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 ‘Nicholas J. Cummings

Caught! Chronically Usurping Communication btw. Government and the Governed, Pushing Back Legal Boundaries Set by Subject Matter and Geopolitical (State and National Borders), Undermining, basically, The USA [Published Sept. 16, 2019].

leave a comment »

Caught! Chronically Usurping Communication btw. Government and the Governed, Pushing Back Legal Boundaries Set by Subject Matter and Geopolitical (State and National Borders), Undermining, basically, The USA [Published Sept. 16, 2019] (“-b4j”, about 8,600 words with footnotes).  [Over one dozen tags, only added Oct. 2.  This post covers key important basics influencing family courts’ purposes & principles]

(Top part — discussion.  Mostly prose, my writing.  If you want the individual professors’ organizations’ or advocates’ names, more pictures, and links, scroll down!  Based on the original word count above, I added about 2,200 words, including those long titles to connecting posts, so that’s not too far.  Tags for this post are shown on the previous (“Builders”) one.  Publishing as-is, without extensive copyediting and without apology. . //LGH Sept. 16.)

This post continues from the bottom of:

Builders and their Blueprints: Who, Really, Designed the Family Courts, How, and Since When? (“The Evidence Speaks”) [Started Aug. 17, 2019, Published Sept. 15].(short-link ends “-aI6” and the middle character is a capital “I” as in the pronoun,  or as in “Idaho.)

For the immediate context of that discussion, go to the very bottom of that post, which has a link to here. Handling the Blueprints/Builders topic above brought up the topics, and specific university centers, psychologists, and nonprofit government-advising institutions (i.e., Brookings Institution, in the USA) engaged in facilitating the usurpation.  I’d also brought up (quoted) an article on the “Transnational Ruling Class, … or Anglo-American Establishment” referring to the historic close, friendly, relations between the RIIA (London) and the CFR (USA). I searched those two terms as symbolic of the ongoing, functional undermining/ bypassing of local (i.e., within national boundaries) representative government in “developed” countries.  There’s a direct connection to the family law practices through, Tavistock Relationships (<~~that Wiki, while flagged, is still informative in this context), formerly Tavistock Centre for Couple Relationships, but also through historic development of the “psych” fields in Europe, what’s now the UK, Canada, the USA and globally. Particularly psychoanalysis (Freud & following) traditions are troubling when entrenched in government practices.

There, I had referenced and quoted:

This undermining of jurisdiction and the effectiveness of geopolitical (national, and within the USA, state, borders) process through perpetually-created crises has been taking place for at least a century, (For example, on the RIIA-CFR topic: Think Tanks and Power in Foreign Policy pp 189-214,CFR-RIIA Interconnections: A Transnational Ruling Class, Liberal Atlantic Community or Anglo-American Establishment? by Inderjeet Parmar, (“Chatham House” referring to the RIIA factor).

My post title here is generic but the original, specific details on this post cover common recent themes and situations in my blogging.  If I were to list them, I’d say:  “Psychologists and other Patriarchs, and their habitat: university centers” and then simply name specific ones, calling attention to in which countries they  were, the specific (i.e., Michael Lamb, Nicholas J. Cummings, Milton H. Erikson) professionals’ spheres of current and recent operation (also relevant here) and who mentored them, and how (Byron R. McCandless, Frieda Fromm Reichman) — which was the “new to me” part of this post, meaning, it’s not just a re-hash of material I’ve already said, posted, or otherwise covered.  There is much review, but it’s not just review!


Also, who mentored those mentors, for example, such as Kurt Lewin, at the Iowa Child Welfare Research Station (1933-1945) he ran after emigration from Nazi Germany, and how it influenced funding and directions in American psychology.  I’ve also included reminders about what scope of studies are involved in the Princeton-Brookings-Columbia (and now University of Cambridge) connections, as well as the patriarchy behind “Fragile Families” research, ongoing…  Just look for the more colorful parts of this post….


FYI: To think you can handle the women’s rights or “domestic (or family) violence (or abuse) prevention” field as somehow separate from all that is mistaken.  They are two arms off the same tree trunk. and tap root. The important thing (in my opinion) is locating the root system, its nutrients, and in which direction its growing. Both arms off the same trunk want to treat  and train as many people as possible, coordinate and saturate government with their knowledge, and, to the extent possible depending on just how gullible or vulnerable the public is, pretend the other arm doesn’t exist.   In addition, they want to get to ALL children as they are being born for proper rearing, and are using “violence prevention” or, alternately, “fatherhood promotion” or “evidence-based child development” (etc.) rationale for doing this.

(Example:  Harvard Center on the Developing Child and its extended reach/special sponsors, involvement of “The Frameworks Institute” and so forth).  The tangled mixture of participants, if laid out side by side and sorted into their respective categories, including “unidentified” then laid onto a chronology (identified date of origin) would be, I suppose, like a combination of the finds from an archeological/anthropological dig.  Except that it’s recent, and the artifacts  are being created at the speed of: collaboration, electronic transmission of data, and travel expenses for personal conferences, website expenses for webinars, most of it written off as exercised in some nonprofit format.


I’ve DONE some digs like that on this blog (check out a few posts from April, 2017 on a center at Brown University involving the Annenberg Foundation: yegads!), with the results being characterized — properly — as “dense walls of text.”  One recurring challenge — I’m intent to use vocabulary which categorizes according to public or private sector, entity or non-entity (which most centers within universities are), whether tax-exempt or not, and who is in which legal domicile — while the power-players and their hired/sponsored professionals in same sectors (both public AND private!) seek to do, and successfully do the exact opposite — blurred, meldedpersona… and they hire consultants to coach them how to do this!  The public, thus the more confused it is (we are) the less able they are to resist sales tactics or manipulations into, if nothing else, ongoing passive consent.  This is so much! like the tactics abusers also use on their targets.

I am also Tweeting on this, as it comes up (i.e., most days) along similar lines though of course mostly focused on this subject matter.

IF neither the UK and Canada has, as the USA does (however effective is another question, but we do have) any requirement to disclose their respective charities’ (tax-exempt entities’) tax returns — NOT the same as financial statements, audited or otherwise — that the public, theoretically, anyone with [un-censored by their own government] access to the internet regardless of national origin (it’s on the internet, in other words) could look up and look at, and learn from over time (and specifically as to individual tax-exempt entities which are required to file) then it’s quite possible this might only be dismantled and comprehended from the USA point of view.

Some organizations post “available upon request” or “available for inspection at our offices” but that’s impractical for any overview and financially burdensome to the person seeking it.  Some organizations do seem “open and transparent” by posting theirs, but on closer look many are partial, many are not even close to the most recent tax year’s (or the year’s before) and many when it comes to tax returns, may have related entities — with money moving between them — but only post one of the entities’ 990s.  There seem to be dozens, if not hundreds, of ways to put off the interested member of the public from getting to the truth of their fiscal operations or even status.

Unless there is some parallel in other countries for developing an understanding and perspective of how their own government revenues are collected, disbursed, and most important — accounted for (invested).  (See “Walter Burien” (currently out of Arizona) for more and concise summaries of this type of information on CAFRs, he says, reporting on it since 1989. He has a mailing list and while emails are rare (i.e., your inbox won’t be cluttered with solicitations), when they come they are very effective communication).


Read the rest of this entry »

Builders and their Blueprints: Who, Really, Designed the Family Courts, How, and Since When? (“The Evidence Speaks”) [Started Aug. 17, 2019, Published Sept. 15].

leave a comment »

This post is:

Builders and their Blueprints: Who, Really, Designed the Family Courts, How, and Since When? (“The Evidence Speaks”) [Started Aug. 17, 2019, Published Sept. 15].(short-link ends “-aI6” — the middle character is capital “I” as in the personal pronoun or “Idaho; with post-publication addition, 8,800 words.

One of my recent posts,

Reform, Solutions, Enhancements, Adjudication Improvements Built on WHAT? (Unproven Because Unspoken Assumptions about the Deliberate Design = the Deliberate Purposes of the Family Courts in the USA)., (short-link ending “-9PC” started May 2, 2019, revisited and expanded June 6-8, “sure hope to publish soon” status, Aug. 6-7,  and finally (!) published August 29 ,

as you can see was in process since May 2, but only published nearly four months later.  Why:  for whatever reasons, some perhaps relating to my strong emotions dealing with the longstanding topic, it was just not coming together:  Adding on wasn’t working.  Off-ramping wasn’t working either.  Finally I figured I should stick with the original idea, resist the temptation to elucidate so much, and let most of those extras go.

Sometimes obstructions to a smooth-flowing post may also relate to personal challenges which can impact the overall fluency of this type of writing, which requires undistracted focus.  (See “Footnoted Feelings 9/13,”  “Footnote: Anecdotal Narrative” and “ANECDOTAL INDIGNATION: also FOOTNOTED!” both of which came up earlier in the composition of this post).  You will be able to see those footnotes better when I publish them. They are now officially evicted from THIS discussion (post)! to: ‘Anecdotal Narrative | Indignation (Aug. 2019) and Feelings (Sep. 2019) Footnoted (from Builders and Their Blueprints post) [started Sept. 14, 2019] (short-link ends “-b41” and the last character is a number). 

As part of that “let it go” effort, I now have this post, which better explains a key theme of that one — common sense says, before choosing Reforms, Solutions, Enhancements** or Adjudication Improvements, ask, and find out who were the builders and show the blueprints which show purpose/design, intent.

**FAMILY COURT PERFORMANCE ENHANCEMENTS?

(** a snide reference to — but also reminder of — “FCEP,” Family Court Enhancement Project, USA, started about 2008; I’ve posted on it (search the acronym); pilot programs stacked with AFCC professionals). (On looking for prior posts, (Search “FCEP on the blog here) I see my original intent to post more on the FCEP dates to June 29, 2014, (with a Feb. 2016 update) — the LAST post I was able to make for about 1.5 yrs while handling a personal situation which had heated up — even through both (our) children are now adults.  Stemming from, originally, family court (mis)handling of an existing, known domestic violence/wife-battering-involved marriage with children.

For a general idea and some search strings on existing family court reform movements (mostly but not all in the USA), see these tags from the first post in search results for “FCEP” on this blog  That sticky post, near the top, deals with the topic of “Censorship” (although it begins “Welcome To My Blog… Let’s Talk!”).

FCEP seems to have followed up on (but not changed course much from) “The Greenbook Initiative” which was run about 2001-2008. Meanwhile, another joint Wingspread Conference was held on related topics around 2007/2008 (<=nearly a dozen years ago!). Given who was running this, what unspoken, unproven assumptions drive the last dozen years of reforms being promoted by those involved in for example, the “Collective Memo of Concern re: parental alienation” to WHO?” and similar task forces, legislative propositions in individual states in the USA?

LGH tags for post in top position on search results (on the blog only) for FCEP:

,

Current Family Court Reform Practice doesn’t even acknowledge blueprints or builders exist:

Why not?  I can’t say for sure, but I can see why this might be a real problem to some:

  • To acknowledge that builders exist would be to identify them, correctly, as nonprofits, a form many of the “family court reformists” also assume for handy references when quoting themselves and/or each other.
  • To understand that builders exist and, correctly, identify them as nonprofits is to understand MUCH more about who each of them is, how (honestly or not) they fill out tax returns, where (by category at least) their revenues, if anything much, come from.  Looking at organizations as nonprofits and business operations (micro, inactive, medium, or “mongo” — huge) speaks often louder than the graphics, logos, pictures, and repetitive mutual-back-slapping and footnoting (in academic publications on-line) ever does.
  • To understand the above is en route to also better understanding our own government, which continues to deal with and heed the counsel of  NON-representative NON-elected PRIVATE, purposes of the few who are so intent for application of their programs (developed through and run through, often tax-exempt organizations) on the many at the cost of, mostly, the many for the long-term profit of, mostly, the few. These “few” prefer to utilize tax-exempt format for organization — a format governments also operate within. Governments pay payroll taxes for their own employees BUT their profits aren’t taxed.

There’s a natural affinity between the two sectors and it’s natural to switch employment after terms of office may finish from one sector to the other sector.  Former government employees with their developed contacts can be grrrreat for nonprofits who seek contracts and grants from the same.

The US government and from what I can tell the various state governments already operate, despite constant talks of BUDGET deficit, at profit, and holding those investment assets (Topic: CAFR, searchable on and off this blog).  The ongoing taxation merely seems to front the long-term-debt on the front end by projecting it forward endlessly. That this goes places it can’t be tracked, ℅ chameleon, MIA, and merging/sub-merging in and out of existence nonprofit I’ve brought up repeatedly throughout this blog, and identified repeatedly in the “marriage/fatherhood” grants, but not only that funding stream.

Similar behaviors found within massive system change in public education (backing of major private tax-exempt foundations and involvement of university “center”  or “Institute” for [A,B,C,or D…]” often involved: (AISR/CES** at Brown University<~on this blog, see esp. my April 11, 2017 (<~~Read!!)(shocked/indignant post) and not too long ago, an example in the “early childhood education” field involving a Warren Buffett (i.e., Berkshire Hathaway shares-backed) foundation (Alliance for Early Success)  [**Annenberg Institute for School Reform/Coalition for Essential Schools].

Yes, story-telling with bright colors may distract from the fiscal outlines and behaviors of the foundations involved (see next image).

I noticed “Alliance for Early Success” through “Harvard Center on the Developing Child, which again has a lot of graphics, websites, personal profiles of involved people and lists of “investors” but when you go for the “Drill-down” by EIN# of what is registered, what isn’t, that’s an entirely different perspective: I’ve gone for this info., repeatedly, researching specific subject matter as it comes up).

Earlier in 2019 I have some posts on this topic, just referencing it again here, 9/15/2019. Look at the foundation names at “earlysuccess.org” (home page slide-show (with left sidebar stable) continues the story-telling and advertising. Notice “Buffett” is near the top, but Pritzker (Current Gov. of Illinois is a Pritzker), Gates, Casey (big in Foster care and responsible fatherhood also), Heising-Simons (I looked up, you can too); Packard obviously computer-related. etc.

This  behavior is more than ‘normal,’ it’s become seemingly standard practice. USA schools (by recall, offhand) where I’ve noticed (in course of writing this blog) include: Harvard, MIT, Yale, Brown, Princeton, Columbia University (NYC), Cornell, SUNY, University of Pennsylvania (<~private) and Duke (<~EastCoast sampler),  UC-Berkeley, Stanford, UCSF (public), USF (private, Jesuit), and so forth, West Coast, and plenty more in between.

See next image: screenprint from my 2017April 11 post after looking up/for financials in the school-reform centers backed by the Annenberg Foundation and involving Brown University in Rhode Island (admitted women first time, ca. 1969; immediately diluted the curriculum).  My opening statement (not to mention, the title) mentions system parts.  This post might be a good review and wake-up:  Under this way of doing business (public, private, mass population going through basic government-funded institutions, whether as privatized or as kept under obvious government control), no person could possibly keep track of it all in their “spare time,” and it’s questionable whether people even paid full-time to do so would.

Top portion of my April 11, 2017 post (http://wp.me/psBXH-5gG), search result for “Brown University” looking for the AISR information for a Sept. 15, 2019 post insert..

Getting to this type of information, should doing so somehow cross someone’s mind in the first place between the story-telling, great causes, and brightly colored graphics and slideshows  (i.e movement) requires overcoming some obstacles which seem less than accidentally strewn in the paths to that information, which situation increases personal time (which = expense) involved while decreasing prospects of even accuracy of such searches, i.e., discouraging the investment of that time and expense to start with.

Who knows whether existing databases that the public cannot access (due to power required) MIGHT, but I do know experientially that the basic public-access databases (whether state-level or via existing private nonprofits such as FoundationCenter aren’t accurate or functional enough to do so.

(Foundation Center (based in NY) again, just bought out Guidestar and rebranded as “Candid” but — I checked again last night, looking up several nonprofits related to this post via cell-phone), despite brighter colors (Black, white, BRIGHT yellow), more high-contrast user interface, what survived the merger includes the corrupted data practice of getting organizations’ names WRONG, whether by adding or subtracting a “the,” losing an “‘s”” or eliminating spaces between the words, or opting for different and unpredictable shortened versions of organization name in subsequent years.

Searchers won’t even know what they missed until they somehow repeat the search by EIN#, at which point it coughs up the tax returns pinned to mis-spelled organization names, not from the data source (which we’re told is the IRS), but by the database provider, “Candid.” (which is, the privately owned business, Foundation Center, Inc.)

Meanwhile, the one searchable field which is harder to get wrong — it’s only 9 digits and that’s “EIN#” — remains submerged in “other search options” not displayed on the top level of “990-finder” search page. To anyone simply aware that EIN#s are searchable, this is a not-very-subtle message:  “GO ahead!  But its’s an extra click each time” and those who, perhaps, may not think to or know to find an EIN# and use that only as the search condition, will not be alerted that even if THEIR data entry (search requests) has no typos in organization name, changes are, some are built into the database itself and may not know what they even missed.  All this erects artificial barriers to getting what is really, very basic information on organizations.

Perhaps I should start a petition called “OVERCOMING BARRIERS” and show public support to demand tax-exempt organizations claiming tax-exempt status for promoting philanthropy (the tax-exempt field overall) adhere to common decency and minimal copyediting style sheets (how to abbreviate, proof-reading for spelling or spacing errors) in human data entry, or whatever automated software function produces those search result names in all FREE (non-subscription) data searches. I have done data entry, copyediting, and text-processing in professional fields and continue to be amazed by how bad the data results are here, and in some federal and other state government search sites.  

If NASA, hospitals, the military, oil exploration and drilling, artificial intelligence, GENE therapy, or any large, hard infrastructure process dependent on accurate software information were that bad, there’d be even more massive failures, levee and dam failures, etc. PG&E was sued in California for failures relating to  the wildfires. But somehow when it comes to tracking where government funds go — and they go to and through nonprofits, obviously — NOT even close enough for jazz it seems is just fine… 


The contrast between entrancing, colorful graphics and the lack of financial details on the same websites (or, elsewhere  where they should be) is often astounding. It’s clear they are learning from each other, and as of the appearance of “The Frameworks Institute” which I mentioned on this blog, receiving coaching in how to translate science into policy-making, user-friendly terms, focusing on conflating project or nonprofit names with parts of government (i.e., name-synchronization) to, probably, catch the public off-guard which sector in fact they are dealing with — and to provide a “unified front” under similar names:   “Surrounded!!”  Program saturation by sound byte, etc.  Public relations/Advertising techniques….

[I’d show this, but I haven’t got laptop to talk to iCloud Photo properly yet.  The images aren’t transferred here yet…][End, Sept. 16, 2019 post-publication insert commentary.//LGH]

More, regarding why, perhaps, current Family Court Reform Practice doesn’t even acknowledge blueprints or builders exist:

Business names (association with a university or medical/health system also seems to add to the credibility) of any reformers and alleged** paradigm-changers. Referencing them as nonprofits which have tax-filings (and showing them) might reveal just how many are filing Form 990-Ns or Form 990-EZs to camouflage just how small, really and historically, they have been and still are.

**The overarching paradigm remains public-private-partnerships, no matter what marketed in its various parts, here, as  enhancements, solutions, or fixing flawed/unenlightened by the latest “science” (trauma, child development, domestic violence-related, father-engagement, etc.) practices. These PP partnerships can then, incrementally, steer change in the predetermined directions, once connected to “the grid” of decisionmaking on where public resources are spent. Personal associations, connections, and group loyalty are also developed through conferencing, publishing, etc. on each new field, or tweak to established fields…

Drawing attention to the builders organized as nonprofits and issuing “blueprints” reveals that the builders exist and organized (coordinate) as nonprofits; it also put names, dates, places, and potentially funding amount specifics, and how sources of that funding (where federal (the US) or lower-level (state, county, etc.) governments just might be part of the problem.
Read the rest of this entry »

A Stunning Validation by Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson: The Assault on Truth, The Origins of Psychoanalysis

with 15 comments

(Originally published 2/5/2013) A key issue in the courts includes sexual assault and violence towards women and children. This has also been a key issue with psychoanalysis. 

Below the introduction, most of the post is about the Stunning Validation, but I keep it current and relevant –because it is! — to the subject matter of this blog.  

Post title: A Stunning Validation by Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson: The Assault on Truth, The Origins of Psychoanalysis (w/ case-sensitive shortlink ending “-1k8” …about 10,000 words long)

The key, or leading edge, feature OF these courts includes therapeutic jurisprudence, attempting to resolve conflict through addition of behavioral health professionals, the fields in which Dr. Nicholas J. Cummings has dedicated much of his life to preserving the business and economic well-being of, to the point that a Wall Street Journal article reported, not too many years ago, that — doctors and hardcore professionals aside, among the top highest paying professional jobs, including the benefits and actual hours worked to earn the pay, were: judges, and (with a doctorate) psychologists:

Dr. Cummings is a visionary who, for half a century not only was able to foresee the future of professional psychology, but also helped create it. A former president of the American Psychological Association (APA) as well as its Divisions 12 (Clinical Psychology) and 29 (Psychotherapy), he formed a number of national organizations in response to trends. Since organized psychology resisted these inevitable changes, Dr. Cummings blazed the way, expecting others would follow.

He launched the professional school movement by founding the four campuses of the California School of Professional Psychology that established clinicians as full-fledged members of the faculty.

As chief of mental health for the Kaiser Permanente health system in the 1950s, he wrote and implemented the first prepaid psychotherapy contract in the era when psychotherapy was an exclusion rather than a covered benefit in health insurance.

He wrote what is known as the freedom-of-choice legislation that requires insurers to reimburse psychologists along with psychiatrists, and he conducted the medical cost offset research showing that psychological interventions save medical/surgical dollars.
Read the rest of this entry »

What These Words Really Mean: “National” “Responsible” “Fatherhood” “Clearinghouse” [Published Oct. 10, 2012, with some updates]

with 7 comments

 

Post title (with date published added to the title only in 2019, a standard I now use in the blog):
What These Words Really Mean: “National” “Responsible” “Fatherhood” “Clearinghouse” [Published Oct. 10, 2012, with some updates], short-link ends “-1aN” and OmiGod, why was it 17.7K words long!

LGH|FCM Archives Oct 2012 (image of a very active posting month) ~~Screen Shot 2019June22

In hindsight (see nearby image, taken just now but with Archives set to October, 2012) of how many posts published that month) it was a busy season; I remember also as a personally intense season in my life, and got moreso in the ensuing few months.  I also see that the post contains both long quotes (some about the father of American Psychology William James — and his interest in things “psychic,” including psychics) and has some tables of fatherhood grantees, as well as exploring what, in fact, does that four-word phrase represent.  AFTER ALL, when the USA sees fit to post a website of resource materials labeled “Fatherhood.gov” (which that clearing house is), it bears looking at — closely! Still up and still funded today, last I looked, and more like it….//LGH June 22, 2019.


PS. I see below I also took on issues and specific entities like new age cults in prison ministries (sic), Santa Monica University + MSIA (Movement for Spiritual Inner Awareness) + Huffington Post (Arianna Huffington got involve in it), John-Roger (The Hulnicks seem to be channeling him…) and so forth. Cult Awareness Network reporting — there’s a lot in this post!

It’s a live issue, has come up in my current posting again, this time in connection with funders of an Early Childhood Development Center at Harvard.


[Posted October 10, 2012; Intro with hindsight added Summer, 2013; Expect two (or more) posts to review and re-state this post and these vital issues as of late October, 2014. See recent comments. ]:


Those words may sound good, but should be interpreted according to usage, and who’s sponsoring the phrase. Questions should be asked: Who and what is the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse [website: fatherhood.gov]? What has it and corporations using such terms (this language) been doing? how about these corporations’ founders, followers and associates?

Is the marriage/fatherhood movement as seen in its media and programming, financing and expansion itself an expression of a religious cult, or taken as a whole and considering how it’s supported from public funds, a new blend of several old religions packaged as for the public good, when in fact the good (profits) end up in private hands?

How cult-connected are some of the key founders. If leadership does have outside connections with known cults, what about the programs created under such leadership?

And, what’s more, if the answers are yes, what does that say about the federal grants involved? Where is the line between cult influence in grant-making agencies, and those agencies themselves?
[Light-blue background text above added October, 2014.]


There is a close connection with the behavior of cults, i.e., such things as Charlatanism, Intimidation, Coercion, Retaliation for Reporting, and other things which will come up. There are also direct connections with some providers to organizations which are skin-deep cult-connected, outrageously so.

The “Saybrook” background mentioned in this post is also shared, to my understanding, with the institution from which a prime AFCC leader (Board Member, publisher, etc.) Robin Deutsch, Ph.D. of the “Massachusetts School of Professional Psychology.”

The hyper-professionalization of the field of psychology in the United States through through establishing independent professional schools of psychology to escalate pay grades and earn more respect by turning out more Psy.D’s and Ph.D’s, has a history entwined with the emergence of the fatherhood movement in the 1980s, at first as an antidote to the feminism of the 1980s. Bio at that site, at least several lines of it.

For early origins in the United States, see biography of William James, 1842-1910 and acknowledged as the father of American psychology and influential on Freud’s “psychodynamic theories.”    (Psyography by Bekah Dillon).

James father’s restlessness and mysticism plus intense attempt to manage and control his sons’ (plural) education, with considerable wealth and mobility seems to be reflected in the field (my opinion) in the field still.  He married a wife chosen by his father.  William James was “often haunted by an assortment of ailments, accompanied by depression and suicidal thoughts.”

William James was born the eldest of five children to Henry James Sr. and Mary James in New York City on January 11, 1842.  Henry James Sr. was an Irish immigrant who was studying theology, philosophy, and mysticism and was well connected with many literary and philosophical celebrities of the time (Pajares, 2002).  He devoted himself to his children, especially their education and in 1843, Henry Jr. (Harry) was born in NYC.

The affluent and deeply religious family was headed by a man who often became troubled and sought refuge in different environments.  Henry frequently found himself displeased with numerous aspects of life and in the summer of 1843, he moved the family to England (Pajares, 2002).  Shortly thereafter, he decided to return to New York City (Pajares, 2002).

The wealth and affluence of the Jameses not only afforded Henry the pleasure of exposing the children to many parts of Western Europe, but also enrolling them in the best schools.  In 1852, he enrolled the boys in the Institution Vergnes.  Henry, dissatisfied with the school, moved the boys to the Pulling Jenks School.  Inspired by the drawing teacher, Mr. Coe, young William developed a deep love for drawing at age eleven (Pajares, 2002).  Eventually, Henry removed the boys from Pulling Jenks; it has been speculated that he withdrew the students for fear that Coe would reinforce young William’s talents and destroy Henry’s impact on his son.

Soon enough, Henry became antsy and shifted the family back to Europe.   Despite young James’s dismay the family left in the summer of 1855.  Until 1858, the children received lessons through private tutors in England and France (Pajares, 2002).

In June of 1858, the family relocated to Newport, Rhode Island and by September, Henry had changed his mind.  The family then settled in Geneva.  As well as studying with the tutors, the children attended schools in Switzerland and Germany.  William James attended the Academy, the precursor to the University of Geneva (Pajares, 2002).

By age 18, James attended schools in five different countries, became familiar with numerous museums and galleries, frequently entertained the guests of his father, including Thoreau, Emerson, Greeley, and Hawthorne, and developed fluency in five different languages (Pajares, 2002). …..[wrote Principles of Psychology, teaching at Harvard] He encouraged various psychological methods, including comparative psychology and the use of various populations as research participants, such as animals, infants, or mentally disabled persons (Schultz and Schultz, 2004)

[I added bold and underline. quote added 10/2014].


Psychology branching out from physiology and philosophy, labs established in 1875 by Wilhelm Wundt (in Germany) and William James (at Harvard).   Brief comparison of the two men.

In 1875, a room was set aside for Wundt for demonstrations in what we now call sensation and perception.  This is the same year that William James would set up a similar lab at Harvard.  We can celebrate that year as the founding of experimental psychology!

In 1879, Wundt assisted his first graduate student at true psychological research — another milestone.  In 1881, he started the journal Philosophische Studien.  In 1883, he began the first course to be titled experimental psychology.  And in 1894, his efforts were rewarded with the official establishment of an “Institute for Experimental Psychology” at Leipzig — the first such in the world. . . .

Among his better known students were Oswald Külpe and Hugo Munsterberg (whom James invited to teach at Harvard), the Russian behaviorists Bekhterev and Pavlov, as well as American students such as Hall (“father” of developmental psychology in America), James McKeen Cattell, Lightner Witmer (founder of the first psychological clinic in the US, at U of Penn), and Wundt’s main interpreter to the English speaking world, E. B. Titchener.  Titchener is particularly responsible for interpreting Wundt badly!

Later in his career, Wundt became interested in social or cultural psychology.  Contrary to what many believe, Wundt did not think that the experimental study of sensations was the be all and end all of psychology!  In fact, he felt that that was only the surface, and additionally that most of psychology was not as amenable to experimental methods.

Instead, he felt that we had to approach cultural psychology through the products it produced — mythology, for example, cultural practices and rituals, literature and art…. He wrote a ten volume Völkerpsychologie, published between 1900 and 1920, which included the idea of stages of cultural development, from the primitive, to the totemic, through the age of heroes and gods, to the age of modern man.


[From the same article, but more on William James, which sheds some light on where we are today]:

James had always shared his father’s interest in mysticism, even in psychic phenomena. This has dampened his reputation among hard-core scientists in the psychological community, but it only endeared him more to the public. In 1897, he published The Will to Believe, and in 1902, Varieties of Religious Experience.

But James was never completely comfortable with being a psychologist, and preferred to think of himself as a philosopher. He is, in fact, considered America’s greatest philosopher, in addition to being the “father” of American psychology!

He was profoundly influenced by an earlier American philosopher, Charles Sanders Peirce, who founded the philosophy of Pragmatism. Pragmatism says that ideas can never be completely proven true or false. Rather, we should be looking to how useful an idea is — how practical, how productive. James called it the “cash value” of an idea! James popularized Pragmatism in books like Pragmatism in 1907 and The Meaning of Truth in 1909. In 1909, he also wrote A Pluralistic Universe, which was part Pragmatism and part an expression of his own beliefs in something not unlike Spinoza’s pantheism.

He had retired from teaching in 1907 because his heart was not was it used to be, not since a mild attack in 1898 when climbing in upstate New York. He did meet Freud when he came to visit Boston in 1909, and was very much impressed. The next year, he went to Europe for his health and to visit his brother Henry, but soon returned to his home in New Hampshire. Two days later, on August 26, 1910, he died in his wife Alice’s arms.

Several of his works were published posthumously, including Some Problems in Philosophy in 1911 and the magnificent Essays in Radical Empiricism in 1912. James’ most famous students included John Dewey, the philosopher often considered the father of modern American education, and Edward Thorndike, whose work with cats opened the door to the Behaviorists.

[I added bold and underline. quote added 10/2014]


Radical Pragmatist by Linda Simon (biography of William James) emphasizes his unstable childhood with a controlling, affluent but discontent country-hopping father, and his fascination with spiritualism. He envied the literary success of his brother, the author Henry James. He used mescal, hashish and opium on himself to better understand altered mental states. He hoped to communicate with the dead from beyond the grave:

March 15, 1998
Radical Pragmatist
A new biography portrays William James as a man who subjected his own experiences to his philosophy.

Read the First Chapter
By DAVID S. REYNOLDS


William James, America’s most famous philosopher, brother of the novelist Henry James, has never seemed so vulnerably human as in Linda Simon’s biography ”Genuine Reality.” Drawing innovatively from the vast correspondence of the James family, Simon portrays a troubled, gritty man whose philosophical vision grew directly from private travail.

Many of James’s psychological problems, as Simon shows, stemmed from his vexed relationship with his aloof yet controlling father, Henry James Sr., a writer and lecturer who failed to gain the prominence enjoyed by his friend Ralph Waldo Emerson among American thinkers. When he was 33 years old, he suffered the first of several mental breakdowns that sent him searching for relief to such optimistic theories as Fourierism, Transcendentalism and, ultimately, Swedenborgianism. Financially secure through family money, he and his wife divided their time between Manhattan and Newport, R.I., exposing their five children to American high culture. But dissatisfaction with the United States impelled them repeatedly to take the family for long stays in Europe. For two of their children, William and Henry, this peripatetic life style bred cosmopolitanism and expansive creativity. For the others — Alice, Robertson and Wilkinson — it fostered rootlessness and confusion. For all of them, it set the stage for periods of emotional instability in adulthood.

. . .

His father’s nervous shuttling between the United States and Europe was duplicated in his own equally frenetic country-hopping. His father’s embrace of supposed cure-alls was repeated in his anxious groping for spiritual and physical rescue among the offbeat fads of the day.

One of the delights of ”Genuine Reality” {{the book}} is its dogged pursuit of James while he rummaged among would-be panaceas. Surprisingly, in light of his reputation as an empirically scientific philosopher, James was deeply fascinated by spiritualism. Although he disdained the transparent theatrics of run-of-the-mill mediums, he harbored a faith that the dead could contact the living. When his friend Frederic Myers was about to die, James asked him to send messages from beyond the grave. To his disappointment, no messages ever came.

If Myers failed him, the psychic Leonora Piper did not. James and his wife first sought out Piper for spiritual consolation shortly after the death of their second child, Herman. Stunned by her apparently otherworldly powers, James made her a special object of study, consulting her regularly and reporting on her to the Society for Psychic Research, an organization for paranormal studies. Even when Piper, tired of being analyzed, publicly denied having spiritual gifts, James did not lose faith in her, as did many of his colleagues.

Spiritualism was merely one of many current phenomena that fascinated him. When bothered by heart trouble, he took doses of a new compound extracted from the lymph glands and testicles of goats. When struck by back pain, he applied a galvanic battery to his spine. To combat depression and insomnia, he consulted mind-cure therapists and faith healers. To gain insight into abnormal mental states, he tried mind-expanding drugs like hashish, mescal and opium.

Simon recounts such wide-ranging experimentation on James’s part without ever giving the impression that he was loony or irresponsible.


David S. Reynolds is a Distinguished Professor of English at Baruch College and the City University of New York Graduate Center. His books include ”Walt Whitman’s America” and ”Beneath the American Renaissance.”

This William James was the grandson of a “captain of industry” who’d come from Ireland to the US in 1789, as described (from first chapter of the Linda Simon book, link from the book review above).

IN THE LATE 1800s, the trip from Cambridge, Massachusetts, to Syracuse, New York, was long, convoluted, and uncomfortable. But it was a trip that William James {{the father of American Psychology discussed above}} undertook regularly in his role as overseer of the James family property. He traveled to Syracuse at least once a year, often more; and whenever he went, he had money on his mind. For himself and his siblings, a few stores on Salina Street, owned by the family since the eighteenth century, meant mortgages and repairs, bankers and agents, and most of all, rent. The Syracuse property supplemented James’s income, subsidized his travels, had helped pay for the publication of his first book, and always served as a reminder of his origins.

He was descended from one of America’s richest men, a captain of industry so wealthy that, rumor had it, only John Jacob Astor exceeded his fortune. Then as now, wealth meant power, and the first William James, grandfather of our philosopher, was a powerful man: restless, decisive, fiercely willful. He believed, with unwavering certainty, that money and power reflected a man’s ultimate achievement. . . .

Yet James’s private and public writings are peppered with metaphors drawn from the world of business, and he strived, with no apology, to shape his publications for the marketplace. His philosophical works, focused as they are on questions of free will and human potential; his personal struggles with power and authority; and his anxiety about his self-worth suggest his affinity, by more than blood, with his grand and looming patriarch. The first William James, of course, did not consider philosophy a suitable occupation for any of his descendants. Family legend has it that he was known as “the Patroon.”

WILLIAM WAS EIGHTEEN when he emigrated from Ireland to America in 1789, twenty-two when he arrived in Albany, where he would make his fortune, take three wives, and sire thirteen children. His career as a businessman began when, with a partner, he opened a small store that sold tobacco and cigars. The shop soon expanded to include dry goods and groceries, but James was not satisfied with being a modest merchant. Shrewd, sharp, ambitious, he built a tobacco factory, leased and operated the saltworks of Syracuse, and, among many civic roles, served as first vice president of the Albany Savings Bank, director of the New York State Bank of Albany, and trustee of Union College. He was a significant force in the decision to build the Erie Canal, which established Albany as a major center of trade.


© 1998 Linda Simon All rights reserved. ISBN: 0-15-193098-8

 

The establishment of  independent (freestanding, as opposed to departments within universities) Schools of Professional Psychology leading to advanced degrees may have begun in 1969 with Nicholas J. Cummings‘ establishment of the California School of Professional Psychology (now absorbed into Alliant International University),   He certainly takes claim for it here, and in a 2008 interview with psychotherapy.net, and with this claim to have educated half the psychologists in California.

Catch the lingo:

Robin M. Deutsch, Ph.D.is a psychologist and the Director of the Center of Excellence for Children, Families and the Law at the Massachusetts School of Professional Psychology (MSPP). She is the former director of Forensic Services of the Children and the Law Program in the Department of Psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital where she remains a consultant. She is Associate Clinical Professor of Psychology at Harvard Medical School. Dr. Deutsch is a graduate of the University of Wisconsin-Madison from which she also received her Ph.D. in counseling psychology.** As a therapist, consultant, custody evaluator, mediator, and parenting coordinator, her work has focused on the application of child development research to children’s adjustment to divorce and parenting issues, the evaluation of families involved in family change and management of high conflict divorce. Dr. Deutsch frequently speaks to interdisciplinary groups on complex issues in child custody disputes. She has provided training for Parenting Coordination throughout the country, Canada and Sweden, including the first Massachusetts training. Dr. Deutsch has published articles on the effects of high conflict divorce, the evaluation of domestic violence, Parenting Coordination,

**(Madison is also where AFCC claims its headquarters, currently, although it is not registered to do business as itself in the state, last I looked (2013) “high-conflict” and pushing parent coordination are AFCC “tells.” the former is to minimize the latter (notice “evaluation of DV” — usually to minimize or dismiss it) and as to parenting coordination, parents have begun to sue over it, and the Supreme Court of PA (as I’m recalling it) recently, and suddenly, eliminated the field by simply changing the administrative rules. See right side-bar)).

it is just a few clicks from the President of MSPP (Nicholas Corvino, Psy.D.) through his bio, hearing that he was “past-President” of the Society for Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, clicking on that, and looking at its Leadership, to seeing that the FOCUS (newsletter?) editor is hailing from Saybrook (Eric Willmarth, Ph.D.). This is a certain set of cultural values (including Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis itself, which has religious overtones and in some religions is contraindicated, i.e., don’t do it..Practitioners often go into counseling or behavioral health and have a sense of “calling” about how to heal others..)….

So, this article is going to look at both incorporation and (as it’s also where I discovered some of the connections) the tendency for people susceptible to joining cults themselves to go into fields where they can access more vulnerable, traumatized, in-pain, or troubled individuals to help them, as they were themselves indoctrinated to do. This goes both ways (short-hand, “new age” and “Evangelical and/or Conservative Christian Fundie” and to me says — when zealous people looking to recruit others into a changed worldview are flooding into a field, we should reconsider whether that’s a good idea, or a bad idea.


However, I have to question why the timing of “corporation status revoked” with the timing of receiving more HHS funds to promote fatherhood, which comes up repeatedly, below.


(UPDATE from 2013) I found this individual cited as a lead presenter in “Disconnected Dads, Strategies for Promoting Responsible Fatherhood” courtesy “Policy Institute for Family Impact Seminars” (FIS) and a few other funders and panelists on the (long) publication… This 70pg document is highlights from a Washington D.C. conference hosted by then-Vice President Al Gore, and on page 1 cites the Charles Ballard organization.

Buckle your seatbelts, this is one of those rollercoaster posts, somewhere between thrilling, comical, and “we are not amused.” [End, 2013 intro…]


Remember the nonprofit from my last post, the one in Washington D.C. which got a bunch of grants (over $2 million) only has one public displayed tax return (that I can see), never got a DUNS# for its HHS grants, and eventually got its nonprofit revoked or failure to file? — this one?

TAGGS.hhs.gov on this group (I searched by its EIN# — which is below).

Recipient Name City State ZIP Code County DUNS Number Sum of Awards
INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITALIZATION  WASHINGTON DC 20019 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA $ 2,549,350

 

One of whose Principal Investigators ended up on THIS one, which I’ve profiled before (herein):

 “Women in Fatherhood Inc”  which is ….

an organized voice of women with diverse perspectives and experiences. We are a national 501c3 comprised of women with direct or indirect professional involvement in the responsible fatherhood field. The mission of Women In Fatherhood is to contribute to and advocate for family and community well-being through the support of positive father involvement and healthy family relationships.

and on THAT board of directors, is:

>Frances Ballard:

Petrice Sams-Abiodun

“Frances Ballard is the Executive Director for the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC). In her role she is responsible for the strategic direction and leadership for activities regarding the NRFC, including the coordination of the media campaign, clearinghouse and Web site, Training and Technical Assistance (T & TA) to responsible fatherhood demonstration sites, and building relationships and partnerships for NRFC. {{*1}} She has over 20 years experience working with fathers, families and healthcare. Her previous positions include 12 years serving as the Vice President and Chief Operating Officer for The Institute for Responsible Fatherhood and Family Revitalization (see below); Consultant to The Annie E. Casey Foundation’s Making Connections Program; Director of Corporate Development and Clinical Manager-Ambulatory Care, Grace Hospital; and Nurse Consultant/Program Developer, The Institute For Responsible Fatherhood and Family Development.** She holds a Masters of Science Degree in Nursing Administration, a B.A. in Social Work, an A.S. in Nursing, and numerous executive management certifications. She is married to Dr. Charles A. Ballard, “pioneer” of the Fatherhood Movement and the mother of their three children, Jonathan, Lydia and Christopher.”

 

**”The Institute For Responsible Fatherhood and Family Development” is an organization  which got over $2 million of grants over several years, but then intentionally? let its corporate registration go unfiled and eventually was revoked by the IRS; Dr. & Mrs. Ballard were both “Principal Investigators” on HHS (grants) to this group, while the single tax return I found shows them on the board of Directors.  This irresponsible behavior, as to filing, was then further rewarded by promotion — to the WIFI group, and from there to the HHS outfit mentioned above.  This is apparently what HHS is doing in the marriage/fatherhood field.  

My problem, you see, is that I actually read this stuff, look at it, say “HUH? What’s THAT?” and go find out.

I might have a much more peaceful life — and a lot less to think about — without going down that Rabbit Hole, but today I did.  I do this because ignorance of what the US Government & certain large family foundations (i.e., private money – such as the Annie E. Casey Foundation) is supporting, and what it’s attacking, in short, what it’s DOING, is not bliss — not in the long term.

And I hate to say this, but it led to the something we have to discuss sooner or later, which is:

 

CULTS, and their CHARACTERISTICS

 

specifically, how did the USA, Inc. (and specifically here, HHS) — become one?  Because — honest! — all I did is look things up.  I look at organizations, and the people running them, and I read what they say.  And before the end of this post, sorry to bring this up, but it leads right to:

 

[Broken link to image; blank space removed]

And I’m not talking, in general, vague principles of comparison.  I’m talking personnel and graduate degrees.  I already talked ultra-conservative Christian  Pepperdine University CDRC centralized push through Mediation as the Norm in California (at public expense) and connect with Marriage/Fatherhood funding (right on the website).

I’m talking “Spiritual Psychology” Marriage and Family Therapists and the (then, very young) man who decided to expose one of these ex-Eckankar, ex-Scientology (or maybe not, depending on who you believe) and ended up dealing with not just a smear campaigns, but death threads, having his house ransacked, and now the guy doesn’t even keep a phone.  But inbetween he was in Geraldo, you name it, and the question I have is — why are we paying, and tax-exempting — this stuff?  Because, when you get right down to it — whether it’s Neopagan New Age (hypnosis, belly-dancing and Mind-Body Ph.D.s (distance learning, on-line) followed by Ph.D.’s in psychology, etc.– or Right-wing Reich (do away with no-fault divorce, exterminate the gays and especially hang the feminists)

It’s going to (I say) end up just about the same place:  It’s going to end up in bed with you — or your kids (regardless of your age, gender, or marital status), demanding absolute loyalty, embezzling, and trying to sound very wise and spiritual.

And if it sounds much more dignified and organized (as the National Clearinghouse for Responsible Fatherhood does – most of the websites I’ve seen, for that matter, look Grrrr–eat) — it may be organized, but it’s going to boil down to about the same thing as any run of the mill cult.  Only some are larger.

Read the rest of this entry »

%d bloggers like this: