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

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

Posts Tagged ‘AFCC Fam.Ct.Rvw Editorial Board listings

Journals, Their Editors, Sponsors + Publishers | #FamilyCourtRvw: The Voice of AFCC w Help from Hofstra — Editorial Board and Access-Visitation Grants as I re-explained/posted May 21, 2018. [Repost with my March 21, 2022 Update**].

with one comment

Some of my posts take weeks to decide what (how much), to post. This shows in the results. These look and sound over-worked because they are. They have the details and cover much ground but just don’t flow right, which adds to the aggravation of their having taken so long for me to write. They also tend to have more incomplete sentences, missing transition words.

My ROI in time and mental energy on that type of post is less because any such post will need major re-allocation, or at the least, editing of content (re-ordering paragraphs, etc.) after publishing.

This one didn’t.  It comes straight from the heart, almost “as-is.” It was easy to write.

[Mildly edited March 23, 2022, to reflect that I did complete what (as originally posted) I’d promised to — remove the update commentary (rant) from the 2018 post this one links to, now that that commentary (rant) is here.  While at it, I’m reviewing my grammar and removing unnecessary words within sentences or unnecessary sentences. Maybe not ALL of them, but enough to make a difference.]

My original inspiration was just to re-post links to an earlier concise but I believe well-stated post  — it had just 5,000 words (with a few exhibits and at the bottom a color-coded table of the Family Court Review’s Editorial board of the time).  Running across this older post, I quickly added an about 2,500 word update-rant-protest-FYI and “I Told You So!”

I then tweeted the 2018 one in that format but promised to move my update commentary to a new post.  This post keeps my promise. Later, I also tweeted excerpts showing all of that post:

New posts need titles. Rather than just copy the other one, I’ve led with the reminder that academic journals have influence, and talked about that here, too.

The emphasis here isn’t on the links and supporting documentation, just on my speaking my mind in light of current developments (see my subtitle for which ones). I wanted it out in just one day with minimal cleanup needed after and met that goal.

Journals, Their Editors, Sponsors + Publishers | #FamilyCourtRvw: The Voice of AFCC w Help from Hofstra — Editorial Board and Access-Visitation Grants as I re-explained/posted May 21, 2018. [Repost with my March 21, 2022 Update**]. (short-link ends “-dXu”)

If I could have five-line titles (or post “subtitles” as some magazines do), this one would be: Why #FamilyCourtReformists (#NFVLCgwu #NSPC et al.) pushing #VAWA Reauthorization with #KaydensLaw Don’t/Won’t and Can’t Afford to expose AFCC]

Because that is indeed what is on my mind at the moment...

So now I have nearly 6,000 words here, including the tags you see next, from the 2018 post.

AFCC’s Family Court Review Editorial Board and Their Respective Affiliations. [Publ. May 21, 2018, with March 21, 2002, update for re-posting]. (generated case-sensitive shortlink ends “-92R”)

It may be helpful here to post the tags from my May, 2018 post, not this one, as active links:

If you’re going to click, I suggest pick the more unusual tags because, for example “AFCC” might just call up almost every post.  Know that I also don’t tag consistently, that when I do, it’s usually more emphatic for that post and that the “Search” function will usually show more results — but with “Search” be sure to use specific, as unique as possible, and short search terms.  This blog is not on the Dewey Decimal System, or like professional journals, with professional indexes or indexers and subscribers that may include both libraries and universities and other nonprofits which can afford to subscribe — its tags, where they exist, are what I can do with what I’ve got, and I do not write according to SEO guidelines: “not in my wheelhouse.”{

~ ~ ~Here they are.

 Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,, , , , , , , , ,   (Every single one of these tags may not be handled on this post, but if not, it’s included to call up related posts I decided should be mentioned).  FOIA is.  RELATE is, and many others, however.  Also, because the post lists the AFCC Editorial Board — and many had affiliations with some of the institutions mentioned in these tags, those tags reference those institutions.  (“SOL” above stands for “School of Law.”) //LGH 3/21/2022.

~ ~ ~

ABOUT JOURNALS, GENERALLY: Besides straight law-school journals, any society (non-profit) generally around some professional expertise, it seems, if they can afford it and clear publisher guidelines, can have such publishers produce (make available on-line, with often many indexes they’d also be listed in) their own, and editor-in-chief / editorial board controlled Issues, Volumes of Issues, and articles (Table of Contents) within each issue — benefitting of course the various editorial boards (which can get long and large) whose members may then add every single time (should they choose) an article gets published onto their resumes or “c.v.’s”.  (Why I know — I’ve read so many resumes!)

Typically journals aren’t just by ordinary people, but white-collar individuals with (often advanced) degrees already in some position of authority — but not always — at a university or within the courts, or (while not the majority, supplemented by) running their own private nonprofits, and/or contracting or consulting for the courts — which is to say — government operations.

Besides straight law schools and the “pay-to-play” specific journals, there are some which blend fields of expertise, i.e., they are “multi-disciplinary.”

AFCC’s FamilyCourtReview is unique with its focus and base within New York State, but there are also others published by the American Psychological Association, and some elsewhere as their own nonprofits which I’ll run across from time to time — seeking diligently and consistently to blend social science and the law (not that AFCC doesn’t also do this), psychology and the law,  Social Science and Public Welfare, and “Socio-legal Scholarship” and a variety of similar names.

I call ’em (repeatedly) as I see ’em on this blog, which makes for some complex posts, but I do  it because I do not approve of the “caste” system in place facilitated and expanded through such journals, particularly where a field’s roots are in some fields historically abusive to women, poorly represented from the start by women, and some of them, with roots in eugenics (which, FYI, sociology leadership has…), and in the context where women being historically excluded from voting, and even later, enrolling in the “East Coast Ivies” USA until the late 1960s-1970s, for God’s sake…  one outlet women (sometimes without any child-rearing or marital experience of their own) were allowed into was professionalizing home economics, child-rearing, child care, and in short places where they could put mothers in their places as non-experts and not knowledgeable on how to raise their own children. These fields within universities were historically in centers run by men anyhow.  I believe the 2018 post has some links to these —

Read the rest of this entry »

AFCC’s Family Court Review Editorial Board and Their Respective Affiliations. [Publ. May 21, 2018, with March 21, 2022, update for re-posting].

leave a comment »

Post title: AFCC’s Family Court Review Editorial Board and Their Respective Affiliations. [Publ. May 21, 2018, with March 21, 2022, update for re-posting]. (generated case-sensitive shortlink ends “-92R”) (5,600 words as copyedited 2022,**)

The table at the bottom of this post isn’t current (of course — its’ now 2022!) but outlines  as a straightforward visual the various countries AFCC board members come from  — most are still from the USA — and emphasizes their affiliations.It’s good to remember. This could be said of many publications, but in the context of the family courts, #FamilyCourtReform (common term on Twitter now), and #FamilyCourtReformists (my version of the same), it matters.  Remember, the editorial board of the journal isn’t the same as the board of directors of the private association.  Both should be kept in mind, and the latter’s tax return and filing history. As shown, it’s actually a minor — pretty small — organization.

#FamilyCourtReformists don’t like to talk about AFCC, at least not to criticize it, and don’t want us to either, especially not where they’re found among colleagues arguing with known AFCC membership — so that is EXACTLY what I do.  For all I know the #FamilyCourtReformists may also be majority #AFCC, those that are practicing lawyers, psychologists, or who run nonprofits doing business with divorcing families (or the family courts).  If so, however, that’s not acknowledge on their websites, generally.  I’ll say it again — without the truth of the membership organizations coming out (especially this one) and how active AFCC is in training judges and family lawyers, custody evaluators AND collaborating throughout (and all along) to frame and reframe “domestic violence” — alongside presentations by US federally-funded DV nonprofits (specifically, Battered Women’s Justice Project (BWJP.org), formerly doing business under the nonprofit which came up with (?) or at least promoted “The Power & Control Wheel” at “TheDuluthModel.org”

(more) 2022 UPDATE COMMENTS:

Nearly four years later (late March, 2022), I have re-publicized this post on Twitter, perhaps and put a link to here on a new post (full title with short-link ending “-dXu”  shown below) just for that purpose. To do so I’m changing revised the border and emphasis colors from bright red to a darker red and corrected a margin issue, but no other major editing planned. (I did some copyediting for clarity and in a few places where I thought the wording was “cogent” (good) formed call-outs looking approximately like this (larger font, this background-color)


Why Now? As sometimes happens I was reviewing Admin Dashboard for a different post from May, 2018 and found this one instead. WordPress, or at least this theme, organizes the Search Filter (when using “by Date”) by month and year, one month at a time in a drop-down menu). I was actually about to re-arrange and re-publish my 2018 Table of Contents…

“Now” is because of current events (explained more on the new post calling attention to this one’s contents) and because I wanted to…  //LGH March 21, 2022).

. . . . . .  [A passionate rant-update used to be here… I moved it, and have now deleted it…//2022]

Now that I’ve just had my say, I expect I’ll taken that “say” to a new post linking to this which will shorten the introduction to this one but keep its few other format and copyediting (for clarity, and a few “call-outs” sections) parts.

Here’s where all that went, just published March 21, 2022:

Journals, Their Editors, Sponsors + Publishers | #FamilyCourtRvw: The Voice of AFCC w Help from Hofstra — Editorial Board and Access-Visitation Grants as I re-explained/posted May 21, 2018. [Repost with my March 21, 2022 Update**]. (short-link ends “-dXu”)

If I could have five-line titles (or post “subtitles” as some magazines do), this one would be, approximately: Why #FamilyCourtReformists (#NFVLCgwu #NSPC et al.) pushing #VAWA Reauthorization with #KaydensLaw Don’t/Won’t/Can’t expose AFCC]

Because that is indeed what is on my mind at the moment...


There is a list of “tags” at the end and readers as always can submit comments.

“PROLOGUE” — my “Why” other than, “It’s Time!…” [[as written in May, 2018]]

In the prologue I have a few resources and links to further explore “State Access and Visitation Programs” grants (Federal to State government entities under HHS, CFDA #93597)) which exists to “support” the states in establishing the types of services likely to be now part of any family court process.  That is, if there’s any way once litigation or even motions to hear begin, more personnel, services or players can be added in and blamed on one or both parents to justify.  The infrastructure (network) already exists, and business and services are going to be flowing through it to sustain the investment so long as we (the public) allow this to continue.

A key part of any power network is one which involves judges, lawyers, and “social scientists” with a token nod towards the issue of domestic violence advocacy… Or faking domestic violence /family court reform advocacy by talking about the symptoms, assuming/alleging causes without even exposing the private power networks’ intersection with public institutions, public funding, and centers at both private and public universities.

AFCC’s “international interdisciplinary” academic journal abbreviated “Fam.Ct.Rvw” and published on-line, is produced jointly (but under AFCC “auspices” and as its voice) through a private university in New York State called “Hofstra. I’ve established recently again on separate posts (referencing the new Editor in Chief) how Family Court Review, the publication, is indeed “the voice of AFCC,” or this could be obtained separately through a Google search.

All people involved in family courts should understand the relationship and note the names of those involved in this private association’s and its members’ private relationship with a private university aimed at “transforming the family court system” — globally, to align policy in the US, for example, with polices overseas — by “subject matter jurisdiction.” Much progress has been made towards ITS (not necessarily individual citizens’, parents’ (mothers or fathers) or children’s goals of justice, due process, and the ability to lead lives without being forced into the “behavioral health/Mental Health Archipelago.”) goals.

Also, on AFCC’s Twitter account (“@AFCCTweets”) I learned that recently it participated with UK (England Wales mostly?) federated “RELATE” charity (with Janet Walker representing both groups) in a 24-hour “Consultation” February 2018  at St. Georges (Windsor Castle) (See next three images, for more, search my Twitter account “LetUsGetHonest,” or theirs)

What about concerned citizens’** response to all this (these power networks in the private arena calling down funds from the public arena to regulate and profit from regulating “families and children…”?

What should our response be?
Read the rest of this entry »

%d bloggers like this: