Posts Tagged ‘AFCC Conference Rhetoric’
Inside AFCC Stanley Cohen Distinguished Awardees’ Conference Circuits, or, “Good GRIEF, Marsha Kline Pruett!” [Written March 4, 2016, publ. about 2 yrs. later]
Post Title: Inside AFCC Stanley Cohen Distinguished Awardees’ Conference Circuits, or, “Good GRIEF, Marsha Kline Pruett!” [Written March 4, 2016, publ. about 2 yrs. later] case-sensitive short-link ends -37M, ca. 8,100 words.
Many years ago, among some mothers blogging their custody challenges and family court fiascoes, the phrase was being circulated “Do You Know Your AFCC?” or “How Well Do You Know Your AFCC?”
(Badass Mamas, some of us were called. Thank you “RandiJames.com”).
Well this post is “How Well Do You Know Your AFCC Stanley Cohen Distinguished Research Awardees?” …. a natural progression as I looked, incidentally to the “Dumpster-Diving in the Credibility Gap” of Batterer Typology verbiage among clinical forensic psychologists, some of who had clear connections also with each other and to AFCC.
Looking at the awardee list systematically and noting who has which associations to which universities, or corporations — and each other — will only educate you about the role of this organization, and about the power of networking. Some “lights should go on” as to WHO you are dealing with, and WHO is running key institutions affecting family law.
2015 – Barbara A. Babb
2014 – Rachel Birnbaum
2013 – Judy Cashmore and Patrick Parkinson
2012 – Amy Holtzworth-Munroe
2011 – Jennifer McIntosh
2010 – Constance R. Ahrons
2009 – Judith Wallerstein
2008 – Nicholas Bala (Professor of Law, Queens University, Ontario Canada. Degree also from Harvard) (see “Prevnet” and a bio at “AttorneyGeneral.Jus.gov.ON.CA“)##
2007 – Sanford Braver, Irwin Sandler, Sharlene Wolchik
2006 – J. Herbie DiFonzo, Mary E. O’Connell
2005 – Janet Walker (<==AFCC 2005 conference in Seattle shows Walker as past-AFCC President and from “Newcastle on Tyne, England”) (check out the brochure!)
2004 – Marsha Kline Pruett
2003 – Paul Amato
2002 – Robert Emery (Professor Psychology, UVirginia & Director “Center for Children Families & the Law) [BA, Brown University in 1974, PhD SUNY-Stonybrook, 1982, “father of five children” (no wife mentioned).
2001 – JoAnne Pedro-Carroll
2000 – Janet Johnston
1999 – Charlene Depner
1998 – Jessica Pearson and Nancy Thoennes
1997 – Joan B. Kelly
Nicholas Bala at PREVNET (imaged added May, 2018)
Click image to enlarge.
Click image to enlarge.
## (Fn from quote) Nicholas Bala bio blurb — just a fragment, you may recognize some familiar themes in this one — only for Canada:
Prof. Bala is a member of the National Judicial Institute Program Planning Committees for Child Witnesses and High Conflict Parental Separations and is editor of the N. J. I. Electronic Benchbook on Child Witness. He is the principal investigator of an interdisciplinary research project on child witnesses funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Prof. Bala’s research on legal issues related to child abuse, youth justice, family violence and family law is extensive and in those areas, he has served as a consultant for the governments of Canada, Ontario and the Yukon and for aboriginal organizations. He was the lead researcher in a report on the Ontario Child Abuse Register (1987-88) and was a member of a research team reviewing the Ontario Office of Child and Family Service Advocacy (2004). He was a consultant to the Special Advisor on Child Sexual Abuse to the Minister of Health and Welfare Canada (1989-90). He also provided advice to Justice Robbins (Ontario, 2000) for his report on child sexual abuse in schools
Nicholas Bala weighing in on “parental alienation” — 2011 article from the “Nuffield Foundation” (address London):
Parental Alienation and the voices of children in family proceedings
22 July 2011
In a relatively small portion of all separation and divorce cases, children reject a parent. How and why does this happen? How do the courts respond to these cases, which are characterised by high levels of conflict between parents, and what should they do? What can we learn from the experience of other jurisdictions such as Canada and the US?
These were some of the questions addressed in a seminar hosted by the Foundation on 13 July and led by Professor Nicholas Bala from Queen’s University in Canada.
- (lonesome- looking photo of child from behind , captioned: “How can courts better respond to high conflict cases and contact disputes?”)
The seminar started with a discussion of the controversial concept of ‘parental alienation.’ While rejecting the view that it is a ‘syndrome,’ Professor Bala recognizes the value of identifying cases where the hostile attitude of one parent results in a child having negative views of the other that are a reflection not of the child’s own experience, and resulting in unjustified rejection of that parent. This approach requires courts and professionals to distinguish cases where a child is justifiably rejecting a parent, for example due to abuse or neglect, from cases of alienation
Yet another AFCC-style wet dream… Someone needs to mop up around here. [‘Conflict Happens'[like in the Seal Beach massacre?]/High-Conflict Institute’, Publ. Nov. 16, 2011]
with one comment
This Image from Oct. 2011 AFCC Regional Training Conference“ (“Pdf” of full conference brochure from AFCCnet.org website~~>)Working with Violent and High-Conflict Families: A Race with No Winners” in Indianapolis added during May 2018 post update. The phrase “high conflict” (no hyphen, only) used 18 times in the brochure. For a change, the word “alienation” was used only twice…
Yet another AFCC-style wet dream… Someone needs to mop up around here. [‘Conflict Happens'[like in the Seal Beach massacre?]/High-Conflict Institute’, Publ. Nov. 16, 2011] (Case-sensitive shortlink here ends “-UD”)
(Some format & minor amount of content updates (such as the image to the right and some others and post title extension starting at the ‘[” added May 14, 2018: I had occasion to reference this post on Twitter). Almost 24,000 words, but still important basic reading though originally written barely two years into this blog:
HAVE YOU HEARD THE LATEST LANGUAGE BLIP FROM THE ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY & CONCILIATION COURTS CULT?
From the “High Conflict Institute”
“CONFLICT HAPPENS“
No longer are DIVORCEs or FAMILIES “high-conflict” but “People” are. In fact, the issues are not the issues either.
When someone comes up to you with an issue — he or she (<=the usual application) doesn’t really mean what s/he says and is not to be taken at face value (ask the forensic psychologists). The REAL problem with family courts isn’t the family courts, and it isn’t even high-conflict families, or high conflict all by its rocky-mountain-high* self. The REAL problem is high-conflict people. Buy this book [“Splitting”] to know if you’re dealing with one:
AFCC 47th Annual (2010, Denver), Traversing the Trail of Alienation
<=**AFCC 47th Conference, Denver, CO, June 2010 (“Traversing the Trail of Alienation,” a trail with “Mile-High Conflict and Mountains of Emotions”)
Promo for “Splitting” from New Harbinger Publications
Bill Eddy image from publications page, Click image to enlarge. Note his affiliations.
Randi Krieger, from publications page (for “Splitting” book out 2011)
This book is advertised with others on alienation at the NCRC (more, below), as they are in the same professional circles. In fact, it appears he’s on the payroll here (2018 comments: link was to Canadian Bar Association. Search of “high-conflict” brought up just 3 articles, but not accessible without sign-up, which I didn’t at this point). (or is “Senior Family Mediator”) as well as his own split-off “High conflict institute” (see last sentence at the link I just provided).
Bill sure was ahead of his AFCC time. While others were simply developing and lobbying for more parenting coordinator rights in Florida, Texas, and wherever — he was writing this book explaining that the Issue is not the Issue, and all the conflict in the family law venue really comes from disordered personalities in the court system.
I find it odd that he’s working with the author of “Stop walking on Eggshells” which someone gave me about halfway through the divorce fiasco, post-restraining order. They meant well, but like Lundy Bancroft’s “Why Does He DO That” — and regardless of some truths it may have held, neither one (conveniently) mentions the custody racket, financial incentive, fatherhood funding, welfare reform or in short anything which would give me a concise narrative of why the courts don’t take death threats followed by family suicide, or a stalking combined with previous death threats and violence, seriously — and insisted on psychologizing all terms.
People who have lived with this (and I acknowledge it exists) don’t need guides — they need out of the relationship.
Which is precisely what people working with the organization Mr. Eddy helps market through, are not going to let happen. Nope. If we wish to detach from a borderline personality, abuser, or simply an ex (and birth happened in there somewhere), we WILL be forced, most likely, to deal with an AFCC-devotee somewhere along the way — or most of the way along the way.
I have the book “Stop Walking on Eggshells” and it didn’t take to long to recognize it was an updated rebuttal of a 1970s feminist classic, (shown in 2005 version) Women and Madness (by Phyllis Chesler, PhD)
(Link expired: but see 12/31/1972 Review by Adrienne Rich. Reading it again now (2018) with my perspective, both experientially in the American family courts (post-battering interventions, 21st century) and having read so much anti-woman, anti-mother, values-driven (garbage) from the same sources she critiqued originally in this book, I have to basically agree. (I also FYI had this book as a young woman).
It asks:
By now there should also be one called “Children and Madness,” for the labeling children get when they report abuse, when they are active and assertive, and when they need to be controlled after any of the above. That’s been documented elsewhere, and comes under
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
Like this:
Written by Let's Get Honest
November 16, 2011 at 10:48 am
Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011), Domestic Violence vs Family Law, Mandatory Mediation, Parent Education promotion, Parenting Coordination promotion, PhDs in Psychology-Psychiatry etc (& AFCC), Psychology & Law = an AFCC tactical lobbying unit, Where's Mom?
Tagged with AFCC, AFCC Conference Rhetoric, AFCC language mixups, Alienated Definitions: Cal Penal Code v Custody Evaluators define "Domestic Violence", Alienated from Reality - CourtTalk vs StreetFacts, Allana Krause case, Beltway Sniper, Bill Eddy LCSW JD, CA extradites & jails another protective mother- Schmidt -Saavedra case, early Richard Gardner Quotes, Education, HHS-TAGGS grants database, High Conflict Institute, Incorporated Where? The Institute for Relational Harm and Public Pathology Education, Interstate Custody Wars, John - Mildred Muhammad Beltway Sniper Case, John Slowiaczek Omaha AAML, Loretta Frederick BWJP-AFCC alliance, Megan Hunter AZ courts, MPDI, NCRC National Conflict Resolution Center, parental kidnapping, Parenting Coordination, PAS High-Conflict Families and Promoting Treatment in the custody process, Phyllis Chesler Women and Madness, RTI Relationship Training Institute (San Diego), Self-Defense from DV, social commentary, Supervised Visitation, The Baker Act (1970 involuntary psychiatric incarcerations), Where's Mom?-Dad beats 5yr old daughter in head for alphabet mistake (Christopher D. Curry - Akron Ohio), women's rights