Posts Tagged ‘Overcoming Barriers (Mass Entity also reg in California)’
Assembling the Pieces: [1] AFCC 54th Annual Conference (2017)’s Diamond (Top) Sponsor “Avirat” (2001 MN, later -2015- in UK, product “OurFamilyWizard™”) found promoting [2] “Family Works, Inc.” (last found registered in Oregon, running “ParentingWisely™”) which probably profits ℅ royalties from [3] “Center For Divorce Education, Inc.” (Ohio Legal Domiciled Nonprofit at the same Ashland, Oregon, address, under same CEO, running “Children In Between™”) which takes Court-Ordered Parent Education Business (Out-of-State + Spanish-Speaking Parents) from [4] Cuyahoga County Ohio’s Domestic Relations Court’s “Special Circumstances, Rule 34” (1994ff).
Assembling the Pieces: [1] AFCC Conference Diamond (top) Sponsor “Avirat” (2001 MN, later in UK, product “OurFamilyWizard(™)”) found promoting [2] “Family Works, Inc.” (last found registered in Oregon, running “ParentingWisely(™)”) which probably profits ℅ royalties from [3] “Center For Divorce Education, Inc.” (Ohio Legal Domiciled Nonprofit at the same Ashland, Oregon, address, under same CEO, running “Children In Between(™) “) which takes (for Out-of-State + Spanish-Speaking Parents) Court-Ordered Parent Education Business from [4] Cuyahoga County, Ohio’s Domestic Relations Court’s “Special Circumstances, Rule 34” (1994ff). (Short-link ends “-9lB” and the middle character is a small “L” not the number “1”) This link and full title will be posted again further below. Post as published is just under 12,000 words.
(How do you think I keep my own posts straight after nine years and almost 800 of them — by total recall and three-word reminders or by placing as many clues in the title as possible to the contents resulting in outrageously long, but memorable [to me!] titles?)
Dec.12 post: https://wp.me/psBXH-9ld (scroll or page down to middle for section with colorful images on OurFamilyWizard® & AFCC’s 54th Annual (2017) Conference in Boston); Dec. 8 post: https://wp.me/psBXH-8HX
Don’t shoot the messenger. I didn’t make this mess. I’m just untangling and translating some of it.
See nearby image: My last two posts have background on this (mess) and explain why I haven’t dropped the topic yet. (Red Flag for RICO situations evident as well as a prime example of classic court-connected programming). If these two posts aren’t still showing under the widget to the right (i.e., if you’re reading this post months later, knocking them off the “Last Few [10] Posts” list), to access those two posts easily, use this blog’s “Archives” (calendar widget near top right): set it to December, 2018, and click on Dec. 11 or 7, which display on the calendar as having links. The “Most Recent Posts” widget displays dates automatically; Archives links to them automatically;I don’t know why they are one day off from each other. You can also use the links I added to the nearby image caption.
The first of these two, ‘A Substantial Background Check and History,” (posted separately Dec. 12 but written almost a year earlier and originally published then on my extensive Front (Home) Page) has a section on “Avirat” and court-mandated consumption of its digital-platform product (OFW).
The second post shown in nearby image, “The Public/Private Nor-For-Profit/For Profit…” (posted Dec. 8) focuses on the nonprofit “Center for Divorce Education” (“CDE”) as related to the presumably for-profit (NOT tax-exempt) “Family Works, Inc.” (“FWI”) being also at the same Oregon address In this dynamic duo, the nonprofit is legal-domicile Ohio and the other one, at this point, I can’t say in what form or where it still exists…).{{**}}
{{**Later, I found it (?) back in Ohio.. Searchable at the Secretary of State Business Search website}}. Its single incorporator (Don A. Gordon) and the only filings shown are: 1997, 1999, and again in April, 2018, then June 2018. I knew Ohio didn’t require annual filings — but only once every about twenty years??) Typo in Entity # corrected. Correct Entity# is “975105,” it formerly displayed “971505 .” I realize the slideshow (image gallery) format is sometimes hard to see details on, which is why I’ve also provided a link so people may repeat the search on-line themselves from the Secretary of State website, and view whichever pdf images are also available there (recommended!).//LGH Image gallery added Jan. 14; typo in FWI Ohio Business ID or Entity# corrected Jan. 16, 2019 }}
To know whether or even approximately how much revenues stream through CDE through court-mandated referrals (in many different states) to FWI, or separately to FWI directly OR through nonprofits supported by social services federal grants, or federal grants to states, one would have to also find some of those government entities accounting trail that handles those types of grants or that type of programming.
In this post, while I just picked one of many county entities that CDE apparently counts on for its business, I couldn’t even find that county’s CAFRs (comprehensive annual financial report), although the county website freely admits it’s obligated to produce them and submit to a higher authority (the “GFOA.”). It doesn’t admit, in the same paragraphs, that the public might deserve access to these or have an interest in reading them.. It sounds to me, then, that generally speaking, this topic tends to on closer look, run through a leaky circuitry whose overseers are less than interested in talking about such leaks, or plugging them, or that the public should even be aware such leaks may characterize the system overall.
SHARE THIS POST on...
Parent Coordination Central (.com) isn’t. Unless Coordinating a Sequence of Adm. Dissolutions was part of the plan? Neither “is” (as a Georgia nonprofit) either The Cooperative Parenting Institute, Inc. or Nat’l Parent Coordination Association, Inc. (Susan Boyan, Anne Marie Termini joint websites and “flash-in-the-pan” Georgia nonprofits, revisited, Dec. 2017)
I was looking at Massachusetts AFCC filings and website again recently, in the context of reunification camp “Overcoming Barriers” being advertised on the site; a topic I’m posting on currently, and very concerned about; the practice seems so aggressive towards minor children and can involve and has involved hauling them (transporting, including by airplane) cross-country for group therapy and re-indoctrination, “deprogramming parental alienation” camps.
MA AFCC “Resources for Families” page, featuring, among other offerings, the 501©3 “Overcoming Barriers.” Parental Alienation-antidote,a.k.a. reunification therapy (or camps)….
(Overcoming Barriers website detail: Our Approach) viewed 12/19/2017
MA AFCC web page featuring Parent Coordination (see website for active links)
Anyhow, I noticed that the MAAFCC.org website, which is pretty basic, not overly populated with information, does take time to advertise and talk about Parent Coordination, and its certification (i.e., get trained to be listed as a provider). It also shows this to have been, it seems, a very recent (2017) administrative ruling to make it, or some new element of it, happen.
Home page of AFCC chapter in MA. Fairly straightforward.
MA AFCC Articles of Incorp (partial, from state business entities search site)
So… on the topic and title of “Parent Coordinator,” like others AFCC members (under its name or under other significant organizations or center they may have been involved with) helped sponsor as professions, such a dispute resolution, or mediator, or the concept of “collaborative divorce,” etc., just because this may not be making headlines on “outraged parent news” journalism, including about parents periodically suing over it in protest, doesn’t mean the court-ordered practice or judicial involvement in certifying or training people for it (to get referral business from the courts) has ceased operations.
Click to enlarge. Self-explanatory. Found on MAAFCC.org website on a page dedicated to “Parenting Coordination” news.
Some apparently have, though, it seems ceased staying legally registered at the state level. The ones in Georgia here, I DNR whether I ever found related tax returns. There may have been Forms 990-N filed (or, maybe not), but it’s not on my priority list to check the IRS individually for these.
Post title:
To be honest, I wanted to refer to this, check back because I referred to it, but not clutter up the original post. Parent post (this will probably be published right after it, and before Christmas Day, 2017) is “Incentivizing Reunification Camps while Family Policy already sets the stage for Familial Abductions.” (short-link ending “-8fE”). The post you’re reading now IS short; consider it a footnote only (not a major expose!)…
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
Do You Know Your…ABA, APA (Founders, History, and via their Forms 990/O or Financial Statements, As Nonprofits?), Or How the ABA from its start maneuvered around existing suffrage for “men of color” long after women also got the vote? If Not, Then You Also May Not Yet Know Your [the Public’s] Assigned Place in the Tax Continuum Pecking Order. (Oct 2014 updated + Publ. July 10, 2017, Pt. 3A)
Elongated post title reflects content after a three-way split of a previously unpublished (because I mistakenly thought it had been published!) post from late October, 2014, a situation I am now correcting in late June 2017 after trying to cite to this post to better explain the recurring topic of networked nonprofits named after public agencies. AND to increase public awareness of major professional associations in the tax-exempt sector collaborating together for population control, behavioral modification, etc., all allegedly for the public interest.
This is “Part 3.” Blog followers may have heard that explained twice before, but newcomers may have not. This post is a blend of updated information and previous insights + narrative; the updates include more visuals (especially excerpts of tax returns).
Do You Know Your…ABA, APA (Founders, History, and via their Forms 990/O and Financial Statements, As Nonprofits?), Or How the ABA from its start maneuvered around Membership Admission for “men of color” despite existing suffrage and qualified men until long after women also got the vote? If Not, Then You Also May Not Yet Know Your [the Public’s] Assigned Place in the Tax Continuum Pecking Order. (Oct 2014 update, Pt. 3A) (Post title with case-sensitive shortlink ending “-76j” generated by WordPress)
The APA and ABA
They are the American Psychological Association (since 1892, incorporated 1925, last “Gross receipts” from the tax return posted on their website, $160 million, assets $236 million) [@ tax latest return posted Oct. 2014; update below shows $200M gross receipts but total assets $230M], and the American Bar Association (since 1878, incorporated ____,** last “gross receipts” posted tax return, $152.6 million and the assets $329 million) [*@ Oct. 2014; updates below]. **This info left blank because: the last 3 tax (FY2012, -13 and -14; 2016 not posted yet on “Form990finder”) returns left it blank; before that, some said 1905, before that, 1878. Before 2008, the IRS Form didn’t ask legal domicile and year founded as part of the header info. I went to Illinois Cyberdrive Search to look up the corporate registration (which comes with plenty of disclaimers), and it currently says, in the details page, only 1992- – which cannot be right. I went to D.C. business entities search (a site I’m familiar with) — the web page and URL had been changed and my username (free registration) no longer recognized — at which point, I figure, leave it blank!]
Both the ABA and APA organizations have related entities -a specific term which relates to and affects their tax returns and financial reports; the term means related if one controls the others, or with common leadership but with separate EIN#s and legal names. For example, from an independently audited financial statement FY2012 for the American Bar Association references some, but not ALL its related entities. But this wouldn’t be known at first reading — the tax returns reference others (See first image. Screenprints from the APA’s recent financial statements, including its “Note 1” describing APA’s related entities reflected in the statements, are shown further below on this post.)
ABA statement regarding which entities are in its Consolidated Audited FS for those years (2012, 2013) show only three, however there are more ABA-related entities shown on tax returns…
And, as you realize if you think about it, both the ABA and the APA also have affiliates or chapters at the state and county level, although these are not registered as “related entities” on the main organizations’ (APA + ABA’s) tax returns or audited financial statements. However these may be organized or named as fiscally separate business entities, these also are linked together and networked by both purpose and long association (meaning, within each major discipline, i.e., whether law or psychology).
For example, some recent Form 990 search results (FY2015 only, ABA only) of such state-level associations and within two of our larger states (NY, CA). You will be able to see which column they are sorted by (next link, and three images with gray-and-white striped tables with blue header rows). Some major states (California, Texas, Florida) Bar Associations didn’t even show up in the search results which raises another question: How many of us would know nationally, off-hand, about how many state and county-level (a) bar and (b) psychological associations exist, and where to find their exact names in a list, from which their tax returns could be looked up, for size, leadership, or activities? Would the ABA and APA main websites tell this? (I checked ABA for “Member list” and was asked to join, and warned that the list was proprietary– but that may be for individual ABA members). State level bar associations don’t appear to be required to follow an exact name format, probably, and even if they did, would the capacities and/or quirks of the standard charitable databases that might be searched reveal all of them? (990finder.foundationcenter.org despite its convenience, often has search results whose organization names do not match the underlying tax returns, which I’ve known for a while now).
- Actually, here’s the ABA interactive map of the US for search of “State and Local Bar Associations“). Under California (of course — where I live!), the State Bar of California, is described as an arm of the Judicial Council, and “Unified.” It’s listed among the 38 pages (for the state). It would then take several other steps to locate their respective tax returns for a generic idea of the assets maintained, or operations. State Bar of California website says it processes $30M of grants to legal aid organizations throughout the state, that it was organized in 1927, and more.
- So, to get a national result, I guess one would have to do at least 50 searches and compile results…
I then did two Form990 searches specifically for NY (one of the largest) and for California (and THE state bar association didn’t show up in those results, but it gives a flavor of the diversity of named bar associations, whether by geography (county, city or for some larger cities, parts of a city), or by demography (Asian American, Black, Hispanic, Women, Mexican, etc.) — each one a separate organization, many likely with their own related entities, such as foundations. The next link is simply an interactive search (entity names links on it are clickable). I had done FY2016 only, but so few results showed, I backed it up one year.
Form 990 Srch Results YR=2015 NAME= State Bar Association Of bring up only 18 (Org Names=Active Links in the pdf) printed July8 2017 (2pp of results)<==Why several major state’s listings aren’t shown, DNK — may be a factor of the database’s labeling, or how they are titled. But the absence of state bar associations tax returns from MAJOR states in such a search is unusual…Note most are filing Form 990Os).
2015 State Bars sorted by Total Assets 7/8/2017. Click to enlarge (true for most images herein).
Search Results within NY, Year 2015, sorted by $$
Search Results 2015 within CA, sorted by $$
Currently, the APA (P for “Psychological”) shows only one related tax-exempt entity, formed in 2001, but a recent (FY 2015) tax return shows it’s focused on promoting the profession across national lines (i.e., states, territories and provinces), by lobbying and organizationally, and as small as it is, relatively speaking, it shares about 50% of its revenues (“expenses”) as for “Payments to Affiliates” — which the fine print shows means the APA itself and possibly another related entity, the APA PAC (political action committee), EIN#000522094 also in D.C.
The same tax return then granted out a portion of is proceeds to others — and a three-page printout of “to whom” reveals minor grants ($15K, $20K range) to a variety of more local psychological associations, most by geography. While those grantees are not showing as “related entities” to either APA or the APAPO, they are benefitting from its operations…
Grantees from p2 of 3 APA PO entity reflect various state-level psychological assoc’ns (see FY2015 return, or link to Sched I of Grants, all 3 pp, nearby in this post.
the APA PO lists two Related Entities, one of which (red oval) is a PAC, the other is APA proper.
the APA PO decribes what its reason for existence is, notice not limited to US only
The APA PO (EIN# on image) references Two Categories of Members, Practice Constituents and Education Constituents (who pay into a certain trust, not identified readily on the Form 990.
APAPO EIN#522262196 FY2015 (45pp) (Sched I of Grants only Grants were USD 471 268 Other Exps (mostly Paymts back to the APA) USD 3 687 269 (link to entire return provided above in text).
State (Territory,DC+ one Canadian) psychological associat’ns supported by the APA PO entity); click to enlarge.
Below (colorful annotations, thumbnail size) is image of a FY2004 list from the same organization’s Form 990. I am simply reminding readers that these state-level organizations exist and interact with the APA, or rather, its related entity.
Back to the “Related Entities”:
For example, the ABA “Financials” link shows combined financial statements and that two corporations were recently dissolved: the James O. Broadhead Corporation (“JOB” EIN#521874598) and the ABA Museum of Law. Not referenced on the “Financials” page for some reason is the National Judicial College (EIN#942427596) in Reno, NV, listed as a Related Entity at least to the dissolving JOB Corporation in 2012. The NJC in Reno (street address at “Judicial College Building,” formed in 1977) is of moderate size and gets grants (I just looked at recent Form 990) from the USDOJ, the USDOT (transportation) and the State Justice Institute — about $2M worth (next five images after the three (keep reading) with this-background-color captions from the unrelated-to-the-ABA NCJFCJ, were added 2017 from the ABA Financial Statements page which is one of the images).
Meanwhile, the financially small, but still influential NCJFCJ formed in 1975 (EIN#362486896), a completely separate entity (not ABA-related) on whom I’ve blogged so much, shows a PO Box 8970 in Reno Nevada (and said to be at the University of Nevada-Reno), and per a FY2004 Form 990 it received $12M of government grants.
So, just for comparison — one paragraph, a link, and three annotated images from the NCJFCJ (Nat’l Council on Juvenile and Family Court Judges, Inc), a FY2004 Form 990.*
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
A BIT about how it’s done — Corporations, Associations, and Changing the Courts through AFCC-based liaisons…. (first published 9/2*/2011*, somewhat reformatted 9/12**/2017**)
Preview to minor updates: I’m getting ready to quote this post (which contents came up on a basic Google Search for a certain AFCC Chapter EIN#…). These days, I insert the full post title with a “short-link” (and notation of its closing letters, for my own use in linking one to another) into the posts, and typically enclose the whole post in a solid box as you see here:
A BIT about how it’s done — Corporations, Associations, and Changing the Courts through AFCC-based liaisons…. (first published 9/2*/2011*, somewhat reformatted 9/12**/2017**) with case-sensitive, word-press-generated post ending “-QJ”
FYI, my Table of Contents, although I worked on it a lot in 2017 and posted it on a “sticky post” near top of the blog, still does NOT go back so far as 2011. IN fact it only goes back to Sept. 24, 2012, as I recall. This time, I did a “quickie-clean-up” to improve some of the visuals, but not a thorough one. The 2011 text begins below the next line; the entire post remains under 10,000 words. Thanks//LGH 9-12-2017.
There’s a lot of drama in the air these days [[Sept. 2011…]] about Presiding Judge Katherine Feinstein’s announcements about whether the courts will, or will not, stay open, and who gets laid off.In researching so many corporations, one thing I’ve come to conclude — that the California Secretary of State’s Corporations Business Entities Search (“http://Kepler.SOS.ca.gov”), which shows this banner:
[[2017 update. Although kepler.sos.ca.gov still does redirect, the current URL is: “http://businesssearch.SOS.CA.Gov” and its layout (once you search) is somewhat different.]]
Is not intended for the general public to research almost anything. There’s not even a field to search by EIN#, or by Incoporating/Registering Officer. [[That part hasn’t changed!!]]
Today’s Post is “all over the place” but provides a sampler of how — with as clumsy tools as various states give — the habit of searching for corporations and people who incorporate them, and then comparing boards of directors, whether they actually file tax returns or not, and whether while the press is all about justice, children, and helping resolve conflicts, a view at the nonprofit characterization many times simply categorizes the group as “Board of Trade” “Business Promotion” — which is what it is. [[…still provides valuable information. Sentence completed on 2017 update!//LGH]]
I apologize for the length, but not for showing you a different way to think about all the budget crises and cries that justice will be languishing (like it already wasn’t) — as well as showing you how very, very active certain types of professionals are when it comes to incorporating, dissolving or getting cancelled, starting again; not to mention taking turns being the registered agent, and then going public to compliment someone else (on the nonprofit one shares directorship of) citing another professional relationship to add validity.
Along the way here, I also appear to have landed back in Lackawanna County, Pennsylvania Family Court, where FAR too many roads seem to end up. The local residents have caught on to this, thanks it appears, to actually one man, Joe Pilchesky who (judging from the forums) may have had a restraining order on him. That doesn’t mean he can’t check facts and report on them, though!
I do not pretend this is a detailed roadmap — and it hasn’t even gotten, really, to the matter of judicial involvement in real estate transactions, LOTS of them, surrounding the courts, which is possibly even more to the heart of the matter than the nonprofits taking money from the courts.
It’s [this post is] about the VEHICLES for transfer of funds (and children) as well as the “spin.” I am continuing to signal alerts about the situation in hopes that if I “wave” enough information out here, some people other than the groups tracking me to find out how much I’ve reported on them, may start to catch the connections. Because I certainly don’t want this to become the next many years of MY life after all those in the court system. it’s just that conscience, at some level, demands reporting . . . .. who to take at face value and who not. Who is basically NOT anyone whose corporate/incorporate filings and financial connections haven’ been vetted, if they are holding public office, or “supporting” through their profession anyone else who is, or recently was.
AGAIN, in this economy, judges and mediators and psychologists (if they ever DO retire?) need retirement income as well, and someone else to reallocate (it’s habit-forming). Why stop ruling the world and changing government just when you were getting so good at it?
Read the rest of this entry »
SHARE THIS POST on...
Evaluate, Coordinate, call “Alienator!” Pt. 4– Three AFCC Ph.D.’s on ONE case & “PAS” = 2011 NH Supreme Court custody reversal. And what’s Warshak got to do with it? [First publ. June 15, 2011, not on blog TOC yet].
This post title with a “shortlink” attached is:
Evaluate, Coordinate, call “Alienator!” Pt. 4– Three AFCC Ph.D.’s on ONE case & “PAS” = 2011 NH Supreme Court custody reversal. And what’s Warshak got to do with it? [First publ. June 15, 2011, not on blog TOC yet]. (WordPress-generated, case-sensitive shortlink ends “-JR”. Note: for normal URLs (web addresses), upper or lower case alpha doesn’t seem to matter, but I’ve learned that within this domain (WordPress) and in such short-links, it does.
LGH UPDATE NOTE: My current table of contents only goes back to Sept., 2012; this is a June 15, 2011 post (early on in this blogger’s learning curve!) so would only be found by search, some other link reference to it, or by Year/Month/Date through the “Archives” (by month) on this blog.
I added some quick (not thorough) updates on Overcoming Barriers at the bottom in response to a comment submitted March, 2016…including tax returns, California corporate registration (Massachusetts could also be searched).
For a December 2017 Update (which at first I thought might fit in here), see:
I was just going to add a very short update (that comment, it seems, in March 2016), but instead added a section on renewed Parental Alienation discussions, and the socialist “re-education camps” in Viet Nam after South fell to the North, in 1975. Similar in other countries. Major quality and scope difference — but force is force, and at some levels, it’s also a form of psychological, personal violence. In my opinion. So, the original (written/published in 2011) post begins in maroon font and below a double-line after the following paragraphs and a few quotes:
Speaking of how to continue keeping “Parental Alienation” conversation going — and ordering services to undo it through the family courts — I recently noticed that a “Dr. Craig Childress” (Craig A. Childress, Psy.D.) is resurrecting parental alienation under a different theory; I have some comments on it over at Red Herring Alert (a wordpress blog). “Same old, same old” with new window dressing and tactics (Childress recommends pressuring providers who do NOT recommend IMMEDIATE, safety-for-the-child total separation from the alienating parent (i.e., “mom” typically) through their licensing board, if this could be categorized under some existing DSM-defined disorder.
You cannot really argue with self-referencing, self-congratulating circles of experts on this matter which is why I recommend a more interesting angle of approach: If they incorporate, find tax returns and corporate records; if they get contracts with the courts, or government grants to run “reunification camps” and similar therapy for parental alienation (in its old or new classifications), pay attention to the details!
The technique and ability to re-indoctrinate people in groups, as well as children, was also in common use in socialist countries; I believe the term used was “re-education camps,” referring to those in South Viet Nam after the fall of Saigon in 1975: Search “Vietnamese Re-Education Camps: A Brief History” (that’s supplemental reading, from a man’s father’s oral history — he lived through such camps — from “Choices” program at Brown; see website) or “Vietnamese Re-Education Camps” from “VietNamWar.info.”
The second link introduces and describes the various levels. I wonder, in the USA, why the country is so heavily invested in a class of professionals whose purpose seems to be behavioral change and keeping up-to-date with tactics and strategies for re-indoctrinating children, women and men into their proper social relationships with each other and particularly after one or more of the same has spoken out about some prior injustice, or sought to escape being subjected to abuse by a family member. These camps apparently went on from 1975 – 1986 until people still being held were allowed to emigrate to the US.
“Vietnamese Re-Education Camps” from “VietNamWar.info.” Posted 4/17/2014 by “kubia”
Following the fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975, Vietnamese Communist government began to open hundreds of “re-education” camps throughout the country. Those camps, as Hanoi officially claimed, were places where individuals could “learn about the ways of the new government” through education and socially constructive labor.
In 1975, it was estimated that around 1 to 2.5 million people1, including former officers, religious leaders, intellectuals, merchants, employees of the old regime, and even some Communists, entered the camps in the hope that they could quickly reconcile with the new government and continued their peaceful life. However, their time in those camps did not last for ten days or two weeks as the government had claimed.
Re-education Camps Levels
The re-education camps were organized into five levels. The level-one camps which were called as study camps or day-study centers located mainly in major urban centers, often in public parks, and allowed attendees to return home each night. In those camps, some 500,000 people2 were instructed about socialism, new government policy in order to unlearn their old ways of thinking. The level-two camps had a similar purpose as the level-one, but attendees were not allowed to return home for three to six months. During the 1970s, at least 200,000 inmates entered more than three hundred level–two camps2.
The level-three re-education camps, known as the socialist-reform camps, could be found in almost every Southern Vietnam province containing at least 50,000 inmates2. Most of them were educated people and thus less susceptible to manipulation than most South Vietnamese in the level-one and two camps. Therefore, the inmates (or prisoners) in these camps had to suffer poorer living conditions, forced labor and daily communist indoctrination.
The last two types of camps were used to incarcerate more “dangerous” southern individuals – including writers, legislator teachers, supreme court judges, province chiefs – until the South was stable to permit their release. By separating members of certain social classes of the old regime, Hanoi wanted to prevent them from conducting joint resistances and forced them to conform to the new social norms. In 1987, at least 15,000 “dangerous” persons were still incarcerated level-four and level-five camps2.
Camp Conditions and Deaths
In most of the re-education camps, living conditions were inhumane. Prisoners were treated with little food, poor sanitation, and no medical care3. They were also assigned to do hard and risky work such as clearing the jungle, constructing barracks, digging wells, cutting trees and even mine field sweeping without necessary working equipments.
Although those hard work required a lot of energy, their provided food portions were extremely small. As a prisoner recall, the experience of hunger dominated every man in his camp. Food was the only thing they talked about. Even when they were quiet, food still haunted their thoughts, their sleep and their dreams. Worse still, various diseases such as malaria, beriberi and dysentery were widespread in some of the camps. As many prisoners were weakened by the lack of food, those diseases could now easily take away their lives.
Starvation diet, overwork, diseases and harshly punishment resulted in a high death rate of the prisoners. According to academic studies of American researchers, a total of 165,000 Vietnamese people died in those camps4.
The End of “Re-education” Period
Most of the re-education camps were operated until 1986 when Nguyen Van Linh became the General Secretary of the Communist Party. He began to close the harsher camps and reformed the others5. Two year later, Washington and Hanoi reached an agreement that Vietnam would free all former soldiers and officials of the old regime who were still held in re-education camps across the country and allowed them to emigrate to the United States under the Orderly Departure Program (ODP). As of August 1995, around 405,000 Vietnamese prisoners and their families were resettled in the U.S6.
– See more at: thevietnamwar.info/vietnamese-re-education-camps/..
The forced “Reunification Camps” (far less harsh, but still forced, and still designed to produce an attitude change) have their professionals willing to engage in these practices.
I think it must take a certain kind of mentality, if not personality aberrancy, to believe in this and what’s more preach about it and take in business to engage in it.
For some reason, those “Re-education camps” remind me of, though lesser in degree, the same idea as, for example, “overcoming barriers.” It’s still based on force — and who knows how many similar programs are operating around the country. As I write this, the Grazzini-Rucki runaway teens were reported (in 2016) to being re-indoctrinated to like their father (who they’d run away from as young teens), while the mother, until recently, was incarcerated for parental interference. See my more recent 2016 posts).
Here’s a sample. I see he’s from Pasadena, California (Los Angeles area). To see it in better formatting (the “copy” function sometimes removes all spaces between words!) click on link:
C. A. CHILDRESS, Psy.D.LICENSED CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST, PSY 18857
547 S. MARENGO DR., STE 105 • PASADENA, CA 91101 • (909) 821-5398Page 1 of 10DSM-5 Diagnosis of “ParentalAlienation”
