Archive for the ‘Where's Mom?’ Category

How can we analyze policy inbetween these leading, bleeding headlines?

with one comment

Maybe if I intersperse headlines, policy talk, and commentary I can get through another day without mourning evidence of national return to stupidity day.

Man, then about 19, begets child; mother (now in other state) age not mentioned

Separation happens; Dad gets custody, Dad remarries (in which order?)

Dad has two more children and, now 34 himself, is accused of molesting his first one, now 15.

DCFS removes daughter he is allegedly molesting from his custody — SORT of, not quite!

Pissed off, or coldly determined, Dad obtains gun — or grabs one he already owns.

Before much of anything is discovered (LEST it be discovered?)

He simply heads two doors down, kills foster Dad, attempts to kill foster mother, DOES kill his own daughter,

What a life she led with her FATHER, a STEPMOTHER, two stepsiblings, and being molested, ALLEGEDLY.

SOMEONE TALKS. She gets out, but not safe. Now she’s dead.

Oh yeah, and not one to go to prison, her father also shoots himself, fatally.

Her MOM was in another state — WHY?

Just another small, friendly, Tennessee Town.

Does anyone know her brief life well enough to tell its brief story? Because when these things happen

at home, the theme is NOT telling anyone outside the family; collusion is the order of the day.

THIS ARTICLE IS FROM TODAY — August 4, 2009

QUIZ — from what YEAR are the orange quotes mid-article?

ANSWER BELOW.

Color Code:

light blue — quotes the article
black — my comments
orange — quotes from a different article (speech, to be precise).

Police: Dad fatally shoots daughter, foster dad

By TRAVIS LOLLER, Associated Press Writer – 31 mins ago

(AND, SELF) (AND TRIES TO KILL FOSTER MOTHER, too)

DYERSBURG, Tenn. – Neighbors in Tennessee are asking why a teenage girl

fatally shot by her father was placed with a foster family just two doors down

after he was accused of abusing her.

Omitted from this lead sentence — ONE WEEK after . . . . .

I believe one of the tags on this one might be “AFTER SHE SPEAKS UP” (if it was the daughter, or her mother, or her stepmother)

This puts a CHILL on reporting abuse…

As dads disappear, the American family is becoming significantly weaker and less capable of fulfilling

its fundamental responsibility

of nurturing and socializing children and conveying values to them.

In turn, the risks to the health and well-being of America’s children

are becoming significantly higher.

Christopher Milburn, 34, killed the 15-year-old and her foster father and

wounded her foster mother before taking his own life Sunday, authorities said.

Sounds like a virtual honor-killing of some sort..

Children growing up without fathers, research shows, are far more likely to live in poverty,

to fail in school, to experience behavioral and emotional problems,

to develop drug and alcohol problems,

to be victims of physical abuse and neglect and, tragically, to commit suicide.

{{THis being a case in point, I suppose?}}

{{The order of events is reversed. Victims of physical (and sexual) abuse are often

turning to drugs, alcohol, and other risky behaviors as a result, per a decade-long

(and basically ignored by the fatherhood movement) Kaiser/CDC study (see blogroll to right), completed the

year before THIS quote I am inserting to this recent Tennessee tragedy.}}

Neighbor Frank Hipps said Milburn was good friends with Todd Randolph, the 46-year-old foster father,

and had worked for him in the past. Hipps, who had known both men for about eight years, said he didn’t know

the details of the abuse allegations but questioned why the girl had been placed so close.

Maybe he didn’t know them so well as he thought.

Who paid WHOM to get this daughter switched only 2 doors down, instead of the Dad switched out of the neighborhood?

Dad used to work for the foster father? Just HOW inbred was this town, exactly?

A mature 46 year old man, foster father, married, and a daughter in the home.

Let’s do the Father/Daughter math: 34 – 15 is HOW old was he when he got a woman pregnant?

Legally old enough: 19. Probably just out of high school.

“That kid shouldn’t have been in that house,” he said.

I agree. I think she should’ve been with her mother.

“This might have been preventable if she had been placed with foster parents out of the community.”

MIGHT is true, especially if he still knew where she was ….

OR for SURE if the man had been in jail for molesting his daughters, which is where child-molesters belong, at least to start.

Neither police in Dyersburg, in northwestern Tennessee, nor child services agency spokesman Rob Johnson

would elaborate on the abuse allegations other than to say the investigation began last week.

The girl, whose name was not released, had been staying with Todd and Susan Randolph

while the state Department of Children’s Services investigated, Dyersburg Police Capt. Steve Isbell said.

WHo paid WHOM to put her there? Come’ ON! !!! Give the girl a fresh start!

Susan Randolph, the girl’s foster mother, was released from a Memphis hospital Monday.

Frank Hipps’ wife, Tammy, said the 15-year-old was Milburn’s daughter by a previous relationship.

He was married and the couple had two younger daughters.

The court probably saw a stable TWO-parent family, it probably had at least HEARD about

the great crisis of fatherlessness we’ve been plagued with as a nation for the past about 15 years

(This girl was born right around the time this doctrine took nationalized, Congressionally recognized wings..

She must’ve been born around 1994. See below. Gee, by then, my In-the-home husband had already

started assaulting me, between babies. WHat a coincidence that, unbeknownst to me, my government

was aware of the crisis and addressing it. . . . . Oh, excuse me, not the crisis of child molestation or

domestic violence, but of FATHERLESSNESS.

The girl’s mother was living out of state

and police were waiting for her to arrive before releasing the girl’s name, Isbell said.

Police found the teenager and Todd Randolph dead at the Randolph home and Milburn about a block away,

dead of a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

One less child molester, allegedly, OR man who didn’t trust the legal system to get the truth out of his innocence.

Guess they must do things different in Family Court in Tennessee; he’d have been FINE if he could just connect

with some PAS-theory court professional and discredit whoever was alleging the abuse. Unless it was the girl…

Charles Wootton, 71, who lives across the street from the Randolphs, said he heard five pops. He looked out the window

and saw Randolph on the ground near the mailbox.

“My wife opened the door and walked out and seen the blood. That’s when I called 911,” he said.

Wootton said neighbors started to gather at the Randolphs’ house and a nurse performed CPR on Todd Randolph,

who had been shot through the neck. {{FOR THE CRIME OF . . . . . . . ??}}

Wootton said when he first looked at Susan Randolph, he thought she was dead, too.

“She told me who did it,” Wootton said.

The Randolphs have two young children who were at their grandparents’ house during the shootings, Wootton said.

Wootton had moved to the neighborhood about two weeks ago, and Todd Randolph had mowed his yard several times.

“The people around here are just about the friendliest you’ve ever met,” said Wootton. “I don’t know what happened to that guy.”

MORAL OF THE STORY: FRIENDLY PEOPLE CAN STILL MOLEST THEIR CHILDREN. WHO REPORTED? THE DAUGHTER?

THE NEW WOMAN? ONE OF HER MANDATED REPORTERS.

Isbell said Milburn had no criminal record in Dyersburg, a city of approximately 18,000 people about 70 miles northeast of Memphis.

Tammy Hipps said Milburn worked as a counselor at the McDowell Center for Children,

which helps at-risk and troubled children.

Well, was he falsely accused or properly accused?

If properly, then again, let’s note here: PERPS like places that give them access to CHILDREN, esp. troubled ones.

The shootings came just over two weeks after Jacob Levi Shaffer of Fayetteville, a small Tennessee town

near the Alabama border about.

70 miles west of Chattanooga, was accused of fatally stabbing his estranged wife,

three members of her family and a neighbor boy to death on July 18.

He also is accused of beating an acquaintance to death in nearby Huntsville, Ala.

BEFORE or AFTER she became “inexplicably” “estranged”??

Perhaps stories like these are why the word “RESPONSIBLE” was added to things like, “National Fathers Return Day?”

One Congressional discussion of which I give, below:

FROM THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD:

Lieberman, Joseph[D-CT]
Begin	1999-06-17	10:13:34
End		10:21:48
Length	00:08:14

Leading off with African Americans and teen pregnancies, he relates:

Mr. LIEBERMAN.

Mr. President, I want to say just a few words on the jarring statistics from that report and column for my colleagues.

Of African American children born in 1996, 70 percent were born to unmarried mothers. At least 80 percent, according to the report,

can expect to spend a significant part of their childhood apart from their fathers.

We can take some comfort and encouragement from the fact that the teen pregnancy rate has dropped in the last few years. But the numbers cited in Mr. Kelly’s column and in the report are nonetheless profoundly unsettling, especially given what we know about the impact of fatherlessness, and indicate we are in the midst of what Kelly aptly terms a “national calamity.”

It is a calamity. Of course, it is not limited to the African American community. On any given night, 4 out of 10 children in
this country are sleeping in homes without fathers.

COMMENTARY:

(THis mental image appears to be far less vivid than the ones of SOME fathers doing horrible things when they DID or DO live

with their children..

Like beating them. Or having sex with them. Or beating their mothers. Or simply refusing to work OR help around the home. Or,

engaging in multiple sexual relationships with other women while married. Or verbally berating a mother in front of the children.

SOME Dads are great Dads and SOME Dads are a terror. Likewise, SOME Moms are great Moms, and SOME Moms are negligent

or bad Moms. It is also harder for a mother to care properly for her children, or in the best manner, which she is afraid of being assaulted

over a minor issue by the Dad when he comes home. If he does that day. Are these senators thinking about these images when they

shudder and are aghast at a home without a Dad).

Many homes were without Dads during the World Wars I, II, Korean War, Viet Nam War, in Iraq, Afghanistan, and many other places

men (and women) have been sent because men decided to make war with each other, in the name of peace and democracy and self-protection.

Some homes of law enforcement officers are now without Dads in them because their Dad responded to a domestic violence dispute, and

caught a bullet, generally also taking out the attacking father as well.

MY Dad’s home, growing up between two of the abovementioned wars was without a Dad in it because, guess what: His Dad (a fireman),

got tired of beating his German immigrant wife and abandoned her with three children. He witnessed this growing up.

He went on to become a successful scientist, raise children he did NOT beat (at least I wasn’t and I never saw my siblings taking this),

studied hard, worked hard, sent ALL children not just to, but also through college also, and left an inheritance. And provide for, from what

I am told/understand, not only his own mother, but also a younger brother who never quite got it together, possibly related to something that

happened when he WAS with that abusive Dad, or what, I was never told. That brother also served his country as a soldier, and died before his time,

never having married or had children.

My Dad NEVER put his children (all daughters) in contact with the abusing/beating/abandoning father, ever, in his lifetime.

I never regretted this, that I can recall. How can you regret something you never saw, where the only thing you knew about him was,

he beat the grandmother that I DID know (a little bit).

However, while Sen. Lieberman was making this speech, about a decade ago, I was for the first time in a full decade of substantial

domestic violence in MY daughters’ lives, with them at an overnight, stay-away camp, a music camp, which we had managed to get

to no thinks from the father who never left. For two weeks, I was not going to be abused at night and was around people who actually

treated me respectfully, and I worked along side them in my profession. We had had a real push getting up there, and were punished

soundly for having left, but during that week and seeing the response to us getting free from abuse for only (and not entirely; there was

a dour-faced, rules-of-camp breaking midweek visit, where $20 was casually tossed at me so I might have enough gas to get back home)

I MADE UP MY MIND that this domestic violence restraining order was GOING to be filed, and I’m “out of here.”

How ironic that i didn’t know what was being prated and pronounced in Washington, D.C. at this time.

Here’s the rest of this little 8 minute speech, in case you WOULD like the names of some of the prominent thinkers behind this

June 1999 presentation to the President of the United States, and get a glimpse inside the working of great, Constitution-respecting, minds

when left unsupervised in the Capital of our beloved country:

We can take some comfort and encouragement from the fact that the teen pregnancy rate has dropped

in the last few years. But the numbers cited in Mr. Kelly’s column and in the report are nonetheless

profoundly unsettling, especially given what we know about the impact of fatherlessness,

{{Gee, that must have been a grass-roots appeal from the teen mothers for help, or their mothers, or

theirs sisters. WHERE did this knowledge about the impact of fatherless come from, given the

establishment in 1994 of: (A) The Violence Against Women Act (help some women leave, rather than

stay, in abusive, dangerous relationships) and (B) Also in 1994, the National Fatherhood Initiative.
(Should I compare months of incorporation as nonprofit with the passage of the law?)}}

and indicate we are

in the midst of what Kelly aptly terms a “national calamity.” It is a calamity. Of course, it is not limited to

the African American community. On any given night, 4 out of 10 children in this country are sleeping in homes without fathers.

(CONTINUED QUOTE, in different format..):

At the end of this column, Michael Kelly asks: How could this happen

in a Nation like ours? And he wonders if anyone is paying attention.

Well, the fact is that people are beginning to pay attention, although

it tends to be more people at the grassroots level who are actively

seeking solutions neighborhood by neighborhood.

{{Evidence being….. WHO?? Time frame? Organizations? Written declarations by any of these?}}

The best known of these groups {{in fact the ONLY one named here..}}

is called the National Fatherhood Initiative.

{{Possibly because of its funding? and prominence of who’s in it?}}

I think it has made tremendous progress in recent years {{CONTEXT 1994-1999}}

in raising awareness of father absence and its impact on our society and in mobilizing a

national effort to promote responsible fatherhood.

Per the HHS TAGGS search on its name:

Fiscal Year	Grantee Name	State	Award Number	Award Title	CFDA Number	Sum of Actions
2008	NATIONAL FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE	MD	90FB0001	NATIONAL FATERHOOD CAPACITY BUILDING INITIATIVE	93086	$ 999,534
2007	NATIONAL FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE	MD	90FB0001	NATIONAL FATERHOOD CAPACITY BUILDING INITIATIVE	93086	$ 999,534
2006	NATIONAL FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE	MD	90FB0001	NATIONAL FATERHOOD CAPACITY BUILDING INITIATIVE	93086	$ 999,534
2001	NATIONAL FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE	MD	90XP0023	THE RESPONSIBILE FATHERHOOD PUABLIC EDUCATION PROGRAM	93647	$ 500,000

And for column width, same search (common field: Award# / CFDA Code)

Fiscal Year	Award Number	Action Issue Date	CFDA Number	CFDA Program Name	Award Activity Type	Award Action Type	Principal Investigator	Sum of Actions
2008	90FB0001	09/25/2008	93086	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION	CHRISTHOPHER BEARD	$ 999,534
2007	90FB0001	09/21/2007	93086	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION	CHRISTHOPHER BROWN	$ 999,534
2006	90FB0001	09/25/2006	93086	Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants	DEMONSTRATION	NEW	CHRISTHOPHER BROWN	$ 999,534
2001	90XP0023	04/09/2001	93647	Social Services Research and Demonstration	SOCIAL SERVICES	NEW	HEATHER THURMAN	$ 500,000

I’d DONE data entry before, and typing. Do you know what the odds of someone even on no sleep, and having a sugar buzz, making THAT many

mistakes in 4 entries (fatherhood, responsible, and public, plus “Christopher” spelled wrong. Same grant, 3rd year, “Christhopher Brown” entered a

samesex marriage, apparently and changed last name “Brown” to his partner’s name “Beard”?

This database exists so the public can search on it. Hmmm…… I wonder if they know to search for misspelled names…. and key terms.

AND SINCE 2000– seen below:

Funding for the “Father Organization” in this “national effort”

Bar chart: info duplicated below as table

93.086: Healthy Marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants

$1,999,068

However the funding for the wild oats it sowed, under this # 93.086:

(I JUST LEARNED) I believe that this code only arose (emerged naturally of course) in about 2006. However, as of 2009,

it is still not a searchable agency code on the USASPENDING.gov. Either in listing “all” programs, or under the agency it belongs under

Hmmm — $2 million less in California for our shelters? (yes, yes, I realize this is federal, not state, spending).

2000-2009 NFI Funding: (See bar chart): Well, I guessed this may not be responsible “Spelling” on whoever entered the data,

but . . . .

When we simply search only the word

“fatherhood” under “recipient” for FY2000-2009,

we get an entirely different picture (also diff’t database):

Top 5 Known Congressional Districts where Recipients are Located

District of Columbia nonvoting (Eleanor Holmes Norton)	$6,942,352
Maryland 08 (Constance A. Morella / Chris Van Hollen)	$2,625,112

Yes this is definitely an “up from the people” grassroots movement,

and not a DC.-down

initiative, surely. They are just responding to (a certain sector) of their constitutents, and from Washington, acting on it. I know straight out of

getting out of my house safe, the FIRST thing on my mind was telling Washington, I needed (well, another) father in the home, since now

I was a “female-headed” household and my children, while this Domestic Violence Restraining order was in effect, were sleeping in a fatherless

home and in danger of (NOT) learning the rights values. They were learning that that stuff they witnessed growing up was illegal. And how to

leave a dangerous relationship and start to recover.

Of course, family court was there waiting for them to go UNlearn those values, fast, and that the 14th Amendment is just a theory.

Top 10 Recipients

NATIONAL FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE	$11,067,190
FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE	$8,673,900
INSTITUTE RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD	$6,557,520
INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM RE	$1,500,000
INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITA	$300,000
INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. RE	$99,350
INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAMILY REVI	$-14,518 **

93647 word “fatherhood”

Was that misspelling intentional? I mean, it WOULD complicate a search by Award Title

Searching, CFDA 93647 (Not the CFDA actually assigned the word “fatherhood” in its description) & word “fatherhood” (“keyword in award title”):

I”ll split in 2, so it displays better:

Exact same search, different fields, so you can see grantee, principal investigators….

i.e.,

“It did this ALL on its own altruistic self, and I’m just reporting on it here.”

The President (is this the same one that signed that 1995 proclamation? about fatherhood?)

SEARCH ON ALL grants, with only the word “fatherhood” in the grant (not grantee) title, produced

358 records, of which here are the 1995-1999 ones:

1999	INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITALIZATION	WASHINGTON	DC	Non-Profit Private Non-Government Organizations	90XA0005	REPLICATION & REVITALIZATION FATHERHOOD MODEL	93670	OTHER	NEW	$ 300,000
1999	INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITALIZATION	WASHINGTON	DC	Non-Profit Private Non-Government Organizations	90XP0014	EVALUATION OF THE INSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD	93647	SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH (INCLUDES SURVEYS)	NEW	$ 180,000
1999	OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY, RESEARCH FOUNDATION	COLUMBUS	OH	State Government	R01HD035702	IMPROVING AND EVALUATING NLSY FATHERHOOD DATA	93864	SCIENTIFIC/HEALTH RESEARCH (INCLUDES SURVEYS)	NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION	$ 139,665
1999	UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA, SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH	MINNEAPOLIS	MN	State Government	R40MC00141	AN INTERVENTION FOR THE TRANSITION TO FATHERHOOD	93110	SCIENTIFIC/HEALTH RESEARCH (INCLUDES SURVEYS)	NEW	$ 344,470
1999	UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA NORMAN CAMPUS	NORMAN	OK	State Government	R40MC00110	AMERICAN INDIAN FATHERHOOD IN TWO OKLAHOMA COMMUNITIES	93110	SCIENTIFIC/HEALTH RESEARCH (INCLUDES SURVEYS)	NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION	$ 149,507
1998	OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY, RESEARCH FOUNDATION	COLUMBUS	OH	State Government	R01HD035702	IMPROVING AND EVALUATING NLSY FATHERHOOD DATA	93864	SCIENTIFIC/HEALTH RESEARCH (INCLUDES SURVEYS)	NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION	$ 104,927
1998	UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA NORMAN CAMPUS	NORMAN	OK	State Government	1R40MC0011001	AMERICAN INDIAN FATHERHOOD IN TWO OKLAHOMA COMMUNITIES	93110	SCIENTIFIC/HEALTH RESEARCH (INCLUDES SURVEYS)	NEW	$ 154,395
1997	OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY	COLUMBUS	OH	State Government	R01HD35702	IMPROVING AND EVALUATING NLSY FATHERHOOD DATA	93864	SCIENTIFIC/HEALTH RESEARCH (INCLUDES SURVEYS)	NEW	$ 119,899
1995	ADDISON COUNTY PARENT & CHILD CENTER	MIDDLEBURY	VT	County Government	90PR0005	RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECTS	93647	DEMONSTRATION	NEW	$ 85,000
1995	INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITALIZATION	WASHINGTON	DC	Non-Profit Private Non-Government Organizations	90PR0003	RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECTS	93647	DEMONSTRATION	NEW	$ 85,000
1995	INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITALIZATION	WASHINGTON	DC	Non-Profit Private Non-Government Organizations	90PR0004	RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECTS	93647	DEMONSTRATION	NEW	$ 85,000
1995	ST. BERNANDINE’S HEAD START	BALTIMORE	MD	Non-Profit Public Non-Government Organizations	90PR0002	RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECTS	93647	DEMONSTRATION	NEW	$ 85,000
1995	WISHARD MEMORIAL HOSPITAL	INDIANAPOLIS	IN	County Government	90PR0001	RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECTS	93647	DEMONSTRATION	NEW	$ 85,000

Notice the variety of recipients, including Universities (this will be useful for later “evidence-based data” resulting from grants to study the topic.

Notice that the TYPE of grants appears to be either “new” or “noncompeting.” Hmmm.

AND NOW Sen Lieberman is reporting on this grassroots movement.

Along with a group of allies, the National Fatherhood Initiative has

been establishing educational programs in hundreds of cities and

towns across America.

It has pulled together bipartisan task forces in

the Senate, the House, and among the Nation’s Governors and

mayors.

YES< there’s ONE thing that a bipartisan majority male Congress and the Nation’s (also primarily male,

if I’m not mistaken??) can unite on, and that the problem with the nation

relates to a lack of male (father) influence on young children throughout the land.

Presumably, these children that are spending, probably, the majority of their waking hours

in school, are not connecting with any decent father figures or adult males and learning from them

good values.

I wonder what the male/female ratio of teachers is in the nation’s elementary and high schools….

It has worked with us to explore public policies that

encourage and support the efforts of fathers to become more involved

in the lives of their children.

Last Monday, the National Fatherhood Initiative held its annual

(FIFTH?) national fatherhood summit here in Washington. At that summit, Gen.

Colin Powell, and an impressive and wide-ranging group of experts

and advocates, talked in depth about the father absence crisis in our

cities and towns and brainstormed about what we can do to turn this

troubling situation around.

And Last June, 2009 President OBAMA, had a “town hall on fatherhood”

which was visited by a major representative in the Violence Against Women movement

(see last post). 15 years later, these articles are still leading, suicides (NOT by the troubled

teens, bu tby at times the fathers who troubled them….) are still happening. Well, the

doctrine’s NOT about to change, it must because THAT murderous, suicide-committing father

HIMSELF had no father model in his life.

There are limits to what we in Government can do to meet this

challenge and advance the cause of responsible fatherhood because,

Because — Because — Because, “regretfully” I supposed according to this point of view,

the FOUNDING Fathers put LIMITS to government into the U.S. Constitution,** and a few

MORE also made their way into the Bill of Rights as Amendments.

(**To appreciate the link — or be tempted to read it, hover cursor over it)

I can’t WAIT til the “Equal Rights” Amendment makes it in, if it ever will.

Of course I would settle for an enforced and respected 14th Amendment:

after all, it is hard to change people’s attitudes and behaviors and

values through legislation.

Possibly because the purpose of legislation is to express THEIR attitudes, by laws they voted on,

or their elected representatives did. Possibly because the purpose of government is to PROTECT

the inalienable rights of citizens….

But that doesn’t mean we are powerless,

Yes, time has shown that the federal grants systems, and initiatives, and private deliberations IS a

way to get around the danged legislation that has made “us” (Who all agree about this fatherhood crisis)

so “powerless.”

nor does it mean we can afford not to try to lessen the impact of a

problem that is literally eating away at our country.

How do you know it’s a PROBLEM and not a SYMPTOM of another problem?

In recent times, we have had a great commonality of concern

expressed in the ideological breadth of the fatherhood promotion

effort both here in the Senate and our task force, but underscored by

statements that the President, the Vice President, and the Secretary

of Health and Human Services have made on this subject in recent

years. Indeed, I think President Clinton most succinctly expressed the

importance of this problem when he said: {{in 1995….?}}}

The single biggest social problem in our society may be the growing

absence of fathers from their children’s homes because it contributes

to so many other social problems.

Again, in your opinion, supported by government-funded research with the premise already supposed.

AS WE CAN SEE BY THE ABOVE NEWS ARTICLE. THE REAL PROBLEM WITH THE SITUATION, AND

WHAT CAUSED THE MAN TO KILL 2 (NOT INCLUDING HIMSELF, AND THE FOSTER MOTHER HE TRIED TO KILL)

was HIS INDIGNANT FEELINGS ABOUT, WELL THE FATHER-ABSENCE IN HIS ADOLESCENT DAUGHTER’S LIFE.

IT WAS, REALLY, LOVE IN ACTION.

(FOR REFERENCE: This was the Monica Lewinsky president, right?

Well, I guess we can overlook that because he has just flown to North Korea,

with a shock of white hair and looking dignified (and leaner) to attempt to retrieve

two FEMALE journalists sentenced to 12 years of hard labor. I hope he succeeds.

However, his signing of that 1995 Memo sentenced women here locally to some unbelievable

long-term trauma, because of its chilling effect on the 14th Amendment (and others)

and the placement of daughters and sons in the household of men who abused (or are

abusing) either them, OR previously their mothers) (case in point).

So there are some things we can and should be trying to do. I am

pleased to note our colleagues, Senators BAYH, DOMENICI, and

others have been working to develop a legislative proposal, which I

think contains some very constructive and creative approaches

Yup, parTICULARLY creative with the laws, due process, and the titling of the

various grants involved. Let alone the use of them, or the monitoring of their use

if any indeed actually takes place.

in which the Federal Government would support financially, with

resources, some of these very promising grassroots father-promotion

efforts,

WOULD support? WOULD support?

Check HHS’s CFDA# 93.086, “promoting responsible fatherhood and healthy marriage” for yourself on THIS site:

http://usaspending.gov (under “SPENDING” “GRANTS”)

and also encourage and enact the removal of some of the

legal and policy barriers that deter men from an active presence in their children’s lives.

A “LEGAL BARRIER” MUST REFER TO A LAW, RIGHT?

Another thing I think we can do to help is to use the platform we

have on the Senate floor–this people’s forum –to elevate this

problem on the national agenda. That is why Senator GREGG and I

have come to the floor today. I am particularly grateful for the

cosponsorship of the Senator from New Hampshire, because he is the

chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Children and Families.

YES, I AM SURE WE ARE REALLY, REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT CHILDREN AND FAMILIES

MORE THAN CHARACTER, OR LEGAL RIGHTS OF MEN AND WOMEN BOTH….

We are joined by a very broad and bipartisan group of cosponsors which

includes Senators BAYH,

BROWNBACK, MACK, DODD, DOMENICI, JEFFORDS, ALLARD,

COCHRAN, LANDRIEU, BUNNING, ROBB, DORGAN, DASCHLE, and

AKAKA. I thank them all for joining in the introduction of this special

resolution this morning, which is to honor Father’s Day coming this

Sunday,

but also to raise our discussion of the problem of absent fathers in

our hopes for the promotion of responsible fatherhood.

Senator GREGG indicated this resolution would declare this Sunday’s

holiday as National Fathers Return Day and call on dads around the

country to use this day, particularly if they are absent, to reconnect

and rededicate themselves to their children’s lives, to understand and

have the self-confidence to appreciate how powerful a contribution

they can make to the well-being of the children that they have helped

to create, and to start by spending this Fathers’ Day returning for

part of

the day to their children and expressing to their children the love they

have for them and their willingness to support them. [Page: S7164]

The statement we hope to make this morning in this resolution

obviously will not change the hearts and minds of distant or

disengaged fathers, but those of us who are sponsoring the resolution

hope it will help to spur a larger national conversation about the

importance of fatherhood and help remind those absent fathers of

their responsibilities, yes, but also of the opportunity they have to

change the life of their child, about the importance of their

fatherhood, and also help remind these absent

fathers of the value of their involvement.

We ask our colleagues to join us in supporting this resolution, and

adopting it perhaps today but certainly before this week is out to

make as strong a statement as possible and to move us one step

closer to the day when every American child has the opportunity to

have a truly happy Father’s Day because he or she will be spending it

with their father.

I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.

Just for a reminder:

– Slavery Abolished. Ratified 12/6/1865. History

1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted,

shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

– Citizenship Rights. Ratified 7/9/1868. Note History

1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States

and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens

of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

WELL, wordcount 5216, enough for today.

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

August 4, 2009 at 5:20 PM

A Radical Idea — Enforce Existing Custody Laws . . and the rest…

(1)

First of all “Demonstration project” means that a few areas around the country will be targeted for experimentation with some new policies (the litigants are generally not going to be told, incidentally). Then, apart again from LITIGANT feedback, as in “we are running a demonstration project and would like your feedback”, but rather, taken from things such as mediation, evaluation, and other statistical reports-from-the-courts (etc.), someone you have never heard of will (without your input) describe, evaluate, and report on this grant. (sometimes there is an uncomfortably close relationship between people GETTING the grants and people EVALUATING the grants).

After that, depending on how that reporting went, it will be expanded nationwide, at government expense, usually.

ONE THING GETS OMITTED: Lots of poor people don’t have internet access, or time to research who’s doing what about them. One aspect of violence is isolation and intentional breakdown of infrastructure. Trust me, (or don’t), most women don’t stick around for abuse, given other viable ways to get out of it. At some point, one figures out the abuser ain’t going to change, and the question then, if not at survival level yet, becomes safest exit. If it is sensed that this exit is about to happen, the controls tighten. TRUST ME, they do.

(2)

“A framework to guide custody and visitation decisions.”

? ? ?

There already IS a framework in place: Laws, and rules of court.

A). Laws. These laws were passed by elected representatives in legislatures, and as such, that’s a fairly FAIR process. When it comes to domestic violence, SOME of these include the word “rebuttable presumption against” and are followed by phrases such as “custody” or “joint custody” and the word “batterer.”

HALFWAY or less through family court process, I figured I’d get smart and look up the pertinent LAWS. Silly me, I didn’t know about the system of federal grants, policies, and that I lived in a nation with a national religion called “Designer Families.”

My point is: There is NOT a need to continue doing this. The framework exists. The only reason to continue conferring more and more is, I can only deduce, to further undermine and restructure it. OUT OF PUBLIC HEARING. . . .. .

Here’s one law(among many) that was deliberately ignored in my case:

278.  Every person, not having a right to custody, who maliciously
takes, entices away, keeps, withholds,or conceals a child and

maliciously deprives a lawful custodian of a right to custody,

or a person of a right to visitation, shall be

punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, a
fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or both that fine
and imprisonment, or by imprisonment in the state prison for 16
months, or two or three years, a fine not exceeding ten thousand
dollars ($10,000), or both that fine and imprisonment

(b) Nothing contained in this section limits the court's contempt
power.
   (c) A custody order obtained after the taking, enticing away,
keeping, withholding, or concealing of a child does not constitute a
defense to a crime charged under this section.

This single law was the framework that crumbled about 1-1/2 years prior to my starting this blog.

Along with the pre-existing (to that crime) employment.  I guess someone had been explicating and

training court personnel out of remembering this, and instead to reward this (criminal) endeavor

with a custody switch.

The law is fairly reasonable in certain areas pertaining to domestic violence. For example, it’s either a misdemeanor or a felony.

I’m not sure whether child abuse could EVER be less than a felony, but in some venues it’s getting a little hard to tell. Probably, as I say,

they are conferencing about how to figure out which is which, and whether they should report, intervene, or ignore. Or apply

“therapeutic jurisprudence” to the entire family unit because ONE of them committed a bunch of misdemeanor or felony crimes.

B) Rules of court. Although I was clueless that these existed for most of my case, someone was kind eventually and sent me the list of the local ones, so I KNEW what had been done wrong in my case from start to finish. Now I’m so smart, I even know who makes these rules. There are rules to insure due process, and there ARE rules directed TO mediators about the quality of orders coming out of this.

I was shocked when I read mine. The california ones are at: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/rules

HECK, if you scroll down, you can even read the Code of Judicial Ethics, too.

California Rules of Court
Title One. Rules Applicable to All Courts (Rules 1.1 – 1.200)	HTML \| PDF(190 KB)
Title Two. Trial Court Rules (Rules 2.1 – 2.1100)	HTML \| PDF(952 KB)
Title Three. Civil Rules (Rules 3.1 – 3.2120)	HTML \| PDF(1832 KB)
Title Four. Criminal Rules (Rules 4.1 – 4.601)	HTML \| PDF(5819 KB)
Title Five. Family and Juvenile Rules (Rules 5.1 – 5.830)	HTML \| PDF(3518 KB)
Title Six. [Reserved]	PDF (84 KB)
Title Seven. Probate Rules (Rules 7.1 – 7.1101)	HTML \| PDF(5978 KB)
Title Eight. Appellate Rules (Rules 8.1 – 8.1125)	HTML \| PDF(3208 KB)
Title Nine. Rules on Law Practice, Attorneys, and Judges (Rules 9.1 – 9.61)	HTML \| PDF(549 KB)
Title Ten. Judicial Administration Rules (Rules 10.1 – 10.1030)	HTML \| PDF(2113 KB)
Standards of Judicial Administration (Standards 2.1 – 10.80)	HTML \| PDF(775 KB)
Ethics Standards for Neutral Arbitrators in Contractual Arbitration	PDF (101 KB)
Appendix A: Judicial Council Legal Forms List	PDF (510 KB)
Appendix B: Liability Limits of a Parent or Guardian Having Custody and Control of a Minor for the Torts of a Minor	PDF (14 KB)
Appendix C: Guidelines for the Operation of Family Law Information Centers and Family Law Facilitator Offices	PDF (27 KB)
Alternative Format: Complete California Rules of Court in PDF format, compressed into a single .ZIP file.	ZIP of PDF Files (updated: 7/1/2009, 6.79 MB)

Code of Judicial Ethics
Formal standards of conduct for judges and candidates for judicial office.

(3)

“procedures currently in use in family court”

Does this mean procedures, as in those that the rules of court mandate, or procedures, as in what actually takes place?

(4)

“identify, contextualize and account for”

Excuse me, “contextualize”??? Maybe the new rules of court will explain this a little better. Does that mean, did the little child see it or not see it, or were they hit in the process? Does this mean, “in context” it was justifiable, I.e., “the devil made me do it!,” or “temporary insanity,” whereas, say, in a criminal or civil court, it would be the mundane misdemeanor worthy of some court action?

(5)

its presence seems not to consistently affect the court’s recommendations regarding custody or visitation arrangements.

I’d have to say that’s false. Reporting and identifying this appears to have the result that custody is often switched, according to a document (which I BELIEVE I linked to from BWJP’s site, although I would have to track back on this one).

Family courts traumatize battered women and hand custody to their abusers 37 percent of the time, finds a report released today (5/2008) by the Voices of Women Organizing Project. Latest story in our “Dangerous Trends, Innovative Responses” series.

“The courts’ own rules and regulations are often not followed,” Lob said. “Those kinds of things just seem so blatantly unfair and unreasonable.”

Eighty percent said their abusers used the courts to follow through on a threat to gain sole custody of the children and prevent the children from being in contact with their mothers.

Women were advised, sometimes by lawyers, not to mention domestic violence in one-quarter of cases, and not to challenge custody for fear of worsening the situation.

“To me, that’s the shocking thing,” Lob said. “We’re in a position where it’s actually sound advice for a woman not to raise these issues.”

Fifty-eight percent of women said that asking for child support triggered retaliation from their abusers.

I have personally talked myself into two conferences which were ABOUT people like me, but not FOR people like me. While these were tremendously validating and exciting (plus I spoke some informally at one of them), I was in the heat of the battle at the time (and losing total contact with my kids, but — barely — retaining the remaining single job that had survived the last round) – – BUT, I repeat, they weren’t typically inviting people like me. You have to research, knock, call, send away and beg (generally speaking, after a certain point in the family law process, someone is going to be destitute. it is simply not possible to stay in that system, be stripped of protection, and maintain a livelihood, without some extreme support or ingenious ways of getting basic needs handled.

Add to this that some of the long, drawn-out custody battles come after leaving a systematic abuser, which before separation can really wear out a person, it gets kinda interesting maintaining some work momentum.

ANYHOW, now, being a little better networked (referring to internet access AND knowing other people), I have found many of the:

foundations
publications
organizations
websites
key authors
key concepts

. . . . . and so forth, that like to talk about what I call “us,” meaning, Mothers Determined to Leave Domestic Violence (WITH kids).

It’s like any other life skill, or professional skill — after say 10 years of extensive exposure (immersion style), networking, reading, and so forth, one gets a little bit of fluency. I mean, that’s how I learned math, music, langauges, other things. Same deal here.

But unlike some other fields, for example music — I don’t think people at the top of this field typically are tone-deaf or unable to play a single instrument. If they compose, often they can play many. What one wants in this field is SOUND.

There are already laws about domestic violence as it pertains to custody.

There are already rules of court about mediation, not that I am in favor of mandated mediation at any point in time.

There are rules of court about what can go in in court. For example, a judge should not be taking testimony — and making decisions based on it — from someone who is not under oath, which happened in my case.

A judge should not make a critical decision (for example, switching custody) following criminal behavior regarding custody. There should not be partiality, and in particular, when threatening behavior clearly intended to obstruct justice has been reported, that took place outside the courtroom, this should raise an eyebrow. I had reported stalking, and submitted a signed eyewitness account. It was filed and ignored.

A judge should also give the legal and factual basis on which a decision is made when directly (in writing) requested to by an attorney, which the one in my case did not.

A mediator should take a few minutes to actually ascertain readily available (and relevant) facts before spouting off.

Now, as to the niceties of IS it domestic violence, or is it NOT domestic violence, and was THAT assault, THAT court order violation, THAT threat, or THAT child abuse as reported by CPS, a D.A., or anyone else, REALLY harmful to the child? – – – why, exactly, are all these volumes of press, books, conferences, etc. being written?

I see it as simple. Don’t HIT, don’t STALK, don’t THREATEN, don’t HARASS, don’t Destroy property of, and (whatever else the protective order reads in the particular case). It’s REALLY in basic, high school English, and doesn’t require extensive interpretation, does it, REALLY?

Another one should be obvious — don’t lie in court, or on the record, then when caught in a BIG one, make up a new one. If this goes on repeatedly, do judges need to attend institutes and conferences in order to be trained how to notice this?

SO JUST ASK ME — I’ll explain it real clear to any attorney, judge, mediator, or any one else who is still unclear that the 3-letter word “law” means “law,” and that the 5-letter word “order” means “order,” and the 7-letter word “custody” means “custody.” I have been a parent, and a teacher, and I”m not TOO confused on this generally speaking. I don’t wing it constantly, veer radically back and forth between whether I actually expect a standard to count, or not count. When learning a new skill, I focus on that one and “call” it consistently (speaking in group situations) til the point gets home.

The skill someone who has been systematically been engaging in domestic violence, which is the word VIOLENCE in it, and which includes a pattern of coercive behavior that violates boundaries (and law), and generally in “order” to give “orders” to the victim. The physical attacks (threats, intimidation, property destruction, punishments, animal abuse, isolation, and a whole other array of possible intentionally humiliating and dependency-inducing behavior towards another adult — OR child) have been compared to “POW” techniques. They are not consistent, so the person is kept on edge as to what may provoke what. Sometimes, a person can’t handle this, and provokes an explosion intentionally rather than live in the tense buildup, anticipation, and fear. It may be the one thing they CAN control in the situation. BUT, overall, what it’s “ABOUT” is giving orders. Period. Hapazardly. Basically, it’s tyranny.

I never was unclear about this for long. Not the first or second time one gets hit in the home — the dynamic is basically clear.

NOW — here we are “out” and this pattern of attempting to give orders, on the part of the former batterer, continues. WHAT is the obvious safe solution? The obvious need is to send a clear, clear message to this individual that he (or she) is now NOT in control and allowed to manipulate and give orders, instead he (or she), is now in the position of TAKING orders from a higher authority — the courts, backed up by police and the threat of arrest/jail. This is THE primary need at this time.

How does family law handle it instead? I found out, the exact opposite way. So, I found myself, during exchanges, repeatedly explaining to the various personnel involved (including police officers, who failed to get it) that the any ORDERS I was now under were the existing court orders, and I expected them to be adhered to so I could live a sane life. Between me, and the father of the girls, there was never any lack of clarity in the situation. Observed over a period of years (in family law), a court order would be obtained, and violated the FIRST weekend (or day) after its issuance. He was acting like a two-year old, testing boundaries, and getting his right to violate every time.

When a woman then puts her foot down in this manner, SHE is labeled, and the whole “thing” is labeled as “high-conflict.”

Well of course it’s high-conflict! Did we expect such a batterer to lie down and play passive easily? When someone is not looking?

Someone who’s gotten away with mayhem, which brings attention and benefits (compliance), and this is confronted, there is going to be conflict. That doesn’t mean it’s a two-way conflict. If the courts would simply pay attention to the situation instead of trying to be so “smart” all the time, more people would survive. IN plain English, this means, fewer would die. NO ONE should have to die for leaving a violent or abusive marriage, and expecting their children to be protected – – and their rights respected — also.

But they do.

Domestic violence per se can be and often is, lethal. It often escalates without warning, and without intervention (including separation)

basically ONLY escalates. Mediation is inadvisable in these cases, and joint custody is a recipe for societal trauma, and debt upon debt.

Mediation is MANDATORY in my area. I can document (now) how our particular mediator violated the rules of court at every opportunity.

SOMEWHERE (i read it) it says that a “spousal batterer” IS a clear and present danger to the physical AND mental health of the citizens of (this state, although technically we are US Citizens, not State citizens).

Study after study — including of substance abusers of various sorts (i refer to Acestudy.org, again), of prostitutes, of adult abusers or victims, and people with significant difficulties later in life (including in forming healthy relationships) – – shows that a violent, battering parent is NOT a good role model. The light bulb is already screwed in for the real stakeholders — those whose lives are at stake.

But the experts are not done yet . . . . . Even though things are already in the law.

FINALLY, the lightbulbs are going off in MY understanding as to why they won’t go off in people’s understanding whose children and lives are NOT at risk in a volatile situation, and who can (safe from the hearing of litigants or custodial mothers, in particular, or domestic violence survivors — or the children who are being molested on regular exchanges with a noncustodial parent — and so forth) : If the light bulb went off, where would they publish? Who would pay them to train the advocates, the judges, the attorneys, the mediators, and the psychologists? WHO would travel around the country and the world to discuss, well people that sometimes have trouble traveling 5-10 miles down the road to see their own kids on a weekend? (case in point).

WHAT’S THE EXCUSE FOR NOT ACTING CONSISTENTLY ON THESE BASICALLY SENSIBLE LAWS?

Here’s another reference I ran across researching something else:

IT DATES BACK TO THE YEAR 2006

{{EDITING NOTE: LINKS DIDN’T COME THROUGH — I WILL RETURN AND FIX}}

The 37-page original is downloadable. These pages have footnotes. It is well worth a read. Here is the cover page:

There are organizations (and the author here is on the board of one of them) who appear — I’ll take responsibility and qualify “to me,” although I am certainly not the only person of this opinion — to be HIGHLY invested in reframing the issue of Domestic Violence (and joint custody after it) from being a terrible role model for children, and experience for either parent, into something that people can be “counseled” out of. Supervised visitation is touted as a “solution” to this problem. People have been killed around supervised visitation, and the literature on this acknowledges it. Still, it’s ordered, and sometimes used as penalties for parents reporting their fears, or hurt to their children.

One has to ask why/ The ONLY reason i can come up with, primarily, is it’s a GREAT profession talking (and publishing) about what to do, and it’s also a great profession, “parenting classes.” There is little to no substantial evidence that even domestic violence (batterers intervention) classes change a spouse highly invested in the coercive control dynamic. Newspapers OFTEN report murders occuring shortly after someone was cleared from a DV class — or had violated a restraining order multiple times, without incarceration. The latest high-profile one I can think of (in California) was Danielle Keller and “Porn King” Mitchell (which I’ve blogged about recently). One in about 2005 that absolutely frightened me was a stalker — just a boyfriend relationship — the woman he was stalking, her body was found in the car trunk a few days after passing with flying colors the latest set of “classes.”

That’s playing Russian Roulette with people’s lives. I object, on behalf of my life, and my kids, and others, to this policy, of trying to “ascertain” who could and who could not benefit from counseling. I counsel strict consequences for domestic violence, which is a lesson in itself.

Regarding Expert Conferences (this, and others, and others, and others) – – – MOST domestic violence victims simply can’t afford to attend them! We can’t afford to subscribe to their publications, and our opinions are NOT asked — in a truly collaborative sense — in these matters. If they were, we’d say, probably to a woman, as mothers: “JUST SAY NO!”

Domestic violence includes economic abuse, and often access to the internet, or internet skills CAN be an ongoing issue. I know that in my situation, I was discouraged from using the PC unless it contributed directly to family income (his), and even in one case, I had to turn down a stable source of income from home to accommodate his desire to keep me without electronic contact with the outside world. When I finally obtained it, at around $8, or was it $18 (DNR)/month, I remember shuddering with fear as the vehicle pulled into the driveway, and praying that my internet would be turned off before he got in the front door. I had at this time worked substantial office support jobs and was internet fluent.

Another reason our voices are often not heard — not really — is that we do not have sufficient funding to take the time and write, post, publish, and attend conferences. If we have children, we are taking care of them, and ourselves. If we do NOT have children, the priority is getting back to them. And if we are domestic violence survivors of any substantial length (OR are in court with such an ex-partner or ex-spouse), it is pretty well guaranteed sheer economic survival is an ongoing issue.

Currently, I am reaching an overload on some of these topics, emotionally — and also have the situation to handle, which is not yet final, either. Support systems are constantly eroded til one begins to wonder what the prime identity is. We may trust people we know individually and personally, but after a certain point, one gets very jaundiced about organizations, ESPECIALLY nonprofit organizations promising help.

One of the best primers I am aware of on custody issues with batterers is called “The Batterer As Parent” (Bancroft/Silverman, Sage, Thousand Oaks 2002). It’s coming up on 7 years since it was published. I’ve personally heard a domestic violence expert, whose job it was to testify in criminal cases, say that this is a classic. I have this book, and my copy is dog-eared. It talks about ALL the things that the family law system as a whole absolutely REFUSES to do — support the nonabusive parent in her — or his — relationship with the children. Be wary of the risk of kidnapping (in my case, the court literally not only failed to act to protect my kids from this, after I requested it, but also failed to acknowledge it — WHEN IT HAPPENED! It talks about being aware that batterers are often chronic and convincing liars, and also of the overlap with incest perpetration.

Here are some of the ‘Scholarly” cites of this book:

Characteristics of court-mandated batterers in four cities: Diversity and dichotomies

EW Gondolf – Violence Against Women, 1999 – vaw.sagepub.com
… 1283 TABLE 2 Family Status and Parents’ Behavior of Batterers in Four Cities (in
percentages) Batterer Program Pittsburgh Denver Houston Dallas Total …
Cited by 63 – Related articles – All 3 versions

Men who batter: some pertinent characteristics.

FJMS FITCH, A Papantonio – Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease, 1983 – jonmd.com
… The authors report statistics on five major correlates of such men: violence between
the batterer’s parents, abuse of the batterer when he was a child, alcohol …
Cited by 52 – Related articles – All 3 versions

HERE IT IS IN ALL ITS 1999 GLORY AND INSIGHT, EXPERTS BACK THEN KNEW THE RISKS:

Supervised visitation in cases of domestic violence

– ►ouhsc.edu [PDF]
M Sheeran, S Hampton – Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 1999 – HeinOnline
… remain: visitation centers are not a guarantee of safety for vulnerable family members;
they do little to improve the ability of a batterer to parent in a …
Cited by 23 – Related articles – BL Direct – All 3 versions

Legal and policy responses to children exposed to domestic violence: The need to …

PG Jaffe, CV Crooks, DA Wolfe – Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 2003 – Springer
… REFERENCES Bancroft, L., & Silverman, JG (2002). The batterer as parent.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Brown, T. (2000). Charging and …
Cited by 19 – Related articles – BL Direct – All 3 versions

Childhood family violence history and women’s risk for intimate partner violence and poor …

– ►wa.gov [PDF]
L Bensley, J Van Eenwyk, K Wynkoop … – American journal of preventive medicine, 2003 – Elsevier
… 14. L. Bancroft and JG Silverman. The batterer as parent: addressing the impact
of domestic violence on family dynamics, Sage, Thousand Oaks CA (2002). 15. …
Cited by 71 – Related articles – All 11 versions

[BOOK] Children of alcoholics: A guidebook for educators, therapists, and parents

RJ Ackerman – 1983 – Learning Publications
Cited by 52 – Related articles – All 2 versions

[CITATION] The batterer as parent: Addressing the impact of domestic violence on family dynamics ( …

L Bancroft, JG Silverman – Brown, Frederico, Hewitt, & Sheehan, Problems and …
Cited by 2 – Related articles

Batterers‘reports of recidivism after counseling

A DeMaris, JK Jackson – Social Casework, 1987 – ncjrs.gov
… had problems with alcohol, and had witnessed violence between their parents. The
small sample size, the limited credibility of batterers‘ self-reports, and the

WELL, what to do? TALK some more? Out of the hearing of women and children?

I’ve managed to talk myself into a few conferences — I couldn’t afford the entrance fees for the most part. In one, I passed as a professional, up to a point. In another, I spoke about my story, and the PTSD it triggered (I was inbetween court hearings about whether or not I’d ever see my kids again) caused me to misplace the car (and house) keys and almost have to spend a night on the streets, as I’d just lost contact with the last round of professional colleagues locally. This MIGHT have cost me the last remaining job, but a very recent contact (and a current client) pulled off a “rescue.” FYI, abuse runs in families, and families are not always there to assist in the buffer zone.

About two years later, I learned that this particlar domestic violence organization (which I mistakenly — it’s a common mistake — confused with a group that was intent in stopping violence against women, i.e., saving our lives, helping us leave situations like that — has a linguistic profile similar to the whitehouse.gov “virtually invisible in public agenda” absence of the word “mother” in its website. A glance at the funding (more than a glance, actually) showed WHY.

It’s easy to make a declaration if it’s a closed -corporation discussion. It’s not that these groups don’t ACKNOWLEDGE the problems, but that they do not acknowledge how their SOLUTIONS exacerbate the already existing problems, of a parent with a REALLY bad attitude, and some REALLy serious problems that a few classes, or even a years’ worth, may or may NOT address.

And if these classes are concurrent with a typical course of action ina faith-based institution, the effects PROBABLY will cancel each other out, when it comes to protection of women.

That’s about all the time I have to post today. I hope this is proving informative.

You cannot have fatherhood and feminists in the same government grants gene pool and expect to get further down the road. The effects will cancel each other out, and leave yet larger and larger debt.

Currently, stipulations MANDATED by the VAWA act on Supervised Visitation (safe havens) contradict — categorically — with stipulations from the Health and Human Services “access visitation” grants. There’s a history (and a financial profile) to this, and I’m reading it these days. It took a while to grasp the “why.” I had to apply a rule I thought I’d mastered earlier — don’t take ANYTHING at face value, and do your background research on who’s who and doing what with whom. It’s a pain in the neck, but wise to do. As I used to learn the field of my profession (music), the terminology, to distinguish good from excellent, and know who’s who in general in my field (and as to the organizations also), it can be done in these fields also.

Again, I am still getting nationwide and intercontinental visitors — any of you are welcome to comment, particularly if you have checked any of the links and agree, or disagree. And remember — if you’re a parent, try to stay AWAY from the child support agency and work it out some other way, especially if you begin divorce or separation as a custodial mother.

Caveat emptor. (“Buyer beware”) There is no free lunch — the bill comes in later. You pay in your freedom, and you may very well pay with your future, and your children’s.

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

July 24, 2009 at 6:36 PM

Experts Examine WHY Breastfeeding is best: We MUST Know!

Sniffing Language

Cobblers notice shoes, hairdressers notice the other end of a person. I’m a domestic violence survivor, writer, reader, and I notice (sniff, I observe, I sense dynamic alterations in) LANGUAGE — the linguistic environment surrounding present and potential policies that might affect the personal survival, health welfare, and safety of my kids, me, or others I know and love, to be quite blunt about this.

I can detail about when and where this started to happen too. I noticed it, a shift in mental processing of things, a heightened sensitivity to the environment. This was odd — the less time I could dedicate to planning a rehearsal, or choosing a method or approach to a certain topic — because my life was totally dedicated to the safety and survival issues at hand, and seeking ways to ensure them, change the dynamics, and safely set a distance from a man that I simply couldn’t get the courts to give me a restraining order on, or enforce an existing court order of ANY sort, upon. Nor could I get any social group to communally put some pressure on the guy to get real, get a job, or get lost. Or, as I say here, “get honest” about any number of manners. So, I didn’t do the usual things I formerly was taught lead to good rehearsals leading to good singing. I had to get the general idea (as in, repertoire), get in there, go on instinct, respond to the singing I heard in the situation, and just lead.

The odd (and disturbing — at least to certain theories about how things work) about this was, they started singing better. Rehearsals were more dynamic, and skills and sound improved. In more than one group. Go figure! Hmm. . . . .

I came to understand that the habit of being dynamically sensitive to my environment, and little details in it, had carried over into the rehearsal situation. And in the arts, this is GOOD, because they come from the spirit and soul within. I had no time to be cerebral, cognitive and detached, I had to be present, open, and responsive. And that was EXACTLY what the job required!

The exact opposite of this approach to life and relationships can be seen in the detached, categorizing, labeling, and pronouncing language of some of the social sciences. I do not think the entire field should be tossed, but I think that there are serious loopholes when doctrine is made in a laboratory, without understanding that people (adults, children, and others) really DO behave differently under observation, for the most part, than when not. If the family law system acknowledged this, I think custody evaluators would probably be done away with. You can’t really evaluate someone who is doing a performance for you, come on! And if anyone is GREAT a “performance” it’s a family, or an individual, caught up in the cycle of abuse, incest, or domestic violence. Or, alcoholism, for that matter. The whole DEAL is about keeping up the pretense, not talking about it.

A woman’s or a child’s safety could be literally dependent upon how good a front she puts up for public, once the abuser knows he’s being looked at more carefully. I know about this.

For more on this hypersensitivity, see the book “Animals in Translation” by Temple Grandin, an autistic (or autims survivor?) animal behavioralist. I understood, after reading this, how my mind had begun to behave more like a deer in the headlights, after a few years post-restraining order, mid-family court, weekly-exchange of kids-wise. I had lost the sense of predictability in our daily schedule, and I had lost this because EVERY weekend, and leading up to it or recovering from it, I had to deal with a potential incident with the father of our children regarding picking up or, if I was able to, retrieving our children from exchanges. This was one of the most insane custody orders post restraining order I have EVER heard of, but it was all we had to deal with. This also relates directly to why I no longer work in a certain field, in which jobs happened on weekends. The two became so associated in my brain that engaging in in the one, to this day, reminds me of that trauma. This can be great on certain arts, and hell on the rest of life.

PREY animals notice more and interpret less. This is why sometimes horses wear blinders, when pulling a taxi in traffic, for example. Humans are designed to interpret more, and once they have got a label, enabling mental filing, notice less. However, a teacher (or conductor) must both keep the goal in mind AND notice, and reconcile the balance. They learn how to do this (for survival).

Theorists, on the other hand, may continue to get a government funding grant, whether or not their theories are true, work, or help or hurt people. There is a considerable distance between funding and performance. I notice, therefore, cognitive detachment in linguistic descriptions in some of these topics.

Sometimes this “noticing language” habit is entertaining and fun. Sometimes, it’s disturbing and annoying. HOWEVER, I think that society might do well, in general, to listen to some of the people on its outskirts. We are the canaries in the coal mine, and certain things we have to say might contradict (in fact generally WILL contradict) the experts.

Of course, the experts are the ones who have the platform, even when their opinions contradict each other — they seem to carry more weight than anyone whose degrees are not as high or deep (Ph.D.) as others. Remind me, next decade, to go get that Ph.D., maybe it will help…..

That’s one way of explaining that I happen to notice language. And there is a style of talking about basic human behavior (of which stalking happens to relate to hunting, which is sometimes followed by a kill, which is why I don’t like being the one followed, or told by people I report this to, you’re exaggerating. No, I’m not…. I trust the instinct in this one.) I’m almost getting to the point that I don’t trust language that doesn’t take into account some basic human instincts and realities –ONE of which is, soon after birth or after giving birth, making the nipple connection, and nursing — or allowing it to take place.

. . .

OK NOW….

Is there really a war on fatherhood? Or is it on motherhood? Where’s Mom?

Consider this word:

Breastfeeding,

When, where, how and why did it become so odd a human behavior that it required research papers to be published, to examine — or safeguard — it?

What is now called breastfeeding used to be (culturally, and universally) commonplace.

Trailer words associated with the fact that both a breast and getting fed happened to be involved, included:

Nursing, Cherishing, Protecting, Imparting,

Loving, Knowing,

Gentleness, Compassion, Confidence one is loved and wanted,

just being there and looking at each other, or nudging each other in a relaxed, nondemanding fashion,

were formerly normal, healthy human behaviors, and not only right after sex.

(If you’re unclear, see “google images” for some visuals)

I CALL THOSE GOOD THINGS.

Now the relationships between some of these must be studied, so as to better predict [and manage] outcomes

I predict that studying what used to be normal, healthy human behaviors (but have been dismantled by various institutions, and industries in “developed’ countries) will soon become the normal human behavior. It certainly appears to be a healthy way to make a steady income, healthier than most. these days, including producing food, if you’re a small farmer, or milking cows.

Asking, well, was it GOOD or NOT good? If it was good, WHY was it good? How can we duplicate it, or better yet, multiply it, without dismantling, if possible, some of the institutions that formerly dismantled, or put some pretty weird warps, in the human family situation.

Who funds these studies and poses these questions? Typically, a government, or a private foundation funding either the government, or some nonprofit, that has an agenda, or some combination of all of the above, as we find in the Fatherhood Movement’s cooperation between many entitities, casting its wide and technically superb (inter)net (presence) over the human, well, language, eliminating the usage of the word “mother” in order to restructure society into a different image. I am going to post another time about a former (not very reputable) campaign from the heart of Fatherland America, which trumpeted the virtues of “motherhood, virtue, patience, temperance” and so forth. And what they did to whoever they thought wasn’t promoting these.

WHY is Breast Best? Well for one thing, anything so many men are fixated on can’t be all that bad.

Just kidding — WHY is breastfeeding best? Why not ask a Mom? (Where did Mom go, anyhow??)

Nursing is normal. Did I know much about it before I began? Honestly, no. I just, well, there was this brand new kid on my tummy, and it seemed the right thing to do.

Seems to me that slavery was one thing that used to break up families, intentionally so. Hmm. SOME folks got educated, but others weren’t supposed to be. They were to be educated to the limit of their job prognosis. Hmmm.

I also predict that with the womb to tomb categorization of humanity, from the moment they are born, caught, extracted, or brought forth (depending on how literary you are feeling) and begin to wiggle, the measuring WILL not stop, we will forget what a normal human, bonding relationship WAS. We won’t have living examples of it to learn from.

Now that ATTITUDE worries me. I have been worried about this for many months, as I began to examine where my justice went, especially this last year. Where my children went had already been determined, and I had also correctly looked up that the correct label for the manner in which they went comes under the category “child-stealing.” The next question was, why was there no concensus on what the law already conceded, and what could I do to get them back? I looked around with wonder and amazement to see that with flip of the coin, what in one situation was a felony, in an entirely different one (see title of this blog) was interpreted as initiative to be rewarded with custody. SURELY a father who would love his children enough to steal them, and harass their mother with court case after court case must have been motivated by love and concern. And SURELy a mother who actually resisted this, and attempted to retain an emotional connection (let alone visual contact) with BOTH her children AND her livelihood (profession) through choosing an alternate educational arrangement must have an unnatural attachment thing going on. Now, I didn’t have one set of kids I DID nurse and one set I DIDn’t for comparison, but I do know that, even absent from them, there’s an attachment there, and it’s weird every day to have it suddenly aborted. Yes, I did use that word.

In my last post I looked at “Where’s Mom?” in a website representing our national direction, and suggested that the ship of state may have lost its moorings, possibly by ignoring the obvious: So far, technologically, you DO need a Mom to actually get a family, even if it’s dis-assembled shortly after birth.

Where’s Mom? is a very relevant question, I thought.

So, here’s an article that came across my (virtual) desk, my Inbox, on some astonishingly new and revolutionary perspectives on WHY breastfeeding is best, at least up until a judge decides she’s doing it for the wrong reasons, to get even with an ex. . . . . and sets a limit on how long this parental alienation can be permitted. The things judges must know these days . . . .

We noncustodial Moms (yes, we converse with each other about how and why that happened, and we research and blog, and vote and call our Congresspeople, and write, and support each other, because the court system sure ain’t…..) were happy to find one that counteracted some of this “father-absence” hypocrisy. YEAH, a lot of fathers are absent. Now let’s talk about WHY! and stop scapegoating an entire gender!

This article supports the premises that for an infant to have a bonding time with Mom growing up (which may or may not contradict our present government’s wish to push things in a different direction, send Mom to work and give us those babies; we have Ph.D.candidate Human Behavioralists needing a grant-funded slot at the local Head Start outfit, think about their job futures, OK? If they do not publish, they might perish! It’s your civic duty to produce low-income babies (or neglect staying home if you’re not low-income) for them to study.)

It IS interesting too, it talks about more than the nipples and what spurts out of them, it talks even about more than the cuddling. It looks at subsequent behaviors. So do I, at the bottom. I picked a few well-known names.

(Did I mention it’s written by women, also?)

Abstract

Research paper no. 43

Breastfeeding and infants’ time use (title is link)

Jennifer Baxter and Julie Smith

Australian Institute of Family Studies, June 2009, 48 pp. ISBN 978-1-921414-09-1. ISSN 1446-9863 (Print); ISSN 1446-9871 (Online)

Being breastfed during infancy is known to improve developmental outcomes, but the pathways by which this occurs remain unclear.

Research Paper no. 43: “Breastfeeding and infants’ time use.”

(More commentary on what governments are studying these days…..)

While I’m glad this study DOES support the concept that breastfeeding is good, as when judges in Canada and Australia have to decide on whether or not to agree with the obvious, or respond to the gentle tug on THEIR consciences from the “But Dads are Nurturers TOO!” demands, Moms (Noncustodial ones, through family court matters) were happy to read this, I still have to ask, WHY do we have to even ask? I mean, in what kind of world are studies needed of this?

Here’s what kind of world:

IN a world of ever-shifting psychological and spiritual plate tectonics, it’s only human to want to be oh so sure about the obvious. WHY do we need to be oh-so-sure? (Using the word “we” loosely, I am not in that mix)

WHY is how to develop and serve “humans” and “families” really necessary?? What are they, food?

Why not leave them alone to figure it out? Why not treat them as animate beings with spirit, soul, body, desires, individuality, and what’s more, hopes, goals, and a variety of pathways in which to wend their way through life, like their hunter-gatherer ancestors?

That is, FYI, what they are — not slabs of flesh, inanimate, passive, waiting to be directed, injected, detected, and projected upon the motion picture screen of some faraway government policy! Unless they (translation: WE — ALL — begin to see each other in this manner, the only logical consequence is more and more literally inanimate, and in fact lifeless (or is it comatose?) slabs of flesh, and there may not be enough slots to store us in. Please, PLEASE, remember Auschwitz, and the ATTITUDES that preceded this, and stop the stereotyping and detached, detached, well thank God it ain’t ME, emotional noninvolvement with other human beings, when it comes to running nations and large enterprises.

People have been born for many, many centuries and millennia. Nations (if not religions, unfortunately) and empires have come and gone.

(And these two are related).

With each new empire, history, and culture, is often re-written, by the winners.

They can crumble over germs or steel, over oppressing people so bad they simply well up and oust a regime, assassinate a dictator, and/or each other. Or assassinations, oustings and regime changes can happen for other reasons. In this world there are now, and have historically been famines, floods, fires, and wars; there is cruelty and prejudice, there is waste and greed. These are qualities that, as far as I can see, have been around a long time, and are not going anywhere soon. And I ABSOLUTELy don’t believe they are going away by government fiat, design or study.

Given that generic assessment of history, I have to ask, then what exactly are were DOING in this profession of Human Behavioral Sciences? What were its origins, what are its purposes and why are “we” doing these things?

I’m a researcher, in fact both my parents were too, one a scientist, the other a librarian. I’m a SEARCHER, I’m curious about causes.

One thing in my searchings I have come to conclude: some of the worst damages to human rights, and people, has been in the name of theories (or doctrines) similar to the ones I’m reading about now, in our country. I think it’s an ATTITUDE thing, to study human populace as if they were rats, or mice, or microbes. I’m not anti-medicine, nad I do appreciate knowing things about molecules, hormones, and, say, that what just happened to me when that stalker called, again, may relate to adrenaline or cortisol, and has some sense behind the chemistry of it.

However, I think in the social sciences, it’s gone off the deep end into crowd control. I think it is a clear indication of caste-maintenance, which ain’t supposed to be in the USA, but is.

Who’s developing this master race and utopia?

Didn’t we learn anything from Hitler, or any other genocides? Didn’t we get embarrased enough by the study of “phrenology” (measuring skull sizes, to assess intelligence) which to me has an uncomfortable sense of sociology.

Anyhow, this study may be supportive of more maternal time. Governments have already determined it’s Breast is Best, but what to do when a couple can’t keep it together til the kid is weaned? Then there have to be policies, judges have to decide, and these judges need experts. W ell, experts are just handy to have around.

Are there any MOMs around who have actually seen children grow up that they nursed (and haven’t been incarcerated for this on the basis of unnatural attachment theory)?

Isn’t smarter, healthier, loved and having been held by Mom at least several times a day enough to know? Apparently not. I tend to wonder if this isn’t because another artificial nipple, breast, nurture and cuddling experience is in the mix, and will need justification. OR, it’s been challenged, and then a study is needed to maintaing a semblance of nature in nurture of infants.

Given what I’ve been reading about our Present Administration’s Parenting Advice (yes, that spells “PAPA”), motherhood is no longer acceptable. It has a conflict with Early Head Start and propping up a seriously design-flawed educational system that neither nurtures nor educates adequately, and was based on producing factory workers who don’t take orders or think too much. Crucial to this is boxing them up, and mediating all experience through the teachers and textbooks (which are highly censored).

I just watched the video of Michael Jackson recently, being interviewed about his father’s severe abuse of all 5 Jacksons, including having them perform with him sitting in his hand with a belt, and ironing cord, using Michael, the youngest, as a role model to chastise the other children, mocking his facial features (you didn’t get it from MY side) and a fairly normal adolescent thing called pimples, about how he didn’t want to grow up (and the uncanny transformation of his own face into something that looks like his hero, Peter Pan), about how his dermatologist nurse (and another surrogate Mom) gave him 3 children, which were snatched at birth (never got to nurse a drop), although by agreement, and now they are going to live with — either Grandpa (that same one that would’ve/should’ve been arrested in our day and time) or Mom (who volunteered her womb and viewed human beings as presents, not people).

The most common sense reason for nursing I can think of is that it APPEARS to be part of the design plan for human beings, and a host of other animals also. Take it away, and they’re sucking down something else for a lifetime perhaps, substitute attachments. I don’t know. It just kinda makes sense. Give the Mom and baby a chance to sit together and make a physical connection. It works together, it helps her womb return to normal size right faster, it’s overall a good arrangement unless she’s been on something harmful which would get into the child. LIfe is rough. Give’em a break!

In the US, we have HHS.

IN Australia, it’s “AIFS”

Australian Institute of Family Studies.

And has these clearinghouses:

Research and clearinghouses

Like over here, they publish, they serve, they have resources, and they have events. That’s nice…

The natural human response, anyone with some spirit at least, is to resist being managed, and only put up with so much as is necessary to get by. People are MOST human and I say most happy, really, pursuing things — that they CHOSE to pursue. Ask an adolescent male. Ask a stalker. Ask a Mom or Dad going to night school. There’s something about the pursuit of it, not the having it served up in a soup line. There’s something about making one’s own personal goals, that brings out the best in a person, or when it’s in a community, that community. When it gets too large, we lose the human element.

There’s not much more intimate, at the start of life, than what’s now called “breastfeeding.” And there’s not much more tenderizing to a Mom, when it’s in a supportive environment especially, and producing a feeling of well-being, etc., than nursing. I do not mean to idolize this, but I do mean to call attention to this.

I think this term must have come up when other ways of feeding began to compete with it. It’s not just about FEEDING. It used to be called NURSING. Now, Nursing has become a profession (and a great one, I acknowledge), and I hear there’s a shortage of it too. Perhaps if we could give people better EMOTIONAL and PHYSICAL support near the beginning of their lives, they wouldn’t need so much – or go about getting so much in other, unhealthy ways — later on in life. Many diseases and compromised immune systems have origins, it’s coming out, not only in antibodies not received as a kid, but sometimes emotional abuse and trauma — the exact OPPOSITE of nurturing.

Abstract

Research paper no. 43

Breastfeeding and infants’ time use

Jennifer Baxter and Julie Smith

Australian Institute of Family Studies, June 2009, 48 pp. ISBN 978-1-921414-09-1. ISSN 1446-9863 (Print); ISSN 1446-9871 (Online)

Being breastfed during infancy is known to improve developmental outcomes, but the pathways by which this occurs remain unclear.

Well, God forbid the us not knowing by what pathways developmental outcomes can be improved? We are, after all, in the business of improving development.

One possible yet unexplored mechanism is that breastfed infants may spend their time differently to infants who are not breastfed.

Please — PLEASE tell me, some institute is not about to intervene with that Mom’s growing relationship with an infant, and either put a video in the home for later analysis, send a social worker with a note pad to take notes, or ask the MOm, self-reporting, to distract her attention from that little being, to documenther time use. Give them a break! They’ll be in school before age 5 (at least in the US) all right already.

This paper analyses infants’ time use according to breastfeeding status in order to help inform the debate about how breastfeeding leads to improved child outcomes.

“improved child outcomes”

OK, well that sounds desirable. I’m just not used to the terminology yet. It sounds odd on my tongue. It sounds like a process that might belong more in an auto assembly line.

Now me, I’m more practically minded. If it works, keep doing it, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. That’s what my ex used to tell me when our children were sleeping, and I’d go to adjust something, make them more c omfortable, more covered, more something. “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”

If it works — keep doing it. If it doesn’t work — as, for example, pushing fatherhood on an entire nation as a response to violence against women and/or feminism, appears to be gettingi more women and children, and men, killed — THEN I’d think this should be closely examined. But why breastfeeding works ???

The analysis uses infants’ time use data from the first wave (2004) of Growing Up in Australia: The Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC), derived from diaries completed by the parents of almost 3,000 Australian infants aged 3-14 months. It explores how much time infants spend in activities such as being held or cuddled, read or talked to, or crying, using data on whether or not infants were still breastfeeding, and taking into account other child and family characteristics. It also compares time spent in different social contexts. Finally, the paper uses the time use data to analyse which infants were still breastfeeding, and what factors are associated with differences in time spent breastfeeding.

The results show that breastfed infants spend more time being held or cuddled and being read or talked to, and less time sleeping, or eating, drinking or being fed other foods. {{Well, in America, Obesity is a major issue}}

They also cried slightly more, and watched television slightly less {{I’d say that’s positive}} than infants who were not being breastfed. Those who breastfed spent more time with their parents, and in particular, almost one additional hour a day alone with their mother compared to non-breastfeeding infants. {{This beats being ignored in a daycare situation. This gives baby and Mom some down time, which she could use also!}}

These findings have important implications for how children grow, and show the value of time use data in exploring pathways to development for infants and young children. The possibility that cognitive advantages for breastfed children may arise from their distinct patterns of time use and social contexts during the breastfeeding phase is an important area for future research using survey data such as from LSAC.

Summary

Being breastfed during infancy contributes to positive developmental outcomes, as well as to good nutrition and health. Expert guidelines for optimal infant feeding recommend that infants be exclusively breastfed for the first six months of life (National Health and Medical Research Council, 2003) and, along with appropriate complementary foods, continue to be breastfed for up to two years and beyond (World Health Assembly, 2001).

{{I did this for one child. I couldn’t for the other, but there were intervening factors (like Dad hitting me, and I know this affected the hormonal balance) intervening. Neither child has ever had an issue with intelligence or obesity, and they were healthy growing up. They weren’t clingy and they weren’t overly aggressive either, until years later, and this was when they became property fought over, and in the light of this, they were institutionalized again — at least their education was. I know that in our case, this was not aimed to help their education, but to break their bond with me. I cannot speak for every case.}}

While being breastfed during infancy is known to improve developmental outcomes, the pathways by which this occurs remain unclear. Components of breast milk are known to be important to brain development, but an important question remains as to whether the observed developmental advantages of children being breastfed also represent unobserved differences in the early life experiences of infants who were breastfed compared to those who were not. For example, there may be aspects of the breastfeeding mother’s behaviour or her interaction with the infant that differ from the non-breastfeeding mother. {{I KNEW THAT!}} One possible yet unexplored mechanism is that breastfed infants may spend their time differently to infants who are not breastfed. Time use research provides a potentially useful tool for further investigation of this issue.

A possible link between time use and children’s outcomes has a basis in the literature on infant development – for example, attachment theory – which indicates that positive interactions with caregivers have implications for secure attachment and socio-emotional development.

CAREGIVERS are mother-substitutes. They are not in the original plan. If you believe in plans. The word is longer. The short word is “MOM.” or “MOTHER” (pick your language).

I know, from the family law experience, that my behaving as a protective or educated mother was not wanted by certain other parties. My children themselves did not have a problem with this until we went into court, which even the mediator documented. It was a manufactured problem. The mantra, the ostinato, the continual claim was that by refusing to worship the government education factory (based on its performance), I was a heretic, and eccentric, and those kids were going to grow up weird and isolated. It was viewed with suspicion, and it was STOPPED. I have often thought that is children were simply allowed to be in their families (and the families were not violent) for as long as the individual kid was ready, before going to schools, schools would be far better. They do not need to be clingy and run in packs and herds, hurting each other or (when older) their teachers, and vice versa. They might have a sense of identity and belonging, and being loved. Unfortunately, this is NOT part of the economic development plan for “developed” countries.

Children’s development opportunities may therefore be affected by who they are with across the day, and where they are. Further, associations between somewhat older children’s time use and their development have been explored, with some relationships apparent, which lead us to question whether such relationships may also be apparent for infants. In addition to exploring the association between breastfeeding and time use, this paper also provides a broader examination of infants’ time use, to help understand the possible development opportunities for these infants.

And so forth. You can read it. I would just like to end with, after breastfeeding has been properly explicated, I suspect the conclusion would be the same:

DO IT.

Just like after the interrelationship between domestic violence and custody in family law settings has been properly explicated, I suspect that the CORRECT conclusion would be, as to domestic violence.

STOP IT

and as to when this is mixed with custody

DON’T!

THERE IS A REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION AGAINST CUSTODY GOING TO A BATTERER. BATTERING A WOMAN IS A POOR ROLE MODEL. BATTERERS DO NOT MAKE GOOD PARENTS UNTIL AND UNLESS THEY HAVE ADDRESSED THIS ISSUE AND CHANGED IT AND KEPT IT CHANGED. ONE HIGH MOTIVATION FOR CHANGING IS TO GIVE THEM A DOSE OF THEIR OWN MEDICINE, WITH EXPLANATION. THE ALTERNATIVE BEING, TO KEEP PROVIDING HIM OPPORTUNITIES FOR MORE OF THE SAME. THIS INCLUDES STRICT ADHERENCE TO THE RESTRAINING ORDER (ONE VIOLATION = IMMEDIATE ARREST). PART OF ABUSE, IN CASE YOU HAVEN’T BEEN THERE YET (LET’S HOPE) IS SETS OF MEANINGLESS, TRIVIALLY JUSTIFIED, AND EVERCHANGING RULES APPLIED TO THE TARGET PERSON, NOT THE PERPETRATOR.

(I’D BETTER STOP, THIS RESEMBLES MANY SCHOOL SITUATIONS).

I expect that after I’m a long gone (which I hope will be a long time away) that family law system will still be around, and attempting to dilute and explicate the truth, that it just don’t make sense to say a person can beat another person (or have sex with a minor child) and be a good enough role model for custody, let alone visitation, let alone supervised visitation. These things — giving custody, visitation or supervised visitation, to a person who has not addressed this problem, called criminal behavior within the family — are going to naturally confuse a child about what’s right and what’s wrong, not exactly something I’d like the next generation to be confused on.

I’d like to end with what I’d consider a common sense and practical outlook towards human development, both in the womb and immediately after birth: this is a healthy attitude towards onesself, I believe. It just makes sense:

While all these things are wonderful to understand, and be aware of:

List of tables

Can I summarize this?

Psalm 139

12Yea, the darkness hideth not from thee; but the night shineth as the day: the darkness and the light are both alike to thee.

13 For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother’s womb.

14 I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.

15 My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.

16 Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.

17 How precious also are thy thoughts unto me, O God! how great is the sum of them!

18 If I should count them, they are more in number than the sand: when I awake, I am still with thee.

Those are the words of a man who understands he is in relationship with Someone who loved him, wanted him, knows him, and that he knew was constantly thinking of him, that would never leave him alone. What better model for this than, at the beginning of life, being held, loved, and nursed by a mother? That act of nurturing and loving is at times attributed to God who, although He is portrayed as a Father, has also these characteristics:

Isaiah 14: 1 Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people, from far; The LORD hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name.

These are the words of someone who had a sense of purpose in this life.

2 And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword; in the shadow of his hand hath he hid me, and made me a polished shaft; in his quiver hath he hid me;. . . .

Isaiah 49

14-15 But Zion said, The LORD hath forsaken me, and my Lord hath forgotten me. Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? yea, they may forget, yet will I not forget thee.

Nursing and compassion go together. It’s not just about the baby! It’s about the relationship. Not forgetting . . . Not having compassion for a child one has nursed MAY happen, but it’s not the norm.

Here’s another verse about “cherishing” like a nursing mother, Paul (who takes a lot of heat for his supposed views of women):

I Thess 1: Nor of men sought we glory, neither of you, nor yet of others, when we might have been burdensome, as the apostles of Christ. 7 But we were gentle among you, even as a nurse cherisheth her children: 8 So being affectionately desirous of you, we were willing to have imparted unto you, not the gospel of God only, but also our own souls, because ye were dear unto us.

These are from before the days of Enfamil, and babies were nursed by another human being. For the most part. It wasn’t always Mom, but it was a woman. Why? because there weren’t factories, cubicles, etc., to the extent we now have them. And it was common knowledge that this was a cherishing, tender activity, and associated with it, the desire to give to that child, because the child was precious.

I understand this. I nursed my children. I don’t see them, I still would like to give, and have been prevented from doing so. Even though they’re almost grown, they were not full-grown when the sudden breakoff of that relatinoship (by a felony act called “child-stealing,”) was a radical disruption to what I was doing with my life which was called imparting good things to my kids. I do not think that I was inbred — in fact I was a practicing music professional in my communities, and as networked and integrated into other people’s and community institutions as most people are (if not more so, being self-employed). I most certainly had an independent soul, personality, and preferences — something I had to fight for during marriage (where this wasn’t welcome), and rebuild after it. I had close and long-term personal friendships, also.

But the primary one was with my children, because they were not yet grown up. They were not in college. And some crucial life struggles and issues were still in process. So, that’s what my life was centered around. This was part role model part provision, part demonstrating, by providing, that they were worth sacrificing for, but that a mother was not to be “used.”

A major part of this struggle (in our case) had been to assert a simple right to leave abuse, and as such, that this did not entail suddenly entering a childlike incompetence (in fact it was the opposite) and inability to make decisions, or face a challenge. . . . . An assumption was made that my daughters were a BURDEN that needed to be relieved, and dumped in a school, so I could get about my REAL life, which was not (as I had been at the time), a profession, but actually making sure I found a 9-3 job, (or a 9-5 job with daycare) and left the real education to the real experts. . . . Well, that was nonsense. The insult was that, I should view children as a burden to be dropped off. I found the attitude odd. And it was coming from people who did not themselves have kids. I have since come to the conclusion (or opinion, really), that these people, like I was at one time, were relationship-starved, despite all the art, all the literature, all the work, and all the adult friends they maintained. I think they were bored and lacked purpose in life. And I had the misfortune to come near their radar screen with children in hand. The assumption was that I could not POSSIBLY walk and chew gum, or work and have kids, and what was worse, HOMESCHOOL them too? This was based on an incredible ignorance of almost all the above topics.

And I was forced back onto the welfare state, needlessly, and told to be thankful. I’ll tell you how I feel about this. I HATE it because I know how it happened, needlessly. It’s abusive, it’s insane, and it communicates a pervasive distrust of me as a person, and bottom line assumption is of incompetence. Oddly enough, the factors driving me to this point also made the same assumptions.

I HATE having choice being so taken away from me, but whether to take a handout, or not, resulting in an unnatural relationship. I HATE the insanity that a government would come in and because of Food Stamps be forbidden to buy vitamins, toilet paper, or cat food, lest I might really be buying cigarettes or booze. I can go and buy candy and sweets or potato chips, til I get diabetic with the same money, so why not a little choice? the real reason is the need to have something to measure. At the same time, they do not take kindly to being measured themselves, lest they come up a little short.

Back to this topic:

Noncustodial mothers, and I know many, do not understand why there is such a national drive to disgrace us and scapegoat us individually, and collectively. Individually, we have some pretty good ideas why this happens, but nationally, I’m here to tell you, this thing ‘mother’ is important, along with “father.” Any version of “fatherhood” that cannot pronounce the word “mother” alongside it is a bastardized version of the real thing, a caricature. Good grief. We are cruel enough already, why add to this?

The word “nurse” in the last reference doesn’t mean the one in a white uniform with a crisp cap (and hypodermic in hand), but the mother (“her own children.”) It’s a noun used only once in the Greek NT, “trophos” (transliterated), but the verb it comes from “trepho”, means is “

A primary verb (properly, threpho; but perhaps strengthened from the base of trope through the idea of convolution); properly, to stiffen, i.e. Fatten (by implication, to cherish (with food, etc.), pamper, rear) — bring up, feed, nourish.

Here’s one more:

Matthew 23:37 (ERV)
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killeth the prophets, and stoneth them that are sent unto her! how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

The image of Jesus as a mother hen is not, I admit, the most common one, but the gathering and healing/helping, soothing, stopping the fighting activity (see context) obviously was not..

These verses referring to this common activity: nursing, cherishing, being gentle, imparting, caring, not forgetting, wanting a person (to have a child be WANTED is a big deal!), gathering the kids together and settling the squabbles, before they kill each other ! is not in the competitive context and as opposed to females we find it today “Dads are Nurturers Too!” but was simply part of a natural part of being a complete human being.

These are from the psalms of David, who was a major figure in the Bible, Old Testament and new, whose exploit with giant-slaying (“David and Goliath”) as well as with women (“David and Bathsheba”) as well as his progeny (Jesus Christ is sometimes known as the “Son of David” although there were many generations between the two recorded) and he was able to overcome having to flee, and live in caves and dens, but then fulfil his destiny to become a king. Isaiah (the second quote) was also a key player, and Paul — who takes a lot of grief in some circles, in case you didn’t know — over the supposed, “woman shut up in church!” thing –and is heavily relied on for this same reason by a lot of churches that never see MY face any more — in practice, well, I just don’t seem him acting terribly dismissive of women in the book.

Another major figure in the Bible is Moses. His story is, during a time of oppression and state-mandated male infanticide to get rid of the potentially upstart slave population’s potential men (and rebels), the midwives were instructed to kill the males. They didn’t. Moses was hid by his parents, and as it goes, they sent him down the river where Pharoah’s daughter (wanting a son!) picked him up, and raised him as her own. Well, I guess she had a figure and a schedule to maintain, and a wet nurse was hired, which ended up being Moses’ true mother. That worked out neatly, and I will bet that sometime during those months or years in which she got to nurse her own son, she also talked to him, and let him know who he was, and his heritage. 40, 80 years later, he is a national hero, confronting his own (surrogate) father and leading millions out of slavery.

These major players in Bible history: in approximate order: God, Moses, Isaiah, David, Jesus, and Paul (most of whom have been portrayed in statue and paintings by artists also — in fact, I think Michelangelo did at least David, God, and Moses) — all freely referred to the characteristics of nursing, cherishing, caring and in short, the supportive bonding relationship as a human need.

I would quote from a different sacred script, but this happens to be the one I know best. Please feel free to comment, if you wish, and if you’ve got some additional (relevant) quotes, I”ll incorporate them into the post.

Nursing was taken for granted as part of human life, and verbs and adjectives were associated with both nursing, and the word mother.

How did these people do such great, history-changing things without expert analysis of WHY breast was best?

Can we say nursing is a good deal for both mother, child, and the rest of us? Yes, it’s not always possible or advisable, but i DO wonder what we’re in such a rush to get rid of it for (pre-, pre-, pre-school in the US) and then, from afar, examine, pronounce and compare it with something else (is there something else superior?) as if it were a foreign thing?

Let’s compare the language used to describe some of this one more time:

Psalm 13913 For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother’s womb.

14 I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.

A soul that knows he has a place in this world and was KNOWN. Assurance, reverence, awe, and praise. This psalmist went on, being the youngest and often treated dismissively by brothers, and father, to defend and protect his sheep (he could nurture), to slay his giant, to also do music (the psalms), to survive being a fugitive from jealousy, and to go on to be king. When a prophet came to anoint the future king, the littlest one was ignored, not being thought worth a mention. Older, bigger, better smarter? ones were paraded in front of the prophet, but finally (as it goes) this one was brought out, and anointed officially, prophesied over, and then (apparently) the troubles and jealousy began. Oh well. Who would have predicted that? The best of predictions and analyses go wrong sometimes.

Was he himself breastfed? Did he have parenting time? Was he, as a shepherd, familiar with the life process of conception, child(lamb)birth, protection of young, leading, feeding, and staving off dangers from the flock?

Another thing, incidentally, he was famous for was humility — when caught in some serious wrongdoing (adultery, and deceitfully getting another man killed so he could have the wife) and confronted, he admitted it. This is called repentance, and was commended.

It’s all in the attitude.

Now, for contrast, a phrase from Study #43 on why, seeking to better perfect human growth patterns and predict, and, and, and . . . .

.These data are then used to investigate the central issue explored in this paper: are the days of breastfed and non-breastfed infants spent differently, to the extent that differences in how breastfed infants spend their time could explain their more positive developmental outcomes?

The analysis shows that infants who were still breastfed spent significantly longer in the day being held or cuddled (32 minutes more) and being read, talked or sung to (27 minutes more), after taking into account other child and parental characteristics. There was a small positive effect of breastfeeding on spending time crying or upset. Breastfed infants were more likely to have been reported to have spent some time crawling, climbing or swinging arms/legs, and some time colouring, drawing and looking at books or puzzles. Breastfed children, on the other hand, spent significantly less time sleeping (40 minutes less), other eating, drinking or being fed (54 minutes less) and watching television (9 minutes less).

Breastfed infants spent longer with their mother (57 minutes more) than infants who were not breastfed, including more time alone with their mother (45 minutes more). Breastfed children also spent somewhat more time with their father (15 minutes more), although this was related to time that the mother and father were together, as breastfeeding was not associated with a difference in the amount of time the child spent with the father alone.

(It’s a RELATIONSHIP THING, I told you!) I wish our countries (respectively) would get OUT of the business of designing (measuring, comparing producing, evaluating and predicting, etc.) families. I really do. OR, alternately, worshipping them as a national ideal. I think this can backfire, too.

As a word of explanation, I am not writing to discredit the authors, or the study. Their credits are below. My point was in the larger context of, my own wonder and awe not at, well, being fearfully and wonderfully made, but at the whole industry of studying human behavior with a view to predicting, developing, understanding, justifying, and possibly controlling it. This is actually a positive contribution to the understanding that MOTHERING is important. Not SMOTHERING.

In my readings about the history of some of the larger social institutions dedicated to studying children and families, it came up that one cause of this was the tremendous amount of orphans caused by war, specifically World Wars I and II. It was both a problem and a ready source of oobservation of what happens to kids without families.

Along these lines, and based on my experiences (and associations, readings, etc.) I am personally very disturbed by the nationalized, so-called “public education” system. Over the long haul — and my life is five decades long, plus some — I was an academic success in a public school, but some of the values problems, and the absence in this context, of solid human connections with more than a few teachers, of discussions about the meaning and purposes of life was absent Though smart, smart was not appreciated in our high school, in fact it was social detriment. Though smart as a kid, I was also picked on as a kid, and my main memory of elementary school was this. I’m not complaining, I’m thinking here. It never occurred to me to tell my mother (or father) about the bullying, which went on a long time; I was very young, and the entire schoolyard was involved at playtimes. I still remember. I had everything handed to me, excelled here and there, and came to life around high school because of music, and I know this was because of the communal experience of doing something worthwhile other than sitting in a classroom, bored, and waiting for the bell.

As to bonding with one’s children, there is a bond. I can’t help thinking about Michael Jackson’s 3 children, basically kids for hire, given up AT BIRTH (I don’t think any one of them got a single sip from their mothe’s breast, and the 3rd, he related, he took away right away, placenta and all, as soon as the cord was snipped. The stunned reporter, well, was stunned. Putting this together with Michael’s stories of his threatening domineering father (they practiced with him sitting by with a belt) and when relating it, Michael put his hand over his mouth. His features were mocked, blaming it on the Mom. Fantastic wealth, fame, and musical success, yet this person, I looked at him on TV, had tried to turn himself into Peter Pan, he did not want to grow up. What did he have for his mother — a woman who was as chastised as the Dad? His own children didn’t know mother, at all, and ALL of them are going to go now either to abusive grandparents (let’s hope that’s changed), or a mother who gave them up at birth and viewed them (the first 2) as a “present” for Michael. They might be fought over, they probably won’t be hurting for food (one never knows) but what would be their place in the world? And what identity?

I am also looking at all the GRIEF in my own home, and life — first the bastardized version of “fatherhood” and “headship” that I lived with in marriage, which entailed also being domineered and, when necessary to make a point, assaulted, in the name of this ideal– and then, after I left that, the closest handy male who himself ALSO had not become a father, or raised a family, tried to catch up on lost time, with the assistance of his wife, and united with husband to remove the children from my care on the basis that i CERTAINLY couldn’t run a life without a man’s direction. The real basis, I believe was their need as people, despite all success, to have a meaningful relationship with young people they were related to. It just so happened they were short two, and mine were on the radar, and basically, that was that.

I don’t mean to give a hard time to people who can’t or don’t keep children with them longer. It can work out.

I do believe, though, that when it comes to national policy, it would be suicide to practice the disappearing Mom act. It’s the beginning of life, and it sets a standard. Leave those children alone! And let them bond with their Moms. Support that standard, and many other things will do better — it might make for better mothers, too, if we allow them space and time to do it. NOW, I have got to say, I think that the educational system exists in relationship to the job system. They are intertwined.

And i think sooner or later when we look at educational failures, and human behavioral failures (which domestic violence, and associated things ARE), we have too look at conceptual failures to acknowledge some basic human truths. And one of those is that MOST of us don’t like being treated like cogs in a machine, or parts in an assembly line. MOST of us would like some decent relationship with a sane human being that knows us, appreciates us, thinks POSITIVELY of us (which many school programs, alas, do not), and does not have an ulterior motive – job stability, money, sex, power, fame, prestige — etc. in there competing with why we are being raised as we are.

Human beings need a raison d’etre, a purpose in life, too. A friend of mine likes to say, all we need is:

Someone to love
Work to do.

One way to be able to love someone else is to have some self-respect (skills mastery, accomplishment, service, function in a community) oneself. A sense that one is unique, not just a point on a bell-curve. Let’s have a little motherhood in here, it’s a great start to other endeavors. That nursing baby NEEDS Mom, and to be held. That Mother/baby situation NEEDS Dad to protect it, and enable this situation. If, however, Dad has become inappropriate because of violence, or absent by choice, or incarceration, then they need a little space to grow up. Neither of them needs to be around violence or poverty and no child certainly should be treated as a piece of property — which is EXACTLY how too many institutions are indeed treating them, no matter what the sign on the doors.

How complex is that? In this regard, I think many institutions have got it wrong in trying to give people what they might rather earn or learn themselves.

Sorry to be so long-winded today.

Here are the women who did the study; it’d be great to read the entire thing (link up top):

About the authors

Jennifer Baxter is a Research Fellow at the Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS), where she works largely on employment issues as they relate to families with children. Since starting at AIFS, Jennifer has made a significant contribution to a number of important reports, including the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA) Social Policy Research Paper No. 30, Mothers and Fathers with Young Children: Paid Employment, Caring and Wellbeing (Baxter, Gray, Alexander, Strazdins, & Bittman, 2007) and AIFS’ submission to the Productivity Commission Parental Leave Inquiry (2008). She has also contributed several Family Matters articles and had work published in other journals. Her research interests include maternal employment following childbearing, child care use, job characteristics and work-family spillover, breastfeeding, children’s time use and parental time with children. She has made extensive use of data from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC) to explore these areas of research.

Jennifer was awarded a PhD in the Demography and Sociology Program of the ANU in 2005. Her work experience includes more than fifteen years in the public sector, having worked in a number of statistical and research positions in government departments.

Julie Smith is a Research Fellow at the Australian Centre for Economic Research on Health at the Australian National University (ANU). She has published over 20 articles on public finance and health policy issues in peer-reviewed journals across several disciplines. She has authored two books on taxation (Taxing Popularity and Gambling Taxation in Australia), and received an Australian Research Council Postdoctoral (APD) Fellowship and Discovery Project funding for her research on the economics of mothers’ milk. She conducted a significant national survey of new mothers’ time use in 2006-07. Her research interests include: economic aspects of breastfeeding; the time use of new mothers <www.acerh.edu.au/programs/Time_Use_Survey.php>; non-market economic production and the care economy; taxation, tax expenditures and public finance policy; economics of the non-profit sector; tobacco control; and health financing. Julie was previously a senior economist in the Australian and New Zealand treasuries, and a Visiting Fellow in the Economics Program at the ANU Research School of Social Sciences. She was awarded a PhD in Economics (ANU) in 2003.

Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up

July 1, 2009 at 1:16 PM

Posted in Designer Families, Where's Mom?

Tagged with Australia, Breastfeeding, Education, Motherhood, social commentary, Social Issues from Religious Viewpoints, Studying Humans, To Nurse or Not?

	Let's Get Honest\|She… on Gulag Archipelago, Bahrain Arc…
	sandwich near Detroi… on Gulag Archipelago, Bahrain Arc…
	Let's Get Honest\|She… on Historic Day Today, and Week,…
	Let's Get Honest\|She… on ‘Table Talk’ Helps…
	Let's Get Honest\|She… on So, You Want Us To Speak Out A…

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

Archive for the ‘Where's Mom?’ Category

How can we analyze policy inbetween these leading, bleeding headlines?

Maybe if I intersperse headlines, policy talk, and commentary I can get through another day without mourning evidence of national return to stupidity day.

Police: Dad fatally shoots daughter, foster dad

When we simply search only the word

“fatherhood” under “recipient” for FY2000-2009,

we get an entirely different picture (also diff’t database):

Top 5 Known Congressional Districts where Recipients are Located

Yes this is definitely an “up from the people” grassroots movement,

and not a DC.-down

Top 10 Recipients

93647 word “fatherhood”

How do you know it’s a PROBLEM and not a SYMPTOM of another problem?

Short Unique Words (Acronyms, or even EIN#s) Work Better than Phrases. I don’t always tag & quit using “categories.”

ARCHIVES | Posts only (March 2009ff, pick a month). For Pages, see my Tables of Contents, & (as of its date published) Sticky Post ’58 Essays.’

Visitor Count (added 1/29/2018, Blog started 3/2009). Only Counts Home Page.

Follow Blog via Email

Twitter It (mention)

Blog Navigation: Current Posts occur BELOW Sticky Posts. Tables Of Contents by Year and Others are Sticky). (One Widget, Many Boxes with Links). Rev. Dec. 2019; Split Apr. 2022

[April, 2022] DONATE! To show appreciation and help me Justify Continuing this INVESTIGATIVE BLOGGING Begun March, 2009,** (Not Tax-Exempt: Yet). WHY ELSE? See Apr. 2022 Narrative in 5 text boxes.

DONATE to Show Appreciation & Help Me Keep Writing (NB: Not an IRS 501©3)

Ten Most Recent Posts, ‘Display Content’ added 27 April, 2022. (For some, that only shows my typically long post title + shortlink, but in the future I’ll move that part further down in post body for better results on this widget).

More Blog Navigation: Doorways to Key Posts & Pages (Apr. 2022, formerly with Dec. 2019 Widget). These Contents May Change.

Meta

DONATE to Show Appreciation & Help Me Keep Writing (NB: Not an IRS 501©3)

Google Translate (added March 2017)

More Resources (a.k.a. Former Sidebar Widgets (FULL of Show & Tell Texts, Links, Key Points and a few ‘DONATE’ Buttons too)

Top Clicks (testing Widget @ March 2017, 2-3 days to display)

Top Posts & Pages (24-48hr Delays apply)

Recent Comments

This Absolutely Uncommon Analysis shouldn’t be! **

Yes, I tweet, too!

Cold,Hard.Fact$ (Links similar but not identical to one off-ramped to Widgets post. I may off-ramp this one soon too..//LGH mid-Aug. 2019

Ltrs to/from US Presidents ~ Federal Agencies

ColdHardFact$ Posts

(Note: I don't use consistently)

Copyright “fair use” doctrine cited USC Title 17 Ch 1 SEC. 107

Archive for the ‘Where's Mom?’ Category

Maybe if I intersperse headlines, policy talk, and commentary I can get through another day without mourning evidence of national return to stupidity day.

When we simply search only the word

“fatherhood” under “recipient” for FY2000-2009,

we get an entirely different picture (also diff’t database):

Top 5 Known Congressional Districts where Recipients are Located

Yes this is definitely an “up from the people” grassroots movement,

and not a DC.-down

Top 10 Recipients

93647 word “fatherhood”

How do you know it’s a PROBLEM and not a SYMPTOM of another problem?

SHARE THIS POST on...

How many social science, legal, and

court-associated experts does it take

to UNscrew a lightbulb?

(1)

(2)

? ? ?

(4)

(5)

[BOOK] Children of alcoholics: A guidebook for educators, therapists, and parents

[CITATION] The batterer as parent: Addressing the impact of domestic violence on family dynamics ( …

WELL, what to do? TALK some more? Out of the hearing of women and children?

SHARE THIS POST on...

Sniffing Language

Breastfeeding,

Nursing, Cherishing, Protecting, Imparting,

Loving, Knowing,

Gentleness, Compassion, Confidence one is loved and wanted,

were formerly normal, healthy human behaviors, and not only right after sex.

Where’s Mom? is a very relevant question, I thought.

WHY is how to develop and serve “humans” and “families” really necessary?? What are they, food?

Who’s developing this master race and utopia?

“improved child outcomes”

SHARE THIS POST on...

Short Unique Words (Acronyms, or even EIN#s) Work Better than Phrases. I don’t always tag & quit using “categories.”

ARCHIVES | Posts only (March 2009ff, pick a month). For Pages, see my Tables of Contents, & (as of its date published) Sticky Post ’58 Essays.’

Visitor Count (added 1/29/2018, Blog started 3/2009). Only Counts Home Page.

Follow Blog via Email

Twitter It (mention)

Blog Navigation: Current Posts occur BELOW Sticky Posts. Tables Of Contents by Year and Others are Sticky). (One Widget, Many Boxes with Links). Rev. Dec. 2019; Split Apr. 2022

[April, 2022] DONATE! To show appreciation and help me Justify Continuing this INVESTIGATIVE BLOGGING Begun March, 2009,** (Not Tax-Exempt: Yet). WHY ELSE? See Apr. 2022 Narrative in 5 text boxes.

DONATE to Show Appreciation & Help Me Keep Writing (NB: Not an IRS 501©3)

More Blog Navigation: Doorways to Key Posts & Pages (Apr. 2022, formerly with Dec. 2019 Widget). These Contents May Change.

Meta

DONATE to Show Appreciation & Help Me Keep Writing (NB: Not an IRS 501©3)

Google Translate (added March 2017)

More Resources (a.k.a. Former Sidebar Widgets (FULL of Show & Tell Texts, Links, Key Points and a few ‘DONATE’ Buttons too)

Top Clicks (testing Widget @ March 2017, 2-3 days to display)

Top Posts & Pages (24-48hr Delays apply)

Recent Comments

This Absolutely Uncommon Analysis shouldn’t be! **

Cold,Hard.Fact$ (Links similar but not identical to one off-ramped to Widgets post. I may off-ramp this one soon too..//LGH mid-Aug. 2019

Ltrs to/from US Presidents ~ Federal Agencies

(Note: I don't use consistently)

Copyright “fair use” doctrine cited USC Title 17 Ch 1 SEC. 107