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 ‘U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work.

Interlocking, Dysfunctional Definitions, Cont’d: “NJII, a NJIT Company,” and (how, exactly, NJ became) “the State of Innovation.” [“Incorporated” March 17, 2019]

leave a comment »

Interlocking, Dysfunctional Definitions, Cont’d: “NJII, a NJIT Company,” and (how, exactly, NJ became) “the State of Innovation.” [“Incorporated” March 17, 2019] Published March 20; 8,600 words, including some repetition.  Shortlink ends “-9wS

This post is not a business entity or doing commerce, so technically speaking it’s not “incorporated” in any state for doing commerce (tax-exempt or not) within the state. However, if you consider my “body of work” in this blog, and that I just injected another post into it, with its separate page and personality (so to speak), in the generic, broader sense, I did “incorporate” it. (Corpus, habeas corpus, corporation, corpse, “corps,” corporal, corporeal, corpuscle: common roots):

This post was inspired first, by a recent Bloomberg.com co-sponsored Tweet, leading to a sponsored article, When Innovation is a State’s Main Industry, March 5, 2019: that’s where I started looking.

Second, and within just a few days, having read the article and begun looking at websites, I also picked up on one of its projects launched under “HealRWorld,” announced in May, 2018 (This link drops many involved names See nearby link with NJII logo, “New Jersey Innovation Institute and HealRWorld® Form Sustainability Accelerator”).”

Among those names dropped is an easily searched name (because it belongs to a Greek Orthodox priest; the Greek connection had already surfaced via maternal family line of HealRWorld CEO/Founder (Michele Vonetes Bongiovanni).

May 14, 2018, NJIT announces the launch.

Sept., 2018, Institutional Investor article, “Priest, Hedge Fund Manager Charged with Fraudulent Short-Selling (of “Ligand Pharmaceuticals” based in San Diego, CA). The SEC charged, said priest vows to challenge and said it’s retaliatory for whistleblowing on accounting fraud at Ligand.  RECENT news as you can see.  Related, under SEC, reads (also Sept., 2018), “SEC Charges Hedge Fund Advisor with Short-and-Distort Scheme

{He charges SEC fell down on its duties. Went looking, 3/21/2019; this is from Lemelson’s Amvona blog; posts a letter to the SEC cc’d to various authorities, warnings in 2016, etc. (TheLanternFoundation (<=FY2014) is a 990PF with small amount of investments in the Amvona Fund, EIN# 461737666 in Massachusetts}}

http://njii.com/sdgaccelerate/. Oct. 1, 2018, shortly after “Priest, Hedge Fund Manager Charged with fraudulent Short-Selling Scheme (Charged by the SEC). Click link and read agenda to see that only 5-15 minutes time was allotted to the many, well-connected individuals. Entire event only 3hrs long.

Also referenced (a different presentation, similar theme) at NJII.com/SDGaccelerate/, featuring a video message from NJ Governor Murphy, here, mentioning yet another involved nonprofit and more clues, though no direct links, to Who’s Who).  (See nearby image, “The Global GOALS”).

RE: NJII + HealRWorld + the UN Summit on SME’s to further the UN’s 17 SDG’s 

That image & link, (“New Jersey Innovation Institute and HealRWorld® Form Sustainability Accelerator“) was the first NJII project beyond the usual and overall Public/Private Incubator Accelerator situation which caught my attention as having too many unanswered questions about who was (ownership) and what  is/are (type of business entity and/or product) was this “SME”and why was it chosen.

The situation and concurrence of people and organizations with disturbing lack of transparency even without the SEC report above had set off several of my observational alarms, from the start.

ALSO involved is the ICSB (International Council for Small Businesses) whose editorial offices are housed at and whose current Executive Director is at George Washington University (MBA and PhD) but originally from Egypt: Dr. Aymen El Tarabishy. He is popular, by having been voted “Outstanding Faculty Member” by the students, every year from 2010-2015, and:

Dr. Tarabishy is the only faculty member in the GW School of Business that teaches in two nationally-ranked programs. He developed the first Social Entrepreneurship and Innovation and Creativity courses offered to MBA and undergraduate students throughout the GW School of Business.

Dr. El Tarabishy is the originator of the United Nations International Day for Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs Day) that will always be celebrated on June 27th. MSMEs Day recognizes the important of entrepreneurs and small businesses worldwide.

MSMEs: Micro-, Small, Medium Enterprises.

(Link to that April 11, 2017 UN resolution”A/RES/71/279  reaffirming prior resolutions also, as to 2030 Agenda:

…Reaffirming also its resolution 69/313 of 27 July 2015 on the Addis Ababa Action Agenda of the Third International Conference on Financing for Development, which is an integral part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, supports and complements it, helps to contextualize its means of implementation targets with concrete policies and actions, and reaffirms the strong political commitment to address the challenge of financing and creating an enabling environment at all levels for sustainable development in the spirit of global partnership and solidarity,

“sustainable development in the spirit of global partnership and solidarity”.. such a thrilling call to action, especially if one is in the business of providing finances or software platforms from which to unify the planet.

Compare with ICSB’s stated purpose (on its tax return):


and, under its third category of “Program Service Accomplishments” (shown below as an image and link to tax return also provided), you can see where the UN might come in.  Incidentally, this doesn’t show that year’s accomplishments, as the IRS form directs.  It talks about purpose:



It was tough locating the ICSB’s actual EIN# (it’s not posted on their colorful website), however that EIN# is 941698897.  On FY2016, the latest return shown at my usual provider — which I learned has recently merged? with or bought the trademark Guidestar® and/or its data and now is labeled “Candid“– there are internal financial inconsistencies which would affect the expenses and as a result, net assets balance, as well as missing paperwork (Schedule R, which should list George Washington University as a “related” organization but does not.  It does aknowledge separately (Schedule O) that GWU pays ICSB Exec Director’s salary, which ICSB then reimburses).  Link and some description in next paragraph.

{{March 21, 2019 — I kept looking. That’s only the beginning of the anomalies for this CALIFORNIA legal domicile entity calling itself (though not registered there as a corporation) a legal domicile District of Columbia entity, on tax return header pages…}}

(ICSB Tax Return FY2016, YE March, 2017 claims “0” employees, but about $167K salaries for them.  The only paid officer, Dr. Tarabishy, received “$40,000” (even for 25 hours a week, with his qualifications, not much!) under “Received from Related Orgs” per Part VIIA, but then credited as from the entity (Part IX, Expenses).  No page for Sched R (which would identify any “related entity” paying the only paid officer here) is uploaded.  I haven’t checked other years yet).  Lists “California” as another state it must file in.

The main assets are listed as “intangible.” If you’ll notice that Page 2 (Program Service Accomplishments) is artificially shortened (not a full 8X11 showing; it says “See additional data” but shows the numbers (Expenses, any grants, Revenues) for Lines 4 a, b, and c.  Obviously by those numbers (whether Revs are greater or less than Expenses), Line 4a and 4c activities help support line 4b.  Then go to “Schedule O” and read the description for Line 4c, “Special Projects” which ties in directly to the UN projects referenced above.

See 3rd image (explanation for “Program Service Accomplishments” labeled Special Projects, Line 4c; I also quoted it above in normal-sized print.

This membership organization’s name came up with another presentation featuring (Guess who: again, — HealRWorld®) which is why I looked it up.  The images will not upload, but here are similar and searchable links:

etc.  Bahamian business registry not searchable without a valid credit or debit card (Not going to provide, so I DNK whether it’s free to just look).  Brief history of Bahamas with map shows history of enslavement dating back centuries, prosperity (because near shipping lanes) during American civil war, later American Prohibition (i.e., rum-running), final independence not until 1973, and it’s currently a member of the Commonwealth of Nations, i.e., recognizing Queen Elizabeth II as the head of state and the Governor-General as her representative.  That’s where “Unify Earth Systems Ltd” seems to be registered, although its ownership because of the level of privacy here isn’t exactly known.

Basic (simple statements) at US Dept. of State regarding the Bahamas also points out that the main trade is tourism and financial services, as well as concerns due to its proximity to Florida.  Diplomatic relations with the US were only established in 1973 when it became independent from the UK.  Here is also the CIA’s “WorldFactbook” (probably one on every country). See “telephone, Telecom, internet, broadcast” sections.  Also “Transnational” only mentions two items: one, a dispute about the maritime border; two,  “transshipment point for cocaine and marijuana bound for US and Europe; offshore financial center”


Too many red flags there also, but I start below with the recent Bloomberg article. I have already Tweeted some of this () (@LetUsGetHonest, Twitter thread, March19, 2019, three tweets and one reply with attached “media” (images), and some links to more information) , but do not expect a discussion to make this post. It should be a separate post.  Feel free...to pay attention and cut through the PR to concrete, declarative statements about what is taking place among how many individuals with what collective vested interests.
Read the rest of this entry »

Six Posts (at least) in the Pipeline Pre-Thanksgiving 2017, Yet I See I’d Outlined the Same Basics One Year Ago (Nov. 2016) [Published 11/21/2017].

with one comment

Title:Six Posts (at least) in the Pipeline, Pre-Thanksgiving 2017 (looking back, looking forward…), Yet I See I’d Outlined Nearly the Same Basics One Year Ago (Nov. 2016) [Published 11/21/2017]. (case-sensitive short-link ends “-7ZH”).  Published initially with tags; about 9,500 words including the “navigation” section with its outline of subtitles near the top, which I felt would help process the many images and references found in the middle. And an extended section on previously-blogged JPA (multi-state, i.e., “regional” government entity) WestEd, which now has a revamped website (which still neglects to post its financials and mis-states its date of origin by 30 years…).

On the bottom of this post I’ve been updating the status of the referenced posts while publishing them, one by one over the past ten days (Nov. 22 – Dec. 1: see post archives for November 2017 for dates).  Once published each post is then re-viewed, clarified, sometimes extending it, sometimes just correcting layout.  I’m posting more frequently now, but it’s still an intense process which ALWAYS uncovers more information to blog, OFTEN further illuminates my own understanding of some situations (typically, organizations placed in the intersection between public and private — and the board members’ ownership of, or investment in, subcontracting organizations) I may have been aware of for years, which I look forward to explaining as I can. Maintaining the anchor (mental commitment) to those already in draft, shown below, sometimes provides conflicting currents as a writer.  I write best typically while most focused on the present research in the overarching context of my own learning curve and desire to communicate clearly what I am seeing and hearing, and watching continue to evolve over the years.  //LGH, Dec. 1, 2017.

Just in case, Title Terminology:  “In the Pipeline” is a common phrase (school-to-prison pipeline, cradle-to-career-pipeline), but here’s how I use it referring instead just to posts.

Posts in the pipeline or “spin-off posts” are portions of some writing in process* with a blog “street address” but still in draft status, felt to be significant enough for more attention under their own titles. *Typically they come up as I am writing some post, and are related but I feel they may seem extraneous to a reader covering the subject matter for the first time. Other times, less often, I start them from scratch on their own post when I realize the topic should be handled before it almost writes itself on some other project I want published sooner.

Sometimes these off-ramped finds, like my  more consistently noticing the presence of independent subcontractors as  major part of some charities, are a key which puts the larger picture together, i.e., opens double-wide doors to understanding.  Examples:  Bridgespan as a subcontractor (and its relationship to “Bain”); or, further back in its  corporate existence (and in my blog’s history), NCCD (National Council on Crime & Delinquency) as an Oakland, California-based subcontractor taking government grants from around the world, or I should say, around the “Commonwealth Nations” and around the USA, on a “Children’s Rights, Inc.” charity based in New York.

There is a recent example also on these blogs, too, although it’s not as a subcontractor of some charity, but a listed partner among others in on certain website offering multi-state filings for charities.  One of the listed partners was bought out within six years of its creation, leading to my better understanding of a (different) company historically significant to the practice of corporate law in the United States (!), and as we have (already) turned the century into the digital age and the professionalization of services to and “software AS a service” companies to the philanthropic / nonprofit sector.

Typically also posts in the pipeline were nearly complete before I moved them under their own titles, with “nearly” still meaning “not yet..” in blog administrator terms.  Parallels to baking bread, or, (to borrow from my more familiar, experiential points of reference), preparing and rehearsing a musical ensemble for a concert, may help explain a sense when 90% “done” isn’t good enough. It’s not about complete perfection, it’s about having enough vital components to complete the course and “deliver the goods” for better understanding of the evolving”playing field” in which this blog became necessary.

About This Post:

This post is shorter than most.  It serves a review and blog administrative function for my use, but  I’m publishing it in the belief it will also help readers see the FamilyCourtMatters blog continuity and understand that while it may seem like widely disparate groups I’m investigating and reporting on, in fact the investigations and reports together circle around some core, basic themes.  [This thought continued below the next “Navigation” section]

Navigation:  Blog sections, by Subtitle.  It seems there are six main sections.  Any section may contain text in a variety of formats, and/or images.  I only posted one table of Forms 990 (for a change!). The longer Sections 2 and 5, especially, set up the Posts in the Pipeline as being along the same concepts but just applied to different organizations.  There is overlap of type, and (future posts will show) also overlap of entities and personnel involved — hardly surprising because I’m looking at some of the more powerful foundations around, and major causes with public policy in transition…There is also some overlap of material below between some of the sections.

I don’t want us to lose sight of what some of these influential groups have themselves lost sight of — the requirement of holding to some real ethics, reason, and at least an attempt to keep their collaborating colleagues honest, instead of just “going for the jugular” on some groups which might be in competition for the same audiences.  Which I say happened in the recent prosecution of a sham (fake) cancer charities.  Not that they weren’t sham (I read — seems like they certainly were) — but they ALSO were in competition with the tobacco mega-fund money coursing triumphantly through government and the philanthropic sectors both, and often in partnership.

That last comment will make more sense in the context of reading up on “NAAG” and “NASCO” (see Outline here):

  1. About This Post (you’re in it…)
  2. Concentric Circles of Investigation, Common Themes – To Review 
    1. WestEd (MIA financials on both old and new websites; see prior posts on this).
    2. AISR at Brown and Annenberg Foundation-Related
    3. NGA
    4. NAAG, NASCO (current project and research themes)
    5. Multi-million-dollar MIA grants (overlaps with some of the above and below groups)
    6. Multi-million-dollar Grants not MIA, but it sure seems the projects are, and don’t look remotely that classy when parts of them show up, either…
    7. NCALP at Capital University (Columbus, Ohio) (transformed into) Family & Youth Law Center / and its IPV Collaborative personally assisting David Mandel’s career path through curricula marketing.
      1. Basic conclusion to the “Concentric Circles / Review” section:  “The more you look, the more of such situations surface.  How much is acceptable? It is really something which is subject to being controlled and monitored — or not?”
  3. “The Same Basics One Year Ago, ” (brief, only one image)
  4. More Recent Discoveries (contents include BizFilings, Guidestar, short section — but Guidestar info cont’d in another section)
  5. Brief Recap of the recent Nov. 18 post and Nov. 11 page significance, and more images from “Guidestar, Inc.” (formerly “Philanthropic Research, Inc.”) and a bit on (Paul) Newman’s Own Foundation, Inc. (versions 1 & 2, based in Connecticut), also referenced as involved, or to be involved, in the MRFP and Single Portal Initiative… 
    1. Contains narrative and many images, plus a Form 990 table for GuideStar USA, Inc.
    2. Summarizes the most recent post and page, obviously.
  6. IN GENERAL (barely a section, but it is a heading)
  7. Six Posts (at least) in the Pipeline, Pre-Thanksgiving 2017 (looking back, looking forward…)
    1. In image format (not interactive)
    2. In texts (bulleted, with titles, links and some surrounding descriptions from the context where they were first referenced).

As you can see above, the actual list of posts is on the bottom in two formats:  Images (from my WordPress Admin site showing titles of post started in November and still in draft) and, for later convenience, text & titles with active links.  And some surrounding abstracts or reminders of the context.  And it’s at the bottom of the post.  FYI there were nine ten (10) in all, not six (6).  One more showed up which hadn’t been imaged (on the historic basis of “Sovereignty” concept, from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).*

*That is, after all, a big question (despite it having become a “dirty word” and negative- or positive-only values-laden descriptor for certain people with certain beliefs in the USA — the question in any form of government is “Who’s the boss?” (legally, and effectively/administratively which will often show up economically).  So, national “sovereignty” as a concept has origins in contrast to, it seems the Holy Roman Empire.  Worth thinking about in the historic sense. This post just provides some resources (links) for further reading.

An image looks like this (the example only has one title showing, though).

#3 of 3 (My Blog Posts Started Nov. 2017 in Draft, by when last modified (not originated). This one more of a study project from recent headlines on Puerto Rico debt and hurricane recovery 2017, transferable info.

A title with link looks just like what you see at the top, or will see if you scroll to the bottom of this post, below the images, to see those in the pipeline listed in bullet format, with some nearby fine-print summaries for most of them.  Why?  Because with enough memory pegs for the months or even possibly years of writing ahead (further down the FamilyCourtMatters road), I expect my head may be buried either deeper into this theme, or into a related one. I sometimes even dream about material I am currently working; it gets under one’s skin…Once it’s published, a previous multi-post project is buried less deeply in my psyche (so to speak), but is better available for mental recall when there’s enough surrounding context.  As with advertising, to a degree also with teaching (and learning): repetition helps comprehension, but better that the repetition is also tied to context.

…These concentric or overlapping circles are just getting wider and further back in time, and the drill-downs on the available financials (or searches when they are not available) deeper.  I am also considering more parts of a typical Form 990 when I do look, and more internal comparisons and looking more consistently at change over time (i.e., looking for earlier filings). So while some may wonder what “Education” or “Big Tobacco” have to do, really, with “Family Courts” or “Domestic Violence Prevention,” as a whole, they are dealing with and justified on the basis of financial matters, and involve similar vehicles and organizing tactics (networking) over time in pursuit if any national or international cause.

Developing overwhelming weight and influence (to stack the odds towards success) in pursuit of a privately chosen cause (public policy, message, results or outcomes) also regularly shows ongoing symptoms, often showing up after the fact or after the infrastructure is already entrenched with matters of control, secrecy, of sequestering of total government entity (collective) AND total corporate (collective, when it comes to the networks) size of assets and investments (income producing, whether through dividends and interest as held, or when sold) from public awareness, and on this basis, demanding more and more compliance, conformity, and personal concessions from the population as a whole.

Many aspects of this resemble tactics of batterers and coercive control when at the individual level which we might now simply call “abuse” or “domestic violence.” It’s the behavior of terrorist mentality, not of a personal subjection to law, and deep respect for others of differing economic, social, racial/ethnic, citizenship OR status.  Or of a different gender. Talk to women or, I’ll bet also men, who have been held captive to this kind of intimate or family control, coercion, and long-term intimidation, not to commonly-accepted laws, standards, or with regard to rights — but to simply what the abusers want.   The difference is just of scale and primary venue, and the bystander audiences addressed.  What I’m talking about here is when the bystander audiences are the entire country not “in on it,” and international participants, too.

Concentric Circles of Investigation, Common Themes – To Review

… … …To review, remember the “where’s your tax return?” status of certain major-cause-collaborating, well-financed (and public, private, or public-private in concert) groups I’ve blogged on? such as (just a few examples…):

  • WestEd  (I notice the website has been, it seems, completely reformatted since I reported on this.  A horizontal timeline slideshow now exists.  While this probably relates to a 50th Anniversary (since 1966), I note there are STILL no Financials (CAFRs — it being a JPA, a government, not private, entity which crosses state borders, though domiciled in California), despite posting an impressive list by type of “Our Clients and Funders” (no amounts or years, and not distinguishing “clients” from “funders.”  It’s just a single page which links to nothing else).  So are the pages within the timeline, that I saw so far.
  • AISR (The Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown) + CES (Coalition of Essential Schools) network, the Ted & Nancy Sizer et al.  Plenty posted before, enough said for now!
    • Except I recall some MIA grants involving a Chicago Entity, and later CPS Schools Chief being ousted for fraud in grants administration.  (See posts in below images)
    • Nearby “Broad Institute | Academy | Center | Foundation (versions 1 versions 2) possibly related.  Had to do with training for urban school system supervisors.
    • And, one post title with active link, and all those posts (in image form with dates published dates):

My Annenberg-related posts published so far; The names speak loudly. Click image to enlarge and see. Only one has tabs (and not all shown on this image)

An Annenberg-related FamilyCourtMatters post + publication date (but no tags), title also shown with link nearby (Nov. 21, 2017 new post)

Challenging the Annenbergs’ Public Education Challenge Grants, Still Searching for AISR@Brown as a Form 990 filer, Still Scrutinizing Why We Accept that Privately Controlled, Synched, Billion-Dollar, Tax-Exempt Foundations Care about the Public as Much as About Controlling Their Collective Assets (and the Public, Lest We Start Demanding a Better Look at the Books!) with case-sensitive short-link ending “-6yC”

The first several paragraphs here overlap from the originating post, before I “get into it,” scrutinizing some of the Forms 990PF and relationships between various Annenberg projects and their main foundation. *** [see below next para. and link]

As previously explained (on the last post, above), this is a large family foundation (well, at least one) whose primary wealth came from ownership of publications/media field — the sale of “Triangle Publications,” by a second-generation business success, Walter H. Annenberg.

  • The NGA (National Governors’ Association) which controls its foundation (501©3) thereby allowing direct corporate “Fellows” concentration, with privileged access, to its conferences that normal citizens cannot attend (i.e., Pay-Us-To-Play in the “major leagues,” but for which no financials are shown, that I can see (view tax returns of the supporting “NGA Center for Best Practices” for more details).  The ‘NGA” is one of the “Big Seven” associations coordinating efforts before the Congress on their own behalf.  [no reminder text or images provided here; it’s more distant blog history…]
  • …and now, more recently, I see the NAAG (National Association of Attorneys General) and NASCO (National Association of State Charity Officials), the NAAG’s “Mission Foundation” (formed in 2002? with funds from MSA Tobacco Settlement), and I haven’t yet explored in depth, but there are plenty of visuals showing a “NAGTRI” (Training and Research Institute) said to have been created in 2007 (logo below, accessible through main NAAG.org website).  Then again, it’s hard to explore what one can’t even access yet.

Read the rest of this entry »

Federal Designer Families: How Californians got their “CFCC,” CRS Year 2000 Report on Access Visitation

with 4 comments

This post is about 10,000 words.  Enjoy!

I have about six posts in the pipeline, all of them timely to some recent indicators (developments) in the “protective mothers” field. All of them, as usual continuing to emphasize a functional vocabulary in discussing the family courts, and pointing out a few significant historical developments affecting them that those IN them rarely point out to clients, which I find strange.

By contrast, the developments in the “responsible fatherhood” field seem to be moving ahead with the usual momentum, and under-reported among “the commoners,” i.e., the general public and most family-court reform groups, who, apparently, don’t consider worthy of notice that this network even exists, or is a priority to understand.

However, it does.  In fact, if you check some of the post-PRWORA-propped up nonprofits, centers, institutes, programming and the “same old, same old” hotshots, there is apparently nothing more important to talk about than what they have done, are doing, and how much HHS is going to pay them this time (sometimes that refers to a five-year, multi-million-dollar grant) to further strengthen and extend their communications, technical support, outreach/ recruiting and funding pipelines already set up in the “Fatherhood” network. (Recent example) Using federal funding to a university. One of team members historically associated with AFCC, another thing family court advocacy groups are averse to talking about.

There are also certain chronic weaknesses and vulnerabilities within this “HMRF” field (but also present, to a degree, in the domestic violence prevention field also), which would be excellent leverage to address some of the problems protective mothers are having in the courts, and I have yet to hear any legitimate (if indeed any) explanation why no significant protective mothers organization, or their featured professionals, has seen fit to raise the topic seriously with a view to DOING something about it, for at least the past dozen years, even when after a certain point, the leadership surely became aware that “outside” information on the responsible fatherhood field, HHS grants and AFCC was somehow “leaking” into the field of vision of some of the “fix the courts” promoters.  One whitepaper did come out over a year after I, literally, did several posts (on two blogs) naming names of the “Let’s JUST not talk about it!” groups and proving which personnel at least knew the whole time.

Nearly two days of technical (keystroke processing speed almost at a standstill) problems with my computer slowed getting them published.  Meanwhile, working out that situation, and concerned about output at this time, I decided to re-publish a 12/5/2009 FamilyCourtMatters post which is STILL more relevant than the average conversation I see on the family court reform in 2016, original title While You Were Sleeping,… How Congress got into the Family Law Business.”  

I have not yet extended the “Table of Contents” back to 2009, so “While You Were Sleeping” was probably missed by most people who may read or follow this blog.  It is not the kind of information one tends to stumble across in general search terms on the family courts or its handling of situations and allegations of criminal behavior such as domestic violence or child abuse. Last month, I felt this post was important enough to clean up (formatting) and link to it, now I am actually re-posting.

It references by name key elements in networks I am blogging consistently on — public/private partnerships, and HOW does the federal government got its hand in into the state-level cookie jar without quite getting caught at it, and vice versa, while the courts themselves contribute to an ever-expanding and increasingly dependent on social services population.

**Mostly, these posts-in-the-pipeline again review some basic vocabulary with which we can talk about things which both the protective mothers’ perspective, and definitely in the fathers’ rights perspective have for years resisted discussing on-line in anything approaching a coherent manner, using accurate and relevant terms to describe the infrastructure and how it networks to promote either their own perspective, or the perspective for which they want “systemic changes” or “a paradigm” change for [divorce law, family courts, child support] because it’s:  unfair to fathers, unfair to mothers, dangerous to children, or gender-biased against men (or women), is destroying the American family, human rights,civil rights, etc.

We who are concerned, afflicted by, or discussing the problems in the family courts, should ALL know and talk what top-level state institutions (such as the California Judicial Council), federal deliberations courtesy of CRS (Congressional Research Service) (“Should the Federal Government get involved in Family Matters which are under State law jurisdiction?”) (unsaid: “HOW can we get our fingers into family and divorce courts without getting caught on it, or held responsible for any negative effects after we have?”) ….. (And “WHO will help us do this?” some of which this post shows who actually did) are actually involved, or, for example, just how one state ends up copying the court (privatization and outsourcing) practices in another.

For example, I had years of personal encounters through the courts before I became aware of the information in just this excerpt from that 2009 post below.  The publication talking about it came out in the context of a state-level, state-wide evaluation of the ruling body of the courts published around May, 2012.  Take a look at this excerpt, which will be repeated below, without the olive-green background:

THE REPORT on the AOC, with its section on the CFCC Division IS RECOMMENDED READING for understanding many things which may relate to complaints about the family courts nationwide. Information on the AOC’s/CFCC begins on page 81:

(from a 2012 “SEC” CALIFORNIA-SPECIFIC REVIEW Of the Administrative Office of the Courts)

Division Description

The Center for Families, Children and the Courts (CFCC) was established in February 2000 through the merger of the Statewide Office of Family Court Services and the Center for Children and the Courts.

Statewide Office on Families was merged with a Center on Children and the Courts.  Consolidation, Year 2000

The Statewide Office of Family Court Services was created by a 1984 legislative mandate to provide leadership, development, assistance, research, grants, education, and technical support to the state’s family court services programs through direct services and community partnerships.


(Report on the California AOC/CFCC Division, p. 81ff, cont’d.  Link above…)
The Center for Children and the Courts was created by the AOC in 1997 in response to the results of a state-wide needs assessment of California juvenile dependency proceedings conducted by the National Center for State Courts.

Notice input from the National Center for State Courts [NCSC] in 1997, a “needs assessment” and that it was first aimed at JUVENILE DEPENDENCY — not the entire family law system.  Notice the title in 1997 didn’t yet include the words “Family.”  Anyone that is running (sponsoring, calling for) a “needs assessment” may very well already have an intended “solution/fix” in mind.  These are rarely 100% neutral.  [[The National Center for State Courts is a 501©3], technically speaking, in the private sector, despite its name.  It files a Form 990]]

From its inception, the CFCC’s mission has been to improve the quality of justice and services to meet the diverse needs of children, youth, parents, families, and other users of the California courts. The division provides a wide range of services to family, juvenile, and collaborative justice courts.

Collaborative Divorce has been an ongoing theme promoted by AFCC members.  This can be seen in some of the nonprofits formed, by looking at who formed them.  Not the topic of this post….

Did you know that in apparently about Year 1983 (but not continuing, I think), the NCSC also served as the “Secretariat” for the organization AFCC?  I believe it’s on my sidebar in one of the AFCC newsletters of that year.

The formation of a specialized center within AOC’s administrative structure institutionalized judicial branch commitment to improving outcomes for children and families. The CFCC is the only division of the AOC that is dedicated to a substantive area of the law. The multidisciplinary model has since been recommended to other states.

If you’ve gotten this far in this dense post –and are even reading my blog — do I need to spell this out further?…

SUMMARY:  The Courts in the State of California have increasingly centralized control and operations over time, other parts of the report also show.  The timing of some of the special divisions seems to correlate to increased federal funding for programming that these divisions seem to control — from the administrative sector…. Good to keep in mind

But notice, they first set up two separate elements — a division within the AOC, and a Statewide Office.  Then, they combined them.  Then within the State-level office are links to the private, tax-exempt sector encouraging business with it. Any entity (which is to say anyone running an entity) which wants excellent, authoritative, advertising then is helped by connection to a state-level promoter within (here, as an example) the CFCC section of the Administrative Office of the Courts.   “Coincidentally,” it appears that key members of the CFCC (such as Charlene Depner, and I believe, Shelly LaBotte as to the Access Visitation grants management) are also long-time, loyal members of AFCC.  AFCC as an organization has certain interests that not all Californians, or Americans, may necessarily agree with, and in its own website claims responsibility for many so-called positive innovations in the family court field.

They are also pretty good at setting the stage for creating new professions at the expense of the courts (the public) and parents (also, the public), one of the earlier ones pushed was mediation, one of the later, “parent coordination.”

Another reason I would question any advocacy group who, knowing about this organization, didn’t talk — and keep talking — about it.
Read the rest of this entry »

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].

with 9 comments

This post title with a “shortlink” attached is:

Evaluate, Coordinate, call “Alienator!” Pt. 4– Three AFCC Ph.D.’s on ONE case &amp; “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:

Revisiting Reunification Camps and Treatments, The good Clinical Psychologist Just Want to Help Traumatized People and “Families in Transition” (or “Transitioning Families”), the Good, Ole Court-Ordered (and of course (™)’d Service Model) Way. Case-sensitive shortlink ends “-8cC” and this was written Dec. 16, 2017, starting as a post update to [another] one for which I wanted to cite to this older post on reunification camps for “estranged” families, but from different angle of approach, as that one explains in the first few paragraphs.  After that, on “Revisiting Reunification Camps,” above, I get into looking at what isn’t apparently a large operation, but one with connections in more than one state to the family court system.  It’s in draft, but will be a short post and out Dec. 16 or 17, 2017. [Published Dec. 21 + (additions/clarifications) 22nd] //LGH.
I expect to publish (shortly) a follow-up to the Reunification Camps post above, some information I came across recently which connects the AFCC-drenched providers of at least three camps (Two mentioned here, one featured in my recent post above], the new one trademarked only 2016 (described in the above post) whose lead psychologist apparently was on-call from the NCMEC (National Center for Missing and Exploited Children) who shortly after Jaycee Dugard (and the two children born to her 18-year-long kidnapper rapist and herself) were rescued, was put in touch with Dugard who then (2009/2010) got a $20M settlement from the State of California and set up the JayC Foundation (of very modest size, but it seems in part supporting the reunification camps used ALSO to force-feed alienated children back in to the parent’s life, particularly in cases where the alienation is connected to litigation around the issues of abuse/domestic violence by the “targeted” parent (the one the kids don’t want to see).
(TRANSITIONING FAMILIES, STABLE PATHS (Abigail M. Judge (“clinician”) Boston, S.Florida, with involvement from Transitioning Families clinician R. Bailey. who has a recent book out co-authored with one of the co-founders (mentioned below in THIS older post) of “Overcoming Barriers.”  In addition, in the context of a recent case (2015) of Judge Gorcya and 3 children aged 9-14 ordered into “juvie detention” for refusing to have lunch with their father then, at last check, attempts to get them for aftercare into some Reunification camp — the Detroit Free Press (now part of USA Today franchise) reporting said the Judge was hoping to get them into Warshak’s “Family Bridges” or one modeled on it — in Toronto, Canada!!, while Dr. Bailey was quoted in the context).  I’m taking bets (just kidding) on how long Gorcya has been (if she is) an AFCC member and how much of that county’s system the association controls. Michigan is also long home, at least by organization name, to a batterers’ intervention coalition (BISC-MI).  //LGH 12/22/2017.

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:



 547 S. MARENGO DR., STE 105 • PASADENA, CA 91101 • (909) 821-5398
Page 1 of 10
DSM-5 Diagnosis of “ParentalAlienation”

Read the rest of this entry »

Let’s Get Honest about “Kids’ Turn” and Judges’ Profit..

with 10 comments

First published Oct. 24, 2011, I would consider Let’s Get Honest about “Kids’ Turn” and Judges’ Profit.. among key posts early in the blog (from a 2017 perspective). In wishing to quote this (for one of its passing references to Kids’ Turn donor “Halsey Minor” (founder of CNET), and because a blog-upgrade has for some reason turned the base post color to a sort of sickly mixture of greenish-white, I’m adding also a font-change, border, and a few other things I didn’t know how to do in 2011. Kids’ Turn has since submerged itself into (if I remember it right) San Francisco Child Abuse Prevention Center (CAPC) which “CAPC” is something of a serial curriculum-peddler (through a series of nonprofits to run the curriculum). That’s a general recall, and anyone is free to do a more detailed check on the Secretary of State, or Attorney General (Charitable Trusts Registry) as I do throughout this blog in case I mis-remembered exactly WHERE Kids’ Turn decided to submerge its identity into another nonprofit with classes to sell.

This may have happened anyway in the organization’s process of growing up and not wishing to call attention to the conflicts of interest it would sure seem to represent for anyone with a divorce case and likely to be added into forced co-parenting education, when the entity routinely has family court connections, family court judges, attorneys, or administrators on its board, and as this post references, contracts with the City and County of SF regarding the court.

Or, I like to think this blog may have had SOMETHING to do with their decision to go further underground and (apparently) otherwise continue business as usual…//LGH 3-25-2017.

Per an Annual Report, 2010, on this organization which sheds light on how the courts work:

The following representative results definitely affirm the efficacy of Kids’ Turn’s 2010 services:

• 50% of Kids’ Turn families are Court ordered

HALF THE CLIENTELE OF KIDS’ TURN ARE ORDERED TO GO THERE BY THE COURTS.  Notably, this Nonprofit also was started by a family law judge, and by the end of this (LONG) blog, you should know much more about the interrelationship between the Profit in Non-Profits and how judges order litigants to attend services provided (fee-based) for organizations that MANY of them have sat on the board of.

Not just for US.  Nope, the UK is going to help out this “charity” (started by family law judge…)

Kids’ Turn will soon complete a partnership with two charities in the United Kingdom (Relate and National Family Mediation) leading to implementation of Kids’ Turn throughout Great Britain.

Amazing….they write:

The UK govt has pledged a new pot of funding to help families. Here is a link to an online article about it which we posted on the KT Facebook Fan Page:

• Our partner agencies will submit funding requests in three categories, one of which is to implement Kids’ Turn throughout the UK

• They will received the funding award notices by March, 2011 and when awarded, the funds will be in place for four years

• The two agencies have settled their partnership challenges and worked out their respective roles re. the implementation of Kids’ Turn

UNbelievable…  Some families stuck in the courts (beCAUSE they are stuck in the courts) can’t afford internet, and “Kids’ Turn” has its facebook page…

I am simply throwing out some greens here, about a gleam in a judge’s eye (1987-1990) that is going global.  Not exactly in the free market — it is subsidized as a sub-grantee THROUGH the California Judicial Council, under “Access Visitation Grants,” and as such, you probably can’t get out of some facet of indoctrination once you file a motion in any family law court, anywhere, for any reason.  You might, but it’s kind of like what I hear of slot machines, gambling, etc.  — the House always wins.

KIDS’ TURN,” INTERNATIONAL” — and is CLOSELY Associated with AFCC:

International Conference Presentations (cached article…)

Kids‘ Turn Executive Director, Claire Barnes, had the privilege to co-present this summer at the International Commission on Couples and Family Relations’ 2002 Conference held in Sydney, Australia.  She collaborated with Claire Missen, Teen Between (Dublin, Ireland) on the topic of Divorce and Teens.  The respective papers, where cultural commonalities and differences specific to gender differences were discussed, are available for review.

Additionally, Susanna Marshland, former Kids‘ Turn Program Director, participated in a panel presentation at this year’s AFCC Conference in Hawaii.  The
topic of Best Practices was a perfect venue for Susanna’s information on the KidsTurn Early Years Program.  Susanna’s remarks are also included
for review.

1. Statistics: a presentation by Claire Missen, Teen Between (Dublin, Ireland)

2. Presentation by Claire Barnes, M.A to the 2002 International Commission on Couple and Family Relations: Distance Diversity Dislocation, June 2002, Sydney, Australia

3. Summary of Presentation for the ‘Best Practices’ workshop
Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Annual Conference, presented by Susanna Marshland, LCSW
June 7, 2002, Waikoloa, Hawaii

How nice to belong to more than one organization for which conferences can involve transcontinental and transoceanic travel to exotic locales to talk about “healing family relationships.”  OF note — this organzation is funded in part as a sub-grantee from US Federal funds, including diversions from WELFARE to enhance CHILD SUPPORT collection for needy families.  ….

But what caught my interest — what is KIDS’ TURN doing on a notice of lien to the SFTC, which is the San Francisco Courts?  (Source:  CRIIS.com, recorded documents)

Record Date Document Number GrantoR GranteE Name Cross Reference Name Document Type

Someone should look into this — what’s THAT about? From what I understand, “SFTC” is the San Francisco Superior (or Trial) Courts — pls. submit comment correcting me if I’m wrong.  And it’s GRANTEE, i.e., Kids’ Turn is granting something to the courts, while receiving grants from the Cal. Judicial Council THrough the courts.

I could write on anything — of course — but have noticed this particular group (out of SF and San Diego, originally) going international, Hawaii, Illinois, you name it.  They say they are really successful — read it on the website here, a study done in 2009 (it began around 1988):

Our programs work. A long-term study published in 2009 showed that Kids’ Turn workshops effectively reduced parent conflict, alienation and internalization of negative behaviors by children.

You KNOW, I’m going to have to take a look at this, which describes Kids Turn as a program offered CONTINUOUSLY since 1988 :

The present paper reviews the literature described above and introduces Kids’ Turn, a divorcing family education program that has been offered in the San Francisco Bay Area continuously since 1988. This manuscript reports change over time within a sample of families who have participated in the Kids’ Turn program and observed reductions in conflict intensity and breadth, parent rejection of child behavior, and parent anxiety and depression. These results provide first-ever evidence of change within participants in a community-based divorcing family education program.

This 23-page review, cited on the Kidsturn.org site, reviewed a whopping 61 PARTICIPANTS…79% female, about half college-educated:


Participants were 61 parents for whom complete data were present before they entered the Kids’ Turn program (Wave 1) and after they had completed the program (Wave 2). Participants were eligible if they had children between the age of 4 and 17 and had (1) registered to complete the Kids’ Turn program, (2) agreed to participate in an independent evaluation of the program efficacy, and (3) had participated in the evaluation study both (a) before their first Kids’ Turn session and (b) after they had completed the program. The majority of participants were female (79%) and most had a college degree or more (53%).

Browsing the description of the Kids’ Turn curriculum (as described here), I see many familiar names known to be influential in the development of the family law system, AFCC members or key members, and of course marketing THEIR information also, and some also related to the organization CRC, on which another post should be written.  For example, Wallerstein, Kelly, Isolina Ricci, and Sanford Braver, e.g.:

Parental Alienation. Participants responded to three items from the Dads for Life project (Braver, Griffin, Cookston, Sandler, & Williams, 2005) that assessed the degree to which participants perceived the other parent was competing for the child’s affection.

The plenteous footnotes reference others (including some on the Board of Kids’ Turn San Diego, see below), such as Warshak, et. al ….

And for something with several pages of footnotes, and not a few tables, we get the comment:

The analyses on the parent-child relationship variables yielded no significant change over time results for the Kids’ Turn parents. These results did not support our theory of the program and failed to replicate results previously found in controlled, randomized trials of family education program for divorcing families which have been found to improve parent-child relationship and communication (Wolchik et al., 2005).

I personally suggest we stop running experiments and trying to “replicate” results on relationships.  People are not lab rats — stop treating them like it.  However, data like this is a LITTLE more fascinating, and one reason I decided to blog this (and not, say, the world is falling apart in the middle east, and earthquakes in New Zealand, etc.) ….  And this group is obviously a little hyper-focused on “parental alienation”:

Finally, for the parent relationship variables, the results indicate a significant decrease in reports of parental alienation. The decrease in parent alienation could be linked to the decrease in conflict breadth and parental conflict, but our analyses including the covariates suggest the changes are not better explained by parent gender, time since separation, or parent or child age. The notion of parental alienation is controversial in the psychological literature because it is more typically associated with the diagnosis of a parental alienation syndrome (see Warshak, 2001), however, there is no doubt that these behaviors present challenging pressures for children.

{{Someone up to translating that jargon into something REAL?}}

Overall, the decrease in these three parent relationship constructs– parent alienation, conflict breadth, and parental conflict – are to be expected from a divorce education program like Kids’ Turn, however, they are hard to attain (Goodman et al, 2005).

The problem is the conflict and not any behaviors causing it, obviously, like some of the ones most hotly contested in the courts, and sometimes precipitating the separations….

BUT I found THIS very interesting:

IT’S A MARKETING SYSTEM, WITH AFFILIATES (SOME INTERNATIONAL) SPONSORED BY US GOVERNMENT.  GO FIGURE.  THIS IS NOT A FREE-MARKET SYSTEM, BUT PARENTS ARE REFERRED THROUGH THE COURTS.  OF COURSE — of course — it’s just for the kids.  We all know that only bad parents divorce, and have high conflict, and therefore good judges, etc. (and Mr. Rogers) must help them out.  The parents’ previous behaviors, qualifications, professions (even if in education, pediatrics, child care, or health and human services) does not seem to be relevant — the word “parent” is fairly universal, I’d say.

The court view is that bad parents have high conflict and good authorities must teach parents — including BOTH parents, even if one has a prison record, is a deadbeat intentionally though personally wealthy — or has assaulted the other spouse — and/or child(ren), or even kidnapped them — MUST assume the position of being taught how to separate (while the courts virtually prevent this from every happening before someone is homeless, dead, or all children are now adults, if then).

The POSITIVE spin on Kids’ Turn:

Kids’ Turn


From 1987 to 1990, Judge Ina Levin Gyemant presided over the family law department of the domestic relations court, noting that while lawyers filed motions and parents sought orders regarding custody, visitation and other diputes, children and their needs were almost completely ignored. Mediation services were mandated for parents in California in 1980,** but no educational program was available for children, who are often the people most vulnerable and confused during separation or divorce.

**mandated mediation has been identified as one of three means, in California, to increase noncustodial parenting (i.e., fathers’) time with their children, the other two being parenting education and supervised visitation.  The program stating these three causes receives close to $1 million in federal grants per year, for California, at least — and has been receiving this funding stream since 1996.  Kids’ Turn is clearly listed as a sub-grantee in more than one county on this stream.  This creates an automatic conflict of interest for court-appointed “mediators” in custody cases involving criminal activity.  MORE ON THIS BELOW (and I’ve blogged it plenty on this blog).

Gyemant and other professionals in law, education, social service, and mental health, felt strongly that early intervention would not only reduce litigation, but increase the well-being of children, improve their performance in school, and teach children and parents important skills in the midst of family reorganization.

In 1988, with the help of attorneys Ann Van Blen and Jennifer Jackson, Gyemant started Kids’ Turn as a nonprofit agency in order to offer direct educational services to children and their parents who are undergoing separation or divorce.

Feeling something strongly doesn’t mean it’s legitimate.  …

The current home office for Kids’ Turn is located in San Francisco. Out of that location, services are conducted for four Bay Area Counties. Those counties are: San Francisco, Marin, Alameda and Contra Costa. Due to the significant response to Kids’ Turn in the East Bay, the organization rents a small space in Oakland in order to accommodate East Bay staff.

In the early 90’s, the Kids’ Turn Board developed a framework for selling the curriculum and for licensing affiliates. Presently, seven organizations hold affiliate status; those organizations are located in California (Sonoma, Napa, San Diego, Shasta and Yolo Counties), Dayton, Ohio, Hillsboro, Oregon, and Bloomington, Illinois.

Illinois has also been a center of both the fatherhood movement, Children’s Rights Co-founder Jeffrey Leving, Esq. (active fathers’ rights attorney and blogger, and who I heard quickly received a white house appointment after Obama was elected) and a former location of the organization AFCC, which is the backbone of the family law system, along with CRC.  Maybe, though, that’s just all coincidence….

Although Kids’ Turn was developed as an early intervention and prevention model, it is highly effective for families who have been divorced or separated for some time.

Therapeutic Jurisprudence, AND recovery, too.  Wide target clientele….

The goal of Kids’ Turn is to provide a safe, accessible environment in which children learn to deal with the difficult situations they face as their family reorganizes. The purposes of the workshops are to: demystify and de-stigmatize the separation/divorce process; provide children and their parents with communication and problem-solving skills to help them with the divorce/separation; provide a place for children and their parents to discuss their thoughts and feelings about their experiences.

In the spring of 1995, Kids’ Turn was featured on the ABC-TV news program, “20/20,” and also recently on CNN, generating calls worldwide from people interested in starting the program in their area. A videotape entitled “For Kids’ Sake” features interviews with participating families and goes inside the sessions to show what takes place in a workshop. Both these videos are available locally.

From the KIDSTURN “purchase curriculum” link:

A four year, longitudinal study completed in 2009 by Dr. Jeffrey Cookston, San Francisco State University affirmed that Kids’ Turn services:

• • •

Reduce parent conflict

Reduce parent alienation*

Reduce internalization of negative behaviors by children

Wow– * THAT phrase is sure comforting for any parent dealing with serious safety issues, such as domestic violence or child molestation, the reporting of which just about guarantees a  “parental alienation” is the diagnosis and a form of reunification therapy (or switching custody to the parent who committed the crimes, or allegedly did).

Each curriculum module consists of six comprehensive and scripted lessons which may be modified to fit the unique needs of each participant group.

Cost: Leader Manuals, $150 (six lessons) Participant Workbooks: $15 each

For details on how to purchase The Kids’ Turn Way© contact: Kids’ Turn

55 New Montgomery, Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94105 phone: 415.777.9977 fax: 415.777.1577 email: kidsturn@earthlink.net http://www.kidsturn.org

Parental Alienation Canada “LOVES” this Richard-Gardner/Warren Farrell/Warshak-oriented curriculum :

Parental Alienation Canada


New Study Validates Positive Family Impact of Kids’ Turn Services

This is where every community should be heading. Where are our Provincial and Federal Government Agencies who have millions upon millions to dole out for single gender issues but not for families. This program is family focussed, particularly on the children, and can serve as a wake up call to recalcitrant parents. I am so pleased to see this as a positive step in an otherwise negative act called divorce. The Video is a little over 6 minutes long and worth a look. The link to the Kid’s Turn website and Facebook page is below. I was made aware of a Calgary based service offering a comprehensive list of counselling Services that should be in every city and when related to DV and marriage breakdown should be part of the tax supported inititiatives currently offered by all levels of government for a single gender only.MJM Calgary Counselling Centre

But apart from that, I have more problem with simple conflicts of interest.  The Courts can ORDER parenting education in order to use up grants, and some judges (etc.) have sat on the boards of the recipient organizations.

This and other Nonprofit’s Information is Available Free on the Internet:

  • KIDS TURN San Diego (EIN 33-0724932)

EXEMPT FUNCTION:  “To Teach and Counsel Children and PArents Going Through Divorce And to Promote Communication and Cooperation among all Family Members.”

(garnered from two different years Form 990s….)

FOURTEEN (count’em, 14) Officers  are listed — all unpaid volunteers — to run this moderate nonprofit who lists as its 2009 Revenue, $169,969 (gross), or, about what a single high-profile Nonprofit CEO might earn…

  • (rounded  to closest $50))
  • Contributions, gifts, grants and similar amounts received — $117,827
  • Program Service Revenue, including government fees and contracts $39, 258
  • Gross sales of inventory, less returns and allowances — NEGATIVE ($5,773)
  • TOTAL REVENUE  $151, 312
  • TOTAL EXPENSES  (lines 10 thru 16 on the form) $190,236

Wow, between that and being a 501(c)3 to start with, I gather not many taxes were paid.  Starting to sound like that AFCC organization (that also is continuing to promote Kids Turn at some of its conferences….

An Art and Wine Auction was held (revenue around $50K) from which about $36 was donated, leaving the remainder, $12,884 — of which the direct expenses NOT including rent, food & beverages, and entertainment (pushing $12,000) and “Other Direct” expenses $6,876.  I am glad that KidsTurn San Diego is so concerned about Kids, including ones that through programs from which IT benefits (although all 14 directors are of course volunteers), have their child support eradicated or abated, which brings me to the Access/Visitation COnnection:

How can it take that many NonProfit officers when the organization is already on the federal sub-grantee stream to start with?  And this is only ONE Kids Turn office/organization:

OFFICERS — (link to website shows many are family law attorneys or attorneys, a mediator, a psychologist, etc. or retired from that profession…)

Sharon Kalemkiarian (Pres)

James Allen (VP)

Constance Ahrons

Kathryn Ashworth

Sheri Liebert

Tracy Blethen (Treasurer)

Linda Papst De Leon

Alexander Kwoka

Barbara Mercer

Brenda Bell

Andrian Martinez

Frank Nageotte

Heather Milligan

Robert A. Simon

(And all the others, Directors:  Executive Directors being a Jim Davis).

Another year (go check yourself), about $32,500 was raised through “tuition” and someone (none of the directors was paid a salary of $65,000.  Again, this will help everyone get along and reduce “parental alienation”….

  • KIDS’ TURN SF (EIN# 94-3112621)
The 2008 form (evid. Tax year July through June) shows about $350,000 in expenses and $482,500 meaning, about $135K in the hole….
The Executive Director earns $78K for a 40 hour week (very modest in the  nonprofit world, though a chunk of their revenue for sure), and the President, $21,000 for a5-hour week, plus 7 more officers, volunteers I gather.  I”m putting the names out here in case anyone has an open custody case (or has had one recently) with these individuals on it…and I do not know who they are, personally…
Claire Barnes, Steven Kinney, Leslie Dawson, Jeffrey Abadie, Gregory Abel, Raymond Jones, Gerard Corbett, Stacey Welsh, Halsey Minor.

I put the EIN numbers out so we can look up the A/V funding on the TAGGS database:
Well, actually Kids’ Turn is SUB-grantees:
WE can see that these “Access Visitation” grants (database goes back to 1998) have switched from one government recipient in the state to another, over the years — Social Services, Child Support, and Currently The California Judicial Council:
Recipient ZIP Code: 95814 

FY Award Number Budget Year
of Support
Agency Award Code Action
Issue Date
This Action
1998 9701CASAVP 1 ACF 2 05-31-1998 $1,113,750.00
1998 9801CASAVP 1 ACF 1 09-01-1998 $1,113,750.00
1999 9901CASAVP 1 ACF 2 08-16-1999 $987,501.00
2003 9801CASAVP 1 ACF 7 02-24-2003 ($250,805.00)
2003 9901CASAVP 1 ACF 5 02-25-2003 ($139,812.00)
2009 9901CASAVP 1 ACF 8 09-14-2009 ($38,917.00)
Award Subtotal: $2,785,467.00

Recipient ZIP Code: 95741

FY Award Number Budget Year
of Support
Agency Award Code Action
Issue Date
This Action
2000 0001CASAVP 1 ACF 3 08-24-2000 $987,501.00
2001 0001CASAVP 1 ACF 4 10-06-2000 ($987,501.00)
Award Subtotal: $0.00

Recipient ZIP Code: 94107

FY Award Number Budget Year
of Support
Agency Award Code Action
Issue Date
This Action
2001 0010CASAVP 1 ACF 5 10-10-2000 $987,501.00
2001 0110CASAVP 1 ACF 1 08-23-2001 $987,501.00
2002 0210CASAVP 1 ACF 2 08-06-2002 $970,431.00
2003 0310CASAVP 1 ACF 1 09-11-2003 $970,431.00
2004 0410CASAVP 1 ACF 1 09-15-2004 $988,710.00
2005 0510CASAVP 1 ACF 1 09-14-2005 $988,710.00
2006 0610CASAVP 1 ACF 1 09-19-2006 $987,973.00
2007 0710CASAVP 1 ACF 1 07-20-2007 $950,190.00
2008 0810CASAVP 1 ACF 1 01-30-2008 $957,600.00
2009 0010CASAVP 1 ACF 8 09-14-2009 ($48,827.00)
2009 0110CASAVP 1 ACF 4 09-14-2009 ($26,938.00)
2009 0210CASAVP 1 ACF 6 09-14-2009 ($46,392.00)
2009 0310CASAVP 1 ACF 2 09-14-2009 ($15,092.00)
2009 0910CASAVP 1 ACF 1 12-23-2008 $942,497.00
2010 1010CASAVP 1 ACF 1 11-25-2009 $946,820.00
2011 1110CASAVP 1 ACF 1 10-08-2010 $928,087.00
Award Subtotal: $11,469,202.00
Total of all awards: $14,254,669.00
$14 million in a state budget may not seem like major impact, but the purpose of these grants is directed to the divorcing or separating populace with children, and has spinoff effects.
has a copyright requiring we acknowledge who wrote it.
A partial quote here shows that these funds, for example, in a Fresno County Court, were contracted to a group, CYS, “Comprehensive Youth Services,” and this CYS identified an “Unmet Need” for more fatherhood programs, acknowledges that this is an “INDUSTRY” that the purpose of the courts (as I mentioned in a recent post) is indeed more “therapeutic” than ‘Jurisprudence.”  Relationship counseling.  Designer Families.  etc.
The mothers, of course, are not told this going in — or the fathers, all the time.  However, when the fathers are then recruited, the mothers are STILL not told ….!!!  Imagine how frustrating it must be to approach a car which you believe is run on Gas (law) and realize it either is totally electric, or runs as some do, on used vegetable oil.  I’m talking about the Family Court Venue, where judges order parents to these marketing affiliates, and (once established) they seek to reach out to people NOT referred by the courts….

Superior Court of California, County of Fresno47

As part of California’s Access to Visitation Grant Program, the Superior Court of Fresno County has contracted with Comprehensive Youth Services (CYS) since 2003 to provide supervised visitation and parent education best practice models. The program complies with industry safety and service standards to meet the following programmatic goals: (a) improve or establish family relationships between noncustodial parents and their children while ensuring the health, safety, and welfare of the minors;

(1) California is a no-fault divorce state.  Stop treating it as a crime, or an “illness” requiring therapy!

(2)  Judging by the headlines, this program goal (a) is not consistently met — people are dying around the insistence that sometimes Dads who may not WANT access to their children, get it on a silver platter from the courts…

(b) improve children’s well- being through positive contact with their noncustodial parents {notice the dishonesty in using the word “parents” — read on…} ; and (c) improve custodial and noncustodial parenting skills.

What is a “custodial or noncustodial parenting skill”?  Is this of, by, and for the people???

Through its work in the community and on the Access to Visitation Grant, CYS identified an unmet need to offer intensive services focused on increasing the parenting skills and healthy behaviors of noncustodial fathers. The agency wanted to complement the program by providing adjunct services for noncustodial parents who would benefit from them but had not been ordered by the court to use them. Without financial assistance such as that provided by the Access Grant; however, many families in impoverished Fresno County could not afford parenting education or therapeutic services.

Where is the evidence of all those poor parents knocking down the doors for more therapy?  USUALLY poor parents want things like housing, transportation, health care, food, clothing and ACADEMIC education for their children… It IS possible to go through life (or used to be, at any rate) without hiring a therapist to cope with the hardships.

Therefore, a critical component of the project’s success would be to provide financial assistance to noncustodial parents participating in the program.

As a result, in 2007 CYS leveraged the success of the Access Grant to obtain grant funding from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families to establish the DADS Program. The program is designed to promote responsible fatherhood, improve the relationships of fathers with their children, and assist fathers in overcoming barriers that may {{that MAY!}} keep them from being effective and nurturing parents.

The program targets families with children and youth who have been exposed to child abuse, neglect, or domestic violence or who are at risk for attachment disorders.

Please note the language change from any INDIVIDUAL being held accountable for PERPETRATING domestic violence or child abuse (crimes) to “FAMILIES with children and youth who have been “exposed to…”    …  If this were a flasher, someone would’ve exposed himself.  Also, with domestic violence, it can be both parents, but often is one primary agressor.  This is gender coverup on the issue.  No wonder this is not publicized in the Family Law Self-Help facilities where BOTH men and women, fathers and mothers, come for assistance in filing when they don’t have an attorney representing them.

As in the Access to Visitation Program, one of the unique services offered by the DADS Program is therapeutic supervised visitation. This service offers a structured mental health therapy component run by a licensed clinician who uses instruction, modeling, and counseling to repair and strengthen the parent-child relationship. The DADS Program is an example of how funding and support of the Access to Visitation Grant has led to increased services that support relationships between parents and children.

The paragraphing (and comments) are mine, and the text from the above link, published March 2008 by California Judicial Council / Administrative Office of the Courts / Center for Families, Children & the Courts (CFCC).

SAN DIEGO COUNTY: The San Diego Kids’ Turn Program is a single-county program with multisite services seeking the continuation of parent education for families in San Diego County. The pro- gram aims to provide, at low cost on a sliding scale, prevention and interven- tion workshops to improve the commu- nication skills of both parents, reduce parental conflict, prevent harm to chil- dren, and reduce demands on the family court system.

And in San Francisco:

SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY: The Family Cohesion Collaborative Program of the Superior Court of San Francisco is part of a multisite comprehensive partnership (San Francisco and Alameda Counties), that will provide supervised visitation and exchange services for families in San Francisco and Alameda Counties through the Rally Visitation Program of the Saint Francis Memorial Hospital. The overall goals of the program are to provide high quality, affordable super- vised visitation and monitored exchange services and to enhance parent education as a means of improving the well-being of children involved in court-ordered parent visitation arrangements.

And so on.  I ASKED for these services and was curtly told that there was “no money in the family” for it.  Therefore, we went on for another year of haraassment, and no restraining order, job losses, and finally on an UNsupervised visitation, and overnight, and despite my warnings and protests to several authorities that this was imminent (based on previous threats! and multiplce accumulating indicators), this finally happened.  The courts coulda cared – more business for more professionals, including a custody evaluator (litigant paid for) and another children’s attorney (public-paid).  The one thing they would NOT help me with was simple enforcement or consequences for violations (ongoing) of existing court orders.  That wasn’t the purpose.  The purpose was directing business to THERAPEUTIC services provided by organizations that sometimes have personnel both as judges and attorneys AND on the nonprofits getting the services.

Return HomePrograms

Again, it goes like this:

The Judicial Council is charged with administering and distributing California’s share of the federal Child Access and Visitation Grant funds from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Child Support Enforcement. These grants, established under section 391 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (Pub.L. 104–193, 110 Stat. 2258)—title III, section 469B of the Social Security Act—enable states to establish and administer programs that support and facilitate noncustodial parents’ access to and visitation with their children.

The congressional goal of the Child Access and Visitation Grant Program is to “remove barriers and increase opportunities for biological parents who are not living in the same household as their children to become more involved in their children lives.” Under the federal statute, Child Access and Visitation Grant funds may be used to support and facilitate noncustodial parents’ access to and visitation [with] their children by means of activities including mediation (both voluntary and mandatory), counseling, education, development of parenting plans, visitation enforcement (including monitoring, supervision and neutral drop-off and pick-up), and development of guidelines for visitation and alternative custody arrangements.

The use of the funds in California, however, is limited by state statute to three types of programs:

  • Supervised visitation and exchange services;
  • Education about protecting children during family disruption; and
  • Group counseling services for parents and children.
THe GRANT APPLICATION PROCESS wants ONE lead court and other sub-contracting courts.  The CONTRACT is only with the lead court:

Under state funding [From the JUDICIAL COUNCIL….], California Access to Visitation Grants are awarded to the family law division of the superior courts through a request-for-proposals (RFP) grant application process. Applicants are strongly encouraged to involve multiple courts and/or multiple agencies in their proposed programs with one court designated as the lead or administering court. While superior courts may contract with local community-based justice partners (i.e., subcontractor agencies) to provide the direct services on behalf of the court, AOC contract agreements are made only with the designated superior court. Grant recipient courts subsequently enter into a contract agreement or Memorandum of Understanding with their designated local subcontractor.

You can imagine how well the evaluation goes, with those many layers of accountability.  The local subcontractor simply has a MOU (Memo of Understanding)….
In 2006, per the HHS/OCSE site, Kids Turn FRESNO was a recipient, along with the CYS mentioned above.  In various years, it also gets grants directly from various foundations:  Here’s a $20K from the San Diego Foundation in 2010:

Kids’ Turn San Diego, Expansion of Kids’ Turn Workshops into Carlsbad      $20,000

Kids’ Turn San Diego plans to bring no less than four, 4-week psycho-educational workshops into Carlsbad, serving 100-120 families who are divorcing or fighting over custody of their children. The workshops will show families how their conflict is negatively impacting their children and teach them to communicate more effectively, manage their anger, focus on their children and create a healthy two household environment for all involved. Furthermore, Kids’ Turn San Diego will help children make a successful adjustment to challenging family changes.

And from the Jewish Community Foundation of San Diego {search for it — simple listing…)

The Foundation is the largest grant maker in San Diego County. In 2009-10, the Foundation awarded and facilitated $67 million in 4,900 grants to 1,200 Jewish and general organizations in San Diego, Israel and around the world.

Partial list of 2010 grant recipients:”

And $5,000 from the California Bar Foundation in 2008-2009 year:

Kids’ Turn San Diego Workshops for Court-Ordered Families Engaged in High-Conflict (sic)  Divorces (San Diego County)

No conflict of interest, “for sure,” there, either…

A Christian group called the Fieldstone Foundation, in 2010 The Kids’ Turn San Diego part of this comes under “Humanitarian,” at least, of these categories:

We are pleased to share our 2010 grant recipients with you. We have enclosed a list of organizations under each of the general granting categories, please scroll down or simply click on the category of your choice:

Kid's Turn logo

It is assumed that parents divorcing don’t know what’s up with their kids….

Each year in San Diego County, more than 25,000 children are involved in their parents’ legal actions. Parents too often become focused on their conflict with the other parent, ignoring or minimizing the needs of their children. Most adults have no idea how children suffer when parents become adversaries. If they are drawn into the process, the children become entangled in loyalty conflicts posing a serious mental health risk. The harmful effects of these childhood experiences persist well into adulthood.

The suffering of these children can be greatly minimized or avoided altogether when  parents learn new coping skills that facilitate a cooperative co-parenting relationship.

How does one co-parent with a spouse who has previously assaulted you, in frint of the children, threatened to kill you and/or himself (in front of the children, often enough), who sabotaged work during marriage and AFTER marriage?  I would have a few words to say to any professionals that want to criticize my “co-parenting” skills before the children were gone, of for attempting to assert that the standard we go by (not knowing of this group or the therapeutic jurisprudence forces in the courts yet) was the Court Orders — and not my ex’s orders.  Or that it would be good for the father to seek work….even though he had lost an external doormat and punching bag to “work out” is personal issues on ….
[Photo of Dad and child…):

This group (San Diego, alone) has VERY high foundational support, according to their page, AND federal funding (or part of the A/V grants) (I do not have current figures).  In addition, they are MARKETING curricula, one year earned $32K in tuition, and charging Group Leaders to be trained to lead groups, for which they then get $100/session.  EACH parent pays $250 for four sessions…

So where is all that money going?  and to whom?

AFCC seems to be often raising money for this particular group, as well….

Another person, an acquaitance, asks what is a Superior Court Judge doing on the Executive Board of this group:


Kids’Turn is a San Francisco RFI funded CRC/AFCC affiliated nonprofit which provides the court’s court ordered parenting classes and counseling services.  Kids’Turn was founded by SF family court officers, and it is directly affiliated with the CRC AND AFCC.

The SF Superior Court has a lien on Kids’Turn, yet Judge Patrick Mahoney is on the executive board.  In fact, all the SF judicial officials in the SF family court have been on the board at one time or another, and they all help with the fundraising efforts. How can this be? Liens compel payment of debts. Where is this money going???

Kids Turn is highly affiliated with the Family Law Profession 
and people pushing mediation, counseling, & "collaboration" to resolve family "conflict." 
For Example:  Jennifer Jackson (I don't know her, particularly).  
Along with other credits, and associations, this family law specialist (certified by the state bar) 
and Fellow of  American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers:


KIDS’ TURN: Program for Children of Separating Families Founder: 1988 President of the Board: 1988-1990 Executive Board: 1998-1996; 1999-2005

Webmaster: through 2003

(1998-1996 being a reverse date, but it was around 1996 I believe

that the Federal A/V grants were starting, of which Kids’ Turn has been a recipient).



Judge Pro Tem 1990-present

Director, Friend in Court: 1990s

If this nonprofit has financial dealings with the court, as an entity, this would seem to be a conflict of interest.
Here’s another SF Law Firm, “Kaye-Moser-Hierbaum” and this is “Moser”s blurb from laywers.com: Among several stellar qualifications, see if you can pick these out.  The partners are all women (one from Harvard) and two also AFCC presenters, “Coaching Clients through Mediation.”
Barbara W. Moser (Partner) born New York, N.Y., 1958; admitted to bar, 1990, California. Education: University of California at Berkeley (B.A., with distinction, 1980); California State University (M.S.W., 1982); University of San Francisco (J.D., magna cum laude, 1990). Phi Beta Kappa, Lifetime Member. Recipient: University of San Francisco School of Law 2006 Alumni Fellow Award. Contributing Editor: “Approaching a Marital Dissolution.” Consultant: Action Guide, “Planning and Conducting Family Law Discovery,” published by the California Continuing Education of the Bar. Former Consultant, Family Law Subcommittee of the CEB Joint Advisory Committee. Lecturer, CEB: “How to Handle a Marital Dissolution” and “Estate Planning in the Context of Divorce.” Presenter: Breckenridge, Colorado, Association of Family and Conciliation Courts: “Coaching Clients Through Mediation.” Lecturer: Contra Costa County Bar Association: “Crossover Issues in Family Law and Estate Planning.” Lecturer, Marin Estate Planning Council: “Crossover Issues in Estate Planning and Family Law.” Lecturer, Queen’s Bench: “How to Launch a Successful Independent Law Practice.” Judge ProTem, Family Law Bench Bar Program, Marin County Superior Court. Settlement Judge Pro Tem, San Francisco Superior Court. Former Secretary, Board of Directors, Kids’ TurnMember: Bar Association of San Francisco (Member, Family Law Section); State Bar of California (Member, Family Law Section); National Association of Women Business Owners; Association of Family and Conciliation Courts; National Association of Female Executives.Languages: American Sign. Practice Areas: Family Law; Domestic Relations; Divorce; Premarital Agreements; Cohabitation Agreements; Postnuptial Agreements; Separation Agreements; Spousal Support; Child Support; Child Custody; Visitation Rights; Stock Option Analysis; Palimony; Paternity.Email: Barbara W. Moser
It seems almost taken for granted that part of one’s associations as a family attorney will include a turn with Kids’ Turn, including some Northern California Super Lawyers, as Ms. Moser certainly is, and even “Best Lawyer of the Year,” per the firm’s site:  The positions include judgeships and domestic violence committees.  ONe partner served:
on the Committee to Revised the Local Rules for the San Francisco County Superior Court Unified Family Court.”  The words “high-conflict” are frequent in the personnel’s description here…
Here’s yet another attorney with ties to Kids’ Turn:
Andrea Leigh Palash San Francisco Start
AAML Previous Positions: President, Northern California Chapter, 1990-91, Co-Chair Northern California Annual Symposium. Member: State Bar of California; San Francisco Bar Association. Previous Positions: State Bar of California: Member, Family Law Section Executive Comm., 1981-87; Law Practice Management Section Executive Comm., 1988-92, Committee on Sexual Orientation Discrimination, 1994-97; San Francisco Bar Assn: Member, Family Law Section, Co-Chair, Comm. on Law Office Economics, 1989-91, Board of Directors, 1993-95. Certified Specialist, Family Law, SBC. Co-Founder, Rally Family Visitation Project, a supervised visitation and exchange program; Board Member, Kids’ Turn, an educational program for children of divorce, 1982-2000. Member, St. Francis Memorial Hospital, Community Advisory Committee. CLE Participation: Lecturing and writing on numerous and various family law topi
From 1982-2000, then if practicing family law, this might be a conflict of interest???
It is just part of the landscape, then?  Because we see, above, that “parental alienation” is a crime (or close to it), in Kids’ Turn language.

This man, Steve Kinney, is not an attorney or judge, but has worked with a former  Presiding Judge of Juvenile Court (in SF) — Donna Hitchens — and Kids’ Turn to design non-violent program material.  Oh yeah, incidentally, he was also President of Kids’ Turn.  Seems like a decent guy, and activities, but here it is:Steve KinneySteve KinneyDirector, Pacific West Region


Steven Kinney is currently the Director of the National Consortium for Academics and Sports-Pacific West Region, Inc. (NCAS). The NCAS was born out of the Center for the Study of Sport in Society at Northeastern University. The NCAS works to create a better society by focusing on educational attainment and using the power and appeal of sport to positively affect social change…

Mr. Kinney has worked with Kids’ Turn and Judge Donna Hitchens, the former presiding Juvenile Court Judge in the City of San Francisco to design, develop, and implement the Nonviolent Family {{FAMILY, not personal}} Skills Program for at-risk youth in San Francisco.

Steven Kinney earned his B.A. and M.A. degrees in English Literature from Notre Dame de Namur University. In his personal life, Mr. Kinney is active in numerous charities and community organizations including the Northern California chapter of the National Football League Alumni Association, where he serves as Secretary of the Executive Committee, and the 100 Black Men of America-Silicon Valley Chapter. Mr. Kinney serves as the President of the Board of Directors for Kid’s Turn an organization that provides workshops and other transitional tools for children and their divorcing parents.


I mentioned, above, how KIDS’ TURN is international.  Sitting on the board of the group above is Claire Barnes, who we know from (as I recall), San Francisco Kids’ Turn.  This includes many sociologists, and psychologists, etc., as we might expect from any such group.  Here she is:

Claire Barnes (USA) has been the Executive Director of Kids’ Turn, San Francisco, for the past seven years. That organisation helps children made vulnerable by family breakdown.

She is also Chair of the Volunteer Council of the San Francisco Symphony. Claire and husband Alan have participated in ICCFR conferences for some years and she joined the Board in 2005, taking on the position of Treasurer in June 2008.

Claire Barnes (Treasurer)


While I’m at it, let me speculate on another individual invited to speak (above) in Hawaii (see top of my post), Claire Missen:

Claire Missen (Vice- Chair)

photoClaire Missen (Ireland) has worked as a marriage counsellor for more than twenty two years, initially with the Marriage and Relationship Counselling Service, Dublin, and latterly in private practice and as a supervisor. Claire was first involved with ICCFR during its Stockholm conference (2001), subsequently joined the Board and was invited to serve as Vice-Chair in 2006.

I was beginning to wonder what the “Ireland Connection” was in Kids’ Turn, and elsewhere — it’s been popping up.  Now, notice who (besides AFCC) this august group gives thanks to, at least from the US component:

Home > Introduction to ICCFR/CIRCF > History > List of organisations

The ONLY contribution from the USA (as opposed to significant international groups from other countries) reads:  ”

Association of Family and Conciliation Courts
Schapiro Thorn Inc

Which just might be explained in financial terms, THUS:

Suzie Thorn

photoSuzie S Thorn (USA) is a prominent matrimonial lawyer in San Francisco. She is President  of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers Foundation, of the Suzie S Thorn Family Foundation, and of Schapiro-Thorn Inc.

(IN other words, we can presume she’s probably a wealthy woman — which of course helps with the “Prominence” in many circles.  Wealth and being the heads of foundations, and corporations (AND being a matrimonial lawyer), are  a “great” standpoint from which to understand court programs targeted at low-income noncustodial fathers, which many of the fatherhood, and certainly the ones benefitting Kids’ Turn, are).  Also, the (1994ff) changes relating to VAWA, women’s rights, and protections from violence which were not previously so available….

Her initial contact with ICCFR resulted from liaison between the Commission and Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) in 1993. She became a Board member in 1995. She was the innovative founder of the ICCFR Trust of which she is now a trustee.

SO, from this position of founder of the ICCFR Trust, the ICCFR thanks — from the United States– AFCC and Thorn-Schapiro, Inc.  That seems appropriate.

SOMETIMES we forget how proper positioning in society allows one to plan, internationally, others’ welfare and what conditions of life should be available during and after divorce. …1993 is even before the National Fatherhood Initiative was founded (though obviously not MUCH before).

The TRUST partners with the Commissions (helps put on conferences?) and is registered as a charity in England:
The ICCFR Trust – sister body to the International Commission on Couple and Family Relations – became a registered charity in England in July 2003. Collaboration between the Commission and the Trust offers access to a full range of working relationships with other organisations and guarantees public accountability for the use of funds given to the Trust for its use.
The Objects of the Trustare: 

  1. To advance the education of the public in the social sciences and in particular in matters concerning family and interpersonal relationships. And
  2. To achieve such other objects which are charitable within the laws of England and Wales as may be determined by the Trustees.(“the Objects”)

The Trustees must use the income and may use the capital of the trust in promoting the Objects.

Registered Charity No. 1098678


I keep trying to alert my friends — “law” is out and “Sociology” has taken its place.  Many of the people/entitites selling this to the public are, naturally, themselves employed by the family law courts, are sociologists, psychologists, family relationship specialists, and/or people who sit atop foundations which can start movements like this, while others wonder where their job history went…

This is a HARD sell for women with children hoping to gain protection under the US laws against (certain crimes), still….  We still wish that the Bill of Rights meant us, too…. and thinking that someone else not female CARES.


{The San Francisco Superior Court has 52 judges and 12 commissioners. The Court currently has one judicial vacancy and one commissioner vacancy.}}


New Assignments Take Effect January 11

SAN FRANCISCO — Presiding Judge James J. McBride today announced the new San Francisco Superior Court judicial assignments for 2010.

Judge McBride has made the following changes to judicial assignments:  I’M PICKING OUT ONES RELATING TO FAMILY OR DEPENDENCY….


. . .Lillian K. Sing — Family Law

Donna Hitchens — Dependency (note, above, working on Kids’ Turn curriculum….)

Judge Hitchens founded the Family Law Self-Help Center, and received “Access to Justice” award for this and other activities.  Please note:

Judge Hitchens has been instrumental in creating three projects that have given a voice to those in the juvenile courts who traditionally may have felt disenfranchised by the system.

The first of these programs is the Dependency Mediation Program, where parents who have been involved in dependency proceedings are trained to act as mediators. Second, Judge Hitchens was instrumental in securing federal grants that helped San Francisco County be selected as a demonstration site for the SafeStart Initiative and the Greenbook Project.

{{Greenbook Project — another topic — is where Domestic Violence and Fatherhood initiatives met, and multiple HHS players as well, to — well, as I said — another topic.  I am less impressed than I should be about the process.  Womens till losing their kids to batterers in the family law venue…}}

Finally, she created the Multi-Agency Juvenile Justice Improvement Committee (MAJJIC), whose goal is to overcome system barriers and coordinate services for youth.

Judge Hitchens was elected to San Francisco Superior Court in 1990.  In 1997, she helped to consolidate the county’s juvenile and family courts and became presiding judge of the Unified Family Court.

KIDS TURN started around 1987 — when was her involvement?

Ellen Chaitin — Family Law/Juvenile/ Dependency

{{Link describes The Judge in 2001 visiting a residential hotel; another one shows she has witnessed gunfire resulting in a slaying,

Patrick J. Mahoney, Supervising Judge/Unified Family Court


Patrick Mahoney — Trials

Julie Tang — Delinquency

(Now, I am getting more curious about the SF Courts.  t):

Is Presiding Judge Katherine Feinstein the daughter of the famous Senator?  etc.

Judge Lillian K, Sing**
400 McAllister – Department 210
Court Clerk (415) 551-3709

**2004 candidacy for County Supervisor, besides showing a VERY active resume, lists Occupation as “Mediator, Advanced Dispute Resolutions” Co-Chair, Mediation Advisory Committee and Superior Court ADR Committee.”and 22 years on the bench. plus undergraduate degree, ”

  • M.S.W., Social Work, Columbia University, New York.
  • B.S., Psychology, Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA.

Judge Monica F. Wiley/Commissioner Marjorie Slabach**
400 McAllister – Department 403
Court Clerk (415) 551-3741

** has been on Kids’ Turn Board, around 2004-2005, per one of their “Gazettes” (publications).

Judge Monica F. Wiley is younger (by about a generation) and the youngest of the appointees, but experienced:

Wiley, 39, of Oakland, has served as a senior associate for Carlson Calladine and Peterson since 2007. Previously, she served as a deputy city attorney for the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office from 1996 to 2007. She also worked as a legal research attorney for the San Francisco County Superior Court in 1996. Wiley earned a Juris Doctorate degree from the Howard University School of Law and a Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of California, Berkeley. She fills the vacancy created by the elevation of Judge Robert Dondero to the District Court of Appeal. Wiley is a Democrat.


Judge Ronald E. Albers/Commissioner Marjorie Slabach
400 McAllister – Department 404
Court Clerk (415) 551-3744

(see link);

In 2009, Ron Albers, 60, was first openly gay judge appointed by a Republican Governor. The article is a good read — very activist Judge. I am wondering how this will intersect with the pro-father, pro-family agenda running through the courts as well…

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s appointment of Ronald E. Albers to a judgeship on the San Francisco County Superior Court last week is believed to be the first time the Republican governor has selected an openly gay person for a judge seat.

Albers, 60, of San Francisco, has served as a commissioner for the Superior Court since 2002. He will earn $178,789 in his new post, to which he was sworn into Monday, June 15. The ceremony coincided with his wedding anniversary; he is married to Colin Alexander, his partner of 34 years.

ANOTHER 8000 word post — I am researching (searching, at least!) and just blogging my notes.

To get another concept of the extent of this organization — browse some of their “gazettes.”  I was shocked when I read a few.  Heres’ a link to a 2008 one, celebrating the 20th year anniversary.  Read EVERY page (scroll down) and California litigants may want to read the fine print listing the various board member s– maybe one of your judges was on there.

(I just looked — and the one that wiped out the child support arrears after custody-switch, to all intents and purposes — was on the board THIS year.  To understsand the (Narcissistic) SCOPE of the intended project — basically ALL divoricing or separating couples with children in the civilized (?) world that — and the “target” clientele appears to be both parents and children to attend (Pay for) these workshops, or get scholarships to attend them.  Again, HALF are court-ordered, and Parental Alienation is a key theme.  So we can expect a lot more courts ordering that parents get “edummicated” on how to NOT have conflict with their ex, child molestation, domestic violence notwithstanding….

2008 Kids’ Turn Gazette pdf

It seems to be training for judges, attorneys and lawyers as well here’s a list of people thanked for their contributions:

Kids’ Turn recognizes the following volunteer Board members who have offered their time, energy and resources to our mission since the founding in 1988. Any errors or omissions are strictly unintentional.

Jeff Abadie Jeanne Ames Comm. Josanna Berkow Nordin Blacker, Esq. Janet Bollier Katie Budge Torrance Bynum Dianne Chan Golton Kathy Clausen Susan Coats, Esq. Joe Crawford, Esq. Tom Cvikota Garrett Daily Leslie Dawson

Ann Diamond Robin Donoghoe, Esq. Geoff Dugan The Hon. Roderic Duncan

(ret.) Ellen Efros Chris Emley Greg Engel, Esq. Pam Engel LionelEngelman Sandra Finney Myrna Frankel Tom Friesch Christina Gabriel,

Joan Gann Frank Glassner Gil Gugielmi The Hon. Ina Gyemant Ana Horta The Hon. Isabella

Horton Grant (ret.) Dorothy Huntington

(dec.) Jennifer Jackson, Esq. The Hon. Maria Elena

James Raymond Jones, Ph.D. Nancy Kahn Maureen Kammer Tricia Kennedy Svetlana Kim Nikki King Comm. Susan King

(ret.) Steven Kinney Lou Kohler The Hon. Newton Lam Margo Leahy Esther Lerner, Esq. Linda Levi Carole Levine Brenda MacLean John Mangini

Bunny Martin Kim Martinez John McWeeny Lynn Mieger, DDS Halsey Minor

Lida Morgenstein Barbara Moser, Esq. Dvora Parker Pam Pierson, Esq. Susan Romer

Andy Ross, Esq. Linda Schwarz J. Gary Shansby John Sikorski, MD Comm. Marge Slabach Dick Starratt

Millicent Susens Charles ‘Kip’ Thieriot Suzie S. Thorn, Esq. Valerie Toler Cia Townsend Nancy Unobskey Ann Van Balen Bobbi Welling Stacey Welsh Donna Wickham Furth,

Esq. Anthony Zanze (dec.) Steve Zemmelman

(Some of these are also board members).  That’s quite an assemblage of attorneys and judges, wouldn’t you say?  )

Representative data reflects that 40% of Kids’ Turn families’ annual income is less than $30,000, and 73% is less than $50,000. Due in part to diminished economic circumstances caused by the separation or divorce, the average family served by Kids’ Turn can only afford to pay a fraction of a Program that costs $400 to offer.

I don’t suppose it might occur to any of the above that the family court system ITSELF contributes to that poverty, and work loss — because the cases last up to 10 and 15 eyars at a time under this wealth-transfer system.  ONE solution might be to SKIP the “Kids’ Turn” requirement and the thousand-dollar custody evaluations and instead run classes on how to form profitable nonprofits, so at least they might (like THESE people) keep more of their earned income….

2008 AFCC Conference — KIds Turn Presenters: in context of Domestic Violence!



Albuquerque, New Mexico ($122/night)

1. ParentEducation as Part of a Thriving Practice

Jurisdictions vary in their requirements for co-parenting education and in how they make classes available. Some districts fund their own services, but others rely on local professionals to develop effective programs. This workshop will illustrate how a creative individual trained first in psy-chotherapy can build a gratifying practice by adding divorce education as one specialty service. Even when a court selects or certifies multiple providers, a diligent professional can achieve a successful practice by offer- ing parent education as well as psychotherapy, evaluation, mediation and other services.

Shirley Thomas, Ph.D., Longmont, CO

2. FromLecturetoLife

Empowerment, self-awareness, resilience, optimism and hope are not words usually associated with Divorce Education. Kids’Turn now teaches life skills that participants can take with them into their reorganized families and lives. Kids’Turn, together with consultants 6 Seconds Emotional Intel- ligence International Trainers, have created a curriculum that focuses on families undergoing reorganization, for a better future. From didactic to interactive teaching, they have added humor based on current educational research on how participants learn and retain information.

Steve Kinney, M.A., President, Kids’ Turn,San Jose, CA

Elyse Jacobs, MFA, Program Director, Kids’ Turn, San Francisco, CA

DO YOU “GET IT” YET?  AFCC-CRC-CFCC-AAML-KIDS’ TURN-FAMILY LAW PRACTICE AND ENDLESS EDUCATION.  These people are never going to stop?  It is assumed that parents separatng, with children, cannot simply LEARN on their own how to do this, but no — the world — and I DO mean “the world” — regardless how broke any country or state is, or how bad the schools or how high the debt load — the WORLD really “needs”  all this — more than food, housing, transportation, vaccinations, cures for cancer, or any of that.

The truth of the matter is, these people need a livelihood, and decades upon decades ago, a VERY few people came up with the idea, in California, of starting the Family Law Codes…and a Judges Slush Fund.  The slush pockets were in the training qualifications for mediators to start with! (read my blog!).

JUST AN IDEA . . . .

Feedback solicited — if some aspect of this post struck you, please comment!

Any sitting judge who is simultaneously on (or previously has been on?) the board of this — or any other organization receiving court-ordered services and that’s quite a few of them — and orders YOU or YOUR KIDS into this program — has a conflict of interest.

When the family law case begins — demand the conflict of interest form.

Meanwhile, let’s find out why Kids’ Turn is has a lien on the SF Courts, or vice versa.  This is ridiculous, even as ridiculous as this long (though ya gotta admit, informative — right?) post!

CFFPP and FVPF, where the word “families” really means “fathers..” [First publ. March 3, 2010 with July 27, 2016 update, and Nov., 2017 related posts referencing this one].

with one comment

Post title (updated to identify later posts referencing this one):CFFPP and FVPF, where the word “families” really means “fathers..” [First publ. March 3, 2010 with July 27, 2016 update, and Nov., 2017 related posts referencing this one]. ( With case-sensitive, word-press generated shortlink ends “-pG”).

This background-color and box (text inside borders) is a 7/27/2016 Update

(see related post “SFFI- CFFPP – JustGive...” Published 7/26/2016; see also, same day, “Do You Know Your Social Science PolicySpeak?”

Both those posts have details on CFFPP (the second, more where it fits in the larger picture), but the “SFFI” one is more focused one of its listed “Funders” — “JustGive.org” as a substantial ($32M or so) on-line funding platform — and who THEY are related to.

FORMATTING: This short statement (post) I wrote March 3, 2010, a VERY tough time in my life personally.  I see I was not too “html-competent” at the time (it may have to do with input equipment also, which wasn’t a laptop as I recall).  Apart from that, CFFPP is a LITTLE (size-wise) nonprofit with famous people on its board (mostly unpaid) but somehow two pages of famous foundation funders also.  The corporation/tax return history of this organization reveals some oddball (although not for the field of “fatherhood practitioner” sponsoring 501©3s, I’ve learned since).  Also, several of the links to documents quoted on this page are, as happens, “Page Not Found” over at the CFFPP.org website.  Here in this update are some similar, if not necessarily, identical links:

In the “Technical Assistance Series” — on Fatherhood Promotion:   {{2017 update: both these next two links became broken sometimes between it seems July 26-27, 2016 (my posting this) and late Nov., 2017 (my revisiting this for follow-up information.) lhe website has been updated, so that’s not too surprising.  Large portions of them are quoted below, however.}}

  • Please notice  Esta Soler and Tangir Mangat, as well as Board of Directors CFFPP  — and their organizational or university affiliations — as well as Staff.  Which (unformatted) for this document is:
    • Board of Directors Esta Soler • Interim Chairperson, Family Violence Prevention Fund /Tanvir Mangat • Treasurer, Private Consultant  /Margaret Stapleton, J.D. • Secretary, National Center on Poverty Law /Adrienne Brooks • Private Consultant /Carole Doeppers • Consumer and Health Privacy Consultant /Earl S. Johnson, Ph.D. • California Health and Human Services Agency / John Rich, M.D., M.P.H. • Boston Public Health Commission / Beth Richie, Ph.D. • University of Illinois at Chicago /Gerald A. Smith • IBM /Oliver Williams, Ph.D. • University of Minnesota  {{See “IDVAAC.org”}}
    • CFFPP Staff Jacquelyn Boggess, J.D. • Senior Policy Analyst / Rebecca May • Policy Analyst /Louisa Medaris • Office Manager /David Pate, Ph.D. • Executive Director / Marguerite Roulet, Ph.D. • Research Associate Scott Sussman, J.D. • Legal Analyst
  • http://cffpp.org/publications/TA_Fthd_DomViol.pdf by Marguerite Roulet, also C. 2003, and about “two meetings held in Madison 2001 and 2002.”  Slightly different Board of Directors lineup, starting with “Wendell Primus, Ph.D.” of Center on Budget and Policy Priorities listed first, and Esta Soler, J.D. of FVPF second.

THIS report is based on two meetings held in Madison, Wisconsin in May 2001 and July 2002. The Center would like to thank the Public Welfare Foundation, the Hill-Snowdon Fund of the Tides Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, whose generous support made these meetings possible. We would also like to thank the many individuals who contributed their time and expertise to the meetings and whose on-going work to fight poverty and racism in the U.S. inspires. Thank you Abdillahi Alawy (Public Welfare Foundation), David Arizmendi (Iniciativa Frontera), Adeyemi Bandele (Men on the Move), …

“Sentence” highlit in yellow above is an incomplete sentence, missing a final word (probably direct object) after the word “inspires”.  My posts also have long but grammatically incomplete sentences — on the other hand, I don’t do this with help from major tax-exempt foundations and a significant staff including at least two people with advanced degrees (I see  (Jacquelyn Boggess — J.D. and David Pate, a Ph.D.) or even a budget for the writing.

Because now I know how to show the images, I’m going to add two pages here — the CFFPP people (first image) and the EXTENSIVE “Acknowledgements” page — both the organizations that funded the meetings, and lots of other people…//LGH:

CFFPP (%22Fathers%22 name, co2003) Fatherhd & DV TA, Page 2 CFFPP personnel ONLY viewed Jul2016

click image to enlarge as needed

CFFPP ('Fathers' in org. name|co2003) Fatherhd & DV TA, Page 3|Acknowledgmts| ONLY viewed Jul2016

click image to enlarge as needed

page 2, left, has figures in background, page 3, right is the plain text one.
CFFPP (“Fathers” in its name, co2003) Fatherhd & DV TA, Page 2 CFFPP personnel ONLY viewed Jul2016

CFFPP (‘Fathers’ in org. name|co2003) Fatherhd & DV TA, Page 3|Acknowledgmts| ONLY viewed Jul2016

[the pdf links above produce same result as clicking on the image.  Technological tweak (setting adjustment) on the image upload menu I hadn’t noticed yet, but now use regularly, making the extra “pdfs” unnecessary except where they are for files more than a page (i.e., one image) long].

Next quote (inside this 2016 update) shows Resources and References from this CFFPP “Fatherhood and DV” Document make NO reference to the multi-million-dollar HHS-backed “responsible fatherhood/ healthymarriage” grants stream which — trust me — plenty of the participating groups knew about (see http://TAGGS.hhs.gov to compare which of them may have been recipients).

I notice heavy references to “Oliver Williams” including the “IDAAV” under “resources” which (in this part) doesn’t specifically mention his name, but which he’s basically (with steering committee) been leading — for years… and probably back then, too.  NOTE:  the “IDVAAC” does NOT appear to be an independent 501©3 or registered business entity– at least not in Minnesota, where it’s been operating from:


Carrillo, Ricardo and Jerry Tello, eds. 1998. Family Violence and Men of Color: Healing the Wounded Male Spirit. New York: Springer Publishing Company, Inc.

Raphael, Jody. 2000. Saving Bernice: Battered Women, Welfare, and Poverty. Boston: Northeastern University Press.

Williams, Oliver, Jacquelyn Boggess, and Janet Carter. 2001. “Fatherhood and Domestic Violence: Exploring the Role of Men Who Batter in the Lives of Their Children” in Sandra A. Graham-Bermann and Jeffrey L. Edleson, eds. Domestic Violence in the Lives of Children: The Future of Research, Intervention, and Social Policy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 157—187.

Williams, Oliver. 1999. “Working in Groups with African American Men Who Batter” in Larry E. Davis, ed. Working With African American Males: A Guide to Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, pp. 229-242.

Williams, Oliver. 1999. “African American Men Who Batter: Treatment Considerations and Community Response” in Robert Staples, ed. The Black Family: Essays and Studies, 6th edi- tion. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, pp. 265-279.


• Building Comprehensive Solutions to Domestic Violence: a Collaborative Project of the National Resource Center on Domestic Violence, University of Iowa School of Social Work, and Greater Hartford {{CT}} Legal Assistance—a series of policy and practice papers

Connecticut’s Evolve Program: a 26 and 52 week culturally competent, broad based, skill building, psycho-educational curriculum for male domestic violence offenders with female victims, by Denise Donnelly, Fernando Mederos, David Nyquist, Oliver Williams, and Sarah Wilson. State of Connecticut Judicial Branch, June 2000

• Men of Color Fatherhood Education and Violence Prevention Project, a joint project of the Domestic Violence Program and the Father-Friendly Initiative of the Boston Public Health Commission

National Institute on Domestic Violence in the African American Community ((Not mentioned — Oliver Williams’ involvement in this..I don’t know also whether the word “National” was ever in its name. See idvaac.org website))
National Latino Family and Fatherhood Institute (not mentioned — See Jerry Tello)

Basically, they (participants/conference leadership) are referring to themselves and their own work. Re: references to states of Connecticut and Massachusetts: AFCC has had a strong presence in both states for years (see my Jun/July 2016 posts for more; not necessarily legally incorporated the whole time) and Connecticut also had — starting about this time — a significant “Fatherhood Initiative of Connecticut” (i.e., statewide)

Shortly after this (and after having corporate status suspended in Illinois) CFFPP underwent a corporate name change — and address change.  This was, however, recorded on an improper EIN#, using “39” where the correct number was “36.”

p17 ONLY, IL (Form NFP112.45:113.60) Appl for Reinstatemt (not stamped %22Rec'd%22)@CFFPP's Amended FY2003 Return as EIN#394038873 (2nd digit should be %226%22) showing Req for Namchange Signed 2-24-2005 in WI (Certific of Diss:Revoc Dec1,20014 (19pp)

p17 ONLY, IL (Form NFP112.45:113.60) Appl for Reinstatemt (not stamped “Rec’d”) @CFFPP’s Amended FY2003 Return as EIN#394038873 (2nd digit should be “6”) showing Req for Namchange Signed 2-24-2005 in WI (Certific of Diss: Revoc Dec1, 20014 (19pp)

p17 ONLY, IL (Form NFP112.45:113.60) Appl for Reinstatemt (not stamped %22Rec’d%22)@CFFPP’s Amended FY2003 Return as EIN#394038873 (2nd digit should be %226%22) showing Req for Namchange Signed 2-24-2005 in WI (Certific of Diss:Revoc Dec1,20014 (19pp)




(End of 2016 Update Section);

March 3, 2010, post (vs. its update, above) Begins Here.

In the last post, a FVPF (Family Violence Prevention Fund) Program targeting fathers was supported by several groups, one of them “CFFP,” a name I recognized (along with most of the others). Which prompts me to finish this draft, a few days old, which began…

“I am tired and ornery today, and instead of blogging current news, I’m going to blog “vocabulary news.” Because I believe the gap between theory and practice in the courts is a vocabulary problem. Yes, you heard me right.”

There’s an established group (since 1995) called “CFFP.” For what that acronym stood for (originally) and stands for (now), read on. It doesn’t take much scrutiny to figure out that what originally said “fathers” now says “family.” On their home page, currently, is a 40 page pdf summarizing the marriage/fatherhood movement in lay terms.

Those at sea in terminology might wish to read this:
Read the rest of this entry »

%d bloggers like this: