with protective silk undergarments. Khan also made sure his soldiers had enough equipment like 2 bows, a quiver of 60 arrows, scimitar, and attached 5 horses. His soldiers also carried useful tools such as meat pots, needle and thread and objects to sharpen arrows.
Khan controlled his people by a code of law he created called the Yasa. These laws were extremely cruel and harsh. The death penalty was a sentence for many offenses including stealing, cheating on your spouse, {{interesting, eh?}} resigning from combat in the middle of a battle, not paying taxes three times and even peeing in public water routes.
Genghis never taxed the outside land he conquered. He let defeated kingdoms live as they liked, which gave people the choice of religion, and to live with their custom laws and celebrations.
((Therefore not provoking their rebellion.))
Another place to stand to move the world.
When I finally Decided to Leave / Moot Points.

The engraving is from
Mechanic’s Magazine
(cover of bound Volume II,
Knight & Lacey, London, 1824)
Courtesy of the
Annenberg Rare Book &
Manuscript Library
University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, USA
| Wall painting in theStanzino delle Matematiche in theGalleria degli Uffizi(Florence, Italy). Painted by Giulio Parigi (1571-1635) in the y |
“Give me somewhere to stand and I will move the earth.”
Greek Mathematical Works, by Ivor Thomas, Loeb Classical Library, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1941, vol. II, p. 35
First, analyze the situation accurately. Accurately, the chances of a court order being respected in my situation, or someone doing something about this (even if officially asked to in a motion) are nil. Most times, while I went about this, a guerrilla attack (and clearly purposed as such) came from another “gang” member offended by the principle that my motions should disrupt their equilibrium, the equilibrium of the self-anointed, self-evaluated, self-selected, with zero accountability. Point 1. The lever must be long enough and not break under the weight. The longer the lever, the less weight need be applied.
Where to stand? I say, look at the finances. Do not approach a crook and talk about ethics! Do not talk about someone drunk with power and talk about the immorality of using their power! Talk in terms they understand, not your own paradigm! How do you think we got into this place to start with?
WOMEN NEED A PLACE TO STAND IN THIS LIFE. WE NEED TO MAKE AND DEFINE THIS PLACE IN FAIR NEGOTIATION WITH MEN. WHEN CHILDREN ARE INVOLVED, THIS FAIR-NESS IS EVEN MORE CRUCIAL.
YOUNG WOMEN NEED TO BE TOLD SOME HARD TRUTHS — THERE ARE MEN THAT WILL GO FOR YOU TO PRODUCE A BABY (THIS CAN ALSO BE TRUE OF THE YOUNG MEN). PARTICULARLY IF YOU ARE YOUNG AND FERTILE, AND HE’S ON A REBOUND. OR IF YOU ARE OLDER AND AFFLUENT, IN THIS CASE, YOUR HOME IS NEEDED FOR A NEW HOME FOR HIS KIDS FROM THE FIRST WOMAN. OR, ALTERNATELY, YOUR CHILDREN FROM A FORMER MARRIAGE MIGHT DO, TOO.
i feel this is just as applicable to professional women in their late mid to late 30s/early 40s as others. Until our society starts VALUING women as people and as women (including mothers!), the whole climate isn’t healthy enough all round, and people need to know in the river of life where the rapids and sharp rocks lie. This differs by culture and community, and it AIN’T up to Washington D.C. and a bunch of economists and human behavioralists drawing research from shelters, prisons, and head start outfits, to set the standards! (OR, churches, dammit! The average church these days, I’ll speak for Protestant, is basically a cult. In every sense of the word. Marketing spirituality and social connection and good feelings, for a price, allegiance. . . . And money, and services).
So now we get too MOOT POINT. This post is just about a moot point today: I’ll revisit it in a while.
Idiom: Moot Point
Category: Law
View examples in Google: Moot point
Wiktionary:
- (US) An issue regarded as potentially debatable, but no longer practically applicable. Although the idea may still be worth debating and exploring academically, and such discussion may be useful for addressing similar issues in the future, the idea has been rendered irrelevant for the present issue.
- Until we rebuild downtown, whether we build more parking spaces is a moot
Moot point (http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/moot-point.html)
Meaning
An irrelevant argument.
Origin
Some may disagree with the above meaning and argue that it means ‘a point open to debate‘, rather than ‘a point not worth debating‘. That former meaning was certainly the correct one when the term was first coined, but that’s going back a while.
In this post, I refer to the second usage
Laurence Humphrey, the president of Magdalen College, Oxford, wrote Nobles or of Nobilitye, a manual of behaviour for the English nobility, in 1563. In that he wrote:
“That they be not forced to sue the lawe, wrapped with so infinite crickes and moot poyntes.”
In medieval England, moots, or meets, were assemblies or councils where points of government were debated. The country was split into juridicial areas called hundreds and administered via assemblies known as hundredmotes. The form of government has long since vanished but the term hundred is still in use as the name of the procedural device which gives consent to MPs’ resignation. British MPs aren’t allowed to resign and, when members wish to leave Parliament they may do so by applying for the notional position of Crown Steward and Bailiff of the Chiltern Hundreds. In such assemblies points which were put up for discussion were said to be mooted.
The change in meaning has come about following the introduction of ‘moot courts’, which are sessions where law students train for their profession by arguing hypothetical cases, i.e. ‘moot points’. The lack of any substantive outcome from these theoretical cases has led to the ‘unimportant/not worth discussing’ meaning of ‘moot point’, which is what many people accept today.
Here is one WHOPPER of a “moot point.” I used to think that bringing this one up would make a difference. I was so glad to see this written here. But, it’s a moot point — in practice no one actually believes this. If they did, too many programs would have to shut down.
Let’s go over this again:
http://www.sddvc.com/pdf/2008finalwithsignatures.pdf
This is out of San Diego: Law Enforcement Protocol:
“The California State Legislature has declared that:
(1) “[S]pousal abusers present a clear and present danger to the mental and
physical well-being of the citizens of the State of California.” (California
Penal Code section 273.8.)
(2) “A substantial body of research demonstrates a strong connection between
Domestic Violence and Child Abuse.” (California Penal Code section
13732(a)). ”
Now, same document:
“The decision to prosecute a batterer lies within the discretion of the District Attorney
and the City Attorney. Victims do not “press charges”, “drop charges” or
“prosecute” their batterers.
So, those offices bear looking at. When they don’t prosecute for any of those (or child-stealing, case in point).
Ay, there’s the rub.** So, they go get civil or family court restraining orders, which are less respected. Or, they go to their family, friends, faith institution, etc. Then they find out what their: family, friends, faith institution, etc., are about. And the years go by, the kids grow up. . . . . .
Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
September 8, 2009 at 4:07 PM
Posted in Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Domestic Violence vs Family Law, History of Family Court, Vocabulary Lessons
Tagged with Clear and Present Danger, domestic violence, family annihilation, family law, HHS-TAGGS grants database, Intimate partner violence, OCSE (Office of Child Support Enforcement), social commentary, trauma, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work.., Victims do not prosecute
The ACES study — Bridging apparent Skipped Synapses in Family Court thinking….
Happy Labor Day post. I give you one study I refer to often on this blog, that dates back to 1998, and one (more) inane/insane custody discussion from Australia, case dating 1999-2003, and topic, joint legal custody and visitation with a young girl and the father who crushed her baby brother’s skull with his bare hands, baby being 3 weeks old and in his father’s arms at the time. The court is less concerned with that behavior than the mother’s “phobia” (odd label, eh?) about that behavior. Nothing much new for Family Law Arena — this is its speciality, in fact, stigmatizing parents that actually seek to protect their kids from trauma, abuse, and possible (in that case) death.
ACES (below): Bridging the Gap between Childhood Trauma and . . . . .Negative consequences later in life.
Or should I call this bridging the gap between theory and reality? Which results in the ever-widening “Chasm,” the Court public Credibility Gap.
So, how does one talk with mad engineer at the helm of a runaway train with one’s kids on it? How get one’s kids safely OFF the train? because in this venue, it doesn’t seem possible. If they spend the duration of their childhood on this train, perhaps this will become their new “normal” and then another generation of trainsters and railway-hoppers will grow up, have kids, and provide new cargo for this Trip to Nowhere (except the trips to the bank for the railroad and its employees). Like the formerly renowned rail system in the U.S., it took a lot of subsidy to keep the thing operational.
There are basically two types of conversations going through the courts:
1. IN open court — in open, and
2. Behind closed doors — in private.
The heart of the matter is in the 2nd arena. Best interests of the child is static, sound-fluff and media-bytes. It’s not reality, and I don’t any longer believe that any one who makes a living in this arena seriously, seriously believes in this paradigm — or if they do, their eyes are simply closed, because the cat is out of the bag.
I believe the language the speak, as any good employee or business person truly does, is that of who is paying their bills. One reason I know this is that I actually experienced leaving an abusive marriage, and how vital a part finances was in getting free. I also watched systematic economic abuse (mismangement, comandeering of access to basic funds/cash flow/steady jobs that would make this possible, and so forth), which restricted and delayed the exit.
Which would you be more accountable to as a secretary whose family’s food and rent (lifestyle) depends on your pleasing that employer? Up to your own personal level of moral/social tolerance (and ability to choose), a disgruntled customer in the waiting room or on the phone? Or your employer? . . . . Well, what about judges and other professionals, some of whose salary (US$) is well over $100,000 and lifestyles and associates to match? Along with judgeships go political influence and possibly later activity — it’s a career path. It took a lot of convincing in California (and publicity) for these judges to give up (statewide) their almost $20 million in SUPPLEMENTAL pay, but not until one of their own, an attorney in Los Angeles, was firmly intimidated and jailed for reporting financial corruption (Richard Fine case), which was his actual job to do in this city, as I understood it. He was put in punitive solitary conffinement, moreover, and I heard, disbarred, for actually bucking this system.
However, these articles ARE about “best interests of the child” and whose head is where in being unable to figure that out in a given case involving infanticide! Or other horrors to any growing child, or the parent of any such child.
I am going to start grading the Family Law systems in my country, and in any country that imitates policies that I give an “F” in my country:
1998 THIS study is also old, and underestimated. Probably because of its common sense, like the 1989 and 1992 ones I quoted earlier, from NOMAS, talking about why the HECK have we got to continue exposing each new generation of children to more and more parents who batter, and then posing STUPID questions like, why is the next generation ending up in jail, or beating THEIR women, or taking the assaults, either.
WHY is business as usual, THAT’s why. A case came to light today where an Australian court (dealing with similar issues down under) is ordering psychiatric evaluation for the mother of a two-year old because the two-year-old’s father, quickly knocking up another woman, had just crushed to death the newborn (3 weeks old) infant with his bare hands, in response to the baby’s crying. The man is in jail, and the court is trying to tell the mother that she needs to have her head examined for wanting to make sure this doesn’t happen to the one that came out of HER womb. No, I am not kidding!
FAMILY LAW – Children – parenting orders – contact in prison – father incarcerated for killing child of another relationship – specific phobic anxiety of the primary carer and compromised capacity to care for the child – no significant contact ordered.
At what point do we get to have the COURT’s “head” – and values — examined? ???
O & C [2005] FMCAfam 200 (29 April 2005)
Last Updated: 6 June 2005
FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA
REASONS FOR JUDGMENTIntroduction – the proceedings
1. This matter comes before me as the final hearing of the competing applications of the various parties concerning B M C born 9 March 1999. Final parenting orders were made in relation to B on 20 February 2002 whereby B lived with the mother and the father had regular contact. However, on 11 March 2003, the father killed his newborn child of another relationship, Z, and the father is now incarcerated until approximately February 2006.
Yes you read that right. Infanticide: 3 years. 3 hots and a cot. Wonder if he’ll get out on parole early, like Garrido did, in time for a repeat performance. Sounds like it didn’t affect his entitlement much, being incarcerated for baby-killing; he still wants to assert his shared parenting responsibilities and rights. Where’s KING SOLOMON (of the Bible) when you need him? Where’s the anti-abortion pro-lifers when you need them? This mother, of child “B” is a pro-lifer. She doesn’t want HER kid to suffer the same fate. For expressing and acting on this protective, motherly sentiment, she may be sentenced to a lifetime — or at least for the duration of B’s childhood — of having her “head examined” over this “phobia.”
“Phobia” being, I guess, being afraid of something the Court isn’t afraid of, probably because it’s not the Court’s offspring involved or at risk.
2. The proceedings were initiated by the mother filing an application on 1 July 2003 in which she sought that previous parenting orders made by this court on 20 February 2002 be suspended and that she have sole responsibility for making decisions about the long term and day to day care, welfare and development of B. Effectively, she sought that there be no contact between B and the father.
3. On 21 November 2003 a Form 3 response was filed and served on behalf of the father {{BEING AS HE WAS INCARCERATED??}}. Relevantly, the father sought joint responsibility for long term decisions affecting B and contact in prison
RELEVANT: What the jailed Dad wants.
IRRELEVANT: what the killed 3-week old baby wanted before his Daddy crushed his skull together: probably either some cuddling, a diaper change, some milk, or to be held differently. Or his Mama.
IRRELEVANT: What the mother wants, safety for HER kid, and her concerns taken seriously.
YES, this WAS 2006, “DOWN UNDER,” and a term well-earned from what I can see of this decision, at least.
As to his paternal grandparents: Well, their son was an adult at the time, but still, they raised this guy. PERHAPS this should be considered “relevant” in allowing unsupervised contact of child “B” with them. (Not mentioned are her parents. . . . or mother of the deceased newborn. )
===============================
I give you one more reason (not including Phillip Garrido, Jaycee Dugard, and any woman who opts to marry a convicted kidnapper and raper) to take domestic violence seriously: The children:
What is the ACE Study?
The ACE Study is an ongoing collaboration between the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention and Kaiser Permanente. Led by Co-principal Investigators Robert F. Anda, MD,
MS, and Vincent J. Felitti, MD, the ACE Study is perhaps the largest scientific research study
of its kind, analyzing the relationship between multiple categories of childhood trauma
(ACEs), and health and behavioral outcomes later in life.What’s an ACE?
Growing up experiencing any of the following conditions in the household prior to age 18:
- Recurrent physical abuse
- Recurrent emotional abuse
- Contact sexual abuse
- An alcohol and/or drug abuser in the
household
- An incarcerated household member
- Someone who is chronically depressed,
mentally ill, institutionalized, or suicidal
- Mother is treated violently
- One or no parents
- Emotional or physical neglect
Origins and Essence of the Study (2003)
ADVERSE CHILDHOOD EXPERIENCES AND STRESS: PAYING THE PIPER (2004?)
The findings of the Adverse Childhood Experiences Study, an ongoing collaboration between Co-Principal
Investigators Vincent J. Felitti, MD, of Kaiser Permanente, and Robert F. Anda, MD, MS, of the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention.
Because the two links above are in multi-column format, I can’t copy and paste. I exhort you to take a look at some of this.
Please note that “one or no parents” was NOT on the top of the list, as it is on current “fatherhood.gov” policy, or HHS/ACF grants prioritization in the Designer Family mode it appears to be stuck in.
Women, including women like me, whose children have been exposed to from 1 to all of the factors above, are after removing their children FROM such factors, having the courts force them back in through shared parenting considerations. IN this case the theoretical ideal is held over the head, and clubbing protective parents, of the practical reality that Batterers do NOT make Good parents until they thoroughly address the battering behavior, and what drives it. Moreover, men have graduated with flying colors from programs allegedly adjusting their attitudes, and gone right out to murder that bitch who forced them to sit through it (McAlpin is one case that comes to mind, Bay Area, 2005. Within just a few days, her body was discovered in a trunk).
Again, the issue becomes who gets to rig the test and give the grades? I give any policy that lacks common sense — protect the kids! — and ignores the golden rule and “F.”
Golden Rule in Family Law: Do unto OTHERS as you would have them do unto YOU (i.e., if it were YOUR kid, whose father just killed a newborn, would you as a judge order the woman who was alarmed at said murder to have her head examined, and the child ordered into contact with the parents of the killer, OR would you yourself be alarmed, and rule accordingly?)
If it’s not good enough for YOUR kid, it’s not good enough for HER kid. That’s the golden rule in the courtroom, I say.
This of course presumes that a judge cares about his or her own kids, which may be a presumption indeed; some judges have been convicted of collecting child pornography and making some of it (Thompson, NJ), another of sexual harassment of female employees (Fed. District judge in Texas).
Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
September 7, 2009 at 1:50 PM
Posted in After She Speaks Up - Reporting Domestic Violence and/or Suicide Threats, Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Designer Families, Domestic Violence vs Family Law, Fatal Assumptions, History of Family Court, Split Personality Court Orders, Vocabulary Lessons
Tagged with ACES study, Australia, custody, Dad in prison, domestic violence, family annihilation, fatherhood, HHS-TAGGS grants database, Intimate partner violence, Motherhood, retaliation for reporting, Self-Defense from DV, trauma, women's rights
Today’s post is a new blog page: “Lessons from Antioch” (California)
The pages are full of the Dugards and the Garridos; people what answers, and collectively, it appears there’s a need to process the trauma, and put names to the “Who, What When, How and Why?” this happened.
(As these posts get a little more personal, understand it’s not just for the blogger’s sake but for the bloggers’ hope that another perspective on these things might get heard.)
It triggers trauma, or perhaps it’s thoughtfulness, or perhaps it’s a desire to mention what other mothers have gone through that is different, but of some similar qualities: sudden loss of access to and contact with their sons or daughters, and lack of closure, or time to recover or heal from prior abuse(s). One can get so acclimatized to abuse, or to repeated violations of personal integrity, that this sort of “alternate reality” becomes “normal.” What’ I’m concerned about in this matter is future generations, and what “normal” has become for American women, both growing up and grown-up mothers.
My own father (deceased) I deduce was told, like many, to “man up,” shut up and step up to the plate when his (wife-beating) father abandoned the household. Retaliation for even CRYING about the violence, let alone reporting it, was simply part of his youth. After being locked in a closet for crying initially (so the family lore goes) he went on, and worked hard, educated himself hard, provided well, such that his own children (ALL of them) also got college educated. I’d say did all right (that’s one adult child’s perspective only; there ARE others), but as the youngest of these, and alone in the house as his marriage disintegrated, I certainly noticed and questioned that, despite the success, he also drank hard too (bottling something else up?), married several times, and, unfortunately, never discussed or addressed any of his own family shortcomings, nor did any of our own adult family actually handle these well, other than by transmitting what I could call UNhealthy family values: Zero dialogue on THE most important issues of life, a lifelong habit. Scapegoating. Tolerance of domestic violence towards, now, more than one member, and clan-like excommunication for anyone who dares to report any of the worst family secrets (and I shudder to think of the ones that haven’t yet come to surface).
My father died suddenly and under circumstances that were not explained to me. I learned more about him after his death from the Internet than from anyone I was related to. He has been described alternately as a genius, and modest (a side of him we didn’t know!), and creative. His mother was devout, and he rejected the concept and existence of God, another family value I myself later rejected, and paid dearly for over the years. I like to think that, had he realized one of his daughters would go on to marry and be exposed to what his own mother was, I like to think he’d be turning over in his grave, but fact is, I don’t know. I do know there was a certain sexism, not uncommon for the day and time. And I do thank him for not following the utterly insane policy that the HHS is nowadays, deciding and enforcing that children need contact with wife-beating fathers, for the good of, I guess, the country (???) and their little lives.
I consider refusal to address violence endorsing it. They consider it “dwelling on the past,” even when the ostensible past was as recent as last week or last month. They got that one down, and in order that my children should not know the truth about this family, have endorsed further criminal behavior towards them, and me, and this state, again in the name of “Family.”
It appears that the family law venue is also in the business of telling people to shut up about both their own family secrets (retaliation on custodial parents for reporting abuse in the form of switching the kid to the accused parent!) as well as ITS own secrets, which (as family secrets tend to) includes the financial business deal driving the steamship that’s steamrolling over (well, I could go on and on with that analogy, it’s an apt one) – — that’s steamrolling over the years that SOME families might have otherwise had in peace to recover from the initial trauma, and rebuild a few lives. Big Brother had a supposedly Better Idea for the country, you know, and so we are to sacrifice the duration of our children’s — well, til they are legally adults — and stay in the system until all the proper tolls have been paid, and “Therapeutic Jurisprudence” has run its course, replacing the former language of right, wrong, crime & punishment, and deterrents for doing it again.
Which deterrents Phillip Garrido had, but in the words of one of his several kidnapped for the purpose of raping women, (the 1976 woman that got him the 50 year jail sentence, that he served a few years of), it just made him a smarter and wiser criminal.
However it’s not the men’s doing this so much as the institutions they create doing this, which frightens me the most, for at least my own children’s futures. Put against this, is their spirit and, I hope, smarts.
And the VOLUNTARY donation of the national resources and sort of “conscience” to the federal government. Kind of like the cycle of rain, rivers flow to the ocean, evaporation, clouds, rain, etc. The concept is that justice and a better society will somehow rain down on us.
I’m not holding my breath.
However, sometimes this happens when the parents may even know where they are; this happens in the “family court venue.”
Recent articles talk about how the girls are recovering from trauma, and that’s partly where I started in this new page. I note a difference of perspective from the experts quoted and what i know about the trauma thing from experience.
I end up talking about the importance of the declaration of independence, and personal defense of boundaries. And how it MIGHT help if the public were a little less self-delusional, compartmentalized, and dissociative when it comes to US vs THEM and the role of government in kissing all our “ow-ies,” settling our squabbles, raising our young, monitoring our marriages, determining our public visions, and protecting our boundaries.
NO, let’s get back to the foundational principles. And add women and girls in the mix as citizens, not as items to be devoured or dominated.
If overall, we ALL had less tolerance for unreasonable dominance, I think a lot of partnerships and society would be healthier. You can force compliance, but you can’t force love, and when force gets into the family business, then we are REALLY in trouble. And we are.
I don’t think the culprit is god or godlessness. I don’t think the culprit is men OR women. I think the loss is of a sense of selves as individuals (socially) and a loss of language — transformational ideology throughout the internet, and our institutions.
As imperfect, or OK< sexist racist classist (etc.) as those colonists were in the latter 1700s, the three “charters of freedom” still shed light and common sense:
- Declaration of Independence
- Constitution
- Bill of Rights.
If we don’t like the middle one, we should change the oath Presidents take on assuming office. Barring that, we should hold them and every one else in any form of government to the same standard of these 3. “Consent of the governed” still counts.
So I recommend we start thinking in those terms again, starting with putting some of the terms back into our heads and coming out of our mouths. Expect a fight, in that matter, though!
That’s all for now. If you want straighter talk and fewer words, get it from the street:

http://www.thestreetspirit.org/
3. If God is, whence come evil things? If He is not, whence come good?
BOETHIUS (Roman philosopher 480?-524 A.D.) The Consolation of Philosophy, translated by W.V. Cooper, 19814. I still believe that standing up for the truth of God is the greatest thing in the world. This is the end of life. The end of life is not to be happy. The end of life is not to achieve pleasure and avoid pain. The end of life is to do the will of God, come what may.
MARTIN LUTHER KING JR., (U.S. clergyman and human rights activist, 1929-1968), “The Most Durable Power,” sermon, Montgomery, Alabama, 6 November 1956(LIFE LIBERTy and PURSUIT of HAPP(y)NESS, and in that order. Physical, mental, or spiritual Welfare =/= happiness, but the first can sustain life. Moral proclamations by government about how to live, how free to be, and what happiness consists of is not the government’s province, it’s ours).
On poverty, who are you going to believe? A Harvard Ph.D. or a poor person?
This stereotype is that poor people can lift themselves out of poverty because, it assumes, they are responsible for their own poverty. Linda Burnham explained in her opening, the myth in America is that “everyone can pull themselves up by their bootstraps.” This myth allows the public to discard “a whole layer of society” who can’t pull themselves up.
Linda spoke of the American economy as both an engine of incredible wealth and an engine of poverty. This engine “creates and recreates poverty everyday in the US and all over the world.” During the war, discussions of poverty have been swept off the table. It is important to connect the war against the poor to the war abroad. Burnham mentioned that Lockheed Martin, the world’s largest weapons manufacturer, has just been awarded a contract to run the welfare system in Florida. The company, who makes huge profits off of war, will now be making huge profits off of managing Florida’s poor.** In order for a country to subjugate and dominate another population, it has to first dominate its population at home. All you have to do is look at the streets of your city to see that this is being done on an everyday basis.
**This is why I don’t think much about the conversations on solving domestic violence. IF it were solved, there’d be less cash flow all round, less poverty, and poverty IS an industry!
Or Ask the Beat Within

Violence And Material Madness
by Speedy, posted May 18, 2009I think violence comes from people who has a bad life style. They don’t get the good things in life and so they get angry, so they look to robbing and stealing. That’s what gets them in here. So then, when they get in here, their whole life is starting to mess up. And when that happens, they’re in the system. Then they get even more madder because they’re missing out on a lot, so they get to more stealing.Some people grow up with anger, and some are taught to be mad and act bad. Like some parents say, when somebody hits you, you supposed to hit them back. But sometimes that’s not the right thing to do, so than they get in trouble for what they parents taught them. But when they get home, he or her mom says, “That a’right.” So than they keep getting’ in trouble.
But some violent stuff mostly come from material madness, so they try to steal and stealing ain’t the right thing. You should just get a job, have some money in yo’ pocket and that’s go be you. And if that material thing is really expensive, so that’s when you save up and get that thing for yourself, so than that’s when you see you don’t have to look to stealing. When you don’t have to steal and you see that you don’t have to do that no more.
OR: (This issue had several letters to President Obama….)
A Letter To The President-
by TAE, posted May 18, 2009Dear Mr. Obama,I think you should make certain things that keep young black men busy for the weekends, so we could stop killing ourselves. I also think that you should start building new colleges for people who cannot afford that type of money, so they could be something in life to take care of their family, and get the majority of the tax money every year.
I think there should be less education about African-American people and more about other cultures so people wouldn’t have to feel down all the time by hearing the word “Nigger” a lot.
People who’s getting abused in their family should be taken care of in a shelter that provides a little bit of discipline, so they could grow up and succeed in life, and keep innocent people out of the pen.
OR:
Dear President
by Richard, posted May 19, 2009How are you Mr. President? I am writing from Santa Clara juvenile hall. My name is Richard. I am facing a life sentence for kidnapping, attempted murder, carjacking, and 2nd degree robbery. I am 17 years old.I would like to congratulate you for becoming the 44th President of the United States of America. You inspire me to do many things. It gives me hope to become something I thought I couldn’t be in life no matter what it is. I believe in you, that you are going to make things right in this world. I know when I go to prison I can try my hardest to get my education and other things. I didn’t think I could at first, but with you as President, I have faith.
I know I am in here and might not get out soon, but I know you will be there for those on the outside of these walls. I know you will make a change. I hope the best for you, Mr. President. Thank you for reading this, and I apologize for taking your time.
Our Mission
The Beat Within’s mission is to provide incarcerated youth with consistent opportunity to share their ideas and life experiences in a safe space that encourages literacy, self-expression, some critical thinking skills, and healthy, supportive relationships with adults and their community. Outside of the juvenile justice system, The Beat Within partners with community organizations and individuals to bring resources to youth both inside and outside of detention. We are committed to being an effective bridge between youth who are locked up and the community that aims to support their progress towards a healthy, non-violent, and productive life.
Regarding recovery from violence (WHICH the Antioch/Dugard articles from today dealt with),
from http://www.Lundy Bancroft.com:
- Addressing the healing needs of children: There is a wide consensus that children’s recovery from exposure to domestic violence (and from divorce) depends largely on the quality of their relationship with the non-battering parent and with their siblings.20
Of course this statement runs entirely contrary to the bulk of the “fatherhood” premises and the entire family court venue basically doesn’t validate or practice.
- Therefore, in addition to safety consideration, court determinations should take into account whether the batterer is likely, based on his past and current behavior, to continue to undermine the mother’s authority, interfere with mother-child relationships, or cause tensions between siblings.
This becomes kind of irrelevant when the court itself does the same things. My experience is that the past was considered to be a totally blank slate, and therefore any fallout was attributed to whoever it “fell” on. Extended family influence (which I tried to bring up, and was significant) was ignored. It was an unbelievably stereotyped reaction. Possibly the reason I’m writing so much is from the impact of the years of being told POST-separation not to talk about this, or any other subsequent criminal behavior(s). Oh well . . .
- Because children need a sense of safety in order to heal,21 juvenile and family court decisions may not want to include leaving the children in the unsupervised care of a man whose violent tendencies they have witnessed, even if they feel a strong bond of affection for him.
So when it typically does, often right after the filing of a civil restraining order, or when divorce is started almost immediately after someone files a protective order, resulting in the “joint custody” “Shared parenting” mindset, then we have a serious values conflict, as I did, in the past, now almost ten years. A move was made (locally) to extend the initial restraining order time to 5 years from 3. I know I would’ve made it had this happened. Certain agencies, and entities, made sure this was defeated. Now that I have time (called unemployment!), I did find out who they were in that case.
If you want straight talk on some poverty, justice, and crime policy issues, again, (although I try, there’s the verbiage issue!), try: Street Spirit, Poor Magazine, the Beat Within (although that’s getting slicker and slicker since I first saw it),
Thanks. Happy Labor Day (USA). Unemployment rate _ _ _ _ _???
Labor (or rest) well, we have one more day off in America. I gave up the concept of seeing a daughter at this time in favor of not fighting that fight until I have some income. The lack of closure is a constant source of stress. Closing has to be done right to be safe. Go figure. This is one reason I think if women leaving abuse could get a bit of space and time, they could run some great businesses. It appears that Jaycee/Alyssa both helped her captorS S S S Ss s s s s run a business (not including any horrors she endured IF the brothel rumor was true) and educated her also-imprisoned daughters, the product of her rapes, but nonetheless her DAUGHTERS, the best she could. I wish her well and the family that’s now reunited with her.
Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
September 6, 2009 at 5:17 PM
Posted in compulsory schooling, Designer Families, Fatal Assumptions, History of Family Court, public education, Vocabulary Lessons
Tagged with "We had no idea!", 2nd Amendment, family law, parental kidnapping, Self-Defense from DV, social commentary, Social Issues from Religious Viewpoints, Studying Humans, trauma, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work.., women's rights
My Copy Editing Disclaimer: While I CAN Copy-edit for stylistic consistency, I DON’T herein: Let’s Get Honest, this blog just ain’t about to be copyedited
Excuse #1: PTSD (what’s YOUR excuse?)
re: The PTSD – There’s no Excuse for Abuse!
Like my approach to this Blog, it’s a choice. (see photo to right)
Almost every excuse I’ve heard, mostly from family members, calls it something else, like “helping.” The real struggle affecting the wider public in this arena (Family Court) is naming. Name-calling. It’s a language issue. Language controls SO much. It controls children and money, which are unfortunately closely related here, and my sense of the courts is that the system has become closer to an auction block than a process dispensing justice, or fair decisions based on facts. We are the state where it’s not only profitable to work in and around the courts, it is ALSO profitable to work for nonprofits dedicated, so they claim, to advising and changing the courts.
The amount of help I would’ve needed at specific dates in time, to be TOTALLY and COMPLETELY solvent and free from abuse in short order after leaving it, almost never, once I had my income set up, exceeded a single child support payment, which at this point in time was set at lower than cash-aid for a family of two, which we’d been on briefly and which generated the initial support order tos tart with. Alternately, I could’ve, with only a half more year of non-intervention policy from my family, omitted the child support entirely, and gone on our merry way, with two great children regularly seeing both parents, while living with one.
Instead, someone coached someone how to stop this, and the answer, the salvation, was the family law arena. In the middle of recovery, and almost to safety or to “shore” (financially speaking, and this counts!) I was kicked back into self-defense mode, as a single mother and the nonbattering parent who’d finally worked up courage to file a restraining order.
By the time I got myself up to speed on domestic violence literature, the laws, the rules of court, and the fact that any and all of the above are, in essence and in practice, “moot points,” my income, safety, boundaries, and stability were gone. It took a very short few years to get this household BACK into trauma and poverty, and from there, snatch my kids.
This did not just affect one family, or three generations, and relatives in one family, though it has. It affected the wider community and burdened the social services, as I called crisis lines, again started attending DV support systems. I hemorrhaged jobs and professional connections, and had a traumatic bonding relationship with law enforcement in two counties (and more cities). MORE police reports were generated from my attempts to get kids back on a weekend exchange (after restraining order was removed) and then retaliatory frivolous calls by my ex (for example, if I was supposedly 1 minute late, when I wasn’t even that), than even happened during the years of physical violence and assaults upon me, my property, and animals in the home. Some severe (physical) threats to me were generated from protesting animal abuse. Still gullible, I continued to hope that law enforcement would help enforce laws. Even when they allowed my children to be removed illegally from my custody based on clear perjury and after a judge’s order had directly forbidden this — less than 24 hours earlier — these peace officers failed to enforce when asked to. The same office knew of the former domestic violence restraining order, and in fact, I think this exchange was beginning to get a bit of a reputation there (though I can’t say for sure).
I did not understand HOW necessary it was for me to understand the ENTIRE system in these matters. And it is appropriate to respond according to the truth of a situation, not to our myths about the truth of our situation. IF I had made it through this website: NAFCJ.net — BEFORE my kids were stolen, I might have acted differently.
No one goes through all that without seeking answers. While few hours go into copyediting, MANY have gone into researching what I blog about, and that’s what underlies the confidence, as unpleasant as what I found was. Namely, if I could summarize it, organized crime in high places. Not exactly breaking news, but still we like to think, protectively, it’s not going to affect us, somehow.
Certain professions attract certain personality types. It’s unfortunate but true, and public service is simply not always the prime motivation.
Old myths die fast.
Life and death truly are in the power of the tongue. When any group seeks to pre-empt language, and re-write history, we had best be VERY cautious.
Name-calling is a basic human trait defining social groups, and always has been. However, when a larger conglomerate of social groups is to function somehow, they have to have a “language” to describe the interactions, and some sort of regulation of those to minimize fighting. As one age gives way to another, language is a real clue. The largest clue is where the greatest silence is. In this arena of family law, there has been an intentional, and arising from a single set of sources (date, places, and times have been identified on their own websites) to CHANGE TERMINOLOGIES, and make excuse for abuse. I speak about this, as well as refer to (hopefully not in totally identifying detail; this is always an internal struggle, how much to say) some of the major areas of silence in this venue.
HOW MANY blogs are you going to find which post grants data from BOTH the fatherhood/marriage and the Violence Against Women (i’m going to, today, some more) groups and ask pointed questions about how many lives are those funds saving — and according to whom? I have limited time, limited brain capacity and when focused on content, cannot also focus on polishing content.
The fallout from failing to SEE and ACT on the truth in this venue is sometimes death, poverty, homelessness, and intergenerational transmission of trauma, to those involved, or sometimes those associated with those involved. What we as a society fail to see is where loss to ONE set of people (in these venues) is gain to another — the profit from prolonging the distress.
No one likes to talk about that, but we must, and I DO — and the fact that I do, in the history of who I’ve been personally dealing with, and now, seeing the wider scope of the problem (which isn’t any prettier), there is an element of fear associated with breaking cultural tabus, speaking up. Families with histories of violence or incest have kept it going through silence, as mine did for 10 years while it happened to me in front of God and a lot of other on-lookers.
But I do because of what’s in me that loves and wants to speak truth, not suppress it (I know ALL about that) and because of what’s left in my heart (which is a lot!) regarding my daughters, who have been lied to, lied about, and induced to lie in some of these matters.
Therefore, getting it “up and out” is an act of some courage for me, and when I focus too much on editing, the courage fails. It’s a totally different process and mode. (This “serious” section was added after the more lighthearted stuff below). In my marriage, when I spoke, he sometimes hit – doing so was ALWAYS trauma, sometimes caused serious injury, and always was intended that I should not speak. This is why I believe some abusers target the neck and mouth area. They don’t want us to speak, or breathe. When it comes to economic abuse, there is difficulty with communication and transportation infrastructures — isolate and intimidate is the name of the game. And then, once this is in place, interrogate and degrade.
Why do they go for the neck? (I learned at a conference in 2007 that this is a lethality indicator, in a publication addressed to dentists! I went to a dentist with teeth knocked loose years before, it didn’t raise any eyebrows even, that I could tell! The story I gave them (at that point) was ridiculous. It wasn’t questioned. That was a serious missed opportunity, and followed up on, might have produced a criminal report and a night in jail; it might have changed things. It SHOULD have. But by this time in the marriage, I’d been through the round of reporting, and reaching out, and speaking up. I was beginning to take a stand against abuse IN my marriage, and things were heating up as a direct consequence.
Though I have lost a tooth, income, children, and thousands of dollars (as have others who then attempted to support me but took not action to confront the abuse or violence), not one cent of “Victim Compensation” funding came this way. Not one identifiable “help” other than naming the abuse that was happening, came from one of the best-funded groups in this area. I believe we deserve answers, and I blog about this while I’m still here, still have housing, still have some health left. The women I link to also do this.
Again, as to abuse — What’s your Excuse for (your SILENCE about) Abuse?
I have and will continue to post some unpleasant $$ figures as to the nationwide economic cost of not understanding “the name of the game” in these fields, and attributing pure motives to every one who has a smooth speech. Which, I don’t think I do, but I try to get facts out, and assemble them in reasonable fashion, if not always in grammatically complete sentences.
Excuse #2: I’ll let Wikipedia (so to speak) speak to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copy_editing
OVERVIEW
The “Five Cs” [1] summarize the copy editor’s job: make the copy (i) clear, (ii) correct, (iii) concise, (iv) comprehensible, and (v) consistent; that is: make it say what it means, and mean what it says. Typically, copy editing involves correcting spelling, punctuation, grammar,mathematics,[2] terminology/jargon and semantics; ensuring that the typescript adheres to the publisher’s house style; and addingheadlines and standardized headers, footers, etc.[2]
The copy editor is expected to ensure that the text flows, that it is sensible, fair, and accurate, and that it will provoke no legal problems for the publisher.[2] Newspaper copy editors are sometimes responsible for selecting which news agency‘s wire copy the newspaper will use and for rewriting it in accordance with house style. Often, the copy editor is the only person, other than the author , to read an entire text before publication. Newspaper managing editors regard copy editors as the newspaper’s last line of accurate defense.
Hence, EXCUSE #2: I’m the author, not “other than the author.”
At least, I’m an “author” in a loose sense of the word.
I assemble, react (in print), cut and paste, and think about it. Aloud. This is NOT “copy editing.” They are entirely different processes, and for a good reason.
A copy editor may abridge a text, by “cutting” and “trimming” it, to reduce its length to fit publishing or broadcasting limits or to improve its meaning.[1]
There is no universal form for the job or job title; it is often written as one word (copyedit)[1] or with a hyphen (copy-edit); the hyphenated form is especially common in the UK. Similarly, the term copy editor may be spelled either as one word, two words, or as a hyphenated compound term. (And if you’re paying attention, I intentionally used all three forms in my title to make this point).
Copy editing is done prior to the work of proofreaders, who handle documents before final publication.[1]
(NOR DO I PROOFREAD, ENOUGH):
Under Wikipedia “Author”:
“According to the studies of James Curran, the system of shared values among editors in Britain has generated a pressure among authors to write to fit the editors’ expectations, removing the focus from the reader-audience and putting a strain on the relationship between authors and editors and on writing as a social act.
I am writing as a social act, and there is a very strained relationship between the author and editor parts; they are not happy yet. However I have made a deliberate decision to go with the first, and relegate the “editor” to a back seat. This may seem backwards, but relates to how I deal with post-traumatic stress issues on some of these topics, and the “fear of speaking” issue. (OR, it may be my way of rebelling against the “perfectionism” tendency). Sometimes it has to come out nonstop, and there isn’t enough time or emotional energy left to go back and revise.
When I do, instead, more reflection and more writing gets in there. Perhaps hearing about the process may help people who haven’t been through certain kinds of trauma understand a bit about some who have.
In my case, i am still mastering “bloggery,” and I am alleviating (by this disclaimer) with the copy editing training I have, and trained, and fairly accurate eye I have when I’m NOT cutting, pasting (or trying to) and trying to figure out which font or margin changes will actually stick.
The “accuracy” and with to avoid public embarrassment thing crawls up my back especially when I, for example as I just noticed today (8-29-09), I caught someone else’s Freudian slip/typo (“simulate conversation” where clearly “sTimulate” conversation was meant. IN these fields, “simulating” conversation, dialogue and openness, mediation, negotiation, and conciliation is blatantly rampant. Never get caught SIMULATING dialogue when you wish to be seen as STIMULATING it!
But further down, regarding a missing foster child case which has now become a homicide INVESTIGATION, in, from my own fingers and brain, in slipped the word “visitation” (topic of today’s post, in part). These word-switches (“hear” for here, or “know” for “no”, etc.) were much more common after the event of the child-stealing than beforehand. I am a crack typist (over 100wpm) and used to be known for a sharp eye for grammar; I have worked in accounting and legal fields also, where accuracy counts. There are definitely different parts of the brain in operation now, to do the same tasks. Sometimes they jump tracks temporarily, I guess. Never used to do that so much.
So, while no author in the general sense, I am in this sense:
Wages
There are no normal wages for authors. The pay for authors is normally based on provisions after standard contracts with companies.
[edit]
> – > – > – >
I have some ideas, but am not interested in fully analyzing why I write, any more than I formerly questioned why I played piano and sang, or why I ate and slept.
There are pros(e) and con (artists) to the habit.
Maybe I’m half hunter by nature, and like to bring home what I caught, like a cat brings home half-alive, half-in-shock mouse. The point isn’t the trophy, but what a great hunter the cat was.
However, this blog is NOT just for the act of blogging or the act of seeking. I have indeed been on a personal hunt to explain WHAT’S UP? with this venue? After i read the literature on “what’s up with the venue” I began looking at the organizations PUBLISHING the literature and pronouncing what’s up with this venue. They are better funded than almost any family court litigant ever will be.
That’s where the real story is. The real story is in what is NOT being talked about it. I talk about it, and I request public action on the information, in the form of taking this information, following up, and being highly motivated to know that this is affecting YOUR life, this particular kind of government waste and lack of accountability as to HOW its funds are being spent.
Regarding the PTSD factor – – these are difficult topics and truths to put out there. They are also, many, personal. Putting together a narrative can be healing, but done wrong, it can also re-traumatize. Hence, I fear that what you see hear is what you GOT. Get it?
One more thing about perfectionism: This also runs in my family line, and I do know (at least so is the family lore) my father watched HIS mother being beat by HIS father; it appears to be what they did back when in many cultures. He was if nothing perfectionist (in his field) and a researcher, creative thinker. I am beginning to understand why, and I happen to know that THIS applies to at least one of my two offspring.
Quote is cited on today’s post. (Note the 1980s dates of the cites)
In my opinion, it would be better, in most cases, for the children of homes where there has been domestic violence not to be in the custody of the abusive parent at all. In many cases it is even advisable that visitation be limited to controlled situations, such as under a therapist’s supervision during a therapy session, unless the batterer has been in batterer’s treatment and demonstrated that he has changed significantly in specific ways.
Caveat. Batterers can often “perform” well for an hour or two, and have been documented doing well in class, but outside class, and sometimes shortly AFTER, murdering. On this basis, I challenge that assertion, it begs the question of demonstrating what, how, for how long, and to whom. Like religious “repentance” it can be very much faked. My personal measure was compliance with court orders: the ability to TAKE an order rather than, when it came to me, the ex-wife, only ISSUING one. What the courts saw as my obstinancy, possibly, I (accurately, I assert) saw as my VERY healthy need for boundaries, and asserting them. One thing family law tends to do (for the uninitiated, if there are still some of these around) is break down personal boundaries, and then judge the person with the broken fences harshly. In a given case, this will be one parent OR the other, not both, and typically it is the female one.
“Merely” observing ones father abuse ones mother is in itself damaging to children. My clinical experience is consistent with the research literature which shows that children who witness their father beat their mother exhibit significantly greater psychological and psychosomatic problems than children from homes without violence (Roy, 1988). Witnessing abuse is more damaging in many ways than actually being abused, and having both happen is very damaging (Goodman and Rosenberg, 1987).
For the past few years — actually several years — I have had to witness from afar things that I knew to be damaging to my daughters, and was unable to do anything about this. I REMEMBER being physically assaulted, traumatized, and a lot more, and I will concur, although I’d surely not want to repeat the experience, this DOES feel horrible. It’s an internal wound hard to get at except by amputating something natural and innate, which is to care how one’s kids are doing, and do something to make sure they are thriving, and most specifically (in my case) headed in a good direction in life, and among people with decent values, and I’m not talking conservative or progressive, I’m talking, respectful of women and respecting the law, and not participating in “dissing” or hurting another parent. Forcing (minors in particular) to do this is part of a gang initiation, it’s like a ritual hazing, to prove membership. I’ve seen the lower middle class version of this, enabled by people who ought to know better, based on the self-assertions. yes, in short, it hurts, adults and children alike, but children moreso in the long run, I feel, because they have more lifespan ahead of them.
Studies show that a high percentage (as high as 55%) of fathers who abuse their wives also abuse their children (Walker and Edwall, 1987). In my experience, if one includes emotional abuses such as being hypercritical, yelling and being cruelly sarcastic, the percentage is much higher.
I was the target of this (as well as blows and choke-holds, throws, kicks, slaps, etc.) during marriage. I NEVER saw physical violence by my father towards my mother (and have in recent years asked, and was said, no it did not happen), and although he was highly critical of me, he was not cruelly sarcastic. I saw it as part of his professional mind (scientific). However, he WAS cruelly sarcastic and critical of my mother, which I believe did affect my sense of integrity as a young woman. I woke up to them arguing. We became a family that didn’t talk about important things, and as the youngest (in such families, everyone has an assigned role), and when siblings left home and before it, I became the “peacekeeper” too often. I disappeared into my own world, happily enough, until I became hungry for something approaching true and relationships/friendships, as I matured. I found these in music and writing, books, etc.
This cruel sarcasm, in the family realm, has been directed at me in my late middle age by this family of origin. I think it is possibly in order to preserve a sense of “family” in that our father is gone, suddenly, and decades ago. I do not think they are as comfortable with their worldviews, and a challenge to them seems a challenge to the core, somehow.
OR, it could just be about money and basic human passions, unrestrained by empathy or concern for the long-range impact. I don’t know, I know it apparently “works” for them and not for me to punish outsiders, namely, those who challenge their authority to usurp authority, which happens to be MY definition of family violence, or abuse, to start with!
I became a teacher professionally, and know that one must KNOW who one is teaching, and that the sarcasm doesn’t motivate for long, the put-down, the cruelty. Does it? Did this work, as a whole and entire person, would you say for, for example, Michael Jackson? He did amazing things. Was it a good life? Well, he didn’t see his kids grow up… He was on medication to survive. . .. Amazing music or no amazing music, and it was.
The damage that children suffer is highly variable, with symptoms ranging from aggressive acting out to extreme shyness and withdrawal, or from total school failure to compulsive school performance. The best way to summarize all the symptoms despite their variety is to say that they resemble what children who suffer other trauma exhibit, and could be seen as a version of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (Walker and Edwall, 1987).
As I reflect on my own childhood, and recall some diary entries I had as to my daughters’ (plural) behavior immediately post-incident, I noticed both aspects. They witnessed some horrible stuff, and when they are of age (and if interested), I will show them the entries, of how these little girls, after an incident would try to “distract” their Dad, by doing some super-feat for their age, or planning something to reconcile us. I am talking, under 5 years old, BOTH of them.
I suspect that my father realized (being without a man in the home) he had to grow up and perform REAL fast, and he sure did. He also drank heavily, tried to handle it later in his work life, a work life that was full of awards and financial rewards too, well-decorated, well-acknowledged. What’s more, he married a number of times (although only to our mother til I was out of the home), and died suddenly shortly after retirement, the circumstances of which I still (quite honestly) have significant questions about.
Both of my daughters are supremely smart and intelligent (I know this), but one was chosen as super-performer, and the other one, after a period (early on) of trying to differentiate herself, even saying as of Kindergarten, “I hate reading” (but became a very competent, and observant reader close to this time), and another time blowing things off, apparently. I tried to accommodate this through the public schools and was soundly punished for NOT having them both in the same format of school, even though I neither respected it (for either girl) nor did it work for them, or our family unit, nor did the idea for it even originate from either Dad or Mom at the time. it was one of those outside “interventions” by “helpers” whose motives are not what they claimed to be. At all.
Then when I finally put them BOTH in the same school, was truly a compromise between my ex’s position (or, his ostensible position, i should say), which might have made someone happy, they were abducted out of it and put, at the time into a strange school system in a new city, each girl in a different school. So “go figure” the rationale behind that.
And so, since this was a post about “copy editing,” about FORM not CONTENT, I will say this content is still relevant. And this is as good an introduction to why I’m blogging here as any:
Equally serious is the long term effect of domestic violence – intergenerational transmission.
I rest my case and my disclaimer.
FYI, the longwinded style, and associative, full-thinking (one hopes) that is natural to me, may be unnatural to others. If you (reader) do not understand how or why this happens, please read up on some writings regarding trauma. The constant interruption of thought is a means of control and setting off balance. I’m completely aware of it. I have had music, which really worked for me, unnaturally deleted from my life along with the children. At a gut level, and through behavioral conditioning (NOT accidental in either marriage or divorce, I assert — unless it was simply generalized narcissism, but based on things I’ve heard and read from my ex, No, it wasn’t. It was intentional to target music. I KNOW that what I got from it threatened this man. Not just the income, but the personal validation and emotional support. It’s hard to dominate someone who is having fun in music! Regularly! (and getting paid for it, and connecting with people through it). For one the existence of those relationships counters the character-smashing that is necessary to “win” in family court and necessary to “win” in abuse, which is in part about winning, anyhow. Period.
So part of what a mind does is healing by speaking, and by connecting thoughts together. I call it “hyper-focus” — although as a musician at the piano, I could most certainly practice and focus for hours (why not?), this is different. It’s like a going “under water” until the thought is complete, and a sense of rising to the surface as it approaches what MY sensibility calls completion. I suppose that’s somewhat meditative. I know that it helped me during the most traumatic months (years) leading up to the abduction, and part of this was having AN audience, not just writing “myself.” Hence, a longwinded (but hopefully informative, and sometimes at least entertaining or interesting)
B L O G. It is my ‘attuned” relationship with myself, and for now, will do. I also wish to leave a bit of a track record (if you read more, you’ll realizing stalking has been an ongoing concern, and I have not reconciled myself either to lifelong economic or emotional abuse by family members, or never seeing a daughter while courts and truth both exist! if not in the same place, at least separately. I call this “hyperfocus,” and while there are drawbacks, in some senses also, it works for me.
So, remind me to hire a copyeditor, once I myself get some income. . . . While the best of art has a SENSE of artlessness about it, THIS stuff is indeed, for the most part “thrown up” (an awkward term, I admit!) on wordpress, not for its art, and I’ll just try to pick up a little artifice along the way, but it makes me very uncomfortable.
Note. I do not know my ex’s mother too well (like our family, by “lore” more than actual face time or communications. Some, but not much since we split, which I do out of respect for her). She had a rough marriage, and one thing I noted in the few letters that got through was that the first person singular was absent. Although narrating what she did, she began with the verb, and omitted the “I.” Maybe she was another “amazing, disappearing, virtually invisible mother” like the noun I blog about sometimes; mothers have become “WOMEN” (There is an office of Violence against WOMEN, but when it comes to MEN, there is a major web section on “FATHERHOOD.” On “marriage” on “children” and on “families” (as to vocabulary). As mothers, we are possibly becoming a vestigial function in society, only kept around (for now) for the biological production of infants, for scapegoats (every religion needs a scapegoat, right?) and to give social status to some man: He is a FATHER, he has a FAMILY, and he is head of the HOUSEHOLD (religious version). If not much else in life.
SPEAKING of “FLOW” (I was, really!), along with hunting and gathering, or should I say (web) surfing, how does this name FLOW off your tongue?
“Csikszentmihalyi“
Mine either, and I found this following a craigslist ad, to which my reaction was, Is there NO area of life which is not a market niche?
And I found, probably not. I hope we have SOME private lives left within the next three decades, but I am skeptical how many of us in the middle ranges of society will be able. Anyhow Wikipedia to the rescue (if for phonetic pronunciation here):
Personal background
He received his B.A. in 1960 and his Ph.D. in 1965, both from the University of Chicago.
He is the father of MIT Media Lab associate professor Christopher Csikszentmihalyi and University of California – Berkeley[4] professor of philosophical and religious traditions ofChina and East Asia, Mark Csikszentmihalyi.
{{His son is one REALLY smart dude too, so perhaps we should listen up!
And, sit at his feet to be taught, too!**}}
[edit]Flow
Mental state in terms of challenge level and skill level. Clickable.[5]
In his seminal work, ‘Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience’, Csíkszentmihályi outlines his theory that people are most happy when they are in a state of flow— a state of concentration or complete absorption with the activity at hand and the situation. The idea of flow is identical to the feeling of being in the zone or in the groove. The flow state is an optimal state of intrinsic motivation, where the person is fully immersed in what he or she is doing. This is a feeling everyone has at times, characterized by a feeling of great absorption, engagement, fulfillment, and skill—and during which temporal concerns (time, food, ego-self, etc.) are typically ignored.[6]
{{This includes during sex, where applicable….}}
In an interview with Wired magazine, Csíkszentmihályi described flow as “being completely involved in an activity for its own sake. The ego falls away. Time flies. Every action, movement, and thought follows inevitably from the previous one, like playing jazz. Your whole being is involved, and you’re using your skills to the utmost.”[7]
To achieve a flow state, a balance must be struck between the challenge of the task and the skill of the performer. If the task is too easy or too difficult, flow cannot occur. Both skill level and challenge level must be matched and high; if skill and challenge are low and matched, then apathy results.[5]
The flow state also implies a kind of focused attention, and indeed, it has been noted that mindfulness meditation, yoga, and martial arts seem to improve a person’s capacity for flow. Among other benefits, all of these activities train and improve attention.
In short, flow could be described as a state where attention, motivation, and the situation meet, resulting in a kind of productive harmony or feedback.
Sorry to inject this (hey, not really — it’s my blog), but to a mother this might be nature (we give birth, remember?), or a musician, but to a scientist, it’s a field of expertise. These are very elementary (and true) observations!
Did I say, teacher?
QUESTION: Am I the only person here that thinks an article on “FLOW” with a Square Graphic with uniform, segmented, labeled dissections of it seems a little, well, Rigid?
Should it be called “Flow, Dissected”?
What can’t the same people that can discuss, with engaging intelligence, the difference between particle and wave theory, not figure out that trying to dissect and label humanity is going to INTERFERE with the same humanity! For one, the thumb is on the scale, and even a child in “supervised visitation” knows that SOMETHING is up, like, a performance. And perform, they are likely to. The only thing that apparently truly FLOWS in such scenarios, is cash, in the form of grants, to analyze, dissect and (another endless stream) report on it. To observe anything in some depth, one needs at LEAST two points of view, and one I recommend is “IMMERSION” (INside) and another “SPECTATOR” (outside). I do this in music. There’s theory, and then “applied” studies. Moreover, there’s some differences between rehearsal and performance, as any musician knows. And the performance IS affected, to a degree, by (a) venue (resonance of the room) and (b) resonacne is sometimes dulled by a full room of bodies. Physically, it changes the resonance for the room. Walls can be hard, and sound waves bounce off it (as I would characterize My interaction with the mediator) or they can be soft, warm, and fuzzily receptive, as too many custody evaluators are with one parent but not the other.
If we can figure this out in music, why cannot a family law system figure it out?
I believe the system was well-designed to do what it is, at this moment in fact doing, and that is interrupt lives, divert cash (FLOW) and create an artificial, and at this point, society-wide source of trauma, which then will generate and justify ever more intrusive monitoring, measuring, calculating and declaring behaviors on the part of the social scientist and utopia-mongers. And I predict that what’s left of individuality in human beings aware of their humanity, and perhaps seeking to be HEARD, erupt in whatever manner it may be. I believe that at some level of policy making, surely (I believe, surely) someone realizes what direction its heading, and is quite OK with that direction, so long as they — and their progeny and cronies — are riding the wave.
In looking at more ancient literature, the analogy of people as water, and final Armageddon, etc., (jihad, etc.) is expected and predicted. I do not believe the Bible calls it honorable, however, but it does predict this. I would say that’s possibly an accurate reading of human nature, given past and future. Ethnic cleansing is not exactly a new concept, but what I’m concerned about is the commmunal cleansing of ETHICS, not ETHNICITIES so much. Although we can see that trend, too.
(I never DO know when to quit, sometimes. . .. . )
AS to Institutions that Specialize in Uncertainty and Flow-Disruptions, I could (but won’t, here) name three signficant institutions in the U.S.A. (home of the largest per-capita incarceration rate in the W-O-R-L-D. This is after the fall of the Berlin wall, too!) who teach authority by interrupting flow. That is the primary characteristic. OK, I’ll tell you one, because I’ve experienced it:
Law Enforcement.
Here’s another:
Public School (bells, periods, whistles, lockdowns, fire drills, etc.) It’s training, folks!!
Basically, any dominator institution will use some of this. The question is, how much?
When people reach a certain level of adulthood, they should have a level of discipline to at least ONE thing (trade, profession, pasion) or another, and be able to transfer discipline in it to discipline in something else. Perhaps we should talk about the “infantilizing of America,” I don’t know. Another topic, hey?
The fact is, biochemistry is related to emotions is related to one’s sense of place in this world. We DO difffer, and resonate to different frequencies. You want total unity and uniformity? Nationwide? There IS a way to get it. . . . at a cost, a human cost, and we are I am afraid headed into either this direction, or a real protest against heading in this direction:
(Found through Google Images search on “GooseStep”, and 3 times I’ve tried to paste the link. However, I’ll still close with notes from the source of this photo, apparently a narrative from a man’s 1969 visit to the Berlin Wall. You will probably find it again:
(Entry was Aug 1 2006)
A 1969 STROLL INTO COMMUNIST EAST BERLIN
October 7, 1969. I had just finished a photo assignment in Austria and visited a friend near Frankfurt. Now I wanted to see what Berlin, isolated well behind the Iron Curtain, was like.
People from all the Communist nations, including China, were doing their thing there. Folk dancing, music, demonstrations of solidarity, and just plain admiring this brave new world of the workers. Several stands in the side streets sold sausages and beer, both of which were pretty good and quite cheap.
As the day wore on I got hungry, and waited in line at the Café Moscau, which featured Russian food. Being alone, I was paired up with what might have been a general in the Russian army, or a doorman, in any case a guy in uniform covered with gold braid and medals. I ordered Beef Stroganoff, which was delicious.
There was a changing-of-the-guard ceremony at the Neue Wache, an old Prussian guardhouse now rich in propaganda value with its eternal flame for the victims of fascism. The soldiers there did a great goosestep.
Let’s all seek a better way, eh?
Anyhow, I ain’t copyediting, I’m thinking aloud, on-line.
Have a nice day. Don’t forget the blogroll.
The difference between my on-line monologues and what I experienced in abuse, and what my kids watched growing up, and what I suspect may or may not have “driven” my ex to expose us to (hours-long manic personal talks, and I DO mean, hours at a time, and afterwards he’d be relieved, and I’d be totally drained and sometimes emotionally dysfunctional, as though his “burden” had been deposited, by direct, face to face injection, into my brain. I would lose all desire to do whatever it was I had just then been doing, typically housework, or getting ready to work, or paperwork. This is NOT what a spouse is for! However, my spouse didn’t write, and apparently this was what I was for, an “ear.” Up to a point it’s OK, beyond that point, it’s using the other person. We were beyond this point shortly after the children were born, when I truly did have other things I needed to do, and they needed from me. We had, hence, a real roller-coaster relationship, the entire household.
Oh yes — the rest of that sentence, at least as to a main verb and object:
. . . . . The difference between an on-line monologue and an (in your face lecture) is that listening is optional.
Now, as to family law venue — there are points at which fighting that battle is not really optional, or will come to any closure before either the energy is totally expended (or funds — my current situation, and still not “resolution” or closure) – – or, it will explode in some manner. Neither is acceptable.
Anyhow, I suggest you exercise the website-exit option if you got this far, and perhaps have your head examined as to why you did!
(Just kidding!)
Unsure how? Look for the closest interactive (e)X, typically lurking in a top right corner, slightly off-the screen, like a spider in a room with high ceilings. (Just kidding).
Click on it and see what happens.
Or don’t. After all, it’s OPTIONal!
(Like so-called “mediation” should be, but that’s another topic)
There are obviously downsides of not having a live audience, with gongs, or tomatoes. I miss singing! . . . . . .
(Not that performances ever ended in that manner! Sometimes people stood afterwards, but it wasn’t too throw tomatoes!)
Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
August 29, 2009 at 7:08 PM
“Wife Abuse and Custody and Visitation by the Abuser” –A Man Speaks from the Past (1989).
This voice from the past (1989 to 2009 = 20 years!) —
is pretty well drowned out by “the Duluth Model,” and the millions of $$ of grants, funds, and now even new professions springing up, all to help avoid what I’d call THIS common sense. I guess I will have to show. This will deal with the issue of Supervised Visitation: The question nowadays is how to make it safe, etc. The question of why ANY visitation with such violence, scarcely gets raised again.
Wife Abuse and Child Custody and Visitation by the Abuser
by Kendall Segel-Evans
originally published:
ENDING MEN’S VIOLENCE NEWSLETTER, Fall, 1989
I recently read the National Organization for Changing Men’s statement on child custody, and the position taken that, in general, sole custody by the previously most involved parent is preferable to joint custody. I would like to elaborate on this position for families where there has been violence between parents (i.e. woman-abuse). The following includes the main points of a deposition I was asked to provide to a lawyer for the mother in a child custody case. I do not believe this is the last or best word on the subject, {{now THAT’s a rare humility in the field!}} but I hope that it will s(t)imulate useful dialogue** about the effects on children of wife-abuse and the treatment of wife-abusers. I also wish to further discussion on the issue of how we are going to truly end men’s violence. *** Clearly, I believe that the treatment of wife-abusers should not only be held accountable to the partner victim/survivors, but also to the children, and to the next generation.
**{{WAS THAT A FREUDIAN SLIP IN THE ORIGINAL?? “simulate” for “stimulate”??}} . . .
***
I’ve noticed that the professionals are more likely to have the “social transformation” goal, while typically women leaving abuse, and specifically MOTHERS leaving abuse, have a more short-term goal, namely LEAVING abuse and providing safety and good things, including good values, safety, education and role models — for their CHILDREN. This is a significant difference, and with different goals come different means to reach that goal. Moreover, as women leaving abuse, we have a ZERO tolerance for situations that might lead to, well, death. Women have been killed around visitation centers, which is a dirty little secret. Another one is that some supervisors are themselves abusive, or “on the take” and so forth. Again, the professionals have spoken to this issue — but not changed it. (For more info see nafcj.net). Are all? No. But why even risk it?
WHY place both children and the nonabusive parent at any sort of risk whatsoever, for any reason? For one, good grief, what about PTSD? A child has witnessed abuse or been abused. Therefore, expose them to the abuser. REGULARLY, and in a performance situation. A mother has been abused or her child. Therefore, force her — and/or her children — to see their father, regularly and in front of others who will “judge.” AND they do (see “Karen Oehme”). The model lacks integrity, to my mind. No matter, it has government backing, and LOTS of it.
SO this post is a “blast from the past.” I’ve read the literature a LOT, I assure you; you don’t hear this person’s name a lot. Too much common sense. And yet he is in the marriage field, and attaches a Bibliography like anyone else:
Kendall Segel-Evans, M.A. Marriage, Family and Child Counselor 4/15/1989
He recommends not taking chances. Such types of recommendations are not the stuff publication, conferences, and promotions are made out of. No new building needs be built for this recommendation. It’s just too dang sensible.
Reminds me of Jack Straton’s similar work, a while back, here below:
1992
|
What About the Kids? Custody and Visitation Decisions in Families with a History of Violence National Training Project of the Duluth Domestic Abuse Project – Thursday, October 8, 1992, Duluth, Minnesota |
from the Journal of the Task Group on Child Custody Issues* of the National Organization for Men Against Sexism Volume 5, Number 1, Spring1993 (Fourth Edition, 2001) c/o University Studies, Portland State University, Portland, OR, 97207-0751 503-725-5844, 503-725-5977 (FAX) , straton@pdx.edu |
What is Fair for Children of Abusive Men?
by Jack C. Straton, Ph.D.
{Let’s GetHonest speaking….}} Reviewing this document years, and years after baptism by a dissolution/custody suit cold-shock immersion in to the language and lore of Family Court, resulting in a return to Food Stamps, but no return of my missing children!, but I HAVE (there’s always a silver lining) perhaps returned closer to placing my hope in things eternal more than things local! (I’m talking Jesus Christ for those who don’t catch the reference), I have a different opinion, not on its CONTENTS but on its CONTEXT, as follows, re::
I want to express my deep gratitude to Ellen Pence, Madeline Dupre, Jim Soderberg and the others from the Duluth Domestic Abuse Intervention Project for giving me this opportunity to speak with you. The State of Minnesota should be proud that, quite literally, the world looks to this program for guidance on understanding and ending domestic violence. I also want to acknowledge how much I continually learn from Barbara Hart, of the Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence.
I will first critically examine the criterion at the base of all custody laws today “What is in the best interests of the children?” I will the talk about children’s choice in these matters. Then I will examine the actual effects of wife-battering on children, and develop an alternative paradigm for custody based on those effects. From this I will examine the question, “Is it ever appropriate to ever give a batterer custody of a child?” (emphasis mine…)
{{PLEASE PARDON THIS INTERJECTION! This article indeed does that, and convincingly.
LINK: DAIP Grants rec’d 2000-2009 (scroll down to bar chart)
(hint: over $4.5 million)
LINK: Grants rec’d by DAIp Parent organization, “Minnesota Program Development, Inc.“
(hint: Over $25 million, and NOT including some of its sub-groups, which apparently get their own grants, too).
(the bottom half of logo proclaims” home of the duluth Model, Social Change to End violence Against Women”)
)
The Duluth Family Visitation Center opened in 1989. Our mission is to provide a safe place where children can build and maintain positive relationships with their parents. The Visitation Center offers support for victims of domestic violence and their children as well as supervised visitation, monitored visitation, and monitored exchange services to families affected by domestic violence.
(See the nice picture??)->_>_>_>_>
The Center provides a variety of children’s books, games and videotapes as well as beverages and snacks for children and parents to help provide a comfortable and nurturing environment where parents can work on building and strengthening their relationship with their child which so often is damaged by violence in the home.
The Center also collaborates with many other community agencies and accepts referrals from the courts and social services. {{NOw you understand the BUSINESS model…}} Currently we serve approximately 120 families and conduct over 4000 visits and exchanges per year at minimal cost to families.
And I do mean BUSINESS model:
.
The database simplifies the logistical work of coordinating a Visitation Center and reduces the time to prepare quarterly reports for funders.
Purchase the visitation center database ($350.00) by visiting our online catalog
Beyond the pure financial collateral, there is also the professional collateral (prestige) and of course feeding much, much much more personal data into databases for further” research and demonstration” projects on how to — end violence against women.
I question why so few have questioned this model. Probably because of the powers behind it, and because those who have been affected by it are often destitute and experiencing PTSD. BY THE WAY — I HAD HEARD OF THIS AND ASKED FOR IT IN MY CASE, AND WAS FLATLY DENIED because there was no “money” for it. In other words, I, the mother, could not pay for it (already on the record) and he the father (being so far arrears in child support) obviously could not. however, when the father asked for — by refusing to acknowledge the court had ordered something different — ZERO contact, it took less than a few months to give this to him, and only one year (as opposed to the years previous I had sought actively seeking help, as single mother, and while personally having to negotiate my own safety, on a near-weekly basis) to retroactively attribute custody and modify the arrears owed ME as the caretaker of our daughters, and which didn’t come to them while living here — down to insignificant and unenforceable payments. Yet our state receives grants to facilitate access by the noncustodial parent. When I became one, I could not access them, either. go figure.
JACK didn’t recommend this model, although he was apparently asked to speak here. BUT – – His voice, too, has been ignored — MOST chiefly by the Duluth “Domestic Abuse Intervention Project” itself, apparently. This paradigm, I simply didn‘t find it once in operation — ever — anywhere — experientially. Our society simply does not accept this yet. And, FYI, there is a LOT of money in this venue bent on “transformational language” and “therapeutic jurisprudence.” Doing this is considered in many circles “good,” and not surprisingly, because many of our school systems share the same premise, they are “values transformation centers” and succeeding well at this, apparently.
Nor have I found someone who accepts this No-Visitation where there’s been Violence paradigm. (And I talk to Dads, not just Moms, and I research, a LOT, on–line. I have been in circles which don‘t believe women should speak, literally, and I have lived in which men did not confront violence towards “one of their own” by even TELLING the man to stop it! Let alone, intervening themselves in any manner to stop it. Ever since I finally took it upon myself to get someone from outside these circles to indeed stop it, I have been exposed, through the family law venue (and others) to a virtual nonstop “litany” of “just get over it” as if either the lethality risk, the economic abuse, the stalkings, and the implicit threat to escalate were somehow “over” in my case. My experience, lots of it, showed the precise opposite. Any attempt at independence was countered. this got tiring for such a person, and others were found and incited to participate in communal denial, a sort of catharctic self–cleansing ritual, I suppose.
AGAIN, I myself didn’t share this paradigm initially. However, this was because I had been enduring years of this type of threat/intimidation/etc. behavior and attempting — myself — to ‘reason” with this man, after it became clear — and from the OUTSET — that saying “no” or “Stop!” was likely to result in physical assault, or worse, and my friends, there IS a “worse.” Now, I have some perspective: 10 years living with a batterer, 10 years of attempting to separate from one. My perspective has changed, after i watched the reactions of society to my assertion of my right to say NO! and ENOUGH! I gave ENOUGH! in the “let’s negotiate” process, and shouldn’t have ever entered into it or been encouraged to. These were the PRIME working years of an intelligent, responsible, and law-abiding woman and mother. Now, I would like some change to happen. i would like the truth of the situation OUT, and I am taking it (obviously) to the blogosphere, and my local Congressperson, AND up the chain, as are others. The truth of the situation is that this paradigm that Jack and Kendall discuss, was not taken seriously by their colleagues then, nor was it ever likely to be. Like him, I have immense respect for Barbara J. Hart (can anyone say “lethality risk assessment”?) But — today or tomorrow, probably — I am about to post the $$ figures of some of these “helping” groups and ask — where’s the help? Moreover, show us the books! I will show the grants, at least from the sources I have. But what I want to see is expenditures, processes, and evaluation tools. I want to see DOCUMENTED fewer homicides, suicides, infanticides, child-kidnappings, and wasted years in the family law system. And if these are not being documented, then what was all the hub-bub about?
IN this “paradigm” all “fallout” from abuse either didn‘t exist (that‘s the “fantasy world” Straton refers to, I suppose) or was exclusively my responsibility to fix, as the mother. However, when I then sought to address this in my own manner, I was again given marching orders, a drumbeat of 3-word myths, and told to get in line. I didn‘t. Consequently, two adolescent girls were removed from my custody and replaced in the care of the man they grew up witnessing threaten, impoverish, assault, abuse animals, deprive of access to transportation and ffinances that a “normal” family would not do, even when I worked at times, and be subjected to repeated lectures on how to behave – – sometimes even on a stool!.
Therefore, as seemingly re–assuring, or validating as these talks may be, that I refer to today, they are most definitely the “minority opinion” in this field. They show me I am not alone in my perspective at what‘s sensible and what‘s not, but these premises were never moved into practice.
There‘s reasons they were not, and THAT should be the topic of a “responsible citizen” male or female, parent or not, in this country. WHY they were not is a public issue, not a “domestic dispute.” The topic of this issues is not just “where are my children?” but “where are my taxes going? as well as “what kind of leaders is this next generation, if we get that far, going to consist of? children accustomed to trauma, abuse, and participating in the cycle themselves?
I suspect the answer, at this point, MIGHT be “YES” but I am not yet resigned to the fatalistic, fundamentalist “I‘m not of this world” passivity when it comes to social justice. I must speak up!
STRATON, Ph.D., Ct’d…..
In the process, I am going to talk today about the effects of male power and control over children, not about parental power and control. I know that it is popular these days to de-gender family conflict, to talk about “spouse abuse” and “family violence” rather than “wife beating” and “rape.” I know that we want a society in which men nurture children to the same extent that women do.
I know that fathers and mothers should both be capable parents. But if you ask “What about the kids?” I want to give you a serious answer. I cannot seriously entertain the myth that our society really is gender neutral, so to consider “What about the kids?” while pretending such neutrality is to engage in denial and cognitive dissonance. I cannot hope to arrive at an answer that will positively affect reality if my underlying assumptions are based on fantasy.
I would like to say more about the history of these movements (which I am still learning), but readers deserve a break:
Have a nice weekend. Again, I’d rather see a sermon than hear one any day.
While this essay is music (the voice of logic, of common sense truth) to my ears, but it’s not a tune many people like these days. Because it actually addresses the impact of role-modeling and personal responsibility upon the next generation.
There are only two places to really put the responsibility: Either on the INDIVIDUAL (which is actually empowering, it acknowledges choice), or on the “THERAPIST” or “SOCIETY AS COLLECTIVE THERAPIST.” Either/or, my friends.
Benefits of putting the responsibility on the INDIVIDUAL. :: If we are indeed EQUAl and ENDOWED with certain UNALIENABLE RIGHTS, then we are also ENDOWED with certain UNALIENABLE RESPONSIBILITIES as to how we exercise them. This leaves a LOT more government time and resources and study, etc., upon maintenance of DUE PROCESS.
It also removes the excuse for killing people, for assault, for rape, for destruction. There IS no excuse. The question comes of up of what about “war”? My answer is, how is what we are seeing now take place towards women attempting to leave abuse, with children, too, not a real war — not a “virtual” war. When there are casualties, that comprises a REAL war.
Moreover, most wars are about ideas to start with. Sometimes they are about basic human lusts couched in more palatable ideas.
SO, check the dogma it’s vitally important, and it’s vitally important also that “foreigners” — people to whom actually facing abuse, having a life on the line, having lost a child, having had to comfort an abused or traumatized child while in trauma onesself — are not to be setting policy. Moreover, those who set policy are not to do so from a particular chip they have on their shoulder, that every one should carry the burden of relieving. And this happens (You can see my chip on the shoulder” here, obviously, but I’m not recommending the undermining of due process in the courts, and re-defining criminal activity as non-criminal. THAT’s Cognitive Dissonance for sure!
(Well, I’d better back out this post fast. Feedback appreciated! My exit takes place Here: XX.
Anything below was added earlier)
This was written Pre-VAWA and Pre-National Fatherhood Inititative, which one theme of this blog has been showing what these cost, and how they attempt to cancel each other out.
Yesterday, I saw a significant DV initiative that was also receiving thousands under “promoting Responsible fatherhood” as well. Same source, different themes entirely. The fatherhood movement has positioned itself as FIRMLY anti-VAWA and in its writings, and in people responding to its writings, says to clearly. Many of them also position themselves as religious, which is true in the WORST (not best) sense of the word, as I understand it. They identify a common enemy, which is feminism, and feminISTS. The prelude to identifying an enemy is attacking it, and this means people. Typically (not always) “feminists” are, my friends, women, and this is who is often getting severely attacked for separating.
The VAWA movement, it has different characteristics, but I do not believe it started out of man-hating. It started out of hating to see beaten up women, and recognizing this has a true social cost.
Both these movements have “morphed” and are now in the higher stratospheres (translation: best-funded organizations) collaborating. In these collaborations they share many things — primarily the design and structure of FAILING TO INCLUDE THOSE MOST DRASTICALLY AFFECTED IN THE COLLABORATIVE PROCESS, and “SALVATION AS A MARKET NICHE.” (in essence). What else is (not) new in the world!
Perhaps THIS ESSAY, THEN (below) can be a reference point from how far off base is society (specifically, government and nonprofits addressing: Violence Against Women, Responsible Fatherhood, and Healthy Marriages — and failing abysmally in terms of the human toll — on all counts, across the nation. (And, world). Perhaps (though I doubt it) some common sense will “redeem” us from all that debt, with so little dent in the problems the debt is incurred to address….Policies get MORE and more pervasive, self-replicating and intrusive, and still we have things like an 11 year old abducted from a bus stop, held captive in a back yard by a (incidentally, MARRIED couple) – – for 18 years — and being used as a personal sex slave and baby-making machine. In a nice suburb, eh? So much for suburbia and “family-oriented” safe communities.

Officer Ally Jacobs sat in on a meeting with Mr Garrido and his daughters after he requested permission to distribute leaflets on the Berkeley campus of the University of California.
But her suspicions were aroused by the strange behaviour of the two girls – and led to the eventual release of their mother, Jaycee Lee Dugard, after nearly two decades of captivity.
She said Mr Garrido arrived with the girls, aged 11 and 15, who stared at their father “like God” during the meeting. “They had this weird look in their eyes, like brainwashed zombies,” she said.
She spoke out as police said that Mr Garrido’s home has been searched for evidence of a link to the unsolved murders of several prostitutes in the early 1990s, and as Garrido, 58, and his wife, Nancy, 54, denied charges of kidnapping, rape and false imprisonment in connection with Miss Dugard’s disappearance at their first court appearance.
When Officer Jacobs asked the younger girl about a bruise near her eye, the 11-year-old said it was an inoperable birth defect.
(I NOTE: THIS WAS A FEMALE POLICE OFFICER, AND HER JOB ENTAILS NOTICING THINGS THAT DEAL WITH LIFE AND DEATH, POTENTIALLY. HER JOB ENTAILS NOTICING “ANOMALIES.” THERE WAS FACT-CHECKING IN THIS CASE, AND THE FACTS CHECKED RESULTED IN FREEDOM AND DELIVERANCE, THOUGH AFTER 18 YEARS, FOR 3 WOMEN, JAYCEE’S MOTHER, JAYCEE’S STEPFATHER, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, FOR HER — AND HER CHILDREN.
A NICE, MARRIED COUPLE . . . . HAD MR. GARRIDO HAD THE SAME CRIMINAL BACKGROUND, AND ACTUALLY BEEN JAYCEE’S FATHER, IN MY EXPERIENCE, HIS KIDNAPPING WOULD HAVE BEEN OVERLOOKED, AND HIS EX-WIFE SEEKING TO SEE HER DAUGHTER BEEN TOLD (as I was) TO JUST GET ALONG WITH IT, OR GIVE IT UP, NO CONTACT WITH YOUR DAUGHTER BECAUSE YOU JUST CAN’T GET ALONG WITH THIS PARENT. CASE IN POINT: WE WERE GIVEN A COURT ORDER THAT EXPOSED US TO CONTINUAL ACCESS AND ABUSE BY A MAN THAT MY DAUGHTERS HAD WITNESSED ASSAULT THEIR MOTHER. EVENTUALLY, A DRASTIC (and criminal) EVENT HAPPENED on an overnight.
TODAYS’ POSTED ARTICLE, 20 YEARS OLD, QUESTIONS THE POLICY ~ ~ REALLY, THE DOGMA ~ ~ THAT WOULD EVER, EVEN ONCE! ~ ~ALLOW SUCH THINGS TO TAKE PLACE. U.S.A. . . . . .
OR – – – OR – – – – THINGS LIKE THIS ONE, A MISSING FOSTER CHILD TURNED INTO A HOMICIDE VISITATION. AGAIN, HAPPENED IN A VERY YUPPIE NEIGHBORHOOD, ALSO NEAR BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA.
HASSANI CAMPBELL (see my recent post on ‘AMBER ALERTS’ for more photos)

Foster Parents Arrested Over Missing Boy
AP
OAKLAND, Calif. (Aug. 28) – The foster parents who held vigils pleading for the safe return of a missing 5-year-old boy with cerebral palsy have been arrested on suspicion of murder, Oakland police said Friday.
Louis Ross and Jennifer Campbell, who is the boy’s aunt, were being questioned by investigators in the case of Hasanni Campbell, who disappeared on Aug. 10 after Ross said he briefly left the boy outside his car in the parking lot of an upscale Oakland neighborhood shoe store where Campbell works.
REGARDING “THERAPY” FOR BATTERERS:
I think Lundy Bancroft says it well — there are certain indicators that one is wasting one’s time. I’ve read them, and you can too, HERE: I am not quoting Mr. Bancroft because he’s an expert, but because i already experienced what he gave voice to. I had no idea who the author was in picking up the book.

While I am thankful for Mr. Bancroft’s insight and observations (and have featured it elsewhere on this blog), I think that the failure to look OUTSIDE the family court system and INTO the funding behind it, which consists of a powerful government grants system, underwritten in some cases by conflicting actual laws (I refer to “supervised visitation” vs. “Access visitation” premises, which are BOTH funded — in a huge way — and which DIRECTLY oppose each other in fundamental premises, creating chaos — not just “disorder” — but literal “CHAOS” in the courts. Why? Because what’s fought over is power, control, and money. I do not, therefore, agree that training to eradicate deeply held prejudices or myths — when applied to JUDICIAL professionals (court-related) any more than when applied to batterers — is a critical solution. I believe that we should pull the plug on the profit system, which it clearly (my research shows) is. That said, in about 2003, had his not book been there (and this above book) for a point of reference WRITTEN BY A MAN for me emotionally, as I exited another life-changing and mind-numbing session with a mediator, I might be a different woman today.
Women, and mothers, do indeed have instincts. I believe these are God-given, and they are protection-related. Moreover, as a DV survivor, and beyond that, professionally a teacher and musician, it has been my job to pay attention to group dynamics in relationship to a standard! The accuracy of my instincts, and speaking up about them, has been ignored in the courtroom. This told me something about family courts, when I accurately predicted a child-snatch, and was shouted down in advance AND afterwards about the same matter.
Two Female Officers (above) accurately noticed, reported — and because they were cops, apparently, and because this was NOT a family law venue, they were not a litigating parent — they were HEARD and lives were saved.
In the Jaycee Dugard case (above), I heard on TV that a woman (neighbor) HAD called 911, saying this man was psychotic, she was very disturbed. Was her call not heard because she was female? I watched Sheriff Rupf apologize on TV that their county law enforcement had “missed it” in this case.
Our current administration has a lot of TALK, but very little RESPECT for mothers in general. Our pro-active protective and active involvement in our children’s lives is viewed with suspicion after separating from their father in particular after marriage. . . . The fact is, I believe, our involvement is a perceived threat to a child-care-based, employee-driven, dependent-family-substrate economy. (which is not today’s topic).
These instincts are not in operation all the time, and along with Phyllis Chesler (Dr.), I acknowledge fully “Woman’s Inhumanity to Woman” exists, and is horrific. And some men (I have known them) notice more than some women. This is also called “CARING.” Such men are also sometimes castigated as “feminine” by fellow-men, and deal with this in whatever manner they choose to.
However, I take a look at who are some of the most vehement women I personally have had to deal with (not including certain judges, whose behavior cannot be logically accounted for somewhere other than financial reward, which I WILL be finding one of these days, and I am not the only person who has had this happen, same judges), I can see where either their childhood was severely messed up, OR, they never got to have children themselves. Some key component of the logic system (the part that doesn’t acknowledge court orders!) is out of commission, and when confronted on this, reacts in a retaliatory manner as if the threat were personal, when the statement was, I want court orders respected! I have already demonstrated the ability to respect court orders I don’t agree with, for years, but the double standard has been devastating to our family.
The other category which comes into play is “second wife” syndrome. While there are I’m sure (and I’d love to be one, some day!) healthy second wife scenarios, all too often a batterer will go specifically SEEK a woman in order to extract the children from the first wife, when he couldn’t otherwise. That 2nd woman lends a seeming credibility, and yet, sometimes these women can be more vicious than the men they married to start with. An abusive man is not going to pick a second woman who is likely to confront him on his abuse!!
WELL, this post is now over-worked, but I wanted to include the Jaycee and Hassani case above, to make a few points. It also has helped me get past another few hours in a day in which, I have no visual contact with either daughter, as one of them is entering college and the other one is, at this point, alienated, a thing I never inflicted upon her father while they lived here. They have HAD to make some sense of their existing world. Their existing world included a sudden, and COMPLETE elimination from their mother’s input and involvement, without a chance to say goodbye. They were involved in keeping secrets (and induced to) before the event, for over a year, on pretenses of the adults around them. The facts surrounding this event are still not out, and I happen to believe that my absent daughters are not yet aware of what was said on paper about them. I know that they are not exposed to the penalties my family has exacted upon me (subsequent) for continuing to speak up.
This is a HOW -TO for the intergenerational transmission of trauma and abuse. IF the goal is to do this, I am looking at the HOW of it. All that REALLY needs to be sacrificed, in the bottom line analysis, to stop it, is a LOT of pride in high places, and what I call dogma and others call social science, policy, or probability-driven practices (it’s called “evidence” but the actual “evidences” considered are often summaries of “probability.”)
AS TO THE 1989 ARTICLE (BELOW):
I’m not in agreement with his theme that men can be taught not to abuse. I think men mostly respond to what they’re taught in this society — authority, and taking control. Women are taught to negotiate and submit, overall (I didn’t realize HOW much til confronting others after leaving my own violent marriage, and then, in shock, realizing it was expected I should take orders. I said no, and took this to the institutions available (first, the courts) to set boundaries and standards. Then I was in for even a ruder awakening to the state of affairs.
So just consider the fall-out, the social fall out from these things, the canaries in the coal mine. it’s also a good part of the present NATIONAL economic distress and contributing to it, do not kid yourself! Asking Big Brother to coach, teach, punish, reward, analyze, and rationalize the common ethical issues of life — BIG, mistake. This is called farming out thinking to others. In the process, we are paying people to also form our own ethics, when these were formed and stated long ago in the US Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights, PLUS the fact that these stemmed from a refusal to become the colony of a distant king.
Figure it out — the distance these days may not be so geographic as in worlds apart in perspectives. The colonization part still seems to apply. Children are the MOST attractive and fertile field for TOO many people, and they are hurt in this unnatural process, a constant interruption to their lives. I saw this happen to my own, there was a point in time (a certain season, when others saw the personal gain in our divorce and and custody issue) that –because of a badly written visitation schedule — I watched my daughter who, prior to this, had been able to adjust to separation with regular visitation, and retain their personal integrity — they became performers. It was clear that they were collateral in the fight, and I believe knew this too. They talked about it, too. It was unfair to them, and to me as their mother.
SOURCE —
http://members.shaw.ca/pdg/wife_abuse_child_custody_visitation.html
Note: “Last updated Nov. 2008”
(More of my comments below, for once!)
Stop Violence Against Women
A project by The Advocates for Human RightsCopyright 2003 Minnesota Advocates for Human Rights.
Permission is granted to use this material for non-commercial purposes. Please use proper attribution.
(THESE documents do not appear to have stopped violence against women. I used to read and read from this International Source, but no matter — the people most directly involved with our lives chose NOT to read, or accept, some of these writings. So what good have they done, other than to increase the frustration level, the awareness of the discrepancy between reasonable, and unreasonable? Sometimes, I wonder.
<><><><><>
(Best read in the original HTML, but here:
Wife Abuse and Child Custody and Visitation by the Abuser,
Kendall Segel-Evans, 1989.
Wife Abuse and Child Custody and Visitation by the Abuser
by Kendall Segel-Evans
originally published:
ENDING MEN’S VIOLENCE NEWSLETTER, Fall, 1989
{{Let’s Get Honest has decided to interrupt the article more than to put :}}
MAIN POINTs?:____________________ after each paragraph, in hopes that a thoughtful reader will think about what was just said.
Again, one of the greatest motivations for THINKING about various policies, doctrines, and dogmas, is if something valuable is at stake in the mix. Plus, if one has developed the habit of THINKING with this in mind, throughout — as if not just “someone’s” life or livelihood, but as if “your own” life, or your child’s, were at stake in the matter. THAT is responsible government hood (along with respecting civil rights and due process). COLLECTIVELY, what we all have at stake is to acknowledge that what we may think is “common” sense is nothing of the sort, and that the view gets foggier the less time one spends at street level — and I mean on a regular basis. Dwelling in courtrooms only is NOT “street level” in the sense of, what happens after the court order is written?)
I recently read the National Organization for Changing Men’s statement on child custody, and the position taken that, in general, sole custody by the previously most involved parent is preferable to joint custody. I would like to elaborate on this position for families where there has been violence between parents (i.e. woman-abuse). The following includes the main points of a deposition I was asked to provide to a lawyer for the mother in a child custody case. I do not believe this is the last or best word on the subject, but I hope that it will simulate useful dialogue about the effects on children of wife-abuse and the treatment of wife-abusers. I also wish to further discussion on the issue of how we are going to truly end men’s violence. Clearly, I believe that the treatment of wife-abusers should not only be held accountable to the partner victim/survivors, but also to the children, and to the next generation.
MAIN POINTs?:____________________
I would like to mention that I will speak of husbands and fathers abusing wives and mothers, because that is the most common situation by far, not because the reverse never happens. It also seems to be true that when there is wife to husband violence it is usually in self-defense and usually does not have the same dynamics or effects as wife abuse. I will use the words violence and abuse somewhat interchangeably, because, in my opinion, domestic violence is not just about physical violence. Domestic violence is a pattern of physical, sexual, economic, social and emotional violence, coercion, manipulation and mistreatment or abuse. Physical violence and the threat of such violence is only the part of the pattern that is most visible and makes the other parts of the pattern difficult to defend against. Once violence is used, its threat is never forgotten. Even when the violence is stopped by threat of legal action or by physical separation, the coercion, manipulation and abusiveness continue (Walker and Edwall, 1987).
MAIN POINTs?:____________________
Accompanying this pattern of behaviors are common styles of coping or personality characteristics – such as the tendency to blame others for ones problems and impulsiveness – that most batterers share. Almost every man I have worked with has a tendency to see his partner (or his children) as responsible for his pain when he is upset. This leads to seeing his partner (or his children) as an enemy who must be defeated before he can feel better. This is destructive to emotional health even when it does not lead to overt violence.
MAIN POINTs?:____________________
In my opinion, it would be better, in most cases, for the children of homes where there has been domestic violence not to be in the custody of the abusive parent at all. In many cases it is even advisable that visitation be limited to controlled situations, such as under a therapist’s supervision during a therapy session, unless the batterer has been in batterer’s treatment and demonstrated that he has changed significantly in specific ways. “Merely” observing ones father abuse ones mother is in itself damaging to children. My clinical experience is consistent with the research literature which shows that children who witness their father beat their mother exhibit significantly greater psychological and psychosomatic problems than children from homes without violence (Roy, 1988). Witnessing abuse is more damaging in many ways than actually being abused, and having both happen is very damaging (Goodman and Rosenberg, 1987). Studies show that a high percentage (as high as 55%) of fathers who abuse their wives also abuse their children (Walker and Edwall, 1987). In my experience, if one includes emotional abuses such as being hypercritical, yelling and being cruelly sarcastic, the percentage is much higher. The damage that children suffer is highly variable, with symptoms ranging from aggressive acting out to extreme shyness and withdrawal, or from total school failure to compulsive school performance. The best way to summarize all the symptoms despite their variety is to say that they resemble what children who suffer other trauma exhibit, and could be seen as a version of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (Walker and Edwall, 1987).
MAIN POINTs?:____________________
Equally serious is the long term effect of domestic violence – intergenerational transmission. Children who observe their mothers being beaten are much more likely to be violent to a partner themselves as adults. In one study, men who observed violence towards their mother were three times more likely to be abusive than men who had not observed such violence (Strauss et al., 1980). The more serious the abuse observed, the more likely the men were to repeat it. Being abused also makes children likely to grow up to be violent, and having both happen increases the probability even more.
MAIN POINTs?:____________________
How children learn to repeat the abuse they observe and experience includes many factors. One of the more important is modeling. When they grow up, children act like their parents did, consciously or not, willingly or not. Several of the boys I have worked with have been terribly conflicted about being like their father, of whom they were afraid and ashamed. But they clearly carried parts of their father’s behavior patterns and attitudes with them. Other boys from violent homes idealized their father, and they were more likely than the others to beat their wives when they grew up (Caesar, 1988). Several of the men I have worked with in group have lamented that they told themselves that they would not beat their wives the way their mother was beaten when they were children. But when they became adults, they found themselves doing the same things their father did.
MAIN POINTs?:____________________
One reason for this is that even if the physical abuse stops, if the children still have contact with the batterer, they are influenced by his coping styles and personality problems. As Lenore Walker observes (Walker and Edwall, 1987, p. 138), “There is also reason for concern about children’s cognitive and emotional development when raised by a batterer who has a paranoid-like pattern of projecting his own inadequacy and lack of impulse-control onto others.” Dr. Pagelow agrees, “It may become desirable to avoid prolonged contact between violent fathers and their sons until the men assume control over their own behavior and the examples of ‘manhood’ they are showing to the boys who love them, (Pagelow, 1984, p. 256). If the abusive man has not sought out domestic violence specific treatment for his problem, there is no reason to believe that the underlying pattern of personality and attitudes that supported the abuse in the past have changed. There is every reason to believe it will impact his children.
MAIN POINTs?:____________________
Additionally, in a society where the majority of wife-beatings do not lead to police reports, much less to filings or convictions, it is easy for children to perceive that abusiveness has no negative consequences. (One study, by Dobash and Dobash, found that 98% of violent incidents between spouses were not reported to the police [reported in Pagelow, 1984, p. 437]). Some children, seeing who has the power and guessing what could happen to them if they opposed the power, will side with the abuser in custody situations. Often, children will deny that the abuse ever happened. Unfortunately, the children who side with the abuser, or deny the abuse, are the most likely to be abusive themselves as adults. It is very important that family court not support this by treating a wife-beating father as if he were just as likely to be a good parent as the woman he beat. As Gelles and Strauss point out in their book Intimate Violence (1988), people are violent in part because they believe they can get away with it. Public consequences are important for preventing the intergenerational transmission of violence. Boys, particularly, need to to see that their father’s abusiveness leads to negative, not positive results.
MAIN POINTs?:____________________
Lastly, I would like to point out that joint legal custody is likely to be damaging to children when there has been spousal violence. My experience with my clients is definitely consistent with the research results reported by Judith Wallerstein to the American Orthopsychiatric Association Convention in 1988. The data clearly show that joint custody is significantly inferior to sole custody with one parent when there is parental conflict after the divorce, in terms of the children’s emotional adjustment as well as the mother’s safety. Most batterers continue their abusiveness after the marriage, into the divorced parent relationship, in the form of control, manipulation and harassment over support payments, visitation times, and parenting styles. The children are always aware of these tensions and battles, and sometimes blame the mother for not just giving in and keeping the peace – or for being too submissive. The batterer often puts the children right in the middle, taking advantage of his belief that she will give in to avoid hurting the children. The damage to the children in this kind of situation is worse because it is ongoing, and never is allowed to be resolved or have time to heal.
MAIN POINTs?:____________________
Because I work with batterers, I am sympathetic to the distress they feel at being separated from their children for long periods of time. However, the men who truly cared about their children for the children’s sake, and not for what the children do for their father’s ego, have been willing to do the therapeutic work necessary to change. They have been willing to accept full responsibility for their violent behavior, and however reluctantly, have accepted whatever restrictions on child visitation existed for safety reasons. They have been willing to be in therapy to deal with “their problem.” They have also recognized that they were abused as children themselves, or witnessed their mother being abused, or both, and are willing to support interrupting the intergenerational transmission of violence.
MAIN POINTs?:____________________
Kendall Segel-Evans, M.A. Marriage, Family and Child Counselor 4/15/1989
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Caesar, P. Lynn., “Exposure to Violence in the Families of Origin
Among Wife Abusers and Maritally Violent Men.” Violence and Victims , Vol. 3, No. 1, Spring, 1988.
Davis, Liane V., and Carlson, Bonnie E., “Observation of Spouse Abuse
– What Happens to the Children?” Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Vol. 2, No. 3, September 1987, pp. 278-291, Sage Publications, 1987.
Dutton, Donald., The Domestic Assault of Women, Allyn and Bacon, 1988.
Gelles, Richard J. and Strauss, Murray A., Intimate Violence, Simon and Schuster, 1988.
Goodman, Gail S., and Rosenberg, Mindy, S., “The Child Witness to Family Violence:
Clinical and Legal Considerations. Ch. 7, pp. 47ff. in: Sonkin, Daniel. Ph.d., Domestic Violence on Trial, Springer, 1987.
Pagelow, Mildred Daley, Family Violence, Praeger Publications, 1984.
Roy, Maria., Children in the Crossfire, Health Communications, Inc. 1988.
Roy, Maria., The Abusive Partner, Van Nostrand, 1982.
Sonkin, Daniel. Phd., Domestic Violence on Trial, Springer, 1987.
Strauss, Murray A., et. al., Behind Closed Doors, Anchor Books, 1980.
Walker, Lenore E.A., and Edwall, Glenace E.
“Domestic Violence and Determination of Visitation and Custody in Divorce.”
Ch. 8, pp. 127ff. Sonkin, Daniel. Phd. Domestic Violence on Trial, Springer, 1987.
Wallerstein, Judith., Report to the American Orthopsychiatric Association Convention, 1988.
Some of the above professionals listed here, from what I understand, have either changed their tune, or found more profit in conferences funded by the shared-custody, father’s-rights, premises that women are equally as violent and dangerous as men in marriage. Or, that what is said above, here, about role modeling and responsibility to the NEXT generation, doesn’t apply. I have seen them (I think even Dutton was seen in my last post, at such a conference.). Nevertheless, read what he wrote!
And I can show you, in approximately $millions$$ (as I have been at times in news headlines) the cost of these premises, in particular to the next generation. But what kind of generation IS it that can’t see right/versus wrong, principles of values as defined by what is and is NOT criminal behavior, when they see an age gap. How does gender pre-empt behavior, or youth pre-empt age? Why must women be held to a higher standard of accountability as parents then men, and men be paid — by the U.S. Government through the states through the courts, prisons, child support systems, mediation, supervised visitation, parenting education classes — and AFTER many times a K-12 (or almost 12th in some cases) educational system that itself is a major public expenditure. . . . Moreover, WHY should programs supposedly aimed at low-income people (as if such people had fewer human rights, common sense, or were less entitled to due process and informed consent about what’s happening! than others) are being utilized by sometimes some very well to do individuals in the divorce arena. For example, google the Alanna Krause case. This does not make “sense” to me.
<><><>
Speaking personally, the exchanges where were the problems occurred in our case. I asked (for YEARS) for help with this, and got none. Then finally on an overnight, I stopped seeing my daughters again.
I think that had COMMON SENSE PREVAILED long ago, our own family would be much more prosperous, and I doubt life with me would’ve been so stressful for the girls, after all, each weekend was likely to become a scene, or not come a scene. I could scarcely relax much around that. Add into the mix child support issues, and we have a decade of devastation, at least from my point of view.
And WHY? To support some new theories and professions? How about the professions Moms were in beforehand? (Many of us were, FYI).
To support: marriage and family therapists, mediators, custody evaluators, trauma specialists?
When a society either refuses to deal with — OR cannot agree on the source and causes of the ongoing sources of trauma, SOMEONE will have to pay the cost of a traumatized populations, just as any war-torn country, or AIDS-ravaged country, there is collateral damages to go with the death, shock, poverty and collapse of infrastructure. In the United States, this plays out entirely differently, of course, because we still have a significant infrastructure, or at least many of the population believe we do, and those not so badly hurt by it as others wish to, apparently, maintain the myths that it’s sustaining something valid.
And yes, I repeat, those are myths.
Where is the real moral, let alone economic, validity in paying multiple professionals to deal with one recalcitrant, overentitled, or person unwilling to seek help with his REAL problems, rather than to alleviate the symptoms of his REAL problems, such as being separated from his children. I had to face this in marriage, and now with family of origin, and again in the family law system? I find a fundamental flaw, and the truth of the matter, the difference is in worldview of (1) humanity and (2) whether or not law applies to all, or only to some. I.e., the “double-standard” mentality.
And that typically falls on the gender divide. Other times, it falls on the Economic Divide. While it’s common for rich to blame poor for being poor in a matter that an abuser blames his victim, there is wiggle room in both viewpoints, and the institutions we live in and deal with ARE not formed, historically, by poor people. They aren’t. Rather, they tend to impoverish. The familyy law system is GOING to do this. It is going to move wealth around, and afterwards, SOMEONE is going to be impoverished under this theme that it’s not an adversarial system, its’ “really” all about the children.
For child-molesters, this may be true. For those who see $$ when they see custody to one parent or the other, in a sense it might be.
But it’s NOT about the children’s welfare, not like this.
If the individual is unwilling to separate his behavior from himself as a person, after being offered multiple opportunities to do so, and go through equivalent shock of personal changes, as did his victim(s) and bystanders affected, then THAT is the issue.
MOREOVER, if the family system surrounding this individual is ALSO unwilling or unable to confront own criminal behavior, life-threatening and life-changing behavior, in one of its own, what’s that family FOR? that is precisely the family that should be dismantled, yet a system says, no it shouldn’t. (Theoretically, although I know plenty of mothers who can’t see their children under this theory. When the pedal hits the metal, that’s how it plays out, too often).
Voices from the even further past, still valid today:
Too bad we’re more religious than actually a truly God-conscious society — because of the simplicity and beauty with which truths are stated:
- “Even a child is known by his doings, whether they be good or whether they be bad.”
- “Ye shall know them by their fruits.”
As to who to socialize with, who to take on as business partner or close friends:
- “Evil communications (this just means “associations”) corrupt good manner (ethos).”
- The book of “Proverbs” (31 in all) was directed to young people, and talks about not associating with an angry man or a furious man “lest you learn his ways.” Family law says, if it’s supervised, it’s OK, and a child must, because it’s his father. Today’s essay talks about that…. Proverbs talks about not meddling with them that are given to sudden change. That’s common sense! Sudden change could be backstabbing, betrayal, turning on you. That habit, done ONCE, is cause to separate if not confronted, admitted, and changed. FAST. We have a RIGHT to be once burnt, twice shy. . . . . . Yet this family law system attracts such characters, accepting hearsay as evidence when it’s not, suppressing evidence when it’s found too often; it keeps the litigation going, and exposing parents and children to a series of sudden shocks, disrupting their entire lives and livelihoods, sometimes everything. We should not have to do this. And Proverbs ALSO talks about not associating with fools: “He that walketh with wise men shall be wise, but a companion of fools shall be ashamed.”
- When our children are forced to break these simplicities, for a different ideology, this is in effect using parents, particularly mothers, to produce children for the state. That’s not what we went through nine months for, or labor! No woman goes through this in order to raise a fool, a criminal, or have her kid hurt and taught values that will lead that child to sometimes a lifetime of it. Or to have no coherent set of values but personal survival!
(Note on quoting Bible verses here: I quote them as what’s in my thinking, others may (if they wish) look some of them up on-line at “http://bible.cc” (KJV) or elsewhere. My quotes may not be verbatim.)
What mother would WANT a son or daughter to join a gang of criminals? Yet they do, or sometimes they die for NOT being in a gang. It’s not only the risks, but the values systems.
What about a government gang? What about a system that robs parents of years of productive work based on a theme that someone is somehow to be deciphered psychologically, apart from his or her behaviors? What about a system that would bring ongoing conflict onto growing children — and do so for financial and personal profit — based on the belief that freedom of association does NOT belong to (typically) their mother?
It’s nice to have a lot of professions spring up on how to stop violence against women, I suppose, BUT how about the professions Moms were in beforehand? (Many of us were, FYI). The professionals I most needed in the early 2000 would’ve been a criminal (not family) defense attorney. Then again, where was the funding going to come from?
Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
August 29, 2009 at 11:46 AM
Posted in After She Speaks Up - Reporting Domestic Violence and/or Suicide Threats, Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Context of Custody Switch, Designer Families, Domestic Violence vs Family Law, History of Family Court, in Studies, My Takes, and Favorite Takes, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids, public education, Split Personality Court Orders, Vocabulary Lessons
Tagged with Accountability, Batterer's Treatment, domestic violence, Duluth model, DV, Govt Fundamentalism, Intergenerational Transmission of DV, Men on Violence Against Women, Modeling, NOMAS, religion vs humanism, social commentary, Social Issues from Religious Viewpoints, Supervised Visitation, trauma, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work..
Who’s actually TALKS with the REAL stakeholders when it comes to Stalking, Domestic Violence (not “abuse”), and Child Abuse??
I have a question, after finding an unusually honest commentary on how the model code for stalking laws was developed. I’ve spent some years, in the process of seeking help, becoming acquainted with the standards for what makes sense, according to LOTS of organizations. I then tried to bring this common sense into actual practice in our own case after it hit the family law venue.
Yeah, right..
I have a question. As usual, thinking aloud (and posting as I go), the introduction gets longer and the original content that inspired the post, lower and lower. Presently, scroll down to just below all the graphics (logos) and there’s the question, and in primarily BLUE content, the quote that started today’s post.
Eventually, over the years, I got to the point of connecting more and more dots, including why would it take this amount of diligent searching by a woman with two college degrees and highly motivated to get some answers, to come to the inclusion that the tipping point is where the intent to publish hits the point to put it into practice. This is a fulcrum.
Eventually I stopped just reading only content, and started paying more attention to in which publication things were published (most of which I couldn’t afford to subscribe to). THEN I started connecting which nonprofit (or, some of these are almost exclusively the project of some government grants, and say so right on the websites) with which publication, which which professionals. This is what would in interpersonal interactions be called “body language.” Only, without warm bodies and live voices and actual interaction face to face, the next best substitute, especially for those without a travel fund, is sometimes a little background check. On-line. Free.
What I post here today was written a while back by a professional now involved in addressing some family court issues, and who I hope to meet someday soon. We appear to have been circling around geographically within a few miles of each other, but consistently in different venues. In other words, she has worked for and at organizations I’ve sought help from and whose halls I’ve sat in as a “client.”
It’s probably time to make a phone call. Meanwhile, today’s a difficult time for me, and I can’t quite say why without revealing which case. Please bare with some of the over-writing here, and understand why today (and I acknowledge, yesterday), sarcasm is pretty high. Fact is, I miss my daughters, and it’s the beginning of a school year. Instead, I get the back hand and the ugly side (or no side at all) of the parent and other adults in control of their lives. I can and have read law, and after looking, still don’t see that I’ve committed a crime in these matters, and I most certainly HAVE seen and identified several ones committed since the case switched from civil to family law, which I to this day believe is where batterers go to hide, and keep up the same pattern of behavior, only with more validation.
Oops, there I go again.
ANYHOW, as to the conferences and subscriptions, I have a suggestion: Instead of a grant to explicate the context of domestic violence in custody decisions (apparently a recent one) and the “Domestic Violence Conference of the Decade,” whose speakers and sponsoring organizations I did take a pretty good (on-line) look at — and got the general picture for sure — and ANOTHER one I just heard of today:
(boy, the logos, and PR, and branding, is getting more and more professional!):
(SEE: http://dvinstitute.org), which it appears just happened in Detroit. . ..

Here’s another one about to happen in San Diego:
http://dvinstitute.org/announces/files/Partial%20Brochure-5-18.pdf
The logo makes me think I’m back in grade school again (check it out — I couldn’t click & drag).
It has a wooden post with 3 pointers, “Future, Present, Past” all askew on a sky background.
- “FUTURE” is pointing right (the only one pointing right) and UP (ditto).
- Present is horizontal and point left, indicating a change of direction. From WHAT?
- Past is pointing left and down. Talk about not very subtle.
I could suggest some more detailed logos. Perhaps the length of the line I stood in yesterday for $15.00 coupon to go get food, which allowed me to get some nonfoods, which Food Stamps program, onto which I’ve been forced back because of former failed systems, most of which interfered with My system called, working! and complying with court orders. Because we might also have a problem with drugs, alcohol or tobacco, or who knows, perhaps just for simplicity, and of course for the safety of those distributing (i.e., no cash), we could only go to ONE store (a few miles away, which is great for those without cars, with children, and poor enough to need help with food). I figure out the expense to time ratio of this, and between wait, and buses, it was approximately $4.00/food benefit per hour, four hours expended in getting coupon and food. Not including getting home with it. A far cry from a conference.
This line contained live people with real stories, and mostly people of color, different colors, sizes, and manners; most of them also, women, many with children, and each with a story, and their own method of dealing with the long wait. It was detailed and usually cheerful, this waiting is routine. I didn’t see anyone I recognized although I’d been there many times before.
Perhaps I should show some children crying, with a forensic child psychologist, or CPS worker. Perhaps I should show a woman crying. Perhaps I should show General Assistance being cut (as it is) to make way for some of the grants I’ve been blogging on, including yesterday.
If economic distress causes violence (I don’t believe it does) than perhaps this is partly why. But an inane signpost over these words? – –
A New Direction for a Safer Tomorrow: National Conference on Supervised Visitation and Safe Exchange
The National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges and the Office on Violence Against
Women are proud to sponsor the first National Conference on Supervised Visitation and Safe
Exchange. This conference will inform professionals (WILL INFORM WHOM?? WHOM????)
about how to provide supervised visitation and safe exchange services that account for (HOW ABOUT PREVENT??) domestic violence.
THink about this: if there is a need for supervised visitation and safe exchange, that means domestic violence is already there.
Pare
nts who don’t threaten to abduct, or hurt a Mom without supervision, or do this (and many do), wouldn’t need this.
National experts will provide education on safety for adult victims and children; services for diverse populations; community
collaboration; and advocacy, in the context of domestic violence and supervised visitation and
safe exchange. The conference will highlight effective practice and programs, offer tips and
tools, provide an opportunity for networking, and inspire and invigorate participants.
Expert Faculty . . .
(I dare site visitors here to look up each and every expert and determine where they are coming from, and who pays their organization’s bills.. . . . . . )
Would you like to see a similar brochure? OK, here. I found it (this search) at
http://parentalalienationcanada.blogspot.com/2009/02/domestic-violence-conference-of-decade.html
|
Please forward to colleagues and friends
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CONFERENCE OF THE DECADE!From Ideology to Inclusion 2009:New Directions in Domestic Violence Research and Intervention
Sponsored by: TO LEARN MORE OR SIGN UP, GO TO:
WWW.CAFCUSA.ORG Domestic Violence Training DVDs Now Available!
See the founders, the pioneers, and today’s most respected experts together at the one-of-a-kind, historic conference, “From Ideology to Inclusion:.”Evidence-Based Policy and Intervention in Domestic Violence The conference was held February 15-16, 2008, in Sacramento, California.
Mail or fax in your order today! |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DID I forget, in addition to any conference fees, there’s (like any good market niche) the collateral sales market too. Incidentally, downloading information is one of the lowest overhead, most profitable fields of direct selling around, once it’s in place. It’s a GREAT business model.
Is that enough Ph.D.’s? Surely I should just their judgments about my danger level, experience of domestic violence, and whether my kids are or are not at risk of — shall we say — parental abduction — better than my own. After all, look at the degrees!
I wonder whether it has occurred to any of these people that some women leaving abuse might prefer going for not just “job training” but more degrees themselves, rather than defending from the latest round of accusations through this system, or for that matter, the latests fads sweeping through it. . ..
Speaking for myself, I already had the degrees, I just wanted “permission to practice” what I was already trained in and couldn’t, formerly, because of the domestic violence situation.
Remind me to get another Piled Higher Deeper (then I won’t call it that any more…), it may pay better than blogging for nothing, if I’m in one of these fixing people fields. Which, however, I wasn’t. I was in music, which helps heal people many times. It changes them. But it doesn’t approach from the point of view, unilaterally: “You need fixing, and we will do it!” It’s more transformative than legislative in nature. Funding for the arts is in jeopardy, but not for family-fixing.
SO, who attended THIS conference?
Who attended this one? (Sorry folks, if you just missed it, this past June): In the words of one of the groups above:
The conference quickly became an international event after its announcement. This was due to all of the internationally respected experts that presented at the conference, as well as attendees that came from all over the U.S., Canada, Europe and Asia. Easily 95 percent of those who had registered and attended the conference were with state, local and U.S. government agencies, including officials and staff from the Department of Health and Human Services. It was also attended by a myriad of public health agencies, Social Services, law enforcement, treatment providers and family law practitioners. The list goes on. In addition, several states had representatives from their Judicial Branches attend, including judges.
Seems to me about the only people NOT there were: family court LITIGANTS, battered women, protective mothers, children who had aged out of the system, in the custody of an abusive parent (these young people DO exist and are now speaking out: Courageous Kids, Alanna Krause, others. I WONDER what my daughter will say, or realize, when she turns 18, soon.) I don’t see the category “shelter workers” there. I don’t see “domestic violence advocates” as a category, do you? Family law practitioners and treatment providers, You BETCHA!
Because of the historic nature of the conference, {{and surely not because of PR, contacts with someone at the station, or anything of a mercenary or publicity-promotion nature…}} Radio Station KFBK-AM 1530, in Sacramento interviewed Erin Pizzey, the founder of the shelter movement and one of the conference presenters (incidentally, it seems Ms. Pizzey, daughter of an ambassador, has come to the conclusion that the shelter movement is run by radical feminists and socialists, and was turned on by them for not going along.).. . Everything is always “radical” “new” “Pioneering” and “launched” (etc.) in this field.
Perhaps this next testimonial may explain why the D.A. was so resistant to allowing me to not lose, or help me regain, custody of my daughters when it was their FATHER, not their MOTHER who had taken them so long ago:
After going through the post conference surveys, we learned that most attendees gave the conference overall scores ranging in the 4 & 5’s (with 5 being the highest score). We have heard directly from many attendees who are mediators and evaluators in family courts, and they called the conference the best they had ever attended on the issue. Many of them have been in the practice for 30 years. One District Attorney wrote:
“I thoroughly enjoyed the conference and felt it was one of the best I’d ever attended (I’ve been attending DV conferences ever since the Judicial Task Force put on a statewide conference after the OJ case!)”
(The clear and blatant theme of this one appears to be that women are equally as violent as men. Hence, the publication “Partner” abuse (and “abuse” not “Violence’) Title: From “Ideology” to “Inclusion.”
Oops: http://www.cafcusa.org/2008%20conference.aspx
It appears these reviews are from the 2008 conference, which was merely “historic” and not “the conference of the decade.” Sorry in searching on the latter term a merely Grand conference got confused with the truly Grandiose, which is about how the language goes too. But it’s not truly likely that the same organizations, in alliance are likely to change directions themselves. They exist, many of them, to change directions of OTHER venues, and other people’s, well, court cases.
(Tell you what — this inclusion does not appear to work in reverse quite so well…)
But, who are the real stakeholders?
Why not instead just raise funds for subscriptions for women leaving abuse to some of the publications talking about us, and our children, and our batterers, and our stalkers, and our children’s abductors, and our options, and how to intervene.
If we could have some “supervised visitation” to some of these conferences, I’m sure we would be competent to stand up and dispel some illusions circulating around these topics. I have known for a long time what would and would not take this household towards safety and self-sufficiency and been asking for it from institutions that had it to offer, they said.
This has fallen mostly on deaf ears. So now I am more interested in talking to these people’s supervisors, and employers, which FYI, happens to be in many cases, the federal grants system.
(note: I talked myself into two such “Screening for Abuse (or, Domestic violence)” type conferences within recent years, AFTER I lost my kids, and while in PTSD, Poverty, dealing with stalking, and working one remaining job. I overcame the PTSD of speaking up, and was called “brave” for doing so, in front of many strangers. One was aimed at health professionals, and was nationwide. ANother was aimed at custody evaluators and was not, although I would characterize BOTH of them as having analyzed the problem of abuse pretty darn well.
It was extremely validating and didn’t make a damn bit of difference in the case, and I doubt will in a whole lot of others. Why?
Because INFORMATION is not MOTIVATION.
EDUCATION doesn’t produce behavior change unless the MOTIVATION to change exceeds the benefits of NOT changing.
Overcoming PTSD to speak in front of strangers, is not my definition of brave. My definition of “brave” entails facing potential death, which I have, not facing a strange audience. It entails facing down that man, with a loaded gun and crazy talk, in my own home, and not just once. The bravery THAT time related to the fact I was a mother, and young children were in the home. My definition of brave is, knowing the possible impact, telling my family to go take a hike and get a life, when they violated my boundaries post-restraining order, and made it consistently clear after this clear statement, that this was not on THEIR agenda.
Similarly SOME people need to start recognizing that surviving abuse may be luck, or it may show competence, and start getting a different attitude about who you are dealing with, when a person shows up not too coherent immediately after an incident. Or when they show up in court (repeatedly forced to, thanks to the family law venue, which specializes on hearsay vs. evidence) also not coherent enough, possibly because of who’s present, and because of the authoritatarian and “it could change on a dime” nature of the interchange.
At this public speaking at a conference for PROFESSIONALS in the FIELD time, I also almost spent a night on the street, because in the process of speaking up, I mislaid car keys, took a commute back home, and found out the keys were in another city. Getting them back took half a night, and more money (of the very little I’d gotten by chance the previous day, allowing me the commute to this conference), help from two friends by phone (my own cell being off) and it was cold, too. I then imposed on someone who was actually a music client (so to speak) to stay overnight so I might not, in the fatigue and stress, oversleep work the next mornign which at this point would’ve resulted in being dismissed.
About a year later (this being halfway through the court cases following child-stealing) I was indeed suddenly dismissed by this same group. Possibly they had what’s called “vicarious trauma” dealing year after year (and it was that) with my inability to get free from ONE abuser, and his friends, and the family law mishandling of a simple, simple restraining order renewal. Which I didn’t, FYI, get.)
I want to say something:
Since then, I have looked into the financing (funding, folks) of this same organization, and at its website. See my post on “the amazing, disappearing word “Mother.” (The group is not featured, but the principle applies). It is a premiere group in the war against violence, not against “women” but, well, “family violence.” I have to really question why in this same state, funds to shelters have been axed, but not to this group. I have to ALSO question why I couldn’t get simple help when I needed it (and that includes, to date) from any of the entities that exist to provide it, after some of the original ones made a few policy mistakes, major ones, in designing the original custody order.
So, why not just invite us to the conferences? Note: before, THAT, raise funds to make sure that their phone and internets stay on (and deal with on-line stalking as well). For example, the other year, had my phone been on, I trust I could’ve found a job and retained access to a moving vehicle through what’s called “work” — even though, through family law inanity, I lost custody on an overnight over a year earlier, all my profession in the aftermath (and buildup), and all hope of collecting any child support arrears in the process.
You know what these conferences are to me, any more? They are like ambulance-chasers. They are carpet baggers.
They are like a person with a boat with room in it, and not too far to BOAT to shore, but too far for most people, particularly people in danger of shock, or fatigue, or not in top marathon shape — they drive by in the boat and wave. Sometimes they grab a kid in the process. They congregate in boats, and talk to each other about the shipwrecks. They even SOS — the shore — for more gas, and refreshments — and “technical support” — to converse — exclusively with each other — about “how to rescue shipwrecked sailors.” SOMETIMES some of them even pull out a child or two, or three, and give the child into the care of other people making a living off the shipwrecks — OR the other parent that helped cause it. That’s bright.
Then they have conferences about “shared parenting.” Or, even about “the context of custody-switch.” Or sometimes even about “the advisability of mediation in family law cases involving allegations of domestic violence or child abuse.” I’ve read many of these, and they are (unlike this blog) generally copyedited, slick, and even have nice charts, sometimes color coded bar graphs, and the whole nine yards.
But what they don’t have is the voices of the people in the water which might show where they missed the boat in these discussion.
NOW — do I think ALL the people in ALL the conferences have impure motives and self-interest in the forefront of their minds?
NO — I know that ALL people are imperfect and have impure motives and self-interest to some degree, including me.
That’s what the Constitution is about, and why any sitting President is sworn, under oath and in public, to preserve, protect, and defend it. It’s about putting some restraint on tyranny.
This includes tyranny by simple exclusion from policy-making conferences.
It should NOT be necessary for almost every mother (or father) who goes through divorce to switch professions and join one that might help him or herself defend herself in a family law custody action, and it PARTICULARLY is not fair where one partner (and it’s most likely to be the female one) has a life in the balance. Not just an emotional economic life, but also a physical life to her or her kids.
TRUTH has a lot of depth and nuances, but the underlying principles are basic, and basically, SIMPLE. When we are talking about human behavior. As a teacher of many years, and I have taught, coached, directed, co-taught, co-directed and/or performed with beginners (tone-deaf) to professionals (in 3 venues: piano/vocal/choral), I know that the same basics work every time, as much as how people sing and their particular voices differ. Certain basics HAVE to be there, including: Air, vocal cords, something to sing, and to do it well — a REASON to sing.
Same for offices, lifestyles, businesses. There is income, expenses, cash flow, overhead, etc. There is some basic math involved.
What the extended decades-long (I’m approaching 10 years, I know others who have been in longer) nonending family law venue DOES is simply divert cash flow. It STOPS what existed before, and recreates a NEW version according to its paradigm. Many times, it stops the process and incentive for either parent to work.
So, IF the actual desire is to STOP VIOLENCE, or CHILD ABUSE and SAVE LIVES: I recommend starting to pay parents, particularly those who are experiencing stalking, abuse, or other threats, for some of these subscriptions, so we can keep up with what’s being proclaimed about us and our kids and our lifestyles,
Or, alternately, we could stop the conferences and get back to something halfway reasonable, like our own businesses. Right now, this thing is really getting out of hand. . . . . After a few years of chasing around the experts, and being ever so happy they had “analyzed” a situation well, I began to realize this is about where it stops. With the talk. (Well, not really, the dynamic of the situation is changing, but the “you’re making it up” folk are cancelling out the “you’re minimizing abuse” folk. Even when they “collaborate.”)
I actually DO have a life (still — not the same one, but a life) to get back to, and it’s clear that this is going to go on, well, forever. I DO have some things I wish to do in life than stop people so intent on stopping domestic violence, they have kept it going a good long while, and people so intent on sharing custody that they are not about to, ever, acknowledge that this is getting too many people hurt. No, “supervised visitation” is NOT a good alternatives, that I can see. For one, I was not offered it once in many years, although it would have been very appropriate given where the problems were happening in our case. Most people I know that HAVE supervised visitation (at their own expense) are women who got it AFTER they reported abuse. They lost custody and have to pay to see their kids.
Do I want to spend the rest of my life fixing this problem? No. I don’t think it’s going away soon. On the other hand, do I accept what has happened and zero accountability for what was stolen from my daughters, and me, and the unnecessary destruction involved? No. Do I want to lose something more if I confront again? No. Would you?
So. why not let the real stakeholders in on the discussions with the “stakeholders” in these systems? Why should we have to run around studying the industry, and finding out about each new conference half of us can’t attend anyhow? And with speakers we have already been exposed to their work, and a sometimes (I speak for myself) even know which grant or grants program is funding the thing and the policy? Have we become a nation of actually employed experts whose very jobs are robbing from the unemployed, whom they are studying?
(I do apologize for my sarcasm here. But my phone is only on today because someone had a good hair day, as opposed to a bad hair day, and another dribble of child support arrears showed up, enough for phone and not much more. In order to get some nonfoods (which is illegal on Food Stamps) rather than ask someone I know for this (again), I waited 2 hours to get a single coupon unredeemable except at one store — not nearby. I waited til the next day to redeem it. On that day, which involved approximately SIX total bus trips, none of them involving more than 10 mile radius total, and after having walked 2 of those miles without proper shoes, I took the baggage home (involving a sack of potatoes and more) and looked for work, a lead on charity cars, and more. Then my phone went off (as happens when one doesn’t pay in time). THIS MORNING, I talked the bus driver into letting me on half price, because the feet wouldn’t make a similar distance this time. It just so happened (couldn’t have been planned around or predicted) that — just under the deadline, a deadbeat Dad paid again. I reflected at how similar this was to life when I LIVED with this man (particularly as to unpredictable access to any kind of cash, and having to dedicate half a day or more to something that would take 20 min to an hour in a car).
The primary difference being then that I had the joy of a little company with my daughters, who were growing up still. I wonder where they are and what they are thinking today.
So, let’s change the dynamics:
Benefits (from OUR point of view, at least):
- Life
- Liberty, hopefully
- Pursuit of happiness
- Decreased National Debt ($1.9 TRILLION, I just heard?)
- Safer classrooms, probably
- Many, many more benefits.
Detriments (possibly from publishers, conferrers, model code designers, and a WHOLE lot more):
- Some professions would have to find a new market niche, because the problems their professions live off would likely abate. Like those who have lived through (see subject line) they would have to be resourceful, flexible, think on their feet, and probably no longer have a “captive” audience or a steady stream of federal grants to solve problems, but enter the free marketplace like the rest of us.
- The professed Ph.D. experts would have to move over for the actual “experts.” An expert is one who has experienced a thing, and has a vocabulary sufficient to communicate to communicate to others what it was. Typically, this entails knowing others involved in the same thing. OUR vocabulary, not the expert social science vocabulary.
- Cash and jobs would flow in a different direction.
I think those would be the primary differences. The question is, HOW would America Survive without the economy of pathology? And the paradigm of the us/them; subject/object expertise heirarchy?
What year do you think this was written?
(Scroll to bottom for answer).
I have pasted an entire section from an article I found on-line today, as I was thinking about the mental segmentation and disconnect between different types of justice (courts), between courts & police, between police & prosecutors (from what I can tell), between “domestic violence” professionals and “child abuse professionals” (meaning, these professionals desire to STOP domestic violence and child abuse, by analyzing and, based on analyses, communicating their results and asking for policy changes. Then, if the policy changes, the matter comes up, is the PRACTICE changed. Again, the typical mentality is to “train” the professionals to practice what’s right.
Very few actually deal with the realities of human nature, namely, that there is no single branch of employment, business, and no profession, where most of the employees are altruistic, and none of them are dangerously self-serving, or motivated by, for example, basic human greed, denial, or lust for power.
This excerpt is a sample of what I’d call honest writing, which shows how even a “model” practice that is published — certain perspectives were omitted. I would imagine that in this case, the voices of the people with these perspectives (the victims the model code was hoping to help) were not present for the dialogue. THAT is indeed a problem, this gap.
it’s really a matter of language. You see, calling an intersection of court, law enforcement, and social services workers when discussing issues that affect people who come under the category victims (i.e., of crimes) without including the victims — IN THOSE DISCUSSIONS — is exclusionary.
It is a larger subset of a larger divide, called “service-providers” (including the “service” of JUSTICE) vs. Recipients/clients.
I’ve blogged on another post here about the effect of stalking on me, and including through other family members. It is a total life-changer (and illegal). I do not know how to sustain regular employment around the degree of it that has come into my life, and have totally switched goals in order to accommodate, if possible, the safety factor. I know other women who have done this. It’s NOT a game, and NOT a joke, but every law enforcement officer I reported to treated it as such, and added in some verbal abuse to go along with my attempt to report. I have reported it to almost every agency or type of individual involved in my case, as I also reported the risk of child-stealing (which happened) and my concerns about the lethality factor in our case, a combo. of gut instinct, only to then find literature that shows my gut was right.
It is an odd feeling to find out how much of one’s life had already been discussed and conferenced about, and how long ago, and relate this to how many women have been killed since because even this (in its own words) “flawed” model still isn’t being followed.
Nevertheless, here it is. It is in off-blue (not “link” color) italics. Any bold or underlining, or variations from italic blue, are my additions,or emphases, except obviously the bolded section headings:
National Institute of Justice Project to Develop Model Anti-Stalking Code for States
Limitations of Report from Domestic Violence Perspective
In response to the great and sudden interest in state stalking codes, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) created a project to develop a model anti-stalking code for states, releasing their final report in _________. (see below) Interestingly enough, the report does not refer to the NIJ’s history of involvement with this issue, which included the development of a model harassment code over 10 years ago.
Unfortunately, the resource group which developed this model code included no domestic violence advocates. (An issue which continues to this day/Let’s Get Honest comments in other fields) Presumably this accounts for the fact that domestic violence, rather than being seen as a central issue in the development of the model code, is relegated to tangential status.
Domestic violence is rarely mentioned in the report, and when it is it may be in a footnote. See, e.g., footnote 83, pages 38 – 39, which touches briefly on the overlap between domestic violence and stalking, and reports without comment on law enforcement attitudes that domestic violence stalking incidents aren’t worth much attention: “… While 77 percent of responding jurisdictions in Australia and Great Britain reported investigating stalking-type incidents, none considered stalking a major problem . High-profile cases were rare in the responding countries, and most agencies consider stalking primarily a domestic violence problem. Typical victims are women of any age escaping abusive relationships with dominant males , they reported… Stalker’s methods did not seem to vary from those used by American stalkers, and the course of events seemed to escalate from unwanted contacts to following and face-to-face threats…” (emphasis added) The message appears to be that a crime in which the primary victims are battered women is not “a major problem.”
Domestic violence is hardly mentioned again until page 92, where one paragraph acknowledges the usefulness of drawing upon criminal justice personnel’s experience with domestic violence in formulating strategies against stalking. However, the report then lays out a research agenda which downplays the body of applicable domestic violence research which has already been conducted. The report calls for research on stalkers (i.e. their behaviors, motivations, demographics, histories), stalking as a crime (i.e. its prevalence and reponse by the criminaljustice system), and the usefulness of restraining orders in stopping stalking (i.e. how well the victim, defendant, and criminal justice personnel understand how to enforce them). Given that the overwhelming majority of stalking cases are domestic violence cases, we can already answer many of these questions. {{I alternate emphasis so every sentence is read in this paragraph.}}
In the discussion on sentencing, the report does not mention batterer’s counseling even once in its three-page discussion of evaluation, treatment, and mental illness, {{I’m not at this point highly enamored of batterer’s counseling, probably because of so many incidents I’ve read where counseling was ordered over incarceration; the batterer then aced the counseling, and went promptly out and murdered his former, reporting, partner. And I believe that where even a 10% outside chance of “murder” as a side-effect of ineffective counseling happens, the chance should not be taken. The concept that behavioral science, which is “prognosis” can substitute some how for safety, is not sound thinking, in my view. }}or in the principal recommendations where counseling is mentioned. This is unfortunate, since there is a growing body of literature on the efficacy of batterer’s counseling which would be applicable to the 70-80% of stalking cases involving domestic violence, and since there are also studies showing that most therapists are woefully untrained and uninformed in the area of domestic violence. {{Cobblers see shoes. Lawyers see legal issues. Therapists see personality problems. I have been stalked, battered, and lost access to the children through “family court matters,” so obviously this is kind of what I notice, too. So even correcting the “training” and “uninformed” factors (imagine the expense) would still be in essence asking a professional in a field to change their outlook on the field. }}
The timing of NIJ’s model code report was also unfortunate. The research was done before any appellate cases on stalking had been published, before the volume of commentators in law review articles, and when very few states had amended their statutes. The model code was based on two surveys sent to police departments around the country and to four other English-speaking countries, telephone interviews with prosecutors and defense attorneys, and analyzing the various state statutes on stalking and related issues. {{THIS PATTERN IS COMMON WHEN IT COMES TO GRANT SITUATIONS FOR POLICY CHANGES. FIRST, “DEMONSTRATION,” SOMETIMES (NOT ALWAYS) STARTING SMALL. THEN, “PROCLAMATION” BASED ON THE PRIOR “DEMONSTRATION” WHICH WERE NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE WHOLE PICTURE}}
It is unfortunate that the NIJ report was not seen as Part I of a two-part process, since it is necessary have an in-depth assessment of how the statutes are actually working in order to evaluate the NIJ’s proposed model code. {{This may have been “unfortunate,” negligent, or intentional. I don’t know which; I wasn’t there. At least this author comments on it. After a while, one begins to notice how many things termed “unfortunate” — weren’t quite left up to fortune. This word cropped up in a mediator report in my case, referring to something which had happened specifically and ONLY after repeated interventions and decisions prompted by said mediator. }}
Analysis of utility of model code proposed by NIJ for battered women
Benefits of Model Code
But even with all the above limitations, the NIJ Report has a great deal of useful information and policy recommendations which could help battered women and their children.
For example, the Report’s principal recommendations for a model stalking code include the following, all of which could be helpful to domestic violence victims:
- a continuum of charges, including felony status
- option of incarceration
- orders to stay away from victim
- counseling
- victim notification before stalker released
- early intervention
- systems put in place so that civil and criminal judges know what the other courts are doing with the same case
- a research agenda
- a multidisciplinary approach
In Chapter Two of the Report, the proposed model code is discused in detail. Probably the most beneficial statement is the following: “Of utmost importance is a state’s decision to require the criminal justice system and related disciplines to take stalking incidents seriously.“
{{CAN YOU NAME AT LEAT 3 RECENT INCIDENTS WHERE IT WASN’T? TOM’S RIVER, A TOLLBOOTH IN CALIFORNIA, AND A HOME (WITH TWO LITTLE GIRLS TRYING –BUT FAILING — TO SAVE MAMA’S LIFE) WHERE THESE RESTRAINING ORDER VIOLATIONS OR STALKING OR SEPARATION DANGER WAS NOT TAKEN SERIOUSLY?}}
The useful elements of the proposed code include a broad definition of prohibited acts; allowing “implied threats”, as opposed to “credible threats”, to be sufficient; the use of increasingly serious penalties to deal with increasingly serious acts, and encompassing misdemeanor and felony sanctions; and the broad definition of intent: “In other words, if a defendant consciously engages in conduct that he knows or should know would cause fear in the person at whom the conduct is directed, the intent element of the model code is satisfied.” The drafters made a similar comment in regard to the fear element: “In some instances, a defendant may be aware, through a past relationship with the victim, of an unusual phobia of the victim’s and use this knowledge to cause fear in the victim… a jury must determine that the victim’s fear was reasonable under the circumstances. ” (emphasis added) This language may open the door to the introduction of evidence regarding the stalker’s past threats toward the same victim, and to expert testimony on stalking generally, which will probably be beneficial to victims.
Similarly, Chapter Three’s sentencing provisions are also generally useful for battered women. The overall goals include protecting the victim, allowing law enforcement to intervene when appropriate, sanctions, and treatment for those defendants who can be helped.
The requirement of victim notification, and accompanying acknowledgements that some stalkers may be more dangerous when released from prison, and that stalking behavior often escalates into violence as time passes are very important for battered women. So are the enhanced penalties for restraining order violations, use of a weapon, minor victims, or prior offenses toward the same or another victim. All of these are typical of domestic violence cases. The no-contact orders upon release are likewise key for protecting battering victims. The advantages and disadvantages of requiring convicted stalkers to wear electronic bracelets are discussed sensitively.
Chapter Four, on pre-trial release, also contains recommendations which are generally good for battered women whose batterers stalk them. These include taking danger to the public into account, considering eliminating release on one’s own recognizance, recommended factors for courts to consider in each case, possible conditions of release, including no-contact orders, victim’s right participate in bail hearings, victim notification of pre-trial release and copies of release orders to the victim.
Chapter Five’s strategies for implementation are also generally helpful for battered women. The emphasis on a multidisciplinary approach underlines the need for all societal systems to work together to end this problem. The recommendations about the response of the criminal justice system are good as well, including training, better police policies and procedures, strengthening restraining order enforcement, providing judges with full criminal and restraining order histories of the defendant at every stage of the case, and the need to keep DMV and voter records of stalking victims confidential.
The NIJ’s proposed model code generally complies with the model code recommended by Susan Bernstein, which was discussed above. The NIJ code includes “threats implied by conduct”, and uses the history between the parties as a context in determining the nature of the threats. While the NIJ code does not mandate using computerized informational tracking systems, the larger NIJ Report recommends these, and also recommends the imposition of increasingly stronger penalties, including felonies. Though Bernstein’s recommendation that harassment include “unconsented conduct” is not addressed directly in the NIJ code, it appears that the NIJ drafters intended to encompass such conduct. Thus, the only key element listed by Bernstein which is not addressed by the NIJ Report is the reasonable woman standard.
Flaws of Model Code
On the other hand, the code has some flaws. First, threats toward the victim’s family are limited to those directed at her “immediate family”, which is defined very narrowly. It would be better to encompass the extended family, both because stalkers do not so limit their behavior, and because many ethnic groups in the US have a much broader definition of family than the nuclear version. Coverage should be provided if the stalker is threatening the victim’s aunt, uncle, grandparents, grandchildren, cousins, godparents, godchildren, in-laws, etc.
Second, “[t]he model code language does not apply if the victim fears sexual assault but does not fear bodily injury.” The drafters discuss the risk of contracting AIDS or being injured for resisting, and state that states may want to include fear of sexual assault in their statutes. However, the idea that sexual assault is not bodily injury in and of itself is ludicrous, and any historical distinction between these two types of injuries should not be maintained.
Third, the drafters propose that states allow for either restitution to the victim, or civil causes of action. It is unclear why victims should not have access to both remedies, since they are not interchangable: restitution is ordered by the criminal court, and covers only out of pocket expenses, while tort suits are under the control of the victim, and also allow for awards for pain and suffering and punitive damages in addition to compensatory damages.
Effectiveness of anti-stalking codes in general for battered women
We last turn to the question of the effectiveness of anti-stalking codes in general for battered women. On the one hand, such codes can be useful. They serve as an acknowledgement that stalking behavior is wrong, and should be criminalized. They contribute to societal awareness that stalking is often part of the overall pattern of domestic violence. They may be an additional charge which prosecutors can use. In some cases, stalking laws can stop the cycle before more violence occurs by criminalizing behavior which otherwise would be non-actionable. On the other hand, there are many limitations to the efficacy of stalking laws in preventing abuse and violence. In some jurisdictions, stalking laws are the latest fad: they represent feathers in the caps of legislators and criminal justice system personnel, without attempting to solve the underlying problems of men’s violence toward women generally and domestic violence in particular. Secondly, there appears to be a belief in some locations that stalking statutes will be a panacea, that if the legislators can merely write the magic combination of words, they will be able to stop this offense. Such viewpoints fail to take the big picture into account — i.e. without fundamental attitude changes on the parts of law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, juries, media, therapists, and the general public, the same old attitudes about domestic violence will attach to stalking cases and result in inaction, undercharging, light sentences, and ineffective orders.
In order to be effective, stalking statutes must be one piece of a much larger coordinated community response. Key pieces of such a response would include in-depth training and written policies addressing domestic violence and stalking, and would be an integral part of the criminal justice system, health care system, educational system, and other social stystems. The training and policies would state that domestic violence is wrong, criminal, and not tolerated. An additional key piece of the response would involve cooperation between all the different parts of the above systems, such as protocols for cooperation, regular interdisciplinary or inter-agency meetings, and death review teams, reflecting the reality that everyone has to work together if we will ever be able to stop domestic violence.
But even with a true coordinated community response, anti-stalking laws are still a limited tool in preventing domestic violence.Even with severe sanctions, some stalkers, like some batterers, will not stop or will repeat this behavior with other victims when released from jail. And some victims may still be reluctant to cooperate with prosecution because protections they are offered by the criminal justice system are inadequate to prevent retaliation. They may also feel sorry for the stalker, love him, want him to get counseling, etc., or they may be forced to deal with him for years to come because they have children in common. It is notable that many state stalking statutes do not cover situations where the former spouse/stalker has visitation rights. This is a major problem for battered women, whose batterers often escalate the violence after separation and transfer their attempts to control the woman to the custody/visitation arena.
In conclusion, anti-stalking laws are a step in the right direction, but in and of themselves will not solve the problems of battered women or other stalking victim.
MY SUMMARY:
(I only commented on top part of article, for a pattern of asking questions. ALL of it brings up good points, and I hope was read).
I COME BACK TO CONCEPT OF SELF-DEFENSE, AND a Survive! mentality for women. (See my Toms River, NJ post). Don’t break any laws, but do like the Boy Scouts, “Be Prepared.” AND, prepare to survive. I suggest that women pretty much be very pro-active in figuring this out themselves and with their own resources, until such day arrives where model codes are appropriate, or if appropriate, enforced, and if enforced, enforced seriously.
I deeply regret the years of my
(1) calling out for others to help me, while
(2) trying to maintain and help myself both, and immediately leave the situation.
I would have been BETTER engaged in time and energy not to have bothered with the first part. Unfortunately, like many women leaving abuse, economics was a huge issue, not just recovery and safety. This is why any effort to address DV issues not taking into account economic issues is simply unrealistic. At this point, i also believe that any discussion of domestic violence which does NOT discuss the negative impact that the realm of family law has had upon all the research, all the laws, and all the protective meaures in place, will not make a major difference. The efforts cancel each other out.
(Verbal Confrontation, or even taking protective action, on my part just brought greater escalations and punishments. In fact, this was typically where it got physical). I am talking about both IN the battering relationship (in my case, called “marriage, co-habiting years” AND in the afterwards years (taking a stand as a separate woman, with children in the household.). I remember one year of emotionally healthy, solvent, sanity — while a restraining order was in place. There was a storm brewing, but the majority of the situation was a sense of growing prosperity and strength, and — apart from the source of this — peace. This was BEFORE I’d had a few hearings in the family law venue.
The only benefit I can see from the whole process is that I now caution women to avoid absolutely every facet of it possible, and go about establishing their own: Safety, solvency and self-determination. It is also necessary to understand that doing so is not just a threat to one’s ex, potentially, but also to the entire “SYSTEM” if you don’t do it “their” way. Which means becoming dependent on aspects of this for safey, solvency, and forking over self-determination to a parenting plan (or something similar) obtained through a custody evaluator or mediator, who are influenced by forces one doesn’t normally have input to deal with, in part because one doesn’t know they exist to start with.
Now, as to my doing this myself, it may entail abandoning this blog, also. However, speaking out is part of a healing process also, and it’s a vital part.
While advocates from more than once side of the fence now dialogue and collaborate with each other (as women and thereafter sometimes men (including men who killed them) continue to die, and children continue to suffer abuse, and some go missing — the one side of the fence that is often not heard — IN the policymaking discussions, IN print IN the publications on these matters, IN the professional organizations that make a livelihood dealing with these matters, and basically on the IN, not the OUT, in these discussions — will continue to be the people with most at stake — their lives.
It is common sometimes to list the “stakeholders” in each new conference. I have looked at many of these lists. Rarely are the actual parents, targeted child, or targeted spouse (when it comes to child abduction or domestic violence or stalking, ALL of which are related, by the way) invited to confer. And if they did, and what such people said WAS published, or broadcast, what about retaliation? Ever think about that?
WHEN WAS THE EXCERPT WRITTEN?
About 15 years after Toms River, NJ – – 1994:
Found at:
http://www.mincava.umn.edu/documents/bwjp/stalking/stalking.html#id2355674
Domestic Violence & Stalking: A Comment on the Model Anti-Stalking Code Proposed by the National Institute of Justice
Nancy K. D. Lemon
Battered Women’s Justice Project
Publication Date: December 1994
(And the blank date in the excerpt was Oct. 1993).
Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
August 26, 2009 at 6:42 PM
Posted in After HE Speaks Up - Reporting Child Sexual Abuse, After She Speaks Up - Reporting Child Sexual Abuse, After She Speaks Up - Reporting Domestic Violence and/or Suicide Threats, Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Context of Custody Switch, Designer Families, Domestic Violence vs Family Law, Fatal Assumptions, Funding Fathers - literally, History of Family Court, in Studies, Lethality Indicators - in News, Mandatory Mediation, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids, Split Personality Court Orders, Vocabulary Lessons
Tagged with BWJP, CAFC, cafcusa, domestic violence, Due process, DV, Expert-itis, FAVTEA, Intimate partner violence, mincava, Model Codes, NIJ, Policy versus Practice, social commentary, Stalking, Studying Humans
Possibly Certifiable Insanity (Stockpiling Mental Health Research Grants, “Discretionary,”nationwide).
In response to wondering how to communicate to one state’s legislator that any new Fatherhood Initiative, either precisely worded or inspiringly vague, though powerfully phrased, is indeed superfluous, I simply researched (again, in this state) two known existing fatherhood programs (at least under one Federal Department) — the one with “fatherhood” in its name, “CFDA 93.086, Healthy Marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood” and the ones which has the intended effect of a “required outcome” to the legal process, namely “Access Visitation” grants, CFDA 93.597, commonly known as putting more time in the hands of the noncustodial parent (a.k.a. father), through moving the decision-making process outside the courtroom, until it has been screened by mediators, custody evaluators, and parenting planners. (See my Cooks in the Court Kitchen Post). Yes, these grants were making it to Kansas as well as to the rest of the U.S. (including V.I., P.R. & Guam).
Note: in the database “usaspending.gov” and under “Grant search by program” it is impossible to search readily by 93.086, as it’s not on the list of hyperlinks. I tend to feel this was not accidental.
CFDA Number = 93086
State = KANSAS
Fiscal Year = 2008
Recipient: CATHOLIC CHARITIES
Recipient ZIP Code: 67214
| FY | Award Number | Budget Year of Support |
Agency | Award Code | Action Issue Date |
Amount This Action |
| 2008 | 90FE0112 | 3 | ACF | 0 | 09-14-2008 | $530,368.00 |
| Award Subtotal: | $530,368.00 | |||||
CFDA Number = 93597
State = KANSAS
Fiscal Year = 2008
Recipient: KS ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL & REHABILITATION SERVICES
Recipient ZIP Code: 66612
| FY | Award Number | Budget Year of Support |
Agency | Award Code | Action Issue Date |
Amount This Action |
| 2008 | 0801KSSAVP | 1 | ACF | 1 | 01-30-2008 | $100,000.00 |
| Award Subtotal: | $100,000.00 | |||||
I noticed how MANY types of things are administered directly through the KS ST Office of the Governor, which to me seems a little over-centralized and top-heavy.
While looking, I marveled that both Abstinence Education and Community Based Abstinence-Education grants with Medical research on Male Contraception (guess which funding won out??) (Actually both types got the grants,
so I suppose the winners are, however, those grants benefitted — or will — and the losers are the taxpayers — if they didn’t. For example,
based on several factors, I’d say the Abstinence Education is a bust. Not that I’m anti-Abstinence, hey, but how many decades is this going to be tried? Since there is a Community-Based stipulation, the kind this decorative adjective, is government-based. In fact, come to think of it, what has happened to just generalized DISCRETION in education, period? The concept that “education” won’t happen without a program (particularly a government run one) is just a little “out there” to start with.
I also believe that if there were better things to do in class, or young people had a vision for surviving past 20 (in some communities), or succeeding in life, there just might be a little less screwing around before financial independence. Also what might be helpful if there was a general tendency to point them in the direction of financial independence, throughout the public schools. We are, however, generally speaking (it seems) teaching the vast majority to hope to hold a job, rather than hope to own or run a business. After all, can’t EVERYONE run a business (?) so someone has to be the employees, right?
What better way to ensure a constant supply of willing employees (and a surplus of them, too) by the caste/income/race-sorting system we call public school education?
The local child support agency (the one that “bailed” in my case, coming to the rescue of the father who’d rather take the kids than get a job) is frequently airing its successes and programs on the local cable TV. What they don’t tell us, in the programs aimed at young teens, is how they treat middle-aged parents in the family law venue. OR WHY . . . . . Too bad, that. . . .
Anyhow, in Kansas, a VERY small segment of what appears to be a wonderful research center, really:
| Fiscal Year | OPDIV | Grantee Name | Award Title | Sum of Actions |
| 2003 | NIH | UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS CENTER FOR RESEARCH INC | STEREOTYPES, SHIFTING STANDARDS, AND SOCIAL JUDGEMENT | $ 138,291 |
| 2002 | NIH | UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS CENTER FOR RESEARCH INC | STEREOTYPES, SHIFTING STANDARDS, AND SOCIAL JUDGEMENT | $ 155,041 |
| 2001 | NIH | UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS CENTER FOR RESEARCH INC | STEREOTYPES, SHIFTING STANDARDS, AND SOCIAL JUDGEMENT | $ 182,417 |
| 2000 | NIH | UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS CENTER FOR RESEARCH INC | STEREOTYPES, SHIFTING STANDARDS, AND SOCIAL JUDGEMENT | $ 177,105 |
| 1999 | NIH | UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS CENTER FOR RESEARCH INC | STEREOTYPES, SHIFTING STANDARDS, AND SOCIAL JUDGEMENT | $160,365 |
(for the sake of margins, the same grant award, but , different fields displaying).
| 2003 | R01MH048844 | 93242 | DISCRETIONARY | SCIENTIFIC/HEALTH RESEARCH (INCLUDES SURVEYS) | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | MONICA R BIERNAT | $ 138,291 |
| 2002 | R01MH048844 | 93242 | DISCRETIONARY | SCIENTIFIC/HEALTH RESEARCH (INCLUDES SURVEYS) | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | MONICA R BIERNAT | $ 155,041 |
| 2001 | R01MH048844 | 93242 | DISCRETIONARY | SCIENTIFIC/HEALTH RESEARCH (INCLUDES SURVEYS) | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | MONICA R BIERNAT | $ 182,417 |
| 2000 | R01MH048844 | 93242 | DISCRETIONARY | SCIENTIFIC/HEALTH RESEARCH (INCLUDES SURVEYS) | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | MONICA R BIERNAT | $ 177,105 |
| 1999 | R01MH048844 | 93242 | DISCRETIONARY | SCIENTIFIC/HEALTH RESEARCH (INCLUDES SURVEYS) | COMPETING CONTINUATION | MONICA R BIERNAT | $ 160,365 |
(Where is the original, the “NEW” of this particular one, after which there was competing, then non-competing continuation?)
WHAT, you say, might this be? It’s CFDA CODE 93242, Mental Health Research . . . . and just the tip of the iceberg on our lust to KNOW (and to predict, and to manage, and to manipulate, and to label, and to — well, it’s all really for the national HEALTH):
We DO want to know why our neighbors (or others, or certain populations, or peoples, or income levels, or etc.) are mentally ill, and to verify (nay, certify) that they are, right? To help them. Become more sane. Like us (case in point, studying all this may not be a sign of sanity…..).
I could not (today) find the “abstract” for these, but below are some samples of abstracts (with the word “stereotype” in them):
Mental Health, Discretionary must be a large segment:
AT THE VERY BOTTOM OF THIS POST, I WILL LIST CERTAIN TYES OF RECIPIENTS: (ALL is too many):
(I thought you might enjoy that. . . . ) I’m not quite sure how shifting standards comes under Mental Health (which this grant is listed under), but hey, it takes all types. I’d love to see the final report. . . . .
Searching Federal HHS grants on just the word “stereotypes” brings up a mix of social and medical sciences, and some overlap.
ONE thing’s clear, it’s being studied. I wonder if this will reduce the amount of “stereotyping” going on, just as studying domestic
violence has reduced the amount of domestic violence, and promoting responsible fatherhood has produced an abundance of responsible fathers nationwide, diminished the number of, well, ones like Doug Ouellette and such. (Responsible in business, dangerous in marriage…. or at least being asked to separate from it…)
For example:
| R01MH071749
Arizona |
STEREOTYPE THREAT AS A STRESS INDUCED COGNITIVE DEFICIT | NIH | NIMH | $ 588,957 |
| Title | Stereotype Threat as a Stress Induced Cognitive Deficit |
|---|---|
| Award Number | R01MH071749 |
| Project Start/End | 01-AUG-2004 / 31-MAY-2008 |
| Abstract | DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): Prior work on stereotype threat (see Steele, Spencer, & Aronson, 2002, for a review) suggests that the stress of being targeted by negative stereotypes can cause stigmatized individuals to perform more poorly on complex cognitive tasks when anything is done to remind them of their membership in a negatively stereotyped group.
Although research has established the generalizability of these stereotype threat effects, a precise and integrated model of the processes by which negative stereotypes interfere with performance is still needed. This application draws on existing literatures examining how stress impacts cognitive processing and outlines a theoretical model that integrates cognitive, physiological, and affective processes that mediate stereotype threat effects on test performance by reducing an individual’s working memory capacity. This model proposes that negative stereotypes reduce performance in testing situations because they present the individual with inconsistent views about the self that induce, a) cognitive processing in an attempt to reconcile the inconsistency, b) a physiological stress response involving increased stress hormones and sympathetic activation, and c) attempts to suppress felt anxiety.
Each of these processes is hypothesized to have a negative effect on an individual’s working memory capacity, a cognitive process integral to any complex mental task. The results of three preliminary experiments are reported to provide evidence that working memory capacity is a key mediator of stereotype threat effects on performance. The 11 experiments that are proposed will expand upon these findings to identify the processes by which stereotype threat interferes with working memory capacity and performance. {{RATHER THAN, say, DOING something to alleviate the stereotyping in the situation..? }}
A significant impact of the present research is that in gaining a better understanding of the stress-related processes that are affected by stereotype threat, it becomes more feasible to develop strategies that will enable individuals to cope successfully with social stigma. |
| Thesaurus | academic achievement, cognition disorder, prejudice, psychological stressor, psychophysiology, social perception, stress, university student anxiety, coping, culture, gender difference, hormone biosynthesis, neural information processing, racial /ethnic difference, self concept, short term memory, social psychology, sympathetic nervous system behavioral /social science research tag, clinical research, human subject, interview, psychological test |
| PI Name/Title | SCHMADER, TONI M. |
| PI eMail | |
| Institution | UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA PO BOX 3308 TUCSON, AZ 857223308 |
| Department | PSYCHOLOGY |
| Fiscal Year | 2007 |
| ICD | NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH |
| IRG | SPIP |
| F31HD058492
North Carolina |
RACE STEREOTYPES AND SELF PERCEPTIONS IN AFRICAN AMERICAN YOUTH | NIH | NICHD | $ 33,879 |
| Title | Race stereotypes and self perceptions in African American youth |
|---|---|
| Award Number | F31HD058492 |
| Project Start/End | 30-SEP-2008 / |
| Abstract | DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): The purpose of the proposed study is (1) to examine the developmental progression of academic race stereotype endorsement in African American youth; (2) to explore, over time, the impact that academic race stereotype endorsement has on the academic self-concept and self-esteem of Black adolescents; (3) to examine whether racial centrality (i.e., the extent to which being Black is central to an individual’s definition of self) moderates the relationship between stereotype endorsement and self-perceptions; (4) to explore the influence of parental racial socialization messages on academic race stereotype endorsement; and (5) to determine the relationships among stereotype endorsement, racial centrality, racial socialization, and decisions about higher education. 135 African American eleventh graders in a rural school district will participate in the project. These students participated in the first wave of the Adolescent Identity Project when they were in middle school. Written parental and student consent will be required for study participation. Consent letters will be distributed to students in their English classes. Once consent has been received, students will be administered self-report questionnaires in small groups (5-10 students) at their schools. Trained research assistants will instruct students on how to complete each measure and will be available to answer questions. Once questionnaires are completed, the research assistant will thank the students and give them a $5 restaurant gift certificate. In addition, during the students’ 12th grade year, they will be mailed a follow-up packet. Students will be questioned about their college plans (whether or not they are planning to attend college and whether it is a Historically Black College or University), SAT scores (if applicable), end of grade scores, and stereotype endorsement. The proposed study will significantly contribute to the body of knowledge on African American adolescents’ achievement-related beliefs and how they develop and change overtime. Understanding achievement-related beliefs will provide a pathway for explaining the factors that contribute to and promote achievement motivation and academic success for African American adolescents. Public Health Relevance: This Public Health Relevance is not available. |
| Thesaurus | There are no thesaurus terms on file for this project. |
| PI Name/Title | OKEKE, NDIDI A. |
| PI eMail | okeke@email.unc.edu |
| Institution | UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL Office of Sponsored Research CHAPEL HILL, NC 27599 |
| Department | PSYCHOLOGY |
| Fiscal Year | 2008 |
| ICD | NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT |
| IRG | ZRG1 |
This looks interesting, and like it ought to justify several more fatherhood grants:
| R01DA024029 | PATERNAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE INVOLVEMENT AND SUBSTANCE USE IN CHILDREN & ADOLESCENTS | NIH | NIDA | $ 1,592,006 |
And, WOW, it’s a new one: so new, not even any thesaurus terms for the abstract yet. Started 2008,
Principal Investigator, an Assistant Professor at Columbia, Institution< NY State Psychiatric Institute, and
the Recipient (by the way, these are hyperlinks; you can click away, as can I…. Start with the grant numbers here) is a scary-sounding:
“Research Foundation for Mental Hygiene, Inc.”
| Total of all awards: | $ 858,685,338 |
(YES, you read that right: $858,685,338 from 1997-2009)
OR, from another data resources:
(i am beginning to wonder whether this is partly WHY the US is the world’s largest “jailor” — population research?).
This one here seems very relevant, but only about $350K:
| R21HL088620 | MEASURING CULTURAL COMPETENCE AND RACIAL BIAS AMONG PHYSICIANS | NIH | NHLBI | $ 346,500 |
I mean, I’m sure this would affect quality of health care. I know I had a sexist oby/gyn for the 2nd child (but I stood up to him, and there was a younger on on duty also, who accepted that not every woman who gives birth should be automatically anesthetized and cut….)
(Then again, the place this grant goes to, I happen to know, got about $127 Million in grants in single year…..)
Here’s one that interests me, as a musician, obviously. I’m surprised to find $3mil on this, as typically music is the first thing cut from the public school curriculum in tough times (i.e., periodically…..)
| R01NS050436 | INTEGRATIVE STUDY OF VOCAL DEVELOPMENT | NIH | NINDS | $ 3,219,146 |
well, NO, that’s apparently about the male zebra finch. . . . Go figure…..
But $858 million?? over about 12 years? That’s like, HEY — what’s going ON with that foundation??
It’s not just the “mental hygiene” concept, but the “Mental Hygiene, INC.” Sounds sci-fi.
(Added 08-11-09: I did look up some more on who ARE they?; it’s on the web, and free for anyone else who is willing to put in the time to look. And a bit of an eye-opener, too. They have done some good work, helping people after 9/11. But it’s major business, and was set up in 1952 to facilitate research projects. )
| Title | Paternal Criminal Justice Involvement and Substance Use in Children & Adolescents |
|---|---|
| Award Number | R01DA024029 |
| Project Start/End | 01-AUG-2008 / 31-MAY-2013 |
| Abstract | DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): Of the 6.5 million adults who were under some form of correctional supervision in 2000, 3.6 million were parents,[{AND MOSTLY MEN}} thereby affecting 7.1 million minor children. Nationally, approximately 85% of all prisoners are male. Contrary to stereotypes, many of the fathers have significant connections to their children: prior to arrest 44% of incarcerated fathers lived with their children and 65% of the others continued at least monthly contact while in prison. Note however, that among incarcerated fathers >60% reported using drugs in the month before their offense; 25% reported a history of alcohol dependence; 14% reported mental illness and 70% did not have a high school diploma.\
Yet, despite evidence that parental involvement with the Criminal Justice System (CJS) is related to children’s elevated risk for substance use, psychopathology, and future incarceration, no rigorous studies of a representative sample of such children have been conducted. {{I thought it was FATHERLESSNESS, not FATHER-INCARCERATION that was the main issue, from what we have been hearing nationally, through the courts, HHS, government, and initiatives….}}
A better understanding of the specific impact of paternal incarceration, from a developmental perspective, could be expected to provide insight into ways of tempering or averting many psychosocial adverse outcomes in the youth. (ANOTHER Idea (mine) might be to find ways to keep the fathers if possible from the behaviors that got them incarcerated to start with. .. . . And then that’d be one less generation to be so impacted. What do you think?)
The main objective of this investigation is to understand the impact, over time, of paternal involvement with the CJS on their children’s substance use, psychopathology, and development of risk behaviors leading to involvement with the Juvenile Justice/CJS. This proposal aims to overcome methodological limitations of previous investigations and will provide generalizable findings relevant to developing public policy for improving the lives of affected children, including reducing their risk for substance use and incarceration. Our framework acknowledges that paternal involvement with the CJS occurs in a complex environment, where risk factors cluster, leading to a number of both direct and indirect sequelae. We will recruit a sample of children (ages 10-14) following the arrest of their fathers. The sample will be representative of CJS fathers from a disadvantaged community (the South Bronx, NYC), who have close contact with their child(ren). They will be recruited through collaboration with a publicly assigned legal defense team, the Bronx Defenders. An age- gender matched comparison group of children whose fathers had never been incarcerated will be recruited in the same residential area. The study includes collaboration with agencies whose involvement make this inherently difficult study possible: including the NYC DOE, NYC DOH-MH, NYC ACS, as well as collaborators and advocacy groups, some participating on the Study’s Advisory Board. PUBLIC HEALTH RELEVANCE: From a public health perspective, policy driven decisions regarding youth, especially those at elevated risk for untoward outcomes, must be based on sound scientific data. The goal of the proposed investigation is to advance our knowledge and understanding of the consequences of paternal involvement with the Criminal Justice System on the substance use/abuse/dependence and other psychopathology of their children. Knowledge about the determinants, over time, for negative youth outcomes, as well as protective factors, is critical to advancing targeted interventions in an effort to break the cycle of Criminal Justice involvement of the next generation. Public Health Relevance: This Public Health Relevance is not available. {{I have a “dumb” idea. Take some of the monies spent studying male zebra finches, and the ones on lethality risks for domestic violence femicides, which are being ignored in public policy (courts) anyhow, and put them towards things that would help break the cycle of (1) ILLITERACY and with it (2) POVERTY. Then I suspect — barring continuing racial profiling by arresting officeres, and a few other possible institutional factors (why not study the INSTITUTIONS as much as the people IN them, eh?) there might be lower incarceration rates. And Research Foundation Inc. could go find something else to research…)) {{PUT IT INTO: Expressive arts, creative arts, dance, and so forth. Put it into college scholarships. Put it into supporting the EXIT from the public school systems that undereducate and badly socialize. . . . Let’s Get Honest!!}} |
| Thesaurus | There are no thesaurus terms on file for this project. |
| PI Name/Title | HOVEN, CHRISTINA W. ASSISTANT PROFESSOR |
| PI eMail | ch42@columbia.edu |
| Institution | NEW YORK STATE PSYCHIATRIC INSTITUTE NEW YORK, NY 10032 |
| Department | |
| Fiscal Year | 2008 |
| ICD | NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON DRUG ABUSE |
| IRG | RPIA |
While money will ALWAYS flow to study incarcerated African American males (or females), how about some to help in DOING the studies, not BEING studied? “Nationally, African Americans, Latin Americans, Native Americans, and some Asian Americans are underrepresented in the sciences and social sciences. ”
Maybe this project wasn’t structured right, it only coughed up $81K: but it sounds reasonable to me:
| R25MH070369 | PROMOTING HS MINORITY ADVANCEMENT IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES | NIH | NIMH | $ 81,491 |
| Title | Promoting HS Minority Advancement in the Social Sciences |
|---|---|
| Award Number | R25MH070369 |
| Project Start/End | 01-JUL-2004 / 30-JUN-2006 |
| Abstract | DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): The long-term goal of the proposed HS-COR Honors Research Training program is to achieve ethnic parity in admissions to (goal=100%) and success in undergraduate programs (goal = 100%) related to the biomedical sciences or mental health fields. Nationally, African Americans, Latin Americans, Native Americans, and some Asian Americans are underrepresented in the sciences and social sciences.
{{POSSIBLY — just conjecturing here, total hypothesis, but I HAVE been nosing around a lot of these grants for many months now — POSSIBLY because the powers that be would rather STUDY such populations than have them participate in running the studies. JUST an idea…}} The specific aims of the program are to increase underrepresented student success by: (a) identifying 6 students who appear to have the greatest potential, (b) training students in the fundamental assumptions, value of, and pitfalls of research, (c) facilitating students’ specific research skills by their working with a faculty mentor on a specific research project, and (d) providing specific information and support to ensure that students have the qualities required to be successful in an undergraduate program, such as assistance with SAT preparation and the presentation of research in science fairs. Students will attend a summer training program on the research process that is designed to build scientific and critical reasoning skills and a practical seminar series and work one-on-one with their research mentors. Faculty mentors’ research projects reflect a variety of areas including the neuropsychology of Alzheimer’s disease, quality of life of elderly women, effects of stereotype threat on academic achievement of minority students, adolescent wellbeing, and violence prevention. Evaluation of three goals is specified. The goals are: (a) admission to college; (b) success while in college; and (c) professionalism. Each goal is made more specific and specific program components are matched with each goal. |
| Thesaurus | academic achievement, behavioral /social science, ethnic group, secondary school, training, vocational guidance African American, Asian American, Hispanic American, Native American, health science research potential, mental health personnel, university adolescence (12-20), behavioral /social science research tag, human subject |
| PI Name/Title | QUILICI, JILL L. |
| PI eMail | jill.quilici@csun.edu |
| Institution | CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY NORTHRIDGE OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND SPONSORED PROJECTS NORTHRIDGE, CA 913308232 |
| Department | PSYCHOLOGY |
| Fiscal Year | 2005 |
| ICD | NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH |
| IRG | ZMH1 |
This might upset a few apple carts and probably wouldn’t be duplicated. Better to mentor children of prisoners, than potential social science superstars….
This one got over $1 million, so it must be very important (or, hard to study):
| R01MH066836
Massachusetts |
FACE OVERGENERALIZATION, PREJUDICE, AND STEREOTYPES | NIH | NIMH | $1,403,454 |
Took 4 years.
$
| Award Number | R01MH066836 |
|---|---|
| Project Start/End | 10-SEP-2003 / 30-JUN-2007 |
| Abstract | DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): Considerable research demonstrates a strong tendency to use facial appearance when forming first impressions.
(What’s more, common sense says this as well)
Moreover, these impressions show remarkable consensus, yielding significant social consequences. (ibid). The long-range objective of the proposed research is to explain consensual first impressions of faces and to develop methods for ameliorating their negative social consequences. Consensual First Impressions of Faces? Does this relate to (or, lead to…) “consensual sex.”?? The working hypothesis is that the psychological qualities that are accurately revealed by the functionally significant facial qualities that mark babies, unfitness, emotion, or identity are overgeneralized to people whose facial structure resembles that of babies, a particular level of fitness, a particular emotion, or a particular identity. The research has three specific aims. One is to use connectionist modeling to test the facial identity overgeneralization hypothesis that the tendency for responses to strangers to vary with their facial resemblance to known individuals contributes to racial prejudice and stereotyping. The connectionist modeling experiments seek to demonstrate that the physical similarity between two faces can in and of itself account for similar impressions of them quite apart from similarities in the social categories of the faces. The second aim is to test whether generalized mere exposure effects can be used to reduce race and age prejudice and stereotyping, as predicted by the facial identity overgeneralization hypothesis. The mere exposure experiments seek to demonstrate that increasing the familiarity of an out-group facial prototype will decrease negative reactions to out-group members. The third aim is to use functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) to investigate neural activation patterns in response to faces that are predicted from each of the three overgeneralization hypotheses. The fMRI experiments seek to determine whether categories of faces that are differentiated by human judges’ ratings and by the activation they elicit in connectionist modeling experiments also elicit distinct patterns of neural activation, thereby demonstrating a neural substrate for the overgeneralization effects. By focusing on the structured facial information that influences prejudice and stereotypes, the proposed research brings a novel theoretical perspective to the field of social cognition, demonstrating that the intrinsic properties of faces make a significant contribution to social biases that have been largely viewed as social constructions. It also suggests novel interventions for reducing prejudice. |
| Thesaurus | face, impression, prejudice, racial /ethnic difference bias, face expression, handedness, identity, neural information processing, social perception, visual stimulus behavioral /social science research tag, clinical research, functional magnetic resonance imaging, human old age (65+), human subject, young adult human (21-34) |
| PI Name/Title | ZEBROWITZ, LESLIE A. PROFESSOR |
| PI eMail | zebrowitz@brandeis.edu |
| Institution | BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY 415 SOUTH STREET WALTHAM, MA 024549110 |
| Department | PSYCHOLOGY |
| Fiscal Year | 2006 |
| ICD | NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH |
| IRG | ZRG1 |
| Total of all awards: | $ 1,403,454 |
Oh, Here’s a $2 million one: Must be longitudinal and very relevant to national health and wellbeing or safety:
| R01HD021332
TEXAS |
ORIGINS AND SIGNIFICANCE OF APPEARANCE-BASED STEREOTYPES | NIH | NICHD | $ 2,352,235 |
| R01HD021332 | ORIGINS AND SIGNIFICANCE OF APPEARANCE-BASED STEREOTYPES | NIH | NICHD | $ 2,352,235 |
| Title | Origins and Significance of Appearance-Based Stereotypes |
|---|---|
| Award Number | R01HD021332 |
| Project Start/End | 01-SEP-1986 / 31-DEC-2007 |
| Abstract | This abstract is not available. |
| Thesaurus | There are no thesaurus terms on file for this project. |
| PI Name/Title | LANGLOIS, JUDITH H. CHARLES AND SARAH SEAY REGENTS’ PROFESSO |
| PI eMail | langlois@psy.utexas.edu |
| Institution | UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AUSTIN PO Box 7726 AUSTIN, TX 78713 |
| Department | PSYCHOLOGY |
| Fiscal Year | 2007 |
| ICD | NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT |
| IRG | ZRG1 |
(NOTE: project duration says 1986 – 2007. These records therefore don’t show 1986 – 1997, probably similar amounts/year.
Well, since this project was over with one and a half years ago, perhaps we can write and find out what they learned.
http://homepage.psy.utexas.edu/homepage/group/LangloisLAB/
http://www.psy.utexas.edu/psy/crl.html#scope
The Children’s Research Laboratory (CRL) was founded in January 1982 to facilitate training and research on a wide variety of topics relating to infant and child development. We are located in the Seay Psychology building at the corner of Dean Keeton and Speedway on the University of Texas campus.
Approximately 7 faculty members and 20 graduate students currently conduct research at the CRL. While most are affiliated with the Department of Psychology, research assistance also has been provided to faculty from the Linguistics Department, the Department of Human Ecology, and the College of Education. Our current facility includes a waiting room for parents, numerous laboratory suites, offices for faculty and graduate researchers, a student lounge, and a developmental psychology library. Space is also available for visiting faculty and post-doctoral fellows. In addition, the CRL provides invaluable training to approximately 150 undergraduate students per year. Their close work with both graduate students and faculty on specific research projetcts prepares them for graduate work toward advanced degrees or other careers involving children.
Our research has examined a broad range of topics, including studies of infant vision and audition, the early development of cognitive and intellectual ability, the development of language, parent-infant interaction, social stereotypes by young children and adults, and the causes of parental abuse of children. Research projects at the CRL are funded primarily through federal and private foundation funds.
Rebecca Anne Hoss, Judith H. Langlois, Rebecca Bigler, Jacqueline D. Woolley, Robert A. Josephs, Kristin Neff, …
This dissertation is dedicated to all those who have supported and guided me in my quest for a graduate degree in psychology, including my loving husband Chance Lawson, my unconditionally supportive…
http://www.jstor.org/pss/1129416

(Abstract:)
The relation between physical attractiveness and behavior was examined by assessing whether behavioral differences exist between attractive and unattractive children.
{{As determined by . . . . .??}}
64 3- and 5-year-old boys and girls were selected as subjects on the basis of physical attractiveness. Same age and sex, attractive, unattractive, and mixed-attractiveness dyads were formed and were observed in a seminaturalistic play setting. A categorical observation system was used to record affiliative, aggressive, activity-, and object-directed play behaviors. A developmental pattern was found for aggression: no differences based on attractiveness were evident in 3-year-olds, but 5-year-old unattractive children aggressed against peers more often than did attractive children. Unattractive children were generally more active than attractive children. Few differences in affiliative behaviors were found between attractive and unattractive children.
>>>>
Phew!
This is a side-note to a Judith Langlois site, but I don’t think the topic is “incidental” to WHAT is our federal HHS department doing with these grants (and why):
INTRODUCTION
It is useful to distinguish, in a first approximation, between behavioral biology in general, and the more special fields of classical comparative psychology, classical ethology, and the newer fields of sociobiology and evolutionary psychology. Contemporary animal behavior research often tries to combine the methods and insights of the experimental approach of comparative psychology with the field observational approach of ethology. Comparative psychology originated in North America as a branch of experimental psychology; its practitioners were mainly interested in differences between species, especially in intelligence and learning. Classical ethology is a branch of biology that originated in Europe, used observational rather than experimental methods, and was interested first and foremost in the naturally occurring behavior of animals. Although the dichotomy must not be overstressed, animal behaviorists tend to be trained in psychology, work with “bright” animals, and generally are interested in learned behaviors; while contemporary ethologists, sociobiologists, and evolutionary psychologists are likely to concentrate on innate behaviors. While the study of learned behavior is both important and immediately applicable to human psychology, these behaviors do not have an evolutionary basis beyond the neural capacity to learn. (For a more detailed account of the differences between these traditions, see, e.g., Barry Sinervo.)
The research covered in this area introduction encompasses a very large domain. For the sake of convenience, we have divided it in clusters that are listed alphabetically under the conventional labels “animal behavior,” “animal cognition,” “ethology,” “behavioral ecology,” “cognitive ecology,” “neuroethology,” “sociobiology,” and “evolutionary psychology.” It should be borne in mind throughout that these labels reflect little more than the contingencies of the history of behavioral biology, and that in practice, the boundaries between these sub-areas tend to be quite blurred.
The question I pose is whether historians and social scientists have much to gain from models of cultural evolution that treat cultural change as a kind of selection process. Can such models provide a unifying paradigm for the social sciences that plays the same role in the study of human culture that models of biological evolution play in biology as a whole?
As an explanatory theory of human behavior, dynamical ((Kind of dynamic, but not quite, so only “dynamical”??) models of cultural evolution and social learning hold more promise of success than models based on rational choice. Under the right conditions, evolutionary models supply a rationale for Nash equilibrium that rational choice theory is hard pressed to deliver. Furthermore, in cases with multiple symmetrical Nash equilibria, the dynamic models offer a plausible, historically path-dependent model of equilibrium selection. In conditions, such as those of correlated encounters, where the evolutionary dynamic theory is structurally at odds with the rational choice theory, the evolutionary theory provides the best account of human behavior.
— Brian Skyrms
Evolutionary Psychology (EP)
EP was articulated in the wake of human sociobiology’s unsuccessful attempts (most notably, Lumsden/Wilson 1981) to come to grips with gene-culture coevolution. Its goal is to uncover “the psychological mechanisms that underpin human … behavior, and … the selective forces that shaped those mechanisms” (Donald Symons). Its key assumptions are, in Eric Alden Smith’s accurate summary, modularity (human behavior is guided by specialized cognitive mechanisms performing specialized tasks); historicity (natural selection shaped those modules to produce adaptive behavior in the paleolithic EEA or “environment of evolutionary adaptedmess”); adaptive specificity (adaptive outcomes, e.g., mate preference, are very specific); and environmental novelty (modern environments are characterized by an unprecedented degree of novelty). From these assumptions, EP deduces that valid adaptive explanations must refer to genetically evolved psychological mechanisms linked to specific features of the EEA; that “culture,” “learning,” “rational choice,” and “fitness maximization” are insufficiently modular to be explanatorily realistic mechanisms, whether cognitive or behavioral; that contemporary human behavior may often be maladaptive; and that measuring fitness outcomes or correlates of contemporary behavioral patterns is irrelevant.
{{I”m tempted to add, this includes collective institutional behavior in many matters. Either we (so to speak) are trying to study, manage, and predict human behavior, so as to better MANAGE it, (evolutionary bias) OR we (so to speak) are trying to enforce a certain religious paradigm on the entire country, a paradigm in which all animals are equal, but SOME (male) animals are more equal than others. And, anyone, incidentally, who doesn’t agree with the above will be tortured in one (or more) institutions, until they do. How this differs IN THEORY AND PRACTICE with what this SAME United States is sending troops overseas to quell (insurgents, and make the world safe for “democracy,” I’m not sure – – it does have frightening similarities. Except, in many other countries, I could probably only put up ONE blog post saying this. . . . . . if I dared. We DO make fun of our government pretty well, I admit }}
ANYHOW, do you catch the flavor of the lingo?
By the way, calling people “bipolar” is popular these days. Never fear, a “Special Unit of Government” is on it, since about 2002, with a Mental Health Research Discretionary type grants. Apparently designed for this particular recipient only: (this is the only recipient that came up under Mental Health Research Discretionary and “Special Unit of Government.”
| Fiscal Year | Grantee Name | State | Grantee Class | Award Title | Award Action Type | Sum of Actions |
| 2009 | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE | MA | Special Unit of Government | ADVANCED CENTER FOR LATINO AND MH SYSTEMS RESEARCH | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | $ 821,185 |
| 2009 | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE | MA | Special Unit of Government | INNOVATIONS IN THE MEASUREMENT OF RACIAL/ETHNIC DISPARITIES IN MENTAL HEALTH CARE | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | $ 85,881 |
| 2009 | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE | MA | Special Unit of Government | LITHIUM MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY OF CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS WITH BIPOLAR | NEW | $- 105,248 |
| 2008 | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE | MA | Special Unit of Government | ADVANCED CENTER FOR LATINO AND MH SYSTEMS RESEARCH | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | $ 906,904 |
| 2008 | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE | MA | Special Unit of Government | INNOVATIONS IN THE MEASUREMENT OF RACIAL/ETHNIC DISPARITIES IN MENTAL HEALTH CARE | NEW | $ 85,844 |
| 2008 | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE | MA | Special Unit of Government | LITHIUM MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY OF CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS WITH BIPOLAR | NEW | $ 213,300 |
| 2007 | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE | MA | Special Unit of Government | A TREATMENT OUTCOME ANALYSIS FOR BEHAVIORAL ADDICTIONS | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | $ 77,680 |
| 2007 | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE | MA | Special Unit of Government | ADVANCED CENTER FOR LATINO AND MH SYSTEMS RESEARCH | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | $ 951,551 |
| 2006 | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE | MA | Special Unit of Government | A TREATMENT OUTCOME ANALYSIS FOR BEHAVIORAL ADDICTIONS | NEW | $ 80,000 |
| 2006 | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE | MA | Special Unit of Government | ADVANCED CENTER FOR LATINO AND MH SYSTEMS RESEARCH | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | $ 985,750 |
| 2006 | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE | MA | Special Unit of Government | ADVANCED CENTER FOR LATINO AND MH SYSTEMS RESEARCH | SUPPLEMENT FOR EXPANSION | $ 59,555 |
| 2006 | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE | MA | Special Unit of Government | HMO SELECTION INCENTIVES AND UNDERPROVISION OF MH CARE | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | $ 80,561 |
| 2005 | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE | MA | Special Unit of Government | ADVANCED CENTER FOR LATINO AND MH SYSTEMS RESEARCH | NEW | $ 921,689 |
| 2005 | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE | MA | Special Unit of Government | HMO SELECTION INCENTIVES AND UNDERPROVISION OF MH CARE | NEW | $ 82,500 |
| 2004 | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE | MA | Special Unit of Government | PSYCHOPATHOLOGY AND CONTROLLING BEHAVIOR IN ADOLESCENTS. | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | $ 200,000 |
| 2003 | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE | MA | Special Unit of Government | LATINO RESEARCH PROGRAM PROJECT | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | $ 898,383 |
| 2003 | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE | MA | Special Unit of Government | PSYCHOPATHOLOGY AND CONTROLLING BEHAVIOR IN ADOLESCENTS. | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | $ 280,000 |
| 2002 | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE | MA | Special Unit of Government | PSYCHOPATHOLOGY AND CONTROLLING BEHAVIOR IN ADOLESCENTS. | NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION | $ 280,000 |
Total (quick-check) $6,753,531
WHO, you may say, is the Cambridge Health Alliance, and what are they doing? What’s so special about them?
Psychopathology and controlling behavior in adolescents. . . . . . . Perhaps someone ought to study where they’ve been for the prior teen years, and take a look at which institutions as well as which environments. . . . .
5R01MH62030-020 (Federal Grant ID — you can look it up):
| Title | Psychopathology and Controlling Behavior in Adolescents. |
|---|---|
| Award Number | R01MH062030 |
| Project Start/End | 25-SEP-2001 / 31-AUG-2006 |
| Abstract | DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): Recent attachment-related studies {{PROBABLY ALSO FEDERALLY FUNDED}} have demonstrated that both childhood behavior problems and adolescent psychopathology are predicted by (1) disorganized infant attachment behavior, behavior that is characterized by conflicting behavioral tendencies and the lack of a coherent relational strategy for dealing with stress (2). However, based on current literature, it is unclear whether a validated measure of disorganized attachment in adolescence exists.(3)
The first aim of the proposed study is to develop and validate a coding protocol for identifying controlling-punitive, controlling-caregiving, and other insecure-disorganized behavior in adolescence. (4) The coding scheme will be based on previous work in the field (5) and will be applied to two attachment-related parent-adolescent interaction assessments. Participants will be 120 adolescents and their mothers from low-income families, (6) 65 of whom who have participated in a longitudinal study at ages 12 and 18 months, 4-5 years, and 7-9 year. (7) The construct validity of the new measure of controlling attachment strategies will be assessed in relation to coding of Unresolved or Cannot Classify attachment strategies as assessed by the Adult Attachment Interview and will also be validated against broader aspects of parent-adolescent interaction assessed in a standard revealed differences conflict resolution task, as coded by the Autonomy and Relatedness Scales. (8) The second aim of the study is to assess whether overall risk in infancy is an important antecedent of disorganized/controlling attachment strategies in adolescence. (9) Mediational models will test whether the onset of behavior problems in the early school years or the mother’s lack of facilitation of automony and relatedness in adolescence adds to and/or mediates any observed relation between early relational risk and adolescent attachment behaviors. (10) The third aim of the study is to assess the degree to which adolescent disorganized/controlling attachment strategies are associated with adolescent psychiatric morbidity. Psychiatric diagnoses will be assessed by the Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnosis (SCID) Axis I, the borderline and antisocial personality disorder sections of the SCID II, the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) , and the Adolescent Dissociative Experiences Scale (ADES). Longitudinal analyses will further assess the degree to which early relational risk and early school age behavior problems are important precursors of adolescent psychopathology. The proposed study will contribute to increased understanding of long-term developmental trajectories that eventuate in psychopathology. In order to implement prevention or treatment programs for reducing adolescent antisocial behavior and psychopathology, it is essential {{FOR WHOM??}} to seek a thorough understanding of the developmental pathways through which such behavior develops over time. |
| Thesaurus | adolescence (12-20), child behavior disorder, child psychology, longitudinal human study, low socioeconomic status, parent offspring interaction, psychopathology age difference, behavior prediction, caregiver, conflict, depression, disease /disorder proneness /risk, gender difference, human morbidity, infant human (0-1 year), maternal behavior, mental disorder diagnosis, psychoanalysis, psychological stressor, psychosocial separation, racial /ethnic difference behavioral /social science research tag, clinical research, human subject, interview, videotape /videodisc |
| PI Name/Title | LYONS-RUTH, KARLEN ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR |
| PI eMail | klruth@hms.harvard.edu |
| Institution | CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE 1493 CAMBRIDGE ST CAMBRIDGE, MA 02139 |
| Department | |
| Fiscal Year | 2004 |
| ICD | NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH |
| IRG | ZRG1 |
COMMENTARY BELOW:
Assistance to Recipient(s) “Cambridge Health Alliance”
(FY 2000-2009)
Summary
Type of projects: Top 5.
| 93.242: Mental Health Research Grants (Doesn’t quite match the total above, eh?, same category) | $11,129,223 |
| 93.145: AIDS Education and Training Centers | $3,953,377 |
| 93.252: Healthy Communities Access Program | $2,476,400 |
| 93.887: Health Care and Other Facilities | $1,633,902 |
| 93.243: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services_Projects of Regional and National Significance | $1,450,000 |
..
Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
August 10, 2009 at 4:44 PM





This stereotype is that poor people can lift themselves out of poverty because, 









From “Our Bodies, Ourselves” to “Our Courts, Ourselves”…
with one comment
The topic of mediation, especially mandatory mediation, is a hot one within the family court venue, and particularly among domestic violence advocates. Many have come up opposed to it.
On the other side of the fence (??) are those who are advocating mediation to cut down on the caseload in these courts, and attempt to reconcile opposing parties for the best interests of the children, supposedly.
While looking through the RAND corporation policy papers, available on-line, I was astounded to find almost nothing whatsoever on violence against4 women, or women per se (although there were articles about the education gap for men and boys of color, with the kneejerk recommendation, more and earlier preschool. I happen to disagree, I think there’s enough subject matter for child development scholars to study throughout the educational, penal, and court institutions in this country already…). There was next to nothing current on domestic violence, although a few articles dating back to 2004/2005 actually used this word.
However, there is this interesting take on mediation. My limited technique can’t paste in the image, so I recommend taking a look at:
All I’m going to say about Our Bodies, Ourselves, is that it is reminiscent of the feminist movement (after all, these ARE our bodies, if it’s women involved), and another era. For more info, read Dr. Phyllis Chesler, including Women & Madness, Mothers on Trial, and Woman’s Inhumanity to Woman. Don’t forget to also take a serious look at Honor Killings vs. Domestic violence (articles), and so forth.
Now about, Our Courts Ourselves — I believe a takeoff on that title:
http://www.rand.org/pubs/reprints/2005/RP1090.pdf
“Our Courts, Ourselves: how the Alternative Dispute Resolution Movement is Reshaping Our Legal System.”
It says plainly what I have deduced, in using the phrase “Designer Family” and in sarcastically stating that a world without conflict IS indeed possible — if everyone is drugged, asleep, or simply not paying attention. . . . . Which appears to be an imminent possibility, or business goal in some arenas… I mean, as slavery is supposedly abolished, SOMEONE has to do life’s dirty work, for cheap or free…. Women got the vote, heck what next? ???
This tends to verify my observations: (from page 168, Section II, “Puritans Populists and Utopians.”)…
Are you frightened yet?
(My quote here, since I can’t cut & paste from the pdf, is from memory, for speed — check source yourself)
To those who are somewhat versed in one of the “Abrahamic” religions (i.e., Judaism, Christianity, Islam), this utopian vision and non-involvement in social justice are at odds with fundamental beliefs that man’s nature needs redemption (i.e., “the Fall”) and that a future resurrection and judgement await.
At the very least, then, this utopian philosophy goes against the core of a substantial portion of the world’s population. Experientially, someone has to become the “wise citizens” and of a supposedly superior, elitist, caste to inform and educate the plebians in how to get along.
The philosophy that CONFLICT is bad, and that PEACE AT ANY PRICE (and sacrificing safety, or justice in the process) is the primary good is — to my reading — a violence against the concept of justice, balance and equity.
Hence, the jargon calling a divorce or process in which women protesting abuse of themselves, or their children, even when sexual abuse has been involved and documented, a “high-conflict” custody comes from this worldview. That is not the primary characteristic — only according to a certain view.
As to “our bodies, ourselves,” an 11 year old in Wisconsin and (I recently heard) a 14 year old in Michigan, have learned that they are property, not people. Michaela Tipton went back to her father to get her mother out of jail. A young man, A student, spent a night in detention for refusing to visit his father also.
http://www.macombdaily.com/articles/2009/11/21/news/srv0000006883874.txt#blogcomments
Teenager incarcerated for refusing to visit his father
Published: Saturday, November 21, 2009
//
ANYHOW, you are either awake or asleep in this matter about trying to create a utopian society where wise citizens (NOT due process and facts/evidence, etc.) choose punishments, and where all the requirements of life are also obtained from the state. Hence, “Health & Human Services.”
The question is, Who is Being Served? And being served What?
2nd largest federal expenditure, Educational Department, making sure (that’s a laugh!) no child left behind. What isn’t being openly marketed — where they are marching, goosestep style, who is paying the drummer, and what is the origin of the tune. Not only can we not make medical or health choices for our kids, we as a populace aren’t smart enough to resource or network our life choices and also help them get educated.
You cannot really deal with the courts entirely separate from the educational system. For one, the courts are trying to run cleanup after educational (moral/value) failures, all at the expense of taxpayers (not those who can write off expenses as business owners and investors, etc.). For another, I am simply not interested in an oligarchy, a dictatorship, or any of that. After all, it’s my own body here, and the children that came out of it are NOT state property, or fodder for others’ professional careers in psychology, mental health, law, pharmacology, etc. I respected their father’s contact with them, and the law. In return from this, I lost all contact with them, and made a mockery of the process.
Several entities are laughing all the way to the bank on this one. The thing is, to get an audit of those statements.
Anyhow — take a look at that rand document — it’s for sure informative. Then also realize that what takes place through the courts, when it does — that’s not mediation in the proper sense of the word. That’s basically program marketing, and “required outcome enforcement” from things such as the Access Visitation Grants, Responsible Fatherhood/Marriage, and such-like.
Enough for today!
SHARE THIS POST on...
Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
November 23, 2009 at 12:56 PM
Posted in Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, compulsory schooling, Designer Families, Domestic Violence vs Family Law, History of Family Court, Mandatory Mediation, My Takes, and Favorite Takes, public education, Vocabulary Lessons
Tagged with custody, Due process, Education, family law, Feminists, social commentary, Social Issues from Religious Viewpoints, Studying Humans, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work..