Posts Tagged ‘U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work..’
Post 1 of 2: Delegation of Federal Dollars (2000-2009)
It is time we discussed these two Presidential letters from a sultry summer in 1995. That’s Post 2 of 2 today 1993-1995.
Post 1 of 2 — Present: Spending Snapshot & (My) Sarcasm
USA “today” 2000-2009:
INTRO: Follow the Money
Of all the discussions I’ve read concerning father’s rights, mother’s rights, and family court reform, even when such discussion discuss the issue of kickbacks or payoffs (which is an issue in these arenas), few blogs or pages on-line discuss the relationship between: Welfare (reform), Child Support issues (“OCSE”) and this “Fatherhood” thing which has compromised justice in the courts, turned them into behavioral modification centers, and jumpstarted a host of new professions, trailing conferences, publications, pronouncements (PAS anyone?) and professional certifications throughout the nation.
And what this blog is about, particularly as these things, these days, are leading to body counts and a consistent degradation of the average household mental health, barring those who are mentally asleep, solid in their faith (in an afterlife, or miraculous provisions in this one), or in the upper 4% or so of society. . . .. OR, who are making a solid living studying the rest of us, or managing us. As some people do not take kindly to being so managed, this also requires significant prison and police help.
On that matter, a WSJ blog article Wednesday declared:
Recession Watch: Calif. County Won’t Prosecute Petty Thieves (By Amir Efrati)
Law-breakers in northern California’s Contra Costa County, population 1 million, stand to benefit from the county’s budget gap. On Tuesday District Attorney Robert Kochly told his county’s police chiefs that beginning in May, his office will no longer prosecute a host of misdemeanors because he has to lay off 20% of his staff, or about 18 prosecutors.
Which infractions won’t be prosecuted? The list includes non-DUI traffic offenses such as driving with a suspended license and reckless driving, simple assault and battery, lewd conduct, trespassing and shoplifting. Here are stories from the SFChron and ABC News.
Even some felony drug cases involving smaller amounts of narcotics won’t end up in court. That means anyone caught with less than a gram of methamphetamine or cocaine, less than 0.5 grams of heroin and fewer than five pills of ecstasy, OxyContin or Vicodin won’t be charged, according to the Chron story.
But bad boys (and girls) shouldn’t get too cocky: “Core” misdemeanors offenses involving domestic violence, drunken driving, firearms and vehicular manslaughter will still be prosecuted. And the Mercury News reports that the police department says it will still make arrests for all misdemeanors, meaning suspects could spend time in jail, even if they aren’t punished by prosecutors.
Since The Golden State can no longer, at least in this county, afford to prosecute its less nefarious residents, we the people should be policing where the money went. Right??? Or, each other (not from afar, or from ivory towers), but perhaps in our own communities and homes. Oh, I forgot, we aren’t IN those homes, we are out working, our kids are in child care, or their Moms are on welfare while the government (finally noticing this) declared — back in 1995 at least, you’ll see — that many of those Dads in prison (possibly for assaulting Mom — or someone else, see 1994) — should be fetched out, re-educated (what happened the first time around? See budget..) and persuaded, if their child support arrearages are reduced, or if they can spend more time with their kids (and pretty please, this time, promise not to molest or assault, and get a job: we trust you, since we just re-educated you in batterers programs and by court-appointed parent educators, etc.) — and replaced in front of their offspring. This is called “Healthy Families.” Meanwhile, a different policy is sending nurses INTo the homes and taking little kids out of them, earlier, for more Head Start.
In short, few follow the money trail. Some do, and I say more should.
Few connect the money with the rhetoric. Many connect sexual misbehavior (or criminal behavior. Or, natural behavior, if you’re Richard Gardner of “PAS” fame) with the rhetoric, but in the long run, it’s about the money. The ship of state is rowed with money. Without money, who would pay the psychiatrists (including those at institutes, not those just analyzing why one parent is so distraught, or child, at contact with the other one, by looking at them, rather than looking at the CASE file, and searching for facts, not assertions).
In short, this nationwide attempt, purportedly to get deadbeat FATHERS back to work, has actually been great business for the analysts. And, say some, child-molesters and woman-beaters.
Both fathers’ groups and mothers’ groups complain about violation of due process in the family courts, just not towards whom it is biased. Well WHAT type of incentive would get a whole institution to violate due process as a matter of general practice?
We need to talk about the money. To do this, we should look at the Executive Branch of Goverment’s statements that helped turn over the ignition in driving the programs that are using it. (Yes, I know I just switched analogies. I do not have cartoon capacity, otherwise, I’d post a few illustrations). Let’s look at the Head of State (historically), and who turned HIS (maybe in the next decade or so, I will have to write “His or Her.” Sorry, Secretary of State Ms. Hillary, but not this time. Moreover, I’m going to talk today about what your husband wrote, turning the ship of state, almost 14 years ago.
http://www.NAFCJ.net talks about this connection. I also see that StopFamilyViolence.org has posted a page by Trish Wilson on this connection between
(a) Government rising concern about WELFARE (costs),
(b) Government’s then “aha!” moment that the deadbeat Dads should help reduce these costs, and
(c) Government’s suddenly “aha!” that Dads are People Too.
(Perhaps if it had interviewed a few of the struggling Moms, it might have come to this conclusion sooner — that their children were growing up in poverty in a female-headed household) (Another thing it might, perhaps, have asked is why are Moms leaving Dads, or Dads leaving Moms? In this regard, I refer to the 1994 V.A.W.A. act, up for re-funding, please contact your Senator, if you’re not a libertarian, or a Dad who believes you were wrongfully thrown out of your house, and she was asking for it, to vote YES to refund).
Again, this is the problem:
(a) single mothers needing welfare because they are not staying with the fathers, and said fathers are not supporting the kids; (b) to fix this, child support was started, or upped. However, because said collection sucks, we will now: (c) divert money from directly (government dole) supporting single mothers to re-engaging single fathers, including those that have been in prison for, either nonpayment, or other serious crimes, such as assault and battery, or worse (worse? well, see yesterday’s post). This is supposed to help all involved — the Dads, the kids, and the public deficit.
OK, I think I just flogged Balaam’s ass long enough on this point. Here’s the hard data, the angel in the road with drawn sword, as it were. (FYI, for the uninitiated, Balaam was a crooked prophet. He prophesied for pay and went panting after it. His bad behavior in the Bible’s Old Testament makes mention in the New (as an example of prophesying for pay).
I hadn’t intended the comparison to our family law system’s paraprofessionals, but I’ll let the serendipity resemblance sit.
Are they working, these policies?
(Also, related, is our current President changing THOSE policies?)
Well, I looked yesterday at a site called “USAspending.gov” and saw that, in order, the top three 2008 expenditures of the Federal government are, in order: Dept. of Health and Human Services (HHS), Dept of Education, Dept. of Transportation. (see interactive map) Together in one year these comprised respectively 54%, 18% and 9%–rounded. Do your mental math (if you did NOT come up through the US public school system in recent decades, chances are better that you can do this. Or, if you’re poor, and are must stretch pennies to eat, stay housed, and get to and from work, assuming you have work). This is about 81% or MOST of the pie.
Considering 2000-2009 overall, the top three federal department expenditures were:
Dept. of HHS (30.5%), Homeland Security (26.4%), and SSA (25.0%). To get the impact, also click on the “switch to dollars” link above. Please review this! (skip the rest of the post, if need be!) Overall (2000-2009) the Dept. of Ed. is suffering, at a merely 3.68% or $532. 188. Did I say, Billion dollars?
It seems clear to me that we (this IS still government of the people, by the people, and for the people, right? (I may have even got the prepositions wrong, but at least I know what a preposition is, as well as preposterous PROpositions, and I don’t mean the stranger that has been trying to talk to me for three days here, failing to get my nonverbal “buzz off” and my verbal “I don’t want to talk to you” messages to date.) . . .
It seems clear to me that “we” are dedicating 30 cents out of every dollar to studying ourselves, another 26 cents spying on ourselves, in part to answer why we let hijackers fly planes into the Twin Towers, demolishing both of them and killing thousands — and into the Dept. of Defense headquarters, taking a chunk out of it also (9/11/2001), and another 25 cents financially supporting adults who can’t or don’t support themselves & kids in poor households. (note these are not 100% female-headed households, FYI), perhaps because? the 3 cents we spent educating them, resulting in some of the dads being in prison or unable to work, or uninvolved with the family.
Or possibly?, because of prior social engineering in the schools that kept kids so under-engaged in creative activities that sex was the best they could come up with, and violence. When this happens, of course it’s still not the government’s fault from prior generations (of schooling or social engineering), but the parents. This is the direct consequence of unmonitored government Of, BY, and FOR “the people,” a perceptual divide where WE (the people) farm out most of our vital force and dollars, trusting THEM (the elite, informed specialists) to steward OUR (or our parents’) money wisely, without OUR oversight. Well, that’s bright, and perhaps a value system we learned under the 3cents worth. Thats my two bits’ worth. (FYI, that’s $0.025, and not $0.02).
I am a subject of some of these socially re-tooling society programs, and as such shouldn’t really have a voice. Plus, I didnt’ graduate in a School of Behavioral Health, nor am I a Harvard psychiatrist. However, my two-bit thinking thinks that if the Dept. of Education with its 30% had done its job right, could teach the kids, while they’re growing up, about how to stay together as a family, at least as well they have been taught about how NOT to have one, or how to unburden one’s womb of an unwanted pregnancy (possibly gotten from some of the healthy-marriage-promoting relationships one developed while at school, and Mom at work).
Perhaps the school environment could have itself modeled a healthy family environment — not the kind with 26 children, close in age to each other, and a rapidly changing assortment of parental figures (some of them molesting kids, others superb, some of them last-minute substitutes who don’t really know the children, for when the main teacher got stressed out or sick, or quit) going in and out of a kids’ lives and trying to keep them all entertained and engaged in learning.
I mean, come to think of it, if we are going to teach kids how to have healthy marriages and families, if No Child is to be Left Behind, then perhaps the one-room schoolhouse with the teachers actually living with the families served, even rotating from house to house (what a commitment!) might be a slightly better model, than being taught by strangers.
(Could we safely say that apart from immigration as adults or halfway through K-12, and private, parochial or other religious, and homeschooling educational scenarios, MOST of the U.S. populace has come through this system, created in the late 1800s). Now what has happened in “family law” is that another department, the Justice Dept. — which funding is far lower (see USAspending.gov) has become a remedial, therapeutic, educational institutional form of jurisprudence (see my post on this). Perhaps, sooner or later, the entire US populace can receive employment, paid by taxes it pays itself, in studying itself. Believe me, I have considered this alternate form of employment, once I learned who is being paid what to study what under the HHS / ACF department responding promptly and expensively to the Presidential Directive below.
Given the current economic situation and tenor of the news, how would you say this government by the people, of the people, and for the people is doing?
I’ll let that question hang over the shadow of the last set of family wipeouts, or the little girl found in a suitcase at the bottom of an irrigation pond, last month. I am today going to apply for Food Stamps for the first time in 9 years, and only second time in my life. THe only reason I would do so is that attempts to enforce child support, create a safety zone (from prior violent husband) in which to safely and non-traumatizedly work, and to raise children while fighting constantly in the family court arena, AFTER my non-welfare-receiving family was just about solvent and, apart from the thunderstorm brewing (because I was doing things that supposedly single mothers couldn’t do — and was told as much, in writing, by someone who didn’t notice, I guess, what I did while living in an intact household with an abuser). Bus lines are being cut (my car is gone, as well as kids, as well as prior profession), and as much as I hate to go one more round with the government THIS decade, it seems a better use of my days to spend one applying for a little piece of plastic that will produce food, than hoofing it around on the buses to bring it back again. That routine (as well as my body) is getting old.
END OF POST 1 of 2. POST 2 HAS MORE PRESIDENTIAL AND FEWER OF MY WORDS.
SHARE THIS POST on...
PAS posts: Pro, Con, & Corollaries
This post will be updated later let’s hope.
This week several states, stupidly, are having “Parental Alienation Awareness Day.”
So I pause from tracking the funding of the “Fatherhood Initiative” and violations of due process in order to attain a government mandate to stop singlehood, I suppose (or is it motherhood?), to address this “Parental Alienation Awareness Day,” and question the thinking behind assigning single days, or months, of awareness to this and then to that, nationally (or, internationally). No wonder medicating for ADD & ADHD is big business: The innocent observer trying nobly to make sense of it all will find his – OR her — brain darting too and fro, or asked to throw dollars at one problem/passion, ignoring the rest, then wonders where all those dollars went.
For a(nother) great example of bureaucratic dollar-throwing, see:
“Sexual predator settles locally”
No, that is NOT a joke, unfortunately. Meanwhile, at one local charity: “Demand up, Donations Down, 5 items only.”
The purpose of having an “awareness” of something is not a fleeting glance, but an incorporation of that awareness into one’s values, principles, and purposes. Or, dismissing it.
“PAA” Day: I am utterly opposed to this terminology — because of its origins, and how “PAS” is used to divert the public conversation from much, much, more hard topics to face — and these have ugly names, but not nearly as ugly as ignoring them is to the people suffering them. These topics are as ugly as (but not unrelated to) “Domestic Violence Awareness Month,” which (good planning on the part of PAS folk?) was about six months apart from this new “day.” As this term is primarily (though not only) directed against custodial Mothers (in order to help switch custody, or gain more access to children), how silly that one month later, we have “Mother’s Day.” Yet, nationally the problem supposedly is “fatherlessness” — referring to a state of children, rather than actions taken previously by their parents (Huh?). So, are you giddy yet? No wonder the year starts out with the month of January, after the god “Janus,” looking two ways.
Today I choose to post links to these ugly-content, hard-to-stomach topics, and to (again) talk about them. The $30K/month link above I found from “lostinlimaohio” which blog somehow came up when I was tracking down why a judge placed a gag order on the Huckaby/Cantu case. In that case, also a judge has (inexplicably) recused himself, and I heard that the DA had issued charges before he had either the coroner’s report OR reports or recordings from the 5-hour long interrogation leading to Ms. Huckaby’s arrest, without bail. 8-year-old Young Miss Cantu is physically GONE, she herself no longer has a future, but 28-year-old Ms. Huckaby is on trial for her life, without bail, and after sensational, high-profile, nationwide (at least) media coverage because of the horror of the accusation & crime (especially for a Sunday school teacher, female). Anomalies caught my eye that I started (reluctantly — I’m busy!) following this. Because it’s about confidence in the prosecutorial process, and due process, and more. If you want my input on that so far (and I may be wrong), post and I’ll reply. Then they gagged it!
One upside of pursuing these topics is you run across other information and insights; and if life is not about insight so that we can live reasonably upright and effective lives, what is it about?
Anyhow, I had no major persistent troubles with the seamy side of life (even after being mugged twice, without physical harm, and despite living in some dangerous urban areas), this side of life arose through and as a direct consequence of who I married, and who have had to deal with since attempting to separate. Since the seamy side of life bit me pretty hard in the butt (and people associated with me, and related to), it bears addressing. One of the most valuable lessons I learned is that some of the less seamy “characters” don’t look it on the outside. If anything, they are in positions of policymaking, and good at dominating conversations, and people.
Meanwhile Mr. or Ms. lostinlimaohio appears to think like me. And (I believe) posted under the title “Wouldn’t Prison Be Cheaper?” an article on the $30,000 state support of this middle-aged man:
Rasmuson’s first conviction for child molestation came in 1981 when a Santa Barbara [CA] court found him guilty of raping an 11-year-old boy. He was sentenced to state prison and conditionally released in 1985. [Four years only?? see:
25 yrs for a cat, 8 for a little girlIn 1987, Rasmuson was arrested again, this time for the kidnapping and sexual assault of a 3-year-old child, who was reportedly later found naked and abandoned in the Los Angeles foothills.
In other words, I think a little screw-up happened judicially, somewhere, or were the prisons just too crowded? As usual, when government screws up, everyone pays, not just emotionally, and family-wide, but also through the nose, which is why the NEXT quote, I put in red, which this state (and nation) currently is, deeply.
According to his neighbors, Rasmuson is living in a mobile home on the fenced acreage while repairs are being made to the house he’s renting on the land. Though the 47-year-old is employed, Rasmuson is still paying the state back for previous care and financial support, meaning taxpayers are also footing the $4,500 monthly rent on the $1.5 million property. In addition, according to the state’s Department of Mental Health, there’s an $800 daily expense for the court-ordered security detail assigned to protect him—for his safety and that of his neighbors. The current set-up is costing taxpayers close to $30,000 a month from the state’s general funds.
Rasmuson won his freedom in 2007 on an appeal, after the courts initially denied his release from Atascadero State Hospital. Under the terms of release set forth in “Jessica’s Law,” Rasmuson is required be monitored by Global Positioning Satellite at all times and must live more than 2,000 feet away from a school or park where children congregate.
Do you know how abundantly I could (have) provided on that salary for my children, and me, and with $ to spare, had not local entities (who will be repeatedly named, on this blog — at least by function) not chosen, outside of my hearing or input, or even awareness, chosen to interfere with my livelihood with their (communal) It takes a Village to Remove [excuse me, ‘Raise’] a Child “help”? The last time I was in range of this salary, my kids disappeared, overnight, despite my attempts to avert that virtually predictable event.
Anyhow, many times, other people have said the thing better already.
I too, have my limits on what I can stomach in a day. I am already missing my daughters (as every day) and simultaneously grieving the lost time, opportunities for all of us (professional, academic personal), but I think perhaps most of all, that when I went for help to the justice, law enforcement, and nonprofits of my geographic area, and the situation became worse. ACTUALLY, in seeking to renew a restraining order, a relative? or? a spinoff employee/patron of the Promoting Responsible Fatherhood movement? helped my ex bounce it into family court, a more friendly venue to batterers, where he could better convince a judge of how much he “loved” his children, now (let’s not talk about the prior violence, OK?). Not only analyzing this past (done, long ago), but doing so looking for how to (THIS time round) handle the present is a full-time occupation, just about. One balances purpose, energy available, emotional health, statistical probabilities of succeeding in changing status qui (that’s plural, probably not in the correct cast, for you non-Latin folk), etc.
There are also other issues I follow and things I do in life, many of them. Like many of the people sponsoring blogs on these issues, in our own lives, the issues are not in “closed” mode, but the problems are ongoing and on-traumatizing also. This can affect quality of blogging — I know in particular that my copyediting is sub-par, and that the appearance of this blog is less than professional (nevertheless, it is getting some international traffic, I note). Some days, it’s better to defer to others who have already written, well, on the topic.
Today, also, another group, Legal Momentum, discusses 15th Anniv. of VAWA…
I am delighted to announce that Legal Momentum, the nation’s oldest legal defense and education fund dedicated to advancing the rights of women and girls, will honor United States Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. on April 22 with its Legal Momentum Hero Award at a symposium marking the fifteenth anniversary of the 1994 Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), initiated and championed by then-Senator Joseph Biden. The historic Act was the first comprehensive federal legislative package designed to end violence against women and put the issue on the national agenda….
The event will take place at Georgetown Law Center in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday, April 22, 9:15 a.m. until 3:00 p.m. The complete list of speakers is posted on our Web site at: http://www.legalmomentum.org/news-room/press-releases/legal-momentum-to-honor-vice.html
LIVE WEBCAST WILL BE AVAILABLE
Although seats are not available at this sold-out event, it will be broadcast live via the Web by Georgetown Law Center at this url: https://www.law.georgetown.edu/webcast/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.randijames.com/2009/04/pas-is-real-targeting-noncustodial.html
Randi James responds to a comment on her site called “PAS is real” and suggesting that we (mothers groups, fathers groups) on stopping this. This is a teaser, the link above has more URLS than the post here I put this exchange in GREEN, for Go Take a Look!, but have not indented. Therefore, all the (contiguous) green below is all quote:
Robert Gartner has left a new comment on your post “Mothers’ Movements“:
Your blog does an injustice to the non custodial women you mention. Everyone knows that family courts do not get it right all the time. Even those on death row, some of them, are innocent.
PAS is real. If your groups could get past that we might have a way to work together.
Posted by Robert Gartner to Randi James at Apr 22, 2009 12:33:00 PM
Unfortunately for you and your ilk, I know that “PAS is Real” is a catch phrase you use to target unsuspecting noncustodial mothers and men who have been primary caretakers. I also personally know that you lurk around women’s boards, especial single mothers and abused women, in order to recruit them into your camp. It is an unfair, divisive tactic that fathers supremacists have been using increasingly.
It’s not that they really believe you…they need something to hold on to…something that seems to make sense. Mothers and innocent fathers do not understand the depth of the origination of the term parental alienation syndrome, a history that should not be forgotten or obscured.
Mothers are often the target of abusive husbands/fathers in relationships where the children have been taught to hate the mother, often taking the abuser’s side because of the perception of power that he has. This is trauma bonding through the use of maternal deprivation:
Maternal Deprivation, or Motherlessness, is occurring with alarming frequency due to the unethical treatment of women and children in family court. Maternal Deprivation is inflicting abuse by severing the mother-child bond. It is a form of abuse that men inflict on both the mother and children, especially men who claim they are “parentally alienated” from their children when there are complaints of abusive treatment by the father.
Maternal Deprivation occurs when men seek to keep their children from being raised by their mothers who are the children’s natural caretakers. Some men murder the mothers of their own children. Others seek to sever the maternal bonds by making false allegations of fictitious psychological syndromes in a deliberate effort to change custody and/or keep the child from having contact with their mother when there are legal proceedings.
Anyone reading old enough to remember the experiment carried out on young monkeys, who were forced to choose between a warm fuzzy (fake) mother and a wire metal, milk-dispensing mother. Guess which one they chose? In the earliest years, kids need to be held and hugged (and later on, too!). I wonder what kind of personnel the new Zero to Five is going to attract to the expanded preschool industry, and who is going to monitor them (and at whose expense)….
“PAS” doesn’t want to talk about cases like this:
Egregious case, but I provide it because a response to the post links to quotes from Richard Gardner, PAS-front-man (until he committed suicide, now adherents continue to carry the NAMBLA etc. torch in many venues):
”I hope he suffers,” said the woman, who has not been identified because she is a sexual abuse victim. “I want him to die in there in jail because that’s what he did to me. He confined me,” the 29-year old daughter said whose assault started when she was just 6 years old.
She said her 48-year-old father, a martial arts instructor, threatened to kill her if she told anyone and kept her a prisoner at home, monitoring her movements using surveillance cameras and delivering fierce beatings during paranoid rages.
As her father was led away in handcuffs, the woman wept quietly and embraced her younger brother, who she said was also a victim of beatings by their father, the Los Angeles Times reported on Saturday.
DNA tests confirmed the daughter’s account, proving that Thibes was both the father and grandfather of her three children. All girls, they are 4, 7 and 11.
. . .
Her father, she said, grew fearful that her brother had told police about abuse at the home and fled to Las Vegas in 2003, taking her and her children. They lived in a motel, where, she said, Thibes told others that she was his girlfriend.
In April 2005, he stabbed her twice in the chest with a 10-inch kitchen knife, police records show. In interviews with police, he described her at various times as his wife, girlfriend or daughter.
The woman said she told hospital workers about the abuse once her father had been arrested and she knew her children were safe in custody.
A comment to THAT post links to a history on Richard Gardner, some of his less “choice” quotes.
CAUTION: some readers, especially survivors of sexual abuse, may find Gardner’s remarks deeply disturbing. Indeed, we all should. {{I chose not to post them. Even the subtitles are offensive. However, they remain as the background and underpinning of “Parental Alienation Awareness Day” and in its tawdry history. Now, when children (PAS in reverse?) are returned to the abuser, and then no longer bond with the protective parent (generally, not always, the mother), the feeling sure feels like “alienated” from this (case in point) perspective. However, there exist other terms already to address these actions and symptoms of such actions: kidnapping, brainwashing, Stockholm syndrome, others.
I think a difficulty arises in labeling something with which one has no personal acquaintance, or accepting this label (insert applicable epithet from other generations or ethnic, religious groups) wholesale. We cannot farm out our THINKING to the experts for long!
Quotes By Richard Gardner, the Father of “Parental Alienation Syndrome”
Battered Moms Lose Children To Abusers Blog does not agree with the pervertedly twisted philosophies ofRichard Gardner. The following information was posted at Stop Family Violence and is posted here to demonstrate that the philosophies of this man, such as “Parental Alienation Syndrome” (PAS) are all integrally related to his pro-pedophilia beliefs and misogyny. The whole idea of the theory is to recast disclosures of abuse as “hysterics” by women and children. But even worse, this sick man’s ideas on punishing children by forcing them to remain with their abusers while depriving them of their protectors needs to be denounced by everyone in the world who cares about the safety and well-being of children. For more info on Richard Gardner, see Cincinatti PAS.
So if you support Parental Alienation Syndrome theories, you agree with the theories of a pedophile supporter.
April 20, 2009 — batteredmomslosecustody
Richard A. Gardner, M.D., is the creator of the creator and main proponent for the bogus Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) theory. Prior to his suicide, Gardner was an unpaid part-time clinical professor of child psychiatry at the College of Physicians and Surgeons at Columbia University . He made his money mainly as a forensic expert. PAS was developed by Dr Richard Gardner in 1985 based on his personal observation, not on scientific study, and on his work as an expert witness often on behalf of fathers accused of molesting their children. Gardner ’s theory of PAS has had a profoundly detrimental effect on how the court systems in our country handle allegations of child sexual abuse, especially during divorce. Because Gardner ’s PAS theory is based on his clinical observations–not scientific data–it must be understood in the context of his extreme views concerning women, pedophilia and child sexual abuse. We provide Gardner’s views so that people can understand the radical, perverse thinking of the so-called “expert” who invented the bogus theory of PAS that has done so much damage.
NOTE: Stop Family Violence does not agree with the views espoused by Gardner – we find them disgusting, offensive, and most importantly, they are not correct. Gardner’s views are based in his own perverse thinking, not in anything scientists know, not in anything our laws condone, and not in anything our culture believes. To be clear – pedophilia is not natural, children do not enjoy, ask for or consent to sexual abuse, and mothers are not to blame if fathers commit such heinous acts against their children.
CAUTION: some readers, especially survivors of sexual abuse, may find Gardner’s remarks deeply disturbing. Indeed, we all should.
Read, and Think About This before you sign another PAS petition.
THEN go to AFCC.net and look at the conference brochures, notice the similarity of terms, and consider:
Would you want your family’s future in the hands of these people?
If not, then stay married, take more abuse, do something . because on the way out, with children, they are going to be. Also, do a serious criminal background check before partnering up, and talk to former partners. Consider, they MIGHT be telling the truth.
. . . And by the way, domestic violence is a clear precursor, sometimes to homelessness (if not death) (or, if not, extended undermployment, and documented health problems.
Finally, the “lostinlimaohio” blog I discovered today, as I was so disturbed by a recent “gag order” on the Cantu / Huckaby case recently, where an 8 year old was discovered in a suitcase at the bottom of an irrigation pond, and a 28-year-old woman/mother is facing the death penalty or life in prison because of special circumstances. Several details in this case flagged my attention as not passing muster. Either my mind can’t conceive of the situation, or my instincts were right. Either way, the case is now gagged.
I don’t know anything more about this blog than that I think the writing is good, it covers many aspects.
It appears to have more of a criminal focus than some of these others, but as the issues that routinely pass through family court halls many times ARE criminal in nature, but handled as psychological and relationship problems (and shunted off for mind-therapy on how to get along with that violent person you just threw out of your house, legally, because, long ago, or not so long about, one of you impregnated the other, and the female partner did not abort).
I may need to separate the funding aspects of this blog into another one, but ALL these issues are related, of course.
Have a happy day… Be “aware” of what you are asked to become aware of. Pay attention to vocabulary, and who invented some of the jargon.
SHARE THIS POST on...
WHY Family Court (let’s get honest) “matters” to us all…
…Even if you’re not inside the doors. . .
…Even if you have your “act” together —
…Even if you’re not IN any marital or intimate partner act. Or relationship.
You are probably living with, next to, or in association with someone who has been. At least one of the people who go behind those doors into this family law / let’s mediate / co-parent / share custody / just get along (adversarial) system is going to be traumatized.
Another will be probably robbed. A third will be shocked. A fourth will be rewarded. A fifth will be back for more easy victories by hearsay accusations the next time he (or she) has a grudge. A sixth will be forced back to negotiate with the abusive partner she (OK, now you can argue: \”or he\”) was attempting to separate from — and will be lectured, after having worked up courage to do this — not to upset the children by showing anger, or conflict, because in this YOU-topia supposedly conflict never happens — or at LEAST never between parents.
This belief, along with Santa Claus, according to the same logic, is going to set your children on a good path for life.
A seventh will have been raised by one or more of the above. An eighth will be teaching (or in class next to) one of the above.
For a take on the intergenerational, societal transmission of trauma, see “www.sanctuaryweb.com“
Get real – – – and
Let’s Get Honest. Without hate.
Let’s look at the script (and playwrights) in family law.
Let’s look at the off-stage directions and who takes cues from whom. And let’s begin to understand that this is not a game, it is real people, real lives, and in some cases, physically “lost” in the drama.
Let’s ALL consider the profit/loss ratio in this endeavor, family law, family court services, custodyh evaluations, mediations, court-appointed guardians, and attempting to, through this process and under cover of “law”, force divorcing parties with enough anmosity they couldn’t work it out separately to come seeking a higher authority to punish the ex somehow, or extract children, or money from her or him, and on what basis. Personally, I (sarcastically) feel that both these words:
“FAMILY COURT“”
are accurate. The trick, like in any new culture, is to understand the idioms — usage — nuances. The “nuance” in this case is, assume the exact opposite is meant. Supposedly this is about “family,” and to help them. Supposedly courts, in the USA (and elsewhere) exist for the purpose of determining truth and dispensing justice. The words “public servant” possibly come to mind.
COURT: Go back a few hundred years, and think “court” again. Try Henry VIII or Louis XIV. Think about what takes place in the halls of a palace, and who gets to be there? How did one get an appointment at a palace? How did one, having obtained it, REtain it? There, that’s a little better, you’re getting warm… . . . Also, did you know that any attorney is considered an “officer of the court.” (not of you…) (I THINK).
FAMILY: The “Family” in question is less likely your own (which will be devastated, most likely, one way or another), but the true “FAMILY” here in are the professionals, and so-called experts that know they will be dealing with each other on an ongoing basis, referring business, exchanging pleasantries, and in some cases referring cases (translation: Jobs). “Good” for them actually could mean keeping a family IN the system. “Good” for the family biological generally means getting themselves OUT of the system and back to life as almost paranormal — or at least work, and sleep. Perhaps the words “fealty” or “feudal” are closer to the truth. I do not denigrate ethical, honest, overworked, and noble judges attorneys, or (well, I haven’t met such a mediator). I’m sure they exist, and among the approximately seven judges I’ve stood before in this case, some more than once, only the 3rd one would I characterize as ethical and having a reputation of actually having read the paperwork before him prior to ruling on it. Unfortunately, he quit family law, but I have been to date unable to.
The “COURT” does indeed hail back to royalty, and I think that is the most idealized among us that are going to lose in court. We have believed (prior to baptism by fire) that this system, while we weren’t in it, somehow existed, in ether, and would protect the innocent and help the falsely accused, if only the truth were at.
I tried that for many years with a man that, in about the 8th year of this “just trying to get along” (survive, from my standpoint), was offended, again, by a minor perceived provocation. I turned the music down, which was earsplitting and had just been turned up to make a point that the conversation was over. We had small children at this time. I reached over and turned a radio dial. Next thing you know, I had been grabbed, hurled, and landed on my chin in literally another room. Teeth were knocked loose.
I didn’t learn til many, MANY years later, that this was felony level domestic violence (serious injury caused) or that even a difference existed between the civil and criminal system existed. Why would I? I had prior to then inhabited churches, schools, parks (raising kids) with playgroups, and concert halls. I did not think that a DETAILED awareness of how our criminal, civil, and other justice system works, let alone knowing the laws of my state (and federal) were important to my safety and wellbeing. NOW, I think that at least the ability to navigate them, including what is the flowchart of a basic lawsuit (which is not that complicated…), should be required for high school graduation. Unfortunately, it appears that in too many US schools, we are still working on the ability to read. Period.
In other places, this may be called “DOMESTIC RELATIONS” or something similar. The same interpretions apply. Get your head out of the clouds and understand who is cozy with whom, and that it’s relationships, not evidence (in practice) that counts, in most arenas. THAT is the problem, and like the beginning of our country, principles count and are worth fighting to preserve, or restore. However one may bash “Dead White Males who owned slaves, or that it took women even longer to get the vote, the fact remains that that Constitution exists, as do the Bill of Rights. Like laws, muscles, or any other talent, they mean nothing without application towards the goal, and where these count is, they are that ideal. Or, should I yet say “were”? – – Use it or lose it. . . ..
Let’s consider
what kind of emotion drives people even showing up, via an Order to Show Cause requesting a Motion to MAKE THAT WOMAN (or MAN) stop, pay, or give me (back) my children. Think about it, and about the logic of any authority (which these courts are, in fact that is primarily what they are, order-makers) then telling both parties — when only one initiated the motion — (this is now the script) that “conflict” is bad for kids, so pretend you don’t have any, or no more contact with your kids. And let’s compare that with things such as, the state laws, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence, and so forth.. . . . MANY of these families, with kids, ended up there precisely because of out of court conflicts that had almost gotten lethal, or had hurt someone. The basic premise of any legal motion is that some “wrong” happened ( “tort” = “wrong” — and believe me, I didn’t learn that term even 3 years into the system), and therefore the court should redress it. However, in entering the halls, when kids are involved, thinking goes haywire, and despite the system of “tort” “redress” (etc.) on which law is based, the judges, and associated employees of the court, or an affiliate of it, then all communicate clearly that BOTH parties are wrong, since they couldn’t settle their own differences without court help. They are presumed needing a sound lecture of some sort, and of course therapy, if possible. The general idea of the process is DUE process. However, the general idea of the family law system as it now exists is virtual behavioral modification, and through this, I say, social engineering — mass scale. JUST REMEMBER “COURTS” // “ROYALTY.” Where do the allegiances typically lie? It often gets down to simply the character of the individual judges.
The desired result of a hearing in court is called and “order.” Contempt of it can (doesn’t often, but CAN) end one in jail. In the mythic interpretation of the process, which those of us without prior connections probably held going in, the order comes from a judge who is more noble and neutral than either of you, will hear EVIDENCE impartially, and in a manner coherent with the rules of court for the jurisdictions, and judicial ethics, as listening to attorneys (if any) who also abide by their professional codes of ethics, etc.
Like I just said above, about Santa Claus — ––
It being a stressed, fragmented world, in general, I imagine that you figure it’s “not your business.”
How about if I said, it’s your money, though, as a taxpayer?
How about if I said, it MAY just relate to the statistical probability of someone you know being a bystander of an irate spouse that took the law into his (and yes, it primarily IS “his” so, or the major news media AND USDOJ are both run by radical feminists, and censor mothers wiping out fathers, kids, bystander and a cop or two, and themselves because they were publicly humiliated, or just bitter, and couldn’t help themselves — and knew how to use a gun, or a knife, or a club, or tie a knot, etc.).
I’m WAY newer to blogging than to Family Court.
On the other hand, unlike FC, my blog doesn\’t imply that it\’s saving families, or even serving them (as in \”Family Court Services.\” Nor do I hope that somehow this will orchestrate a brave, new world. In fact years ago, when I was hauled in (no, it wasn\’t voluntary), my venues were limited to, and my focus on: my immediate family, profession(s), colleagues (when I still had them), and the communities I lived and worked in. I got on-line to email some friends from time to time. I wasn\’t fighting to find out where my rights went, and (because I wasn\’t in the habit of breaking laws or court orders to get my way in life) I wasn\’t desperately trying to search what my state code called that last despicable act. Or how come it only took 20 minutes to change my kid\’s futures, that had been set since an early age towards college, with scholarships, ANY college they set their sites on, within reason.
I would like to talk about what some of these myths do, that allow decent upstanding law-abiding, non-wife-beating, hard-working parents (and individuals) to keep clear of these halls and not trouble their sleep about what happens inside them . Let’s Get Honest about what the myth that justice is happening in behind these closed doors is costing the country, and your communities, overall.
Recently (Spring 2009), the US closed lots of schools in a panic over swine flu. Clearly someone understands the concept of “quarantine” for the general public safety. Then they decided to open them again. How about opening some of the closed doors in courtrooms? The people’s changes and humiliations / /wins / losses //responses to these (trauma, or as it sometimes, I”m sorry to say, turns out, kidnappings // femicides/homicide/suicides // poverty afterwards is already in public view.
So, “general public,” gentle readers, the family court leper colony is not working — for the family, or for the general public. However, it IS working quite well, thank you, for the type of personnel who designed it to start with (primarily, in the USA, in Southern California). And YOU (if you are Joe common bloke, Ann single working woman, or Mrs. Joe & Ann Smith, gainfully employed. Or (I hear now Maine is the 5th state in the US), Mr. & Mr. Joe and Harry Blow and Ms. & Ms. Ann and Sydney BestFriends. It may not really be about gender, only, in the courts either. I was a Mr. & Mrs., and prior to separation, we paid too, unaware of others’ trauma.
Any effort to reform it, should this be the goal, will have to address for whom this venue IS working just fine. To track this, try some of my links, or do your own research. I wouldn’t suggest calling all men bad (OR good) or all women, and the culture in general, a bunch of femininazi, male-bashing, sex-deprived (or sex-crazed, as case may be) misfits. That’s generally speaking not helpful.
What may be more helpful is to realize that large sectors of populace do actually believe those things. Some of them say it with Ph.D. language (“fatherlessness” — a.k.a. single mothers, case in point — are to blame for society’s ills.). Can you recognize the same talk, said in “expert” language and footnoted with a bunch of experts who believe the same thing? Then you’re getting a handle on the picture.
NOTE on TONE: “Related Blogs,” to left, some of them have a different tone than I want here. But they ALSO still have facts (news reports, laws, cases, etc.) there too. And they have a right to respond as expressively as they want to. Many or all of the bloggers there typically, lost custody of children to a batterer or a child-moleester, and sometimes as a direct consequence for having reported it. Some of them, as I heard, have been in jail for failing to be able, after that, come up with enough child support (we’re talking women). Some of the women I’ve met recently have gone to international courts for safety, and they/we are also aware of other groups going to the same international courts for different purposes.
So they have a right to be pissed off and say “forget you” or “I’m pissed off” or THIS (see image) is what I think of that group of demagogues. The point of my blog is dialogue (hopefully) and taking a close look at the players who are laughing the way to the bank (metaphorically) while the cats and dogs are spitting, hissing, biting, and scratching in the dust. I hope to keep the intensity level just enough to keep you (meaning “us”) VERY uncomfortable with inaction, but not so lit up that only discharging emotion action takes place.
Speaking up IS action, and particularly if one has been subject to violence already for doing so.
Identifiable causes, and identifiable solutions exist to the problems of familycourtmatters. These solutions are emotionally painful and would require some businesses that profit from our pain to find another source of referral, or another line of work. I suggest they be required to work with tangible production, who have manipulated people as if they were putty to accept the dysfunction — but let’s hope do not require bloodshed. And bloodshed IS already happening as a direct consequence of the hostility, lack of personal restraint, and level of frustration (BUT, it’s still the lack of restraint, I say) that is stirred up in these venues. So, see some of the “related blogs” to left. These women have been at it longer than me, and they have done their homework and I believe lived it too. I’m talking being stripped down naked when they went in for help. The problem is international in scope.
I was a hardworking (female, single mother) bloke, too, until I attempted to renew a standing domestic violence restraining order, simply in order to participate better in the “hard-working parent” part. I held no personal animosity against my children’s father, I just was unreconciled to the battering, abuse thing. Other than that, he was allowed to see his children quite frequently, just not continue to assault me, in front of them. I’m no criminal, and wasn’t a bitter, etc., etc. Mom. However, I had recently and VERY belatedly gotten some legal help setting boundaries, obviously an issue where there has been violence, and there was a major amount of cleanup and rebuilding. I needed my personal space for sure. This is a little hard to establish when one’s partner is more focused on his “manhood” than your “person-hood.”
Now I have been in the courts, shortly here, ALMOST as many years as I was in in-home, upfront abuse. I think this perspective should be discussed. I also want to speak to some of the noble people who have kept their noses clean by leaving justice to the experts, and mythically believing that, even if it DOESN’T happen, it’s not going to affect them personally.
It already has.
BUT — can we talk, blog, comment, post links, favorite books, and simply converse, without the skip the hate talk, pompous vague assertions, and ex-spurt** opinions, but
just see if (or is it \”whether\”)? there are still a few good men, women,
– – and children (children can blog, right?) —
who can skillfully toss out some metaphors, paradigms, puns, and maybe whimsical analogies
for me (and y\’all) to juggle around, look at them from underneath,
see if they have some weight, or bounce, or whether they dissipate into thin air under
their own hot, gaseous contents. This might even be fun.
Venom is not welcome. Biting sarcasm is fine. Insults too (it’s hard to be sarcastic without insulting SOMEone), but no threats, no advocacy to violence OR any illegal activity (I LIKE my blog, thank you!). Name-calling should be fleeting, at least skillful, and only, if a tall, as a lead in to something worthwhile to say. Remember, I moderate the comments.
Get personal — and speak for yourself: I FEEL, I\’VE NOTICED, I BELIEVE, but not personally nasty. Don\’t behind behind the curtain of plurals, vague assertions that can\’t be disproved, pronounced with a finality. This is not the place for the Wizard of Oz, but a bunch of Totos. We will bark back and expose your backside. Take credit for having a genuine personal experience apart from the gang you happen to belong to. I\’ll do the same.
**Ex-spurts are known by that action — spurting forth publications, opinions, pronouncements (DVDs, Conferences, and more). Did a conference save a life? Maybe. I’m generally a little wary when the people pronouncing on families can afford the DVDs and conferences, and the subject families, after having been “fixed” by the same bunch, can’t. Where’s the due process in THAT?
Forming organizations, alliances, and nonprofits to stop what the other nonprofits are doing wrong, or compensate for whatever government isn\’t doing to their pleasing.
The real experts have had the experiences BEFORE they start publishing, promoting, and starting branches of study that didn\’t exist before a pet pre-occupation became a profession. I\’d rather SEE an expert (at his or her work) than HEAR one any day.
And I do music. . . . . or Did. My music survived only XX years parallel to lawsuits, accusations, family rifts, threats, stalking etc. I’m here still at XX + about 2 years post-music, and still sweeping up. Like any Mom who has better things to do with (what remains of) her time, and always did, I am interested in stopping the mess-making at its source.
I plan to do plenty of spurting forth of words here — but unlike those in family court (I mean, the denizens, not the nomads passing through),
I am not trying to use these words to separate you from your children — or your money. Just maybe some of your time. I have no style sheet. Remember the advice of Tim Ferriss — you can get ex-spurt status on any number of things in under 4 weeks — it\’s more a matter of credibility. On the other hand, you can say the same thing for a decade or two,
I have no outline. I simply intend to talk, promote my links and books, and see what\’s around the bend here. Don\’t be too rigid except where it counts — (no, fellas, not that part!) — on civil rights. On matters of law, and fair play. And on the facts. There are plenty of ways to skin a cat, but whose idea was that to start with?
There are also many ways to abuse – – very few, that I\’ve found, to stop it — but \”family court\” sure doesn\’t appear to be ONE of them.
Possibly removing the financial / emotional incentives for continued abuse.
What do you say?
Please make fun of some euphemisms. Speak in short words. Or long words. Just don\’t bore us with something we\’ve already been drenched in – – like \”alienation,\” or insult my intelligence by pronouncing a truth that is your personal truth only as if it were one of those universal ones, like (at least to date), water is essential to life. Having two parents in the home, I\’m sorry to say, is not, not always. I know plenty of very, very dysfunctional two-parent homes. I came from one, and so did my erst-while, ex-cohabitant spouse. I\’ll verify he\’s got some severe issues, and I\’ve read in my pleadings, this is also held to be true of me. So, one exception disproves a universal rule, let\’s get (real).
Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History 
Obamaland: Domestic Violence Awareness pre- and post-election
leave a comment »
SUBJECT MEMO:
Obama on Domestic Violence, in “Domestic Violence Awareness Month” (Oct. 08)
OCTOBER 2, 2008 2:18AM
Kelly Lark’s Open Salon blog
“http://open.salon.com/blog/kellylark/2008/10/01/obama_on_domestic_violence
(1) About My (FamilyCourtMatters) Blog, Topic-Switching.
I see it as “Alternating Threads of Thought.” There IS a tapestry involved, imperfect and news-sensitive though it is.
Readers will find that I may skip from topic to topic among my posts. One day, it may be recent news of family annihilations (in the context of divorce and custody). Another, it may be my reaction to administrative non-reaction to this. A third day, it may be a bit of history on the courts, or the next day, I post an article from the 1990s. Yesterday, I tacked on a database (that has been lurking link-side for a long time here), about the US Federal Government, where your $$ went, and how to find out.
(On the $$, I am also working up a separate site . . . . sarcastically entitled “Administering Families, Serving Humanity.” (“http://hhs-acf-ocse-et-al.blogspot.com/“). So far, it’s not yet populated with a post.
Well, possibly that comes from having been a musician, and part of this time, a conductor. Expect different dynamics, melodies, and energy levels. It’s not just about a single tune (“Father’s Rights. Mother’s Rights. Best Interests of Children. Feminism is anti-God. God is anti-woman. Domestic Violence. Child Abuse, or “false allegations” thereof. Parental Alienation vs. Post-divorce pedophiliac behavior. Parental KIDNAPPING. Due Process Lost. Law and (dis)order. in the Courts. Forensic Psychology vs. fact-finding when it comes to child abuse (or for that matter, IPV). “Healthy Marriage” promotion vs. a single citizen’s right to protect herself/himself and her or his children. (Boy, i bet THAT order of genders caught your attention!) … Sob stories, Statistics, suicides, femicides, homicides, familycides, or – – – – is it REALLY all just about the money? Or is it social engineering from on high…))
Clamoring melodies trying to drown each other out, true. But on this blog (although I’m sure you detect to what tune my theme is generally pitched) the idea is to examine many threads, and pick up on the energy level, dynamics, and the cumulative expression. IF the cumulative expression is diminishment of CIVIL rights and due process, we have a problem, folks! If you come to this conclusion, then I have plenty of links for you to do some homework, or search terms to think about to validate / invalidate your conclusions ideas.
IF justice is being bought and sold at the federal mandate (or initiative) level, and the bottom end of the food chain, those with the most to lose in the matter of injustice, then we have a moral / spiritual / serious constitutional issue (which I think we do).
OR, is it just about the heirarchy of studiers (and funding for the studies) vs. studied (the population to be tested, randomly sampled, and have the techniques re-adjusted to achieve a desired result — a GOVERNMENT desired result that was not subject to popular vote or poll) then we have a problem. And that “we” is all of us but those who do not need a country to protect their assets, their families, or their livelihoods.
So Subject Switching here is to be expected. Pick your melody and follow it — or, just float along, feel the tilt and roll of the boat. If you have leisure for the “float along” blog-read, I presume you are not IN the system, because IN the system many of us (without personal connections, or personal resources, or a professional guide — or a professional guide TO the professional guides, who prey on novices) are water-skiers with one ski and a frayed rope, we need to pay close attention to the wake (of the motorboat) and find ways to maintain our stamina on the fly. As such, we will be skiing faster and farther afield, and more dangerously so, than those in the motorboat. If this is you, you might enjoy the thrill of it, or, having had enough, try to let go, slowly sink, and hope shore is within swimming distance. Or, that the boat circling back to see where you were, lets you on board, and doesn’t force more of the same.
After all, a trip through the family law (and child support, psycho-jargon) system, or through the wide-cast trawling nets that reel squiggling, flapping, or stunned catch from the bottom of the ocean (or food chain, as it were), is going to change one’s major relationships: With children, spouse, employment, possibly former social acquaintances, concepts of “liberty and justice for all” and a few more items.
Therefore, it’s my blog, and it’s broad in scope. If you are overwhelmed, welcome to it. It succeeded in communicating — because that’s how families are. If you as a bystander don’t LIKE supporting families (societies) trashed by this, then please come back later and chew off some more data and digest it, or chew it (but don’t inhale — former President Clinton says he didn’t, neither should you. Take time out, but DO come back.) And don’t spit anything dark and nasty at me, either, please! Spittoons ARE available in comments, which I moderate.
Or visit some of the illustrious buttons I’ll be adding later today, and get another take on these items.
Speaking of visitors, this blog is getting viewers from many countries, including a few whose names I don’t even recognize. Please make yourselves known in a comment or two — I get a little nervous when India, Egypt, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia show up shortly after I’ve posted something with the word “honor killing” in it, or something about a brave 12 year old that said, give me the law, not your version of it — to her parents, when it came to marrying too early. Then again, maybe it’s someone else taking heart, which would be wonderful. I do wonder what West Finland, Sweden, and Scotland are doing here, and Washington, D.C., I’m citing your data and commenting on it, so “deal with it,” OK? Los Angeles, if you’re the Courthouse, ditto!
(2) Today’s topic, and how I got to it:
Intro:
How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Or, how many “awareness” days can you pile into one little month, APRIL, when at least in the U-S-A, many are most sensitively aware to the I-R-S? I believe April was: Sexual Assault Awareness month, Child Abuse Awareness Month, and in a few states, governors were persuaded to tack on “Parental Alienation Awareness DAY.” After all, one needs to even the score every now and then, which PA is intended to do, and in some arenas, has more than. The thing to become aware of as to “PAS,” however, is its author, its origins, its prophets & priests, and the varying (and they do vary — radically) responses of various areas of professional expertise (and grants/salaries) Pro or Con.
Well, I can now scope out the “He Said / She Said // WE (the experts) say” sites, fairly quickly, They tend to have more limited vocabularies, and the themes are fairly simple to follow. This gets boring, and sometimes I like to check one of the regular news an commentary, and just search on a hot term: “domestic violence” or (any of the above). Say, “truthout,” or CS Monitor, or Washington Post, or, today, Salon.com caught my eye.
In between other interests which kind of make up for, I suppose the years when the general tenor of the marital conversation was half a Bible version on gender roles (if you’ve been there, you know which one I mean), or reproof for not living up to my 9 /10ths of the imaginary marriage vows (as opposed to the one I said out loud, before witnesses), or reminding the holder of the 1/10th that if he was the boss and I was the hired hand, where was my pay?, and if working conditions didn’t improve, someone just might be short a hired (oops, “conscripted” hand) for the assigned tasks. Or, recovering from the somewhat predictable response to such protests (see, eventual DV restraining order actually was granted, based on declaration, and in the company of a support organization which had been helping me survive emotionally, learning a few legal rights on the way, until this event) — part of my compensation is an extra prolific range of reading, on-line and off. And, I talk to lots of people about their situation. I am a personal data net. It helps me navigate…and is entertaining at times, too.
So, I searched “Open Salon” on “Domestic Violence” (Parental alienation didn’t yield a single relevant result, which also tells me that this is a specialized vocabulary to this (Alice in Wonder)land, and, that (as in mirrors) normal words read forwards, but only make sense if you understand they are interpreted backwards..
And here it is:
(3) PRE-ELECTION PRIORITY:
“Obama on Domestic Violence” (link):
OCTOBER 2, 2008 2:18AM
Kelly Lark’s Open Salon blog
Ms. Kelly Lark says:
{{“Hail”is too reminiscent of “Heil, H_ _ _ _ _” and I tend to reserve mine for now.. How about, “thank” or “express appreciation”? We are in a republic (ostensibly) not an imperial regime. At least on the books. Let’s wait a little on the “Hail, the Conquering Hero Comes,” or Palm Sunday, as it were.}}
Strengthen Families
President Obama was raised by a single parent and knows the difficulties that young people face when their fathers are absent. {{ DESPITE MY RAILING ON THESE SITES< I FEEL HE TURNED OUT ALL RIGHT. DON”T YOU? HE BECAME PRESIDENT. I VOTED FOR HIM IN PART HOPING HE MIGHT ALSO UNDERSTAND THE SINGLE MOM TAKE ON LIFE.}}
He is committed to responsible fatherhood, (1) by supporting fathers who stand by their families and encouraging young men to work towards good jobs in promising career pathways. The President has also proposed an historic investment in providing home visits to low-income, first-time parents by trained professionals. (2) The President and First Lady are also committed to ensuring that children have nutritious meals to eat at home and at school, so that they grow up healthy and strong.
[The bold below was a technical error and will be corrected later]…
A commitment to stopping domestic violence, which is primarily targeted at women when it comes to fatalities, would most certainly help ensure that the children at least get to grow up, period!!
(1) “responsible fatherhood” is a code word for the uninformed, and boy is IT well funded. By “encouraging young MEN to work towards good jobs in promising career pathways” I would like to note, WHAT ABOUT THE WOMEN?? It’s already abundantly clear it is desirable that the Moms put their kids in earlier and earlier Head Start. The purpose of this is that we go to work. So why do young MEN get our President’s and his wife’s special encouragement, while the young women, some of who are giving birth, don’t even get a mention when it comes to “promising career pathways.” What is expected? Does he want us at home with our kids (but not homeschooling, which is anti-patriotic, I heard), or in the workforce? Does he want to perpetuate the WAGE gap while attempting to narrow the health care gap? What’ gives?
And, I would also like to ask, where is the respect here for some of the older women, who have raised children somehow with or without the benefit of VAWA, and are working also? If we happen to be divorced and NOT playing 2nd string Mom to some children that were Healthily replaced into Marriages that the Federal Government approves of, what are we expected to to do? Take up the slack in the VAWA funding as encouraged to do in the Oct. 08 speech above?
Now, while I see under “Women” this is mentioned, I just wish to point out that when discussing “families” it takes a woman to make one.
“Prevent Violence Against Women
Violence against women and girls remains a global epidemic. The Violence Against Women Act, originally authored by Vice President Biden, plays a key role in helping communities and law enforcement combat domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking. At home and abroad, President Obama will work to promote policies that seek to eradicate violence against women.”
On subsequent posts, I will describe some of the funding for policies that tend to do the exact opposite. When it comes to $$ versus words, a $$ is worth a thousand words, and paints a clearer picture.
Other links on VAWA, not necessarily up to date:
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (VAWA) is a United States federal law. It was passed as Title IV, sec. 40001-40703 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 HR 3355 and signed as Public Law 103-322 by President Bill Clinton on September 13, 1994. It provided $1.6 billion to enhance investigation and prosecution of the violent crime perpetrated against women, increased pre-trial detention of the accused, imposed automatic and mandatory restitution on those convicted, and allowed civil redress in cases prosecutors chose to leave unprosecuted.
VAWA was drafted by Senator Joe Biden’s office with support from a number of advocacy organizations including Legal Momentum and The National Organization for Women, which described the bill as “the greatest breakthrough in civil rights for women in nearly two decades.”
VAWA was reauthorized by Congress in 2000, and again in December 2005. The bill was signed into law by President George W. Bush on January 5, 2006.
Criticisms of VAWA legislation
Various persons and groups, including Marc H. Rudov, Glenn Sacks, Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting (RADAR), and African-Americans for VAWA Reform (AAVR), have voiced concerns that VAWA violates due process, equal protection, and other civil rights. {{ALL OF WHICH DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ITSELF DOES….}} None of these groups oppose laws protecting victims of domestic violence. They oppose laws that discriminate exclusively against specific social groups and deny these groups equal protections.
NOTE: Click on “Rudov” (a name I’m less familiar with) for a sampling of the thinking behind opposition to VAWA
PICTURE ME IN THE AUDIENCE, EAGERLY RAISING MY HAND, AS IN A CLASSROOM, JUMPING UP & DOWN FOR ATTENTION.. .. “Sir, Sir? SIR?? I have a question”
Given that many “women” are “mothers,” and the Bush and Clinton administrations are avidly promoting “Healthy Marriages” (meaning, 2-parent households preferred, all others, go to the back of the line, when it comes to custody) “Promoting Responsible Fatherhood,” how are you going to reconcile the domestic violence restraining orders, obtained through the VAWA fundings, with the inevitable trip through the family law system, where another paradigm reigns?
How are you going to reconcile “Promoting Responsible Fatherhood” {{=child support waivers (lowered obligations) in exchange for increased access (to children that may have witnessed Dad beating Mom to the point the law had to intervene)}} with the above claim. As I am sure you know, those movements “rule” in the family law system, and are vastly outfunded compared to this $25million, though we do appreciate it?
Would it not be simpler to de-fang the the policies that are specificall directed AGAINST VAWA and AGAINST the right of a woman to NOT remarry after leaving an abuser, without losing the children that she removed from that volatile environment?
Or, I have another idea. If the “communities of faith” continue (as they have) to operate as a law unto themselves (as they do) in the matter of domestic violence, being as clergy at least, many of them mandated reporters of DV & child abuse, how’s about you remove the tax-exempt status unless they PUBLICALLY post the laws stating that domestic violence, spiritual or moral problem that it is too, IS in this country a felony or misdemeanor crime??
Prevent Violence Against Women
Violence against women and girls remains a global epidemic. The Violence Against Women Act, originally authored by Vice President Biden, plays a key role in helping communities and law enforcement combat domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking. At home and abroad, President Obama will work to promote policies that seek to eradicate violence against women.
SHARE THIS POST on...
Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
May 3, 2009 at 1:54 PM
Posted in Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Domestic Violence vs Family Law, Funding Fathers - literally, History of Family Court, Lethality Indicators - in News, Organizations, Foundations, Associations NGO Hybrids
Tagged with domestic violence, family annihilation, Feminists, Intimate partner violence, mediation, obfuscation, social commentary, trauma, U.S. Govt $$ hard @ work.., women's rights