Posts Tagged ‘“Divorce Wars | Interventions with Families in Conflict” by Elizabeth M. Ellis’
Dialogue from 7/26/2011 post, charting HHS/OCSE Grants to States (CFDAs 93563, 93564)
This post shows what’s being done with significant OCSE federal grants and should be of interest to every taxpayer. There is a follow-up one (link also at the bottom) coming soon:
These charts and this topic will be continued on a post called:
Child Support, Fatherhood Promotion: More DIALOGUE and TABLES of OCSE Grants to States (CFDAs 93601, 93563, 93564) from my 7/26/2011 Post
OK, I have a “mouth” and opened it to bring up another point, right before hitting “Publish” on this post. So now, we have 10,600 words, about 2,200 of them in THIS section, which I will also mark with a different background-color (I’ll call it “smoky-blue”) for those who may wish to scroll below it and get to the subject matter referenced in the post title.
I HOPE (which is to be distinguished from actually believing) that people who currently are engrossed in journalistic reporting of custody disasters, however genuine and genuinely disturbing they are, may eventually wake up with a jolt (or any other way) and realize it’s time to do some catch-up homework on the money trail, as I have been doing for several years now.
Remember that Robert Frost poem about Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening? (co. 1923 & ff) (“…miles to go before I sleep”) and “The Road Less Traveled” (“….and it has made all the difference”), called recently by a NYT Book Reviewer The Most Misread Poem in America (9/11/2015 by David Orr. Odd subject matter for any Sept. 11 publication, in America).

Robert Frost in 1913 (from NYT Book Review Link attached)
I probably misread the poem also. So what?
I cited Robert Frost because the poems are familiar, and because I myself have been familiar with spending a lot of (my childhood actually) IN woods, both snowy and yellow (red, etc.) autumn colors. It simply came to mind as expressing the situation.
But I do have miles to go, and see two paths diverging in reporting this subject matter. And one path, the one I do follow, does seem less worn.
I don’t consider holding a minority point of view on certain issues being wrong when the majority point of view, in this case, summarized as “if we can JUST get major media coverage, THEN we will call attention to:
- the federal funding (fatherhood.gov, formerly “Fatherhood.HHS.gov”) etc.) for propaganda, literally, against single mothers, as a social ill not to mention the A/V funding run through the child support system to help women lose contact with their children to violent or abusive men because of ‘co-parenting’ (and because social science “proves” — forget the current President of the USA and a WHOLE lot other exceptions to this demographic rule) that being raised without a father = allegedly being prepped for a life of crime, delinquency, premature sexuality, “multiple-partner-fertility” and retarded academic and economic status.
(Those who may think I’m exaggerating in the above summary probably haven’t waded through some of the verbiage! Case in point, exposing what’s actually claimed to sunlight might do more to “dry it up” by revealing its logically withered and humiliating state, than anything that could actually be SAID in response to such inane claims — made in the context, what’s more, of paid-for social science R&D run upon, particularly, low-income populations nationwide….)
Continuing with my list (and the sentence signifying a certain point of view about custody reform):
- the private, conflict-of-interest, nonprofit trade (a) membership and (b) court-connected, ( c ) policy-influencing associations [501©3s] involving judges (AFCC et al.) and the fiscal behaviors of those running those associations / corporations;
- that the judiciary, courts, and government itself is as we speak being internationally aligned through leveraging of the tax-exempt sector (including family wealth housed in foundations) to the detriment of national sovereignty (let alone, “justice”), with a series of networked “centers” at specific public & private universities nationwide; {Footnote “##International”}
- how federal funds are being POURED down holes where the “sun don’t shine” in multiple ways, one of which ways includes religious-exempt corporations who the IRS has to go through special hoops to audit, not to mention “take the money and run” nonprofits (small and large) and, when it comes to what I, as Let’s Get Honest, have been reporting most recently;
- that the DV Cartel has for at least a decade (more likely, two) been joined at the hip — despite appearances to the contrary when “domestic violence awareness campaigns are being run — with the fathers’ rights group, which apparently have the lion’s share of the federal faucet).
“Yes, once we can get everyone’s attention through sensationalist and anecdoctal “tell-the-story” journalism on family court custody disasters, and his/hers debates on whether or not the abuse was real (i.e., parental alienation vs. domestic violence), THEN — someday in the lalaland future, NOT NOW — we can being a systematic exposition of the truth (as expressed in part, in some of the bulleted points above).
{Footnote ##International: Read at least three-and-a-half pages, please! This is an Oct. 2015 retrospective of articles published before and after WWII by a generation and group of writers who had ties with (London’s) Chatham House and the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA) published in “International Affairs” as ”
The rise of the dual culture of world development and world government
in International Affairs, 1930–1950, by GIOVANNI FARESE
. . . To be clear, entirely new developments are taking place, ushering in a new era whose contours are still barely visible in the mist. [[SPEAKING OF NOW, i.e., OCT. 2015]] An example is the birth of the BRICS’4 New Development Bank (NDB), including an emergency fund for stabilization (the Contingent Reserve Arrangement, or CRA), and that of the new Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) both led by China, by far their largest shareholder. It is a breach into the Bretton Woods System based on the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and the Trans-Paci c Partnership (TTP) also signal global shifts. Moreover, the re-establishment of the United States–Cuba relationship opens a new chapter of engagement between former Cold War foes.5 Finally, the world will continue to get more connected as shown, for instance, by the MIR initiative for the development of transport and communication in the METR region (Middle East, Europe, Turkey and Russia) to boost social mobility and social welfare in the area, aiming at lowering extremism and proneness to conflicts.
…Today, in the age of globalization, only joint solutions will work. We need multiple lenses: the historian’s, the economist’s, the jurist’s, the political scientist’s and the practitioner’s. This is why this virtual issue draws on different disciplines. …
The attempt here is to draw also on the practical culture of ‘men of deeds’, those who did not write scholarly papers, but who—in their capacities as bankers, diplomats, policy-makers—were at some point invited to present a paper at Chatham House (the London-based Royal Institute of International Affairs [RIIA], established in 1920).7 …
Ideas did not originate from a void then, nor can today. On the other hand, by presenting the authors and their ties with International Affairs, it also aims at showing the relevance of the journal, and of Chatham House, as a hub for the dissemination of this culture. It is, therefore, also a contri- bution to the history of Chatham House.
Articles, authors, affiliations: a generational and epistemic community
This virtual issue comprises 20 articles, written by 18 authors and published in International Affairs (IA) between 1931 and 1949. Eight were written before the Second World War, twelve after the war. Most of the articles stem directly from seminars held at Chatham House; ….With the exception of two, authors were all born between 1872 and 1900, so they all experienced the tragedy of two world wars. Some of them even fought in Europe during the First World War. All died, except two, between 1945 and 1985. A generational community thus emerges. The two world wars and the great depression of 1929–33 were major events that shaped their conscience—and lives, of course…..
We may want to focus only on the immediate, the local, and the recent. While I can barely get people to talk about events in the last generation since PRWORA, a WHOLE lot of the US policy — and PARTICULARLY in fields involving “health and human services,” mental health and family structures — including the family court system, itself also a fairly recent creation — has been shaped by policy discussed in London and implemented in the UK. In a sense, it’s a reclaiming of the United States as a policy-outpost of the former British empire, economically and practically if not legally. …
The next section references major US organizations, and universities from which many “experts” (on fatherhood, family structure, etc. catch my drift?) continue to receive public funding, publish and recommend there be (yet) more social science research and demonstration projects run on the populace, as a domestic “stock” and capital human resource — but we should ask, “WHOSE”??
(The rise of the dual culture of world development and world government
in International Affairs, 1930–1950, by GIOVANNI FARESE, continued)
Most of them had various links with their own national govern- ments (typically the Foreign O ce, while Beyen became Dutch Minister of Foreign A airs) or with international organizations (FAO, ILO, UNESCO[8] or other UN organizations). Some were rebuilders of western Europe, engaged in the implementation of the Marshall Plan (Finletter), or of the Common Market (Beyen). Despite their di ering views, they agreed that supranational orders could foster prosperity and security.
Interestingly, these men had ties not only with Chatham House but with a web of sister institutions, including the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations (CFR, established in 1921), the Honolulu-based Institute of Pacific Relations, (IPR, established in 1925), the Toronto-based Canadian Institute of International Relations (CIIR, established in 1928; today, Canadian International Council), and their journals Foreign Affairs, Pacific Affairs and International Journal.
A network of universities of global reach also emerges from the authors’ multiple ties (including Cambridge, Harvard, London School of Economics, Oxford, New York University, Princeton, Stanford, University College London, Yale). Notably, some of the authors joined larger intellectual circles as part of the global elite of past recipients of prestigious fellowships (Rhodes scholars, Rockefeller fellows).
Finally, though all authors here are men, links with prominent women—such as Marjory Allen and Eleanor Roosevelt—emerge.
8 The Food and Agriculture Organization, the International Labour Organization and the United Nations Educational, Scienti c and Cultural Organization, respectively.
That discussion may sound esoteric, academic, far away and long ago. I ASSURE YOU, if you should start to investigate the CURRENT HHS funding relating to the subject matter of families (especially “child abuse prevention, family violence prevention, and fatherlessness as a solution to both, marriage promotion, etc.) and see some of the institutions (specifically, centers at universities) , as well as the AFCC’s international board of directors, emphasis on “Multidisciplinary professionals” and overt promotion of shared programming across country borders, specifically the USA’s northern border (into Canada) and “Across the Pond” with the UK, in addition to the habit of privatizing government services, redefining government services in terms of social science demographics and running (that is to say, “testing”) behavioral modification curriula on (us) at ALL ages and socioeconomic profiles (except the VERY richest elites), it will be much less “esoteric.”
Specifically, while, ABC’s “20/20″ Footprints in the Snow” articles (links shown below), and arguing with 20/20 news outlets who them out, for being biased, withholding information, and in response, getting out the follow-up evidence,** I think may be exciting — but are not leading to a solution to the custody issues. They are simply complaining, loudly about it.
Read the rest of this entry »
Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
April 18, 2016 at 7:58 PM
Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011)
Tagged with "Divorce Wars | Interventions with Families in Conflict" by Elizabeth M. Ellis, "Footprints in the Snow", $3.6 Billion OCSE awards Year 2010 - Chart shows WHICH Govt Agencies got the largest ones, ABC 20/20 coverage of the Grazzini-Rucki Case, Center for American Progress (EIN#300126510--Total Assets 2014 $55, Center for American Progress (EIN#300126510--Total Assets 2014 $55M - a DC nonprofit with related 501©4, Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP), CENTER ON BUDGET AND POLICY PRIORITIES=EIN#521234565=DC Org-Got $540K from "Center for American Progress" in 2014, CFDA 93563 Child Support Enforcement (regular), CFDA 93564 Child Support Research & Demo, CFDA 93601 Child Supp Spec Projects ("90FI" series), CFFPP, Chief Justice Joseph Lambert (KY - pushing ADR - "Established Family Courts & COnstruction of 50 or more judicial centers"!), CLASP EIN#237000150-Got $590K grant from Center for Amer Progress in 2014), Georgetown Univ Law Center (EIN#53-01196603) got $300K from Center for American Progress in 2014. (In DC obviously), Jacquelyn Boggess (Wisconsin's CFFPP), Jill Groblewski, Kentucky Unified Court System, National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty (former analyst here - went to Center for American Progress - weighing in on fatherhood funding) DC Org see separate page to come), OCSE (Office of Child Support Enforcement), Parenting Coordination

