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

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

Posts Tagged ‘VAWA

Child Justice, Inc. , First Star, Inc., and the Tennessee Valley Authority — All in the Family? (Eileen King, Sherry Quirk) (Child Advocacy + Energy Law). [Begun Feb. 9, Moved Here Mar. 30, Publ. Apr. 29, 2022].

leave a comment »

In this post, “NSPC” represents the website National Safe Parents Coalition which became active shortly before February 9, 2022 — it seems to be February 4 — obviously timed as something to refer to and publicize an VAWA reauthorization testimony featuring Angela Jolie and others, and (yet another) law named after a needlessly murdered child. This time, this law was  named after Kayden (but the website references others, which I have posted recently also). (VAWA Reauthorization 2022).

No post on the NSPC with the goal of sharing drill-downs on its claimed membership, that is those on display as logos with links would be a short post. I’ve been whittling it down by sections, while continuing to research, post, write, and where I can stay engaged in social media on these themes. My last few posts have diverged a little, but not too far, as they tie into one of the partner websites of NSPC.

It’s been taking weeks, sometimes over a month, to get these out, and is quite stressful to see what I know to be “fake advocacy” and diversion from following the economics by the loudest (most public) actors involved in the campaigns.  Two centers at two different law schools are supporting the agenda, with the entourage of protective parents organizations (one, so delinquent and status-suspended for now legitimate reason, it’s embarrassing), and a nearly two-decade-long conference which still isn’t incorporated, vaguely refers to a nonprofit it’s part of, but doesn’t identify it (referring to the Battered Mothers’ Custody Conference), along with an entire administrative networks along two or three lines only:  resource centers (DVRN) and state coalitions against domestic violence all claiming concern about it and responses to it.

Today is April 29, 2022.  I am about to be “off” blogging for a while (household move upcoming, major logistics involved), and in looking for which of these drafts to put out next, I chose this one begun February 9th!  That soon after the activation of the NSPC website tells you its high priority — but it was not an easy explanation, and so has waited.

Child Justice, Inc., First Star, Inc., and the Tennessee Valley Authority — All in the Family? (Eileen King, Sherry Quirk, Child Advocacy + Energy Law). [Written Feb. 9, Moved Here, Mar. 30, , Published Apr. 29, 2022]. (short-link ends “-e4O” –> final character is capital “O” as in Ohio). As published (before any revisions), about 5,200 words only.

The information may not be commonly known; I only found it (several years ago) from excessive curiosity on how things work, and what was driving the strange, ritualistic behavior of certain people and organizations.

There were a few other honorable mention (drafts in the pipeline) and I’d also considered (and still recommend you use archives to review), six years old now, what I laid out in a series of posts during March, 2016.  I went back and cleaned up the appearances of those posts.  In doing so, I found about twelve more I’d written during the same time frame.

I want this information out, and understood — the situation we are dealing with (“We” because VAWA was reauthorized with the alterations to “incentivize” states to do better at keeping kids safe IN the custody courts, and if you’re in the USA, that includes you..  If you’re not and think this is a legitimate or responsible action by us, you’re deluded.).

These movements have affected a major part of my own prime working years, and of course relationships with adult children, by effectively turning as many people as possible in power aside from a rational cause of what’s driving poor judicial decision-making into one which better suits those who wish to profit from exactly that.  Read my definitions of “hierarchical” below, which was the first term which came to mind in describing the situation, overall.

~~>This post is about a specific portion, one of the “members” of NSPC.  It’s a short post, not hard to read, but you need to think about it for the impact to sink in.

~~>Because of my housing situation, I’m not going to polish it, add transitions, or babysit readers to show them what A + B + C + D add up to. I may (maybe) come back and do that in a few weeks.  Questions are welcome, here (there is a comment option for every post), or if on Twitter, include short-link and date published, at least part of the title if you want an answer from me, or where more answers may be found.

If you consider what I just did in a quick run-down on NOW Entities (4/28/2022) or, did in part (“Table Talk on Task Forces,” 4/26/2022), that’s the kind of work that could/should be done with the tax-exempt entities mentioned here (First Star apparently has more than one now).  Get to the Tax Returns.

But this one, beyond that, ask (yourself) some hard questions:  WHY are these people pushing this agenda?  How is it that on both the east and west coast** of USA, leadership with very close ties to and background in the energy / utilities provision industries are so into helping vulnerable children / foster children/ cleaning up the family courts through more training, featuring all the murdered and abused children / talking constantly about ritual child abuse (CPPA et al.), and soliciting — all these years — case information from traumatized mothers, and using that to get laws passed to (allegedly) fix the situation?

**For the energy part, Child Advocacy Institute, see also background of Robert Fellmeth, who has or at least had connections to First Star also.  Below, I’d blogged earlier in some detail; links and partial quotes are below.

I’d be interested to see what conclusions others come to after asking some hard questions:  Again, WHY doesn’t NSPC choose to file for business entity / membership organization status up front?  Why put out numbers it can’t back up as to how many members, and much more.

(WHY is it so necessary to have people in power already (see “TVA”) steer the futures of those who are not?)

THIS POST IS:

Child Justice, Inc., First Star, Inc., and the Tennessee Valley Authority — All in the Family? (Eileen King, Sherry Quirk, Child Advocacy + Energy Law). [Written Feb. 9, Here, Mar. 30, 2022]. (short-link ends “-e4O” –> final character is capital “O” as in Ohio).

A post on the NSPC became necessary the moment it surfaced. There are still some “survivor mothers” (fka battered mothers) out here who don’t believe in and don’t join cults like this one, and while we’ve lost a lot, haven’t yet lost our minds… or powers of observation as campaigns develop.  I happen to specialize in rapid-fire drill-downs of the new, and an elephant’s memory (and I take notes) of existing tax-exempt entities known to have impacted, or attempted to impact, negatively and needlessly, my and my own offspring’s safety and prosperity, tax-exempts specializing in demographic and profiling terms we happen to match. (single mother, noncustodial mother, domestic violence survivor, “protective parents” in the family court (that last — “give it a break!!”), etc.

The (reference deleted: think bovine excrement) never stops, it just gets repackaged and piled higher, spread wider, too.

Read the rest of this entry »

Is the USA Bipolar, Schizo, ADHD, Or Just Playing Us? |How Federal Gov’t both LOVEs and HATES Women [2,000 words evicted Mar.30, 2022 from Draft Post Feb. 6]

with one comment

THIS POST

Is the USA Bipolar, Schizo, ADHD, Or Just Playing Us? | How Federal Gov’t both LOVEs and HATES Women [2,000 words evicted Mar.30, 2022]** short-link ends “”-e4t”

** began as a major section on my Feb. 6, 2022 and STILL in draft (March 30, 2022) post called:

NSPC — ‘Coalition’ Meaning What? Rebranding the Same Themes with, Generally, the Same Entities While Channeling (vs. Exposing) AFCC Lingo and Ignoring USA’s ‘We Both Love and Hate Women’ Federal Funds? [Post begun Feb. 6, 2022]. (case-sensitive short-link ends “-dxg”)

(Evicted from that post not for its content but for weight limits on any one post.  The part highlit yellow is now this post.


From time to time, I sense the need to mention a few self-contradicting, ongoing legislative realities.

Funding realities go with the legislative and at times are perhaps the drivers (have you visited the US DOJ or the US HHS recently? can YOU track that funding?) but here I’m referencing specific Acts of Congress.

Sections in this post:

  • USA allegedly LOVES and CARES ABOUT women because..
  • USA (more covertly) HATES women because …
  • Meanwhile, in Family Courts… the bottom line…

I’ve bifurcated the “LOVE” and “HATE” evidences (federal funding programs) which, taken together, weigh the balance, I say, in “hate” through absence of honesty and forthrightness within the former about the latter. (Passive/aggressve, much?)  I think the net effect is, Hates more than Loves women — but then again, I am one. Maybe I’m biased in favor of my lack of a Y chromosome… and because having children and being a mother — even with an abuser — was still a fantastic experience I wouldn’t trade in for anything.

The message here: any policy can be heralded as great  so long as it’s known by “stakeholders” (i.e., those who get the laws passed) that the back doors, the exit strategies to actually making any policy matter are retained.

Family courts, a still-recent phenomenon in the USA, happen to be one of the major back doors, the “safety valve” from actually stopping domestic violence, violence and criminal behavior against women because they are women.  Through their existence many people (correctly) perceive, they can and will continue to get away with it, from chronic and debilitating (but legally still low-level up through felony levels leading predictably, or sometimes not so predictably, to murder. The same goes with child abuse.  It’s simply a matter of changing venues (referrals, diversions) and in the new venues, old behaviors get “new words” to describe them.  Felonies are no longer felonies — but new categorizes of felonies can be created to replace.  The basic “transfer” process.

Meanwhile, privatization of government services continues, all conflict is GOOD conflict if you’re in the business of resolving family (or any other kind) of conflict for pay, or in the coaching industry (pay to play trainings, certified facilitators, and divorce coaching of desperate? parents by formerly desperate — until they signed on for the divorce-coaching field and quit fighting it — parents)  and oh so many people are really into that business. Pay for and sit through the trainings, get screened MAYBE by provider, set up the most basic website under some creative name, and link to the trainer’s website for more trainings.  In case you think that’s a reference to “One Mom’s Battle” business model (not that it’s anywhere close to the first of this type), it was.

It’s late in the day, I want a post out (and the other post shorter; it has a heavier payload). For what it’s worth, this post is just basic statement —  something to think about.

Below the next horizontal line is “as-written” (for me, spontaneously) nearly two months ago, except that I quickly added several tags. If clicked they’d lead to more in-depth summaries on the blog of either VAWA, CAPTA, FVPSA or The Greenbook Initiative (its timeline matters), etc.  The tags here don’t mean I’ve handled all those issues in this short post, but those are related issues…//LGH 30 March 2022.


“…USA’s “We Both Love and Hate Women’ Federal Funds” refers to two contradictory policies, both federally funded, starting in different decades.  

Neither side of the equation (love women, but men and fathers are worth more when you get right down to it) cares enough about the public to ensure that people accessing services on the “women” side are properly informed about the funding on the men’s side to defeat or bypass the impact of the funds indicating the country cares about the welfare of even half its own population.

Read the rest of this entry »

Good Cop, Bad Cop (not to mention Camouflage) in the Federally-Funded Gender War, Classic Examples (Inset, Callout or Footnote to my other 6/24/2017 post)

with one comment

Re: Good Cop, Bad Cop (not to mention Camouflage) in the Federally-Funded Gender War, Classic Examples (Inset, Callout or Footnote to my other 6/24/2017 post) (case-sensitive short-link ends “-74c”).


In a newsletter or journal, or textbook layout, there are times a call-out or inset, supplementary detail is appropriate.  Here, maybe consider it an inset, or a footnote.  Either way, the box below in teal (green-blue) borders and print near the bottom of the post below, and its lead-in paragraph didn’t stand fully on its own in summarizing the “scenario,” and was interrupting the flow of a post already detailed in summarizing something similar, but not identical.  That post: ….1. The War on Women(‘s Rights) in an All-Gender World? 2. Organization Names and Name Changes Distract from their Coordinated Agenda, but Operations and Strategy Reveal Agenda (So, LOOK at the Books, and KEEP Looking). (case-sensitive, shortlink ending “-73P”)

So I moved it here.

I then added the “House Divided Against Itself” section, quoting from (basically) three different times and sources in hopes this may also better explain what I am seeing and concerned about currently.
Read the rest of this entry »

Yes, we SHOULD call them “restraining order suggestions” (Certifiably Insane Protection Orders in MN; meanwhile, more “Fatherhood” in KS) [[Orig. Aug. 7, 2009]].

with 25 comments

[[Title & Shortlink added Dec. 1, 2023 to refer to this post]]

[Feb. 17, 2016 UPDATE NOTES:


This post originally published over five years ago — on August 7, 2009.  For more recent focus of this blog, see more recent posts (2016, 2014) which focus on systems operations, and consolidation of economic power from outside state lines (divorce and custody remaining under state jurisdiction, as well as domestic violence prevention orders).


I am currently working on posts regarding the Greenbook Initiative (2000-2008) and involved parties, on the NCJFCJ, on IDVAAC, and the “DV cartel” as identified by its participants (centralized, coordinated, and stuck in a policy rut) on the HHS and USDOJ grants stream.


I look up nonprofit organizations functioning as social policy conduits for a small group of inter-related professionals who cut deals with each other on what to minimize, what to focus on.  These represent a much larger pattern throughout government, not just relating to domestic violence itself.


Many times by the time individuals find out about the policy deals that were cut, their lives, or kids are “gone.”  If not physically, often in all the other critical aspects of life which people NOT entrenched in some of these systems may still take for granted.  For example, the ability to get to and from, and hold a job once one has been hired, or completing projects for clients inbetween police events, court hearings, and ongoing threats to one’s personal safety and particularly, financial survival (i.e., ability to sustain food, housing, transportation, etc.). This comment added 2/17/2016 //LGH]

THIS POST IS: Yes, we SHOULD call them “restraining order suggestions” (Certifiably Insane Protection Orders in MN; meanwhile, more “Fatherhood” in KS) [[Orig. Aug. 7, 2009]].

(Short-link ends “-ez” and post is about 10,600 words.  Including many quotes…and the text of a Kansas Senate Bill starting a “Fatherhood Initiative” — and the entire text of the U.S. Declaration of Independence (trying to see if there’s a disconnect somewhere between those two?)

I also respond to some news articles at length on the timeline in the first article shown below.) (Parts of this post also refer to the Inter-American Council on Human Rights (IACHR) for a domestic violence (“DV”) case from Kansas (Claudine Dombrowski) which appealed that high up for justice…) //LGH 12/1/23.


Today’s [Aug. 2009] headlines are right on topic with yesterday’s post. . . and the one referenced above….

Mr & Mrs. OUELETTEs, MINNESOTA, 2 accounts of 2,100 on the web, from Kare11News.

(1) Wife had order of protection against husband prior to murder-suicide

(2)  Harris man gave up guns before strangling wife, hanging himself

Well, I swore I was NOT going to blog on this today, but I fear that these are indeed possibly copy-cat murder/suicides.  It is now “out there” in the news as a possible way out of an emotionally embarrassing and humiliating situation.

Read THIS one, and then see if you can tell which parts were certifiably insane public policy, and how many warning signs people ignored.

And I’ll tell you why this one chills me, and makes me glad to be alive today.

(TOP of post — Minnesota.  BOTTOM — Kansas.

They relate.)

Blogger’s Preface

At this point, it seems to be “certifiably insane public policy” to expect women to trust, or men to respect, such restraining orders, when clearly they don’t — I already blogged on this re: the woman in Pennsylvania who fought back.

Recently, I wrote about a father accused of molesting his (teenaged) daughter who, seeing as she was only moved 2 doors down, and into the home of a man that used to be the same father’s employee (say, what???!?).   Within one week, Dad had killed: daughter, foster father and himself, and almost killed foster mother, too.  So THAT helpful ruling got 3 people dead and one injury.

Great going, child protective services in that region of Tennessee.

Here’s another one that slipped through the cracks somehow, and at several different points.  What “gets” me about this one is realizing several domestic violence prevention groups, nonprofits, that have been getting millions upon millions of federal dollars, over at least a decade in grants to provent violence locally, rurally, and in Indian tribes, as well as technical assistance grants to, I guess, “get the word out.”

So far, I can see they are doing a great job with putting together literature that’s already on the web somewhere, positioning themselves as the experts, consulting in private with other professionals about what to do, and keeping a body count.  Which hasn’t substantially changed (per these counts) statewide in Minnesota within a decade.

So either the state is raising more suicidal or unable-to-handle-stress people, or immature young adults who then continue the immaturity into adulthood and parenthood (referring to the fathers in this case), or something. . . . . . Or so many people are being born each day that they STILL don’t know the warning signs of danger, and are talked into minimizing them.

Let’s maybe add ONE more “lethality risk” — trusting in protection orders to start with.  

That’s for the courts and for the women alike.  And encouraging a woman to do so (or continuing to present them as viable alternatives — when in fact they are panaceas too often) also places her in risk, given the facts.  Ignorance of them is NOT bliss. . . .

When police DO respond in time, they run the risk of death themselves.  When they do NOT respond in time, typically Mom, and sometimes Dad, are killed, and sometimes more.  Or otherwise traumatized.  SO . . . . .   what else is available?

CONSIDER THIS ONE:

  • State:  Minnesota
  • Body Count:  2, no responding officers or bystanders killed this time.
  • Orphans:  3, ages 10 (boy), 8 & 8 (twin girls)
  • Who are they now living with?  Relatives.
  • Did they witness the murder  – – of their mother by their father, YES, the girls
  • Did they try to intervene and fail? – — YES, an 8 year old girl tried to save her mother.
  • Was 911 called? – — YES, by an 8 year old daughter?

 

  • Was the call heeded (it seems No), or interfered with (yes, by the father)? – – – read below.
  • Was that restraining order as written certifiably insane?  – — ABSOLUTELY.  (And it seems identical to the one I got many years ago.)
  • Does making a restrained person turn in his or her guns always save a life? – — NO.  Other weapons also can kill (apparently here, hands).
  • Or, a person not allowed to get a gun could get a friend’s (or in a recent case girlfriend’s gun).

 

  • Are risk assessments going to redeem lives from living in fear (or being lost)?  – – – I’m  not sure.  I’m of the current opinion, NO, unless the woman herself takes them seriously and takes serious actions not reliant on 911 to ensure safety.

So, let’s talk about the body counts vis-a-vis the legal terminology:

When you think about it, and read the results, even calling these things “protection orders” makes zero sense.  They are restraint requests.  A man without restraint is ordered in public by a judge to show restraint.

WHO is to protect, in “protection order”?  The power of the state?  Does the state, like God, declare “protection” exists because it ordered this?  And is the state, in so doing, lying to the protected parties?

I think so, basically.  

Here’s a perhaps (I ALWAYS say “perhaps,” or try to) more viable protection order:

A trained, armed mother with an attitude to match, telling the man who just received the judicial order, that she is going to take the boundaries of the property seriously, and understands all laws regarding the 2nd amendment, and any contingencies.  IN other words, she needs to be more determined and more aggressive than the person who formerly attacked or threatened her.

So do the people surrounding or dealing with her on this issue.

Alternately, a “not in the same state” “county” “500 mile radius” mother, and kids.  And the kids could be told the truth about why this is happening, in age-appropriate terms but without name-calling or derogatory treatment of their father.

But of course that would screw up “access visitation” and “National Fathers Return Days” somewhat….

NOW, this mindset is not typically the state of a woman who has gotten to the point of requesting such an order from her husband, right? The request for an order represents to an abuser an ESCALATION in OPPOSITION to SUBMISSION.  How’s he likely to respond?

Read the rest of this entry »