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

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?' (See March 23 & 5, 2014). More Than 745 posts and 45 pages of Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Posts Tagged ‘Grazzini-Rucki

Early Morning Intuitive on the Larger Picture (#3 of 3 on a “Red Herring Alert” Post and HHS/OFA’s “Healthy Marriage Responsible Fatherhood” (“HMRF”) Ongoing Distributions)

with one comment

Early Morning Intuitive on the Larger Picture

I JUST FOUND RECENTLY:  Meyer Elkin Feb. 27, 1992 Oral interview by David Kuroda, found on Video, posted on May 6, 2013.  The 1992 transcript is on my right sidebar (has been for some years) and a link also within the summary below.

Meyer Elkin (d. 1994?) has more to do with the origins of family court than most people outside the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts may realize.  This would be a good listen (and/or read) showing the original inspirations, which continue today…  It’s good to hear folklore, which this is,  (self-reporting on one’s own work, as interviewed by someone engaged in similar business and as a “founder” of such a movement) in the folklorists’ own words..  As summarized on YouTube — bookmark this in your memory please, and take some time to consider what you find in that interview, how it may relate to what we are experiencing today in the same courts:

Published on May 6, 2013

Interviewed by David Kuroda on February 27, 1992

An interview with Meyer Elkin as he discusses the beginning of his career in social work; education in social work at Berkeley; early positions during social work career; work with the Jewish Committee for Personal Service; the Conciliation Court in Los Angeles.

Meyer Elkin, a social worker with an MSW from the University of California, Berkeley, School of Social Welfare, created the Conciliation Court in Los Angeles as a vehicle for the Court to provide mediation and counseling to families considering divorce. It became the prototype for other conciliation court programs elsewhere in the United States.

To view a transcript of the interview, visit https://libraries.usc.edu/california-…

The California Social Welfare Archives (CSWA), established in 1979, is a non-profit organization operating under the auspices of the USC School of Social Work and affiliated with the University Libraries. It collects and preserves documents and personal histories of significant contributors to the evolution of social welfare ensuring their availability to future generations — students, teachers, historians, and researchers. Collection activity includes gathering and archiving social welfare materials of historical significance, conducting oral history interviews with contributors to social welfare solutions in California, and creating events to publicly recognize significant contributors to California social welfare.

For a written transcript of the interview, please email cswa@usc.edu.

The Association of Family and Conciliation Courts jointly publishes Family Court Review with Hofstra University (Maurice A. Deane? School of Law).  A look at its editorial board would be a lesson in itself in who’s been running these operations, or trying to anyhow.


For the context, see blog title.  I wrote out, non-stop and almost intuitively, what I believed was relevant to the viewing audience of a 4/26/2016 post which had actually raised information on the HMRF funding — below detailed, case-specific information about no less than FIVE criminal prosecutions arising out of ONE high-profile (at least in the Dakota County, Minnesota) case with which many family court litigants might identify, regardless of whether they may be on the same socioeconomic scale (apparently — high) of the two family lines involved.

That post actually has given rise to what will be FIVE other posts:  This 3-part series, one I already published, and another one which is looking in more detail at a specific “FBO” (Faith Based Organization) in Georgia with some peculiar fiscal habits I haven’t gotten to the bottom of.

Such as, how HHS is citing (again) the wrong city and address for this grantee, as compared to what the grantee is writing on its own tax returns; [##straightened out below; see “Georgia Corporation Search Results” found after THIS post was published.  It doesn’t “straighten out” why a Board of Directors would use a different address on its federal tax returns than when reporting to the State of Georgia, however…];

…and how the grantee is functioning apparently under two DIFFERENT EIN#s, only one which shows up as the legitimate recipient of tax-deductible contributions, and another which has been used since 2014 (fiscal year 2013 as I recall),

…and — more to the point — why again, there is enough internal inconsistency in this organization’s reporting of its predominantly ABSTINENCE_focused activities (along with healthy marriage, etc.) — such that it is self-reporting on the organization details, receipt of profits in EVERY category of program service activity– but this does NOT show on Page 1 (at all) and it does not show on the Schedules at the back of tax returns which are supposed to also report this, along with the grants.

Again, the organization itself (according to their tax returns) seem to exist primarily courtesy federal HHS grants (and some, other levels — state or county I guess, which might likewise still represent HHS grants to the state, passed through to the county, or directly to that county) contributions, and supposedly NOT running a profitable business, courtesy the taxpayers, tax-exempt, and without admitting to the profits. But, that certainly does appear to be what it’s doing.


Let me talk about this for a bit:

A big case of “Huh??? !!” regarding just ONE, and hardly the largest one among others, grantee in Georgia…

(running programming from another grantee, in Colorado who at a certain point not too many years ago, got mixed up in an Uganda President’s “kill-the-gays” movement and had to backtrack, apparently ALSO change organization names and corporate business entities a few times, issue a disclaimer “THAT wasn’t our intention!” (searchable on this blog and on-line)

..and that entity in Georgia’s lack of demonstrating (year after year) even an understanding of how to fill out a tax return, let alone those tax returns reflecting what HHS says the organization is and where it operates (!!).  Even a casual look only leads to even more “Questionability” on the ultimate purpose (agenda) behind these HMRF and post-PRWORA-based federal grants systems in the first place.

Read the rest of this entry »

Early Morning Intuitive on “the Larger Picture” (#2 of 3: TAGGS, FBOs, Competitive Abstinence Education, and other Oxymoronic Public Policy Labels)

leave a comment »

….So few people are keeping these topics “on the front burner,” despite their regular impact on the federal budget (a few billion over the years) but much larger on the public, including confusion, family partition, and fragmentation of understanding!

As these things go, I write, sometimes the core post in one sitting, then I start adding supporting detail (links, visuals), clarifying terms with examples, and we have a very long post.  Or, the posts are split, requiring linking narratives.

So, here is the second three posts labeled “Early Morning Intuitive” because that’s how they started on my reading a certain Red Herring Alert post written by someone in Minnesota, courtesy Dakota County Family Court Case, who is at risk of being incarcerated by the State of Minnesota for allegedly interfering with an allegedly (but now that past is being actively dismissed, as is typical for the family court venue in general) abusive father’s parental rights to access all children, including two teenagers who at the time made it quite clear they didn’t want that contact, or to live with him.
In fact, in this case, which on my part is hearsay — I understand he is also ordered to also receive child support payments and health insurance payments from his ex-wife, although the court seems to have already broken her back financially some years ago. But I do realize generally, this is about  par for the course in family court contested cases — SOMEONE is going to lose through attrition, and someone else is often going to win. What’s less well-known is how our federal government both stages some of these battles AND sets the stakes, places the odds on one party to win and another to lose.

Most people don’t stage bloodsports (which divorce, face it, sometimes literally is) and dramatic conflict through altruism, but usually because it’s good for business — that is to say, profits.  This is ALSO true, whether you like this news or not, as to HHS as a grant-making agency involved in the “Federal Designer Family” business (my terms) or, if you will “healthy marriage promotion/responsible fatherhood” business (their terms).  “HMRF!!”  Here, one can identify spectactors, promoters, agents, and the extended family of those actually in the ring.  There are the coaches, and the medics (obviously a necessary part of the deal)…and sometimes, crime-scene cleanup.

It is not a popular view to see a major federal agency primary purpose, as regards healing and helping families, to actually be “losing the money in the cracks, and keeping up the pressure on the middle- and of course, low-income population” by continually talking about debts and deficits.

And not talking about just how very large is the nonprofit sector, including the FBO nonprofit sector in this country, along with the religious-exempt organizations who tend to sponsor the same (and get to do so with complete lack of transparency as to their operations to the general public, and working with a handy set of volunteers and target audiences (for government programs, I’m talking) who typically are not well-informed on their leaders’ assets, liabilities, income and revenues — or just how many corporations the head pastors (in some denominations) may be setting up, controlled by them, and both 501©3 and for-profit LLCs.  And with who else are they setting these up.

Before you pass judgment on my supposedly unpatriotic and/or heretical attitude, my skepticism, or my so-called negativity, please put your hands, as I have been, on some of the evidence, and identified place where that evidence cannot be shown.

After doing this, give me a better way to describe the same evidence, or interpret it, and I’ll be glad to consider — if I see that you have actually looked at it, and have some insight into its existence in the first place. (Comments fields are appropriate places to do this).


That RedHerringAlert (blog) post, Conversation with Dakota County Commissioner Chair Nancy Schouweiler Posted on April 26, 2016Dede Evavold’s continued attempt, with assistance, obviously from the individual over at LionNews …

Image from Lion News


On the other end of the “prosecuting and jailing people for parental interference spectrum are countless cases where the authorities, including law enforcement AND the courts, didn’t give a cr@p about a fathers’ interference with mothers’ rights, even court-ordered ones.

As I’ve made clear periodically in this blog, I’m one of those mothers.  I also have seen the long-term, chronic impact of this on my family line (three generations of it).

The original alleged purpose for radically restructuring welfare (that is, the Social Security Act of 1934 as reframed in 1996 under the privatization and “Block Grants to States” and “fatherlessness is a social disease” logic), the rationale was an emotional mix — wrapped up in some social science rhetoric to make it seem less emotional (and racist/sexist) than it actually was, is that to help people out of poverty, they must constantly be reminded what got them there — too much sex too early (as opposed to safe sex, abstinence is the preferred FBO solution), and especially not getting or staying married. However, once the infrastructure was set in place — as no question, this “HMRF” grants stream has been — there’s nowhere to go but expand and perpetuate, re-brand and replicate — trademarking terms along the way as needed.


Along those lines —
Read the rest of this entry »

Early Morning Intuitive on “The Larger Picture” (#1 of 3, Intro.)

leave a comment »

It’s taking too long (nearly a week, sometimes) to get out these posts. While I’d rather just do this as one long one — as I learned, I added the material, which has now resulted in 18,000 words. Splitting this into three posts seems fair enough — the alternative being, I shut up — so it is now partitioned. Some language in the middle may refer to “below” when it’s actually in another section, but for the content, the value is still delivered. I used the same tags are the same for all three.

Speaking of value delivered year after year free of charge, here’s myDonatebutton for those with the inclination and the wherewithal. It’s processed through PayPal, so any amount accepted. I’m not a 501©3 though, so don’t do it for tax exemption purposes…because it’s not tax-deductible.

I included some of the surrounding text from my appeal on the sidebar:

This Absolutely Uncommon Analysis shouldn’t be!

What I do here: I expose the Systems Design, and the Designers, so Y.O.U. can Show Others, and to notify those playing certain games, “you’ve been flagged.”


Heard of “disruptive technologies?” Disruptive innovations?  Well, this is a disruptive blog. I give people who’ve already been strung out and stripped down BY the system another place to stand and look at it, and a clear, fairly diagnostic language (vs. pretty logos and moving pictures) to describe it to others. AND, which many don’t do, I tell how I found the information; links databases and all.


Despite the blog’s appearance, I know what I’m doing! You’re looking at long-term leverage, in the hands of the “non-experts,” in the public interest, not public funded propaganda to drive business to private pockets. Hence, I’m not afraid to ask:


Donate Button with Credit Cards
The formula wasn’t complex, but the concept itself was just so devious insidious, parasitic, grandiose, and by now, so baked into the economic, institutional infrastructure, people either don’t notice, or, in a common, cowardly, but all too human response they see, and just start denying, or looking for nicer explanations of an ugly truth — where it’s heading, and for lack of nicer, but still honest terms, it’s heading towards yet more slavery (and tolerating it) and genocide (and tolerating it).

Thanks for any contributions to the cause…

 

“Introduction”

The post has three major sectionsinstallments marked by titles of this size, alignment and color: each preceded by “Early Morning Intuitive on “The Larger Picture.”  This post is “Introduction,” then, the next will be:

Intermediate Section 

(TAGGS, FBOs, and Sex Prevention*) 

(a.k.a. “Abstinence Education”)

[And the last will actually be that “Early Morning Intuitive” writing]…and the one which inspired this post is the third (see below).  It started as a comment on a post over at Red Herring Alert, which had brought up things I report on, as well as progress of a case I’m also interested in for several reasons:  like how in the heck does an entire system, the family law system, whose self-declared leadership back in the 1970s emphasized new words and new practices to reduce the OLD language of criminal law in favor of the NEW language of behavioral health** — in order to rescue families, better, my dear— end up with multiple state-level, felony criminal prosecutions against one mother, another mother, and a married couple for actually helping protect children who had run away from, several say, an abusive situation?

**Check out that “Combating Divorce” link  which starts with a quote from parental-alienation-original Richard Gardner, M.D., or at least referencing him, followed by the sales pitch for “Collaborative Divorce” and Mediation — followed by the quote I was referencing above:  “new vs. old.”

In 1975, Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) Review Editor Meyer Elkin, editorialized on the language of family law:

“Why do we continue to use the language of criminal law in family law? Is it primarily tradition that causes us to continue to use the old words in family law? Or is it something else? Is it a reflection of the prevailing ambivalence of this society which, on the one hand, tells people that divorce is okay, but by its actions, or lack thereof, shows that many still do not accept the idea of divorce in a pair-oriented society? We need to develop new words that will alleviate stress on the divorcing family rather than add to stresses already present…. Family law is entering a new period. There is now present an opportunity for introducing new practices and procedures—and words that will represent the combined expertise of both law and the behavioral sciences who, after all, are equally concerned and have similar goals regarding the strengthening of the family. Lets us now start the search for the words.”

And in the 20th Anniversary issue (1983) of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Review, Elkin commented on the ripple effect of transforming divorce from a battle into a process of healing and growth:

“Let all of us, in our own unique way, recommit ourselves to the search for the pebbles of change that can be cast into the social pond. Let us create a divorce process that recycles divorce pain into new patterns of personal and familial growth, which, in turn, will also strengthen our entire society. Let us protect our children from the unnecessary hazards of the divorce experience so that they, like their parents, can be strengthened by divorce rather than defeated by it. And let us never forget that if the lights go out in our children’s eyes, be they children of divorce or any other children, we will all live in darkness.”

What’s interesting — I found this by a straight Google search for Meyer Elkin’s 1975 speech.  However no link on the current menu of the fairly simple web page “divorcepeacemaking.com” leads to this page, or would alert the unaware that this individual has a high allegiance to the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, as a “neutral” professional in the divorce field. Unless through exposure one knows the authors and noticed those on the Resources page as, largely AFCC also, i.e., Wallerstein, Kelly, Constance Ahrons, Philip Stahl, etc…


Yes, let’s get divorce away from the courtroom and into better and MUCH less scary-looking hands whose academic interests appeared to have been Germanic languages, apparently brilliant, but then(?) took a turn into a more guaranteed line of work — clinical psychology, educational psychology and counseling psychology in California’s State university system…====>

Carol R. Hughes, Ph.D., L.M.F.T., psychotherapist, in Laguna Hills, CA

And, rather than presenting evidence before merely a judge, why not get more paid professionals involved and let them work it out with divorcing couple?

Traditional Litigation — Courthouse and the couple below (“Subjected!” and the text says there are actually winners and losers, and it’s a battle);  Mediation, no judge and the couple on top (“You”l be in charge” and the text says the mediator is a neutral);Collaborative Divorce — the Gang’s all Here (images from same website FAQs page).

Each Parent has Divorce Coach & Attorney. “Family” has “Child Specialist” and “Neutral Financial Professional.” More accurately, this would have (3+3+2=)8 stick figures shown. The circle “Family” is emphasized, however more accurately it might read “Children” and have more figurines. What there really are more of is involved professionals — but no Judge. NO JUDGE and NOT IN COURT seems an overall goal, although most of one’s legal rights to due process, codes of evidence, the right to subpoena, etc. seems to exist when there IS a legal case.

 

What’s that about — reducing the competition in the “modern family rescue team” business– “No Parents Allowed!” ???

 

 

I’m starting to think the overall picture was to disarm and dilute prosecution of crime, in general, giving safe haven to certain kinds of crimes which are fairly unique to families.  (See also elimination of the seven prior causes of divorce — one of which included involvement in felonies — which “no-FAULT divorce” facilitated).   Redefining what is, and is not, a felony ???   Which brings me to the third section title:

Early Morning Intuitive on the Larger Picture.

Which is below the other sections, the bottom “third” of this post of this series.

In between are several charts, tables, basic vocabulary, and how to tell an HHS “tell”  for consideration.  It’s called “Early Morning Intuitive” because that’s what it was.  I’d had a nearly sleepless night after another, recent, psychic shock, although its accusations as some of the others, were pure “schlock” and was almost absent-mindedly reviewing a recent Red Herring Alert post, and noticed it had mentioned the federal funding.  This being familiar territory, I just opened my mouth (sic) and went into what ended up being a nonstop narrative that pretty much distills the essence of (this blog, and the larger picture).  It came out at least coherent enough to preserve on a post, not comment alone.

Pretty much what’s in between is much more analytical, show-and-tell, and labored.  That doesn’t make it any less valid.

Show and Tell is important.  But, if you just want “Tell” for a change (not my style), scroll or page down to that bottom section, and hopefully your eyes may peripherally catch some of the substance in between, for example, that it’s time to for more people to get hands-on to TAGGS.HHS.Gov, start using it (with observation in the “on” position) and asking some intelligent questions about what they see there, and what they do NOT see there, and how it does (or does NOT) correspond to other sources of information on the same data.


One reason my posts tend to get so long as I am talking about things people tend NOT to talk about it, and doing so using terms and resources that are also typically under-utilized, and some, so broad and vague in their symbolic meaning (example:  “Fatherhood” “Marriage” “Faith-based Organizations” and anything labeled “_______ Prevention”) I feel it necessary to continue re-iterating what vocabulary might better describe how the entities (often government entities — here, a federal agency called “HHS” — actually are talking about — without really talking about it — if you know what I mean…

First of all, anything labeled XYZ “Prevention” (case in point in this post, having sex outside marriage, especially while a teenager) means running some programming, possibly developed originally by another organization already on the HHS grants stream, as a nonprofit or for-profit.  Case in point “Abstinence Education,” “The Center for Relationship Training” (Colorado) and it’s “WAIT Training” as well as a Stone Mountain, Georgia (?) FBO (Faith-Based Organization) called “More Than Conquerors, Inc.” whose most recent nearly $10M of funding and historic activity has centered around Abstinence Education — including using that WAIT Training Curriculum and targeting at-risk youth.  Meaning, typically, poor and/or of the darker-skinned ethnic backgrounds…

So, regarding some of these terms SHOULD you happen to stumble across the existence of $150M/year allocation (since 1996) and $10M allocation (since 1996) being run through HHS using such terms as “Fatherhood” “Marriage” “Faith-based Organizations,” and “_______ Prevention” including “family violence” or “child abuse” prevention, as well as good, positive words like “Healthy” and “Responsible” — know that:

There’s the intended meaning for the target audience — the bystanding public who IF they even hear about these social policies and programming, and the family courts as they exist now vis-a-vis diverting criminal prosecution of so-called “family/relationships” matters [[which what we used to mean by “domestic violence” or “child abuse” is rapidly becoming]] is supposed to feel great about all this when they file income taxes or deal with the IRS, or even thank their “lucky stars” (or God, or whomever, including perhaps their own wisdom in not having such crazy lifestyles?) that they aren’t facing some of the hellish circumstances some neighbors, or others heard about (on-line, in print, or locally/nationally) are, Grazzini-Rucki case in point, in which one family with young children is split into multiple pieces (including potentially some runaways, some in foster care, one or more pieces in jail or threatened with it) locked in chronic war with each other +conflicting stories about WHY from the presiding court-appointed professionals, and law enforcement and/or MSM contributing their insight and opinion on who’s the good guy and who’s the bad-guy and just how this ties into XYZ national problem….

….and then there’s the telegraphed meaning for those on the inside, participating program recipients, curricula providers, tax-exempt foundation backers, and I suppose potentially HHS employees** who thankfully, can routinely choose the same, or similar, organizations to distribute the largesse (grants) to THIS time. Many of these will be thanking their “lucky stars” (or God, or whomever, including perhaps their on sagacity in hooking up with, or forming 501©3s exempt from paying taxes on corporate revenues because they ARE the good guys (charitable service providers) — and these people know more directly what the symbolically, internationally, quasi-religious language actually means to their bottom line, conference circuits, write-offs, and social networking.   (**whether or not HHS employees feel this way, they at least currently have a job — and probably have a nice pension also….and health insurance, etc., and if they get laid off, some business connections in this field….)
Read the rest of this entry »

Credentialing and Schooling Psychologists (speaking of MN and the Grazzini-Rucki case)

with one comment

[Section on Schools of Professional Psychology likely to be moved to a separate post.  It was added post-publication anyhow.. Until then, the post is about 11,000 words.  After it’s removed, closer to 8,000 words //LGH]

Fascinating (I think!) information on the matter of private, for-profit education as a major, flourishing form of investment, and the Minnesota School of Professional Psychology at Argosy University as part of this larger trend.

I have sustained an ongoing interest in the “Schools of Professional Psychology” ever since learning who was pushing for them in the late 1960s, in my state, and why.  (“Psychologists need doctorates too if they’re going to continue getting some R.E.S.P.E.C.T. — and proper income…ideally, like doctors get….” There seems to be a perpetual chip on the shoulder of too many in the field.. a professional trait…).  There seem parallels between the Argosy University situation and the Alliant International University (with California campuses, and having absorbed the California School of Professional Psychology, while also hosting a “non-entity” called “IVAT” (Institute on Violence, Abuse and Trauma) associated with Robert Geffner’s “FVSAI” (Family Violence and Sexual Assault Institute, a small nonprofit with Texas jurisdiction & California address).

A BIT ABOUT (SOME) SCHOOLS of PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY

Schools of Professional Psychology tend to prepare people as marriage/family therapists and custody evaluators, among other future career paths.  This gets interesting when the schools come in different religious types.  For example, there’s the Christian/religious/theological style:

Since 1965:  Fuller Seminary: School of Psychology:

Pioneering Integration and Excellence in Teaching, Training, and Research

Since 1965, Fuller’s School of Psychology has been creating a pioneer program integrating evangelical Christian faith and psychology. By placing strong theological study in the heart of psychology, you will become clinical psychologists, marriage and family therapists, and educators who are prepared to serve with integrated professionalism and practice.

The “History” page gives the inspiration and original financial backing information:

In 1961, psychologist John G. Finch delivered a series of lectures at Fuller Seminary on the theological and psychological dimensions of humankind. The vision he articulated, one that integrated the Christian faith with the field of psychology, sparked the idea for a School of Psychology at Fuller. With generous financial support from C. Davis and Annette Weyerhaeuser, further study and planning followed and, in 1964, the opening of the Pasadena Community Counseling Center initiated the first phase of the new program
(This being the 1960s, a class photo shows next, with rows of men in suits and ONE woman):

John G. Finch in the 1980s and again in the 1990s was accused of sexual improprieties with his clients, some of them married women.  Seattle Times (4/27/1992, “Communities”) article described in detail, including some incidents that began, it was claimed, as early as 1965 — about the time he was “inspiring” Fuller to get the School of Psychology started.  (Is this how some therapists who groom patients for sex get their stables of partners established? Is it why they went into the field? With the religious element, that’s not just professional, but professional and spiritual abuse.  “Caveat emptor.”

A (married) woman claimed to have met him at a Christian camp.  Separately (not in this article), a married man was in therapy with Finch while Finch, unknown to him, was having sex with the man’s wife, which she confessed to years later, but Finch, naturally, deflected accusations of having a romantic relationship with his patient’s wife.  The man then sued as “John Doe” for malpractice and outrage…

If the goal behind raising up more Christian psychologists and marriage therapists is indeed evangelizing and transforming the world through faith, perhaps a better means might be for the flocks of sheep to to quit the passive, “see-nothing-do-nothing” sheeplike behavior and remember they are human beings — and hold leadership accountable.  For leadership, we’d rather see a sermon than hear one,  and more might be open to the sermons if they weren’t seeing this type of behavior coming from the sermonizers.  In this case, it was primarily the women who continued reporting over the years and came forward, as I recall.

A prominent Pierce County psychologist has been charged by the state with violating his code of ethics by allegedly having sex with his clients, engaging in nude therapy and violating their confidences.

It is one of the most egregious cases ever taken to the board, say officials with the state Examining Board of Psychology, where the charges were filed last month. The board continues to receive complaints about the psychologist, who has been licensed in the state since 1965.

The charges, based on claims by six patients, say Gig Harbor therapist John Finch violated his code of ethics by having sex with clients, shared their private conversations with others and fostered their dependence on him.   Sex between patients and therapists is forbidden under state ethics law but is not a criminal offense. ….

Complaints were made against Finch 10 years ago, but were dropped by the state Department of Licensing – which at the time had jurisdiction over the licensing of psychologists – because the complainants were not deemed credible. But investigators remained suspicious.

“I believe Dr. Finch practices in a questionable and controversial manner,” said Ruth Palnick, who investigated the charges for the Department of Licensing in 1982, in documents filed at the time. “John Finch bears watching, but I really don’t feel we would get far with these witnesses.”

The psychology board has received 11 complaints against Finch, beginning in 1990, six of which are included in the statement of charges. They paint a portrait of a man who promoted himself as a Christian therapist and fostered such dependence by his patients that he persuaded them to remove their clothes and engage in sex with him.

It is only today that some of the women feel strong enough to talk about their experiences with Finch.

“The hardest thing is I’ve lived with this secret for 26 years, more than half of my life,” said Ineke Rouw, who met Finch in 1964 at a Bible conference in Bellingham. Active in a Christian church, Rouw began therapy with him soon thereafter and continued until 1987. She began to see Finch because of concerns about her inability to become pregnant.  [[And quit after confiding in another therapist….  He had sex with her while billing her for therapy, totaling from $20 – $30K over the years….Other lawsuits were filed, six women (“A through F”) came forward. At the time of “nude therapy” (sometimes involving sex with clients) he was ordained Methodist minister, founder of Fuller School of Psychology (it says) and married with children…  See rest of article.]]


 A husband even sued the man as “John Doe” for malpractice and outrage.  In this case, Finch had the man in therapy, while having sex with his wife (!!), who much later, confessed to having had sex with him during those times. Here’s part of it:

Supreme Court of Washington,En Banc.  John DOE, Respondent, v. John G. FINCH and John G. Finch, Ph.D., P.S., Petitioner.  No. 64131-5.    Decided: August 21, 1997:

Doe was in therapy with Dr. Finch from 1974 to 1980.   Much of Doe’s therapy focused on Doe’s failing marriage.  In 1976, Dr. Finch began a romantic and sexual relationship with Doe’s wife that lasted until at least 1981.   Doe felt jealousy toward Dr. Finch, and it seemed to Doe that his wife had a higher opinion of Dr. Finch than of Doe. Dr. Finch assured Doe that Dr. Finch’s relationship with Doe’s wife was strictly professional.

In December 1981, Doe wrote an angry letter to Dr. Finch, blaming Dr. Finch for the failure of Doe’s marriage, and making specific allegations of an inappropriate relationship between Dr. Finch and Doe’s wife.

What amazes me is that Fuller hasn’t meanwhile removed the reference from their school.

Another Christian School of Psychology in Southern California (Malibu) would be at Pepperdine, who also has programs (Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution, Boone (as in “Pat Boone”) Family Center) which graduate people who then go into the family law practice:  I have posted on it before on this blog in context of marriage/fatherhood grants promotion. Pepperdine’s  combines psychology and education.  The two fields are of course closely related:

Pepperdine University Graduate School of Education and Psychology…  (School of Education founded 1971, of Psychology, 1981)

Pepperdine University is a Christian university committed to the highest standards of academic excellence and Christian values, where students are strengthened for lives of purpose, service, and leadership.

Access an exceptional education at multiple campuses throughout Southern California, as well as online


Preamble    (from “Spiritual Formation and the Christian Mission” page)

The Graduate School of Education and Psychology (GSEP) at Pepperdine University fully supports the University’s Christian mission and promotes spiritual formation for the sake of serving the needs of others, and especially the needs of those Jesus called “the least of these” (Matthew 25:45).

In keeping with the holistic vision of faith/learning integration that Pepperdine has embraced for so many years – GSEP affirms all space as God’s space and all times as God’s time. For that reason, GSEP encourages its students, faculty, and staff to view their work as sacred work, regardless of where or when that work might be carried out. From a Christian perspective, a life of purpose inspires us to serve, and by serving, it shapes the way we lead.  [Diversity of religious views of students is emphasized; it’s hoped the time at Pepperdine will be “transformative”….]

24255 Pacific Coast Highway, Malibu, CA 90263

(Other Factoids:  Senior Admin (4), all men, all white.  Board of Directors has more variety (men and women, businesses (Northrup Grunman, Hughes Missile Group, VP of eHarmony…) and professionals (dentist, lawyer, doctor) and even a US District Judge for DC Court of Appeals).

Then, there are the Schools of Professional Psychology whose ties are definitely more humanistic or associated with “new-age” worldviews and practices (not that sexual or other abuse is necessarily any less likely to occur within their ranks…).

The Massachusetts School of Professional Psychology (for example), recently renamed “William James College,”  which I’m aware of because of AFCC former President? or Board Member, Robin Deutsch’ involvement in its Center of Excellence for Families and Children (or similarly named center) there — I also noted had ties to Saybrook University.

The Massachusetts School of Professional Psychology, now (as of May, 2015) named William James College, maintains its focus on experiential learning, and continues to have one of its “Centers of Excellence” to be run by a well-known (if you pay attention to this organization) Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) Board Member/President (former or present, I don’t keep close track), i.e., Robin Deutsch, Ph.D. a.k.a. “Dr. Robin Deutsch.”  Her bio reads like a smorgasbord of AFCC-promoted policies, positions (alienation, high-conflict) and professions (parenting coordination) and acknowledges the connection at the bottom of the bio blurb:

Robin M. Deutsch, PhD, ABPP is the Director of the Center of Excellence for Children, Families and the Law at William James College. Formerly an Associate Clinical Professor of Psychology at Harvard Medical School, she practices as a custody evaluator, mediator, parent coordinator, therapist and consultant. Dr. Deutsch lectures widely throughout North America and Europe on Parenting Coordination, parenting and child development and complex issues related to family conflict, including parent-child contact problems, attachment, abuse and neglect and trauma.

(AFCC is international with known connections in — North America and Europe.  So, between private practice in several fields and her lecture circuit, when does she run this Center of Excellence?)

She has published extensively on issues related to attachment, alienation, co-parenting after divorce, high conflict divorce, parenting plans and parenting coordination. Dr. Deutsch has performed a wide variety of forensic evaluations and testified in juvenile, family, district and federal courts involving divorce and visitation disputes, relocation, domestic violence, adoption, alienation, abuse and neglect. She provides consultation and expert witness services on boundary violations, ethical issues, child and adolescent development, complex custody issues and custody and parenting evaluations. Dr. Deutsch was a member of the American Psychological Association (APA) task force that developed Guidelines for Parenting Coordinators (2011), the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) Task Force that developed Guidelines for Parenting Coordinators (2006), and the AFCC Task force that developed Guidelines for Court Involved Therapists (2010). She was the former President of the AFCC (2008-2009) and the former Chair of the APA Ethics Committee (2007).

Hofstra University’s Maurice A. Deane School of Law co-publishes “Family Court Review” with the AFCC.  They have, however, radically revised and simplified their main website so it’s pretty unlikely a person not already searching for that information would actually find it:

The Maurice A. Deane School of Law is part of Hofstra University and is fully accredited by the Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar of the American Bar Association.  I also see on the site for the School of Law that Hofstra’s Barr Pass Rates (2013, 2014) ranging from around 72 to 81%, very average overall, like — about a C+ )….

http://law.hofstra.edu/currentstudents/studentactivities/journals/familycourtreview/about/ (Click to see there’s also a direct link to ‘AFCC’ as well as to the Editorial Board of the “FCR.”  (complete words I guess are going out … acronyms in….If you know what the acronym is, or to look for it, so much the better.  If not, tough luck….)

An Interdisciplinary Journal

Sponsored by AFCC – Association of Family
and Concilition## Courts
Published in cooperation with the
Maurice A. Deane School of Law at Hofstra University

Managing Editor
Ruth C. Stern
Maurice A. Deane School of Law
Hofstra University

Former Editors
Meyer Elkin (1963-1986)
Stanley Cohen (1986-1991)
Hugh McIsaac (1991-1996)
Andrew I. Schepard (1996-2015)

FAMILY COURT REVIEW EDITORIAL BOARD

#The mis-spelling “Concilition” has been up there for a long time.  Wonder if anyone reads that website, or reports to the webmaster.  Anyhow, I’d make a note of the “Editorial Board” individuals.  Notably, no links to the individuals at their affiliated websites is offered (why not?).  Robin Deutsch has likewise been a William James College (formerly MSPP) Center of Excellence for Families, Children and the Law — for quite a while (a few years, I’d say), but her affiliation listed here is “Massachusetts General Hospital.”

Robin Deutsch Director, Children and the Law Program
Massachusetts General Hospital
Charlene E. Depner Assistant Director, Center for Families, Children & the Courts, Judicial Council – Administrative Office of the Courts

Incidentally, another reason to keep both AFCC and Hofstra University (as a co-sponsor of its publication Family Court Review, and Hofstra also being a private university in New York State, which has a Unified Court System (partnering with the “Center for Court Innovation” — funded by the Ford Foundation originally, i.e., via “Fund for the City of New York” being the nonprofit)….

New York like California (like Texas, also I’ve notice like Illinois …. Chicago) is a large, coastal state with a huge court system — and policies are shipped cross-continentally through various centers and professionals (and the associations that go with them).  I just realized that the Chief Judge of New York State  just appointed the Hon. Gail A. Prudenti, Chief Administrative Judge (of NYS) — also maintains a relationship with Hofstra, and as of last September 2015, joined one of its Centers (those centers that you do NOT see from the Law School home page….) as chair of the NYS Permanent Judicial Commission on Justice for Children, replacing the late Hon. Judith S. Kaye (formerly Judith S. Kaye — notably AFCC program-friendly)

Hon. A. Gail Prudenti Named Chair of NY’s Permanent Judicial Commission on Justice for Children

On Feb. 2, 2016, Chief Judge Janet DiFiore announced the appointment of the Honorable the Honorable A. Gail Prudenti as chair of the New York State Permanent Judicial Commission on Justice for Children. Judge Prudenti succeeds the late Judith S. Kaye, New York’s longest-serving chief judge, who led the Commission with distinction from 1992 until her recent passing.

“I am both thrilled and humbled that Chief Judge DiFiore has asked me to lead this prestigious Commission, whose vital work is very close to my heart, intersecting as well as completing my objectives as executive director of the Center for Children, Families and the Law,” said Judge Prudenti. “While I can never fill Judge Kaye’s shoes, I am deeply committed to building upon her wonderful legacy and look forward to working with the distinguished members of the Commission to that end.”

Hofstra Law and the Center for Children, Families and the Law have a history of partnering with the Commission ….

About the Permanent Judicial Commission on Justice for Children

Formed in 1988 to improve the lives and life chances of children involved with New York courts, the Commission is made up of judges, lawyers, advocates, physicians, legislators, and state and local officials. At its inception, the Commission predominantly targeted its efforts toward the youngest children before the court, including infants involved in child welfare proceedings. In 1994, the State Court of Appeals designated the Commission to implement the New York State Court Improvement Project (CIP), a federally funded project to assess and improve foster care, termination of parental rights, and adoption proceedings. Since 2006, the group has expanded its focus to include older youth involved with the courts.

Read the full official announcement (PDF).  (which mentions, in addition to a string of remarkable firsts and appointments….)

She earned her law degree from the University of Aberdeen, Scotland, which also awarded her an honorary Doctorate of Laws in 2004 and an honorary appointment as Professor in the School of Law.”   [HUH?  What was her original nationality and when did she become a US Citizen?]


“Related Posts” (on this Hofstra U site announcing the appointment): 

I’ve been saying for years that AFCC (and whoever’s been backing it) is basically running the family courts of the nation, not to mention helping create them (see Meyer Elkin article, this page).  One of these days, some people will start believing me, in reporting what I am simply seeing year after year!  Start understanding this organization better (including how its memberships networks in positions of power and what those positions are, let alone what is the agenda) and you will better understand the family courts themselves, and start talking more sense about “reforming them…”  For example, it’s up-front, in-your-face ridiculous to expect this organization to let go of “parental alienation” while its membership are constantly promoting it, or to DE-frock the centralization of the profession of psychology from the courts….  And that has ramifications….

 Saybrook University Wiki.  Started as the “Humanistic Psychology Institute” at Cal State U Sonoma (in the SF Bay Area, Northern California) in 1971 by Rollo May, 600 students in 2014, ranked in the bottom quartile and 173/185 among psychology doctoral programs not long ago.  It features low-residency masters and doctoral degrees, and professional certifications:

Saybrook University is an educational institution founded in 1971. It offers postgraduate education with a focus on humanistic psychology. It features low residency, master’s and doctoral degrees and professional certification programs. The university is accredited by the Senior Colleges and Universities Commission of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC).[2][3] As of 2014 the university served 600 students.[4]

In 1971, the American psychologist Rollo May helped to establish the Humanistic Psychology Institute at California State University, Sonoma.[4][5] Later on it was renamed the Saybrook Graduate School and Research Center.[4] Author Michael Mayer recalls that the Saybrook name derives from Saybrook, Connecticut, where during a conference in 1964 several psychologists, including May, expressed a desire “to create a school that embodied the values of the ‘human growth and potential movement’ and to educate practitioner-scholars in the methods and philosophies of human-centered psychotherapy”.[6] In 2009, the school was renamed Saybrook University.[4] The university became affiliated with the shared services organization TCS Education System in 2014 to provide administrative and financial services, so that the school could focus on teaching and research.[7][8] The same year, the school moved from San Francisco to Oakland, California.[9] 

RANKINGS:   Based on a survey of academic programs, US News & World Report ranked Saybrook’s psychology program in the bottom quartile of its 2013 ranking of graduate psychology programs. The precise rankings in this quartile are not published.[14][15] The United States National Research Council rankings (NRC) ranked Saybrook 173/174 out of 185 in its 2014 rankings of 185 psychology PhD programs.[16]

Looking up that Old (1964) Saybrook conference (there was a “Saybrook II” around 1998/1999), while realizing this should be a separate post, this does summarize involved personnel and the general ideas driving it:

The Original “Old Saybrook” ConferenceIn the preface to the second edition of Toward a Psychology of Being (1968), Abraham Maslow wrote:

“Much has happened to the world of Psychology since this book was first published (1962) …I must confess, that I have come to see this humanist trend in psychology as a revolution in the truest, oldest sense in which Galileo, Darwin, Einstein, Freud and Marx made revolutions, i.e., new ways of perceiving and thinking, new images of man and society…”

Between editions of Maslow’s classic, on November 28th through 30th, 1964, the original Old Saybrook conference took place in the little New England Town of Old Saybrook, Connecticut. There, as David Elkins recounts it, “at the Saybrook Inn, a resort hotel and spa, the new American Association for Humanistic Psychology was holding its ‘First Invitational Conference on Humanistic Psychology’. Abe Maslow was there. So was Carl Rogers, and Rollo May, Charlotte Buhler, Clark Moustakas, Floyd Matson, James Bugental, Miles Vich, Robert Knapp, and a host of other luminaries including Henry Murray, Gordon Allport, George Kelly, Gardner Murphy, Robert White, Rene Dubos, Norma Rosenquist, Alvin Lasko, Victor Butterfield, E.J. Shoben and Roman Tratch.”

The original Old Saybrook gathering, though but one significant event, is often credited as a landmark moment in the history of humanistic psychology. The “revolution” Maslow describes had opened doors, some then newly cracked in the field, like Creativity research; others which had been systemically shut to psychology, such as consciousness and self exploration; other doors to European existential-phenomenology, and still others to Eastern philosophical traditions

New Saybrook article (from the same site): Read David Elkins’ article, Old Saybrook I and II: The Visioning and Re-Visioning of Humanistic Psychology, from the December, 1998/January, 1999 issue of the AHP Perspective. Ironically, David Elkins was teaching (a professor) at Pepperdine at the time. I wonder if he’s any relation to the AFCC-folkloric founder, Meyer Elkin… “David N. Elkins, Ph.D., is a licensed psychologist and professor in the Graduate School of Education and Psychology of Pepperdine University and is president of Division 32 (Humanistic Psychology) of APA. His book, Beyond Religion: A Personal Program for Building a Spiritual Life Outside the Walls of Traditional Religion, was recently released by Quest Books.
NOTE: This is an abridged version of Dr. Elkins� text”

August 23, 2010 — Saybrook University announces “David Elkins named Director of Saybrook’s PsyD Program” says he actually helped Pepperdine get (chaired the committee that got)  its APA accreditation.  Interesting!

Saybrook’s Graduate College of Psychology and Humanistic Studies is pleased to announce that David Elkins has been appointed director of the PsyD program.

A licensed clinical psychologist who taught at Pepperdine University for 25 years, Elkins has worked hospital, community health, and private practice settings, and was the Director of the Humanistic Psychology Center in Tustin, California.

Elkins’ background in humanistic psychology is extensive:  he serves on the board of the Journal of Humanistic Psychology and The Humanistic Psychologist;  he has served as a board member of the Association for Humanistic Psychology;  and in 1998-1999 served as president of the APA’s Division 32, Society for Humanistic Psychology.  While at Pepperdine he designed and taught the existential-humanistic psychology track of their PsyD program.  He also chaired the committee that achieved APA accreditation for the Pepperdine PsyD.

Elkins’ most recent book is Humanistic Psychology:  A Clinical Manifesto:  A Critique of Clinical Psychology and the Need for Progressive Alternatives

I found a book review of Elkins‘ “Beyond Religion: A Personal Pathway for Building a Spiritual Life Outside the Walls of Traditional Religion” which says he was a former minister.  Published in Wheaton, IL.:

Schouborg, Gary (2001). Paths to Spirituality: A Review Article of Beyond Religion, by David N. Elkins”. The Humanistic Psychologist, 27 n.3, 369-373.

. . .

Because Elkins views spirituality as indefinable, he approaches it from multiple angles. He characterizes it variously as a hunger for attention and care, for psychological health, for imagination, for passion and depth, for the sacred or numinous, for waking up one’s soul to the wonder of life, for “the more”. The advantage of this approach is that he increases his chances of connecting with someone for whom one phrase or another is particularly meaningful. A further advantage is that the multiple phrases express the kaleidoscopic richness of spirituality. I would be interested, however, in what he thinks might be lost by summing all of what he ascribes to spirituality in the single phrase, emotional responsiveness.

The second half of the book describes eight alternative paths to traditional religion — The Feminine, The Arts, The Body, Psychology, Mythology, Nature, Relationship, Dark Nights of the Soul — concluding with step-by-step instructions on how to walk them. All the paths share in moving us beyond our culture’s over-emphasis on masculine reason, structure, tangibility by appealing to our need for the feminine relational, intuitive, mystical. The concluding chapter is a guide to creating a four-step “Soul Journal” for oneself that helps: (1) identify what sorts of experiences nourish one’s soul; (2) design a program to engage in activities that will produce those experiences; (3) engage in those activities; (4) evaluate how well the Soul Journal is nurturing the soul. Elkins’ instructions are do-able and sensitive to the unique needs of each individual.


 

(Elkins =/= Elkin.  Meyer Elkin died in 1994 at age 1978; here’s his Los Angeles Times Obituary.  I am reminded that the mediation unit, called “Los Angeles Conciliation Court” which it says he founded, not in 1963 — but earlier; it says, in 1955, and that this was not the Los Angeles Superior Court itself, but a unit within it.  

Meyer Elkin:  Founder, Los Angeles County Conciliation Court (L.A. times, 4/15/1994)

Meyer Elkin, 78, founder of the Los Angeles County Conciliation Court. The unusual mediation unit, which he set up in 1955 as a part of Los Angeles County Superior Court, handles divorce and custody disputes and provides court-ordered counseling for the families involved. Elkin also founded and edited the professional journal Conciliation Courts Review and helped to found the Assn. of Family Conciliation Courts. After growing up in Brooklyn, N.Y., he began his career as a parole officer in Tuscon. A social worker deeply involved in community social problems, Elkin worked throughout his life to aid families and young people. After his retirement in 1977, he devoted his attention to what is now El Nido Family Centers in Los Angeles. He served on the board, as president and as an adviser to the nonprofit family counseling agency. Elkin earned the Koshland Award, California’s top accolade for achievement in social work, and the Leadership Award of the American Assn. of Marriage and Family Counselors. On March 17 in Beverly Hills of emphysema.

You can see the same missionary zeal to transform society in this summary, and determination to “keep the vision going — only more relevant to this time.” There’s a certain disdain for “reductionistic science” and elevation for “other ways of knowing” in this language. The scientific method is actually frowned upon, it seems, in some of these circles, while the “practitioners” still enjoy the professional titles, jargon (“Forensic, clinical, scientific, evaluative, ….”) which would, in fact, be more appropriate to scientists who do practice the method as part of their normal work lives:

. . . That small conference in Old Saybrook, Connecticut, helped clarify the vision and set the course of the field in America. Within a few years this movement would become a major “third force” in American psychology. It would spawn various humanistic organizations, provide a penetrating critique of reductionistic science, create an array of new approaches to counseling and psychotherapy, and articulate new research methodologies and “ways of knowing” in the search for knowledge. Maslow would become president of the American Psychological Association; Rogers would receive two of APA’s most prestigious awards – one for his contributions to science and the other for his contributions to practice.

While humanistic psychology seemed to be making inroads into the academic and professional community, the humanistic vision was moving out into the streets of America. Its values and ideals became part of the counterculture of the 1960s and 1970s. The human potential movement was born and spread through our society in the form of encounter groups, growth centers, body therapies, communes, alternative life styles, and new spiritualities. The humanistic voice echoed in the issues of the day women’s liberation, civil rights, the Vietnam War.

Some scholars in the movement became concerned that humanistic psychology was being preempted by the counterculture and, as a result, its message was not being heard or taken seriously in the research centers and halls of academia. Indeed, from a historical perspective it seems that mainstream american psychology, after only a brief humanistic pause in the 1960s, went merrily on its positivistic and reductionistic way.

“Positivistic and reductionistic” meaning …???

This is where Old Saybrook II comes in. First and foremost, Old Saybrook II is a scholarly endeavor to sort out the past thirty-five years of the humanistic movement in America and to rekindle the vision of psychology that was articulated in 1964. The Old Saybrook II scholars realize that the rekindled vision must reflect our times. It must address the scholarly and intellectual issues of our day, and it must have both the substance and the flavor of the twenty-first century. In short, the task of Old Saybrook II is to “re-vision” humanistic psychology for our times. As the official description of the project puts it:

The present Old Saybrook II Project is designed to ask again some of the key questions addressed at Old Saybrook in light of the great cultural transformations now upon us. In particular, it is to look again at the interface between psychology, the humanities, spirituality, and the social sciences at the beginning of what many describe as an era of postmodernity or transmodernity.

A central question is: How does the vision of psychology articulated at Old Saybrook, which boldly asserted both the plenitude and subtleties of Human Being, now reaffirm itself in an era of information and communication technology, which includes as its symptoms a globalizing economy, an acute awareness of environmental crises, managed health care, and the rampant industrialization of mental health and human services?

The Old Saybrook II Project will explore what aspects of Humanistic Psychology theory and praxis need to be deconstructed and reconstructed in the light of new social structures and cultural realities, and will ask what service a reinvigorated and reframed person-centered psychology can offer to a world the process of reinventing itself.


Here’s a profile of a Wm. James College graduate (Eric D. Willmarth) at “hypnosiscentral.com,”  active at Saybrook and in the Hypnosis fields, with two sons, one who became a psychologist and the other, already having a bachelor’s in psychology, now getting a teaching certificate.

Eric K. Willmarth, Ph.D., is a fully licensed psychologist living with his wife Carol in Grand Rapids, Michigan. He has two sons, Dr. Kevin Willmarth, a psychologist in Ohio and Alex Willmarth, who has his bachelor’s degree in psychology and is now attending Oakland University seeking his teaching certificate.

Dr. Willmarth received his Bachelor’s Degree from William James College, his Master’s Degree in Clinical Psychology from Eastern Michigan University, and his Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology from the Fielding Graduate University. He is a past  president of both the Michigan  Society of  Behavioral  Medicine and Biofeedback and the Michigan Society of Clinical Hypnosis. He is also the past president of the APA Division 30-Psychological Hypnosis and currently serves as President of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis.

Eric is Board Certified in Pain Management by the American Academy of Pain Management, a Fellow of the Society of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, an Approved Consultant of the American Society of Clinical Hypnosis, and a member of the International Society of Hypnosis. He has been an adjunct professor at the Forest School of Professional Psychology and Western Michigan University. He is currently the Director of Training for Saybrook University’s College of Integrative Medicine and Health Sciences where he also serves as the Director of the Integrative Mental Health Specialization.  He teaches the Advanced Hypnosis and the Advanced Biofeedback Practicum courses along with the Basic and Intermediate Hypnosis Courses at Saybrook.

Eric is the founder and president of Michigan Behavioral Consultants (www.michiganbehavioral.com), a group psychology and social work practice focused on pain management and behavioral health. The group offers multiple forms of therapy and psychological testing services at locations throughout Michigan.

A life-long musician and photographer, Eric has spent years videotaping interviews with the giants of hypnosis research and practice. “The Willmarth Interviews” will hopefully promote the appropriate use and understanding of clinical hypnosis and pay tribute to the many talented men and women who contribute to this field.

(End of post-publication insert about the Schools of Professional Psychology!  Originally, I continued as below….//LGH, 2/29/2016)



I ALSO LOOK, BELOW, AT THE A.F.C.E. (AMERICAN COLLEGE OF FORENSIC EXAMINERS)

I also took a sidelong look at the credentialing college of the psychologist in the Minnesota case who was also involved with the MSPP and Argosy, which credentialing (mill) got its own separate investigation by “Pro Publica” which tells us something about the fascination with having credentialing (more letters behind the name in addition to the degrees obtained) in contrast with the behavior of the credentialing organizations themselves, and just what it takes to become a Fellow or Diplomate of the one involved.  Argosy was large enough alone, but swallowed up by something even larger, which is where it gets interesting and as a comment on the cradle-to-career pipeline, as managed by those at the corporate/investment end of the ownership of, well, that pipeline.

I wrote this post rather quickly in late January, spruced it up some here, and hope it’s if nothing else, a little entertaining – and of course, illuminating.  Not my primary focus, though, these days…


Being who I am (Ms. Look-it-up) I learned about the original investors, two men formerly investment bankers at Lazard Freres & Company, (<== read the VERY interesting history for a refresher) and their sponsorship of a disgraced (including by whistleblowers) EDMC (Education Management Corporation), and more.

Before the end of this post, we’ll get the former Governor of Tennessee, Lamar Alexander, and some Goldman-Sachs, and I even see Cincinnati, Ohio’s “KnowledgeWorks” gets in there.  I can connect that to Minneapolis’ “GenerationNext” (which I was looking at last summer, along with certain major community foundations within MN, and in California) which is modeled after “StriveTogether” which is (if one continues clicking on logos and reading fine print at the bottom of web-pages) a “subsidiary” of KnowledgeWorks.”
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

February 28, 2016 at 8:50 pm

Posted in 1996 TANF PRWORA (cat. added 11/2011)

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

What does Custody-Switching REALLY have to do with Unsound Psychological Theory? (Not much, actually)

with 4 comments

BLOGGER note:  I determined to start posting “fast and furious” which may mean, less developmentally edited.  So, you may see in this one what a copyeditor or developmental editor would clearly mark as two or three different “starts” to the post.  That is indeed what happened.  You may also notice not completely consistent styles for quotes (though I tried to mark off the different sections).  I am sacrificing these technical issues for quantity of publication on material already looked up.  I may (or, may not) come back and clean it up, add a full list of “tags.”  I often tweak published posts when possible (out of desire to avoid humiliation if nothing else, at the format, or wording).      BUT, this is still good material, so out it goes.  Also — thanks to some recent paypal contributions through my Donate Button, much appreciated.  They are rare, generally speaking….and to reiterate, I am not a 501©3.


FYI, I am also in significantly pressured litigation involving my immediate future (I’ll leave it at that description).  I just came from ANOTHER (local) court venue yesterday, and now have another level of understanding of what “theater” means.  I had the facts, I even complied with the rules of court; the plaintiff didn’t have a cause of action, proven standing, the lawsuit was obviously retaliatory for exercising known rights, and I was up “pro se” and under conditions of ridiculous duress (documented in my Answer) against two lawyers, ONE of who I learned in this process was a frequent-flyer in this jurisdiction and after a “rout” (which was clearly expected) expressed (his) real feelings about women like me, and about the class I represented in the present case.  A reference to the Salem witch trials (process of trying the witches) was made.  The other one (the real motive behind the  lawsuit and not the “fake plaintiff” labeling), being much younger, represents literally decades more of this self-assured crooked behavior being financially rewarded without objection from anyone wearing a black robe.


On the bright side, I heard (though haven’t seen the print yet) that Sandra Grazzini-Rucki was just released from jail.   Not from having to face a felony trial in the near future — but at least she’s been de-incarcerated.  GOOD.


This post highlights the a footnoted portion of a recent post, published January 23: 2016 More Business As Usual in MN? (Criminalizing, Terrorizing, Jailing Mothers) which picked up on some passing language in a related Carver County Corruption post which, unfortunately (in my opinion) was circulated, it says, to 150 legislators.

Please take into consideration the next few paragraphs.

I know they may have long sentences and what may appear to be “far-off” topics.  However, you are hearing from an individual (myself) who has been studying and writing on this for SIX YEARS now, diligently, while also, experientially, dealing long-term with many of the institutions and issues involved over time:  domestic violence, family courts, custody/visitation / child support issues, overnight switch of care-taking parent, abrupt cutoff of contact with one’s own children, corollary (and predictable) impoverishment through ongoing court litigation, stress (off the charts, throughout), forced dealings with social service organizations, familiarity with the wild-goose-chase of 800#s people approaching any public institution for help tend to get, usually coming up empty where actual help is concerned.

I’ll bet several of those legislators, know a lot more about why custody-switching takes place (and under which programs) than the well-intentioned authors.  There is no bliss, nor do I see any purpose, in continuing to ignore how power is consolidated in and around government in an urgent focus to obtain press coverage of specific, local, or even county or state-level policies.  As a country, we have been (I eventually learned) at least 100 years, ALL of us (all citizens, all taxpayers, and most residents, citizens or not) living and functioning in a land where public/private partnerships are the political clout.  Public signifying “Government Entity” and Private signifying “NOT government entity.”  I did not always know this — I deduced it after about a year of delving into the realm of non-profit organizations strategically coordinated to co-opt the judicial process.  

The Private “NOT government entity” functions in both tax-paying (corporate) and NOT tax-paying (corporate) forms.  I’m over-simplifying that, obviously (government entities pay FICA, social security, etc. — but they do NOT pay the corporate taxes because, as entities, because they themselves are receiving payments collected by the IRS or (depending on the level of government, if federal, state, local, special district, or multi-district, i.e., Joint Powers Authority, etc.)

Legislators, already by  definition in positions of power, are more likely to be aware how  financial power circulates among from public (federal to state to county, or metro regions or “joint power authorities” etc.) to, and in combination with private (for-profit/nonprofit corporations and associations) and in and through academic centers at universities, and all that ….. The University of Minnesota is, I hear, the 9th largest research institution in the nation and is essentially part of government.

As to domestic violence issues, a center at its School of Social Welfare called “Institute on Domestic Violence in the African American Community” has several people on its steering committee, including Oliver Williams, PhD (who has published alongside Jeffrey Edleson, PhD** who has moved from UMN to UCBerkeley, where he is Dean of School of Social Welfare) as well as Johnny Rice II, M.S.,

Minnesotans, Did You Know About IDVAAC and MNCAVA?  And, “the Jeffrey Edleson” Connection, how Men’s Groups & Father’s Rights (federally supported) Continue to Influence DV Policy?  And how, separately, the Duluth-based nonprofit (cf. Ellen Pence) “DAIP” fits in?

IDVAAC is a key — but so far as I can tell, unincorporated website and collection of networked professionals, at UMinn School of Social Welfare; an example of coordinated control of national social policy from “centers” or “institutes” within academia.  

But that’s another topic — coming soon…..


  • Attributing PAS Theory as a CAUSE in Custody-Switching:Should We Focus on the Individuals (Judges + Psychologists), or Perhaps Court-Connected Corporations [especially 501(c)3s]  + Their Networks, Initiatives, and Projects?
  • Why Focus on Individual Judges + Psychologists, instead of their Networks of Court-Connected 501(c)3s + Favorite Initiatives, Projects, and Purposes?

The absurdly long titles are the same rhetorical question I’ve been asking for years, and already know where I stand on it.  As most people go with the other choice (focus on individual performers in the family court system), I’ve had a lot of free, not-socializing time to keep investigating the networks, in a public-access, free (except for time invested!) way, and continue to learn about some of the key players.  The patterns are easy to see, but not of course, if you never, EVER, go through a few basic look-ups to start to see some of the evidence revealing those patterns.  

For one, the systems are not designed so as to be easily viewable by ANYONE struggling with a current case, or by tax-payers, because they involved corporations.  Tax-exempt, and able to take both private and public donations, and as corporations, not as restricted to local political (state/county/municipal, metro, etc.) jurisdictions as are the specific courts themselves.  But, heck, it’s not as though they are 100% leaving no footprint, or linguistic similarities to identify themselves.
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

February 25, 2016 at 2:34 pm

2016 More Business As Usual in MN? (Criminalizing, Terrorizing, Jailing Mothers)

with 6 comments

~ ~ ~

Post published Jan. 23, 2016; internal post title with active short-link added Feb. 12, 2019 (a practice I adopted later for easier cross-referencing either on the blog, or as applicable, on Twitter.  The short-links as generated by WordPress, unlike some other platforms, or in general, web or email addresses, are case-sensitive).  

This post broke a year-and-a-half hiatus in my blogging (not my research and writing on the topic, just publishing posts), necessary for personal (litigation/life transition) reasons.  My previous post was in June, 2014.  

While my main reason for overcoming the hiatus was the egregious situation in this high-profile case, attentive readers will notice that case was not the only, or primary, focus of this post (see tables, charts, domestic violence and other organizations profiled, post intro. and what I said (wrote) other than and between the quotes, tables, or organization profiles).  

2016 More Business As Usual in MN? (Criminalizing, Terrorizing, Jailing Mothers) (Case-sensitive WordPress-generated shortlink ends “-2QS”; word count including this identification and short preview, about 9,300 words)

~ ~ ~

I’ve been aware of an ongoing, escalating situation in Dakota County, Minnesota, involving a jailed mother facing multiple felony charges, a no doubt jubilant father undergoing reunification with his runaway teenaged daughters,  three (male) journalists who helped keep the police on-target, and pending felony charges for three others (one-and-a-half married couples) who allegedly helped with parental interference resulting from a custody order issued in the family court.


This mother of five became a fugitive long before she was accused of felony parental interference.  See news reports (some, below), and footnote, a  3/14/2013 post from the blog Carver County Corruption at the bottom of this post. The post dates to about a month before the girls ran away. It names involved professionals, but to those who pay attention, it also shows involved systems (such as child support) and the existence of family wealth as an incentive to “churn the case.”

Update to this post:  The 3/14/2013 post remains as footnote at the bottom, but I have removed my extended “dissertation” section on both Paul Reitman (showing other publications, persuasions, affiliations) and on the “NCJFCJ” which the comment mentioned, along with the NCJFCJ [National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges — a private, nonstock, nonprofit organization based out of University of Nevada-Reno, and one which you should learn about, and about which I have learned (a lot) and have a lot to say….] “family-serving” agencies systems-change “Greenbook” (1999 publication) and “The Greenbook Initiative” (eight-year pilot-demo-evaluation project involving NCJFCJ and historic friends among the domestic violence “industry” (I call it “cartel” — and I’m a survivor too,  but the term seems to apply).  This planned removal shortens the post by about one-third.  The removed material has already been published Feb. 25, 2016 under “What does Custody-Switching REALLY have to do with Unsound Psychological Theory? (Not much, actually)


I want to call attention to what this, including this case, means for women (particularly mothers) and will continue to mean regardless of who (Democrat or Republican) is elected next President of the USA.

I want to talk about the off-stage actors, the executive producers, involved in any and all custody disputes in America.  I want to talk about the behind-the-curtain scripts which are running along the same lines throughout the country.

A business model is a business model.  Jailed mothers, righteously-indignant fathers supported by journalists, and runaway/reunified teenagers is not about law, justice, or representative government gone awry, gone “rogue.”  It’s about the same government having been outsourced and outflanked by the for-profit/not-for-profit [tax-exempt, privately controlled] corporate wealth working through (and with) public institutions. It’s also about what happens when the population goes to sleep on the above; on public/private coordinated operations which cross multiple jurisdictions.

Did I mention, it’s about moving the money, local, intermediate, inter/national?

This case, and that it’s possible in this country, is a power play by those involved which always comes with a “spin” to justify the excess force inflicted.  These outrageous custody cases, decade after decade, are therefore predictable outcomes of the larger business model in place, particularly but not only in the family court venues.
Read the rest of this entry »

%d bloggers like this: