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

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

Posts Tagged ‘government privatization through corporations

Standard Journalism on Each New Family Court Fiasco Wastes Your Time, and Mine [Publ. July 14, 2022].

leave a comment »

You are reading:

Standard Journalism on Each New Family Court Fiasco Wastes Your Time, and Mine [Publ. July 14, 2022]. (short-link here ends “-eRJ”)  

As revised Nov. 13, 2022 to clarify #EndTheAcronym “CAFR” (a term I used 20 times below; it’s been a theme in this blog for a decade) about 12,000 – 13,000 words, in clearly marked sections).  You will detect my sense of irritation and feeling both a bit besieged and betrayed in that opening section, which is narrative and not detailed documentation; but detailed documentation describes What I Do; when I summarize, I’m speaking from that awareness and years of investigations, not free-lance, not on any sponsored fellowship, or for employment.  I’ve done it because it needs doing, and because I’ve yet to see anyone PAID for doing this who’s willing to expose the public/private enterprises or the philanthropic sector as a whole, which my studies have led consistently to over the years, as an issue of its own. I’ve also done it for future generations, and as a mother: even though my children are now fully adult, not even that young; I still care about what they may face down the road.  

I want a record preserved of what I have seen, and what I have also talked a bout year after year, “to the contrary” of typical advocacy, typical journalism and which reflects at the highest levels on policy-making; on what this country is doing to its citizens WITH their resources, and where that’s going.

More to the point (of why I want to call attention to it, again), this post lists titles of seven planned posts around this theme, talking about themes I believe deserve higher priority, and in this list also featuring the nature and major players of the family courts, by name and (as to Denver, Colorado, USA specifically and also naming specific entities or agencies, Commonwealth Countries Canada, the UK, and of course Australia) and “time for a re-cap” of what, exactly, is the AFCC.

If you read nothing else below, read those titles (probably the bottom half of the post) and what’s immediately before the listing, with comments in between.  Know that of that list ONLY this one has been published so far (so no links shown there except to this one will be active as of Nov. 2022)..

Nov. 13, 2022, update sections (plural, next) aren’t a separate post only because I have other posts and obligations (life tasks) higher in priority. These sections are probably a third of the total length.  

It’ will sound and it feels awkward to go back and update posts written months (or, sometimes, years ago) but I am not in a position to do several re-writes.  This fix, an extended “update” typed directly onto an already-published post, is a compromise.  In different conditions, I would have started a new post with better-written updates and just link back to this one.

These updates are more informal, summary and rushed than anything below it, which information and expression I still stand by, enough to be re-posting it (probably with images) on Twitter, even a platform now owned by Elon Musk and with an uncertain future. Sometimes I feel speaking out NOW pre-empts speaking out PERFECTLY  (as to expression, not as to subject matter or basic content which I say is decent and fair).  Of course it contains some of my feelings and sentiment about dealing, long-term, with the same dilemma and with coalitions of people of indeterminate number, influence (but seeking major influence) getting press coverage, but whom I know as beyond unethical in the reporting and approach. They are not “the good guys” in the situation, even when possibly talking about even worse guys.

Rather than talk ABOUT the problem issues, these (FamilyCourtReformists and their favorite journalists and/or cheerleaders from outside the USA when talking about things inside it) pick “substitute” issues and talk them up instead, get published somewhere — several “wheres” in fact, and relentlessly refer to each other each time.

Quantity over quality prevails throughout.

These operate like cults and I say because of that, are corrupt, obstruct justice and because impervious to reason (while publishing and social-media promoting as though exercising it), also dangerous to sound government (while proclaiming it’s what they really want).  If RICO (a single, overall, “Racketeer-Influenced and Corrupt Organization”) were the best and most accurate answer to this question: “what are the family courts and their peripheral operations as an enterprise?” this crowd would be LEAST likely to expose it, and are probably (therefore) IN on it, as it’s obvious they don’t want anyone else exposing it, either.

References to “cottage industry” (easier to dismiss or contemplate, minimizes) yes.  RICO? No.  But I’ve made and posted this comparison (Search RICO on the blog, top right sidebar).  The key concept behind “RICO” is “CRIMINAL” — organized crime.  That’s why when the problems keep showing up, it’s that organization that should be reported (how it’s’ structured — not individual laws or policies).  What do we do when government begins to resemble and act like “organized crime?”  Which is scarier — an individual abuser in a community, or that situation, which affects all of the communities, plural?

I don’t know exactly how, when, or by whom, these individuals and their respective entities (or, non-entities) were compromised, but that they have been (if they even started from a legitimate perspective or motive) is evident.  That this also involves Harvard, University of Chicago, at times Yale, Princeton, etc. graduates, law professors (east coast, west coast) and marriage/family therapists (like Mo Hannah, PhD,**) is no less disturbing, in fact more so.  With backing, often, by major tax-exempt foundations, or universities which have the same, in abundance not to mention institutional funds: large ones..

(** who co-founded the Battered Mothers Custody Conference, operating without incorporating, and  featuring, most years, a California nonprofit which has been since FTB/SOS suspended there, barely casts a fiscal shadow but shows up promoted on the “Safe Parents” website, welcomed as among the initial “members” while I’ve been blocked by both it and some of the (original) members, on Twitter).


Meanwhile, the IRS database (http://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/) even ProPublica.org admits isn’t current.  Beyond it not being current, its search results showing “location” aren’t always showing legal domicile; and entity addresses can change without legal domicile changing.  When there are many similar but not identical filings named after specific causes, how search by geography?

I’d love to take on THAT project; it is on my back burner to find out why.  A problem arises when the IRS isn’t posting the latest delivered tax returns; an entity may change its name before they do so.  Other data comes from those IRS returns.  I’ve read that, and some entities clearly understand (because their returns say so in a Schedule O (Supplementary info to a Form 990) they aren’t subject to questioning for tax returns older than three years.  If the postings are already two years behind, how is that supposed to help with open and transparent government?

<>Preview and Sound-Off, WHY I’m feeling a need to reference this post again:

(Nov. 13, 2022.  Yes, I voted!).

Although I never got to publish any of those seven posts, my describing them here with lengthy titles and some previews did announce aloud that this theme, in my voice, my words and with my (known) perspective was coming.

However small my followers are here or on Twitter (note:  there can be more readers who don’t “follow”), once published here, July, 2022, that word was out.  Between now and then I was again put homeless and am struggling not just for housing but also to not completely stop commenting and writing. I never stopped reading or researching these topics for long, no matter what else is on my personal plate, but life issues can and do impact quantity of output, especially with what (format, copy editing, clarity) quality standards I don’t feel I can compromise, knowing it’s already not Chicago or APA style, or even fully copy edited/proof read most times.  Other causes of delay may involved input devices (technology obstacles).  I have been negotiating hotel living a few (typically three to five) days at a time for over five months now, and keeping as close track on finances as possible.  Each hotel reservation, most of them, grab excess funds up front and then release them on check-out; up to 25 or 30%. Although (more expensive) hotels exists with full kitchens, I didn’t feel I could afford these and so have been without a kitchen sink, stovetop, or even a half-sized refrigerator since last June. In exchange for not having these, I mostly stayed at one place which I felt was physically secure, know was clean, and where my car (I do have a car) could be seen from the hotel room. It was not halfway across some large parking lot.

There has been another round of litigation in my name, out of state, which I had to let slide and did not participate in, although it affects my future deeply.

If you are noticing since July, 2022, some “news” on specific court professionals or programs from Colorado and specifically, Denver, (like “bad custody evaluators” being outed, or reunification camps) on-line SINCE I posted here, know that while most protective mothers groups involved in the DVCoalitions and being (used by, and volunteering for it apparently) the FamilyCourtReformists power players, have long been aware of this blog and of exactly where I stand on covering up financials needlessly, failing to talk about the networked nonprofits direct the public to investigate public-access information that they have every right to and ought to know exists and which information can and should be studied and talked about (such as the Family Values, Marriage/Fatherhood and Faith-based Initiatives movement; what these are and how they works, the role welfare reform played in sponsoring this at public expense, AND that CAFRs (excuse me “ACFRs” now) show that governments aren’t as broke as they talk at any level.

 


The so-called “protective mothers” nonprofits and group email/on-line forums at a minimum from California and those involved long-term in the Battered Mothers Custody Conference (2003f) and those they worked alongside for now about two decades (including but not limited to those featured now in the website NationalSafeParents.org and at least (as to leadership) Joan Meier of the so-called “National Family Violence Law Center,” previously of “DVLEAP.org” (see my recent post)) are reasonably aware (not naive about) what I blog.

Based on my early email communications, on-line commentary, some phone calls with the same, at least their founders and main spokesman, and my friendships with people loyally devoted to and hoping in this movement (formerly battered mothers, at least one then homeless, in-state and out of state) are (beyond those I specifically communicated with) aware of me as a person, and if not, of this blog.  I have communications dating back to 2009, but my domestic violence-family court case just preceded these times earlier in California.  Beyond these groups, I also know by acquaintance from having, first, sought help from (remember those lists of 800 referral numbers and websites handed out, women?) and later researched the filings of “resources” for women in this situation.  It has always seemed strange to me how groups in California would ignore parents in California while crossing state lines (whether in person or on-line) to recruit and solicit stories of broken parents and children about broken family courts, from across the nation, and work with equally SMALL (if the tax returns are to be believed) groups whose legal domicile often didn’t match their entity addresses, who weren’t even large enough to be required to file full-sized Forms 990 and who (of course) habitually (like “AFCC”) opted to NOT post those financials on their own websites.

WHAT made it necessary to favor nonprofits groups who don’t, don’t have to [i.e., university-sponsored “centers” or “institutes” whose funds and backers would be hard to track in detail) or barely file (even if something is shown on their websites), while the press often, uncritically, continues to cite their affiliations by name, as if a source of credibility? That’s what the Protective Mothers (and “Safe Parents” “Family Court Reformists” overall) have featured throughout to either seem financially and numbers-wise larger (and more grassroots) than they are — or at times to seem smaller and more representative of the “underdogs” in these situations?

(For more general take, see my June, 2014 post, “parades, charades and facades”)…


A decade or so ago I also worked for a few years in informal conjunction with Liz Richards (NAFCJ.net) of Annandale, Virginia, who also knew these individuals and was reporting on what, basically, they wouldn’t.  Basically, I developed this blog realizing she had chosen not to focus on developing her website further.  We split paths many years ago but before then, reviewing some of these earlier emails the other day (while looking for one I’d mistakenly archived), I was again reminded that she’d reportedly (based on how I was handled, I have no reason go disbelieve) frozen out long ago of mainstream DV and protective parents circles.  She was that early inquiring about what Joan Meier reasonably did or didn’t know, and (like me) corruption among DV advocates.  We later split, in part, after I found my email being shared without privacy among a very large group email which was a safety issue at the time.  I later heard that she called me names and cited another reason for my breaking off communications.  (Another one, although I understand the mannerisms and value someone with her “cut to the chase” aggressive phone manner, I got tired of being handled in this way.

Such groups if they even glances at my blog, realize I’m saying the financial trail and networked nonprofits should be handled before their favorite series of themes:  unsound psychological theories and flawed practices in broken family courts with “lack of oversight” and “inadequate training” and not enough federal — to be echoed at the state level (USA) legislation to demand more trainings (Kayden’s Law, Jennifer’s law in Connecticut) which — ultimately — this crowd OR their friends and backers who developed the “it’s NOT about the money, it’s about unsound psychological theory, especially Parental Alienation and Coercive Control and clever abusers outsmarting judges, or innocent judges fooled by mean custody evaluators (and so forth), will be involved in:  after all, it was their idea to report on it, right?

The “murdered children” theme featuring Center for Judicial Excellence (<~~Link to its latest IRS Form 990EZ, that’s FY2019, EIN#204892221, total receipts only $157K, no paid directors, yet its purpose is to, according to Part III:

To improve the judiciary’s public accountability and strengthen and maintain the integrity of the courts)

… wasn’t there from the start, but seems to have come seeking more dramatic impact and after several mothers noted that prior agenda was talking as though women (NOT just children) were in fact, being “murdered.”  I call this sometimes “roadkill” of the family court system, and am lucky (or, “by the grace of God”) none of my immediate family was killed by my ex, batterer, husband, and father of our children, either during or after I filed for and got a (CIVIL) “restraining order with kickout” as these are called in California.  I had been living in a war zone; a real waking nightmare, for the duration of the marriage. NO witnesses referred me to any legal help; I had to find it and go figure it out then this “help” neglected to mention welfare reform (or, naturally, AFCC) and what was predictably coming up next:  custody challenge, and custody switch, if we all were still alive after a few years.

When it comes to press releases and helping journalists continue to build their resumes, then talking about murdered children is OK.  When mothers who’ve known this for YEARS (I am NOT the only one; I may be one of the more vocal ones, but certainly not the only one) kept pointing out that we are dropping like flies —and it’s NOT only 58,000 children a year (a theme which has been resurrected again, I see) and probably never was — being switched to the custody of known abusers or getting “unsupervised visitation” with them —  that doesn’t merit our attention:  What political clout do we have that FamilyCourtReformists want?  They need fresh blood, new victims, aged-out children and parents (mother or fathers) who don’t look too closely at the financial incentives, and show others where to look such things up.

And, from time to time, one must switch away from the theme of incest (another prime issue — I doubt there’s relief for the victims) if it begins to lose its shock effect.


On Twitter and certain FamilyCourtReformists backing specific (sponsored by tax-exempt foundation through non-profit media, or other media) I have noticed more articles surfacing recently featuring Colorado. There is a sense of my posts saying “what’s up with Denver?” (And calling attention to what’s been there for years, specifically named) having been seen, but not acknowledged, as it’s preferable (for the FamilyCourtReformists) as to be seen as “leaders” and the first on any topic, and with that, of course, the most concerned about the human beings impacted by the disastrous erosion of justice in the family court system USA.

(From the post below, it shows there also):

Media awareness should also incorporate for-profit vs. tax-exempt awareness. Always look for the entity names and figure out which type it is or was. Media is often owned (and sponsored) by the powerful and well-connected. Access to or control of platforms as well as brands and entities are bought and sold, or rented (licensed). They may also be privately controlled, i.e. not public-traded.  They are rarely neutral.

That goes for universities too, though most are tax-exempt (private) or tax-exempt (because public); which is which also matters.

 

(The above quote, above the title, is my voice. Although this post isn’t published yet, I quoted enough from it for anyone who’s aware of what I was GOING to be talking about, such as the AFCC connection to IAALS.DU.edu, and the “Healthy Marriages/ResponsibleFatherhood dynamic duo (or, trio if you include Galena Rhoades) at the same DU’s “Center for Marital and Family Studies” (Scott Stanley, Howard J. Marksman, et al.) — not to mention the presence for FOUR decades now of the nonprofit “Center for Policy Research” run, in part, by Jessica Pearson, Ph.D. (Also now active in FRPN.org, which I keep bringing up, as attempting to establish state-wide Fatherhood Commissions nationwide, and while the website references Temple University in Pennsylvania, the HHS grants in this project (and, FRPN is a project, not an entity) goes to the University, not CPR, which in turn subcontracts with that university.

“Family Court Fiasco” reporting could come from any state.  Such cases exist in many states: pick one, you’ll find several.  That Denver and Colorado seem to be current and VERY recent focuses seems a bit extra “coincidental.”  Whether or not it is, DV advocates and family court people, as well as family lawyers and of course judges should be and no doubt are well aware what entities in Colorado play significant roles in addressing domestic violence and child abuse in courts nationwide.

(Still Nov. 2022 update; I expect I’ll have embarrassed myself enough here to have to move it to its own place soon, anyway.  But I still need to find housing, so …. Can’t predict when this may happen.

Written in installments and sections.  Read straight through or skip to any section (page down, I have no internal links to do so).  I may [re]move (or FOOTNOTE) one large section on a school district  (in Uvalde, Texas) added for purposes of comparison, not for coverage, a situation which certainly deserves coverage and where looking at the school district, city and county financial statements would add depth and context to the headlines, but that section is here for illustration and for basic vocabulary concepts: Entities vs. Projects run by Entities, which also applies to the family courts. BOTH, as the headlines show, can be venues for massacres: family courts just do it more gradually.  However, family courts are not “entities” and it’s the entities which most directly relate to the public, through taxation and how they handle and account for themselves.//LGH]

<>UPDATE Nov. 13, 2022  because this post references CAFRs.  

Since then the acronym has changed, but the reporting requirements continue.  Pertains to government entity financial reports — audited and showing the cumulative operations, not just a yearly budget).

I have since learned that the government (vs. private entity (see my revised motto: Identify the entities, find the funding, talk sense)  comprehensive audited financial report, acronym “CAFR” is now supposed to be called “ACFR” for political sensitivity reasons relating to how it sounds when spoken aloud.  I used “CAFR” 20 times in this post alone.  I posted this on discovering it (see nearby image/s).  

Whatever you call them, at least recognize they exist and start looking up reading (at least the tables of contents and introductory pages ,and at a minimum “Note 1” to the financial statements.

To locate ”ACFRs (fka “CAFRs”), I suggest use the updated search terms the governments reporting have been asked to — and these are supposed to come out every year for EVERY government…entity)… so you find them.  Either that, or search under “Comptrollers” offices or just Google it on-line with entity name and latest year you expect one to have been filed.  It’s my understanding these are produced nationwide USA, also Canada, but probably in other developed countries too. Also be aware, school districts tend to put forward almost everything BUT their own ACFRs.  Was true at Margery Stoneman in Florida after another mass shooting as it was of the one in Uvalde.  These are rich sources of information about local (and up through the federal level of governments … plural..) operations.  They are not the only necessary place to look, but they really are essential to cut through and recognize (in contrast with what these report — and EVERY legislator likely knows (EVERY legislator and heads of major news agencies, I’m told, get these EVERY year.  If they didn’t, they’d know to look for them.  

Example:  “Connecticut Audited Comprehensive Financial Report, 2021” and you might get a link to that, or the previous year’s.  //End Update Nov. 13, 2022.


Most media covering family court fiascoes doesn’t give much relevant context of the family courts or of the media platforms.  Concerned people will have to get it, to educate themselves. To do this is to  become aware of the practice of censorship and dissemination of confusion in a coordinated attempt to manipulate public opinion and policy. Certain options have historically been kept off the table, without any reasonable explanations why, and without discrediting those options.

By options, I mean the option in selecting what to report from among all possible and plausible explanations of why these courts function as they do.

It seems that where we can’t be persuaded or manipulated to campaign for that which isn’t in our best interests, we may be left in an ignorant or confused enough state to just not oppose those who’ve already decided what’s in our best interests, i.e., we might just be conditioned to remain passive and consenting through silence, to just “let it go with the flow” for the FamilyCourtReformists et al.

The family court arena is critical to the nation’s future; those seeking to profit from it long-term know this well and from everything I’ve seen over the years wish to restrict its control to a few, inter-related private parties catering to those already in power. Overall, this is literally an coordinated attempt to undermine due process and basic separation and balance of powers within the United States. An appeal to what other countries are doing as a better model, mostly because more behavioral health services are involved, ordered, and/or mandated, is incorporated, whether in the administration of the family courts, or as regards domestic violence and child abuse issues.

As I write, the continued coverage (not on Fox News, however!!) of an alleged attempted coup/riot at the White House, our nation’s capital, January 6, 2021, is constantly in the news and being processed, with much indignation. As serious as that is, what about the family courts?

The family court arena deserves a serious, sustained and close look and exposure from other than — from outside —  standardized journalism, and from outside the coordinated collaboration of experts and stakeholders often quoted in such journalism, who have identifiable interests in keeping confusion and obfuscation going: it’s called, their career curves, reputations, and typically salaries.

This is my second run at a preview of my post series written between May 30 and mid-July, 2022.  The first run at that preview (written about halfway through it) I’ve now placed seventh, so it’s a “Re/View” although in fact it brings up some more general topics.  (See bottom of this post).  It’s called:

These seven draft posts have substantial content and are almost publication-ready, so I decided to list them here and describe what to expect, especially for the first three.  Their seven titles and links are marked clearly at the bottom in the format you see above (except titles there are bold).  That section is also clearly marked as:

THE (so far) SEVEN POSTS IN THIS SERIES (Named, Numbered, and Described)*

*Not having a separate staff or editors, or even “interns,”  I usually re-read the published post the day after, and make alterations (copy-editing or otherwise clarifying). This version is July 15, 2022, “the day after.” Any serious writer (I’m serious about this blog and this subject matter) knows that composing and editing are different processes, usually best done NOT by the author.  I don’t have that luxury here, so focus on the writing (although revising and self-critique is always part of it, and often delays publication) until I publish; once that burden is lifted, I then (try to, most times) go back and polish it some more.  Even mainstream news articles get updates; some of them even have typos, so some updates here for clarity (and I mis-spelled one proper noun a few times) should be no big deal.

Their titles still show dates begun, not dates published: No link to any post now in draft becomes both active and accurate until I publish it, and these are all still in draft. My protocol in starting any post these days is to include a “Drafted” or “Begun” date because it takes me weeks, or sometimes months, to get them posted. Yesterday (July 14) I forgot to update the title, but corrected it today.

(NB: I am not funded or salaried for these; writing still has to be worked around other life events and logistics, which have recently become more complicated, and there are ongoing technical and platform issues I’m still working on).

About half this post discusses the family court fiasco journalism contrasting it with an alternative rarely seen (I haven’t seen it yet…): exposing the underlying backbone and skeleton of the family courts and domestic violence (and responsible fatherhood) fields. This series takes that discussion forward, documenting existing, older networks I’d previously called out, and connecting interests I’d felt existed but hadn’t yet verified.  I look forward to finishing the series especially on the entities centered in the Denver, Colorado area (see series list, below), although Posts (4) and (5) below will be excellent resources — and they are significant “call-outs” to the public and affected parents to wake up! about what is taking place under their noses.

Also, since I use the term “INFRASTRUCTURE” to indicate what’s absent from standard journalism on these topics — the INFRASTRUCTURE of the family courts —  I wrote a section on it into this preview, with some images, links to others definitions, and examples of its common usage. My use is a little more generic, but the basic meaning of the underlying, sustaining structure of the operation(s) applies.  The “INFRA” in “Infrastructure” refers to that which is underneath, upholds, and sustains.

If the family courts are indeed producing fiascoes and disasters, it’s time to look at the foundations, the infrastructure on which they are built — and not just continually look at what bubbles up to the surface, or look only at programs run THROUGH them.  it’s the difference between the plumbing, sewer and irrigation systems and what flows through them.  Sure, they interact, but there is always some engineer or designer and (as I say so often here) “blueprints” involved.

Can you imagine a structural engineer who doesn’t understand the physical properties of a building, or the importance of understanding geology, bedrock etc.?  (Perhaps take a look at San Francisco’s sinking Millennium Towers if this seems irrelevant,  searchable on this blog).  Well, I need a term which can refer to the subterranean issues of the family courts and their foundations:  that is the level we should be discussing openly and in public; so should those reporting on them, or training lawyers in family law, domestic violence, etc.

INFRASTRUCTURE is a repeat topic for this blog, and a key concept for understanding how systems work.  While it’s usually and typically referring specifically to physical attributes of some systems (like highways, roads, bridges, courthouses, school facilities, tunnels, etc.) I’m using it figuratively to refer to the economic systems and conduits by which both information and resources (funding) circulates between the employed public and government, and between governments and private companies involved in these specific, developed fields.

INFRASTRUCTURE Section Preview.

In this section, I quote Cambridge English Dictionary, Investopedia (of course), refer to Bentley Systems 500, and either show, quote, or link to earlier posts I’ve written (for example, in 2019, on an Australia-originated model for a new asset class; it’s called “The Macquarie Model” and understanding that this is occurring may (should) help more of us comprehend that as physical critical infrastructure is being sold off for leasing and investor returns (complex enterprise arrangements), so too the family courts are primed for referral to outside contractors, who may be in fact more “insiders” than is obvious.

Add to this the categories of tax-exempt and not-tax-exempt as sectors, we have a complex, but still understandable, system in place to keep both customers, mandated services (referrals) and proliferation of practices supported by tax-exempt organizations + (see “university centers” also) to keep systems going, and these systems are also in a process of change (i.e., “systems-change mechanisms” are built in).

For illustration of one principle, distinguishing operations and programs or projects of entities as opposed to the Entities themselves — this applies to the family courts — I began with the example of “School Districts” (the entities) versus Schools (which are their operations and projecst) and — it’s headline news now — Uvalde School District in Texas. However I’m just doing this for illustration of the concept and to show that neither coverage nor the school district’s own website, is exactly forthcoming on its financials (but, I did find them).

Think about it (Robb Elementary School, May, 2022). There was a school massacre of children in  Texas.  Is this a “gun control’ or “mental health” or “communications” problem?

The family courts also seem to get children murdered, just not so dramatically all in one place at one time.  Both in hindsight could’ve been if not avoided totally, handled better, with fewer deaths.  There are indeed parallels between the systems. Sometimes looking at a similar (but not identical) situation helps comprehend, for comparison, the one at hand — which here is those family courts.

My focus is on how essential it is to use sensible and functional vocabulary among ourselves (and I do NOT include “FamilyCourtReformists” in this group, but especially women and mothers who’ve experienced seen the results of this system). We ought to by now understand and accept that we’re NOT likely to find this in: standard journalism; even on many public OR private entity websites, although that (accounting, entity-speak, economics, and finances) is the language spoken among these entities, in public/private partnerships, by investors, and for those who either do, or seek to, dominate any field and control enough assets  (revenue-producing wealth, often warehoused cleverly to avoid taxation across enterprises) to drive, manage, and plan the futures of society as it pleases them and their colleagues.

The masses are not necessarily to be educated on how that works; it makes (us) less manageable. Confusion, distraction, entertainment, shock-treatment (repeated, applied and avoidable social traumas, such as school shootings), without connections that the public can independently verify, are routine.

Is there hope? Is time left in which to make a difference?

I don’t know, but I do know there is still wide opportunity (for those with Internet access and who can or will make the time) to self-educate on these matters, and to become aware of and alert to patterns of communication which, again, strategically omit references to the system infrastructure of any problem being addressed, although details, anecdotes (a key feature for the journalism and story line “hook”), and sampling (cherry-picking, in fact) expert commentary on the same.



Talking about problem outcomes as though no infrastructure for the venues (Merriam-Webster: place where the thing takes place, whether a music concert, an art exhibition, or a trial) in which they occur even exists encourages readers to grasp at straws, to speculate, form ungrounded and unsound theories — or become more gullible to believe others theories stated or, more often, insinuated and implied, in such reporting.

(Etymonline.com):

venue (n.)

c. 1300, “a coming for the purpose of attack,” from Old French venue “coming” (12c.), from fem. past participle of venir “to come,” from Latin venire “to come,” from PIE root *gwa- “to go, come.” The sense of “place where a case in law is tried” is first recorded 1530s. Extended to locality in general, especially “site of a concert or sporting event” (1857). Change of venue is from Blackstone (1768).

Family courts are government operations with venues (rooms in courthouses,  or their own buildings).  They are not corporate or government entities, but part of some other government entity; they have no “personhood.”  They are budgetary items on a number of financial statements.  As government operations, they also have legal domiciles for that government (apart from its financing) and that too is going to vary by country.  It seems to me that Commonwealth countries such as the United Kingdom (as least in England and Wales) and Canada differentiate between public and private law, with family courts being considered “private” but child protection and criminal issues, public.

This also impacts who gets some defense counsel when accused, and who doesn’t.

The term seems to have as many uses as the word “church” but one thing family courts are NOT are their own entities.  Therefore, they will show up accounted for (to the extent they’re legitimately run, and their supporting entities are behaving properly to report their accounts) on some other entity’s financials — as well as planning documents, etc.

There should be a paper trail, and the finances should be documented and visible to the public.  Yet that seems THE main thing the public is discouraged from getting to, getting at, and thinking about.



This series was prompted by such an article I discovered with a built-in IMPLIED explanation for why women reporting domestic violence so often lose custody of their children.  Who does “implying” help?  (Post 1 in the series addresses this).

I have been saying (for years) start with what you know or can know that’s NOT majority hearsay and the rest speculation; work from the (definable) lowest common denominator known as to government structure, look at how it portrays its own operations, and get some working definitions of how resources flow from taxes through government entities, and in doing this you’ll have to also consider the private ones. You’ll need to comprehend the concept of “entity” to start with, and “non-entity”  and other terms with associated concepts, most of which will never make it into a news article about a family court fiasco (“fiasco” at least from the mother’s point of view after reporting abuse of herself or her children). I sometimes publicize phrases that call attention to such terms and concepts:

  • A PROJECT IS NOT A PERSON (corporate or government entity).
  • A BUDGET =/= A BALANCE SHEET

For Example:  public schools are projects, operations, of school districts, which are category a special government entities.  As such, they must cough up some financials and we ought to read them!  

Read the rest of this entry »

Re: CFCC and other Public Institution/Private Profit Partnering…The Public has already been Weighed in the Balance and Found (Dumbed-Down)

leave a comment »

I have several posts in the pipeline after a year-plus pause in publishing on this blog. They are lined up and will start coming fast and furious, shortly… Meanwhile, in the process of streamlining the pipeline and revisiting some of the more recent ones, I still find valuable information buried halfway down a 10,000-word post that I’d like positioned closer to the top.

I do keep my “ear to the ground” (actually to the on-line airwaves, and some telephonic) in ongoing developments within the family courts and beyond, and have a sense of what mainstream media is UNlikely to ever report, and too few private bloggers (it would seem) are reporting, in part because it takes more sustained attention to understand. In the light of current events, I decided to still take material from a two-year-old post to speak and teach about what I’m seeing in ever-accelerating, and unobstructed (because it seems largely unnoticed!) action.

[First post was not most recent version.  This one, similar, has a few more paragraphs in the Intro, bring it to just over  4,000 words. Feb. 22, 2pm PST/LGH]

So, this post is just over 4,000 words and lifted (verbatim, below this introduction, I’ll indicate the dividing line between intro and re-post) from about half of my 2/25/2014 post “The Stacked Deck, the Coups d’Etat, and the Fork in the Road,” which combined exhortation with some complex passages and quotes on consolidation of political clout, into business roundtables, about the history of CalPERS (as a major investment platform, as most institutional investment pools are), and more.

Not everyone wants to talk about all that! But we all can and should be able to talk about how public institutions — such as the California Judicial Council, with its Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), its websites, and its linked referrals from that website — are becoming turnstiles to the private-industry (often, nonprofit) outsourcing of government functions, and how this process only encourages the development and expansion of the PRIVATE sector setting up shop in PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS, by coordinated agreement that the public, half or more of the time, had little awareness of, and next to no participation in, into force-fed (court-ordered and court-website-advertised) consumption of services.

It is hard not to consent to things about which one is not fully conscious. That’s no secret to those who, starting (I’m learning and becoming increasingly convinced deducing from other evidence) at a minimum 100 years ago, at least by 1913, met privately in specific places and institutions, to plan in advance. Look at the major turning points and changes within US history, and on what did events and by what authorities, Presidential or Congressional, did they seem to hinge? I will be blogging on this in 2016 also…

So long as the public doesn’t figure out the basic power schematics (i.e., blueprints), we will continue being stripped down, outsourced, and at points determined no longer-exploitable, etc.

SPEAKING OF “BLUEPRINTS”: One clue, I should say, is the habit of using the term “Blueprint” or “Models” in talking about externally-planned system changes to government operations. Whatever happened to the concept of grassroots anything? What, exactly, is the relationship of those funding the debt to having any say in what blueprints are applied to their lives, remotely assembled and coordinated?

That’s INCREMENTAL, DELIBERATE, PRIVATIZATION/STANDARDIZATION of government (across jurisdictional lines):

This thinking (devising blueprints, models to apply nationally, etc.) obviously resembles more the corporate world than what we might like to think still exists of individuals having a voice in the institutions affecting their lives, as expressed primarily through state-legistlatures, i.e., the states where those same individuals pay, “through the nose,” DMV fees to drive, State (and other) taxes, Fees to get married, get divorced, file anything in court (unless waived), and in which they have to declare residency, and depending on which state, varying prices for gas, real estate, or potentially even (see “Flint, Michigan” recently) safe drinking water, let alone schools.

In fact, one of my draft posts “in the pipeline” (from early January, 2016), in stunned awareness, I had to introduce almost as a joke: “A Judge, a Lawyer and a Psychotherapist walk into a bar…”.. (for that particular blueprint, those professions were actually involved — but on closer scrutiny, the judge [as I recall] acknowledged the inspiration from a judicial membership association ((and HHS grantee, and key player in (Years 2000-2008) “The Greenbook Initiative”)) based at University of Nevada-Reno. This, so far, is the title:

Miami Child Well-Being Court(tm) Model, with its roots in “NCJFCJ” (also tm), part of the HHS-dedicated DV Cartel”

(My use of the word “DV cartel” is deliberate, based on extensive lookups of nonprofit organizations and how they are networked together, and the behavior of these nonprofits over time.  The word “cartel” has a commonly understood and negative meaning and a dictionary definition, and I am using it in this sense.

People who do not read tax returns, or read ENOUGH on who is conferencing with whom about which policies (over time) may not have a basis for using this term “cartel,” but I certainly do. I am a “DV” (domestic violence) survivor and am NOT using this term in the sense that, for example, some fathers’ (or mens’) rights groups might use it simply to discredit the existence of violence towards women, or the dangers of unchecked domestic violence to society at large.  OK? And the NCJFCJ is indeed involved in said DV cartel as a policymaker, and proud of it, too.

[Link describing the “MCWB Court()” Model, found at “cap.law.harvard.edu” uploaded there looks like on 7-22-2015, but referring to a 2011 publication]<=check out the description, and fine print on who-all was involved. Hint: “RTI” is one BIG entity)(cf. “Research Triangle International” in NC). Details included:

  • Work with the Children’s Bureau T & TA Network to carve out a national learning collaborative to support effective diffusion of the Miami model and related best practices in court, child welfare, and child mental health. The collaborative will foster shared knowledge and strategies related to funding challenges, organizational barriers and solutions, and discipline‐specific leadership.

Carve out ? Effective diffusion? Sounds like a chemical experiment….The proud leadership has already determined it should be nationally diffused, overcoming funding and organizational barriers. “Parent protests” isn’t apparently on the list because the average parent may not know, in advance, what’s coming, in such situations.



MEANWHILE, the PUBLIC has already PRE-FUNDED the PRIVATE MODELS. HOW?


The same USA public, some of which is being forced into consumption of all kinds of services (ESPECIALLY in anything related to families, children, and mental health/relationships/Behavioral modification programming), already through, for example, the long-standing Social Security Act(administered through the US HHS) and other Acts of Congress (such as the VAWA act administered through the USDOJ/OVW) has already pre-funded the establishment, “capacity-building” and maintenance of these services — encouraging a superstructure of professions, and then profession associations to keep it organized nationwide (actually, more often internationally).   The pre-funding comes simply because the public is, by and large, tagged for producing the tax revenues to keep the juices flowing through the federal agencies.

Now, consider that while these are all evolving over time, that HHS only came into being in 1980, the HHS/ACF (Administration on Children and Families) only in 1991, the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) only in 1994, and a RADICAL restructuring of the 1934 Social Security Act in 1996, labeled (that version), “PRWORA”.  All that timing, coincidence?  You think?


Now consider who is going to be taking advantage of this “macro market awareness”, and who is going to be taken advantage OF, in any equation where the one, smaller (fewer members) “sector” IS aware of the pre-funding grants streams, and the other (the public at large, generally speaking) IS NOT.  Where one realizes that the public is going to be in more significant distress through their position on the tax spectrum, and the tax-exempt organizations (which typify who business is directed to) can expand operations and public relations simply because they are operating on a different basis when it comes to funding government itself, across the system (all levels)?


Hmm….

The older (February 25, 2014) post, further down, simply says what I want to be talking about:

The Stacked Deck = the Racket/eering= about the FEDERAL BUDGET = about TAXES.  

Because taxes produce revenues. They are taken from some, exempted from others, enabling them to consolidate power and preserve family (private) wealth with which to influence government, and they are simply evaded by yet others —  often characterized on websites as a nonprofit or charitable organization …

and, in referencing California Judicial Council’s “CFCC” site below (main reason I copied this post to a new one), it also summarized a subset of this situation:

So, when I say, again:

For yet others, their assets (or, if they had none, children) are being stripped out simply through the family courts, conciliation courts and/or “Unified Family Courts,” with presiding judges strapped into the “AFCC*/CRC**/NACC/*** “CFCC” etc. system.

Each of those is an element in a system designed to steer and access federal money (grants, or contracts) into programs.  People involved have overlapping (vertical and horizontal) relationships among the whole.  In the above link:  Access/Visitation:  FEDERAL FUNDING (GRANTS CFDA 93.597) Social Security Law, etc.

And, just a reference (but I left most of it in the original post) to the VAST scale of wealth represented by institutional investment platforms.  I live in California and took CalPERS for an example, but quoting Walter Burien on this, as he summarizes the situation in plain terms, which I have yet to see anyone rebut based on the facts.  I have seen (and posted on) attempts to rebut based on “ad-hominem” (personality) attacks, which is perhaps an indication of a weak argument, if indeed there is an argument against the facts he presents which can be rebutted (sp?) by showing they are either (1) false or (2) irrelevant or (3) both.

(My Dec. 2012 EconomicBrain [“Cold,Hard.Fact$”] post combines several articles — I think pretty well — but see “Are You Ready for Real Change,” Jan./2012 therein, and towards the bottom):

Government has built their internal empires by and through selective presentation and utilizing taxpayer revenue systematically separated from the general purpose operating budgets to build power-bases of standing wealth outside of the “general purpose” operating funds. /// A large local government can be crying “Budget Shortfall’ under their selectively presented general purpose operating budget but upon review of the financial wealth power based funds held and “other” income, the same local government upon total and comprehensive review can be clearly in the black by millions if not billions of dollars.


There is nothing complicated here. If an individual or a government has established significant fund balances developed over decades, those funds balances are power-bases by investment that makes or breaks many individual fortunes by where those funds are invested.


If an individual or a local government thinks they can tag someone else to pay for shortfalls in other areas without tapping into their power-bases of funds under domestic and international investment management they will do so.

Read the rest of this entry »

%d bloggers like this: