Posts Tagged ‘Education’

Alternate Takes on Abstinence-Only Education

I felt we needed a comic break. Or course, good satire often hits close to home.

I also felt that I should take a break from mocking Responsible Fatherhood and Healthy Marriage Education.

(1 of 4)

Salon.com News | Third columnist caught with hand in the Bush till

Jan 27, 2005 … Salon has confirmed that Michael McManus, a marriage advocate whose syndicated … to help promote Bush’s No Child Left Behind program to minority audiences. … help push proposals, according to a report Thursday in USA Today. … hired by HHS to implement the Community Healthy Marriage Initiative, …
www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/01/27/mcmanus/print.html

(2 of 4)

You should also read THIS site to better understand WHY HHS “just happens” to be so happily forcing happily ever after or else down our throats. And we are paying for it, too!

http://old.mediatransparency.org/personprofile.php?personID=89

(3 & 4)

Propaganda of The Police State -Bush Orders an End to Hiring …

In 2002, Gallagher contributed to an essay promoting marriage that appeared …. to promote Bush’s No Child Left Behind law through advertising on his cable …
www.infowars.com/…/propaganda_bush_orders_end_hiring_columnists.htm

Writer Backing Bush Plan Had Gotten Federal Contract …

Jan 25, 2005 … Bush’s push for a $300 million initiative encouraging marriage … to promote Bush’s No Child Left Behind law through advertising … We didn’t pay her to promote the president’s healthy marriage initiative at all. …
http://www.washingtonpost.com › Politics › Bush Administration – Similar

WELL, OK, here’s part of that 4th site:

. . . Gallagher received an additional $20,000 from the Bush administration in 2002 and 2003 for writing a report, titled “Can Government Strengthen Marriage?”, for a private organization called the National Fatherhood Initiative. That report, published last year, was funded by a Justice Department grant, said NFI spokesman Vincent DiCaro. Gallagher said she was “aware vaguely” that her work was federally funded. {{?? ???}} {{Kind of like being “vaguely aware” of who the father of one’s baby might be?}}In columns, television appearances and interviews with such newspapers as The Washington Post, Gallagher last year defended Bush’s proposal for a constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage.

And these same folks are still up and running strong. Did I mention that Wade Horn, as I THINK, I recall, is among those highly involved in the origins of the AFCC?

Wade Horn, HHS assistant secretary for children and families, said his division hired Gallagher as “a well-known national expert,” along with other specialists in the field, to help devise the president’s healthy marriage initiative. “It’s not unusual in the federal government to do that,” he said.

The essay Gallagher drafted appeared under Horn’s byline — with the headline “Closing the Marriage Gap” — and ran in Crisis magazine, which promotes humanism rooted in Catholic Church teachings. Horn said most of the brochures written by Gallagher — such as “The Top Ten Reasons Marriage Matters” — were not used as the program evolved.

“I don’t see any comparison between what has been alleged with Armstrong Williams and what we did with Maggie Gallagher,” said Horn, .who founded the National Fatherhood Initiative before entering government.

Although this is a fast “intro,” some of this info shows the IN-BREEDING involved in these programs and who promotes them. In other words, those sites are worth studying in more depth. What we probably need nationally is a few more Wynona Wards to work on the abuse of — power — and money — in these matters. Or, a lot more Erin Brockoviches.

But enough of that on Marriage, Fatherhood, etc.. . . . It’s getting “old.”

Accordingly this post is going after “Abstinence Education” instead.

The whole concept of continuous funding on almost ANYTHING pertaining to marriage, sex, fatherhood (motherhood), let alone how to balance a checkbook — from a federal government which has Congressional members like “Hot Mike Duvall,” and a country whose governors include both former Presidents AND Governors who can’t keep their pants zipped or their own marriages together. I mean, where does one start? Bill Clinton? John F. Kennedy? FDR?

And so what if they could? Are they moral in other areas of life also?

That said, I think that we should expect of our leaders TOTAL ethics in these two primary categories: Money and Sex. In their personal lives.

The government has NO business in my pocketbook except for the most nominal of functions of government, and it absoLUTEly should stay out of my pants, or skirts, and of my kids’, too. Good grief.

Again, let me go “religious” on this one (before quoting the next site, which is going to do its own take on religious conservatives) and quote the Bible, Romans, and all that.

Note: If I have inadvertently missed offending a particular group in this post, I will try to catch up next one. The “PC” gene is crawling up the back of my brain here.

Also please maintain a healthy perspective and realize that 2,000 years, gender, religion and culture separate me from this quote! On the other hand, I think it nails the hypocrisy thing just fine…

Romans 2: (the hyperlinks are to which Greek word it comes from….)

17 Behold thou art called a Jew {{See Below at **}} and restest in the law and makest thy boast of God {{**}} 18 And knowest his will and approvest the things that are more excellent being instructed out of the law 19 And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind a light of them which are in darkness 20 An instructor of the foolish a teacher of babes which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law 21 Thou therefore which teachest another teachest thou not thyself thou that preachest a man should not steal dost thou steal 22 Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery dost thou commit adultery thou that abhorrest idols dost thou commit sacrilege 23 Thou that makest thy boast of the law through breaking the law dishonourest thou God 24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you as it is written

{{**case in point, where this reads “Jew,” we might as well read, here, “mental health expert” or “licensed marriage and family therapist” or almost any other functional description which carries with it the ATTITUDE that adults who can’t get along are somehow now children that need to be taught.

In our country, legally, adulthood is at age 18 or 21. For some women, this is suddenly reversed when marrying the wrong person. For BOTH divorcing parents who weren’t smart and savvy enough to work it out apart from this system entirely, (in which case wouldn’t they have been smart and savvy enough to stay together), suddenly they are become as little kids needing instruction from Der Vaterland….}}

This quote from Romans 2, written by the apostle Paul (“Saul”) is already volatile enough — other portions of his writings have been used (AB-used?) to justify plenty of violence towards women, and Romans 1 would of course offend anyone in favor of same-sex, well, sex.

Anyhow, I’m not this author, who was beheaded in a Roman Prison about 2000 years ago; he paid for insulting the wrong people in power already.

I’m just me. I’m female, Christian, a domestic violence SURVIVOR, and have enough respect that have finally figured out to steer clear of church buildings and those who frequent them. Except for a good concert or so, when I’m able or in the mood.

The best of us on a good day have some hypocrisy, and are not thoroughly honest. However, is it REALLY necessary to take — forcibly, through the IRS — wages from employees, funnel them through the Feds, and then force-feed back, focusing on LOW-income populations who can’t get around this (gee, how’d they become so low-income to start with? Possibly through this system?), things like parental education, how NOT to leave a marriage, how to have a double standard of behavior based on gender, and how, when, and with whom to have sex — when the people preaching this aren’t UNIFORMLY systematically faithful to their smart, typically intelligent if not trophy, and such wives that helped them get elected, gave them children, and so forth? ???

I mean, if there weren’t all this preaching, it’d be one thing. But when there is, then I’d rather see a sermon than hear one. ANYHOW, back to this:

“Abstinence Education /

George Bush”

Abstinence Education – Let’s talk about sex

Aside from invading Iraq, one of George W. Bush’s favorite pet projects is pushing what is called abstinence-only education. According to Bush, the best way …
irregulartimes.com/abstinenceed.html – Cached – Similar

Abstinence-only education is founded upon the assumption that giving teenagers complete and accurate information about sex is dangerous. This foundation of George W. Bush’s abstinence agenda goes a long way in explaining the Republican animosity towards education in general. In abstinence-only education we see that Bush and his Republican supporters believe that knowledge is dangerous, and should be kept from people as much as possible.

What George W. Bush never mentions is that the alternative to abstinence-only education is not some kind of hippy free love seminar in public schools. The medical community and responsible educational organizations promote an alternative called abstinence-plus. You won’t hear conservatives talking about this approach because it makes a lot of sense, and it’s easier for conservatives to sell abstinence-only programs when they’re able to keep parents frightened about unrestrained adolescent promiscuity.

Abstinence-plus includes a strong component of information about the reasons that abstaining from sex can be an extremely wise choice for teenagers. The difference is that abstinence-plus does more than just tell teenagers not to have sex. Abstinence-plus programs also provide access to full and accurate information about sex, so that students can make intelligent decisions about having sex instead of remaining in the dark until it’s too late. It’s essential for public schools to provide students with complete sex education because if students don’t get their education at school, they’ll search for accurate information elsewhere.

In a shocking display of naivete, George W. Bush and his Republican supporters suggest that teenagers would have sex less if only public schools did not let them know that sex exists. They ignore the fact that almost all American teenagers are skilled users of the Internet, which has plenty of information, both accurate and inaccurate. It’s the job of public schools to cut through the clutter of publicly available information, and provide an accurate presentation of it for their students. When George W. Bush insists that American public schools only be allowed to teach students about the reasons people should not have sex, he is performing a monumentally perverse act of academic censorship. That not only fails teenagers’ need for serious honesty about sex, it fails their need for an example of democratic principles in action.

All other points aside, George W. Bush’s anti-education agenda is a dangerous idea because research shows that abstinence-only education just doesn’t work. Not too surprisingly, researchers have found that when teenagers sign pledge forms in front of their parents, promising not to have sex, they’re not really very likely to follow through. In fact, students who sign pledge forms as a part of sexual abstinence training are just as likely to have premarital sex as other students! The same is true of the students in abstinence-only programs in general. Full sexual education, on the other hand, has been shown not to act as an encouragement for students to have sex, and is shown to provide students protection from pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases better than abstinence-only education does. The Bush Administration knows that abstinence-only education does not work at decreasing adolescent sexual behaviors, and actually increases students’ risk of sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancy.

That’s why George W. Bush ordered that all behavioral standards for evaluating the success of abstinence-only educational programs be eliminated. He didn’t want to the government to gather information that he knew would show abstinence-only education to be a complete failure.

The ultimate irony is that George W. Bush is pushing abstinence-only education at the same time that he is pushing for governmental programs to be performed by religious organizations.

Talk about total confusion! I’ve looked at the grant system, and Catholic Charities is prominent in many of these programs.

So, Bush’s plan includes promotion of taxpayer funding of abstinence-only programs by, among other groups, the Catholic Church. Given the scandal in the Catholic Church about long term and pervasive sexual assault of children by priests, this plan seems not only doomed to failure, but actually quite dangerous. After all, the Catholic Church, like other major religious institutions, appears to have been unable to convince its own leaders to stop having sex with children.

How, then, are we supposed to believe that the Catholic Church is deserving of government grants in order to teach teenagers not to have sex with each other?

Easy: We are to “Take it on Faith.” . . . . . .

Abstinence-only Education | Union of Concerned Scientists

Since his tenure as governor of Texas, President George W. Bush has made no secret of his view that sex education should teach teenagers “abstinence only” …
http://www.ucsusa.org › Scientific Integrity › Abuses of Science – Cached – Similar

Well, on to more worthy endeavors, I was just having some fun here.

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

January 13, 2010 at 3:20 PM

Posted in AFCC, Designer Families, Funding Fathers - literally, History of Family Court, Who's Who (bio snapshots)

Tagged with "We had no idea!", Education, fatherhood, social commentary, Social Issues from Religious Viewpoints, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work..

Rocky Mountain High– if you’re in one of these professions…

leave a comment »

or should I say, Rocky Mountain HYbrid? Sure looks like one here….

A.k.a. Carpet Bagging on Divorce Distress, at high altitudes…

I just had an odd question: Why is SF’s famous, and well-established Family Violence Prevention Fund, a pace-setter and leader in the field of violence preVENtion conferences and training, promoting conferences like this?

I mean, I just got on “endabuse.org” and searched for “family law,” to see if they actually address some of the rampant troubles with the family law system. After all, they are a FAMILY violence prevention fund….

Here are links on top right, first page”:

Do you see anything about preventing violence against WOMEN? In fact, women show up, if they’re immigrants. A search of “fathers” versus a search of “mothers” on this site pull up entirely different stats — you should try it some time.

This came up on page 1 of search results, only the 4th item:

Family Violence Prevention Fund: News: Save The Date:

clipped from Google – 11/2009

The Association of Family and Conciliation Courts 46th annual conference will be held at the Sheraton New Orleans and will examine how family law research, practices and processes have evolved.** It will feature 70 workshops, including three-hour advanced sessions, three plenary sessions and a choice of six daylong pre-conference institutes.

Sessions will address challenges to conventional child custody wisdom including assertions about 50/50 parenting, the child’s role in the process, the resiliency of children after divorce, the changing role of court systems in resolving family disputes, and more. For more information, click here.
…

**:have evolved.” Wake up. Want to know how? Look at AFCC’s “About us” or history page — this was not accident, it was intentional transformation, and “how” they evolved was particularly through conferences such as the AFCC puts on, policies which the FVPF has now more overtly (i’m not sure for how long they were ever truly independent) bought into….

I DID “click here,” which brought me not to New Orleans, but to Denver. At which point, this post was conceived and “evolved” — we deserve to know that the organization called “endabuse” is advertising for, and sponsoring conferences for, the organization that is promoting doctrines specifically originated to cover up domestic VIOLENCE (not “abuse”), Child Abuse (is the term, although it does violence to children), and incest, etc. . . . To cover up criminal behavior and change it into something else, linguistically.

/ / / / /

Let me clarify “AFCC”, in case you’re under 20, IN one of these professions, and haven’t been a parent involved in divorce: Custody Switches Happen. HOW do they happen? When something is confronted by one parent, or reported by a children, generally speaking. WHY does this occur? Well, a variety of reasons, but generally in retaliation for reporting. (From what I can see). I mean, what’s the common (?) or $$-and-cents for pulling a sole-custody switch midway through a growing child’s life? It’s $$ and sense from a certain perspective… The “best interests” of the child is not as common sense as we might wish to think (see my blog on slavery & domestic violence, a recent one).

But I’m blabbing here: AFCC, per Liz Richards of NAFCJ.net, and I have to agree after my studies, at least of grants patterns and some of the printed materials, not to mention experiences:

This and other factors show that the fathers rights movement was a creation of a ring [of] judges who dominate the family court system and public policy in many states. These judges are not only hearing a large percentage of domestic litigation, they are also writing the state laws covering custody, divorce and child support. In addition they influence HHS-ACF agency which controls most of the grant funds going to the state level agencies and courts. Their people are getting the grants and using for the fathers rights cases.

READ ABOUT THESE GROUPS TO COMPREHEND THE EXTENT OF THIS COLLUSION

AFCC: Association of Family and Conciliation Courts
“AFCC is the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts – an interdisciplinary and international association of professionals dedicated to the resolution of family conflict.” . . . .

The AFCC claims their focus is on training judges, custody evaluators and mediators about custody and divorce issues. But in reality they are a father focused organization and promoting alienation theories to explain away family violence by men. In reality they act as a “clearinghouse” for organized case rigging. They hold conferences about parental alienation but never mention the many professional experts who have condemned it [[using this PAS to retaliate against those reporting abuse, including sometimes sexual abuse of minors]]as harmful to children or the link to incest promoter Richard Gardner. Their scheme involves “recruiting” male litigants through fathers groups and federal HHS programs managed by the local child support agencies for program “services” which are ostensibly for helping non-custodial fathers get their visitation rights so they would have less incentive to default on child support obligations.

The LEGAL disincentive for defaulting on child support obligations is a contempt of a court order action. There was no problem in using this against the protective mother in Oconto Wisconsin, recently, so I know the judges “understand” the concept. But when a father is involved, somehow we need to give them “incentive” to care about their children’s welfare by helping “bribe” (you give me this, I may give you that, perhaps) them to carry this out in the form of stepping up to that child support plate. That alone is suspect to me, as well as many other aspects of the child support system.. . . . . Women are supposed to care, men have to be bribed to?
ALSO, Is that what any type of courts are FOR? To resolve family conflict? I thought that’s what counseling and therapy was for. Sounds like we have a confusion of purposes somewhere (and should throw out the Constitution as irrelevant, as well as laws). ANYHOW, here they are:

Exhibit and advertise at AFCC 47Th Annual Conference June 2-5, 2010 Denver, Colorado More information>>	AFCC Training Programs In Baltimore, Maryland December 7-8 & 9-10, 2009More information >>
AFCC Training Programs In Houston, Texas February 22-23 & 24-25, 2010More information >>	Subscribe to the AFCC free Monthly eNews Subscribe>>

ANYHOW

‘Traversing the Trail of Alienation: Mountains of Emotion, Mile High Conflict‘

…AFCC’s Annual Conference is the premiere event for family law, mental health and dispute resolution professionals. AFCC’s 47th Annual Conference will bring together between 800-1000 judges, lawyers, mediators, social workers, psychologists, parenting coordinators, parent educators and others.

I’d like to pause here for a brief prayer: “Lord, deliver us from all do-gooders, parent educators, and unsolicited profiteering helpers that may cross my life, or my children’s this day, in Jesus name, Amen.” (I’d rather SEE a sermon than attend a parenting seminar any day. This is parenting: you get your kids SAFE, FIRST, and teach them right from wrong based on behavior, character — not family function. You do not assault & batter yourself, and you protect them from those who do, to the best of your ability, and empathize at least when you can’t. How many of those parenting educators have actually GONE through what family law system has put us through, and after DV, too in many cases? Moreover, I’m not paid for being a mother. In some contexts, doing this can be criminalized as resulting in family “conflict,” i.e., taking a stand somwhere along the line!)

The exhibitor forum is centrally located in a high traffic area near conference beverage breaks and is designed to maximize visibility of exhibitors. Exhibitors receive admission to all conference sessions, meal functions and networking opportunities, including AFCC’s famous Hospitality Suite.

Don’t miss this great opportunity to build your business with AFCC

Join AFCC for a look at innovations and interventions for addressing our most difficult

work. This conference will build on a special issue of

guest edited by Dr. Barbara Fidler and Professor Nicholas Bala. The program and journal will examine the latest interventions

designed to address family conflict involving allegations of alienation, featuring unique perspectives from

judges, lawyers, mental health and dispute resolution professionals.

Family Court Review on alienation, forthcoming in January 2010,

FVPF should not be promoting this! Why are they? Oh– I forgot to tell you:

Fiscal Year	OPDIV	Grantee Name	City	Award Title	CFDA Program Name	Principal Investigator	Sum of Actions
2009	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION & SERVICES	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants	ESTA SOLER	$- 1
2009	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	SPECIAL ISSUE RESOURCE CENTERS FOR INFORMATION AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants	DEBBIE LEE	$ 1,353,812
2009	DHHS/OS	Family Violence Prevention Fund	SAN FRANCISCO	FY09 HEALTH CARE PROVIDER RESPONSE TO VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN – EDUCATION, TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM	Advancing System Improvements to Support Targets for Healthy People 2010 (ASIST2010)	LISA JAMES	$ 31,000
2008	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	SPECIAL ISSUE RESOURCE CENTERS FOR INFORMATION AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants	DEBBIE LEE	$ 1,323,812
2007	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	SPECIAL ISSUE RESOURCE CENTERS FOR INFORMATION AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants	DEBBIE LEE	$ 1,394,127
2006	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	SPECIAL ISSUE RESOURCE CENTERS FOR INFORMATION AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants	DEBBIE LEE	$ 1,145,872
2005	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT	Child Abuse and Neglect Discretionary Activities	ESTA SOLER	$ 496,000
2005	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION & SERVICES	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants	ESTA SOLER	$ 1,240,689
2004	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION & SERVICES	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants	ESTA SOLER	$ 1,215,689
2003	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION & SERVICES	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants	ESTA SOLER	$ 1,133,236
2003	CDC	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	PUBLIC HEALTH CONFERENCE SUPPORT COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT	Centers for Disease Control and Prevention_Investigations and Technical Assistance	ESTA SOLER, PRESIDENT	$ 102,186
2002	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION & SERVICES	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants	ESTA SOLER	$ 1,113,796
2001	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION & SERVICES	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants	ESTA SOLER	$ 958,542
2000	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION & SERVICES – SPECIAL ISSUE RESOURCE CENTER	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants	ESTA SOLER	$ 804,542
1999	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION & SERVICES – SPECIAL ISSUE RESOURCE CENTER	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants	ESTA SOLER	$ 698,710
1998	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION & SERVICES	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants	ESTA SOLER	$ 50,000
1998	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION & SERVICES – SPECIAL ISSUE RESOURCE CENTER	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants	ESTA SOLER	$ 678,710
1998	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION SERVICES	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants	LRNI MARIN	$ 50,000
1997	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION & SERVICES – SPECIAL ISSUE RESOURCE CENTER	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants	ESTA SOLER	$ 637,604
1997	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	P.A. FV-03-93 – DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: HEALTH CARE & ACCESS: SIRC	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Discretionary Grants	JANET NUDELMAN	$- 9,549
1995	ACF	FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	SAN FRANCISCO	P.A. FV-03-93 – DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: HEALTH CARE & ACCESS: SIRC	Family Violence Prevention and Services/Grants for Battered Women’s Shelters: Grants to States and Indian Tribes	JANET NUDELMAN	$ 451,525

Do you see the word “discretionary” in the “grants to shelters” ??label? Really, it’s about conferences and training, not actually STOPPING violence. For another, perhaps, because they can: I mean — this is 2009, alone.

Recipient Name	State	Federal Funding (for this search)	DUNS Number
FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION FUND	California	$10,825,813	618375687

Funding is going GREAT for THIS nonprofit:

Assistance to Recipient(s) “family violence prevention fund”
(FY 2000-2010)

Federal dollars: $33,745,685
Total number of recipients: 1
Total number of transactions: 67

Look at which branches are funding it now — the best of both worlds, from HHS and DOJ both. One is promoting fatherhood through federal grants, another is spouting out millions (and that’s literally) to organizations like this, and others, to “train” judges how to recognize domestic violence (clue: look in the law, look at the facts, look at the bleeding, look at the casualties) and be good and address it, supposedly.

Top 5 Agencies Providing Assistance

DOJ – Office of Justice Programs	$18,464,457
HHS – Secy. of Health and Human Services	$11,107,290
HHS – Administration for Children and Families	$4,071,752
HHS – Centers for Disease Control and Prevention	$102,186

HERE”s the CALIFORNIA chapter of AFCC, transforming the words “clear and present danger” (lifted DIRECTLY from the legislature’s own definition of a spousal batterer) into a budget crisis — which the same group has contributed to!

Whose children ARE they now? Are they your subject matter or the progeny of two parents? When you see a kid, do you see a $$ sign for your profession?

Apparently so, and government grants to ENDABUSE.org going to promote AFCC — a membership charging organization — for professionals to hawk their wares, while too many parents are UNaware of it.

Which I hope to stop, obviously!

That’s what I call Carpetbagging, no matter what the altitude.

Would like to analyze a bit more, but time and technical limitations prevent. Check this out yourself….

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

November 28, 2009 at 3:05 PM

From “Our Bodies, Ourselves” to “Our Courts, Ourselves”…

with one comment

The topic of mediation, especially mandatory mediation, is a hot one within the family court venue, and particularly among domestic violence advocates. Many have come up opposed to it.

On the other side of the fence (??) are those who are advocating mediation to cut down on the caseload in these courts, and attempt to reconcile opposing parties for the best interests of the children, supposedly.

While looking through the RAND corporation policy papers, available on-line, I was astounded to find almost nothing whatsoever on violence against4 women, or women per se (although there were articles about the education gap for men and boys of color, with the kneejerk recommendation, more and earlier preschool. I happen to disagree, I think there’s enough subject matter for child development scholars to study throughout the educational, penal, and court institutions in this country already…). There was next to nothing current on domestic violence, although a few articles dating back to 2004/2005 actually used this word.

However, there is this interesting take on mediation. My limited technique can’t paste in the image, so I recommend taking a look at:

All I’m going to say about Our Bodies, Ourselves, is that it is reminiscent of the feminist movement (after all, these ARE our bodies, if it’s women involved), and another era. For more info, read Dr. Phyllis Chesler, including Women & Madness, Mothers on Trial, and Woman’s Inhumanity to Woman. Don’t forget to also take a serious look at Honor Killings vs. Domestic violence (articles), and so forth.

Now about, Our Courts Ourselves — I believe a takeoff on that title:

http://www.rand.org/pubs/reprints/2005/RP1090.pdf

“Our Courts, Ourselves: how the Alternative Dispute Resolution Movement is Reshaping Our Legal System.”

It says plainly what I have deduced, in using the phrase “Designer Family” and in sarcastically stating that a world without conflict IS indeed possible — if everyone is drugged, asleep, or simply not paying attention. . . . . Which appears to be an imminent possibility, or business goal in some arenas… I mean, as slavery is supposedly abolished, SOMEONE has to do life’s dirty work, for cheap or free…. Women got the vote, heck what next? ???

This tends to verify my observations: (from page 168, Section II, “Puritans Populists and Utopians.”)…

Members of America’s utopian societies yearned for social harmony and eschewed conflict. One of their goals was to eliminate adversarial legal processes. In Edward Bellamy’s Utopia, depicted in his wildly popular 1988 novel Looking Backward, citizens are inducted into the armies of a corporatist state into which all contribute and from which all receive the necessities of life….

Are you frightened yet?

As communitarian values replace private interest, economic competition, social conflict and adversarial processes are eliminated…Wise citizens take the place of judges and juries in deciding how and when to punish bad behavior, lawyers’ services become superfluous, and the law itself is discarded.

(My quote here, since I can’t cut & paste from the pdf, is from memory, for speed — check source yourself)

Bellamy’s novel inspired a new political movement called Nationalism, comprised of a series of grassroots organizations dedicated to creating a utopian society devoid of economic and social conflict and gave rise to the establishment of the Populist Party.. . .

Many in the Nationalist Movement had ties with Theosophy, a contemporary religious movement…. substituting “Universal brotherhood and cooperation for competition..” but the roots of Theosophy lay in spiritualism, and elevating the divine spirit within the individual. Their leaders eschewed social justice and activism, and eventually the movements parted paths.

To those who are somewhat versed in one of the “Abrahamic” religions (i.e., Judaism, Christianity, Islam), this utopian vision and non-involvement in social justice are at odds with fundamental beliefs that man’s nature needs redemption (i.e., “the Fall”) and that a future resurrection and judgement await.

At the very least, then, this utopian philosophy goes against the core of a substantial portion of the world’s population. Experientially, someone has to become the “wise citizens” and of a supposedly superior, elitist, caste to inform and educate the plebians in how to get along.

The philosophy that CONFLICT is bad, and that PEACE AT ANY PRICE (and sacrificing safety, or justice in the process) is the primary good is — to my reading — a violence against the concept of justice, balance and equity.

Hence, the jargon calling a divorce or process in which women protesting abuse of themselves, or their children, even when sexual abuse has been involved and documented, a “high-conflict” custody comes from this worldview. That is not the primary characteristic — only according to a certain view.

As to “our bodies, ourselves,” an 11 year old in Wisconsin and (I recently heard) a 14 year old in Michigan, have learned that they are property, not people. Michaela Tipton went back to her father to get her mother out of jail. A young man, A student, spent a night in detention for refusing to visit his father also.

http://www.macombdaily.com/articles/2009/11/21/news/srv0000006883874.txt#blogcomments
Teenager incarcerated for refusing to visit his father
Published: Saturday, November 21, 2009

A 14-year-old boy was thrown into the county youth home overnight and handcuffed for about four hours after refusing to follow a judge’s order to visit his father, as part of an ongoing custody case.

The boy, Jacob Mastrogiovanni of Warren, was ordered Thursday to spend three days in the youth home by family court Judge John Foster, who lifted the sentenced Friday following protests by his mother and a night of incarceration for her son.

The uncommon occurrence of a contempt of

court sentence for a child in a child custody dispute angered his mother, Dawn Platevoet, and several of her relatives, including the boy’s grandmother. They picketed in front of the county courthouse in downtown Mount Clemens on Thursday and Friday, garnering media attention.
“A judge shouldn’t throw an all-A student in jail for refusing to visit his father,” Platevoet said. “There are other ways to handle the situation, and apparently the judge agreed because he let him out.”
Jacob was slated to remain in the Juvenile Justice Center until 7 p.m. Sunday but was released by Foster about 12:30 p.m. Friday. Foster had Jacob brought from the youth home in handcuffs about 8:30 a.m. Friday to appear in front of him in Macomb County Circuit Court later that morning. Jacob waited in a holding cell.

Moments after he was released Friday, Jacob said Foster didn’t specify why he freed him.
“He said that I don’t decide whether I see my dad or not,” Jacob said. “It was kind of like a warning, this time, I guess.”
Foster’s secretary said the judge did not want to comment.

Jacob and Platevoet wouldn’t delve into many details of why he won’t visit his father, Victor Mastrogiovanni of Chesterfield Township. She said Jacob began resisting in July following an unspecified incident.

They said when Jacob has visited Mastrogiovanni recently that he is forced to stay in his room without any contact.

On Foster’s order, the three have been attending weekly counseling sessions since early September. {{That’s the racket, folks…}} But they and the therapist have been unable to resolve the disagreement.

Platevoet and Mastrogiovanni never married and have had some disputes for years {{OBviously. The boy is 14!}}regarding custody and support issues, they said.

Mastrogiovanni, who has been married for two years and has a 15-month-old child, [[IE 2nd marriage, new kid]]said he did not want to comment specifically about the dispute.

“I love my kid very much and want what’s best for him,” he said.

Platevoet said she would like her son to visit his dad but can’t force him.

“What am I supposed to do? Grab him by the back of the head and put him in the car?” she said. “He’s a teenager and wants to do teenager things.”

She said Jacob “listens to me” about other things but not about the visits

ANYHOW, you are either awake or asleep in this matter about trying to create a utopian society where wise citizens (NOT due process and facts/evidence, etc.) choose punishments, and where all the requirements of life are also obtained from the state. Hence, “Health & Human Services.”

The question is, Who is Being Served? And being served What?

2nd largest federal expenditure, Educational Department, making sure (that’s a laugh!) no child left behind. What isn’t being openly marketed — where they are marching, goosestep style, who is paying the drummer, and what is the origin of the tune. Not only can we not make medical or health choices for our kids, we as a populace aren’t smart enough to resource or network our life choices and also help them get educated.

You cannot really deal with the courts entirely separate from the educational system. For one, the courts are trying to run cleanup after educational (moral/value) failures, all at the expense of taxpayers (not those who can write off expenses as business owners and investors, etc.). For another, I am simply not interested in an oligarchy, a dictatorship, or any of that. After all, it’s my own body here, and the children that came out of it are NOT state property, or fodder for others’ professional careers in psychology, mental health, law, pharmacology, etc. I respected their father’s contact with them, and the law. In return from this, I lost all contact with them, and made a mockery of the process.

Several entities are laughing all the way to the bank on this one. The thing is, to get an audit of those statements.

Anyhow — take a look at that rand document — it’s for sure informative. Then also realize that what takes place through the courts, when it does — that’s not mediation in the proper sense of the word. That’s basically program marketing, and “required outcome enforcement” from things such as the Access Visitation Grants, Responsible Fatherhood/Marriage, and such-like.

Enough for today!

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

November 23, 2009 at 12:56 PM

Posted in Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, compulsory schooling, Designer Families, Domestic Violence vs Family Law, History of Family Court, Mandatory Mediation, My Takes, and Favorite Takes, public education, Vocabulary Lessons

Tagged with custody, Due process, Education, family law, Feminists, social commentary, Social Issues from Religious Viewpoints, Studying Humans, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work..

Richmond, CA Rev. talks sense about alcohol’s role in gangrape.

with one comment

Yesterday, being off-line (not including a miniature and slow cell phone, without a keyboard), I reviewed some local newsprint. In fact, lack of access to the internet has caused a variety of “bad hair” days, and some dashed off, ill-formatted posts. I became a Mac fan, glad to learn how this works, and a real convert. Then it went MIA, and it’s back to figuring out strange computers display/paste, etc. vagaries, on the fly. Moroever today, as far as hair is concerned, for me it’s a bad hair day (literally) as well. Consider yourself forewarned.

Domestic violence (of which sexual assault by any family member would be part of, though not the case here) and/or child abuse are definitely crimes that involve enablers, standers-by, and those who fail to report. As we know. The Richmond gangrape shocked everyone, and shock was appropriate, however, what indeed are our illusions about the public school system to start with?

While it’s appropriate to express shock at the number of passers-by that allowed this young lady to be gangraped after a homecoming dance, few articles have mentioned that she had been drinking underage, too. While that’s NO excuse, I feel this article handled it sensitively enough.

I haven’t posted for some days. While there’s no shortage of topics, I looked forward to posting this article, if no other. Someone needs to say it. And, seeing as I tend to ramrod religion from time to time, and may in a few minutes here, I was glad to see this Rev. at least brought up the topic of, what was this 15 year old doing drinking? What was that context? No, that’s no excuse — she didn’t provoke this. However, it was an element of the vulnerability here, and deserves some press.

Perspective: Alcohol abuse at heart of Richmond rape case

Rev. Alvin C. Bernstine
Guest Commentary

Posted: 11/15/2009 12:01:00 AM PST

Tuesday Nov 3

Please know that I do not mean to minimize the crime nor suggest that the victim’s inability to physically repel her assailants makes the crime less horrifying. I do, however, believe that more attention must given to the fact that a contributing factor to this horrifying crime was the abuse of alcohol, and possibly other substances.

I also know that adults make bad decisions, use poor judgment and do stupid things when intoxicated, and that heavily stimulated youth on alcohol is a recipe for violent behavior.

The lack of attention to the presence of alcohol abuse in this horrifying instance does nothing to minimize that nearly 60 percent of all high school students are drinkers of alcohol, and that in 2005 more than half of all Americans age 12 or older reported being drinkers. In one report “alcohol has been tried by 41 percent of current 8th graders, 63 percent of 10th graders, 75 percent of 12th graders, and 87 percent of college students” (Drugs and Society).

Young people are using alcohol at alarming rates, and the use of alcohol or some psychoactive substance is present in nearly all violent crimes committed by youth.

Alcohol diminishes the capacity to engage in moral reasoning, which radically impairs one’s ability to make judgments. In a culture where women are daily objectified, young men impaired by alcohol are not likely to control their impulses and are more prone to herd behavior in regard to women. Alcohol has been a constant among teen activities, and the use of it is a kind of rite of passage into adulthood.

While we pursue the assailants of this brutal act, let us be mindful that there is also some irresponsible, sleazy adult, possibly a parent, who assisted in making alcohol available to youth.

It seems that children may have engaged in a horrible crime, but some adult contributed to this damnable behavior. I pray our outcry to this crime would include efforts at educating children about substance abuse, particularly alcohol, and making adults accountable who contribute to the delinquency of minors.

I pray more parents step up and serve as monitors for school activities, which would reduce alcohol use and curtail violent behavior among youth. If parents are afraid to attend youth functions, then we probably should not let our children attend. Our children should know that the use of alcohol among children is not something that we can tolerate.

Rev. Bernstine is pastor of the Bethlehem Missionary Baptist Church in Richmond.

Meanwhile, same incident, a career public educator moralizes on the immoral status of our educational system, in re: this same incident. PR key — never lose a chance to moralize (I try not to, right?). . . . . I include this link for those interested in reading the 70 comments, including those who thought the author was a “blooming idiot” and another one who blamed — what else, single parents, father absence (not of the victim, but maybe we could go blame some of the rapists, then?) and them danged immigrants. Notice the difference in tone from what’s above:

http://www.dailynews.com/opinions/ci_13695043?source=rss\

Paul White: Gang rape watchers a product of schools’ moral void

Full story: LA Daily News

THE refusal by dozens of students and adults to intervene in a two-hour gang rape at a Richmond, Calif.. . . . [[(read it yourself…)]]

What are you “standing by” in your life these days? . . . . Think about it..

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

November 16, 2009 at 5:35 PM

Posted in public education

Tagged with Education, Richmond CA gangrape 2009, social commentary, Social Issues from Religious Viewpoints

“Why does he DO that?” A walk on the wild side…. [with some 2013 updates]

with one comment

(note — see the comment, from 2009. The person “gets” what I was doing in the post, thank you!)

I am speaking as an owner and long-time appreciator of the book. “Why Does He Do That? Inside the Minds of Angry & Controlling Men.”.. which showed up like a savior, emotionally, right as my case plummeted from stablized position under protection of a restraining order, into the volatile, “mandatory-mediation” arena of Family Court, which reminded me of “Chutes and Ladders”, with more chutes than ladders.

You take one false step (or have your family placed at the top of a chute through being hauled into this venue) and are on a chute.

Kind of like life WITH the abusive guy (or woman) to start with, anyhow, huh? Hmm… Wonder why they function similarly!

(The post on “Family Court Matters a la board-games” is in pre-development stage, meaning, a little gleam in the blogger’s eye still. Paper, Scissors Stone (last post) got me thinking for sure…..)

If you haven’t read Lundy Bancroft’s material AND/OR you are not yourself a victim or being forced to co-parent with a batterer, you’re not fully informed in the domestic violence field, period.

(2013 Update, In Hindsight):

Then again, if we’d all been talking about something besides “batterers” perhaps neither Batterers Intervention Programs nor “domestic violence” would have developed into “fields,” coalitions, or industries.

And the conversation about those fields and how THEY operate is the conversation that no one seems to want to talk about, even as updates to “The Batterer As Parent” have been published and being circulated in various circles.

I mean, think about it (why didn’t we earlier??) There is a crime called “assault and battery” — but by the time someone has become a “batter-er” that means, it’s habitual — which means someone else is experiencing “domestic violence.” How can you domesticate “violence” and what’s domestic about it? (Well, you can tame down its labeling and call it domestic “abuse” — which has been done…

In fact, as it turns out, “BIPs” are actually diversionary programs to criminal prosecution for the beating up on others. Some people figured out, along with programs like, “moral reconation therapy(tm)” and Psychoeducational classes for kids undergoing divorce — that the more programs the merrier. I guess… The money is made upfront in the trainings, yours truly (The United States Government, which is essentially “yours truly” — the taxpayers) set up the policies and the corporations and then runs the population through them every time someone shows up actually needing some realtime social service — or justice — or help.

I can’t explain it too well in a single post, but this conflict was staged and manipulated in order to obtain more and more central control (literally, an economic stranglehold) on most of us through those of us that are willing to sell out for collaboration, sales, and the conference circuit. As sincere or genuine as these individuals may be, I do know they are playing on empathy to increase sales. I do not know whether or not they see the endgame, after their own use has expired in the long-range plan of bankrupting Americans so we are left as a human resource without other options than begging or slavery, at a sheer subsistence level.

Some of us have been their in marriage, we have been there AFTER filing restraining orders, which were intended to protect us (allegedly), but we were NOT there after even a year or two in the family court Archipelago.

Somehow, in this destitute and distressed state, we grasp at straws of empathy and keep referring friends and neighbors to explain our own situation to the same types of information — such as if only someone would JUST UNDERSTAND batterers’ psyches, our kids would be safer, and life would be better.

Anyhow, what follows was from very early in this blog (October 2009) and shows my understanding at that time. Even then, I was questioning the logic of the question.

Read the rest of this entry »

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

October 8, 2009 at 7:59 PM

Only $118,310,126 (last year), in hopes of Healthy Marriages and Responsible Fathers

leave a comment »

Set this Press Release to the “SPIN” Cycle:

California Healthy Marriages Coalition Says GM Bankruptcy Could Create More
Than Financial Devastation for Families

SAN DIEGO, June 11 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The GM Bankruptcy is causing six
dealerships around California to be closed. These closures will create more
bad news for California's economy by increasing the already high unemployment
rate of 11 percent, and adding financial stress to the families involved in
these cutbacks. Statistics show that financial strain is one of the leading
causes of divorce and that divorce itself places additional strains on the
economy and on business. This is a distressing cycle for which California's
leading marriage-support organization offers some new reassurance.
{{Just "trust" our press release, statistics show.  Which, or should we say "whose", is
not mentioned..}}
 


{{And HOW did this premiere marriage-support organization (at least according to itself) race 
to the forefront of all California's marriage support organizations??  Clearly 
it must be on its own merits. . . . blood, sweat, tears, ingenuity (that's true), 
and entrepreneurship, standing on the shoulders of giants.  Seriously, the Dept. of Health
and Human Services IS indeed a giant, funding this group from the top down, and some of the
other coalitions under its w - i - d - e umbrella from the bottom up.)






Target Population:
Married and Unmarried persons in California, ages 15 and
older, of all racial, cultural and economic backgrounds


Federal Award Amount:
$2,342,080/year


Program Name:
California Healthy Marriages Coalition


Project Period:
9/30/2006 - 9/29/2011




. . . 
SOURCE  California Healthy Marriages Coalition
 

Yes, alas, ’tis true. . ..  
 
recently, as well as, well,  not so recently, it seems clear from the various newspaper headlines that many marriages are not very healthy.  Also, the same could be said of divorces.      But, for those readers who, as either (U.S.) employees or employERS, actually pay taxes, I would like to reassure you that the U.S. Government is on it, it has a PLAN.  You may or may not be in on the plan, but I assure you it has many plan to fix the overall unhealthiness of both marriages, and the lack of safety attendant to divorce from, well, a spouse that doesn’t believe in divorce.  It would also like to assure you to trust the experts (its hired ones and delegated ones)  To analyze and fix the situation.  This IS, after all, what governments exist for right?  I seem to foggily remember something about the purpose of governments in the Declaration of Independence, and about the word “consent.”     It seems to me that somewhere along the line “We the People” got turned into a version of “You People,” and the posse of experts got called in to fix families.  What they actually ended up doing is breaking the legal system, by turning it into a behavioral health marketplace, clearly infringing on the niche of the faith institutions, for example, I heard that recently the Knights of Columbus, on behalf  of Catholics everywhere, have launched a(nother) fatherhood initiative, lest we somehow forget who’s the boss, called:  http://FathersForGood.org.  
 

 
Notice anything missing from the logo there?
 

(this time, WITH a Mom..)
And now again, this time with a little more style…
 
Now for all those little pieces of education that add up to $118, 310, 126 – – for 2008 — enjoy the panorama of organizations that are addressing this problem of, well, unhealthy marriages and irresponsible fathers.  (I have omitted “Abstinence Education,” because it would overload this post’s, well, capacity).
This wordpress page can only carry one year’s worth of links at a time.  Moreover these are alphabetical by Grant Recipient, nationwide, and not by state (although zip codes are listed).  The fun part is, they are “click-able,” meaning, you can click on an institution’s name and see what else it’s been up to, for how long and for how much.  Perhaps I might show a few more ways to search, but someone of basic intelligence (and motivated) can learn a lot simply by looking.  Another trick you might try is searching its name on “usaspending.gov” and see what kind of cute bar charts and stats show up.  
Thus one can get an overview of almost any CFDA number BUT this one, 93.086, on a certain database.  
Is this inintentional?  If part of required Civic Literacy was understanding the federal grants system, if rather than whine, moan, or complain — or complain to elected representatives –MORE AVERAGE JOES & JANE DOES (the alive ones) started monitoring our home states, state by state and agency by agency, we might stop asking why states are running out of money for domestic violence shelters and general assistance, because the answer would be obvious.  Instead, we would ask intelligent, and pointed questions from the point of view, these are public funds, and (if government) you are public servants, and (if nonprofit) you’re tax exempt for a reason — how does this fulfil the reason, and who is evaluating, and by what standard? 
And then question the standards if they are unreasonable, inconsistent, or do not exist.
Alternately, we could chug along and say, “isn’t so and so handling this? Because I’m busy, and have my own life to handle.”



Sure they are.  That’s why inbetween talking about this, I can’t keep up with the healines, or follow up with the last ones before there are new ones.  That’s why protective orders protect, law enforcement enforces (consistently), child support is collected (consistently and without gender bias), and welfare helps people be better.  AND, (case in point) marriages are clearly getting healed — either that, or they can’t keep up with the new babies (despite Abstinence Education, which I omitted from this list, but is still going strong).
(OK, that’ll have to be another post — WOW, I just pulled 653 records under one code, 93.010 (community-based A.E.)
(not a searchable code in “usaspending.gov,” at least not readily…)
However, top 5 programs with the keyword “abstinence” in the PROJECT title:



93.010: Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)
$128,610,003


 98.001: USAID Foreign Assistance for Programs Overseas
$11,058,644


 93.279: Drug Abuse and Addiction Research Programs
$9,561,182


 93.995: Adolescent Family Life_Demonstration Projects
$8,064,374


 93.273: Alcohol Research Programs
$6,222,97



AND as far as WHO is really interested in why people don’t abstain and trying to get them to:
Top 10 Recipients



 FAMILY HEALTH INTERNATIONAL (FHI)
$3,593,286


 SCRIPPS RESEARCH INSTITUTE
$2,551,682


 PROGRAM FOR APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY IN HEALTH
$2,233,162


 HERITAGE COMMUNITY SERVICES INC
$2,000,000


 BROWN UNIVERSITY
$1,672,760


 POPULATION COUNCIL INC
$1,613,000


 PATH
$1,500,000


 NEUROBEHAVIORAL RESEARCH INC
$1,466,239


 NEW HOPE CENTER INC
$1,399,907


 CENTER FOR SELF-SUFFICIENCY, INC.
$1,399,300



Results 1 to 500 of 653 matches.  restricted to “NEW” only, I got 240 new grants:
(AFTER ALL THIS, WILL YOU BE ABLE TO “ABSTAIN” FROM LOOKING FURTHER INTO THESE?)
Here’s a quick partial look:
 



Fiscal Year
Grantee Name
State
Award Title
Budget Year
CFDA Program Name
Award Class
Principal Investigator
($$)Sum of Actions



 
 
 



2009 
Columbus Hospital 
NJ 
COMMUNITY BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION 
2 
Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)  
DISCRETIONARY 
BERNADETTE VISSANI 
$- 739,820 


2009 
METRO ATLANTA YOUTH FOR CHRIST, INC 
GA 
COMMUNITY-BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION 
3 
Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)  
DISCRETIONARY 
CINDY MILLER 
$ 300,186 


2009 
Saint Michael`s Medical Center, Inc 
NJ 
COMMUNITY BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION 
1 
Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)  
DISCRETIONARY 
BERNADETTE VISSANI 
$ 677,551 


2008 
A WOMAN`S PLACE MINISTRIES, INC. 
FL 
ABSTINENCE EDUCATION 
1 
Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)  
DISCRETIONARY 
MICHAEL LAYTON 
$ 600,000 


2008 
A WOMENS CONCERN, INC. 
MA 
HEALTHY FUTURES ABSTINENCE EDUCATION INITIATIVE 
3 
Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)  
DISCRETIONARY 
ELIZABETH SNYDER 
$ 600,000 


2008 
ABSTINENCE & MARRIAGE EDUCATION PARTNERSHIP 
IL 
COMMUNITY BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION 
1 
Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)  
DISCRETIONARY 
SCOTT PHELPS 
$ 512,500 


2008 
ABSTINENCE EDUCATION CONSULTANTS,INC. 
KS 
COMMUNITY-BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION 
1 
Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)  
DISCRETIONARY 
LOIS THEIS 
$ 600,000 


2008 
ABSTINENCE TIL MARRIAGE EDUCATION 
OH 
COMMUNITY BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION 
3 
Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)  
DISCRETIONARY 
CATHERINE E WOOD 
$ 600,000 


2008 
AIDS RESOURCE CENTER OF WISCONSIN, INC 
WI 
COMMUNITY BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION 
1 
Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)  
DISCRETIONARY 
SCOTT STOKES 
$ 600,000 


2008 
ALPHA CENTER 
SD 
COMMUNITY BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION 
1 
Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)  
DISCRETIONARY 
KIMBERLY MARTINEZ 
$ 600,000 


2008 
ALTERNATIVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 
TX 
COMMUNITY BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION 
1 
Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)  
DISCRETIONARY 
SHARI L CARROLL 
$ 454,922 


2008 
ARIZONA MEXICO BORDER HEALTH FOUNDATION 
AZ 
COMMUNITY BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION 
1 
Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)  
DISCRETIONARY 
ALBERT MORENO 
$ 550,000 


2008 
AWARE, INC. 
WA 
WASHINGTON STATE: COMMUNITY-BASED ABSTINENCE UNTIL MARRIAGE PROJECT 
1 
Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)  
DISCRETIONARY 
JAMES N GRENFELL 
$ 499,849 


2008 
About Our Kids, Inc. 
MO 
STRATEGIES FOR ABSTINENCE AND VIRTUE EDUCATION (SAVE) 
2 
Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)  
DISCRETIONARY 
ALICIA HUMES 
$ 600,000 


2008 
Abstinence the Better Choice, Inc. 
OH 
ABSTINENCE THE BETTER CHOICE 
3 
Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)  
DISCRETIONARY 
CHERYL BIDDLE 
$ 600,000 


2008 
Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Inc. 
AZ 
POWER FITNESS ABSTINENCE PROGRAM- TEACHING YOUTH AGES 12 THROUGH 18 THE SOCIAL, PSYCHOLOGI 
3 
Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)  
DISCRETIONARY 
EVA GODDARD 
$ 600,000 



 
 
 
and $427 mil (see above link “still going strong”) for another code 93.235, plain old “A.E.” Then I searched the word “abstinence” as a keyword in the project title, and got 
 
 
 
 
 In these venues, (once under the facuet of grants and publications  –  alittle easier to do while not being stalked, or in a court case onesself) talking (and publishing) about problems pays more than solving them, in fact, a LOT more.   This also provides an incentive to try to keep actual problem-solvers (like those who have observed and been hurt by the system, and been taking names and notes, too) OUT of the  talkfests, or decision making process, if they are heard.  And, more and more, out of being informed that the decisionmaking process is not where it should be — as to legal matters, in the courts, not the psychologists’ offices.  
Solving problems cuts off cash flow.  There’s  a clear disincentive.  Ask someone who’s life, or whose child’s life is at stake (and who has not got a history of perjury in the case file already) and SHE will tell you, safety first, shared parenting second.  Child’s right not to suffer abuse or be threatened (let alone the mother’s) or kidnapped supersedes person with history of threatening or abuse’s right to see the child. In re:  “healthy marriages,” her /their (if children) right not to be hurt or killed, or traumatized in fear of this happening, or expose her children to being abused, and deal with frequent exchanges with a former batterer (even if the children were not directly battered) supersedes 53 professionals’ need to reconsider this.  At what point are professionals to be forced to read these headlines that we read, and sometimes analyze, kind of like sitting through traffic court and watch graphic accident footage after one was caught speeding. 
I have been through this.  I have been IN a court case, same month, and domestic violence murder going on, same city, and one could not tell from the demeanor on the outside.  My case had a history of violence, injury, repeated disregard of laws, and treats to abduct (which in fact had just happened).  No matter, we are in la-la-land again. . . .   I had a PTSD incident in the courtroom.  No matter. . . .   
SO, my hope is that the general public will become generally acquainted with how this works, so that if one of THEIR friends is involved (and, of course this presumes that my readers are interested in justice, not perverting it) (which may or may not be wise) – – they can at least see where things went.  $$ wise.  This year.
 
Experts are being churned out at an alarming rate.  Grants go to this, too.  Grants sometimes drive the field of expertise, and very much so in this field of fatherhood and families.  I have looked, and can say this.  Have you?  Could you rebut that assertion with data from the top universities around the country, and colleges?  (Not unless several programs disappear fast….)
Do yourself and others a favor — become a LITTLE more expert in this today than you were yesterday.
And show someone else.  OK?
 
One philosophical question I have from time to time is how much of our adult lives (let alone growing up) are spent OUTside any government institutions to start with.  I mean, what part of our lives are NOT regulated, measured, examined and evaluated (at our own expense) to drive policiesi (without our informed consent, really) that will further tinker with the dynamics of eat, sleep, breed, marry, divorce, educate (let’s not omit that) and re-educate, regulate, and direct.    I have an unfortunate independent streak, and I tend to think there are often better ways to do things.  As a woman, I don’t think needlessly repetitive tasks are the natural inheritance of my gender biologically, and although sometimes there’s a comfort in them, there should be other ways to do one thing or another.  
 
Like better, or less wasteful.  The benefit is, getting more done.  Take for example, deleting religion from public school systems (supposedly) and then trying to re-inject it after criminal behavior, or during the divorce/separation scenarios.  Take for example, a system that itself stresses and dismantles families, and then another (equally chaotic and burdensome to the general public) system to put them back together again.  Take for example, the talk about “separation of church and state” and then nationally calling upon “faith-based organizations” to, though they are largely tax-exempt, at public expense put them back together again.  To WHOM are any of the organizations below accountable, and what demonstration of effectiveness are they showing, or are the “exempt” from that as well as (those that are) from taxes, too?
 
Anyhow, I give you a single “CFDA” (Category of Federal Domestic Assistance) called “Healthy Marriages Promoting Responsible Fatherhood.”  I guess it is assumed that mothers will be healthy without extra coaching and bribing.  Or, that if you get a responsible father (i.e., buy one, and this is explained through another grants systems as well, this IS indeed the premise in practice here – – one has to look at the child support system’s role in divorce).  . . .     or perhaps this acknowledges that for whatever reasons (let’s not mention any OTHER programs this same Of/By/For the people government might have had its hands in), there is a social crisis not just of “fatherlessness” but of “irresponsible fatherhood.”
 
I can vouch for the one I know — father of my children.  He’d rather fight than work any day, which process eventually put me out of work.  No matter, the government stepped in, through family court matters, enter mediation, exit civil rights, eventually exit my contact with my offspring (they did spring out of me, physically.  I pushed, they sprang. . ..  whatever… I was awake for the process and can verify:  I had two children a very long time ago).  And then out they go, to work their own way through life, lest Dad be humiliated by paying much of his child support arrears, which was partly what the battle was about to start with.  I felt that one of us should work, and offered the alternatives of (1) stop messing with me, so I could (since it doesn’t appear you want to) or (2) pay up.  Version (1) entailed requesting a restraining order renewal, or 2nd one, or  . . . . or . . . .   and version (2) required — and I pursued this through the assigned agency – – court-ordered child support should actually be collected before our daughters became adults.  However the MAIN conversation was not about what’s good for the children, but who gets to give orders — forever, basically.    I categorically disagreed with this philosophy as being anti-Constitutional and anti-civil rights and anti-reasonable.  My right to disagree was disagreed with, which makes the situation a GREAT pickings for the family law venue, it LOVES “high-conflict” situations — this draws federal moneys and justifies many professions.   
Anyhow, here they are:  the helpers, last year (2008):
While not all of these were birthed, or even nurtured, by California Healthy Marriages Coalition (“the coalition of coalitions model.”  Sounds kind of like the “war to end all wars,” I don’t know….), they were perhaps started as a gleam in SOMEONE”s eye, having been informed of what’s available from Big Brother, who, on behalf of us all, will make all those ouchies better, soon, soon . .       When we “consent” to taxes, it’s good to know what we have consented for them to be distributed to, well, do.    For example,   ///
CFDA Number = 93086 Fiscal Year = 2008  Recipient: ACTIVE RELATIONSHIPS CENTER  Recipient ZIP Code: 75205



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0037
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$550,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$550,000.00



Recipient: AS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH  Recipient ZIP Code: 96799



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0054
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$450,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$450,000.00



Recipient: AUBURN UNIVERSITY  Recipient ZIP Code: 36849



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0001
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$1,899,487.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,899,487.00



Recipient: AVANCE – AUSTIN CHAPTER  Recipient ZIP Code: 78704



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0063
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$261,825.00


Award Subtotal:
$261,825.00



Recipient: AVANCE – CORPUS CHRISTI CHAPTER  Recipient ZIP Code: 78415



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0071
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: AVANCE – HOUSTON CHAPTER  Recipient ZIP Code: 77092



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0084
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$236,851.00


Award Subtotal:
$236,851.00



Recipient: AVANCE, INC. – EL PASO  Recipient ZIP Code: 79902



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0100
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: Alliance for North Texas Healthy & Effective Marriages  Recipient ZIP Code: 75246



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0072
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$903,425.00


Award Subtotal:
$903,425.00



Recipient: Archuleta County Department of Human Services  Recipient ZIP Code: 81147



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0055
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$200,000.00


2008
90FR0055
2
ACF
1
 07-31-2008
$0.00


Award Subtotal:
$200,000.00



Recipient: Arizona Youth Partnership  Recipient ZIP Code: 85741



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0136
3
ACF
0
 09-17-2008
$550,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$550,000.00



Recipient: BARAGA-HOUGHTON-KEWEENAW CHILD DEVELOPMENT BOARD, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 49931



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0018
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: BEECH ACRES PARENTING CENTER  Recipient ZIP Code: 45230



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0100
2
ACF
1
 07-31-2008
$0.00


2008
90FE0100
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$550,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$550,000.00



Recipient: BEST FRIENDS FOUNDATION  Recipient ZIP Code: 20015



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0058
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$500,724.00


Award Subtotal:
$500,724.00



Recipient: BETHANY CHRISTIAN SERVICES  Recipient ZIP Code: 49501



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0057
3
ACF
0
 09-17-2008
$500,000.00


2008
90FE0098
3
ACF
0
 09-26-2008
$499,980.00


Award Subtotal:
$999,980.00



Recipient: BETTER FAMILY LIFE, INC.  Recipient ZIP Code: 63108



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0023
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$1,097,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,097,000.00



Recipient: BILL WILSON CENTER  Recipient ZIP Code: 95052



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0096
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$243,469.00


Award Subtotal:
$243,469.00



Recipient: BOAT PEOPLE S.O.S. INC.  Recipient ZIP Code: 22041



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0032
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$545,806.00


2008
90FR0038
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$795,806.00



Recipient: BOONEVILLE MUNICIPAL SEPERATE SCHOOL DISTRICT  Recipient ZIP Code: 38829



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0036
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$532,675.00


2008
90FE0036
2
ACF
1
 07-31-2008
$0.00


Award Subtotal:
$532,675.00



Recipient: Brighter Beginnings  Recipient ZIP Code: 94601



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0099
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: CAMBODIAN ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 90806



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0065
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$450,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$450,000.00



Recipient: CATHOLIC CHARITIES  Recipient ZIP Code: 67214



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0112
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$530,368.00


Award Subtotal:
$530,368.00



Recipient: CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF ORANGE COUNTY, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 92705



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0080
3
ACF
0
 09-26-2008
$550,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$550,000.00



Recipient: CECIL COUNTY GOVERNMENT  Recipient ZIP Code: 21921



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0018
3
ACF
0
 09-26-2008
$500,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$500,000.00



Recipient: CENTER FOR SELF-SUFFICIENCY, INC.  Recipient ZIP Code: 53211



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0013
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$1,096,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,096,000.00



Recipient: CENTERFORCE  Recipient ZIP Code: 94901



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0004
3
ACF
0
 09-26-2008
$481,554.00


Award Subtotal:
$481,554.00



Recipient: CHARACTER COUNTS IN MAINE  Recipient ZIP Code: 04116



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0122
3
ACF
0
 09-17-2008
$500,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$500,000.00



Recipient: CHILD & FAMILY RESOURCES INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 85716



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0059
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$500,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$500,000.00



Recipient: CHILD & FAMILY SERVICES OF NEW HAMPSHIRE  Recipient ZIP Code: 03101



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0077
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$315,830.00


Award Subtotal:
$315,830.00



Recipient: CHILD ABUSE COUNCIL, INC.  Recipient ZIP Code: 33609



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0052
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: CHILD AND FAMILY RESOURCE COUNCIL  Recipient ZIP Code: 49503



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0038
2
ACF
1
 09-14-2008
$0.00


2008
90FE0038
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$1,016,258.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,016,258.00



Recipient: CHILD DEVLOPMENT RESOURCES, INC.  Recipient ZIP Code: 23127



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0043
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$249,999.00


Award Subtotal:
$249,999.00



Recipient: CHILD, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 78751



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0078
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$511,133.00


Award Subtotal:
$511,133.00



Recipient: CHILDREN’S FRIEND AND SERVICE  Recipient ZIP Code: 02903



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0030
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: CHILDREN`S AID SOCIETY IN CLEARFIELD COUNTY  Recipient ZIP Code: 16830



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0118
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$226,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$226,000.00



Recipient: CHILDREN`S INSTITUTE , INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 90005



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0076
2
ACF
1
 09-25-2008
$0.00


2008
90FR0076
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$500,000.00


2008
90FR0088
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$1,000,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,500,000.00



Recipient: CHOANOKE AREA DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 27869



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0001
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$245,296.00


Award Subtotal:
$245,296.00



Recipient: CHW DBA CALIFORNIA HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER  Recipient ZIP Code: 90015



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0071
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: CIRCLE OF PARENTS  Recipient ZIP Code: 60611



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0098
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$1,000,000.00


2008
90FR0098
2
ACF
1
 06-06-2008
$0.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,000,000.00



Recipient: CJH Educational Grant Services, Inc.  Recipient ZIP Code: 27620



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0059
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$550,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$550,000.00



Recipient: CO DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES  Recipient ZIP Code: 80236



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0085
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$2,000,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$2,000,000.00



Recipient: COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY  Recipient ZIP Code: 80523



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0028
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$482,687.00


2008
90FE0028
2
ACF
1
 03-18-2008
$0.00


Award Subtotal:
$482,687.00



Recipient: COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ASSN OF COOK COUNTY  Recipient ZIP Code: 60604



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0089
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$450,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$450,000.00



Recipient: COMMUNITY SERVICES FOR CHILDREN, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 18109



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0033
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$228,603.00


Award Subtotal:
$228,603.00



Recipient: CONFEDERATED SALISH & KOOTENAI TRIBES  Recipient ZIP Code: 59855



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FN0007
2
ACF
1
 09-14-2008
$0.00


2008
90FN0007
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$149,940.00


2008
90FR0006
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$465,494.00


Award Subtotal:
$615,434.00



Recipient: CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF SILETZ  Recipient ZIP Code: 97380



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FN0009
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$149,918.00


2008
90FN0009
2
ACF
1
 09-14-2008
$0.00


Award Subtotal:
$149,918.00



Recipient: COOK INLET TRIBAL COUNCIL, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 99508



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0066
2
ACF
1
 07-31-2008
$0.00


2008
90FR0066
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$418,832.00


Award Subtotal:
$418,832.00



Recipient: CORNERSTONE OF HOPE CHURCH  Recipient ZIP Code: 46221



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0119
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$350,560.00


Award Subtotal:
$350,560.00



Recipient: COUNCIL ON PREVENTION & EDUCATION SUBSTANCES, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 40204



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0007
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$259,532.00


2008
90FR0015
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$499,968.00


Award Subtotal:
$759,500.00



Recipient: CRECIENDOS UNIDOS/GROWING TOGETHER  Recipient ZIP Code: 85006



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0010
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$275,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$275,000.00



Recipient: CT ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES  Recipient ZIP Code: 06106



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0031
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$1,000,000.00


2008
90FR0031
2
ACF
1
 07-31-2008
$0.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,000,000.00



Recipient: CURATORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI  Recipient ZIP Code: 65211



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0130
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$499,775.00


Award Subtotal:
$499,775.00



Recipient: CUYAHOGA COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS  Recipient ZIP Code: 44113



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0052
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$533,730.00


Award Subtotal:
$533,730.00



Recipient: California Healthy Marriages Coalition  Recipient ZIP Code: 92024



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0104
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$2,400,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$2,400,000.00



Recipient: Child Find of America, Inc.  Recipient ZIP Code: 12561



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0020
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: Community Marriage Builders, Inc.  Recipient ZIP Code: 47714



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0034
3
ACF
0
 09-17-2008
$543,303.00


Award Subtotal:
$543,303.00



Recipient: Comprehensive Youth Services of Fresno, Inc.  Recipient ZIP Code: 93726



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0053
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


2008
90FR0053
2
ACF
1
 07-31-2008
$0.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: DC DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES  Recipient ZIP Code: 20032



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0087
3
ACF
0
 09-26-2008
$2,000,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$2,000,000.00



Recipient: Denver Indian Family Resource Center  Recipient ZIP Code: 80226



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0081
2
ACF
1
 09-26-2008
$0.00


2008
90FR0081
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$198,280.00


Award Subtotal:
$198,280.00



Recipient: Detroit Workforce Development Department  Recipient ZIP Code: 48202



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0073
3
ACF
0
 09-26-2008
$500,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$500,000.00



Recipient: EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY  Recipient ZIP Code: 27858



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0017
3
ACF
0
 09-26-2008
$525,161.00


Award Subtotal:
$525,161.00



Recipient: EAST LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY UNION  Recipient ZIP Code: 90022



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0056
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$1,100,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,100,000.00



Recipient: EL PASO CENTER FOR CHILDREN  Recipient ZIP Code: 79930



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0088
3
ACF
0
 09-17-2008
$550,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$550,000.00



Recipient: ELIZABETHS NEW LIFE CENTER  Recipient ZIP Code: 45405



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0035
3
ACF
0
 09-17-2008
$1,859,692.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,859,692.00



Recipient: Employment Opportunity & Training Center of Northeaster  Recipient ZIP Code: 18503



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0060
3
ACF
0
 09-26-2008
$225,608.00


Award Subtotal:
$225,608.00



Recipient: Exchange Club Center for the Prevention of Child Abuse  Recipient ZIP Code: 34981



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0025
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$242,822.00


Award Subtotal:
$242,822.00



Recipient: FAMILY & CHILDREN’S SERVICE, INC.  Recipient ZIP Code: 74120



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0007
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: FAMILY RESOURCES INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 33733



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0132
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$1,100,000.00


2008
90FE0132
2
ACF
1
 07-31-2008
$0.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,100,000.00



Recipient: FIRST A M E CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER  Recipient ZIP Code: 98122



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0032
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: FIRST NATIONS COMMUNITY HEALTHSOURCE  Recipient ZIP Code: 87108



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0061
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$300,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$300,000.00



Recipient: FIRST THINGS FIRST  Recipient ZIP Code: 37405



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0031
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$1,099,953.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,099,953.00



Recipient: FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY  Recipient ZIP Code: 54520



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FN0006
2
ACF
1
 09-14-2008
$0.00


2008
90FN0006
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$150,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$150,000.00



Recipient: FOREST INSTITUTE OF PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY  Recipient ZIP Code: 65807



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0110
3
ACF
0
 09-17-2008
$940,669.00


Award Subtotal:
$940,669.00



Recipient: FORTUNE SOCIETY, INC (THE)  Recipient ZIP Code: 10011



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0017
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: FOUNDATION FOR A GREAT MARRIAGE  Recipient ZIP Code: 54115



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0108
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$550,000.00


2008
90FE0124
3
ACF
0
 09-17-2008
$550,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,100,000.00



Recipient: FOUNTAIN OF LIFE INTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES  Recipient ZIP Code: 33027



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0073
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$438,383.00


Award Subtotal:
$438,383.00



Recipient: FRIENDSHIP WEST BAPTIST CHURCH  Recipient ZIP Code: 75232



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0117
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$542,025.00


Award Subtotal:
$542,025.00



Recipient: Family Guidance, Inc.  Recipient ZIP Code: 15143



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0103
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$1,510,098.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,510,098.00



Recipient: Family Service Center at Houston and Harris County  Recipient ZIP Code: 77006



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0082
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$477,539.00


Award Subtotal:
$477,539.00



Recipient: Family Service, Inc  Recipient ZIP Code: 01840



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0087
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$227,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$227,000.00



Recipient: Family Services of Westchester, Inc.  Recipient ZIP Code: 10573



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0036
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$497,812.00


Award Subtotal:
$497,812.00



Recipient: Fathers & Families Resources/Research Center  Recipient ZIP Code: 46208



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0048
3
ACF
0
 09-17-2008
$550,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$550,000.00



Recipient: Florida State University  Recipient ZIP Code: 32306



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0022
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$530,009.00


Award Subtotal:
$530,009.00



Recipient: Future Foundation  Recipient ZIP Code: 30344



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0045
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$402,632.00


Award Subtotal:
$402,632.00



Recipient: GA ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES  Recipient ZIP Code: 30303



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0064
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$225,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$225,000.00



Recipient: GOODWILL INDUSTRIES INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 55104



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0068
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$500,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$500,000.00



Recipient: GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF CENTRAL TEXAS, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 78753



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0051
2
ACF
1
 09-25-2008
$0.00


2008
90FR0051
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$240,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$240,000.00



Recipient: GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF PITTSBURGH  Recipient ZIP Code: 15202



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0063
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$225,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$225,000.00



Recipient: GRANATO COUNSELING SERVICES  Recipient ZIP Code: 22182



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0006
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$548,932.00


Award Subtotal:
$548,932.00



Recipient: GWINNETT CHILDRENS SHELTER  Recipient ZIP Code: 30515



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0104
2
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: HEALTHY FAMILIES COUNSELING & SUPPORT  Recipient ZIP Code: 64119



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0008
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$500,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$500,000.00



Recipient: HEALTHY FAMILY INITIATIVES  Recipient ZIP Code: 77074



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0081
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$537,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$537,000.00



Recipient: HEALTHY START, INC.  Recipient ZIP Code: 15208



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0103
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$900,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$900,000.00



Recipient: HOOPA VALLEY BUSINESS COUNCIL, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT  Recipient ZIP Code: 95546



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FN0001
2
ACF
1
 09-26-2008
$0.00


2008
90FN0001
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$146,750.00


Award Subtotal:
$146,750.00



Recipient: Healthy Families/Thriving Communities Collaborative Cou  Recipient ZIP Code: 20009



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0049
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$500,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$500,000.00



Recipient: High Country Consulting LLC  Recipient ZIP Code: 82001



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0025
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$549,952.00


Award Subtotal:
$549,952.00



Recipient: IOWA FAMILY POLICY CENTER  Recipient ZIP Code: 50327



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0126
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$550,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$550,000.00



Recipient: Identity, Inc  Recipient ZIP Code: 20877



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0090
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: Imperial Valley Regional Occupational Program  Recipient ZIP Code: 92243



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0075
2
ACF
1
 03-18-2008
$0.00


2008
90FE0075
3
ACF
0
 09-17-2008
$515,615.00


Award Subtotal:
$515,615.00



Recipient: Indiana Department of Correction  Recipient ZIP Code: 46204



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0019
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$249,896.00


2008
90FR0101
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$400,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$649,896.00



Recipient: Indiana Youth Institute  Recipient ZIP Code: 46204



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0086
2
ACF
1
 09-26-2008
$0.00


2008
90FR0086
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$999,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$999,000.00



Recipient: JOHN BROWN UNIVERSITY  Recipient ZIP Code: 72761



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0004
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$544,782.00


Award Subtotal:
$544,782.00



Recipient: Jewish Family & Children`s Service of Sarasota-Manatee,  Recipient ZIP Code: 34237



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0068
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$494,943.00


Award Subtotal:
$494,943.00



Recipient: Kanawha Institute for Social Research & Action, Inc.  Recipient ZIP Code: 25064



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0012
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$497,514.00


Award Subtotal:
$497,514.00



Recipient: Kentucky River Foothills Development Council, Inc.  Recipient ZIP Code: 40475



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0125
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$490,680.00


Award Subtotal:
$490,680.00



Recipient: LATIN AMERICAN YOUTH CENTER  Recipient ZIP Code: 20007



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0072
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$250,000.00


2008
90FR0072
2
ACF
1
 04-29-2008
$0.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: LAUGH YOUR WAY AMERICA  Recipient ZIP Code: 54481



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0005
3
ACF
0
 09-17-2008
$274,933.00


Award Subtotal:
$274,933.00



Recipient: LIGHTHOUSE YOUTH SERVICES, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 45206



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0005
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$500,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$500,000.00



Recipient: LIVE THE LIFE MINISTRIES  Recipient ZIP Code: 32317



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0077
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$549,985.00


Award Subtotal:
$549,985.00



Recipient: LONGVIEW WELNESS CENTER  Recipient ZIP Code: 75601



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0091
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$1,500,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,500,000.00



Recipient: LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF SOUTH DAKOTA  Recipient ZIP Code: 57105



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0097
2
ACF
1
 09-14-2008
$0.00


2008
90FR0097
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$500,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$500,000.00



Recipient: MARRIAGE SAVERS OF CLARK COUNTY  Recipient ZIP Code: 45503



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0009
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$540,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$540,000.00



Recipient: MD ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES  Recipient ZIP Code: 21201



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0091
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$899,991.00


2008
90FR0092
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$441,514.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,341,505.00



Recipient: MODEL CITIES – EL PASO  Recipient ZIP Code: 79935



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0053
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$499,758.00


Award Subtotal:
$499,758.00



Recipient: MOREHOUSE COLLEGE  Recipient ZIP Code: 30314



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0066
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$549,147.00


Award Subtotal:
$549,147.00



Recipient: Madison Cty Com Health Centers, Inc  Recipient ZIP Code: 46015



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0039
3
ACF
0
 09-17-2008
$546,983.00


Award Subtotal:
$546,983.00



Recipient: Meier Clinics Foundation  Recipient ZIP Code: 60187



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0011
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$2,000,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$2,000,000.00



Recipient: Metro United Methodist Urban Ministry  Recipient ZIP Code: 92116



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0016
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$268,349.00


Award Subtotal:
$268,349.00



Recipient: Minnesota Council on Crime and Justice  Recipient ZIP Code: 55406



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0028
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$400,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$400,000.00



Recipient: Montrose County Health and Human Services  Recipient ZIP Code: 81401



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0079
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$249,552.00


Award Subtotal:
$249,552.00



Recipient: NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MARRIAGE ENHANCEMENT  Recipient ZIP Code: 85022



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0040
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: NATIONAL FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE  Recipient ZIP Code: 20877



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FB0001
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$999,534.00


Award Subtotal:
$999,534.00



Recipient: NATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY  Recipient ZIP Code: 10017



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0090
2
ACF
1
 06-06-2008
$0.00


2008
90FE0090
3
ACF
0
 09-17-2008
$495,285.00


Award Subtotal:
$495,285.00



Recipient: NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF CONCERNED BLACK MEN, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 20006



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0047
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY REGENTS  Recipient ZIP Code: 88003



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0135
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$494,996.00


2008
90FR0057
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$218,336.00


Award Subtotal:
$713,332.00



Recipient: NJ ST DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS  Recipient ZIP Code: 08625



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0026
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$394,248.00


Award Subtotal:
$394,248.00



Recipient: NORTHWEST FAMILY SERVICES  Recipient ZIP Code: 97213



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0079
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$1,100,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,100,000.00



Recipient: NW Marriage Institute  Recipient ZIP Code: 98682



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0041
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$275,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$275,000.00



Recipient: New York Youth At Risk, Inc.  Recipient ZIP Code: 10038



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0093
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$225,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$225,000.00



Recipient: Northwood-Apppold United Methodist Church  Recipient ZIP Code: 21218



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0062
3
ACF
0
 09-17-2008
$400,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$400,000.00



Recipient: Nueva Esperanza  Recipient ZIP Code: 19140



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0069
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$550,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$550,000.00



Recipient: OAKLAND FAMILY SERVICES  Recipient ZIP Code: 48053



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0070
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$200,170.00


Award Subtotal:
$200,170.00



Recipient: OAKLAND/LIVINGSTON HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY  Recipient ZIP Code: 48056



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0010
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$368,555.00


Award Subtotal:
$368,555.00



Recipient: OH St Governor`s Office of Faith Based & Comm Initiativ  Recipient ZIP Code: 43215



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0109
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$544,140.00


Award Subtotal:
$544,140.00



Recipient: OK ST DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES  Recipient ZIP Code: 73125



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0030
2
ACF
1
 03-18-2008
$0.00


2008
90FE0030
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$549,791.00


Award Subtotal:
$549,791.00



Recipient: OPERATION KEEPSAKE  Recipient ZIP Code: 44087



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0021
2
ACF
1
 03-18-2008
$0.00


2008
90FE0021
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$459,419.00


Award Subtotal:
$459,419.00



Recipient: OPPORTUNITIES INDUSTRIAL CENTER OF AMERICA, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 19122



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0016
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$550,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$550,000.00



Recipient: Osborne Association, Inc.  Recipient ZIP Code: 10455



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0050
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$448,856.00


2008
90FR0050
2
ACF
1
 07-31-2008
$0.00


2008
90FR0056
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$698,856.00



Recipient: PAIRS FOUNDATION  Recipient ZIP Code: 33332



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0029
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$990,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$990,000.00



Recipient: PARENTS PLUS  Recipient ZIP Code: 54952



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0113
3
ACF
0
 09-17-2008
$549,629.00


2008
90FE0113
2
ACF
1
 07-31-2008
$0.00


Award Subtotal:
$549,629.00



Recipient: PEACE, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 13202



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0107
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$465,937.00


Award Subtotal:
$465,937.00



Recipient: PEER ASSISTANCE SERVICES, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 80231



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0020
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$525,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$525,000.00



Recipient: PERSONAL INVOLVEMENT CENTER  Recipient ZIP Code: 90003



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0092
3
ACF
0
 09-26-2008
$550,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$550,000.00



Recipient: PITTSBURG PRESCHOOL COORDINATION COUNCIL, INC.  Recipient ZIP Code: 94565



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0012
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$550,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$550,000.00



Recipient: PREGNANCY SUPPORT CENTER OF STARK COUNTY  Recipient ZIP Code: 44708



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0055
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$535,075.00


Award Subtotal:
$535,075.00



Recipient: PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL OF WESTMORELAND FAYETTE INC.  Recipient ZIP Code: 15601



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0075
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


2008
90FR0075
2
ACF
1
 07-31-2008
$0.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: PROJECT S.O.S., INC.  Recipient ZIP Code: 32224



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0074
3
ACF
0
 09-17-2008
$454,332.00


Award Subtotal:
$454,332.00



Recipient: PUBLIC STRATEGIES INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 73116



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0026
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$1,000,000.00


2008
90FH0001
3
ACF
0
 09-29-2008
$3,250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$4,250,000.00



Recipient Recipient: PUERTO RICAN FAMILY INSTITUTE, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 10011



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0013
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$900,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$900,000.00



Recipient: Parents as Teachers National Center, Inc.  Recipient ZIP Code: 63146



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0080
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: Professional Counseling Resources, Inc.  Recipient ZIP Code: 19805



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0046
3
ACF
0
 09-26-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: QUILEUTE INDIAN TRIBE  Recipient ZIP Code: 98350



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FN0002
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$150,000.00


2008
90FN0002
2
ACF
1
 09-26-2008
$0.00


Award Subtotal:
$150,000.00



Recipient: RECAPTURING THE VISION, INTERNATIONAL, INC.  Recipient ZIP Code: 33157



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0043
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$550,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$550,000.00



Recipient: RED CLIFF TRIBE  Recipient ZIP Code: 54814



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FN0003
2
ACF
1
 09-14-2008
$0.00


2008
90FN0003
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$146,672.00


Award Subtotal:
$146,672.00



Recipient: REGION II COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY  Recipient ZIP Code: 49204



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0078
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$203,854.00


Award Subtotal:
$203,854.00



Recipient: REGION XIX EDUCATION SERVICE CENTER  Recipient ZIP Code: 79925



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0042
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$900,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$900,000.00



Recipient: RIDGE Project, Inc  Recipient ZIP Code: 43527



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0044
2
ACF
1
 06-06-2008
$0.00


2008
90FR0044
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$412,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$412,000.00



Recipient: ROCKDALE HOSPITAL & HEALTH SYSTEM  Recipient ZIP Code: 30012



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0014
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$455,510.00


Award Subtotal:
$455,510.00



Recipient: ROSALIE MANOR  Recipient ZIP Code: 53210



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0037
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$500,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$500,000.00



Recipient: Read To Me International Foundation  Recipient ZIP Code: 96815



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0062
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: Relationship Research Foundation, Inc.  Recipient ZIP Code: 92612



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0058
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: Resource, Inc  Recipient ZIP Code: 55404



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0022
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: Resources for Children`s Health  Recipient ZIP Code: 19102



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0040
2
ACF
2
 09-26-2008
$0.00


2008
90FR0040
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: SAMARITAN COUNSELING CENTER  Recipient ZIP Code: 87102



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0067
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$549,961.00


Award Subtotal:
$549,961.00



Recipient: SAMARITAN COUNSELING CENTERS  Recipient ZIP Code: 97212



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0121
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$462,919.00


Award Subtotal:
$462,919.00



Recipient: SOUTH PUGET INTERTRIBAL PLANNING AGENCY  Recipient ZIP Code: 98584



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FN0004
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$150,000.00


2008
90FN0004
2
ACF
1
 09-14-2008
$0.00


Award Subtotal:
$150,000.00



Recipient: SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY AND A&M COLLEGE  Recipient ZIP Code: 70813



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0027
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$249,548.00


Award Subtotal:
$249,548.00



Recipient: SOUTHWEST KEY PROGRAMS, INC.  Recipient ZIP Code: 78704



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0034
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$460,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$460,000.00



Recipient: ST MARY COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY  Recipient ZIP Code: 70538



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0094
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$230,092.00


Award Subtotal:
$230,092.00



Recipient: SUNY, STONY BROOK  Recipient ZIP Code: 11794



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0131
2
ACF
1
 09-14-2008
$0.00


2008
90FE0131
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$549,910.00


Award Subtotal:
$549,910.00



Recipient: SUQUAMISH & KLALLAM HEALTH PLAN  Recipient ZIP Code: 98346



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FN0010
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$150,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$150,000.00



Recipient: Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project  Recipient ZIP Code: 95821



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0015
2
ACF
1
 09-26-2008
$0.00


2008
90FE0015
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$549,256.00


Award Subtotal:
$549,256.00



Recipient: Scholarship and Guidance Association  Recipient ZIP Code: 60603



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0042
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$483,333.00


2008
90FE0137
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$242,770.00


Award Subtotal:
$726,103.00



Recipient: Shalom Task Force  Recipient ZIP Code: 10274



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0106
3
ACF
0
 09-17-2008
$480,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$480,000.00



Recipient: Shelby County Division of Corrections  Recipient ZIP Code: 38103



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0067
2
ACF
1
 09-14-2008
$0.00


2008
90FR0067
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$500,000.00


2008
90FR0095
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$485,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$985,000.00



Recipient: South Coast Business Employment Corporation  Recipient ZIP Code: 97420



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0023
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$400,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$400,000.00



Recipient: St. Louis Healthy Marriage Coalition  Recipient ZIP Code: 63103



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0133
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$1,099,882.00


2008
90FE0133
2
ACF
1
 06-06-2008
$0.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,099,882.00



Recipient: TANANA CHIEFS CONFERENCE  Recipient ZIP Code: 99701



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FN0005
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$146,016.00


2008
90FN0005
2
ACF
1
 09-14-2008
$0.00


Award Subtotal:
$146,016.00



Recipient: TEEN-AID, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 99207



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0102
3
ACF
0
 09-26-2008
$495,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$495,000.00



Recipient: TEXAS ARMS OF LOVE (dba, PEOPLE OF PRINCIPLE)  Recipient ZIP Code: 79761



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0102
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$425,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$425,000.00



Recipient: TEXAS HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION  Recipient ZIP Code: 78711



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0019
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$900,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$900,000.00



Recipient: TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY-SAN MARCOS  Recipient ZIP Code: 78666



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0128
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$497,641.00


Award Subtotal:
$497,641.00



Recipient: THE DIBBLE FUND FOR MARRIAGE EDUCATION  Recipient ZIP Code:



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0024
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$550,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$550,000.00



Recipient: THE FAMILY HEALTH AND EDUCATION INSTITUTE, INC.  Recipient ZIP Code: 20706



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0084
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$500,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$500,000.00



Recipient: THE HIVE CREATIVE GROUP  Recipient ZIP Code: 36303



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0093
3
ACF
0
 09-26-2008
$550,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$550,000.00



Recipient: THE VILLAGE FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN, INC`  Recipient ZIP Code: 06105



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0045
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: THERAPY HELP, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 80220



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0123
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$550,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$550,000.00



Recipient: TLINGIT & HAIDA TRIBES CENTRAL COUNCIL  Recipient ZIP Code: 99801



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FN0008
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$150,000.00


2008
90FN0008
2
ACF
1
 09-26-2008
$0.00


Award Subtotal:
$150,000.00



Recipient: TRINITY HEALTH-ST JOSEPH MERCY-OAKLAND  Recipient ZIP Code: 48341



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0099
3
ACF
0
 09-17-2008
$545,730.00


Award Subtotal:
$545,730.00



Recipient: The Family Life Line, Inc.  Recipient ZIP Code: 87124



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0115
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$495,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$495,000.00



Recipient: The South Carolina Center for Fathers and Families  Recipient ZIP Code: 29204



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0021
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$499,456.00


Award Subtotal:
$499,456.00



Recipient: Trinity Church, Inc  Recipient ZIP Code: 33168



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0060
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$550,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$550,000.00



Recipient: UNITED WAY OF JACKSON COUNTY, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 49201



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0138
2
ACF
0
 02-11-2008
$1,099,461.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,099,461.00



Recipient: UNIVERSITY BEHAVIORAL ASSOCIATES  Recipient ZIP Code: 10467



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0086
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$495,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$495,000.00



Recipient: UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FOR MEDICAL SCIENCES  Recipient ZIP Code: 72205



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0041
2
ACF
1
 08-26-2008
$0.00


2008
90FR0041
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA  Recipient ZIP Code: 32826



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0003
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$273,293.00


Award Subtotal:
$273,293.00



Recipient: UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE RESEARCH FOUNDATION  Recipient ZIP Code: 40292



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0002
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$542,920.00


Award Subtotal:
$542,920.00



Recipient: UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL  Recipient ZIP Code: 27599



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0094
2
ACF
1
 06-06-2008
$0.00


2008
90FE0094
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$530,482.00


Award Subtotal:
$530,482.00



Recipient: UPPER DES MOINES OPPORTUNITY, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 51342



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0082
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$225,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$225,000.00



Recipient: UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY  Recipient ZIP Code: 84322



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0129
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$417,324.00


Award Subtotal:
$417,324.00



Recipient: Urban Ventures Leadership Foundation  Recipient ZIP Code: 55408



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0033
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION  Recipient ZIP Code: 05401



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0029
2
ACF
1
 07-31-2008
$0.00


2008
90FR0029
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: VISTA COMMUNITY CLINIC  Recipient ZIP Code: 92084



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0024
3
ACF
0
 09-26-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: WAIT Training  Recipient ZIP Code: 80111



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0051
3
ACF
0
 09-26-2008
$1,010,330.00


Award Subtotal:
$1,010,330.00



Recipient: WAYNE METROPOLITAN COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY  Recipient ZIP Code: 48192



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0008
2
ACF
2
 06-06-2008
$0.00


2008
90FR0008
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



Recipient: WELD COUNTY RESOURCES DEPARTMENT  Recipient ZIP Code: 80632



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0134
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$974,358.00


Award Subtotal:
$974,358.00



Recipient: WOMEN’S OPPORTUNITY AND RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT, INC.  Recipient ZIP Code: 59802



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0054
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$212,399.00


2008
90FR0054
2
ACF
1
 06-06-2008
$0.00


Award Subtotal:
$212,399.00



Recipient: WSOS COMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSION, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 43420



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0011
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$249,492.00


Award Subtotal:
$249,492.00



Recipient: YORK COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION CORPORATION  Recipient ZIP Code: 04073



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0014
2
ACF
1
 06-06-2008
$0.00


2008
90FR0014
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$245,333.00


Award Subtotal:
$245,333.00



Recipient: YOUTH DEVELOPMENT, INC  Recipient ZIP Code: 87105



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0047
3
ACF
0
 09-25-2008
$900,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$900,000.00



Recipient: YWCA OF SAN ANTONIO  Recipient ZIP Code: 78205



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FE0127
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$529,585.00


Award Subtotal:
$529,585.00



Recipient: YouthLaunch, Inc.  Recipient ZIP Code: 78731



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0069
3
ACF
0
 09-14-2008
$243,315.00


Award Subtotal:
$243,315.00



Recipient: enFAMILIA, Inc  Recipient ZIP Code: 33033



FY
Award Number
Budget Year of Support
Agency
Award Code
Action Issue Date
Amount This Action


2008
90FR0039
3
ACF
0
 09-22-2008
$250,000.00


Award Subtotal:
$250,000.00



 



Total of all awards:
$118,310,126.00



   FOR OUR NEXT “CLASS” WE WILL LEARN HOW TO EXAMINE ONE OR TWO OF THESE GRANT RECIPIENTS.     ///
SHARE THIS POST on...
Share

				Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
				Email
			

				Click to print (Opens in new window)
				Print
			
Tweet

				Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
				Reddit
			
Share on Tumblr
Like Loading...

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

August 24, 2009 at 2:32 PM

Posted in Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Designer Families, Funding Fathers - literally, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids, public education

Tagged with Abstinence Education, Declaration of Independence/Bill of Rights, Education, fatherhood, Healthy Marriages Promoting Responsible Fatherhood, HHS-TAGGS grants database, obfuscation, Responsible Citizenhood, social commentary, Studying Humans, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work.., USASPENDING.GOV database

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

leave a comment »

(and, “HOW MUCH TIME AND HOW MANY EXPERTS WILL IT TAKE TO FIGURE THIS OUT?”)

This post is in response to, gradually, retroactively, discovering what was published, conferenced, said, explicated, implicated, rationalized, demonstrated, and nationalized during the past ten (or so) years since I filed a domestic violence restraining order, and found out that this person was NOT an isolated, deeply disturbed, person, but was in fact living out a systematic creed, which thrived better in certain types of schizoid linguistic neighborhoods than others — such as, faith institutions and family court.

It is not one of my better posts, except for a few graphics. HOWEVER, I do feel it’s truthful.

What one wants, in the field of Domestic Violence, is STOPPING it. Not theory, but results.

However, unlike in, say music, where there is a range of audiences, many of them who pay, in THIS field, there is a fountain of funding for theorists. Not content to actually work on getting laws enforced, and saving lives, there is constant, constant tinkering, reframing, training, talking and (you get the picture). Well, if you don’t, here’s one:

This pie chart shows Federal Spending by Federal Department:

FEDERAL SPENDING FY 2009 YTD

(legend at the link). PURPLE is Health and Human Services. RUST– is Education

RUST is what we were supposed to learn from “Zero to 5” and from “K-12” (and beyond) but didn’t about behavior ethics and character, as well as the usual academic whatnot (reading, writing, counting, obeying rules, doing homework, working hard, and not joining gangs or impregnating/getting impregnated before one is, say at least 16 or 17 years old….)

PURPLE — that’s primarily catchup, at this point -_ healthy families, responsible fatherhood, early heard start, child development, and many many more things (Including some fantastic funding for more scientific research, medical, and so forth).

Despite the majority of federal spending going there, we are behind in education, and people are still killing spouses and/or children after divorce, or over the issue of child support, even. Children are kidnapped over these issues, traumatizing them and burdening society further.

Grants, once established, are like the energizer battery, and just keep on going, going, going for the most part. WHO is reporting WHAT as to the results?

Are results measured by people who go through the programs (a headcount) or by the headlines? As finances are a major predictor and risk factor in otherwise stressed relationships, perhaps we ought to find out what’s happening to these finances.

SO, I put it this way,. . . .

If a “lightbulb” going off signifies “Aha!” — understanding, my question is, . . .

http://www.waynewhitecoop.com

How many social science, legal, and

court-associated experts does it take

to UNscrew a lightbulb?

http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/light-bulb-ban.jpg

and

My experience, and others’, and the headlines, show that frequent contact with a batterer, including frequent visitation

(however supervised, however accessed, however negotiated) can be hazardous to your physical and mental health.

I never got supervised. As a consequence, I consistently was traumatized, stalked, harrassed, and lost work — and eventually children around this. Because I knew this to be a NOT safe situation, I had to choose between seeing my children, ever (even when court had ordered it), and working steadily, EVER, basically. The exchange was not a 15 minute exchange with court orders poorly written as mine, and going to court to fix this had never resulted in anything (in my case) but significant loss.

It was a traumatic and awful experience every time except for THE first time, when I finally got domestic violence restraining order with kickout and had a little space to begin repairing and rebuilding every area of life this battering thing had knocked out of kilter, including work, relationships, and physically, aspects of the house (not to mention my health).

Now, to find out later, how MANY experts had been practicing how MANY ideas in which areas of the United States (and the funding they got to do this), and how LITTLE actual input from litigants seems to have been sought — a typical list of what are called “stakeholders” doesn’t include the people affected MOST directly: Moms, Dads, and Children. No, the stakeholders, in some people’s view, are the professionals — well it’s saddening they need SO much training to figure out what I (and others) could have easily told them — and what’s already on the rules of court, samples of which I link to below.

BUT, now,

Here comes yet another federal grant to explicate, reframe, and contextualize what the rest of us know needs to be simply STOPPED:

Development of a Framework for Identifying and Explicating the Context of Domestic Violence in Custody Cases and its Implications for Custody Determinations

BWJP has been invited to apply for a grant from the Office on Violence Against Women for (1) a demonstration project to develop (2) a framework to guide custody and visitation decisions in cases involving domestic violence. Research on custody and visitation determinations provide(3)troubling evidence that procedures currently in use in family courts often fail to(4) identify, contextualize and account for the occurrence of domestic violence in these cases, and if identified, (5) its presence seems not to consistently affect the court’s recommendations regarding custody or visitation arrangements.

(My numbers, and color coding, added for commentary, below)….

Let me translate:

(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

Demonstrating Healthy Marriages – Think Big, Invest Much, Expect a Lot, Require –???

leave a comment »

U.S. Health and Human Services — Administration of Children and Families

Office of Family Assistance

Healthy Marriage Demonstration Grants

Last post, after I got over the sticker shock of how much California Healthy Marriages took (as I perceived it) starting in 2006 from funds that otherwise might have met desperate need, unmet to date, for enforcement of existing court orders granting me ACCESS and VISITATION to my to stolen on an overnight visitation daughters, just as I’d found despite searching — HARD — no such help before then to get help <>prevent this event, <>enforce existing child support or collect any of the mounting arrears, or <>consistently enforce even the weak, poorly-written visitation court orders, <>obtain an extension or renewal of the original restraining order so I could work in peace and a degree of safety in supporting my household WITHOUT consistent child support, or <>stopping the subsequent (once RO was off) stalking, etc.

Another year, including a flurry of arrangements and orders, none of them adhered to, yet when i pressed for this, certain things were done OUTSIDE the courtroom to warn me not to disrupt the status by taking my court-ordered rights (or his responsibilities to them) at face value. Eventually I again saw (a few rounds in family law system will probably make this clear) that the court itself wasn’t taking them seriously either, and I was evidently some rabble rouser for doing so myself. Concern for their intents with our daughters continued to rise. During this time, of course there was no child support either.

In subsequent months, after the dust had settled into the dreary zero contact, I worked instead on seeking help merely to maintain a cell phone so as to replace the work lost in all this process, not to mention unemployment. The bottom, marginalized line of society were told to get in line (and I did), and that a phone was simply not a necessity for life. At least life on welfare, which I am beginning to realize was possibly in the original plan. It’s hard to control people who are in a satisfied manner working and living out their life’s purpose, particularly when there’s a match between that and livelihood. They are less likely to have the financial difficulties.

Phone help — and unemployment — was, however, promised from certain agenices, as if a person going through the family law system needed another layer of bureaucracy to decipher.

So, after THAT, I sort of figured out a way to maintain things, and tried to keep my chin up.

All this time, really prior to that child-stealing event had worked its way through family law and child support court to the point of, basically ZERO (contact, or enforcement of arrears), I had had existing work, pending work, and referrals, plus sources of them. It was increasingly frustrating to have no single obstacle to acting on this other than the toxic relationship of having dared to leave a divorce, and then after that dared to say “No” to invasive orders-giving about how to rebuild a life and livelihood. And to have attempted to set clear and reasonable boundaries — and mean it. To continue to be dealing on a personal level with this level of hostility and/or dysfunctional thinking, the same kind that endorses wife-assault if she’s uppity, or he doens’t want to answer that last question. Or just because . . . . I’m talking about dealing with family who refused to acknowledge existing court orders, and systematically placed themselves in my life and above the law against my will, and brought destruction with it. I call that a criminal mind set.

Most of my life work had been spent in voluntary situations/organizations (nonprofits often) where people came there because they wanted to, or wanted their kids to, which made for a much better climate (and better pay, too).

Now that my schedule had so cleared, and significant time to study WHY this happened, the answers are not that complicated to understand — just hard to accept. What it’s hard to accept for our society is that some women — and sometimes for VERY valid reasons — “just want to be alone” when it comes to live-in sexual partners, or live-out ones either. In addition to this, the fact of not having a live-in sexual partner (married or unmarried) would not be AS hazardous to adults’ or children’s health if society would simply just “deal with it,” rather than attempt to wholesale “eradicate” it. The word “CHOICE” is the relevant word here.

I DID learn a valuable lesson, to bastardize a quote from an assassinated U.S. President, “Ask NOT what your country can do for you — even when it has proclaimed it will ….”

I had been naively looking in the wrong Department of the U.S. Government. Naively, I thought the key to why justice wasn’t happening lay in the justice department, and its workings. I looked at law, rules of court, mediation (as to domestic violence issues), I consulted databases (and emailed staff at) national judicial databases, or the respected National Council of Juvenile & Family Court Judges (“NCJFCJ” if I have the word order correct), I read, researched, networked, talked, called, and wrote, gaining information, seeking to see the WHY . . . . .

Now, here I see these movements and this particular California Coaliation:

This coalition, as of 2006 (the year of this loss) had received over $2 Million — per year — for 5 years — in my state to help marriages that WEREN’T on the rocks, or split up, or broke already due to domestic violence, and related extended-family-wide safety issues. So, I think I could be forgiven for a strong, public exclamation at this indignation. For one, ACF, the same OPDIV umbrella under which HHS’s hated and feared OCSE had granted this CHMC, Inc. group $2.4mil/year on the basis of its HOPING and EXPECTING that this demonstration grant would demonstrate some serious results and accomplish many lofty goals, such as reducing crime, poverty, domestic violence, and of course the social plague of “fatherlessness” which is now responsible for those first 3 social plagues.

For the unwary:

(Administration of Children and Families)

(Operating Division)

(Health and Human Services)

(Office of Child Support Enforcement)

(California Healthy Marriages Coalition, Inc.)

I realized that this coalition’s “Target Population” was, basically the entire state (married or unmarried, rich or poor, and any cultural or racial background too) that had successfully survived life to the age of 15, which I suppose represents fertility, or something similar. They are thinking BIG — and as such deserve big bucks.

These funds are not just dollars, they practically have a life of their own:

They are going to:

BIRTH
NURTURE, and
SUPPORT the development of a . . .

. . . . well, you can read below. . . .

Name of Grantee:	California Healthy Marriages Coalition
Federal Project Officer:	Michelle Clune (202) 401-5467
Target Population:	Married and Unmarried persons in California, ages 15 and older, of all racial, cultural and economic backgrounds
Federal Award Amount:	$2,342,080/year
Program Name:	California Healthy Marriages Coalition
Project Period:	9/30/2006 – 9/29/2011
Priority Area:	1 (five or more allowable activities)

Allowable Activities: Public advertising campaign (#1); Education in high schools on the value of marriage (#2); Marriage education, marriage skills and relationship skills programs for non-married pregnant women and non-married expectant fathers (#3); Pre-marital education and marriage skills training for engaged couples and for couples interested in marriage (#4); marriage enhancement and marriage skills training programs for married couples (#5); divorce reduction programs that teach relationship skills (#6); and marriage mentoring programs which use married couples as role models and mentors in at-risk communities (#7).

Organization Description: California Healthy Marriages Coalition (CHMC) is a non-profit organization whose purpose is to saturate the entire state of California with marriage education. CHMC will pioneer a “coalition of coalitions” model across the state.

Use(s) of ACF Program Grant Funds: The program grant funds will be used to birth, nurture, and support the development of a statewide interlinking network of community healthy marriage coalitions. The grantee will use the following curricula:

— Youth: “Connections” and “Love U2”
— Non-married pregnant women and expectant fathers: “Love’s Cradle” and “Bringing Baby Home”
— Pre-marital education: “FOCCUS,” “PREPARE/ENRICH,” and “The RE Marriage Prep Program,” and “How to Avoid Marrying a Jerk.”
— Marriage enrichment: “Relationship Enhancement (RE),” “Mastering the Magic of Love,” “PAIRS,” “10 Great Dates,” “Active Relationships,” and “World Class Marriage.”
— Divorce reduction programs: “Retrouvaille,” and “The Third Option”

>>>>>>>

See, I thought FAR too small. I did birth, nurture and support only as many as I spent 9 months apiece on. MY vision was to separate them from domestic violence, give them the best possible education, and set an example that it’s OK to leave dangerous situations — that women are not to be assaulted by their spouses, and don’t have to stick around for more of that. This has to do with things like self-respect, exercising legal rights and other such folderol.

I would like to, pretty soon, take a closer look at the marriage education being offered. I think a BETTER way to preserve marriages in California, especially existing ones, would be to SATURATE the faith communities with copies of:

Mandated reporting laws on domestic violence and child abuse, and a stern statement to rabbis, pastors, imams, priests etc., AND any teachers or child care workers involved (etc.) that “THIS MEANS YOU”
Copies of the state’s laws against these behaviors for distribution and posting.
Statements against joint counseling of couples once violence has entered (which could be dangerous); retaliation might well happen after the one-hour or half-hour “performance” has ended, and without witnesses.
Warnings to have a little humility when a situation exceeds their expertise…call in an expert (I have literally seen thumbnail-sized (tiny) booklets that appear to suggest someone reading the few pages is qualified to counsel such situations. We’ve seen SWAT teams that couldn’t save the situations, let alone a casual reader).
A reminder that women got the vote in 1920, and that POSSIBLY, some of the institutions might wish to allow them to speak up not only in their public places, but also possibly have a voice in their marriages also.
800#s resources in case the messages don’t get through
(A frank reminder to the WOMAN to avoid the family law system at all costs, if possible, should this crop up)
“You Breed ’em You Feed’em” business cards, pre-marriage.
Occasional messages from the pulpit that no one was created to be a scapegoat or target in life, male or female.
Prominent postings of the Bill of Rights
A realistic statement on how they expect to reconcile their activities with contrary activities within the public school system, for example some dismantling of the “abstinence education” stuff.
Financial education, as this is a primary area of struggle within marriages.
Suggestion that, for real, the couple look at the family history, education and work history, too.
Got milk? Got any more ideas?

Among, of course, other things, such as the wisdom of having both partners retain access to finances, transportation, and be informed of the state of their own economic affairs, and other things such as might be a deterrent to different forms of abuse common in these places.

I think SATURATING California with such things might save some marriages (or prevent some unwise ones).

It might have mine… The joint counseling thing almost made a statistic out of our nuclear unit.

Moreover, saturation or non-saturation, there ARE people who just shouldn’t get married, no matter how much they like to have sex. I’d like to see (since it’s taxpayer funds) how California Healthy Marriages plans to handle this, and has to date.

I would like to see that NONE of the materials are saturated with the misogynistic, near-vigilante, woman-blaming, feminist-hating talk. For example, when people are killed by an irate ex (last time this happened — well, I know there was a hostage/femicide-suicide combo this past week, in San Jose. They WERE happily married, but the husband was not the little girls’ father, who didn’t take kindly to losing custody. Now she’s an orphan. Both biological parents are gone. Tragedies are tragedies. However, at times, as with any movement, it attracts all sorts. We had (see blogroll to right) one commenter blaming a domestic violence homicide on the woman, for fililng a protective order. It was awful; a little background search (Google) revealed that the person had done jail time previously, related to some skinhead type affiliations (and weapons accumulations).

This coalition needs to be sensitive to the fact that such hate-talk exists, and not take advantage of a tragedy to promote a policy, or that it will produce MORE overentitled males and transformational cell groups whose real agenda is not publically stated. These indeed do exist, and some may be viewed, apparently (fairly new site to me) at http://www.rickross.com.

I owe my readers a short post. This is one. . . .

Here’s the link to review the stringent requirements and “detailed” descriptions of other “Priority Area Demonstration Grants for Healthy Marriages.” I look forward to a radical shift in the headlines — fewer family wipeouts, and less government intrusion in our lives through child support enforcement, or lack thereof.

I’m also still searching (among these) for a description in any abstract of what constitutes a Healthy Marriage. I mean, among these grant recipients, is it sufficient (for now — this IS California after all, and the challenge isn’t going away) that a man and a woman be involved? Does there need to be some parity in contributions, rights, or discussions of long-term plans? Do they have to have the same religion? Do they have to decide whether childre are to be involved, or what to do if this is a second marriage for one partner? (In that case, read more on my blog and the blogroll to the right, FAST!). Does healthy involve “mild” or any forms of domestic violence, and if so, is this going to be “explicated” by a differently funded HHS grant from, say, Office of Violence Against Women?

Can a healthy marriage happen where the woman earns more or is more highly educated?

What about age differences (I am simply noticing that many — not all — of the incidents with fatalities involve a middle-aged male with a far younger woman, which makes me wonder whether he married for the babies or not. Or vice versa.).

In fact, now that I think of it, how in the world could a coalition define what is really a relationship? I mean, who’s to say what they do in the bedroom or with their finances? And if it’s a religious group behind this, WHO is going to advocate for the poor girl to keep her credit and bank accounts open, if they exist, and NOT put a house in only one person’s name?

Is it going to say: Boys and Girls belong together to procreate. If you’re going to procreate you should marry and stay married.

Is it going to address the high incarceration rate in the U.S. and say, “when Dad gets out, we want you two kids {meaning the parents of a child or children) back together, now, OK? MARRIAGE is HEALTHY, and FATHERLESSNESS is a social scourge, after all.

(FYI, this is already what the US is doing….).

HAPPY BROWSING:

HERE is the link to the descriptions of the use of these funds. As you can see, some have smaller target populations, although one with the word “Dibble” does say “throughout United States.” Another one I looked at yesterday (and need to view a bit more) made news article for having been taken over for certain bookkeeping inconsistencies by the Dept. of Education. I’m puzzled why the funds are still going through. We are, after all, in tough economic times (and I’m still owed money, also).

We appear to be carved up into REGIONS (not states).

Regions 1- 9 (except “6,” which appears to be “MIA”

Hover for a summary (titles and target populations), or Click to Look.

Many of these are 5-year obligations of around $500,000/year.

Apart from the CHMC above — I hope there’s a no-competition clause in there somewhere, because it’s not the only one in California — my other favorite for scope of vision (if not clarity) is:

Office of Family Assistance
Healthy Marriage Demonstration Grant

Name of Grantee: The Dibble Fund for Marriage Education

Federal Project Officer:

Heather Sonabend (202) 260-0873 Target Population: High school teens across America Federal Award Amount: $549,999/year Program Name: Healthy Marriage Discretionary Grants Project Period: 09/30/2006 – 9/29/2011 Priority Area: 8 (one or two allowable activities)

Allowable Activities: Public advertising campaigns on the value of marriage and the skills needed to increase marital stability and health (#1) and education in high schools on the value of marriage, relationship skills and budgeting (#2).

Organization Description: The Dibble Fund for Marriage Education was founded in 1996 with a mission to focus on helping teens learn the skills needed for current healthy relationships and future strong and sustainable marriages.

WOW — that was shortly AFTER the National Fatherhood Initiative (1994) and shortly BEFORE the U.S. Congress voted in both houses that we have a plague of fatherlessness (1998/1999, see prior posts and I think I have blogrolls on this). I hope they will be nice to Mothers too…

Use(s) of ACF Program Grant Funds: The Dibble Fund plans to create a public advertising campaign on the value of marriage and the skills needed to increase marital stability and health, and to provide education in high schools on the value of marriage, relationship skills, and budgeting. They will train 500 Family and Consumer Sciences high school teachers each year to implement peer education projects to reach 113,500 students with over 1.66 million hours of instruction over 5 years. They will increase the number of high school age youth that have access to “best practices” healthy relationship and marriage programs (including **Love U2, Connections, and The Art of Loving Well curriculums{{Curricula??}}) through schools, youth agencies, faith communities, and peer-to-peer education efforts in states with limited Healthy Marriage Initiative (HMI) teen programming. They will influence the knowledge and attitudes of teens about healthy relationships, the “success sequence,” and marriage through an innovative media campaign that reaches teens “where they are,” by leveraging the power and reach of the entertainment media (TV shows and magazines that teens already flock to), the internet, and other new media (mobile phones, i-pods, and other new technology that delivers content in non-traditional ways).

You have to admire the chutzpah, though — “teens across America” and in states deprived by “limited Healthy Marriage Initiative” teen programming. That’s ALMOST higher than the U.S. Dept. of Education goal that No Child Be Left Behind — ALL be able to read, write, and count (at a minimum) before they turn 18.

BERKELEY, CA must be Healthy-Marriage Initiatve deprived (too many same-sex marriage advocates?) because they got a grant, I saw in yesterday’s chart.

But then again, the HHS budget is far larger than the Education budget, so they can aim higher.

**Some curricula designers are going to be profiting from this 4SURE, too.

REGION 8 — apparently Colorado, Colorado, and Colorado** plus Utah and Wyoming.

**See my link on “Policy-Studies.com” and if it’s still there, “Center for Policy Research” with Jessica Pearson et al. The 1983-2005 picture of a tree showing its growth is worth the wait time if your PC/Mac takes as long to load as mine does.

Under Wyoming, I note a group that’s new on the scene (in getting gov’t grants to promote marriage….) as of 2002 — AND targeting 2nd marriages and stepparents. Good for them. They will also be aided (where one partner is the man) in the generous Access Visitation Grants in getting his child support reduced by gaining custody of the children, if they aren’t already in the home:

Organization Description: The High Country Consulting, LLC dba Faith Initiatives of Wyoming (FIWY) is a statewide intermediary organization for faith and community-based (F/CB) organizations founded in 2002. It currently serves more than 2400 F/CB organizations through training and technical assistance, fund development, identification of best practices and advancement and use of technology, all aimed at building service capacity at the local level. FIWY also assists with direct management services, data handling, event planning and coordination of partnership activities for F/CB projects.

It WILL, of course, be cautious not to maintain a balance between the religious viewpoints with those of atheists, or non-adherents. I’m curious of those 2400 F/CB organizations span a variety of faiths…

Use(s) of ACF Program Grant Funds: High Country Consulting will implement and evaluate a marriage enrichment program that will target stepfamilies and couples in second marriages. They will provide marriage preparation, enrichment and divorce reduction services through both community-based and faith-based organizations, using a pilot program as a cultural model to reach out to over 1,250 participants…

REGION 1 – (Simply substitute the number in the “URL” to switch regions) — one grant only,

Character Counts In Maine

Organization Description: Founded in 2002, Character Counts In Maine (CCM), doing business as Heritage of Maine, has delivered abstinence education that includes marriage preparation skill building for adolescents in communities across Maine over the past two years. Their Heritage Keepers abstinence until marriage curriculum teaches relationship skills which lead to the formation of safe and stable marriages. CCM has formed a coalition of civic and faith-based organizations, high schools, youth groups, churches and marriage education organizations known as the Main Community Partnership to bring healthy relationship education to high school adolescents.

Target Population:

Adolescents/Teens in High School; Educators in High Schools (to deliver services to adolescents); High School Principals (quarterly newsletter)

REGION 2 — 3 grants, slightly more interesting:

In the Bronx

Organization Description: University Behavioral Associates was founded in 1995 by the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Montefiore Medical Center and is the main provider of behavioral health care in Bronx, New York. Additionally, the organization has long-standing relationships with local welfare-to-work programs and has the capability to manage information for hundreds of married couples.

SO — we have the religious approach, and the Behavioral Modification approach. So long as teens and adults from one set of marriage programs don’t marry teens and adults from the other side. Well, this is targeted at already married people..

Organization Description: The Research Foundation of SUNY, Stony Brook University is a non-profit organization located within the Stony Brook University campus. They proposed to use a highly innovative, empirically-supported, empowering program for income, unwed parents soon after the birth of a child.

Region 3

Organization Description: Family Guidance, Inc. will be the lead agency for a coalition of regional non-profit agencies, calling itself “TWOgether Pittsburgh,” to strengthen marriages. Coalition members include: The Center for Urban Biblical Ministry, The National Fatherhood Initiative, evaluator Dr. Stanley Denton, The Women’s Center and Shelter of Pittsburgh, and Smith Brothers Advertising.

High school students, married and unmarried couples and individuals who are residents of Pittsburgh, PA and the surrounding 5 counties.

Region 4 – one of the larger (or more active regions — SE United States (Georgia, FL, Alabama, N. Carolina, etc.)

This one particularly bears some looking at, and I hope to. Several universities make the list, a “Trinity Church” and a good deal of abstinence-based education, which is being fought elsewhere in government circles, at least within the school systems. I also note a certain curriculum popping up a lot, and am curious as to how many of the institutes receiving grants (judging by originating date) may be offshoots of the Fatherhood movement which — it should be clearly noted here — is a reaction to the feminist movement which, at least according to itself, is a response to simply oppression on the basis of gender, and things such as — you got it — violence within the home, or an attempt to deprive a person of some basic civil rights. Feminism is not the antithesis to patriotism (nor is patriotism as promoted by some of these groups synonymous for respect for the Constitution and the laws of the land).

I became a feminist precisely because of my trip through marriage and afterwards, the family law system. Til then, I took too much for granted. I am a mother, and I retain my faith — just practice it in safer places. We find help and strength where it is found. The hardest thing in my life to date was not having children, raising them with a violent, narcissistic, father (and working and struggling economically also), nor was it afterwards supporting them. That was a piece of cake, until the advisors began flocking into my life on the basis that I didn’t have a man in there (long before I was ready for such a relationship, after all this). On the basis of my profile, not the actual behavior, facts, results, or character. In fact, the experience of being “advised” after marriage when I wasn’t seeking or needing it, of being forced to do things I personally knew (and announced) were destructive to both work, relationships, and daughters’ educational options — was very much like living with abuse, only with more participants and less actual physical attack. Psychological escalated, along with the lies (once audiences were found).

The hardest thing I have ever done in my life, that I can recall, is surviving the total removal of my children from my household, and all significant contact with them at THE very point where our household was poised to succeed dramatically, in several categories (work, housing, schooling, neighobrhood, and surroundings). It was about AS healthy a (single-parent) family (with contact with the other parent available in the circumstances.

THAT, friends, was the problem to an abuser — success and independence HAS to be stopped. This doesn’t happen by telling the truth and complying with commonsense laws: Don’t steal, don’t perjure onesself in court, don’t suborn perjury, don’t kidnap, don’t harass, don’t stalk, and don’t refuse to work in order to punish the other parent — adn the kids alongside. Put your need to dominate SECOND for once in your middle-aged, male life. Develop work, not just alliances in the slander, and take-down campaign in order to somehow justify that NO single mother can handle life alone.

Well, not with this kind of attitude running the environment.

There are many uncomfortable similarities with the personal history here (which parallels many I’ve heard of) to the overall scope of this movement. HEY, I’m in favor of marriage, too obviously — I married, right?

I’m just not in favor of a national religion, at others’ expense and my own. I am pretty sure, by now, that the difficulties these children went through, and others still are (and mine are), and their confusion (or unified, but unjustified, belief of lies about their mothers, which is undermining to a healthy values system for growing adolescents) — are in good part traceable to some of the grants and initiatives I have been detailing on this blog. They are contributors to the social problems, while purporting to solve them.

Until this connection is made by enough people, the burden will just get larger and larger, while the public proclamation would be, funds are shrinking and shrinking. WShen the proclamations are coming from THE largest arm of the Exec Dept (and elsewhere), at some point in time, we have to say, WHAT are you doing with that MONEY? At an individual level (like I am starting to) and then call your Congressperson in charge whatever grant affects your area.

The catch: Mostly the people who can do this are on the outskirts

In essence, it’s socialism. There have to be safe options for not marrying, and these are to be as valid as the others. When it comes to my case, it was only being forced to live a serious “half-life” half-in and half-out (or, 95% in)multiple GOVERNMENT_RUN- institutions — that economically and artificially suppressed prosperity for us. I was forced to fight, instead of work, after having done my best to reconcile the irreconciliable differences with an abuser. This has done nothing but escalate, since I met the guy, basically — with only a few brief pauses.

I talk with a LOT of people on a daily basis, and it’s rarely a day I don’t hear of another similar situation.

Preaching marriage around the place doesn’t help matters, as far as I am concerned — the entitlement in such cases is through the roof. I did practically everything I am reading about in these abstracts — didn’t have children out of wedlock, stayed committed, worked alongside, supported, you name it. Hung in there as long as possible. My commitment to this ideal of marriage, for one, didn’t match the father of my children’s. He was committed to its privileges, but not its emotional sacrifices in that, he was to engage with a separate human being AS a separate human being, not a household (or biological) function.

ABOUT MARRIAGE

When it works well, it works well. When it doesn’t, then I wish that the national atmosphere (federally-pronounced) would cool it on the propaganda — the air is highly charged around here, and domestic violence ignites quickly when marriage (or other fatherhood, proprietary success-mandated) entitlements become the national ideal.

I dare anyone to get up there and OPENLY substitute one skin color, one ethnic group for the word “father” and another for the word “mother” in the same languages, and then got about to make this happen.

Or, religion.

it would be seen for what it truly is — ridiculous, and bigoted. Somehow, and for somereason, the concept of “fatherhood” unites a LOT wider spectrum of people, more closely, and incites more trouble. For example, I’d say a good proportion of the domestic violence I lived through and my kids witnessed, traumatizing and sometimes terrorizing all of us, and then engendering response compensatory behaviors (including super-performance mentality in the girls, when small), plus it wreaks havoc on the biochemistry (I came out obese, which was handled, but remains a struggle when dealing closely with the situation long-term). The obesity was a clear self-defense measure, and has been studied nationally (www.acestudy.org). When I lost weight, significantly, and felt TERRIFIC (post-marriage) we were still seeing each other regularly (on exchange of the children for visitation) and somehow this brought out more aggression, stalking, and competitive behaviors from a person who’d already filed for divorce! I was sitting at my work, and considering not only my own safety, but that of a person apparently perceived (not even real) “rival.”

I’ve had to struggle morally with whether it was FAIR for me to enter into relationships — almost any kind — with the knowledge of how volatile the situation is.

Put that together with work, and figure it out.

These groups are talking about the high cost of “fatherlessness” to a growing society. I’m not sure this equates with motherlessness. But here’s a question you don’t hear too often — what about Rachel lamenting her children (that’s a Bible reference).

What about the effect on society of taking competent, mature, sometimes skilled and dedicated FEMALE workers and contributors to society — and keeping them traumatized a decade at a time, and in use of multiple social services they wouldn’t otherwise need. What about their risk of old age poverty and homelessness from simply a few decades out of the work force, in order to handle:

1. Abuse, first, (including verty often as part of the control system, economic abuse), then.

2. Recovery, brief respite indeed — AFTER which, a long drawn-out custody trial for all too many, resulting in MORE lost work and opportunities.

What does THAT do for society? First, stealing from its contributions, and then, burdening the safety net.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it

HANDLE the domestic violence issues, and you will handle a multitude of other issues. STOP forcing women who left abuse through classes (I wasn’t, but I know it’s a cash stream in the family law) when they weren’t violent. STOP trying to put back together what already broke up unless you are willing to sign up front: I take PERSONAL responsibility, up to and including incarceration along with those classes, if those attending my class addressing battering behavior go out and kill their ex, or anyone else, afterwards.

WELL, if taking the class allows a slick performer to pass with flying colors, and fly out the door, get sentence, or get OUT, and then go get EVEN, it’s setting the climate for homicide. And I’m not the first person to point this out, either.

I bet there’d be fewer takers on these grants, and a slightly different economy.

The government is not a good teacher, it’s an abusive rulers, and it would do better to follow the examples of good teachers that are already OUT there, find out what principles they use, and follow them.

This is of course practically impossible with such a federally huge educational system — which is one reason many people, who can, opt out of it. Now the government wants another crack at educating people who didn’t make the grade the first time through.

No, I do not have a firm technical business plan answer. But I know one that’s NOT it when I see it, and “healthy marriage education” falls under that category. Either we have a national religion or we don’t. The country needs to make up its mind. The educational system claims that we don’t (I’m not sure I agree), HHS department is demonstrating we do, structurally speaking.

In my life, and as a fully-functioning intelligent working adult, I have experienced the worst of both worlds when it comes to treatment of females — blind to abuse, and upset at personal (peaceful) choice. From atheists “educated” and from religious “undereducated” both.

This post was drafted a few days ago, I have more research coming. The BOLD LINKS above give more detailed descriptions.

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

July 19, 2009 at 3:24 PM

Posted in "Til Death Do Us Part" (literally), Designer Families, Domestic Violence vs Family Law, History of Family Court

Tagged with custody, Education, family annihilation, Intimate partner violence, mediation, parental kidnapping, social commentary, Social Issues from Religious Viewpoints, Studying Humans, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work.., women's rights

“Wife fought off Pa. man killed in shootout.” Maybe–MAYBE, Forget the Restraining Orders, Remember 2nd Amendment? Or, toss a coin…

with 2 comments

Part II of II on “Responsible Citizenhood” is in labor.

The waters have broken, and there is a flood of information and synthesis of concepts gushing forth on many topics, and my brain is dialating. They will have to be posted in stages.

Translation: I am being a Responsible Citizen (see prior posts) and exploring who is my Congress, the Constitution, who is funding whom, and finding all kinds of juicy information on whose idea was it to reinstitute a national religion called Fatherhood, funded by all of us. I have also located a few new (to me at least) search tools How many thoughts have been provoked!

But, this (relatively) recent news alert reminded me, that Part of Responsible Citizenhood might entail learning how to handle a gun, and being willing to use it during a home invasion. Even a home invasion by an estranged husband:

Wife fought off Pa. man killed in shootout

by Michael Rubinkam

Let’s look at this headline again. This woman fought him off, and neither she, nor any of her offspring got killed. If you look up the articles and read the details, she made a mistake, which, if you read below and see how WIGGLY Pa considers the “PFAs” when it comes to what they mean, is almost understandable. But once the situation became clear, she took QUICK action to protect her children, get free, and call for help.

This is not, folks, how it often plays out. Who knows whether, God, fortune, or luck played a role, but we DO know this woman didn’t stop to debate, and she also didn’t panic and go dysfunctional. May I propose that this woman listening to her INSTINCTS and acting on them may have prevented a higher body count. LESSON ONE: Don’t jerk around with someone who has just crossed a boundary. Don’t second guess instinct. And (next time) don’t compromise one INCH on an existing protective or restraining order — it sends a mixed message, and could lead to this.

May I propose something else? I suggest that lawmakers and courts consider that women are people too, and smarten up to having us believe the fiction and play the slot games with any intimate partner who has been battering us in the home, or threatening to, etc. May I suggest that instead of — or in addition to — DISarming him, they somehow ARM her, and if she’s not trained how to do so, get her some professional responsible training. It could be mace, it could be pepper spray, but constitutionally, it could be a gun, too, at least in the home.

Given the options, she has hope, luck, prayer, and walking around the neighborhood with her instincts on alert, her antennae up, and then trying to also rebuild a life. “LIFE, LIBERTY, and PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.” Now what was that first one again?

Detriment: May give a whole new picture of “motherhood” to “fatherhood” people who don’t believe women should be allowed to separate, do not have equal rights, and VAWA should go back to where it came from.

In this above statement, I omitted the comma between “fatherhood” people and who don’t believe. This is generous on my part, because I am conceding that there could be people all excited about and promoting fatherhood who DON’T believe these things. In fact, I don’t really believe this. I think that what the “fatherhood” movement is about is that the genetic / gender / biological composition of a family and household (one man, one woman, both married) is more important than the character or behavior of such families. I am not the only person who believes this. Some data is here (hover cursor for my comment. Note: This dates to 2002, almost 7 years ago. .http://www.canow.org/fam_report.pdf.

Now, when I married, I picked someone of the opposite gender, rather than someone of the same gender and, when it came to wanting children, either adoption or a sperm donor. This is probably because of how I like my sex, and the other versions didn’t concern me.

However, when I realized that my opposite-gender person’s main concern was my gender and household function ONLY, and not me as a person — and began physically punishing me for showing up as a person like him, and expecting to pursue some personal goals, not only the laundry/cleaning/nursing/f____ing role (in addition to supporting him in his business, and — if I wanted necessities — also working myself in and/or outside the home for pay) — I made a determination that behavior was the determinant, not gender, or a two-parent status. The MAIN reason I did this was because we had children, and it was a damn lousy role model they were being exposed to. The children were of my gender, and they were being taught how this one was somehow inferior and equipped with fewer rights, if any, and no boundaries or ability to say NO without taking retaliation for it. THAT’s a lousy role model, and he got himself evicted, not after several warnings.

I suppose you would like me to get to the story here, how THIS woman saved her life, her children’s life, but alas, not the pursuing policeman’s life, or her husband’s (although I lay that one as his responsibility — no one forced him to threaten his wife with a gun or kidnap his child, or place himself above a clear law he knew was in place upon him).

YATESVILLE, Pa. (AP) — Hobbled by a broken ankle, the estranged wife of a man killed in a shootout with Pennsylvania state troopers managed to fight him off as he threatened her with a gun before he kidnapped their 9-year-old son, the woman’s friend said.

The order of events is a little jumbled in the paragraph. The AP wanted it out fast, I guess, and so we get this:

A. Her ankle was broken
B. She was estranged from her husband
C. He was killed by PA state troopers in a shootout (i.e., he was shooting back).
D. 1. She fought him off 2. while he threatened her with a gun.
E. He kidnapped their 9 year old son.

Having been through a FEW of the events above (not including the shootout), let me put it, I suspect, chrono.

B. Cause of broken ankle — don’t know and probably not relevant.
D.2 He threatened her with a gun
D. 1 THIS MOM FOUGHT BACK.
E. THEN (having been fought off), he grabs their son and dashes off (probably in a car).
C. State troopers, apparently, caught up with him, and I’ll gol-dang bet he shot first. Predictably, they shot back.
Thank God the state troopers had some firearms training, so HE got killed, not his wife and not the son he kidnapped, this time.

First of all, let’s deal with the grammar dishonesty (gender bias?) with B. “She was estranged from her husband” which has an element of the truth, and distorts the actual context. This is such common press practice in domestic violence homicide (or incident) reporting:

LEGALLY, it appears he’d acted first, and she had responded with a “protection from abuse” order. Unless the news disagrees with the judge that is THE most relevant factor in the case, apart from this incident. It most certainly is prime factual, legal and emotional dynamic CONTEXT of the incident. “She was estranged” could’ve been, she got tired of his dirty socks around home, she wanted to pursue another affair, or he did; he refused to work OR was an alcoholic, she was bored, he was using drugs or alcohol, or they had other “irreconciliable differences.” “She was estranged” already must minimized the truth. If a protective order was in place, and these reporters are not aware enough yet that this produces LOTS of hot news leads in the form of crime reporting, they need to review the job descriptions — or their editors do. (To tell the truth, I didn’t notice this the first time through the story myself, although I have always thought it an odd phrase).

B. THEY were estranged. or, better,

B. “In _____ (date) (or how recent), she obtained a PFA (say it: “protection from abuse“) order (in what court, or county), forcing him to leave the family home.

It is so typical of abusers, abuser enablers, and for that matter, the bulk of the family law system, to IGNORE THE ACTIONS and TALK ABOUT WHO “WAS” WHAT RATHER THAN WHO “DID” WHAT. IT”S PSYCHOLOGY NOT EVIDENCE. THIS IS NO ACCIDENT!

From the 2002 California Family Court Report (link above): (under “Loss of Due Process”)

A. Lack of procedural and evidentiary due process,since the Family Code was

separated from the Code of Civil Procedure and the Evidence Code in

1992.

Alas (and the emphasis of other articles on this event) — – Mad Dad was not in a compromise mood, and shot at responding officers. Terribly, he got a cop, too. Again — and these officers WERE brave, and they DID stop a kidnapping in process.

That’s about a recipe for suicide by cop. Whether or not he had thought THIS far ahead, one thing is clear: He’d pre-meditated far enough ahead to bring a gun and point it at his wife.

I experienced a decade of being exceedingly afraid of my husband in the home, being traumatized, and eventually being sure enough (because he talked about it often enough, fantasizing about this, and telling me, so, or otherwise bringing it up casually in conversation: “I’ll just have to kill you.” At this time, both our children were under 8 years old.) This has caused economic devastation upon me, my daughters, and people associated with both him, and us. It has wasted taxpayer funds year after year (in family law, where our case shouldn’t have been at the time) and taken almost 20 years of the prime working years of my life and trashed them repeatedly, under threats, stalkings, intimidations, sudden appearances at my home, and in general, one hell of a mess. He is still only working part-time, if that, doesn’t pay taxes (I don’t because I don’t earn enough), he is not financially independent yet and, because of this and unfortunately, neither am I. Our state is broke (supposedly) which is headline news, and is getting people very short-tempered in general.

I wonder, and I DO reflect — SUPPOSE I HAD FOUGHT BACK, AND NOT ONLY THAT, THREATENED BACK: IF YOU EVER DO THIS AGAIN, YOU’LL BE MISSING A BODY PART. OR DEAD! And then dropped everything until I had learned self defense.

Or, I had told been less committed to my marriage vows, and dumped his ass out on the street — in other words, brought it to a head earlier. WHY did I not do that? (a number of reasons: #1. VAWA and awareness of DV laws was not commonplace. #2. I’d never had a similar experience where I had to set a boundary with a violent man before, and wasn’t acquainted personally with such situations. #3. self-defense and handling a gun is not a typical part of the public school education, and not exactly promoted, as in, exercising 2nd Amendment rights, in general. We are not hunting our food, but buying it, for the most part (or growing it). I was not raised in urban areas, where awareness of guns and gun violence was commonplace, but in more rural; people shot deer, or sometimes squirrels, not people! I also wasn’t raised on TV.

School rewards taking orders and obeying rules, at least theoretically.

And that’s not “feminine” behavior.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

WHAT IF MEN UNDERSTOOD – – – REALLY UNDERSTOOD – – – THAT EVEN WITHIN A RELATIONSHIP, A SMACK WILL BE SMACKED, BACK, HARDER, BECAUSE IT’S SO OUT OF ORDER? WHAT IF WOMEN WEREN’T SO DESPERATE TO SURVIVE ECONOMICALLY, OR FOR SEXUAL ATTENTION, OR TO HAVE A MAN ON THE ARM, THAT NONE OF THEM COMPROMISED?

WOULD THERE STILL BE FAMILIES AS WE KNOW THEM NOW?

Maybe the fatherhood guys are “right.” Maybe (from that perspective) if men are not needed to provide for and protect women,and defend them from other suitors, stalkers, or rapists, or to help them, particularly when they are more vulnerable, pregnant and raising young kids, the differences between the sexes (as to functions in life) would so blur, that, well, the drive to achieve and provide would diminish, the wheels of the economy would crumble (and a lot of faith institutions also), and life just wouldn’t have that same glow, or afterglow.

Without the primal urge, there would be no skyscrapers (9/11?) or cathedrals, and no empires, multi-national or otherwise. Maybe. life just wouldn’t have that zest and drama. Newspapers would need to find other ways to sell the products, if there weren’t crises to report.

Well, that’s a larger topic. But it seems a natural question: If the nuclear family ain’t what protects, and provides for its young, the only alternative is for equality of income. NOW, Papa Obama and the majority of Head Start, Zero to Five, Administration for Families and Children, (sorry sir to pick on you, this wasn’t your idea to start with) might be out of work. ONLY if the ONLY way to produce income is a “job” that MUST be done outside the home, ONLY then is it essential to have the other functions of raising a family: care, daytime feeding, and education — to be done by someone else, institutionally.

However the people so vigorously promoting this solution ONLY (and highly suspicious of, say, the homeschooling option which is a lot more fluid, lets mothers network and find each other’s long suits, collaborate locally to find the best teachers (including some of each other, as well as hired professionals), and fire the lousy ones — now THAT’S a plus) and actually have a better understanding of who their children are, and possibly better relationships with them, not rigidly defined ones) — these people — and I coudl show you, or you could look for yourself — are THEMSELVES either inheriting wealth, or have sufficient assets to go fund ggovernment policy, publicize and drive various programs through and teach THEIR young how to own businesses and produce passive cash flow, themselves.

Then who would work in the businesses they own? There has to be a steady population — and the majority of the population — that does NOT know how to live independently from the government, or the “employee” situation — or life would, well, it just wouldn’t work right. Who would work the factories, produce the many, many terrific products we enjoy in this country, the material prosperity, the varities of fast foods (and agencies pronouncing that fast foods are bad for you), and all that?

(Along with the domestic violence kidnappings, suicides by cop, traumatized kids, and sometimes dead people, that go along with when this doesn’t work out so well…..).

Well, that dialogue is what I get for thinking. It’s Monday night quarterbacking, I guess, “what-if” scenarios. I cannot turn back the clock in my own case. The fact is, if I hadn’t been who I was, probably the genetic and particular DNA of my two wonderful daughters (who are probably not reading this, yet), and with whom I am NOT spending any more time, would not have been born. I have already determined (and she’s spoken with me recently) that woman number two was targeted for a certain gullibility and in a certain venue, for use to get the kids away from me. He’s out on the loose again, troubling me, because I’ve been contacted, and her, because of what that indicates.

HOWEVER, the rest of this post, below, shows how the local Women’s Resource Agency describes why women should keep coming, keep asking for “PFA” orders and keep playing the odds, because, it’s after all, only about ONE out of THREE cases that violates these orders, and “NOT ALL” do “WHAT HE DID.”

Well, in school, 66% is not a passing grade. Last I heard, 70% was. We are talking 66% success rate when the other 33% (add your decimal points later) might get killed and result in this. We’re not talking about graduating from high school, but living out a normal lifespan, and not in terror, trauma, or having to before a child is ten, witness a homicide. Or two. Or being kidnapped. About officers NOT having to make that sacrifice, and THEIR children lose a Daddy also. How is THAT “promoting responsible fatherhood.”

I think that the time of restraining orders may have passed, and that we probably need to focus on both attitudes, cultural values and self-defense techniques (including weapons if necessary) that make it ABSOLUTELY clear that any such violation of a personal boundary in the form of a HIT will be met with equal, and to make a point, slightly greater responding force to emphasize the unacceptability of it.

I think local communities will have to figure out processes, not “states” they wish to achieve. And this requires being realistic about restraining order and a valid understanding of what abuse IS.

I have one: ABUSE is violating personal boundaries (and, most time, state criminal laws) in order to establish a “giving orders” situation between what should be intimate partners. As such, it qualifies as “two-year-old” behavior and should result in the adult who has regressed to it, and thinks that 2009 is, in fact, closer to 1920 (when women finally got the vote) should be treated like the two-year-old mentality of, the world should conform to you when you don’t like it, without your submitting to some process of negotiation, compromise, or humility. I would like to add that, as I recall this, I always wondered why our daughters didn’t go through the famous “Terrible Twos” {is this an Americdan term only? I don’t know…} rebellious stages. I remember this at the time also. It could be that we weren’t dumping them off in daycare, where they needed more attention, oir it just possibly could’ve been that we had a much larger Terrible Two in the home, in the form of their father, and they knew this.

Only when it’s UNacceptable throughout society to beat women, and terrorize anyone, will this stop. The only acceptable reasons for doing anything like this in defense of life’s essentials — and these do not include maintaining a status quo in which the abuser’s world is perfect, and his ego cannot handle rejection, the need to apologize, or occasional value conflicts. The heart of any really good intimate relationship would do real well to closely resemble what’s written in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, which most of us (and our legislators) have apparently forgotten.

I happen to be a Christian, and my faith tells me about when this will, and will not happen. I have had to often re-evaluate the duality (us/them) and domination (Christ came once and was humbled/crucified voluntarily, but will return in authority as king and by force put down all rebellion, bringing in world peace), and I assure you, in the many, MANY years I have been around and working (through music) in several faith institutions, the music is terrific, but within white (in particular, but not only) Protestantism, nondenominational especially, equality of women is “anathema” and these places are producing wife-beaters and wife-killers. They do not communally or prominently acknowledge the laws of the land in their hearts, and many (those who do not ordain women, or and hate even the concept of them in leadership, let alone of gays, or lesbians) , despite sometimes sheltering a battered woman, or helping her (i’ve been helped a few times recently), they will NOT stop sheltering the doctines and attitudes that produce more batterred women, and more overentitled men. this is behind the “fatherhood” movement, and it produces a form of social schizophrenia, in which we have a public school system where “God” is not allowed, or prayer, yet public policy where “faith-based” advice and policies are promoted. Well, which is it, folks?

That’s all the psycho- social-analysis for this post. What’s below (written earlier) relates more directly to this particular domestic violence double-homicide, kidnapping, assault, and tragedy which began with “she was estranged,” and a look at the neighborhood response.

What probably kept that woman and her children alive was her willingness to fight back. What put her at risk was compromising the existing restraining order (including drop off at curb), and (possibly) her not having the means or intent to, at ALL times since it was issued, NEVER compromise it AT ALL. ONE means might be for her husband to have understand that she understood her 2nd Amendment right to self-defense, and having it in the home, AND her willingness and intent to act on it, if even 3 yards of a restraining order was violated. This sends a clear message, and would put that man back in a place to reconsider whether he wants to test the limits, or can talk or plan, or manipulate his way out of obeying that order.

The courts need to do more to communicate this necessity to women who have just separated. They need to understand that NOW, it’s OK to take a personally aggressive stance and back it up with a willingness to act if boundaries are violated. That IS, after all, WHY the “United States of America” is no longer a British colony, or any other colony (so far), and we might do well to keep communicating this principle to our young, boy and girl alike. Not to belabor the point, but our schools absolutely do NOT, do this at this point, and I say, intentionally so. You can’t “manage” people so well who understand their self-worth.

However Susan Autenreith may have been raised, at the crucial time, she found something within herself to say No, and stand up to this. Having made a mistake, she didn’t condemn herself or try to talk out of the situation. Gun meant FIGHT BACK, YELL DIRECTIONS TO HE KIDS, & CALL FOR HELP.

How Logical Is This?

~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

About that MOM?

Let’s go chrono, OK?

Not all (female) readers have been through the process of, say,

(1) childbirth,

(2) being assaulted, threatened, intimidated, battered, and in short abused, or other situations which tell you “Danger! Danger!,”

(3) filing and getting a PFA (domestic violence restraining, or etc.) order with kickout, indicating “Danger! Danger!” to all and “STAY AWAY!” to Dad, (and, you can’t buy guns, either, or own them), and then

(4) IMMEDIATELY after these at least actions (applying for a temporary, filing with judge, getting it signed, serving the husband (which then in effect throws him out of the house in some manner), going to court for a hearing to have it made permanent, having it made “permanent” (i.e., facing the ex in that court hearing), and meanwhile attempting to explain this to one’s children in terms they can understand why he can’t live here anymore, then — with a restraining order in effect — typically the NEXT stop is the mediator who will then proceed to act as though there wasn’t really, any serious domestic violence (other than, meetings may be separate) and say, “OK, so long as it’s peaceful communications around the children” and then design some visitation plan any other divorcing couple might have, even the most amicable divorces. Which appears to have happened in this place.

In 1992, Jack Straton, Ph.D. (NOMAS: National Org. of Men Against Sexism) recommended a cooling off period.

So far, no one has figured this out, evidently.

(5) Agreeing, after this, to a custody/visitation exchange plan which basically has a split personality:

Hey, he was so dangerous, you had to get a judge to tell him to stay away, and order no weapons in the home, BUT . . . .. BUT . . . . . it’s OK to give this same, by now pretty distraught or indignant/upset man access to the fruit of his loins, regularly . . . . After all, what about a child’s right to bond with both parents?

This, I say, gives the man, the woman, and the children a mixed message. I have also learned (the hard way) since, the courts ALSO are getting contradictory messages (and funding) about these matters. IS domestic violence a crime, or not a crime?

And so we get cases like the Autenreiths, where Dad didn’t LIKE having that protective order in place, and made this clear with a 9mm. His girlfriend helped him get a gun. Again, his girlfriend.

WHICH BRINGS UP THIS POINT: Telling a man to not own weapons, and get rid of any he does own, doesn’t prevent him — in the least — from grabbing one from a friend who has one (or in this case, a girlfriend buying one for him. I believe this is called a straw purchase, and laws exist to address this, but still, it points out that generally there is a way around the law for those who intend to find one).

(How long were they separated? How hard is it for a man with a plan to get around a piece of paper?)

in order to STOP the cycle of abuse which, without intervention, generally does one thing — escalate, until someone is killed, or more than one,

WHAT ARE THE ODDS? HOW WELL DO YOU KNOW THAT MAN? HOW WILL HE RESPOND TO THE PFA?

=======

HERE IS THE RESPONSE REGARDING “PFA’S” TO THIS PARTICULAR ASSAULT, BATTERY, CHILD-KIDNAPPING, THREATS, CAR CHASE AND DOUBLE-HOMICIDE. I HAVE EMPHASIZED ANY AREAS THAT SHOW UNCERTAINTY, LOOPHOLES FOR DANGER:

WOMEN’S RESOURCES OF MONROE COUNTY (PA): PFA’s WORK IN MOST CASES

By Andrew Scott

Pocono Record June 12, 2009

A protection-from-abuse order [“”PFA”] may be just a piece of paper unable to stop the likes of Daniel Autenrieth, the Northampton County man who threatened his wife at gunpoint, kidnapped their son and led police on a high-speed chase that ended in a fatal shootout in Tobyhanna.

{To review: PFA, then:

DEAD PEOPLE — 2, OFFICER, MAN
WOUNDED — 1, OFFICER
VERY TRAUMATIZED — 9 YEAR OLD SON, MOM, OTHER KIDS}}

The fact remains that most people with PFAs filed against them comply with those court orders and don’t do what Autenrieth did. So although PFAs aren’t absolutely guaranteed to stop someone who’s unbalanced or really intent on doing harm, people who are being physically abused or feel threatened with physical harm in relationships still should apply for PFAs.

That was the message at a Thursday press conference at Women’s Resources of Monroe County in Delaware Water Gap. Women’s Resources is part of the Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence, which provides a network of advocacy, legal, counseling, medical and other support services for domestic violence victims.

. . .

In Pennsylvania, PFA violators can face up to six months in county jail and fines of up to $1,000, depending on the severity of the violation, said Wendy Bentzoni, a detective with the Monroe County District Attorney’s Office.

If a woman requests a PFA against her husband and he consents to the order’s terms

Being evicted from the home he/she shares with the plaintiff/victim and having no contact with that person.
Being evicted, but being allowed to have contact.
Being allowed to stay in the home as long as there is no physical abuse or threat of physical abuse.

In Pennsylvania, a PFA can be in effect for any length of time up to three years, depending on what a judge rules or what the parties involved consent to in each individual case. If the defendant doesn’t violate the PFA, the order simply expires when its time is up.

Of the 450 PFAs granted in Monroe County last year, more than 125 were violated by defendants, Bentzoni said.

{{OK, Let’s look at that. Suppose it was 150. 150 violated out of 450 is 1 out of 3. That means for every 2 that WERE kept (as far as they know — by whether or not a violation was reported or not) 1 was not. How do you like them odds? Your PFA has a 33.33% of being violated (in which case, see above for potential risk/fallout).

In some cases, getting a PFA filed against an abuser can worsen the victim’s situation because the abuser sees it as the victim trying to take power away from the abuser{{WHICH IT IS INCIDENTALLY}}, she said. Desperate to retain that power over the victim, the abuser might become even more dangerous.

“Against someone with no fear of the law or jail, a PFA might not be the best action to take,” Kessler said. “In that case, we explore other options with the victim. The goal is to get the victim out of a vulnerable position.”

If the abuser is the sole breadwinner for the victim and their children, fear of losing the abuser’s financial support also might deter the victim from applying for a PFA, Kessler said.

Well, I know in my case it sure delayed getting one. Often economic abuse can precede physical.

Economic abuse can precedes and enables the physical AND IS PRE-MEDITATED. If the targeted person can’t afford to get away, or see how they could conceivably do so, they will take their chances staying, possibly. What a great choice — homelessness or increasing domestic abuse.

So, it seems to me if we want a less violent world, the most sensible thing would be focus on teaching children and young people how to become economically independent. In a wonderful contradiction of intent, we DON’T! The entire public schools system in the U.S.A., for the most part, consists of teaching children how to be submissive and take orders, leave the thinking up to the experts, who will grade them, and prepare them for this: College, and Jobs. Not, College and BUSINESSES. Or College, and understanding the economic principles that would help them become business owners, investors, cash-stream producers, foundation producers, and independent thinkers. How hypocritical.

And that includes independent thinking about how to survive financially should they choose to have children, or should they not choose to have children, but set up housekeeping (and sleeping) with a partner that might become sick, injured, or — face it – incarcerated. They should not have to go nurse off Dad, or Mom, or Big Brother the Welfare State, in this case. The goal should NOT be lifetime jobs, but lifetime progression towards financial independence. They cannot do this if they aren’t studying people who have accomplished this, and the basic principles of wealth.

We should also teach them not to let any partner or potential partner disarm them economically — whether it be job, or bank account, or credit, or access to transportation etc. That any such action is aggression, and dangerous to their welfare, creating an artificial co-dependence. They should know this going into relationships.

Now right there, we have a SERIOUS problems. Many world religions don’t accept this, and are not likely to.

Well, maybe they should, in the US, then lose their tax-exempt status. Believe me, I’ve thought of it. Because if they are contributing to the climate of “It’s OK to dominate a woman by any means (or weapon) that comes to hand, because it makes you more of a man,” then they should have to fork over the taxes that society might need to take care of the resulting mess.

And I’ll tell you another “secret” (not a real secret) — one I’ve been thinking about more recently. The majority of these institutions are in a co-dependent and domination relationship within their own ranks. If they didn’t dominate and under-educate them on their own sacred scripts (men and women alike), in the US, at least, many people would not be so dependent on spiritual, social, and emotional nourishment on the weekends and maybe ONE weekday. But that is another post, and probably, blog.

We ought to teach, besides, reading math writing, sport and the arts (to put it roughly) the PROCESSES and VALUES OF:

Self-sufficiency, Self-defense, and self-discipline, to the point of in-depth excellence and mastery in one primary area. With that I believe will come sufficient self-esteem not to enter into too many co-dependent relationships.

I recommend reading John Taylor Gatto’s short book called Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling, in which he says, plainly, that the seven lessons he, as a teacher (and at the time NY State Teacher of the Year” actually is teaching is not “relevance” and “interrelationship” of subjects, but the exact opposite. Specifically, in order from the chapter: “The Seven Lesson Schoolteacher,” they are:

CONFUSION
CLASS POSITION
INDIFFERENCE
EMOTIONAL DEPENDENCY
INTELLECTUAL DEPENDENCY
PROVISIONAL SELF-ESTEEM
ONE CAN’T HIDE.

The next chapter is called the “psychopathic school” after which he details his efforts of getting a little girl who read beautifully out of a class of bad readers. The girl (reading aloud beautifully) tells him how the administration had explained to her mother that she was, in reality, a “bad reader who had fantasies of being a better reader than she was.” Then, the author relates how the principal tried the same thing on him: how was he, a substitute to know whether or not this child could read.

MY EXPERIENCE: This actually is at the heart of the educational AND the family law system of “experts.” My “sin” was homeschooling the children, and having fantasies (as do many single mothers leaving abuse) that we could make a sound decision on behalf of our sons and daughter, after we’d made just about the soundest one around — LEAVING the situation!

Consider this:

Our form of compulsory schooling was an invention of the State of Massachusetts around 1850. It was resisted — with guns — by about 80% of the Massachusetts population, the last outpost being Barnstable on Cape Cod not surrendering its children until the area was seized by militia and children marched to school under guard. (p. 25,

There is more, but as I review those 7 lessons above, I can’t help thinking about the uncommon similarities between abuse — even it’s definitions — and the family law system, as well as the concept of using another abusive system to handle abuse by one person towards another in the presence of children.

Is ALL conflict bad? No, conflict involving true self-defense, or boundary violations.

Is marriage, or an “intimate partner relationship,” a person as property contract? A relationship as property contract? I believe the law calls it a FIDUCIARY relationship. As such, no one has a right to commit what in other context would be a crime, to protect loss of contact with this former sexual partner, parent of one’s children, children, or the breakdown of a relationship.

WHEN IT GETS TO THE POINT OF PFAs and RESTRAINING ORDERS, the enforcement should be thorough, immediate, clear, and strong. The dialogue above illustrates why, in practice, it ain’t. SO the conflicts go on, and escalate.

I have taught lots of children (and adults) in lots of venues and classrooms, and non-class situations. There are always rules ,and in-progress negotiation about common standards, there is always a dynamic flexibility within the group, there is the matter of consensus and critical mass.

The superb choir that got me going into music was about 40 in number, and we stood in mixed quartets, holding our own parts, produced records, soloists, and in general moved mountains and kicked butt musically. It was powerful stuff. We rehearsed almost daily and worked to pay for some of our own needs (including uniforms, painting the room, and going to conferences). We associated after school (and sometimes before) and in other venues than school; we ate, played, and attended concerts together.

Since then, I have sung in (and sometimes directed) choirs numbering from approximately 12 up to over 100. The ideal size (and one of the best choirs I was in) was about 18, or very maximum 20, if they were professionals and unified. I have had a little choir of only 11 do amazing things, because it was small enough to be responsive.

I have always thought it odd that the top ensembles are generally smaller than a typical public school classroom, and many of them not much larger than a large family, with a cousin or two. It brings out the best when there is a unified goal that is reasonable (but still stretching limits) to the people involved. The best choirs also were VOLUNTARY, not compulsory. They chose challenging music (to keep the participants growing) but always taking into account that the audience might not feel so esoteric in general. They mixed and matched, but they HAD to set a fairly high standard technically and musically – or in portrayal.

How does this relate to the Wife who Fought Back?

The system they were ensared in was too large, and is ruling and prognosticating by “the odds.” MOST people (translation: men) do not violate the PFAs, after all, just over 125 out of 450 did in this particular area. Therefore, the women should keep on coming, because what else could they do? It MIGHT not result in this, after all, NOT ALL men do what Mr. Autenreith did.

And we have this growing crisis of “fatherlessness”? That’s a fatherless family, and it just made a peace officer’s kids fatherless, too. I wonder what kind of father the nine-year old will make, should he become one.

I think the doctrine is becoming a little self-defeating, if not downright dangerous. I mean, this is all about the children, right? It’s all because children in single-parent families are at risk.

Well, yeah, with some vigilantes running around the place . . . . . However, if she’d been armed and determined…

I think we (Responsible Citizens) need to take a serious look at the Seven-Lesson Schoolteacher and ask, is this what we are willing to be taught, as adults, by our elected officials? I mean, the same values ARE shared, it is the “Hidden Currriculum” overall, I’d say. And it’s downright un-American, including “parenting classes.” The government already had a shot at the majority of the children in this country, through the public school system. If it were my kids, and the teachers failed, I’d go find me a new teacher and system.

OH, I FORGOT TO MENTION — I DID. AND MY CHILDREN WERE STOLEN ON AN OVERNIGHT VISITATION (UNSUPERVISED) PRECISELY BECAUSE I DID. AND PUT BACK IN THE SYSTEM, BECAUSE THEIR MAMA HAD ALREADY FIGURED OUT THAT THE 7 LESSONS WERE BOGUS.

This is a system that brooks no competitors. It allows some, but scoops up any stragglers, and family law is a great place to find them, and weaken them for the snatch.

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

July 2, 2009 at 6:10 PM

Experts Examine WHY Breastfeeding is best: We MUST Know!

leave a comment »

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! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

Posts Tagged ‘Education’

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

93.010: Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)	$128,610,003
98.001: USAID Foreign Assistance for Programs Overseas	$11,058,644
93.279: Drug Abuse and Addiction Research Programs	$9,561,182
93.995: Adolescent Family Life_Demonstration Projects	$8,064,374
93.273: Alcohol Research Programs	$6,222,97

FAMILY HEALTH INTERNATIONAL (FHI)	$3,593,286
SCRIPPS RESEARCH INSTITUTE	$2,551,682
PROGRAM FOR APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY IN HEALTH	$2,233,162
HERITAGE COMMUNITY SERVICES INC	$2,000,000
BROWN UNIVERSITY	$1,672,760
POPULATION COUNCIL INC	$1,613,000
PATH	$1,500,000
NEUROBEHAVIORAL RESEARCH INC	$1,466,239
NEW HOPE CENTER INC	$1,399,907
CENTER FOR SELF-SUFFICIENCY, INC.	$1,399,300

2009	Columbus Hospital	NJ	COMMUNITY BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION	2	Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)	DISCRETIONARY	BERNADETTE VISSANI	$- 739,820
2009	METRO ATLANTA YOUTH FOR CHRIST, INC	GA	COMMUNITY-BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION	3	Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)	DISCRETIONARY	CINDY MILLER	$ 300,186
2009	Saint Michael`s Medical Center, Inc	NJ	COMMUNITY BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION	1	Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)	DISCRETIONARY	BERNADETTE VISSANI	$ 677,551
2008	A WOMAN`S PLACE MINISTRIES, INC.	FL	ABSTINENCE EDUCATION	1	Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)	DISCRETIONARY	MICHAEL LAYTON	$ 600,000
2008	A WOMENS CONCERN, INC.	MA	HEALTHY FUTURES ABSTINENCE EDUCATION INITIATIVE	3	Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)	DISCRETIONARY	ELIZABETH SNYDER	$ 600,000
2008	ABSTINENCE & MARRIAGE EDUCATION PARTNERSHIP	IL	COMMUNITY BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION	1	Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)	DISCRETIONARY	SCOTT PHELPS	$ 512,500
2008	ABSTINENCE EDUCATION CONSULTANTS,INC.	KS	COMMUNITY-BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION	1	Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)	DISCRETIONARY	LOIS THEIS	$ 600,000
2008	ABSTINENCE TIL MARRIAGE EDUCATION	OH	COMMUNITY BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION	3	Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)	DISCRETIONARY	CATHERINE E WOOD	$ 600,000
2008	AIDS RESOURCE CENTER OF WISCONSIN, INC	WI	COMMUNITY BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION	1	Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)	DISCRETIONARY	SCOTT STOKES	$ 600,000
2008	ALPHA CENTER	SD	COMMUNITY BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION	1	Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)	DISCRETIONARY	KIMBERLY MARTINEZ	$ 600,000
2008	ALTERNATIVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES	TX	COMMUNITY BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION	1	Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)	DISCRETIONARY	SHARI L CARROLL	$ 454,922
2008	ARIZONA MEXICO BORDER HEALTH FOUNDATION	AZ	COMMUNITY BASED ABSTINENCE EDUCATION	1	Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)	DISCRETIONARY	ALBERT MORENO	$ 550,000
2008	AWARE, INC.	WA	WASHINGTON STATE: COMMUNITY-BASED ABSTINENCE UNTIL MARRIAGE PROJECT	1	Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)	DISCRETIONARY	JAMES N GRENFELL	$ 499,849
2008	About Our Kids, Inc.	MO	STRATEGIES FOR ABSTINENCE AND VIRTUE EDUCATION (SAVE)	2	Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)	DISCRETIONARY	ALICIA HUMES	$ 600,000
2008	Abstinence the Better Choice, Inc.	OH	ABSTINENCE THE BETTER CHOICE	3	Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)	DISCRETIONARY	CHERYL BIDDLE	$ 600,000
2008	Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Inc.	AZ	POWER FITNESS ABSTINENCE PROGRAM- TEACHING YOUTH AGES 12 THROUGH 18 THE SOCIAL, PSYCHOLOGI	3	Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE)	DISCRETIONARY	EVA GODDARD	$ 600,000

FY	Award Number	Budget Year of Support	Agency	Award Code	Action Issue Date	Amount This Action
2008	90FE0037	3	ACF	0	09-14-2008	$550,000.00
Award Subtotal:						$550,000.00

Posts Tagged ‘Education’

(1 of 4)

(2 of 4)

(3 & 4)

Accordingly this post is going after “Abstinence Education” instead.

“Abstinence Education /

George Bush”

Easy: We are to “Take it on Faith.” . . . . . .

SHARE THIS POST on...

A.k.a. Carpet Bagging on Divorce Distress, at high altitudes…

Top 5 Agencies Providing Assistance

SHARE THIS POST on...

“Our Courts, Ourselves: how the Alternative Dispute Resolution Movement is Reshaping Our Legal System.”

SHARE THIS POST on...

Paul White: Gang rape watchers a product of schools’ moral void

SHARE THIS POST on...

SHARE THIS POST on...

Set this Press Release to the “SPIN” Cycle:

Yes, alas, ’tis true. . ..

Notice anything missing from the logo there?

Top 10 Recipients

And show someone else. OK?

Anyhow, here they are: the helpers, last year (2008):

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...

Healthy Marriage Demonstration Grants

These funds are not just dollars, they practically have a life of their own:

They are going to:

BIRTH

NURTURE, and

SUPPORT the development of a . . .

HAPPY BROWSING:

Apart from the CHMC above — I hope there’s a no-competition clause in there somewhere, because it’s not the only one in California — my other favorite for scope of vision (if not clarity) is:

Office of Family Assistance Healthy Marriage Demonstration Grant

REGION 1 – (Simply substitute the number in the “URL” to switch regions) — one grant only,

SHARE THIS POST on...

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

Office of Family Assistance
Healthy Marriage Demonstration Grant