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

'A Different Kind of Attention Develops Sound Judgment' | 'Suppose I'm Right Here?' (See March 23 & 5, 2014). More Than 745 posts and 45 pages of Public-Interest Investigative Blogging On These Matters Since 2009.

Posts Tagged ‘women’s rights

The ACES study — Bridging apparent Skipped Synapses in Family Court thinking….

leave a comment »

Happy Labor Day post.  I give you one study I refer to often on this blog, that dates back to 1998, and one (more) inane/insane custody discussion from Australia, case dating 1999-2003, and topic, joint legal custody and visitation with a young girl and the father who crushed her baby brother’s skull with his bare hands, baby being 3 weeks old and in his father’s arms at the time.  The court is less concerned with that behavior than the mother’s “phobia” (odd label, eh?) about that behavior.  Nothing much new for Family Law Arena — this is its speciality, in fact, stigmatizing parents that actually seek to protect their kids from trauma, abuse, and possible (in that case) death.

 

ACES (below):  Bridging the Gap between Childhood Trauma and . . . . .Negative consequences later in life.

 

Or should I call this bridging the gap between theory and reality?  Which results in the ever-widening “Chasm,” the Court public Credibility Gap.

So, how does one talk with mad engineer at the helm of a runaway train with one’s kids on it?  How get one’s kids safely OFF the train?  because in this venue, it doesn’t seem possible.  If they spend the duration of their childhood on this train, perhaps this will become their new “normal” and then another generation of trainsters and railway-hoppers will grow up, have kids, and provide new cargo for this Trip to Nowhere (except the trips to the bank for the railroad and its employees).  Like the formerly renowned rail system in the U.S., it took a lot of subsidy to keep the thing operational.

There are basically two types of conversations going through the courts:  

1.  IN open court — in open, and 

2.  Behind closed doors — in private.

The heart of the matter is in the 2nd arena.  Best interests of the child is static, sound-fluff and media-bytes.  It’s not reality, and I don’t any longer believe that any one who makes a living in this arena seriously, seriously believes in this paradigm — or if they do, their eyes are simply closed, because the cat is out of the bag.  

I believe the language the speak, as any good employee or business person truly does, is that of who is paying their bills. One reason I know this is that I actually experienced leaving an abusive marriage, and how vital a part finances was in getting free.  I also watched systematic economic abuse (mismangement, comandeering of access to basic funds/cash flow/steady jobs that would make this possible, and so forth), which restricted and delayed the exit.   

Which would you be more accountable to as a secretary whose family’s food and rent (lifestyle) depends on your pleasing that employer?  Up to your own personal level of moral/social tolerance (and ability to choose), a disgruntled customer in the waiting room or on the phone?  Or your employer?    . . . . Well, what about judges and other professionals, some of whose salary (US$) is well over $100,000 and lifestyles and associates to match?  Along with judgeships go political influence and possibly later activity — it’s a career path.  It took a lot of convincing in California (and publicity) for these judges to give up (statewide) their almost $20 million in SUPPLEMENTAL pay, but not until one of their own, an attorney in Los Angeles, was firmly intimidated and jailed for reporting financial corruption (Richard Fine case), which was his actual job to do in this city, as I understood it.  He was put in punitive solitary conffinement, moreover, and I heard, disbarred, for actually bucking this system.

However, these articles ARE about “best interests of the child” and whose head is where in being unable to figure that out in a given case involving infanticide! Or other horrors to any growing child, or the parent of any such child.

 

I am going to start grading the Family Law systems in my country, and in any country that imitates policies that I give an “F” in my country:

 

1998 THIS study is also old, and underestimated.  Probably because of its common sense, like the 1989 and 1992 ones I quoted earlier, from NOMAS, talking about why the HECK have we got to continue exposing each new generation of children to more and more parents who batter, and then posing STUPID questions like, why is the next generation ending up in jail, or beating THEIR women, or taking the assaults, either.

WHY is business as usual, THAT’s why.  A case came to light today where an Australian court (dealing with similar issues down under) is ordering psychiatric evaluation for the mother of a two-year old because the two-year-old’s father, quickly knocking up another woman, had just crushed to death the newborn (3 weeks old) infant with his bare hands, in response to the baby’s crying.  The man is in jail, and the court is trying to tell the mother that she needs to have her head examined for wanting to make sure this doesn’t happen to the one that came out of HER womb.  No, I am not kidding!

 

FAMILY LAW – Children – parenting orders – contact in prison – father incarcerated for killing child of another relationship – specific phobic anxiety of the primary carer and compromised capacity to care for the child – no significant contact ordered.

At what point do we get to have the COURT’s “head”  – and values — examined?   ???

 

O & C [2005] FMCAfam 200 (29 April 2005)

Last Updated: 6 June 2005

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

REASONS FOR JUDGMENTIntroduction – the proceedings

1. This matter comes before me as the final hearing of the competing applications of the various parties concerning B M C born 9 March 1999. Final parenting orders were made in relation to B on 20 February 2002 whereby B lived with the mother and the father had regular contact. However, on 11 March 2003, the father killed his newborn child of another relationship, Z, and the father is now incarcerated until approximately February 2006.

Yes you read that right.  Infanticide:  3 years.  3 hots and a cot.  Wonder if he’ll get out on parole early, like Garrido did, in time for a repeat performance.  Sounds like it didn’t affect his entitlement much, being incarcerated for baby-killing; he still wants to assert his shared parenting responsibilities and rights.  Where’s KING SOLOMON (of the Bible) when you need him?   Where’s the anti-abortion pro-lifers when you need them?  This mother, of child “B” is a pro-lifer.  She doesn’t want HER kid to suffer the same fate.  For expressing and acting on this protective, motherly sentiment, she may be sentenced to a lifetime — or at least for the duration of B’s childhood — of having her “head examined” over this “phobia.”

“Phobia” being, I guess, being afraid of something the Court isn’t afraid of, probably because it’s not the Court’s offspring involved or at risk.


2. The proceedings were initiated by the mother filing an application on 1 July 2003 in which she sought that previous parenting orders made by this court on 20 February 2002 be suspended and that she have sole responsibility for making decisions about the long term and day to day care, welfare and development of B. Effectively, she sought that there be no contact between B and the father.

3. On 21 November 2003 a Form 3 response was filed and served on behalf of the father  {{BEING AS HE WAS INCARCERATED??}}. Relevantly, the father sought joint responsibility for long term decisions affecting B and contact in prison 

 

RELEVANT:  What the jailed Dad wants.

IRRELEVANT:  what the killed 3-week old baby wanted before his Daddy crushed his skull together:  probably either some cuddling, a diaper change, some milk, or to be held differently.  Or his Mama.

IRRELEVANT:  What the mother wants, safety for HER kid, and her concerns taken seriously.

YES, this WAS 2006, “DOWN UNDER,” and a term well-earned from what I can see of this decision, at least.

As to his paternal grandparents:  Well, their son was an adult at the time, but still, they raised this guy.  PERHAPS this should be considered “relevant” in allowing unsupervised contact of child “B” with them.  (Not mentioned are her parents. . . . or mother of the deceased newborn.    )

===============================

I give you one more reason (not including Phillip Garrido, Jaycee Dugard, and any woman who opts to marry a convicted kidnapper and raper) to take domestic violence seriously:  The children:

   

 

What is the ACE Study?

The ACE Study is an ongoing collaboration between the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention and Kaiser Permanente.  Led by Co-principal Investigators Robert F. Anda, MD, 
MS, and Vincent J. Felitti, MD, the ACE Study is perhaps the largest scientific research study 
of its kind, analyzing the relationship between multiple categories of childhood trauma 
(ACEs), and health and behavioral outcomes later in life.

 What’s an ACE?

Growing up experiencing any of the following conditions in the household prior to age 18:

 

  1. Recurrent physical abuse
  2. Recurrent emotional abuse
  3. Contact sexual abuse
  4. An alcohol and/or drug abuser in the 
    household
  5. An incarcerated household member
  6. Someone who is chronically depressed, 
    mentally ill, institutionalized, or suicidal
  7. Mother is treated violently
  8. One or no parents
  9. Emotional or physical neglect

 

Origins and Essence of the Study (2003)

 

ADVERSE CHILDHOOD EXPERIENCES AND STRESS:  PAYING THE PIPER (2004?)

 

The findings of the Adverse Childhood Experiences Study, an ongoing collaboration between Co-Principal 

Investigators Vincent J. Felitti, MD, of Kaiser Permanente, and Robert F. Anda, MD, MS, of the Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention. 

 

 

Because the two links above are in multi-column format, I can’t copy and paste.  I exhort you to take a look at some of this.

 

Please note that “one or no parents” was NOT on the top of the list, as it is on current “fatherhood.gov” policy, or HHS/ACF grants prioritization in the Designer Family mode it appears to be stuck in.

 

Women, including women like me, whose children have been exposed to from 1 to all of the factors above, are after removing their children FROM such factors, having the courts force them back in through shared parenting considerations.  IN this case the theoretical ideal is held over the head, and clubbing protective parents, of the practical reality that Batterers do NOT make Good parents until they thoroughly address the battering behavior, and what drives it.  Moreover, men have graduated with flying colors from programs allegedly adjusting their attitudes, and gone right out to murder that bitch who forced them to sit through it (McAlpin is one case that comes to mind, Bay Area, 2005.  Within just a few days, her body was discovered in a trunk).

 

 

 

 

Again, the issue becomes who gets to rig the test and give the grades?  I give any policy that lacks common sense — protect the kids! — and ignores the golden rule and “F.”

 

Golden Rule in Family Law:  Do unto OTHERS as you would have them do unto YOU (i.e., if it were YOUR kid, whose father just killed a newborn, would you as a judge order the woman who was alarmed at said murder to have her head examined, and the child ordered into contact with the parents of the killer, OR would you yourself be alarmed, and rule accordingly?)

 

If it’s not good enough for YOUR kid, it’s not good enough for HER kid.  That’s the golden rule in the courtroom, I say.

 

This of course presumes that a judge cares about his or her own kids, which may be a presumption indeed; some judges have been convicted of collecting child pornography and making some of it (Thompson, NJ), another of sexual harassment of female employees (Fed. District judge in Texas).

 

 

Today’s post is a new blog page: “Lessons from Antioch” (California)

leave a comment »

 

The pages are full of the Dugards and the Garridos; people what answers, and collectively, it appears there’s a need to process the trauma, and put names to the “Who, What When, How and Why?” this happened.

Click on this link:

(As these posts get a little more personal, understand it’s not just for the blogger’s sake but for the bloggers’ hope that another perspective on these things might get heard.)

It triggers trauma, or perhaps it’s thoughtfulness, or perhaps it’s a desire to mention what other mothers have gone through that is different, but of some similar qualities: sudden loss of access to and contact with their sons or daughters, and lack of closure, or time to recover or heal from prior abuse(s).  One can get so acclimatized to abuse, or to repeated violations of personal integrity, that this sort of “alternate reality” becomes  “normal.”  What’ I’m concerned about in this matter is future generations, and what “normal” has become for American women, both growing up and grown-up mothers.

My own father (deceased)  I deduce was told, like many, to “man up,” shut up and step up to the plate when his (wife-beating) father abandoned the household.  Retaliation for even CRYING about the violence, let alone reporting it, was simply part of his youth.  After being locked in a closet for crying initially (so the family lore goes) he went on, and worked hard, educated himself hard, provided well, such that his own children (ALL of them) also got college educated.  I’d say did all right (that’s one adult child’s perspective only; there ARE others), but as the youngest of these, and alone in the house as his marriage disintegrated, I certainly noticed and questioned that, despite the success, he also drank hard too (bottling something else up?), married several times, and, unfortunately, never discussed or addressed any of his own family shortcomings, nor did any of our own adult family actually handle these well, other than by transmitting what I could call UNhealthy family values:  Zero dialogue on THE most important issues of life, a lifelong habit.  Scapegoating.  Tolerance of domestic violence towards, now, more than one member, and clan-like excommunication for anyone who dares to report any of the worst family secrets (and I shudder to think of the ones that haven’t yet come to surface).

My father died suddenly and under circumstances that were not explained to me.  I learned more about him after his death from the Internet than from anyone I was related to.   He has been described alternately as a genius, and modest (a side of him we didn’t know!), and creative.  His mother was devout, and he rejected the concept and existence of God, another family value I myself later rejected, and paid dearly for over the years.  I like to think that, had he realized one of his daughters would go on to marry and be exposed to what his own mother was, I like to think he’d be turning over in his grave, but fact is, I don’t know.  I do know there was a certain sexism, not uncommon for the day and time.  And I do thank him for not following the utterly insane policy that the HHS is nowadays, deciding and enforcing that children need contact with wife-beating fathers, for the good of, I guess, the country (???) and their little lives.

I consider refusal to address violence endorsing it.  They consider it “dwelling on the past,” even when the ostensible past was as recent as last week or last month.  They got that one down, and in order that my children should not know the truth about this family, have endorsed further criminal behavior towards them, and me, and this state, again in the name of “Family.”

It appears that the family law venue is also in the business of telling people to shut up about both their own family secrets (retaliation on custodial parents for reporting abuse in the form of switching the kid to the accused parent!) as well as ITS own secrets, which (as family secrets tend to) includes the financial business deal driving the steamship that’s steamrolling over (well, I could go on and on with that analogy, it’s an apt one) – — that’s steamrolling over the years that SOME families might have otherwise had in peace to recover from the initial trauma, and rebuild a few lives.  Big Brother had a supposedly Better Idea for the country, you know, and so we are to sacrifice the duration of our children’s — well, til they are legally adults — and stay in the system until all the proper tolls have been paid, and “Therapeutic Jurisprudence” has run its course, replacing the former language of right, wrong, crime & punishment, and deterrents for doing it again.  

Which deterrents Phillip Garrido had, but in the words of one of his several kidnapped for the purpose of raping women, (the 1976 woman that got him the 50 year jail sentence, that he served a few years of), it just made him a smarter and wiser criminal.

 

However it’s not the men’s doing this so much as the institutions they create doing this, which frightens me the most, for at least my own children’s futures.  Put against this, is their spirit and, I hope, smarts.  

And the VOLUNTARY donation of the national resources and sort of “conscience” to the federal government.  Kind of like the cycle of rain, rivers flow to the ocean, evaporation, clouds, rain, etc.  The concept is that justice and a better society will somehow rain down on us.

I’m not holding my breath.  

 

However, sometimes this happens when the parents may even know where they are; this happens in the “family court venue.”  

Recent articles talk about how the girls are recovering from trauma, and that’s partly where I started in this new page.  I note a difference of perspective from the experts quoted and what i know about the trauma thing from experience.

I end up talking about the importance of the declaration of independence, and personal defense of boundaries.  And how it MIGHT help if the public were a little less self-delusional, compartmentalized, and dissociative when it comes to US vs THEM and the role of government in kissing all our “ow-ies,” settling our squabbles, raising our young, monitoring our marriages, determining our public visions, and protecting our boundaries.

NO, let’s get back to the foundational principles.  And add women and girls in the mix as citizens, not as items to be devoured or dominated.

If overall, we ALL had less tolerance for unreasonable dominance, I think a lot of partnerships and society would be healthier.  You can force compliance, but you can’t force love, and when force gets into the family business, then we are REALLY in trouble.  And we are.  

I don’t think the culprit is god or godlessness. I don’t think the culprit is men OR women.  I think the loss is of a sense of selves as individuals (socially) and a loss of language — transformational ideology throughout the internet, and our institutions.  

As imperfect, or OK< sexist racist classist (etc.) as those colonists were in the latter 1700s, the three “charters of freedom” still shed light and common sense:

  • Declaration of Independence
  • Constitution
  • Bill of Rights.

 

If we don’t like the middle one, we should change the oath Presidents take on assuming office.  Barring that, we should hold them and every one else in any form of government to the same standard of these 3.  “Consent of the governed” still counts.

So I recommend we start thinking in those terms again, starting with putting some of the terms back into our heads and coming out of our mouths.  Expect a fight, in that matter, though!

That’s all for now.  If you want  straighter talk and fewer words, get it from the street:

http://www.thestreetspirit.org/

On God (Dec. 2006)

3. If God is, whence come evil things? If He is not, whence come good?
BOETHIUS (Roman philosopher 480?-524 A.D.) The Consolation of Philosophy, translated by W.V. Cooper, 1981

4. I still believe that standing up for the truth of God is the greatest thing in the world. This is the end of life. The end of life is not to be happy. The end of life is not to achieve pleasure and avoid pain. The end of life is to do the will of God, come what may.  
MARTIN LUTHER KING JR., (U.S. clergyman and human rights activist, 1929-1968), “The Most Durable Power,” sermon, Montgomery, Alabama, 6 November 1956

(LIFE LIBERTy and PURSUIT of HAPP(y)NESS, and in that order.  Physical, mental, or spiritual Welfare =/= happiness, but the first can sustain life.    Moral proclamations by government about how to live, how free to be, and what happiness consists of is not the government’s province, it’s ours).

 

On poverty, who are you going to believe? A Harvard Ph.D. or a poor person?

Poor Magazine

 

This stereotype is that poor people can lift themselves out of poverty because, it assumes, they are responsible for their own poverty.   Linda Burnham explained in her opening, the myth in America is that “everyone can pull themselves up by their bootstraps.” This myth allows the public to discard “a whole layer of society” who can’t pull themselves up.

Linda spoke of the American economy as both an engine of incredible wealth and an engine of poverty. This engine “creates and recreates poverty everyday in the US and all over the world.” During the war, discussions of poverty have been swept off the table. It is important to connect the war against the poor to the war abroad. Burnham mentioned that Lockheed Martin, the world’s largest weapons manufacturer, has just been awarded a contract to run the welfare system in Florida. The company, who makes huge profits off of war, will now be making huge profits off of managing Florida’s poor.** In order for a country to subjugate and dominate another population, it has to first dominate its population at home. All you have to do is look at the streets of your city to see that this is being done on an everyday basis.

**This is why I don’t think much about the conversations on solving domestic violence.  IF it were solved, there’d be less cash flow all round, less poverty, and poverty IS an industry!

 

Or Ask the Beat Within

logo

Violence And Material Madness
by Speedy, posted May 18, 2009I think violence comes from people who has a bad life style. They don’t get the good things in life and so they get angry, so they look to robbing and stealing. That’s what gets them in here. So then, when they get in here, their whole life is starting to mess up. And when that happens, they’re in the system. Then they get even more madder because they’re missing out on a lot, so they get to more stealing.

Some people grow up with anger, and some are taught to be mad and act bad. Like some parents say, when somebody hits you, you supposed to hit them back. But sometimes that’s not the right thing to do, so than they get in trouble for what they parents taught them. But when they get home, he or her mom says, “That a’right.” So than they keep getting’ in trouble.

But some violent stuff mostly come from material madness, so they try to steal and stealing ain’t the right thing. You should just get a job, have some money in yo’ pocket and that’s go be you. And if that material thing is really expensive, so that’s when you save up and get that thing for yourself, so than that’s when you see you don’t have to look to stealing. When you don’t have to steal and you see that you don’t have to do that no more.

OR:  (This issue had several letters to President Obama….)

A Letter To The President-
by TAE, posted May 18, 2009Dear Mr. Obama,

I think you should make certain things that keep young black men busy for the weekends, so we could stop killing ourselves. I also think that you should start building new colleges for people who cannot afford that type of money, so they could be something in life to take care of their family, and get the majority of the tax money every year.

I think there should be less education about African-American people and more about other cultures so people wouldn’t have to feel down all the time by hearing the word “Nigger” a lot.

People who’s getting abused in their family should be taken care of in a shelter that provides a little bit of discipline, so they could grow up and succeed in life, and keep innocent people out of the pen.

OR:

Dear President
by Richard, posted May 19, 2009How are you Mr. President? I am writing from Santa Clara juvenile hall. My name is Richard. I am facing a life sentence for kidnapping, attempted murder, carjacking, and 2nd degree robbery. I am 17 years old.

I would like to congratulate you for becoming the 44th President of the United States of America. You inspire me to do many things. It gives me hope to become something I thought I couldn’t be in life no matter what it is. I believe in you, that you are going to make things right in this world. I know when I go to prison I can try my hardest to get my education and other things. I didn’t think I could at first, but with you as President, I have faith.

I know I am in here and might not get out soon, but I know you will be there for those on the outside of these walls. I know you will make a change. I hope the best for you, Mr. President. Thank you for reading this, and I apologize for taking your time.

 

Our Mission

The Beat Within’s mission is to provide incarcerated youth with consistent opportunity to share their ideas and life experiences in a safe space that encourages literacy, self-expression, some critical thinking skills, and healthy, supportive relationships with adults and their community. Outside of the juvenile justice system, The Beat Within partners with community organizations and individuals to bring resources to youth both inside and outside of detention. We are committed to being an effective bridge between youth who are locked up and the community that aims to support their progress towards a healthy, non-violent, and productive life.

 

Regarding recovery from violence (WHICH the Antioch/Dugard articles from today dealt with),

from http://www.Lundy Bancroft.com:

  • Addressing the healing needs of children: There is a wide consensus that children’s recovery from exposure to domestic violence (and from divorce) depends largely on the quality of their relationship with the non-battering parent and with their siblings.20 

Of course this statement runs entirely contrary to the bulk of the “fatherhood” premises and the entire family court venue basically doesn’t validate or practice.

  • Therefore, in addition to safety consideration, court determinations should take into account whether the batterer is likely, based on his past and current behavior, to continue to undermine the mother’s authority, interfere with mother-child relationships, or cause tensions between siblings.

This becomes kind of irrelevant when the court itself does the same things.  My experience is that the past was considered to be a totally blank slate, and therefore any fallout was attributed to whoever it “fell” on.  Extended family influence (which I tried to bring up, and was significant) was ignored.  It was an unbelievably stereotyped reaction.  Possibly the reason I’m writing so much is from the impact of the years of being told POST-separation not to talk about this, or any other subsequent criminal behavior(s).  Oh well . . . 

  • Because children need a sense of safety in order to heal,21 juvenile and family court decisions may not want to include leaving the children in the unsupervised care of a man whose violent tendencies they have witnessed, even if they feel a strong bond of affection for him.

 

So when it typically does, often right after the filing of a civil restraining order, or when divorce is started almost immediately after someone files a protective order, resulting in the “joint custody” “Shared parenting” mindset, then we have a serious values conflict, as I did, in the past, now almost ten years.  A move was made (locally) to extend the initial restraining order time to 5 years from 3. I know I would’ve made it had this happened.  Certain agencies, and entities, made sure this was defeated.  Now that I have time (called unemployment!), I did find out who they were in that case.  

 

If you want straight talk on some poverty, justice, and crime policy issues, again, (although I try, there’s the verbiage issue!), try:  Street Spirit, Poor Magazine, the Beat Within (although that’s getting slicker and slicker since I first saw it),

 

Thanks.  Happy Labor Day (USA).  Unemployment rate _ _ _ _ _???

Labor (or rest) well, we have one more day off in America.  I gave up the concept of seeing a daughter at this time in favor of not fighting that fight until I have some income.  The lack of closure is a constant source of stress.  Closing has to be done right to be safe.  Go figure.  This is one reason I think if women leaving abuse could get a bit of space and time, they could run some great businesses.  It appears that Jaycee/Alyssa both helped her captorS S S S Ss s s s s run a business (not including any horrors she endured IF the brothel rumor was true) and educated her also-imprisoned daughters, the product of her rapes, but nonetheless her DAUGHTERS,  the best she could.  I wish her well and the family that’s now reunited with her.

Mixed Sentiments — from a different battlefield — on the Passing of Senator Ted Kennedy, who valiantly fought: Brain Cancer, for Not Leaving Children Behind, and for Caring for the nation’s Health.

with 2 comments

AUGUST 26, 2009

 

I rarely sleep, and as the TV flashed with news of this lion of a personality, and carrier of the family name, it coincided unfortunately with the third year since I lost my daughters to felony child-stealing, in retaliation for reporting, in seeking asylum from domestic violence.

I struggle with respecting this event, with discomfort about our nations hyper-respect of public figures.  Senator Ted apparently was a womanizer as well as struggled with alcohol, and eventually married a woman 22 years his junior; do his many public accomplishments compensate, is this just the way of “famous men” that change society?

He lost two brothers to assassination, assassinations that affected our country.

I am currently reviewing the work of a young woman, local, that lost a sister and a brother to murder, for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and probably also wrong color.  She too is near the end of her dynasty — both parents gone.  Her mother took the loss of two children hard, and also was fighting cancer.  Her older sister was seen talking to some people in a van.  She was found later, hog-tied, stabbed many times, raped many times, and thrown out like trash in a dumpster.  Her SISTER.  Her brother was stabbed in the heart for confronting someone trailing other women.  Why do I run across people like this?  I don’t know, except I don’t live in a castle or gated community, and I find people’s stories interesting.  I have been cut out of my own daughters’ stories by a  top-heavy, supposedly well-intentioned system that knew that two bright girls were not going to escape its radar or grasp, and that mother must therefore disappear.

Unlike me, she figured out FAST that a system was not going to protect her own two sons, and found a trusted friend to become guardian, so at least she can see them.  Like others, for a fee.  Like me, she wants some version of the truth to survive for her children.


We are allowed to give birth, but too often, not to also speak.

 

How famous is Senator Ted, then, and how much more important his story, and his contributions?  Should I mourn him more than others?  And yet it’s clear he worked hard, campaigned hard, pushed initiatives through, and changed our society.  How can I handle this today, when I shouldn’t be blogging but doing something more self-preserving.  Do I share the national regret and awe?  

Quite honestly, no, but I mean no harm in saying so.

How long can I afford to pause and commemorate? 

Probably shouldn’t have today, but i did.

 

it is easy and common to pick heroes and praise them, and transfer parts of our identity to heroes who gave their lives in service, and forget the non-heroes, some of whom I commemorate below.

I am not sure where Senator Ted falls in this mix.  I think the metaphor of this book has come to the rescue.  It seems both to symbolize the federalism and the poverty, and the reporting of it that go together in the topic “FAMOUS.”  

 

 

Let us Now Praise Famous Men

The book Let Us Now Praise Famous Men grew out of an assignment the two men accepted in 1936 to produce a magazine article on the conditions among white sharecropper families in the U.S. South. It was the time of U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt‘s “New Deal programs designed to help the poorest segments of the society. Agee and Evans spent eight weeks that summer researching their assignment, mainly among three white sharecropping families mired in desperate poverty. They returned with Evans’ portfolio of stark images—of families with gaunt faces, adults and children huddled in bare shacks before dusty yards in the Depression-era nowhere of the deep south—and Agee’s detailed notes.

As he remarks in the book’s preface, the original assignment was to produce a “photographic and verbal record of the daily living and environment of an average white family of tenant farmers.” However, as the Literary Encyclopedia points out, “Agee ultimately conceived of the project as a work of several volumes to be entitled Three Tenant Families,though only the first volume, Let Us Now Praise Famous Men, was ever written.” Agee considered that the larger work, though based in journalism, would be “an independent inquiry into certain normal predicaments of human divinity.

 

The resulting single book is a critically praised opus that leapt over the traditional forms and limitations of journalism of the time. By combining factual reportage with passages of literary complexity and poetic beauty, Agee presented a complete picture, an accurate, minutely detailed report of what he had seen coupled with insight into his feelings about the experience and the difficulties of capturing it for a broad audience. In doing so, he created an enduring portrait of a nearly invisible segment of the American population.

 

My father had a love, and some ear, for poetry, and always claimed he could hear the rhythm of the Lord’s Prayer (or possibly it was the 23rd psalm) in Agee’s “Knoxville, Summer of 1915.”  Ever the critic (and unable to carry a tune himself) he tried to talk me out of both music, and Christianity (unsuccessful in both cases), and we had something of a truce.  I do not have, emotionally or socially, a family at this point; I have made my own in life, and as to the one with whom I share DNA, it’s the two daughters only (now gone) and the deceased Dad, and my memories of him will have to do.  . . .  

So perhaps the Agee reference, the federalism, and my wish to point out, that deep poverty and distress still exist, sometimes still caused by either the basic human lusts, or the governmental god-like posturing, will make up for my mixed sense of duty in perhaps failure to “note” with enough awe, the passing of another member of the Kennedy dynasty, regardless of on how wide a screen and with how broad a stroke for how long, he painted his visions of what the United States should be.  For one, as a woman, a mother, and a Christian, I do not share his multiple visions on how to help the poor and educate America.  I do not think this is the original American vision, a totalitarian welfare state, an inverted pyramid building the 21st century equivalent of pyramids of social structure.  I think this “nation/religion” is the way of Egypt, milennia ago.  No, I do not.  But still, Let us Now Praise Famous Men.  

 

One of the follies of humanity is poor choice of who to praise and with whom to associate — famous  preempts worthy. 

 

Throughout the book, Agee and Evans use pseudonyms to obscure the identity of the three tenant farmer families. This convention is retained in the follow-up book And Their Children After Them

lthough Agee’s and Evans’ work was never published as the intended magazine article, their work has endured in the form in which it finally emerged, a lengthy, highly original book. Agee’s text is part ethnography, part cultural anthropological study, and part novelistic, poetic narrative set in the shacks and fields of Alabama. Evans’ black-and-white photographs, starkly real but also matching the grand poetry of the text, are included as a portfolio, without comment, in the book.

Although at its heart a story of the three families, the Gudgers, Woods, and Ricketts (pseudonyms for the Burroughs, Tengles and Fields) the book is also a meditation on reporting and intrusion, on observing and interfering with subjects, sufficient to occupy any student of anthropology, journalism, or, for that matter, revolution.

 

 

THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF SENATOR EDWARD M. KENNEDY 1962-2009

August 26, 2009

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

 

Senator Kennedy has authored more than 2,500 bills throughout his career in the United States Senate.  Of those bills, several hundred have become Public Law.  Attached is a sample of some of those laws, which have made a significant difference in the quality of life for the American people. Download the PDF document of his accomplishments here.

 

Reflections:

Who old enough does not remember? the assassinations, the plane crash, and now we have newsbroadcasts, and a nation commemorating the legacy of this Senator from Massachusetts.  It is healing to commemorate, with respect, men who have changed the face of the nation.  Last night, I watched on TV, Charlie Rose seeking to know this man through former friends and writers, and also speaking with the Senator also.  As I saw the shock of white hair, the broad, broad charismatic smile, and listened to Senator Kennedy promote Education and Health Care, his two major federal programs and passions, I had a hard time.  I heard the Senator talk about how America cannot be left behind in globalization and MUST give EVERY child the capacity to succeed in a global economy.

 

I thought, where are the memorials for the people who were not born into Kennedy family, but still died?  

Viet Nam Memorial

By thee have I run through a troop and leapt over a wall

Psalm 18:

1 I will love thee, O LORD, my strength.

2 The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer; my God, my strength, in whom I will trust; my buckler, and the horn of my salvation, and my high tower.

3 I will call upon the LORD, who is worthy to be praised: so shall I be saved from mine enemies.

4 The sorrows of death compassed me, and the floods of ungodly men made me afraid.

5 The sorrows of hell compassed me about: the snares of death prevented me.

6 In my distress I called upon the LORD, and cried unto my God: he heard my voice out of his temple, and my cry came before him, even into his ears.

. . . . 

With the merciful thou wilt shew thyself merciful; with an upright man thou wilt shew thyself upright;

26 With the pure thou wilt shew thyself pure; and with the froward thou wilt shew thyself froward.

27 For thou wilt save the afflicted people; but wilt bring down high looks.

28 For thou wilt light my candle: the LORD my God will enlighten my darkness.

29 For by thee I have run through a troop; and by my God have I leaped over a wall.

30 As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him.

31 For who is God save the LORD? or who is a rock save our God?

32 It is God that girdeth me with strength, and maketh my way perfect.

33 He maketh my feet like hinds’ feet, and setteth me upon my high places.

34 He teacheth my hands to war, so that a bow of steel is broken by mine arms.

35 Thou hast also given me the shield of thy salvation: and thy right hand hath holden me up, and thy gentleness hath made me great.

36 Thou hast enlarged my steps under me, that my feet did not slip

 

WHO MOURNS THESE?

 

Deborah Ross (51) and Ersie Charles Everette (58)

2009 Tried to break up, Shot to death at work, in a Tollbooth, and her male friend in a parking lot, ambushed

Cross said the shootings appeared to stem from a domestic dispute as Burris and Deborah Ross, 51, a California Department of Transportation toll booth collector, had recently broken up.

“He clearly had no regard for human life, so we wanted to apprehend him as soon as possible,” Cross said. “We had authorities all throughout Northern California trying to find this guy.”

Burris apparently opened fire with a shotgun shortly before 6 p.m. Tuesday, killing Ross and Ersie Charles Everette, 58, of San Leandro, Calif., who was sitting in his truck in the toll plaza parking lot.

Ross and Burris had shared a house in Richmond, and neighbors said the two had been having financial problems. Richmond Police were called to the house on Saturday, police spokeswoman Sgt. Bisa French said Wednesday. It is unknown what the nature of the call was as no report was taken, French said.

Although their relationship had just ended, Burris was aware of Everette, who drove Ross to work Tuesday, Cross said.

“Somehow, he knew the guy was there at her job, there’s a connection between the two victims, but what that relationship is, we don’t know at this time,” Cross said.

Everette, known as “Chuck” by those who knew him, was a longtime, well-respected bus driver for Golden Gate Transit who had received numerous accolades, spokeswoman Mary Currie said Wednesday.

“He was a likable guy, a good guy,” Currie said. “Passengers liked him. His co-workers liked him.”

Tuesday’s shootings occurred at the bridge over the northern portion of San Francisco Bay that connects well-to-do Marin County with Richmond and other East Bay suburbs. Witnesses said a man used the butt of a shotgun to shatter the window of the No. 3 toll booth, then fired at least three times inside, stunning rush-hour commuters in the westbound lanes before fleeing in the van owned by Western Eagle Shuttle of San Rafael, Calif.

Officers found Ross’ body inside the booth, while Everette was discovered slumped over in a white pickup truck in a nearby parking lot.

> > > 

2009/2008  Torres, Catalina (44) & Eustacio (41),  Sgt. Paul Starzyk

Brother, Sister, both domestic violence workers, both murdered by an “ex”

 

According to the San Francisco chronicle, on the evening of July 19th, Eustacio Torres was shot by his ex-girlfriend at a converted garage that Torres was renovating. Torres and his girlfriend, Bernadette Agustin, met about five years ago when Torres was renovating her house. They became partners in that business for a few years. The market started to tumble downhill, and their buildings went into foreclosure causing them to lose money. This caused tension between the couple. After some time, their relationship started to become difficult for both of them. Torres realized that Agustin was dangerous; however he never got a restraining order against her. On the evening on July 19th Agustin went to meet Torres at the garage. Prior to this incident she bought a pistol. She brought shot him with it.

About a year ago Eustacio Torres’ sister, Catalina Torres, a volunteer for a battered women’s group, was shot and killed inside of her Martinez apartment while trying to protect one of her customers in a beauty salon.

Her customer’s husband, Felix Sandoval, entered the beauty salon raged at his wife who had a restraining order against him. Catalina and her customer jetted out of the beauty salon. Sandoval couldn’t find his wife so he followed Torres to her apartment and shot her in the head, simply because she was affiliated with the incident. He then shot at the door and hit Sgt. Paul Starzyk. He still busted in and shot and killed Sandoval.

Since these two murders are a year apart and both victims come from the same family, the Torres family is suffering deeply from these two tragedies.

It is sad, yet ironic how both tragedies happened in the way that they did. They were related and both incidents happened a year apart. Considering the fact that Eustacio, Catalina’s brother had to help bury her, it is sad that he got killed also. They both worked together in a domestic violence group together. Now the Torres family has lost two of their family members to similar incidents.

MARTINEZ — Last September, Catalina Torres’ family struggled to find answers about why she died at the hands of an estranged in-law who also killed a Martinez police sergeant.

> > >

Less than a year later, they find themselves again trying to find clarity after the slaying late last month of her brother, Eustacio Torres, by an estranged girlfriend in San Diego.

According to San Diego police, the bodies of Eustacio Torres, 41, and Bernadette Agustin, 52, were discovered by his nephew — Catalina Torres’ son — in the early-morning hours of July 20 at his home on in the Paradise Hills area. Investigators believe that Agustin shot Eustacio Torres and herself.

Eustacio Torres’ death follows the slaying of his sister Sept. 6, 2008, by Felix Sandoval. Sandoval burst into a Martinez beauty salon looking for his wife. She was not there, and he confronted her cousin, Catalina Torres, at a nearby apartment. While she shielded one of the home’s residents, Sandoval shot and killed her.

Sandoval then shot at police approaching the apartment, mortally wounding Sgt. Paul Starzyk. But Starzyk’s final act was to kill Sandoval, saving the others in the apartment.

Sandoval was in the midst of a divorce from his wife, who had filed a restraining order against him, and Catalina Torres had been supporting her separation from him. In San Diego, Eustacio Torres was severing ties with Agustin. Although the Torres family has experienced two devastating losses, Noe Torres, youngest of the six siblings, said they do not feel like victims.

A memorial fund has been established in Eustacio Torres’ name. Donations can be made at any Wells Fargo Bank branch to the account number 2629533015.

 

Since these two murders are a year apart and both victims come from the same family, the Torres family is suffering deeply from these two tragedies.
It is sad, yet ironic how both tragedies happened in the way that they did. They were related and both incidents happened a year apart. Considering the fact that Eustacio, Catalina’s brother had to help bury her, it is sad that he got killed also. They both worked together in a domestic violence group together. Now the Torres family has lost two of their family members to similar incidents.

 

2008 account “Details emerge in Martinez triple shooting:

Catalina Torres survived domestic abuse and became a strong advocate for a nonprofit group that helps victims of domestic violence.

“She was a battered woman who became an advocate,” said Maria Preciado, Torres’ close friend. “She took negative experiences and turned them into positive things.”

In a tragic turn of events, the 44-year-old STAND Against Domestic Violence volunteer lost her life Saturday, an innocent bystander in a deadly domestic disturbance involving her cousin’s estranged husband.

Officers were called to the salon about 11:35 a.m. Saturday on reports of a domestic disturbance. Sandoval broke the salon’s front window with his hand and entered holding a gun, police said. According to witnesses, he was looking for his estranged wife, salon owner Margarita Sandoval.

Martinez police Chief Tom Simonetti said Felix Sandoval, who was waving the gun around, never fired a shot in the salon, but confronted his teenage daughter in the parking lot behind the salon and told her he was going to kill his wife and his other children. Sandoval ran to an upstairs apartment on the opposite side of the parking lot where Torres, an unidentified woman and three of Sandoval’s children were, the chief said.

 

Elnora Caldwell, 46

She asked for protection

 

SEPTEMBER 2008, This beautiful woman Tried to Leave, Died, Stabbed, on side of the road

Contra Costa sheriff building death penalty argument in wife stabbing

 

 

Investigators said Monday that they are trying to build a death penalty case against an Oakland man who allegedly stabbed his estranged wife near the Caldecott Tunnel and pushed her out of his pickup in front of stunned motorists. Robert Woods, a 47-year-old former maintenance worker for the city of Oakland, was arrested on suspicion of murdering Elnora Caldwell, 46. Caldwellobtained a restraining order against Woods earlier this year, saying she was afraid of him. She was stabbed to death Saturday night and pushed from the pickup on a stretch of Fish Ranch Road that passes over the east end of the Caldecott Tunnel. ..Caldwell’s family members believe she was kidnapped Saturday from her Oakland home, perhaps by someone other than Woods.

Police and witnesses said Woods went to Caldwell’s Oakland apartment and washed up, then turned himself in to an Oakland police officer in the area. More than a dozen motorists stopped to help Caldwell. Some gave her chest compressions and others jotted down the license plate number of the GMC pickup. Alameda County Superior Court records show that Caldwell applied for a domestic violence restraining order against Woods on April 29, and that the order was to be active until 2013. 

Caldwell wrote in her application for the restraining order that Woods had shoved her after showing up unannounced at the Nordstrom department store in San Francisco where she worked and accusing her of infidelity. In 2007, she wrote, Woods pulled her hair during an argument in his truck, forcing her to flee and take a taxi home.

In a third incident, Caldwell said, her husband broke a glass sliding door at her apartment.

It has to stop,” Caldwell wrote of alleged verbal and physical abuse.

Court records show that Woods was fired from his job as a maintenance worker for the city of Oakland last year for allegedly doing drugs and threatening to kill co-workers.

? ? ? 

 

Domestic Violence Murder/Suicides – Here’s a summary:

In the U.S., estimates from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) are that more than three women a day are killed by their intimate partners. Women are killed by intimate partners more often than by another acquaintance of stranger.Most of these murders involved were preceded by physical and psychological abuse.

Outside the domestic realm, males are killed much more often than females; they are killed most often in fights with other men.

According to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports, 1,055 women and 287 men were murdered by their intimate partners in 2005. These figures are striking, because in the past, in the 1970s and earlier, the numbers of men and women so victimized were about even. In other words, there has been a significant decline in the numbers of men killed by their partners but not for women.

The number of men who were murdered by intimates dropped by 75% between 1976 and 2005 (BJS). The number of black females murdered in this time has declined but the number of white females murdered has dropped only by 6%. Statistics Canada (1998, 2005), similarly, reveals a sharp decline in the numbers of male domestic homicide victims but not of female victims of homicide.

The reason that women are resorting less to murder of their partners is most likely because many of these women were battered women who felt trapped in a dangerous situation. Today, the presence of violence prevention programming and the availability of shelters are paving the way to other options. The fact that domestic violence services apparently are saving the lives of more men than women is a positive, though unintended consequence of the women’s shelter movement (see van Wormer and Bartollas, 2007).

 

 Nina Reiser (31), mother of 2.  No asylum in America

2006, Russian-born Oby/Gyn tries to divorce Hans Reiser (WIKIPEDIA) but disappears on exchange of children

Nina Reiser Hans Reiser

Hans Reiser Admits to Murdering Nina Reiser, Pleads to Reduced 

In 1998, while working in Saint Petersburg, Russia, Hans Reiser reportedly selected from a mail-order bride catalogue,[9] and subsequently married, Nina Sharanova (Нина Шаранова), a Russian-born and trained obstetrician and gynecologist[10] who was studying to become an American licensed OB/GYN. Reiser himself stated that he met Nina when he went to a date set up by a Russian dating service; Nina had come along to translate for his date. . . . 

In May, Nina Reiser alleged in court filings that her husband had failed to pay 50 percent medical expenses and childcare expenses as ordered by a judge and was in arrears for more than $12,000. [13]

Recovery of Nina’s body and sentencing

According to officials, prosecutors agreed to a deal whereby Reiser would reveal the location of his wife’s body in exchange for pleading guilty to second-degree murder. The deal was made with the agreement of Nina’s family, but was subject to final approval by Judge Goodman.[45][46] On Monday, July 7, 2008, Reiser led police to Nina’s body buried in the Oakland hills. Reiser’s attorney, William DuBois, who was handcuffed to Reiser and accompanied by a heavy police guard to the site, said that the remains were found buried on the side of a hill between Redwood Regional Park and the Huckleberry Botanic Regional Preserve, less than half a mile (< 800 m) from the home on Exeter Drive where Reiser lived with his mother, and where Nina Reiser was last seen alive on 3 September 20

 

Anastasia Melnitchenko, 22, unmarried, No asylum in America 

2005 Tried to break up, stalked; a clearly preventable homicide — her body found in car trunk

Body-in-trunk suspect got lots of counseling

‘Doing satisfactorily’ after 6 months of weekly sessions

He was fulfilling that obligation Oct. 19, two days before Melnitchenko disappeared, when he attended a weekly session of a program in Richmond run by Priority Male Center for Positive Peaceful Living

Jaxon Van Derbeken, Chronicle Staff Writer

Wednesday, October 26, 2005

The El Sobrante man charged with murdering a woman he had repeatedly terrorized attended a two-hour counseling session for domestic violence offenders just days before the slaying, authorities said Tuesday.

McAlpin was on probation stemming from eight felony convictions in two separate cases for stalking, threatening and attacking Melnitchenko on several occasions from 2001 to 2004. Part of his sentence in the most recent case was that he attend a yearlong domestic violence prevention program.

THE BEST WAY TO “PREVENT” VIOLENCE IS TO SEND A CLEAR MESSAGE TO GIVE NO QUARTER TO PERPERTRATORS.  MCALPIN WAS A COCKY OVERENTITLED YOUNG MAN WITH NO RESPECT FOR THE WOMAN, OR THE LAW — AND FROM THE STORY, IT’S CLEAR WHY HE HAD NO REASON TO RESPECT THE LAW, TOO.  I DNR BUT I SUSPECT HE WAS WHITE.  I DON’T THINK THIS POOR WOMAN EVER EVEN LIVED WITH HIM.  THEY DATED BRIEFLY.  SHE DIED.  THE STORY OF HER DEATH INTERSECTS WITH THE STORY OF A JUDGE WITH A MISSION; I MAY TELL IT ANOTHER TIME.  THIS EVENT INTERSECTS WITH MY ATTEMPTS TO GET HELP IN 2005, THE SAME YEAR. I REMEMBER TRYING TO TELL MY FAMILY THAT THIS STALKING, THESE INDICATORS, SPELLED TROUBLE!  MY PROBLEM WAS WHO I TOLD, WHO I SOUGHT HELP FROM, AS WAS ANASTASIA’S.

Taking matters into their own hand; two brothers kill widow & her relatives: 

Winta Mehari, 28; her brother Yonas Mehari, 17;

and their mother, 50-year-old Regbe Bahrengasi

Widow and HER relatives killed in revenge, seeking money, by deceased husband’s relatives.  2 year old involved.

2006 – No Asylum for Eritrean Family from revenge, greed,

extortion? in the Golden State

Planned to exterminate family during Thanksgiving Dinner?  

ALAMEDA — A dispute over money was the cause of the shooting deaths of three members of an Eritrean family in Oakland on Thanksgiving Day, a relative of the victims alleged Tuesday after the suspects in the case were arraigned on charges that could bring them the death penalty.

Asmeron Gebreselassie, 43, the suspected gunman, and 39-year-old Tewodros Gebreselassie were each charged Tuesday with three counts of murder; one count of attempted murder for the non-fatal shooting of Yehtram Mehari, the brother of Winta and Yonas; one count of kidnapping for allegedly taking Winta Mehari’s 2-year-old son from the scene; and two counts of false imprisonment involving two other family members, Angersom Mehari and Merhawi Mehari.

 They also were charged with two special circumstances murder allegations that could earn them the death penalty: multiple murder and murder during the course of a kidnapping.

 The victims and the defendants were all members of Oakland’s sizable Eritrean community. About 50 members of that community, many dressed in traditional Eritrean clothing, packed Tuesday’s court hearing.

Oakland police say they think the motive for the shooting at the Keller Plaza apartment complex at 5301 Telegraph Ave. in Oakland about 3 p.m. on Thanksgiving was that the Gebreselassie brothers wanted revenge for the death of their brother, Abraham Tewolde, 42, on March 1.

Police said Abraham Tewolde’s cause of death was undetermined and his brothers were suspicious of Winta Mehari, his widow.

 Keflezighi said Tewolde died of natural causes but Tewolde’s family members asked Mehari’s family members to give them money.

 

I REMEMBER THIS ONE.  I WAS DRIVING TO EAT DINNER, TAKEN CHARITABLY IN, NOT WITH MY DAUGHTERS, BECAUSE THEY’D ALREADY BEEN TAKEN, COMPLICIT WITH MY OWN FAMILY AND AROUND MONEY ISSUES ALSO.  I RAN INTO POLICE CARS & TV CAMERAS BLOCKING THE WAY.

Was this misogyny?  Was this something like an honor killing?  What WAS this?  A young man, apparently a good one, was killed, victim to two men seeking revenge on his mother.  His crime?  Being a brother, apparently!

Meanwhile, students and teachers at Berkeley High School were mourning the death of Yonas Mehari. The boys varsity soccer team, which he played on, wore black armbands in his honor and dedicated its season to him Monday night.

All the victims and suspects were immigrants from Eritrea, and the killings have shocked the East Bay’s tightly-knit community from that small East African nation. Many people packed the courtroom today, and others without seats waited in the hallway.

Hundreds of mourners have been visiting the apartment complex, home to a large number of Eritreans and Ethiopians, to pay their respects. Many have also brought food for the family and donated money for transporting the three bodies to Eritrea for burial, for medical bills for others injured in the attack and for care of Winta’s Mehari’s son.

Police said the brothers, who also live in the apartment complex, were angry at Winta Mehari over the unexplained death of their brother, Abraham Tewolde, 42, who was her husband. A mechanic who ran a small auto shop on Broadway, Tewolde collapsed and died March 1. An autopsy was unable to determine the cause of his death, coroner’s officials said.

Police said the Gebreselassie brothers suspected Winta Mehari had some role in her husband’s death. Tewodros Gebreselassie, an engineer, attended the party at the Mehari’s third-floor apartment on Thanksgiving, and police said he admitted to helping his brother plan the attack.

Witnesses told police that Tewodros Gebreselassie was talking on his cell phone and said, “Yeah, they’re all here,” according to court records. Minutes later he opened the apartment door for Asmeron Gebreselassie, who then opened fire on the Mehari family. When the shooting started, Tewodros Gebreselassie grabbed his 2-year-old nephew, Winta Mehari’s son, and carried him back to the second-floor apartment where the Gebreselassie lived, witnesses said.

Asmeron Gebreselassie also shot his brother-in-law Yehtram Mehari in the foot, witnesses told police. Another brother, Angersom Mehari, jumped out a window and suffered a broken back. A third brother, Merhawi Mehari, hid in the closet and avoided injury.

Police found the boy unharmed after the two brothers surrendered to a SWAT team following a brief standoff at their apartment. The guns he allegedly used were later found, police said.

At Berkeley High School, students, teachers and counselors spent Monday and today remembering the 17-year-old Yonas Mehari, who played soccer, ran cross country and helped tutor other students.

“I’ve known him for four years, and I really saw him as a leader, an independent thinker and just a really sweet kid to be around,” said Kristin Glenchur, athletic director at Berkeley High. “He was always around volunteering for something” such as working the scoreboards during football games or the concession stands, she said.

His slain mother was active in the Eritrean Orthodox Church in Oakland and was popular among her immigrant community, estimated by the Eritrean consulate in Oakland at to be about 3,000 people.

Donations to the Mehari Family Fund can be deposited at any Bank of America branch under account number 0560942210.

 

SUMMARY:

Sometimes there is no refuge from family violence — members take the law into their own hands; oftentimes greed is a factor, as in many cases above.  McAlpin appears to have just been a man with a mission intersecting with a system with a different mission.  She got cross in the cross-fire of attempts to reform a man after:  kidnapping, stalking, assault, and threats to kill.  

How IMPORTANT is it that the United States set the standard that misogyny is “anathema” it’s unacceptable?

I fear that Senator Ted, Presidents Bush, Clinton, and now Obama, have failed to do this.  Moreover, women’s groups also, subject to the same human emotions, claw and fight each other sometimes to the top, seeking scarce prestige, or abundant federal funds.  This is also a spinoff of misogyny.  We who watch such things don’t see such huge, huge divides among the men’s groups.  We have now an older Republican white President, a young and charming (and philandering) white President, and an even younger and MORE charming African-American President, all united in fixing the crises of fatherlessness, and making sure that mothers don’t actually get to (safely) fulfil their motherhood unless a man is present, and it’s CLEAR we do not have have equal protection or rights under law, despite the claims to the contrary.  If so, where are all the dead men on the side of the road simply for leaving?  Where are the women blowing away a few family generations to take the law into their own hands?  They just aren’t there!

 

I should be more respectful, and I will take another day to be so, of the passing of a major political figure this week, Senator Ted Kennedy.

I wish I did not have a troubling memory of his womanizing, of the two programs he promoted the mOST (education/health) which have negatively affected my family the MOST.  I wish that the date of his passing did not coincide with the date my kids were stolen, yet remain within (at last sighting) driving distance, but inaccessible to me, because I simply took a stand against misogyny and violence.

I took a stand for telling the truth in court, and not mincing words.  Perhaps I am very disrespectful.

I wish I were not thinking of how he endorsed our current President, for whom I too voted, not being fully aware of his stance on the ubiquitous and impoverishing, endangering to women “fatherhood” movement.  It is never enough, never enough — always another initiative, another grant, through churches, through family members when they are themselves swept up and confronted by their failure to confront, and through family law system, and through an unbelievably condescending virtual caste system by the elite making it near impossible for less fortunate to escape the economic abuse that would enable them to escape threats of injury, death, having children abducted, either by the ex or through the courts or (case in point) both, and through violence to our civil rights within this nation.

They said Sen. Kennedy worked like a dog, and i believe it. Some of us do, too, on a single issue that doesn’t often go away.  I never tried to raise his offspring, and I do not appreciate his or any other administration , or their programs, just because they have the platform, prating on about how to raise mine, married or single, through a burdensome system that doesn’t even impart decent values, let alone decent academics.  And in 20 years of THIS battle, I’ve never had a hand laid on any of mine, anything that was mine, or on ME, from someone who openly said he or she hated me or wanted to hurt me.

It was always from the “helpers” and those “concerned.”  Sure. . . . 

 

But in re:

Kennedy’s Battle With Cancer Lost


U.S. has lost a great statesman, obviously.  But before this, long before this, we have lost something else.  We have lost self-respect as individuals, and transferred it to our leaders, HOPING in them.  This is misplaced hope too often, and it’s unwise.

Jeremiah was a prophet who watched and spoke out against the deterioration of his nation:  For this, he got left in a pit without water, and would’ve starved there, were he not later rescued.   Later, Jesus Christ, also preaching “repent” got crucified.  

Jeremiah 17

.

5 Thus saith the LORD: Cursed is the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD.

6 For he shall be like the heath in the desert, and shall not see when good cometh; but shall inhabit the parched places in the wilderness, a salt land and not inhabited.

7 Blessed is the man that trusteth in the LORD, and whose hope the LORD is.

8 For he shall be as a tree planted by the waters, and that spreadeth out his roots by the river, and shall not fear when heat cometh, but his leaf shall be green; and shall not be careful in the year of drought, neither shall cease from yielding fruit.

9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and it is desperately sick: who can know it?

10 I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, according to the fruit of his doings.

11 As the partridge that gathereth young which she hath not brought forth, so is he that getteth riches, and not by right; in the midst of his days they shall leave him, and at his end he shall be a fool.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

For the past 20 years, I have sought refuge in my home, from my home, from my family’s close resonance to the tune my ex-husband played. I have a logical mind, and mind seeks logic to piece a life together, even if the logic is to accept chaos.  But I HAVE found a logic to the, what I will call, narcissistic, self-referential habit of federal domination of the markets — well MOST markets.  Education, family design, health care, welfare, child-bearing practically, and reform.  

The U.S. is succeeding at incarceration — we are the world’s LARGEST jailor — and failing at education.  The reason we are failing at education is because we have trusted our leaders to design a system.  Instead, they designed an ECONOMY to support themselves, and placed our children at its mercy.  This was a transformational system of values sold as good, but not in practice good.  It is possible to succeed very well in this educational system and be an utter failure as a person.  It is also possible to fail in this system and be a business success.  Or to fail all round.

I am 50-plus.  At this age, I had to pick WHAT to dedicate what’s left of my life to; and it was a hard choice between Family Law system and Educational System.  Both systems hurt my kids and my family, and are creating the tiered society, while claiming to provide the opposite.  I have a relative with her own children run through a private school system that took offence that i too — in a different way — opted out of the local public schools.  In truth, I believe that if our daughters succeeded without wealth at what she’d sacrificed to become wealthy and with wealth BUY, it would somehow show up her life plan.  Our respective nieces might be competing for similar college slots – – I don’t know.  

But I have watched close up, and then system-wide, forced failure and social exclusion for simply doing something about it.  So have many fellow-blogger mothers (see right column).

Look at this graphic:

(it’s an old one) from “America, What Went Wrong“? An book that documents the destruction of the middle class.

An INDEPENDENT middle class, with time to think, and understanding basic business principles, will hold its government accountable.  A DEPENDENT (upon professional jobs, many of them government-sanctioned or supplied), which my generation came from (but not my parents) will indeed do the dirty work and bidding of the top group, keeping the heirarchy in place.

From 1990 to 2009, I have been overexposed to impoverishment, and how it’s manufactured.  I watched my husband do this, in order to keep himself on top, he was willing that the ship should go down.  Nothing more mattered, and all discussions were moot (or off) that didn’t first establish this dominance.  Neither I nor our children were actually to show up as people, or with needs, but as performers.

Now, according to the myths taught in public school (and elsewhere) about HOW government works (which dealing with in-home abuse didn’t really leave time for an official study of), it should be possible to leave the situation.  No one should care HOW I leave it, so long as it’s done legally and without harm to our children.  However once we showed up as a household, without a resident male, in waltzed the “experts,” ignoring the facts, the danger, the track record, and proudly proclaiming situations that didn’t exist as though they did.  

Having some exposure to the Bible and its language, this was easy to detect as playing “god.” And naturally, I protested.

And so, the divide and conquer of the middle class, overeducated fools (lots of academia, insufficient truly hard times), scrabbling to assert their intellectual dominance and right to explain away that violence happened in their family, and they, too, failed to report.  

In the long run, I chalk it up to basic human emotions of (1) pride (2) fear (3) greed (4) prejudice (THIs kind, “misogyny.”)  Where logic fails, dominance by gender — or age (it keeps flipping around, the varieties of messages I get), only a few years — or marital status, or SOMETHING to preserve the us/them, Object/subject relationship which is not a human relationship.  Because surely they didn’t misdiagnose a situation, the judges were wrong, I was wrong, the statistics were wrong, everyone else was wrong, and this intact family unit (sort of) was “right.”  Or else. . . . . Social shunning was tried, and I didn’t repent, to the antes were upped, and my kids were stolen, and all contact cut off.  

Perhaps it is because of working so hard on these issues, I have been watching politics from afar.

Perhaps it is because of these issues, I have a different “take” on the passing of a Senator that was compared last night to Daniel Webster and Henry Clay.  The words “dynasty” may apply, but these are NOT words coherent with the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Here’s a woman talking sense:

 

In THE SHOCK DOCTRINE, Naomi Klein explodes the myth that the global free market triumphed democratically. Exposing the thinking, the money trail and the puppet strings behind the world-changing crises and wars of the last four decades, The Shock Doctrine is the gripping story of how America’s “free market” policies have come to dominate the world– through the exploitation of disaster-shocked people and countries.

At the most chaotic juncture in Iraq’s civil war, a new law is unveiled that would allow Shell and BP to claim the country’s vast oil reserves…. Immediately following September 11, the Bush Administration quietly out-sources the running of the “War on Terror” to Halliburton and Blackwater…. After a tsunami wipes out the coasts of Southeast Asia, the pristine beaches are auctioned off to tourist resorts…. New Orleans’s residents, scattered from Hurricane Katrina, discover that their public housing, hospitals and schools will never be reopened…. These events are examples of “the shock doctrine”: using the public’s disorientation following massive collective shocks – wars, terrorist attacks, or natural disasters — to achieve control by imposing economic shock therapy. Sometimes, when the first two shocks don’t succeed in wiping out resistance, a third shock is employed: the electrode in the prison cell or the Taser gun on the streets.

 

This is the theme of the National Fatherhood Initiative, there is a “crisis in fatherlessness.”  I have watched these manufactured crises on a personal level and also a national level and have begun to get an understanding of some of the causes and sources, ONE of which is most definitely the educational system.  Divide and conquer, and assume control of assets and assessments.  That’s elementary.  One very empowering activity, to young people, is the arts, and self-sufficiency.  No problem.  Delete the arts, if possible, and free time, and uninterrupted quantities of time for reflection, and also do not study (honestly) either history or the economic system, in particular not the history of any system one is currently in.  Again, I saw this in my marriage, how the most basic amenities were threatening to my “intimate partner.”  THE most threatening one apparently was access to a steady cash flow.  If I got this by working, the reserves must be eliminated by his working less, or making the process of getting to/from work more burdensome and timesconsuming.  Rooms got trashed or re-arranged while I was out, at class or working or with the kids.  There was no stability.  Once you get the pattern, it’s only a matter of breaking it.  My writing (I was also journaling the abuse) threatened this person.  I exported the journals.  He exported his behind and friendship to the people into whose care I’d put them.  I went and got them back. . . . . But it was too late.  They had to be turned, I guess (?).

Here’s another one which speaks to it about “lockdown” of the fortress continents.  Care must be taken to incorporate cheap labor:

Fortress continents

The US and Europe are both creating multi-tiered regional strongholds

There is so much in life to be considered, but in considering memorials, again, I keep coming back to scripture:

“Pray for kings and all that are in authority, that we may live a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.” (I Tim. 2:1).

“It is not good to have respect of persons.” (James).

You know what, with all due respect, it’s not.  LIFE is about what you respect, and who you honor:  Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, soul, mind and strength, and thy neighbor as thyself.”

There is not to be a tiered respect of people according to how MUCH of this world they’ve changed.  We, ALL of us in the U.S., are to respect ourselves, and the founding principles of this country, which then allow us to respect at LEAST our neighbors.  

“Love worketh no ill towards his neighbor.”

Sometimes it’s simply in what one does NOT do, that love.

So, below are my unforgiveable (??) thoughts, in respect that a Senator has died, on seeing the extensive television recognition of this man, and hearing about what he had been doing while I was across the country, trying to stay afloat and keep the pilot light lit in my own life, spiritually and physically.

And I have to go about what’s left of this day, seeking funds sufficient for today and build something to tomorrow.

I saw a charming, Robert-Redford smile, and I thought about Chappaquiddick

about this man’s marriage to a woman 22 years his junior, a 38 year old divorced attorney single mother, and wondered things that were less respectful than appropriate.  I thought about the CFDA pie chart I know, where his two most passionate areas:  Education and Health — were THE largest and most impoverishing segments of the budget; and the effect of this incredible top-heavy Federal language transformation into a welfare state directing lives of the lowly.  

It did not help when I learned that this person was a prime author of the “No Child Left Behind” act and a real pusher of Head Start.  Trust the elite to prescribe for the poor every time.  It is also quite unfortunate that his death this week commemorates about 3 years fo the “death” of my relationship with my own daughters, and primarily because I REFUSED to accept that poverty resulting from violence should result in becoming a surrogate womb for childless narcissistic relatives convinced that, having not experienced what my daughters and I did, or accepted court rulings already made, that they, TOO, “knew what was best” for three females leaving family violence.  When I refused, I was punished by these people, and part of the punishment was declaring what I provided for our daughters, either was irrelevant and did not exist, and what they wished instead, was somehow superior.  

The punishment included the gradual deletion of the arts, the dumbing down of my children, the deletion of jobs in my profession (in the arts) because of the need to fight family!, and eventually the criminal removal of children (minors) from my household in order to, ostensibly, “rescue” them somehow, by totally removing all contact with a law abiding, working, intelligent, informed and independent mother. I have had cause and many years to reflect on the benefits and fallbacks of my own, and my ex-spouses public educations amid dysfuncitonal families, mine in a different way from his, and the values that differ.

This gives a totally different perspective on “No Child Left Behind,” when one realizes that the children of those promoting this policies (if such exist) do not always attend public schools, and if they did, they are not in lower-income neighborhoods.  To me, the mark of acceptability is, if it’s good enough for YOUR child, then I’ll listen.  

I’ll finish with this well-written summary:

MichaelMoore.com Commemoration


August 26th, 2009 2:25 am
Ted Kennedy Dies of Brain Cancer at Age 77

 

‘Liberal Lion’ of the Senate Led Storied Political Family After Deaths of President John F. Kennedy, Sen. Robert F. Kennedy

ABC News

Aug. 26, 2009 — Sen. Ted Kennedy died shortly before midnight Tuesday at his home in Hyannis Port, Mass., at age 77.

The man known as the “liberal lion of the Senate” had fought a more than year-long battle with brain cancer, and according to his son had lived longer with the disease than his doctors expected him to.

“We’ve lost the irreplaceable center of our family and joyous light in our lives, but the inspiration of his faith, optimism, and perseverance will live on in our hearts forever,” the Kennedy family said in a statement. “He loved this country and devoted his life to serving it.”

Sen. Edward Moore Kennedy, the youngest Kennedy brother who was left to head the family’s political dynasty after his brothers President John F. Kennedy and Sen. Robert F. Kennedy were assassinated.

Kennedy championed health care reform, working wages and equal rights in his storied career. In August, he was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom — the nation’s highest civilian honor — by President Obama. His daughter, Kara Kennedy, accepted the award on his behalf.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, known as Ted or Teddy, was diagnosed with a malignant brain tumor in May 2008 and underwent a successful brain surgery soon after that. But his health continued to deteriorate, and Kennedy suffered a seizure while attending the luncheon following President Barack Obama’s inauguration.

For Kennedy, the ascension of Obama was an important step toward realizing his goal of health care reform.

At the Democratic National Convention in August 2008, the Massachusetts Democrat promised, “I pledge to you that I will be there next January on the floor of the United States Senate when we begin the great test.”

Sen. Kennedy made good on that pledge, but ultimately lost his battle with cancer.

Kennedy was first elected to the Senate in 1962, at the age of 30, and his tenure there would span four decades.

A hardworking, well-liked politician who became the standard-bearer of his brothers’ liberal causes, his career was clouded by allegations of personal immorality and accusations that his family’s clout helped him avoid the consequences of an accident that left a young woman dead.

But for the younger members of the Kennedy clan, from his own three children to those of his brothers JFK and RFK, Ted Kennedy — once seen as the youngest and least talented in a family of glamorous overachievers — was both a surrogate father and the center of the family.

And certainly it was Ted Kennedy who bore many of the tragedies of the family — the violent deaths of four of his siblings, his son’s battle with cancer, and the death of his nephew John F. Kennedy Jr. in a plane crash.

 

 

Kennedy, Youngest Kennedy Brother, Led Political Dynasty in Wake of Tragedy

Edward Moore Kennedy was born in Brookline, Mass., on Feb. 22, 1932, the ninth and youngest child of Joseph P. Kennedy and Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy.

His father, a third-generation Irish-American who became a multimillionaire businessman and served for a time as a U.S. ambassador to Britain, had risen high and was determined that his sons would rise higher still.

Overshadowed by his elder siblings, Teddy, as he was known to family and friends, grew up mostly in the New York City suburb of Bronxville, N.Y., and attended private boarding schools. He was expelled from Harvard during his freshman year after he asked a friend to take an exam for him.

After a two-year stint in the Army, Kennedy returned to earn degrees at Harvard and then the University of Virginia law school. He married Virginia Joan Bennett, known by her middle name, in 1958. The couple would have three children, Kara, Teddy Jr. and Patrick.

By the time he reached adulthood, tragedy had already claimed some of his siblings: eldest brother Joe Jr. was killed in World War II, sister Kathleen died in a plane crash, and another sister, Rosemary, who was mildly retarded, had to be institutionalized following a botched lobotomy.

But then the family hit its pinnacle in 1960, when John F. Kennedy became president.

His brother’s ascension created a political opportunity, and Joe Kennedy decided he should take over JFK’s Senate seat. Ted Kennedy was only 28 at the time — two years short of the required age — so a family friend was found to hold the temporary appointment.

In 1962, Ted Kennedy — backed by his family money and the enthusiasm his name generated among Massachusetts’ Catholics, was elected to the Senate.

 

The Only One Left

In 1963, President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas. His brother Robert became the focus of the family’s — and much of the country’s — dreams.

Following the tragedy in Dallas, Robert and Ted Kennedy became closer than they had ever been as children.

“When I was working for Robert Kennedy, there was hardly a day in which the two of them didn’t physically get together, I would say at least three or four times,” said Frank Mankiewicz, who served as an aide to Robert Kennedy. “I mean, if, if Sen. Robert Kennedy wasn’t in his office, and nobody knew where he was, chances are he was seeing Ted about something.”

Five years later, while pursuing the Democratic presidential nomination in 1968 against Lyndon Johnson, Sen. Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed. That left Ted as the only surviving Kennedy son.

“He seriously contemplated getting out of politics after Robert’s death,” said Kennedy biographer Adam Clymer. “He thought, you know, it might just be too much. He might be too obviously the next target and all of that. But he decided to stick it out and as he said on more than one occasion, pick up a fallen standard.”

Kennedy was seen by many as his brothers’ heir, and perhaps he could have won the White House had he stepped into the presidential race then. But he didn’t. And the very next year there occurred a tragedy that would forever block Ted Kennedy’s presidential ambitions.

In July 1969, following a party on Martha’s Vineyard, Kennedy drove off a bridge on the tiny Massachusetts island of Chappaquiddick. The car plunged into the water. Kennedy escaped, but his passenger did not.

Kennedy later said he dived into the water repeatedly in a vain attempt to save Mary Jo Kopechne, one of the “boiler room girls” who had worked on Bobby Kennedy’s campaign. But Kopechne, 28, drowned, still trapped in the car.

Questions arose about how Kennedy had known Kopechne — he denied any “private relationship,” and Kopechne’s parents also insisted there was no relationship — and why he failed to report the accident for about nine hours.

Kennedy pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of leaving the scene of an accident. He received a two-month suspended sentence and lost his driver’s license for a year, but the political price was higher.

Kennedy was re-elected to the Senate in 1970, but the accident at Chappaquiddick effectively squashed his presidential hopes.

He ran unsuccessfully for the Democratic nomination in 1979 against incumbent President Jimmy Carter.

Once when his daughter Kara, then 19, was passing out campaign leaflets, a man took one and said to her, “You know your father killed a young woman about your age, don’t you?”

 

 

Kennedy Curse: Political Power, Personal Tragedy

Sen. Ted Kennedy was not done confronting personal tragedy.

In 1973, 12-year-old Teddy Jr. was diagnosed with bone cancer, and he had to have a leg amputated. Kennedy’s marriage to Joan deteriorated. Some blamed her drinking, others cited his alleged womanizing. The couple divorced in 1981.

In contrast, Kennedy’s career in the Senate continued to flourish.

He supported teachers’ unions, women’s and abortion rights, and health care reform. He sponsored the Family and Medical Leave Act. And he was seen as a stalwart of the Democratic Party, delivering several rousing speeches at conventions.

Former Boston Glober reporter Tom Oliphant, who covered Kennedy’s career in Washington, observed, “It’s not all back slapping and, and personal relationships. I think one of the things that sets Kennedy’s politics apart is his, what I call his dirty little secret. He works like a dog.”

Political analyst Mark Shields said Kennedy’s “concerns were national concerns, but his forum for achieving his ends and changing policy, became the Senate. And he mastered it like nobody else I’ve ever seen.”

But another family incident exposed Kennedy’s vulnerabilities and held him up to public censure.

A nephew, William Kennedy Smith, was accused of raping a woman at the family’s estate in Palm Beach, Fla. The case generated lurid headlines around the world. Kennedy was at the estate at the time of the alleged attack and had been at the bar where Smith met his accuser.

Eyebrows were raised even further when a young woman who had been with Kennedy’s son Patrick that night revealed that she had seen the senator roaming around the house at night, wearing an oxford shirt but no trousers.

Smith was acquitted following a highly sensational trial, but the incident definitely left a dent in Kennedy’s armor. His alleged heavy drinking and womanizing were widely lampooned, and in October 1991 he thought it prudent to be low-key in his opposition to Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas, who had been accused of sexually harassing a former subordinate.

Kennedy’s life, both professional and personal, took a turn for the better in 1992.

He married Victoria Reggie, a divorced attorney with two children from a previous marriage, Curran and Caroline. That year Kennedy also supported Bill Clinton, an open admirer of the Kennedy clan.

“Well, sometime during our courtship, I realized that I didn’t want to live the rest of my life without Vicky,” Kennedy said about his wife of nearly 30 years. “And since we have been together, it’s made my life a lot more fulfilling. I think more serene, kind of emotional stability.”

Elected in 1992, President Bill Clinton appointed Kennedy’s sister, Jean Kennedy Smith, ambassador to Ireland. And in 1994, Kennedy had the satisfaction of seeing his son Patrick elected to the House of Representatives from Rhode Island.

But tragedy returned that year.

In May 1994, Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis died of cancer. Kennedy had remained close to his sister-in-law, who once quit her job at a publisher’s after it came out with an unflattering biography of Ted.

 

 

Kennedy’s Battle With Cancer Lost

Kennedy had served as a surrogate father for many of his nephews and nieces, but he may have been closest to Jackie’s children, Caroline and John F. Kennedy Jr.

He was horrified when in July 1999, five years after Jackie’s death, John Jr. and his bride of two years, Carolyn Bessette Kennedy, along with her sister Lauren Bessette, were killed when the small plane John was piloting crashed off the Massachusetts island of Martha’s Vineyard.

Sen. Kennedy led the family during the harrowing wait for information as Coast Guard crews searched for the missing plane.

When the bodies were retrieved from the ocean, Kennedy and his two sons went to identify the remains. The senator’s eulogy for his nephew who “had every gift but length of years” and “the wife who became his perfect soul mate” touched grief-stricken Americans.

It was an all-too-familiar sight for those who remember Ted Kennedy mourning the deaths of his brothers John and Robert, and helping the family bear up after the deaths of Robert’s sons David and Michael.

For decades, it was Ted Kennedy who carried the burden and led the way as the patriarch of a family seen as America’s answer to royalty.

 

With all due respect, we do not need any more royalty in this country.  We need to set our sites on something invisible, something written, but something of principle, that unites us.  Our leaders need to stick to that, and out of respect to OURSELVES ,we should demand that.


Yes, we SHOULD call them “restraining order suggestions” (Certifiably Insane Protection Orders in MN; meanwhile, more “Fatherhood” in KS)

with 25 comments

[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 2/16/2016 //LGH]

Today’s 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.

(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 part of post — Minnesota.  BOTTOM — Kansas.  They relate.)

Preface Commentary:

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 violendce 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 to gether 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 (referringto 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?

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 publically 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 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.

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

HARRIS, Minn. — In rural Chisago County, houses are far apart, but neighbors are close.

Roland and Mavis Ramberg thought they knew the neighbors down the road, Doug and Candice Ouellette, who were both  38 years old.

Their grandchildren and the Ouellette’s 10-year-old son and 8-year-old twin girls were friends.

“They seemed like a nice couple,” says Mavis.

> > > Yes, we all like to think that pleasantries in social endeavors

mean the couple is nice in private.  This mentality also appears to hold true among custody evaluators and mediators — well, he/she showed self-control while in MY office, or while I was watching, therefore, that’s the standard..Therefore my formal assessment (opinion?) is that, he/she is a nice guy and the other partner is eccentric, or has personality problems (that don’t relate to or arise from the relationship? . . . ).

I have been seriously assaulted both immediately before and immediately after a social engagement in our home, like many women who have been in violent relationships.  No matter how much evidence hits the press or anywhere else about the reality of this type of dual- behavior, the communal lore (at least in the press) seems to be, denial and surprise..as if this was a new thing.  “What a nice couple.”

Define “nice.”  Define knowledge of one’s neighbors.


Then on Wednesday night, the Rambergs realized that something was clearly wrong.

>>Apparently they didn’t know about:  the prior suicide attempt resulting in a call to police, OR the restraining order situation, or the divorce.  They were still a “nice” couple.

“All I saw was squad cars, upon squad cars and helicopter,” says Roland

One of the Ouellette’s little girls had called 911. Investigators say Doug strangled Candice to death in their home, then hanged himself in an outbuilding.

“I can’t imagine anything worse than having your dad kill your mom and then kill himself,” says Chisago County Chief Deputy Bob Shoemaker.

Court documents filed in Chisago County detail the couple’s troubled marriage. In June, police were called to the Ouellette’s home for an attempted suicide.

{{This suicide attempt is characterized as  “a troubled marriage,” not a troubled man.  Well, attempted suicides ARE troubling to all involved}}

In her own words, Candice (mother) tells the court that Doug locked himself in the pole barn with guns,

held a revolver to his head and threatened to kill himself.

At that time Candice received an order for protection, an order authorities say was later terminated by the agreement both she and her husband.  {{The sentence is incomplete…}}

{{AND all the “experts” said, “Amen, So Be it.  We’re glad you reconciled.”}}

A suicide attempt should trigger a separation and mandated SOMETHING.  Fatherlessness over the decades sure has triggered a LOT of initiatives.  Why not initiatives to mandate that potential fatherlessness as demonstrated by suicide attempt should result in suicide-prevention action by the courts, et al.?  (See my past 14 years of lethality risk studies, last post)  Common sense:  In the news there are “suicide” attacks, bombs.  Wars sometimes involve suicide bombing  SO when there’s a home war, watch out!}}

{HAS SOMEONE ACTUALLY — OR WILL THEY LATER — READ THE ORDER THAT TERMINATES?  How much later? . . . that’s the trouble with getting stories out so fast — their incompleteness…}}

But at the end of June, Candice filed for divorce, with a no contact provision.

  • It looks like there was a stipulation in the paperwork
  • that allows him to go to the outbuildings during daylight hours
  • between 9 and 5 pm,” says Shoemaker.

Gee, with all the hoopla, particularly by President Obama et al., this past Father’s Day, perhaps it made him feel even worse.  That’s why I say, maybe we ought to “call it a day” on the “days.”  MOST of them. . . . . . .

til 5pm?  BUT — – – – BUT – – – – did not this attack, strangulation-murder, happen around 9:15pm (or was it just discovered then)?  How long were those girls in the home alone with their Mom’s body?

What kind of self-restraint was presumed the suicidal Dad would show in this presumptuous order?  And, why didn’t the Mom call 911 the SECOND he approached the home after 5pm?  Was it an ambush or sneak attack?  Or was she still half in “placation/mediation/well, he’s their father mode”?  And had it not yet sunk in that she had a RIGHT to self-defense and say no?  OR, it being rural, did she not have any other recourse?  Unfortunately, we do not have a brain-scan of her final thoughts.. Do those girls have some final words or cries burned into their brains, and the boy?. . .  (I can imagine why, probably, having been in those shoes.  And my order didn’t even stipulate only certain hours…)

THAT ORDER IS  – – AS WELL AS TERMINATING THE EARLIER ONE – – was  the “certifiably insane” part . . . . . The “frog in a pan of warm water” effect.  The “graduated sanctions” philosophy.  That order, whether written ‘by them’ or not, was signed by a judge, and was a piece of crap!  If any of my readers has negotiated a “mutual” agreement with someone who has attempted or threatened to attempt suicide before, and all went well, all are still alive, it worked out, please comment on my post, and give the case # too, and what county and what year.  I’d like to see something to validate the court attention-deficit process women leaving abuse are put through.  One files a protection order on the other, indicating some serious and significant differences in perspective, than are ordered to mediate, or reconcile, or just get along and put their differences aside.

AND – – I had the same thing.  Same field of endeavor from this man, and same not a REAL protection order.  It was not really safe, it was risky to do this, in our context, and obviously this one also.  At the time, it was a drastic improvement.  In retrospect, it was unfair to us, 100%, and exposed us to risk, and compromised how efficiently we could recover and rebuild/repair things that were broken.  ON THE OTHER HAND, if he hadn’t perceived he won something back, we might have been the Ouellettes. . . . .  This is why the VPC calls it “American Roulette” in reporting on these things.  However, they are focusing on the guns.  There were no guns in this murder/suicide.

The documents also reveal the couple may have been having some financial problems. Candice was working from home. Her husband was part owner of a family construction company. Friends say business had been slow.

Go figure:  She was working from home, with young children at home, and the “protection order” allowed him daily access from 9-5pm, rather than put a physical separation from their places of business and her (now) home.  

At this point, authorities don’t know yet what triggered Doug Ouellette’s final violent act. Investigators are continuing to talk with family members, while friends like the Rambergs try to understand their deep sense of loss.

  • “What triggered” is one big (and typical) assumption:  He was wound tight, he was distressed, he was depressed, he was missing his kids, he was lost at sea, he was suffering from the economy, he was a distressed Dad.  All these things wound him up, and it wasn’t his fault, he was all loaded up and ready to go, and he was TRIGGERED.  (gun analogy, eh? )  Pop!  Something that wasn’t his fault happened, and he strangled his wife.

It could never have been a cold-blooded, planned intentional event, complete with coming in after daylight, to kill his wife. . . . Tell me something — how fast can the average person on the lam from ground searchers and a helicopter that saw him dash into a ground, work up a noose, jump in it and jump off it?  In that state of affairs?  Or was it planned?  (Aug. 08/09 update — see comments!)

Suppose they hadn’t come – would he have done something to the kids too?

  • Final Violent Act.  Actually, his 2nd to final violent act.  The final one was to hang himself.

  • Talk with family members.  The same family members that didn’t know enough seriously insist on SERIOUSLY SEPARATING those two after the suicide attempt?  The same family members now in charge of the children?  The same family members that, after said attempt, didn’t become so immediately alarmed that they GOT INFORMED on such situations and spoke with him, and her, about it?  

PUBLIC COST:  Helicopter, court time, including with judges, court clerks, crime scene clean-up, investigators, etc.


“You just feel kinda crushed because what are those poor kids gonna do,” says Mavis.

Authorities say the three children were not harmed physically and are now staying with family members.

I’ll guarantee you they were harmed psychologically and emotionally, and they are in my prayers, as are my own – – read on!

In the transcript of the 911 call made by the little girl, she tells the operator that she tried to push her father away from her mother.

Doug Ouellette himself told the operator that the kids were just playing and were told to leave the phone alone.

“And then, the operator . .. and then . . . ..  and then the operator said, “OK, Sir, just remind them not to. . . . ” and the alert was dropped?  Help was dispatched?”  Our readers here should’ve been told….

If they believed the Dad, still, this would’ve been a GREAT time for a welfare drive-by, and possibly, possibly someone might’ve been saved.  The Dad, at least, would be put in prison and then, thereafter, a family court program (prompted by the fatherhood movement) would’ve helped get him back in his kids lives… so they could be in the custody of the father that murdered their mother, as is encouraged in similar situations.  WHAT did the rest of that transcript SAY, and WHY wasn’t whatever it did say put into this article?  Or was it “spiked” by the editors as compromising police response policy on 911 calls.  Given that THIS home had a prior suicide attempt AND CURRENT PROTECTION ORDER in it.  The father’s word was believed over his daughter’s although in this case she was telling the truth?  I just want to know.

Including this case in Harris, eight women in Minnesota have been murdered (so far…) in 2009 as a result of domestic violence – three were murder-suicide by an intimate partner.

In 2008, 6 of 21 domestic murders in Minnesota were murder-suicides by intimate partner. In addition there were 4 attempted suicides after the murder.

{{YES, there is always funding available to keep the body-counts, and particularly as to femicides (I happen to know) in Minnesota.  Too bad some of this funding wasn’t used for a technical initiative to put protection order data at the disposal of 911 operators, and in their faces. . . . . .  when taking calls….and reduce the count a little this time}}

Harris is about 50 miles north of the Twin Cities.

(Copyright 2009 by KARE. All Rights Reserved.) 

Fewer comments, so I’ll put my comments in quotes instead. . . .

2nd ARTICLE, SAME STORY, DIFFERENT COVERAGE, MORE DETAILS:

Harris man gave up guns before strangling wife, hanging himself

Officials say a Harris, Minn., man strangled his wife in front of their kids and hung himself in a shed after running from police.

By ABBY SIMONS, Star Tribune

Last update: August 6, 2009 – 10:01 PM

LET a feminist, or a woman who’s read the risk assessments do this headline.  Right now, it sounds like, “he was a good guy — he gave up the guns, after all — but then something TRIGGERED him (possibly her?) (possibly the economy?) — and he strangled her, then hung himself.  NO, that’s not the heart of the story, though it may be the hook.  Let’s try again:

First suicide attempt, then suicide/murder in front of the kids.

No, not catchy or local enough:

Gun control doesn’t stop murder/suicide by divorcing Harris man.

No, too generic:

Better dead than divorced — her too — says Harris man, after recent suicide attempt provokes no-contact order.

No, not graphic enough:

Harris man violates no-contact order, chokes his wife, lies to police when 8 year old daughter calls 911 and attempts to stop him, then flees and finally hangs himself.

Nope, too long:

Divorce can be deadly — Divorcing rural Harris man with restraining order due to last suicide attempt, turns in guns, but later strangles wife to death, despite 8-yr old daughter’s attempt to intervene and her 911 call, then flees police and hangs himself.

Well, I’m not working the night desk for a reason, obviously.  Here’s the story.  But WHY NOT GET IMPORTANT TRUTHS (not just facts) OUT WITH THE STORY?

We’ll get the safety recipe right one of these years. . . . .  Oops, ignored lethal risks (again) this time.

The story:

Authorities say a 38-year-old rural Harris, Minn., man who killed his estranged wife and then himself Wednesday had surrendered his guns to the local sheriff’s office this summer after his wife got a restraining order against him.

NO !!!  NO!!!  Stop giving extra credit for partial compliance with restraining order!!  Later he violated and killed!  Stop! !  it went like this: – – and can we delete the emphasis on her “estranged” status?  For one, it rhymes with “deranged” and sounds strange on the tongue.  It’s not about HER, it’s about HIM!  He killed.  She tried to protect her kids and herself, and hopefully him by separation.  

“Authorities say a 38-year old rural Harris, Minn. man killed his wife, after prior suicide attempt and while a protection order was in effect (if “ineffectual”) and then himself Wednesday, even though he DID turn in his guns willingly.”

(if the source of the story IS authoritative, this would be generically true, no matter how law enforcement phrased it.}}

Candice and Douglas Ouellette were in the midst of divorcing, authorities said Thursday.

One of the couple’s 8-year-old twin daughters called 911 about 9:15 p.m. Wednesday and told a dispatcher that their father was choking their mother at the family’s home near 450th Street and Holman Avenue, said Chisago County Chief Deputy Bob Shoemaker. One of the girls struggled in vain to pull her father off [of] her mother.

Narratives:

The account above says a call by the girl was intercepted / talked down by her father.  I have seen this type of behavior (sudden switch of modes when a phone call was involved).


Deputies arrived to find Candice Ouellette dead, the girls unharmed and Douglas Ouellette missing, which sparked an intense search by the sheriff’s office and the Minnesota State Patrol.

A State Patrol helicopter swept the area, and the State Patrol SWAT went to Chisago County, said Department of Public Safety spokesman Andy Skoogman.

The pilot spotted Ouellette running into a pole barn on the property around 10:20 p.m. Searchers found Ouellette’s body hanging inside.

{{How much time elapsed from the pilot spotting this to the short-wave-radio or cell phone? call to the searchers on the ground.  Was HIS death preventable?  Had he prepared that noose?   Why couldn’t he have been stopped?}}

The twins [twin GIRLS] and a 10-year-old son who was staying with a friend that night are in the care of relatives.

Trouble at home

Doug Ouellette’s Facebook profile features photos of a red-faced family warming up after a day of snowmobiling, his kids on four-wheelers or Ouellette hoisting a giant fish on trip to Canada in 2007. Among his favorite quotes: “Life is good.”

(A word to the wise about facebook, then, eh?)

He is listed on the Better Business Bureau website as vice president of Coon Rapids-based Boulder Creek Builders, Inc., a family-run company.

But behind the scenes recently, things apparently were tumultuous. In June, Doug Ouellette threatened suicide, and his wife obtained an order for protection that required him, among other things, to surrender to the sheriff’s office his guns and his permit to carry a handgun.

“There was no problem turning them over,” Shoemaker said.

He was allowed on the property only during the day, and only to access his outer shop and pole barns. He was not to contact his wife other than by telephone or e-mail once a day.  {{WONDER IF THIS WAS ADHERED TO}}  {{WHERE WAS THE REST OF HIS FAMILY?}}

Shoemaker said it was unclear whether Doug Ouellette broke into the home or was let in. {{WHY NOT??}} He apparently did not leave a suicide note.

Shoemaker said the incident was the first murder-suicide in Chisago County in about 13 years.

Have they had many protection orders, and what worked about the others, if so?  Had such rulings gotten lax?

Similar and close by

But the case was the second murder-suicide in two weeks involving estranged couples just north of the Twin Cities.

On July 30, James H. Schwartzbauer, 46, of Wyoming shot and killed his estranged longtime partner, Erica Ann Wilson, 38, in the parking lot of the Circle Pines apartment complex where she lived. Schwartzbauer had been hospitalized the week before after threatening suicide.

((DID THIS CAUSE THE “estrangement” then also?  Or was it his “mature” response to that estrangement?))

((Hospitalization brings up this question:  Was he on medication?  What was the follow-up?  Was his ability to survive in life dependent upon his partner?  Did they BOTH live or only her in this apartment?  Was it male PMS, given the age difference?))

The Wyoming Police Department, with the help of family members, had removed all the guns from Schwartzbauer’s home. Anoka County sheriff’s officials were investigating where Schwartzbauer got the gun.

GEE:  Sounds like at least 3 lethality indicators there:  separation, suicide threatened, and a protection order (apparently) of some sort in place, confronting the guy.  Well, while they were investigating where he got the gun, another man murdered another woman in a similar situation — well possibly.

(From news article:)

According to the Minnesota Coalition for Battered Women, out of 21 women murdered in the state in 2008, six were killed by intimate partners who then killed themselves.

I guess this is helpful to know.  It sure helped the two women in question and their former partner/spouses.  I’ve known these stats, or ones like it, for years.  It sure helped me to get the court’s attention, when this was in my initial reason for seeking a protection order, and subsequently in family law, after my children were stolen, I reported stalking, and also to responding police to various incidents.  My having reported this now, and produced a non-response, sure helped my sense of safety thereafter, and to this date.  I am glad agencies like these are receiving funding to keep a more accurate count than simply reading the newspapers, or say, checking on-line occasionally, might yield.  This is a valuable, life-saving public service.  For example, readers of THESE incidents now know that there were OTHERS.  

(FROM Minnesota Coalition for Battered Women website):

“While battering continues to occur in the lives of far too many women and children, thirty years of advocacy and social change work in the battered women’s movement have led to some important changes. {{FOR EXAMPLE:}} There is far more information available about domestic violence and its impact in the lives of women, children, and men, and there are now resources available to battered women and their children across the state of Minnesota and the nation.”

“MCBW strives to provide the best possible resources to battered women and to the advocates that work on their behalf. Please utilize the resources available through this website, and do not hesitate to contact the MCBW office if you have further questions or are looking for information that is not included on this site.

From me:

$2,550,332 federal FY 2000-2009, more in 2002 and 2007/2008

Minnesota is indeed a hotspot of federal funding for violence against women nonprofits.  That is a separate post.  They know much violence happens around separation, and that suicide is an indicator.  Perhaps this case (these cases) hadn’t shown up with a history of prior battering, and so warnings were not issued?

Home

From News Article:

“Four others were murdered by partners who then tried to kill themselves but failed. While firearms have been most prevalently used in murder-suicides, 13 percent of Minnesota women murdered by an intimate partner from 1989 through 2005 were strangled.”

I told you groups were counting, and I showed you (last post?) for at least how long people with access to the internet (and looking for this information) have had access to “risk assessments” “danger assessments'” or “lethality indicators.”  Since 1989 here, 1985 my last post.  So here we are 24 years later, same indicators still not being heeded and acted appropriately on.  5 years AFTER this group started, apparently, a national Violence Against Women Act was passed, with lots of funding to stop precisely this kind of thing.  AFTER this, apparently, the family law system with its weak-ass consideration of domestic violence was developed, and possibly — possibly — influenced some of the ignorance in these matters of what to do to keep her safe.  And him.

1999, National Father’s Return Day:  Congressional testimony

In 1999, 10 years AFTER this organization began (and 5 years after the “dynamic duo” of:  VAWA and NFI (National Fatherhood Initiative), we get N.H. and other Congressmen testifying  (Washington D.C.) the public proclamation that Father’s Day ain’t good enough, we need, and right next to it, a “National Fathers Return Day” also.   Similar declaration (is it “enough” yet?) now going on in Kansas; please call to protest (INFO BELOW)**

06-17-1999

Be it Resolved, That the Senate–

(1) recognizes that the creation of a better United States requires the active involvement of fathers in the rearing and development of their children;

((The what?  The “creation” of a better United States? — IS THIS SOME NEW CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT and stance I MISSED SOMEWHERE IN THE LAST 20 YEARS? That resolved to replace the mandate of the Declaration of Independence {{from the oppressive regime of England, REMEMBER??}} with the Declaration of Utopia Manufacturing, Inc.?  LET ME DOUBLECHECK:

Preamble:  “We the people of these United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare (not specific!), and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution of the United States of America.”

Did you note the word “LIBERTY” and did you see the word in order to “create a more perfect Union” or was it “form” (out of what was already there…).  The word “create” in this document was reserved at least here to reference to a Creator.

Use of the word “blessings” is from a generalized belief in a God.  As does the Declaration of Independence, in:

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

When in the course of human events, it bcomes necessary for one MARRIAGE and/or one INTIMATE PARTNERSHIP to dissolve the bands which have connected the individuals in it to one another, and to assume among the citizens of this nation, the separate and equal station to which the laws of this land (let alone nature, and nature’s God) entitle them. . . . 

Guess what? When this came to a time in my life, his and mine, I had to declare in public why and get legal help to do so.

Note:  “separate and equal.”  I don’t hear “separate and equal” in this above, 1999, resolution — or anything like it.  

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. ” 

These people did NOT like being oppressed, and this Constitution and the separation from Great Britain was in order to protest that and stop being Colonized and Used.  While this continued and continues (to this day) to groups and subgroups of people within the U.S. (and outside it, by the U.S., regrettably), THIS DOCUMENT TALKS ABOUT THOSE RIGHTS. . . . .  Not designer families, which are NOT its province!

(How can one consent to what one is not informed of?)

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

“. . . all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Am I talking about anything contrary to law, bill of rights or the U.S. Constitution?  NO.  I am talking about what sure evinces a design to reduce — women, in particularly mothers who have had to or chose to divorce or separate — under absolute Despotism, egged on by speeches like these here, and enacted into laws and then followed through by tax-supported grants to make sure no Dad — when there has been a risk in particular — is REALLY fully separated from his children.  The pattern of the family courts follows resolutions like this one and results, too often, in certifiably insane protection orders like the above one, resulting in:  2 deaths, 3 orphans, and distress all round.  

Because I now realize the status quo, I have had to let go (to date) of attempting to see my own daughters, laying low lest this person has himself a “bad hair day” or incites a friend/relative to, and my relatives HAVE been incited to participate, as have strangers, in several aggressively illegal actions. 

BACK TO 1999 and “recreating the United States in the image of a few fathers’ and other “prominent” (if not logical) thinkers.”  

(2) urges each father in the United States to accept his full share of responsibility for the lives of his children, to be actively involved in rearing his children, and to encourage the emotional, academic, moral, and spiritual development of his children;

The word “his” indicates ownership.  It takes two parents, currently, to produce one child.  

This presumes that a single mother is incompetent to encourage the emotional, academic, moral and spiritual development of her children, especially with a  little outside support.  Speaking authoritatively for ONLy myself, that’s hogwash, and insulting.

It also presumes that gender alone renders a father competent to have this to give, when sometimes significant mental illness — or seriously recalcitrant criminal behavior/attitudes — says they don’t, and won’t.  (SEE COMMENT from one of Candi’s friends, now on this post 08-08-09).   

This also TOTALLY ignores the fact that some mothers remarry good men, who can help them do this.  If i were one of those 2nd husband good men, such a statement above would be insulting to me. 

(3) urges the States to hold fathers who ignore their legal responsibilities accountable for their actions and to pursue more aggressive enforcement of child support obligations;

Please spend a few minutes on my blog and read about the “SAVP” grants administered THROUGH the “OCSE” to compromise legal process in family law in order to increase “noncustodial parent” time with the children through mediation.  Then go to Center for Policy Research in Denver, CO, and find out what Drs. Pearson and Theonnes and Venohr (I believe all have Ph.D.s) have been to since 1981.

Alternately, go to nafcj.net and read about this (although it was personally, on-line and in-depth checking out NAFCJ.net claims that brought me to my present acceptance of them; plus it was the only coherent explanation for why so many public officials seem to have lost all sense of propriety to their assigned legal responsibilities in re: child support, custody, etc.)

Or, show the sources of trusted insight into these matters, as we know that top leaders have staff to support their positions.  This should be transparent to the public.

STATES HAVE DROPPED THE BALL — THEIR HANDS ARE TOO BUSY ADMINISTERING FUNDS TO PUT DADS BACK IN HOMES THEY LEFT OR WERE THROWN OUT OF.  THIS INVOLVES SOME BRIBERY IN VENUE OF CHILD SUPPORT ADJUSTMENTS, AND ALL TOO OFTEN WITHIN THE COURT SYSTEM.  SUPPOSEDLY THIS IS FOR THE KIDS’ SAKE.

Douglas Ouellette returned. . . . . 

(MINNESOTA NEWS ARTICLE, CONT’D).

The Coalition’s Shellene Johnson said women are at greater danger to be killed by a partner when they attempt to leave or have just left the relationship. She said that often, protective orders alone don’t protect the woman.

“Our hope is the courts and mental health community will start recognizing that this is a significant red flag, and look into the context of what’s happening in those relationships,” she said.

MCBW’s HOPE.  Their HOPE, after 30 years of advocacy — I gather, 1979, 1989, 1999, and the latest 2009 murder/suicide — there is a HOPE that the mental health community will START recognizing that an attempted suicide is a red flag. . . .  THAT’s bright.  What’s the bill?

A relative of Doug Ouellette declined to comment. Calls to other relatives were not returned.

Abby Simons • 612-673-4921

More National Fatherhood Initiatives, this one in Kansas.

( it just keeps going, going, going as they keep killing, killing killing when she tries to separate):

LOOK:  Being informed on what’s being done with tax dollars in tough times is our responsibility as citizens, period.

I sought answers because I WANTED a coherent explanation for why so many different systems could fail a simple request to renew a restraining order and let me, and my daughters, get on with our lives.  Eliminating their Dad from their lives was never on my map — only his life-threatening and injury-causing violence, and the risk, that I might become a Candace Ouellette.

It is absolutely, absolutely clear to me that eliminating ME from my daughters’ lives was on his map, and on the maps of individuals in our particular case who opposed me, point by point by point, as I simply sought enforcement of existing court orders.

In the above Ouellette case I still find a disturbing missing piece of information — why did the searchers not intervene in time to prevent the Dad from hanging himself?  And HAD not that little 8 year old daughter called 911, might they, too, have been killed, along with their father’s belief system, apparently, that the mother did not deserve to separate from him?   Something doesn’t make sense, in that he so QUICKLY hung himself.  Any investigative reporters reading this are welcome to follow up, if possible before the next headline steals public attention.

It is time to wake up and smell the coffee — and find out who is paying which pipers to pay which tunes.

To understand why I posted this below, one needs to understand how LATE we are in this fatherhood vs. feminists game of name-calling and stereotyping.  I posted Senator Faust-Goudeau, about who I know little personally, because a colleague (see blogroll) of mine is in her state, and alerted us, and this grandiosely-worded proposed Act is apparently a current action being debated.

My response below was more a spontaneous, incredulous reaction that this talk, which appears to have been lifted nearly verbatim from a combination of documents I have read, and link to on this site (see “courts in the kitchen” blog), could be taken seriously.  Over time, I’ve tried to accommodate — lots — for understanding differences of perspective, that my thinking (between the trauma and the personal background — I’m definitely a voracious reader, mostly nonfiction, but my work life has not been based in theory, but in street-level, hands-on practice which exposes theories in different fields (particularly educational!!) for what water they do and don’t hold.

So, I didn’t go point for point and quote.  But, friends, it’s late in the game to be dismissing how powerfully entrenched and networked AND financed this “fatherhood” movement is, and its influence in the family law and many other arenas.

Here’s an Australian, male, Ph.D. talking about the Father’s Rights Movement, and 4 major points:

https://familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/fathers-rights-domestic-violence-manspeak/

Do you know what these are?

We women who ARE leaving batterers or whose children ARE being subjected to molestation (and I don’t speak for others) are getting it from the President on Down and the Courts on up, while family-oriented and patriarchal faith institutions won’t support our cause (although they may dole out some charity, if we sit under the teachings we disagree with, and which have endorsed-by-silence (from the PULPIT) wife-beating as part of husband-leadership) and feminist organizations are not entirely a clear fit for us either, as mothers, although I certainly will work alongside, if not within, any organization or person, which has its head screwed on straight as to legal rights and is not on the take from other groups which are not.

No one — at all — is funding me for any research I do.  My reporting lacks finesse, but I generally do my homework.

I expect any and all elected Congressional Senators or Representatives to either do theirs, or have staff that do, and I DO want an explanation for the origins of this type of initiative at this late in the game.  Perhaps we could talk, if it’s clear the talk is not about personalities, but about principles.  

People whose lives or children are not at immediate risk, or who have not lost decades, or livelihoods to this type of (propaganda — below, I call it “tripe”) may not understand the intensity of talk from those who have.  Many times, they also do not understand the shorter timeframes, windows of opportunity we are dealing with.  We are dealing with the short lives of children’s childhood, and sometimes juggling this with unknown times of our OWN safety in cases involving prior stalking, battery, threats and claims.

My current President, for whom I voted, and whose former home state, urban area, I have a significant work history (pre-marriage), was raised by a single Mom, as was at some point, my own father.  One thing I do NOT share with my current President is having been, or been related to anyone, who was just a few years  ago, one of the 10 richest United States Senators, period.  Nor have I used any single aspect of my profile, which does have significant diversity in it,  to speak for everyone who shares one or two aspects of the same profile, and try to demand that everyone accept the same platform and adjust their entire lifestyles to accommodate it.

This fatherhood movement, talk, initiatives, grants, and so forth is doing EXACTLY like that, even when it costs lives. One system it’s draining is for battered women’s shelters, and legal help for battered women snared in the family law system, a system which I now understand was designed to do exactly that.

        

Oletha Faust-Goudeau

Kansas Senate Democrat
District 29 (2004 District MapDistrict Demographics)
First Term: 2009

4158 Regents Lane
WICHITA 67208

Phone: 316-652-9067
Email: Oletha29th@aol.com

Business Information
Occupation: Community Act.
PO Box 20335
Wichita 67208

Below is the act.  PHONE or WRITE or EMAIL to protest (if still necessary) this act for several reasons:

1.  Similar policies are already encouraging already overentitled men to  kidnap and/or molest and/or kill youngsters, their mothers, and themselves, and sometimes bystanders, and sometimes responding police officers, in the process of getting even with their mothers.

2. Nearly every statement in this Act has already been stated in public, in the U.S. Congress, echoed by Presidents Bush, Clinton & Obama, as well as governors across the United States, and has also laws enacted to facilitate the further engagement of fathers in their families post-separation from those families (post-conception, post-divorce, post-restraining order, post-etc.) AND substantial federal grant monies to support this.

3.  Nationwide and in prominent positions, the “tripe” — and it IS tripe — that this is a recent phenomenon on which dialogue has not yet taken place, or to which the public has not paid attention — that there is a fatherhood crisis, and along with this, the absence of fathers has been in otherwise creditable institutions been EQUATED AS CAUSE for significant other social problems, which might as easily have been attributable to almost any other reasonable cause, such as illiteracy, racism in incarceration of fathers, and the premise having been that the household values are more pre-eminent than the school or other associations values in growing children.  This in effect is a misogynistic policy.

4.  The programs and grants to go along with them have undermined due process in the courts.  MOreover, the average woman is NOT told of these programs when engaging in the family court system, whereas ample documentation exists, both privately individual cases AND publically on nonprofit websites reporting on this — that noncustodial parents (mostly fathers), through programs that frequently have the word “father” or “fatherhood” in them, and often publically funded — ARE being recruited into programs offering them free legal help, mediation preparation coaching, reduced child support arrears in exchange for increased custodial time, even including fathers in prison, whereas mothers, who often then lose custodial access (sometimes COMPLETELY) to their own children through such programs, are unable to utilize these same programs or funding (including effective legal help) to children who were removed from their households.  

5.  ANYTHING which undermines due process in the courts is bad public policy and WILL be fought back against, draining significant time energy and money from the hands of the general public, and placing it into the hands of the professionals who profit from all this.  Again, ANYTHING which undermines due process in the courts – IN the courtroom —is bad public policy and subversion of our U.S. Constitution,and Bill of Rights  which exist to prevent exactly such behaviors.

The fatherhood movement PER SE seeks to make primary decisions and wield influence OUTSIDE the courtroom, and OUTSIDE open discussion and view of the bulk of the American public (i.e., “Behind closed doors” — just like abuse).  This can be seen from even, for example, the history pages of some of the major organizations (I guess I’ll have to blog that).

The family court reform movement which seeks to put this back IN the court room.  They are in DIRECT opposition to each other.  One wants prime influence to be through outside associations, alliances, conferences — and institutions.  The other wants this stopped, and wants our U.S. 14th Amendment rights to be observed.  I do not believe in compromise by “training” court-related professionals to “understand” domestic violence issues (I differ from some reform groups in this stance), because I don’t feel (see last post) that anyone of reasonably sound mind WITHOUT ulterior motives could fail to understand that a violent parent is not a good role model, no matter what gender.  OR, that the more dangerous of the genders when it comes to killing women and children, are male, not female.

IF the father’s rights groups want to continue to promote the fallacy that the violence is equal in quantity, lethality, and severity — thereby shutting off doors to escape and diffuse the situation from battered women, or mothers of molested/battered children — then they may very well get more and more of what they are saying now exists.  They MAY get more and more women fighting back, because we do have a right to defend our physical lives from hell on earth.

Moreover, in my state, at least, even a law gives a parent a right to flee from imminent harm to her children by someone convicted of domestic violence against her.  No problem — the way around that?  Law enforcement won’t enforce.

6.  Establishing “fatherhood” in this manner absolutely constitutes the establishment of a national religion, and as such is an outright and flagrant violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.  No matter how prevalent this is throughout our country presently, it’s still a violation of this Amendment and should as such urgently be reversed.  

I am very curious whether this Senator is a professing Christian, and if so, while obviously that shouldn’t rule any public office, how she does or does not reconcile, as a woman, this initiative here with the recorded (in the bible, I mean), life of the Lord Jesus Christ in the gospels.  It was notable in NOT being biased against women, from what I read.  Moreover, former President Jimmy Carter has himself publically separated from his Southern Baptist Convention roots over this same issue of equality towards women.  While I’m not “ga-gag” over his new affiliation, “elders.org,” at least it is a statement.

! ! ! !

SENATE BILL No. 128 

By Senator Faust-Goudeau 

1-27 


AN ACT creating and implementing the fatherhood initiative program; 

relating to the duties of the department of social and rehabilitation 

services. 

Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Kansas: 


Section 1.

(a) Subject to the provisions of appropriation acts, the sec- 

retary of social and rehabilitation services shall establish a fatherhood 

initiative program within the department of social and rehabilitation serv- 

ices.

The objectives of the initiative shall be to: 

(1) Promote public education concerning the financial and emotional responsibilities of fatherhood; 

MY pie chart of federal spending indicates that THE largest sector of public expense is HHS, and THE 2nd only is EDUCATION.  Therefore I recommend the latter be given a severe “time out” for having promoted and structurally modeled abusive and civil-rights-violating behaviors such that the former has bloated beyond the capacity of the general population to sustain.  Moreover, they also should either toss a coin, or duke it out (like the appointed champions of old) in a safe, enclosed place (and out of view of the public is OK, if taxes are suspended for the meantime — in fact, without their interferences, the rest of us, except the thousands in their employ, and the thousands more living off of their grants, and the professions that are enabled by the dysfunction of the educational one in particular, might be a little better off as a whole) — and come out when one has been vanquished.  

In particular, they need to decide between them — again, a coin toss would do, because promoting either one I feel is really wrong — that the U.S. Populace AND all its institutions MUST be LBGT friendly (or be accused of hate crimes), OR be misogynistic (or be accused of male-bashing, or scapegoated for any and all social ills) for railing to be father-friendly enough.  After all, how are children who live in a home with two Mommies going to bring sperm donor or surrogate father home?  

Moreover, how are adopted children to bring their fathers home.

Moreover, how are orphaned children to feel when the world assigns a general hoopla to father’s day, and far less to mothers’?

Moreover, why should a President part of whose platform was indeed that he had been raised by a single mother, be unable to put the word ‘Mother” on the family issues page of the White House?



(2) assist men in preparation for the legal, financial and emotional responsibilities of fatherhood; 

(3) promote the establishment of paternity at childbirth; 

(4) encourage fathers, regardless of marital status, to foster their emotional connection to and financial support of their children; 


(5) establish support mechanisms for fathers in their relationship with their children, regardless of their marital and financial status; 

HOW is this compatible with programs emanating out of the same dept (for which such support mechanisms ALREADY are thriving, and funded) to correlate with the “marriage promotion” funding, CFDA Code 93.086?  Let alone Abstinence Education?


(6) integrate state and local services available for families;

and 


(7) promote, foster, encourage and otherwise support programs de- signed to educate and train young men who are both current and future 

fathers as to effective parenting skills, behaviors and attitudes. 

I.e., every male past puberty who has not had a vasectomy or been injured in his private parts to the extent of being unable to father children (or voluntarily entered the Catholic priesthood) up til what age?  Define young?  Good grief   Get a grip on yourself, Ma’am!!

Citizens and those on temporary visa a like?  Suppose such values are in direct contradiction to their cultures and nations of origin?

HOW does this initiative expect to reel in atheistic young men presently in private schools, military academies, and/or not in trouble with the law?


(b) The secretary, on or before the first day of the regular legislative session, shall report annually to the legislature: 


(1) The number of fathers and children participating in the program; 


(2) an overview of any moneys spent on the program; and 


(3) the cost-savings analysis of implementing the program by having 

children build and retain a relationship with their father

How dare any act so sweeping be presented without FIRST demonstrating that costs (to whom??) (what kind of cost?) (WHat’s the WORTH of a soul, anyhow?) would actually be saved, and have been by similar programs already saved in these matters.


And who the hell says that costs mean more than lives in these matters?  Because this national promotion of fatherhood is ALREADY getting people killed (see my blog:  “Can we call it a day?”).  What IS this, population control?

WILL THIS ANALSYSIS INCLUDE the LONGER-TERM SOCIAL Cost OF INCIDENTS when fathers, enabled by this philosophy, go kill MOm & themselves in order to re-engage with their children or otherwise proteset separation from their families? 

ANALYSIS (3) is incoherent with “overview” (2), as it implies more precise conclusions substantiated by relevant data.  And (1) (like the rest of this initiative) sounds like it is lifted STRAIGHT ouf of the access/visitation grant descriptions with a spice of the national fatherhood initiative phrasing (See http://www.hhs.fatherhood.gov or elsewhere on HHS site), which attributes “success” in such programs with how many people went through them, which overview the GAO has already showed lacks accuracy.


(c) The secretary may adopt any rules and regulations necessary to 

implement the provisions of this section. 

Sec. 2. This act shall take effect and be in force from and after its publication in the statute book.

Actually, that’s in theory only.  In theory, there’s already a Violence Against Women Act, but violence against women is still thriving.  


This interspersing of fatherhood promotion with domestic violence headlines may not seem related, but it is.  The one has weakened the other, and compromised the court’s willingness to let a woman completely separate when such activities are involved.  It appears (anecdotally) that they WILL permit total separation more likely in situations when there has NOT been significant abuse or violence reported.

A person who has researched these issues somewhat (either through my site, or others linked to on this blog), will understand clearly how the above resolution basically parrots the premises (the main ones) of this movement.  I provided the link (again) above to the 1999 statements by various congresspeople to the president on this issue.

As such, I think a short Act might be sponsored, paraphrased thus:

Anyone who talks like this, expecting to be taken seriously,  is either already owned by certain political forces, or is simply not informed enough to hold public office, OR is informed, but is pretending not to be, or otherwise should give a coherent explanation of why we should, August 2009, believe this analysis just rose up from the grassroots in its present form.  Good grief!

Sound leadership requires sound analysis by SOMEONE.  Initiatives redirecting public policy, institutions, or funds, should show better logic, originality, and in-depth thinking beyond sound-bytes or assertions of this sort.


 A woman from this state (Kansas) has already filed an international appeal for help in the matter of losing custody of her young daughter to a batterer:

(2007)

On May 11,2007,  just before Mother’s Day weekend, ten mothers, one victimized child, now an adult,  leading national and state organizations filed a complaint against the United States with the Inter American Commission on Human Rights. Their petition claims that U.S. courts, by frequently awarding child custody to abusers and child molesters, has failed to protect the life, liberties, security and other human rights of abused mothers and their children.  

. . . 

For more than 30 years U.S. judges have given custody or unsupervised visitation of children to abusers and molesters putting the children directly at risk,” says Dianne Post, an international attorney who authored the petition.  “These horrendous human rights violations have been brought to the attention of family court systems, and state and federal governments, to no avail. We turn now to international courts to protect the rights and safety of US children.”

The complaint details several cases with documented medical evidence of child sexual abuse, yet in each instance the father who was accused of abuse was given full custody of the children.  Several of the mothers were jailed by the courts because of their persistent efforts to protect their children from abuse, several were ordered not to speak of the abuse and not to report abuse to authorities.  Every mother was denied contact with her child for some period of time though none was ever proven to have harmed them.

“My life was completely shattered apart on that day and my childhood was destroyed,” said Jeff Hoverson, the adult child petitioner, about the day a family court judge ordered sheriff deputies to deliver him into the custody of his abuser. “It was as if I was just kidnapped. I was torn from everything I knew….I was made into a possession rather than a child.”  Hoverson endured years of trauma and fear living in his father’s home before escaping and returning to his mother at age 17.  He is haunted by years of feeling helpless to prevent his father’s night-time visits to his sisters’ bedrooms.

Studies of gender bias in the courts, conducted in the 1980’s and 90’s, found disturbing trends of courts minimizing or excusing men’s violence against women, and favoring the abusers.  In 1990 the United States Congress passed a resolution recommending the prohibition of giving joint or sole custody to abusers.  Seventeen years later, the practice continues unabated.  Ten years ago today (2007), leading national organizations were joined by  members of Congress in a protest in Washington D.C. to again raise awareness about the problems in family courts.  Today, petitioners say, the problem is systemic and widespread in family law courts across the nation.

. . .

The petition seeks a finding from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights that the U.S. has violated the Declaration of the Rights and Responsibilities of Man and the Charter of the Organization of American States and a statement of the steps that the U.S. must take to comply with its human rights obligations in regards to battered women and children in child custody cases.

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights was created in 1959 and is expressly authorized to examine allegations of human rights violations by members of the Organization of American States, which include the United States. . .

In addition to The Leadership Council on Child Abuse and Interpersonal Violence, other national organizations supporting the international lawsuit include:

  • National Organization for Women and the NOW Foundation,
  • National Coalition Against Domestic Violence,
  • Justice For Children,
  • National Family Court Watch Project,
  • Legal Momentum,
  • Family Violence Prevention Fund,
  • National Alliance to End Sexual Violence,
  • Domestic Violence Report,
  • Sidran Traumatic Stress Institute, and
  • the National Center on Sexual and Domestic Violence.

The petition is supported by many state organizations as well.

In December 2005, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a petition against the United States with the Inter American Commission on Human Rights for their failure to protect Jessica Gonzales’ three children from their abusive father, who murdered them.  Their petition, the first of its kind, asserted that domestic violence victims have the right to be protected by the state from the violent acts of their abuser.

{Note, as with Gonzales, THE QUESTION OF ENFORCEMENT COMES UP. . . .. }

or additional information contact:

Irene Weiser
Stop Family Violence
actnow ^t stopfamilyviolence.org
607-539-6856

View the petition at http://www.StopFamilyViolence.org/468 

SUMMARY (today’s post):  The court order preceding the Ouellete suicide/murder was indeed certifiably insane.  

There are coherent reasons both those individuals died and both those little girls witnessed their mother’s murder by their father.  Some of these are policy, and as to response time, as to their individual families, I cannot answer.  I had, as I’ve said before, a similar order with even less restriction and even weaker justification for such.  This was hashed together quickly, overeen by a family court mediator, and in the aftermath of the restraining order becoming permanent.  NO ONE coached me on visitation order, although I was (wrongly) coached into offering joint legal custody when I didn’t have to, which later became a downfall and cost me my profession and those children.  I am among those mothers, not that is on the suit, but among those mothers that lost my children to a man who battered me during marriage, over many years (along with many forms of abuse).  

I then went through more years of legal abuse, which further turned upon failure to pay child support on his part, a similar tactic to what was used while we were together, to keep me from becomign too independent.  The child-stealing as well as the bounce into fmaily law venue, in my case, BOTH were at times when this household was set to prosper, and I had given NO indication of intent to separate him from the children, or from contact with the children (contrary to court claims), but had repeatedly sent a clear message, in multiple venues, that I WAS changing the dynamics of our relationship.  I refused to take orders, for the most part, that were not in writing from the court, and was fought tooth and nail — at police stations, and every where other possible point of contact, including several he created that trespassed my intentionally set boundaries.  

  What I HAD separated from in my move was taking direct orders, in particular from a man that refused to obey them himself and has (to this date) continued in contempt of all the court orders ever in our long, long, family law case.

This is long-term trauma and punishment for speaking up and out about criminal behavior by Dad (and some of his associates) towards the children, and me.  This type of behavior has marked ALL of my acquaintance with him, practically since the day we married (but not before), and to this date the standard has been set, I am not informed about the general whereabouts of my own daughters, unless I happen to get lucky, get through, or hear incidentally.  I have been eradicated from their lives lest they learn the same values I hold dear — that a woman does not sit on this earth to be a man’s slave in any form, and that she is of EQUAL LEGAL STATUS to him, and should be in marriage as well as after it.

It is my understanding that MOST of the blogs (with graphic buttons) on my post are of similar experience regarding their children and the courts, it is how we know each other.  This is a FAR more widespread social crisis than “fatherlessness” which has existed since wars began.  

What I would like to see addressed, and would like ALL of the above organizations to address (some of whom I know a bit more about than others), is not THAT the courts are doing this, but WHY they are doing this and WHO is allowing them to. It is assuredly not new.

Sorry to entwine (and what’s worse, quote and comment on!) a

  • 2009 Minnesota News headline news account, plus related MN battered women’s coalition information, with a
  • 1999 Washington D.C. address to Congress about the father crisis, compared to the
  • 1776 U.S. Constitution and Declaration of Independence with a related
  • 2009 Kansas, surprise, “new” proposal to enact a “Fatherhood Initiative” Bill, and from there to a
  • 2007 appeal to the Inter American Council on Human Rights (IACHR) because of a known Kansas battered Mom was on it, as reported by Stop Family Violence (2nd graphic button on my website, only unfortunately not their real logo), and the uncomfortable reminders that:

INFORMATION ABOUT SITUATIONS IS STILL NOT INFORMING POLICY.

AND WHERE WE SHOULD MOVE IS FROM REPORTING THE SITUATIONS TO STUDYING WHAT HAPPENED, THAT WOMEN STILL CAN’T, ONCE MARRIED OR IN “AN INTIMATE PARTNERSHIP”  AND A NEED FOR SEPARATION DUE TO SAFETY ARISES, GET IT!!

That is, however, how I often think.  Probably relates to the prior life as a musician, balancing different resonances from different singers, etc.  It feels more balanced to weave the threads, even though a single topic would pack a greater emotional punch.

Sorry for that analogy…




Demonstrating Healthy Marriages – Think Big, Invest Much, Expect a Lot, Require –???

leave a comment »

 

U.S. Health and Human Services — Administration of Children and Families

Office of Family Assistance

Healthy Marriage Demonstration Grants

 

Last post, after I got over the sticker shock of how much California Healthy Marriages took (as I perceived it) starting in 2006 from funds that otherwise might have met desperate need, unmet to date, for enforcement of existing court orders granting me ACCESS and VISITATION to my to stolen on an overnight visitation daughters, just as I’d found despite searching — HARD — no such help before then to get help <>prevent this event, <>enforce existing child support or collect any of the mounting arrears, or <>consistently enforce even the weak, poorly-written visitation court orders, <>obtain an extension or renewal of the original restraining order so I could work in peace and a degree of safety in supporting my household WITHOUT consistent child support, or <>stopping the subsequent (once RO was off) stalking, etc.  

Another year, including a flurry of arrangements and orders, none of them adhered to, yet when i pressed for this, certain things were done OUTSIDE the courtroom to warn me not to disrupt the status by taking my court-ordered rights (or his responsibilities to them) at face value.  Eventually I again saw (a few rounds in family law system will probably make this clear) that the court itself wasn’t taking them seriously either, and I was evidently some rabble rouser for doing so myself.  Concern for their intents with our daughters continued to rise.  During this time, of course there was no child support either.

 

In subsequent months, after the dust had settled into the dreary zero contact, I worked instead on seeking help merely to maintain a cell phone so as to replace the work lost in all this process, not to mention unemployment.  The bottom, marginalized line of society were told to get in line (and I did), and that a phone was simply not a necessity for life.  At least life on welfare, which I am beginning to realize was possibly in the original plan.  It’s hard to control people who are in a satisfied manner working and living out their life’s purpose, particularly when there’s a match between that and livelihood.  They are less likely to have the financial difficulties.  

Phone help — and unemployment — was, however, promised from certain agenices, as if a person going through the family law system needed another layer of bureaucracy to decipher.  

So, after THAT, I sort of figured out a way to maintain things, and tried to keep my chin up.  

All this time, really prior to that child-stealing event had worked its way through family law and child support court to the point of, basically ZERO (contact, or enforcement of arrears), I had had existing work, pending work, and referrals, plus sources of them.  It was increasingly frustrating to have no single obstacle to acting on this other than the toxic relationship of having dared to leave a divorce, and then after that dared to say “No” to invasive orders-giving about how to rebuild a life and livelihood.  And to have attempted to set clear and reasonable boundaries — and mean it.  To continue to be dealing on a personal level with this level of hostility and/or dysfunctional thinking, the same kind that endorses wife-assault if she’s uppity, or he doens’t want to answer that last question. Or just because . . . . I’m talking about dealing with family who refused to acknowledge existing court orders, and systematically placed themselves in my life and above the law against my will, and brought destruction with it.  I call that a criminal mind set.

Most of my life work had been spent in voluntary situations/organizations (nonprofits often) where people came there because they wanted to, or wanted their kids to, which made for a much better climate (and better pay, too).

Now that my schedule had so cleared, and significant time to study WHY this happened, the answers are not that complicated to understand — just hard to accept.  What it’s hard to accept for our society is that some women — and sometimes for VERY valid reasons — “just want to be alone” when it comes to live-in sexual partners, or live-out ones either.  In addition to this, the fact of not having a live-in sexual partner (married or unmarried) would not be AS hazardous to adults’ or children’s health if society would simply just “deal with it,” rather than attempt to wholesale “eradicate” it.  The word “CHOICE” is the relevant word here.  

I DID learn a valuable lesson, to bastardize a quote from an assassinated U.S. President, “Ask NOT what your country can do for you — even when it has proclaimed it will ….”

 

I had been naively looking in the wrong Department of the U.S. Government.  Naively, I thought the key to why justice wasn’t happening lay in the justice department, and its workings.  I looked at law, rules of court, mediation (as to domestic violence issues), I consulted databases (and emailed staff at) national judicial databases, or the respected National Council of Juvenile & Family Court Judges (“NCJFCJ” if I have the word order correct), I read, researched, networked, talked, called, and wrote, gaining information, seeking to see the WHY . . . . . 

 

Now, here I see these movements and this particular California Coaliation:

This coalition, as of 2006 (the year of this loss) had received over $2 Million — per year — for 5 years — in my state to help marriages that WEREN’T on the rocks, or split up, or broke already due to domestic violence, and related extended-family-wide safety issues.  So, I think I could be forgiven for a strong, public exclamation at this indignation.  For one, ACF, the same OPDIV umbrella under which HHS’s hated and feared OCSE had granted this CHMC, Inc. group $2.4mil/year on the basis of its HOPING and EXPECTING that this demonstration grant would demonstrate some serious results and accomplish many lofty goals, such as reducing crime, poverty, domestic violence, and of course the social plague of “fatherlessness” which is now responsible for those first 3 social plagues.

For the unwary:

 (Administration of Children and Families) 

(Operating Division)

(Health and Human Services)

(Office of Child Support Enforcement)

(California Healthy Marriages Coalition, Inc.)

 

I realized that this coalition’s “Target Population” was, basically the entire state (married or unmarried, rich or poor, and any cultural or racial background too) that had successfully survived life to the age of 15, which I suppose represents fertility, or something similar.  They are thinking BIG — and as such deserve big bucks.

These funds are not just dollars, they practically have a life of their own:  

They are going to:

  • BIRTH

  • NURTURE, and 

  • SUPPORT the development of a . . . 

. . . . well, you can read below. . . .  

 

Name of Grantee: California Healthy Marriages Coalition
Federal Project Officer: Michelle Clune (202) 401-5467
Target Population: Married and Unmarried persons in California, ages 15 and
older, of all racial, cultural and economic backgrounds
Federal Award Amount: $2,342,080/year
Program Name: California Healthy Marriages Coalition
Project Period: 9/30/2006 – 9/29/2011
Priority Area: 1 (five or more allowable activities)

Allowable Activities: Public advertising campaign (#1); Education in high schools on the value of marriage (#2); Marriage education, marriage skills and relationship skills programs for non-married pregnant women and non-married expectant fathers (#3); Pre-marital education and marriage skills training for engaged couples and for couples interested in marriage (#4); marriage enhancement and marriage skills training programs for married couples (#5); divorce reduction programs that teach relationship skills (#6); and marriage mentoring programs which use married couples as role models and mentors in at-risk communities (#7).

Organization Description: California Healthy Marriages Coalition (CHMC) is a non-profit organization whose purpose is to saturate the entire state of California with marriage education. CHMC will pioneer a “coalition of coalitions” model across the state.

Use(s) of ACF Program Grant Funds: The program grant funds will be used to birth, nurture, and support the development of a statewide interlinking network of community healthy marriage coalitions. The grantee will use the following curricula:

— Youth: “Connections” and “Love U2”
— Non-married pregnant women and expectant fathers: “Love’s Cradle” and “Bringing Baby Home”
— Pre-marital education: “FOCCUS,” “PREPARE/ENRICH,” and “The RE Marriage Prep Program,” and “How to Avoid Marrying a Jerk.”
— Marriage enrichment: “Relationship Enhancement (RE),” “Mastering the Magic of Love,” “PAIRS,” “10 Great Dates,” “Active Relationships,” and “World Class Marriage.”
— Divorce reduction programs: “Retrouvaille,” and “The Third Option”

 

>>>>>>>

See, I thought FAR too small.  I did birth, nurture and support only as many as I spent 9 months apiece on.  MY vision was to separate them from domestic violence, give them the best possible education, and set an example that it’s OK to leave dangerous situations — that women are not to be assaulted  by their spouses, and don’t have to stick around for more of that.  This has to do with things like self-respect, exercising legal rights and other such folderol.  

I would like to, pretty soon, take a closer look at the marriage education being offered.  I think a BETTER way to preserve marriages in California, especially existing ones, would be to SATURATE the faith communities with copies of:

  • Mandated reporting laws on domestic violence and child abuse, and a stern statement to rabbis, pastors, imams,  priests etc., AND any teachers or child care workers involved (etc.) that “THIS MEANS YOU”
  • Copies of the state’s laws against these behaviors for distribution and posting.
  • Statements against joint counseling of couples once violence has entered (which could be dangerous); retaliation might well happen after the one-hour or half-hour “performance” has ended, and without witnesses.
  • Warnings to have a little humility when a situation exceeds their expertise…call in an expert  (I have literally seen thumbnail-sized (tiny) booklets that appear to suggest someone reading the few pages is qualified to counsel such situations.  We’ve seen SWAT teams that couldn’t save the situations, let alone a casual reader).
  • A reminder that women got the vote in 1920, and that POSSIBLY, some of the institutions might wish to allow them to speak up not only in their public places, but also possibly have a voice in their marriages also.
  • 800#s resources in case the messages don’t get through
  • (A frank reminder to the WOMAN to avoid the family law system at all costs, if possible, should this crop up)
  • “You Breed ’em You Feed’em” business cards, pre-marriage.
  • Occasional messages from the pulpit that no one was created to be a scapegoat or target in life, male or female.
  • Prominent postings of the Bill of Rights
  • A realistic statement on how they expect to reconcile their activities with contrary activities within the public school system, for example some dismantling of the “abstinence education” stuff.
  • Financial education, as this is a primary area of struggle within marriages.  
  • Suggestion that, for real, the couple look at the family history, education and work history, too.
  • Got milk?  Got any more ideas?

Among, of course, other things, such as the wisdom of having both partners retain access to finances, transportation, and be informed of the state of their own economic affairs, and other things such as might be a deterrent to different forms of abuse common in these places.

I think SATURATING California with such things might save some marriages (or prevent some unwise ones).  

It might have mine… The joint counseling thing almost made a statistic out of our nuclear unit.

 

Moreover, saturation or non-saturation, there ARE people who just shouldn’t get married, no matter how much they like to have sex.  I’d like to see (since it’s taxpayer funds) how California Healthy Marriages plans to handle this, and has to date.

I would like to see that NONE of the materials are saturated with the misogynistic, near-vigilante, woman-blaming, feminist-hating talk.  For example, when people are killed by an irate ex (last time this happened — well, I know there was a hostage/femicide-suicide combo this past week, in San Jose.  They WERE happily married, but the husband was not the little girls’ father, who didn’t take kindly to losing custody.  Now she’s an orphan.  Both biological parents are gone.  Tragedies are tragedies.  However, at times, as with any movement, it attracts all sorts.  We had (see blogroll to right) one commenter blaming a domestic violence homicide on the woman, for fililng a protective order.  It was awful; a little background search (Google) revealed that the person had done jail time previously, related to some skinhead type affiliations (and weapons accumulations).  

This coalition needs to be sensitive to the fact that such hate-talk exists, and not take advantage of a tragedy to promote a policy, or that it will produce MORE overentitled males and transformational cell groups whose real agenda is not publically stated.  These indeed do exist, and some may be viewed, apparently (fairly new site to me) at http://www.rickross.com.

I owe my readers a short post.  This is one. . . . 

 

Here’s the link to review the stringent requirements and “detailed” descriptions of  other “Priority Area Demonstration Grants for Healthy Marriages.”  I look forward to a radical shift in the headlines — fewer family wipeouts, and less government intrusion in our lives through child support enforcement, or lack thereof.

 

I’m also still searching (among these) for a description in any abstract of what constitutes a Healthy Marriage.  I mean, among these grant recipients, is it sufficient (for now — this IS California after all, and the challenge isn’t going away) that a man and a woman be involved?  Does there need to be some parity in contributions, rights, or discussions of long-term plans?  Do they have to have the same religion?  Do they have to decide whether childre are to be involved, or what to do if this is a second marriage for one partner?  (In that case, read more on my blog and the blogroll to the right, FAST!).  Does healthy involve “mild” or any forms of domestic violence, and if so, is this going to be “explicated” by a differently funded HHS grant from, say, Office of Violence Against Women?  

Can a healthy marriage happen where the woman earns more or is more highly educated?

What about age differences (I am simply noticing that many — not all — of the incidents with fatalities involve a middle-aged male with a far younger woman, which makes me wonder whether he married for the babies or not.  Or vice versa.).  

In fact, now that I think of it, how in the world could a coalition define what is really a relationship?  I mean, who’s to say what they do in the bedroom or with their finances?  And if it’s a religious group behind this, WHO is going to advocate for the poor girl to keep her credit and bank accounts open, if they exist, and NOT put a house in only one person’s name?

Is it going to say:  Boys and Girls belong together to procreate.  If you’re going to procreate you should marry and stay married.

Is it going to address the high incarceration rate in the U.S. and say, “when Dad gets out, we want you two kids {meaning the parents of a child or children) back together, now, OK?  MARRIAGE is HEALTHY, and FATHERLESSNESS is a social scourge, after all.

(FYI, this is already what the US is doing….).

HAPPY BROWSING:

HERE is the link to the descriptions of the use of these funds.  As you can see, some have smaller target populations, although one with the word “Dibble” does say “throughout United States.”  Another one I looked at yesterday (and need to view a bit more) made news article for having been taken over for certain bookkeeping inconsistencies by the Dept. of Education.  I’m puzzled why the funds are still going through.  We are, after all, in tough economic times (and I’m still owed money, also).

 

We appear to be carved up into REGIONS (not states).  

Regions 1- 9 (except “6,” which appears to be “MIA”

Hover for a summary (titles and target populations), or Click to Look.

Many of these are 5-year obligations of around $500,000/year.

 

Apart from the CHMC  above — I hope there’s a no-competition clause in there somewhere, because it’s not the only one in California — my other favorite for scope of vision (if not clarity) is:

 

Office of Family Assistance
Healthy Marriage Demonstration Grant

 

Name of Grantee: The Dibble Fund for Marriage Education        

Federal Project Officer:        

Heather Sonabend (202) 260-0873 Target Population: High school teens across America Federal Award Amount: $549,999/year Program Name: Healthy Marriage Discretionary Grants Project Period: 09/30/2006 – 9/29/2011 Priority Area: 8 (one or two allowable activities)

 

Allowable Activities: Public advertising campaigns on the value of marriage and the skills needed to increase marital stability and health (#1) and education in high schools on the value of marriage, relationship skills and budgeting (#2).

Organization Description: The Dibble Fund for Marriage Education was founded in 1996 with a mission to focus on helping teens learn the skills needed for current healthy relationships and future strong and sustainable marriages.

WOW — that was shortly AFTER the National Fatherhood Initiative (1994) and shortly BEFORE the U.S. Congress voted in both houses that we have a plague of fatherlessness (1998/1999, see prior posts and I think I have blogrolls on this).  I hope they will be nice to Mothers too…

Use(s) of ACF Program Grant Funds: The Dibble Fund plans to create a public advertising campaign on the value of marriage and the skills needed to increase marital stability and health, and to provide education in high schools on the value of marriage, relationship skills, and budgeting. They will train 500 Family and Consumer Sciences high school teachers each year to implement peer education projects to reach 113,500 students with over 1.66 million hours of instruction over 5 years. They will increase the number of high school age youth that have access to “best practices” healthy relationship and marriage programs (including **Love U2, Connections, and The Art of Loving Well curriculums{{Curricula??}}) through schools, youth agencies, faith communities, and peer-to-peer education efforts in states with limited Healthy Marriage Initiative (HMI) teen programming. They will influence the knowledge and attitudes of teens about healthy relationships, the “success sequence,” and marriage through an innovative media campaign that reaches teens “where they are,” by leveraging the power and reach of the entertainment media (TV shows and magazines that teens already flock to), the internet, and other new media (mobile phones, i-pods, and other new technology that delivers content in non-traditional ways).

 

You have to admire the chutzpah, though — “teens across America” and in states deprived by “limited Healthy Marriage Initiative” teen programming.  That’s ALMOST higher than the U.S. Dept. of Education goal that No Child Be Left Behind — ALL be able to read, write, and count (at a minimum) before they turn 18

BERKELEY, CA must be Healthy-Marriage Initiatve deprived (too many same-sex marriage advocates?) because they got a grant, I saw in yesterday’s chart.  

But then again, the HHS budget is far larger than the Education budget, so they can aim higher.

 

**Some curricula designers are going to be profiting from this 4SURE, too.

REGION 8 — apparently Colorado, Colorado, and Colorado** plus Utah and Wyoming.

 

**See my link on “Policy-Studies.com” and if it’s still there, “Center for Policy Research” with Jessica Pearson et al.  The 1983-2005 picture of a tree showing its growth is worth the wait time if your PC/Mac takes as long to load as mine does.

Under Wyoming, I note a group that’s new on the scene (in getting gov’t grants to promote marriage….) as of 2002 — AND targeting 2nd marriages and stepparents.  Good for them.  They will also be aided (where one partner is the man) in the generous Access Visitation Grants in getting his child support reduced by gaining custody of the children, if they aren’t already in the home:

Organization Description: The High Country Consulting, LLC dba Faith Initiatives of Wyoming (FIWY) is a statewide intermediary organization for faith and community-based (F/CB) organizations founded in 2002. It currently serves more than 2400 F/CB organizations through training and technical assistance, fund development, identification of best practices and advancement and use of technology, all aimed at building service capacity at the local level. FIWY also assists with direct management services, data handling, event planning and coordination of partnership activities for F/CB projects.

It WILL, of course, be cautious not to maintain a balance between the religious viewpoints with those of atheists, or non-adherents. I’m curious of those 2400 F/CB organizations span a variety of faiths…


Use(s) of ACF Program Grant Funds: High Country Consulting will implement and evaluate a marriage enrichment program that will target stepfamilies and couples in second marriages. They will provide marriage preparation, enrichment and divorce reduction services through both community-based and faith-based organizations, using a pilot program as a cultural model to reach out to over 1,250 participants…

 

REGION 1 – (Simply substitute the number in the “URL” to switch regions) — one grant only, 

 

Character Counts In Maine
 Organization Description: Founded in 2002, Character Counts In Maine (CCM), doing business as Heritage of Maine, has delivered abstinence education that includes marriage preparation skill building for adolescents in communities across Maine over the past two years. Their Heritage Keepers abstinence until marriage curriculum teaches relationship skills which lead to the formation of safe and stable marriages. CCM has formed a coalition of civic and faith-based organizations, high schools, youth groups, churches and marriage education organizations known as the Main Community Partnership to bring healthy relationship education to high school adolescents.  
Target Population:    

 

Adolescents/Teens in High School; Educators in High Schools (to deliver services to adolescents); High School Principals (quarterly newsletter)

 

 

REGION 2 — 3 grants, slightly  more interesting:


 In the Bronx

Organization Description: University Behavioral Associates was founded in 1995 by the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Montefiore Medical Center and is the main provider of behavioral health care in Bronx, New York. Additionally, the organization has long-standing relationships with local welfare-to-work programs and has the capability to manage information for hundreds of married couples.

SO — we have the religious approach, and the Behavioral Modification approach.  So long as teens and adults from one set of marriage programs don’t marry teens and adults from the other side.  Well, this is targeted at already married people..   

Organization Description: The Research Foundation of SUNY, Stony Brook University is a non-profit organization located within the Stony Brook University campus. They proposed to use a highly innovative, empirically-supported, empowering program for income, unwed parents soon after the birth of a child.

 

Region 3

 

Organization Description: Family Guidance, Inc. will be the lead agency for a coalition of regional non-profit agencies, calling itself “TWOgether Pittsburgh,” to strengthen marriages. Coalition members include: The Center for Urban Biblical Ministry, The National Fatherhood Initiative, evaluator Dr. Stanley Denton, The Women’s Center and Shelter of Pittsburgh, and Smith Brothers Advertising.

High school students, married and unmarried couples and individuals who are residents of Pittsburgh, PA and the surrounding 5 counties.

 

 

Region 4 – one of the larger (or more active regions — SE United States (Georgia, FL, Alabama, N. Carolina, etc.)

 

This one particularly bears some looking at, and I hope to.  Several universities make the list, a “Trinity Church” and a good deal of abstinence-based education, which is being fought elsewhere in government circles, at least within the school systems.  I also note a certain curriculum popping up a lot, and am curious as to how many of the institutes receiving grants (judging by originating date) may be offshoots of the Fatherhood movement which — it should be clearly noted here — is a reaction to the feminist movement which, at least according to itself, is a response to simply oppression on the basis of gender, and things such as — you got it — violence within the home, or an attempt to deprive a person of some basic civil rights.  Feminism is not the antithesis to patriotism (nor is patriotism as promoted by some of these groups synonymous for respect for the Constitution and the laws of the land).  

 

I became a feminist precisely because of my trip through marriage and afterwards, the family law system.  Til then, I took too much for granted.  I am a mother, and I retain my faith — just practice it in safer places.  We find help and strength where it is found.  The hardest thing in my life to date was not having children, raising them with a violent, narcissistic, father (and working and struggling economically also), nor was it afterwards supporting them.  That was a piece of cake, until the advisors began flocking into my life on the basis that I didn’t have a man in there (long before I was ready for such a relationship, after all this).  On the basis of my profile, not the actual behavior, facts, results, or character.  In fact, the experience of being “advised” after marriage when I wasn’t seeking or needing it, of being forced to do things I personally knew (and announced) were destructive to both work, relationships, and daughters’ educational options — was very much like living with abuse, only with more participants and less actual physical attack.  Psychological escalated, along with the lies (once audiences were found).  

The hardest thing I have ever done in my life, that I can recall, is surviving the total removal of my children from my household, and all significant contact with them at THE very point where our household was poised to succeed dramatically, in several categories (work, housing, schooling, neighobrhood, and surroundings).  It was about AS healthy a (single-parent) family (with contact with the other parent available in the circumstances.

THAT, friends, was the problem to an abuser — success and independence HAS to be stopped.  This doesn’t happen by telling the truth and complying with commonsense laws:  Don’t steal, don’t perjure onesself in court, don’t suborn perjury, don’t kidnap, don’t harass, don’t stalk, and don’t refuse to work in order to punish the other parent — adn the kids alongside.  Put your need to dominate SECOND for once in your middle-aged, male life.   Develop work, not just alliances in the slander, and take-down campaign in order to somehow justify that NO single mother can handle life alone.

 

Well, not with this kind of attitude running the environment.

 

There are many uncomfortable similarities with the personal history here (which parallels many I’ve heard of) to the overall scope of this movement.  HEY, I’m in favor of marriage, too obviously — I married, right?

 

I’m just not in favor of a national religion, at others’ expense and my own.  I am pretty sure, by now, that the difficulties these children went through, and others still are (and mine are), and their confusion (or unified, but unjustified, belief of lies about their mothers, which is undermining to a healthy values system for growing adolescents) — are in good part traceable to some of the grants and initiatives I have been detailing on this blog.  They are contributors to the social problems, while purporting to solve them.

 

Until this connection is made by enough people, the burden will just get larger and larger, while the public proclamation would be, funds are shrinking and shrinking.  WShen the proclamations are coming from THE largest arm of the Exec Dept (and elsewhere), at some point in time, we have to say, WHAT are you doing with that MONEY?  At an individual level (like I am starting to) and then call your Congressperson in charge whatever grant affects your area.  

The catch:  Mostly the people who can do this are on the outskirts

 

In essence, it’s socialism.  There have to be safe options for not marrying, and these are to be as valid as the others.  When it comes to my case, it was only being forced to live a serious “half-life” half-in and half-out (or, 95% in)multiple GOVERNMENT_RUN- institutions — that economically and artificially suppressed prosperity for us.  I was forced to fight, instead of work, after having done my best to reconcile the irreconciliable differences with an abuser.  This has done nothing but escalate, since I met the guy, basically — with only a few brief pauses.

I talk with a LOT of people on a daily basis, and it’s rarely a day I don’t hear of another similar situation.

 

Preaching marriage around the place doesn’t help matters, as far as I am concerned — the entitlement in such cases is through the roof.  I did practically everything I am reading about in these abstracts — didn’t have children out of wedlock, stayed committed, worked alongside, supported, you name it.  Hung in there as long as possible.  My commitment to this ideal of marriage, for one, didn’t match the father of my children’s.  He was committed to its privileges, but not its emotional sacrifices in that, he was to engage with a separate human being AS a separate human being, not a household (or biological) function.

ABOUT MARRIAGE

When it works well, it works well.  When it doesn’t, then I wish that the national atmosphere (federally-pronounced) would cool it on the propaganda — the air is highly charged around here, and domestic violence ignites quickly when marriage (or other fatherhood, proprietary success-mandated) entitlements become the national ideal.

 

I dare anyone to get up there and OPENLY substitute one skin color, one ethnic group for the word “father” and another for the word “mother” in the same languages, and then got about to make this happen.

 

Or, religion.  

 

it would be seen for what it truly is — ridiculous, and bigoted.  Somehow, and for somereason, the concept of “fatherhood” unites a LOT wider spectrum of people, more closely, and incites more trouble.  For example, I’d say a good proportion of the domestic violence I lived through and my kids witnessed, traumatizing and sometimes terrorizing all of us, and then engendering response compensatory behaviors (including super-performance mentality in the girls, when small), plus it wreaks havoc on the biochemistry (I came out obese, which was handled, but remains a struggle when dealing closely with the situation long-term).  The obesity was a clear self-defense measure, and has been studied nationally (www.acestudy.org).  When I lost weight, significantly, and felt TERRIFIC (post-marriage) we were still seeing each other regularly (on exchange of the children for visitation) and somehow this brought out more aggression, stalking, and competitive behaviors from a person who’d already filed for divorce!  I was sitting at my work, and considering not only my own safety, but that of a person apparently perceived (not even real) “rival.”  

I’ve had to struggle morally with whether it was FAIR for me to enter into relationships — almost any kind — with the knowledge of how volatile the situation is.  

Put that together with work, and figure it out.

 

These groups are talking about the high cost of “fatherlessness” to a growing society.  I’m not sure this equates with motherlessness.  But here’s a question you don’t hear too often — what about Rachel lamenting her children (that’s a Bible reference).  

 

What about the effect on society of taking competent, mature, sometimes skilled and dedicated FEMALE workers and contributors to society — and keeping them traumatized a decade at a time, and in use of multiple social services they wouldn’t otherwise need.  What about their risk of old age poverty and homelessness from simply a few decades out of the work force, in order to handle:

1.  Abuse, first, (including verty often as part of the control system, economic abuse), then.

2.  Recovery, brief respite indeed — AFTER which, a long drawn-out custody trial for all too many, resulting in MORE lost work and opportunities.

 

What does THAT do for society?  First, stealing from its contributions, and then, burdening the safety net.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it 

 

HANDLE the domestic violence issues, and you will handle a multitude of other issues.  STOP forcing women who left abuse through classes (I wasn’t, but I know it’s a cash stream in the family law) when they weren’t violent.  STOP trying to put back together what already broke up unless you are willing to sign up front:  I take PERSONAL responsibility, up to and including incarceration along with those classes, if those attending my class addressing battering behavior  go out and kill their ex, or anyone else, afterwards.  

 

WELL, if taking the class allows a slick performer to pass with flying colors, and fly out the door, get sentence, or get OUT, and then go get EVEN, it’s setting the climate for homicide.  And I’m not the first person to point this out, either.

I bet there’d be fewer takers on these grants, and a slightly different economy.

The government is not a good teacher, it’s an abusive rulers, and it would do better to follow the examples of good teachers that are already OUT there, find out what principles they use, and follow them.

This is of course practically impossible with such a federally huge educational system — which is one reason many people, who can, opt out of it.   Now the government wants another crack at educating people who didn’t make the grade the first time through.  

No, I do not have a firm technical business plan answer.  But I know one that’s NOT it when I see it, and “healthy marriage education” falls under that category.  Either we have a national religion or we don’t.  The country needs to make up its mind.  The educational system claims that we don’t (I’m not sure I agree), HHS department is demonstrating we do, structurally speaking.

In my life, and as a fully-functioning intelligent working adult, I have experienced the worst of both worlds when it comes to treatment of females — blind to abuse, and upset at personal (peaceful) choice.  From atheists “educated” and from religious “undereducated” both. 

This post was drafted a few days ago, I have more research coming.  The BOLD LINKS above give more detailed descriptions.

The Golden State’s Gold Rush, 1998-2009, Healing Families, Promoting Responsible Fatherhood

with one comment

FYI:  In re budget crisis……

For your viewing pleasure and information.

http://www.taggs.hhs.gov/AdvancedSearchResults.cfm

 

This unbelievably patronizing budget, focused on healthy marriages, head starts, responsible fatherhood, parenting classes, and forcing adults who separated — often for the woman’s, or the man’s own safety and sanity —  to stay joined at the hip (through “access/visitation grants — more on this below), and thereafter trying to manage “high-conflict relationships” — through the court system – is (collectively) the truly most IRresponsible father(land) I have yet met.  

Most irresponsible fathers will affect a family line, and those individuals who come into contact with members of that family line, through work or otherwise.  This, however, respresents an unbelievably presumptuous and dishonest treatment of the portion of the American public that, by maintaining taxpaying employement or employEES, including many who populate and staff its institutions, pays its bills.

At some point it is simply responsible to admit that a relationship has failed, and separate.  ESPECIALLY in cases involving battering, domestic violence, or other forms of abuse.  Or  even, say, ongoing promiscuity  — or refusal to participate in supporting the household — on the part of one or both partners.  Generally speaking it’s one more than another.  One person has been “used.”  This is a horrible example for any children involved, and a real drain on the community, which often has to make up the gap.  But the principle of cutting one’s losses can come to the rescue, and stop the process before another family is dead, or homeless, or traumatized out of social functionality.

When it comes to hazardous JOBS, if there is an alternative, a person is allowed to of his or her own free will, QUIT.

I admit that some people take relationships casually, and perhaps when these people are identified, their LOCAL communities should address the issue.  But good grief — to try to force this on an entire NATION, and bill the entire nation (those who pay taxes) to fund the concept that there should be a chicken in every pot (yet we have vegetarians), and  a biologically related FATHER in every child’s life, no matter whether this is good for the kid, or the mother or not — that’s budget suicide, and sometimes suicide for him, and death for the Moms too, or children.  This is the story the headlines are telling us.  Some people don’t handle stress and relationships well, and are better off kept away from the person they hate to the point of having committed crimes against their partner.  Rather than face their personal demons, they externalize, blame (“demonize”) someone else, and then attack and attempt to destroy them, and people associated with them.

I am sorry to say this, but this at times includes the children.  When a situation has become dangerous to a parent, then to suddenly proclaim “Kids need their Dads no matter what!” is social insanity.  And, presently, policy.  

Why not when it comes to hazardous marriages?  WHY??  oh WHY??? is the Federal Government encouraging the States encouraging the Courts (with help from “faith-based” organizations and “Community Action Organizations” and other nonprofits of dubious parentage) to rake divorcing families over the coals in order to recreate a United States in which EVERY child has a Dad in his or her life, and EVERY mother has either a MAN in her life (if he’s alive), OR the Government telling her how to raise her children and educate her children (and by virtue of this, her lifestyle?   To be permanently punished for a poor choice of spouse or partner, when one has otherwise behaved in an upright and responsible citizenhood fashion, is abusive, and a sign Federal Government In Loco Parentis having totally forgotten its own origins:  “of, by for the people” and “consent of the governed.”   It has lost its mind — or, has NOT lost its mind, and is of a mind to leech a living off its own people by creating a constant source of conflict, between the courts, promoting this “fatherhood” thing (alongside most fundamentalist religions) and the nationwide school curriculum saying “It’s Elementary” (etc.) that some families have two parents of the same sex, and anyone who disagrees is committing a hate crime.   

It seems to me that in both institutions – courts, and schools — a habitual undermining of basic civil rights, as well as promotion of a certain “religion” (in one place, the nuclear family, in the other, the dismantling of the traditional nuclear family [if indeed this ever existed], both practically and as to teaching), and at the other end — as people come of age to procreate, which appears to be a more engaging activity than the studies in many public schools — as if an afterthought, now that some of these parents are on welfare, this same government then wants to now teach them how to be parents, especially Dads.  Moms are taught by default how to make babies for government studies and programs; the fodder for Ph.D. “Child Development Scholars” and other therapists.

OK, now that that’s out of my system, how this relates to

the “Gold Rush” in the “Golden State,”. . . .

 

I’ve posted below, for only ONE state, and only TWO “Categories of Federal Domestic Assistance” (“CFDA”), and from only ONE major U.S. Exeuctive Branch Department, “Health and Human Services.” These are (some of) the many types of grants given for  redesigning the U.S. family.  Apparently the also significant U.S. Dept. of Education didn’t do a good enough job the first time through (either that, or it’s them “foreigners” (meaning, any group whose feet hit these shores en masse after your particular ethnic group did, except Native Americans…).  We need to constantly make and remake the family til we get it right one of these days.

Again, this is only SOME of where your funding for the local public schools, homeless assistance, or law enforcement, or other social services went.  It went in large part into social engineering programs.

OH, by the way, these programs are also compromising due process in the courts ~~even in the family courts which exist primarily to compromise evidence for conciliation to start with!~~ so they are affecting civil and legal rights under the U.S. Constitution.  That we let this happen is probably a factor of the educational system (and NOT accidental over the decades….), which teaches us neither, really, how government NOR the economy actually operate.  Nor is it real good at uncensored history, especially the history of its own self (dating to a little while after the Civil War, and before women got the vote).

So, this time, I searched:

  • CFDA #s: 93086 (healthy marriage), 93597 (Access Visitation Grants to states)
  • California Only (California has largest court system)
  • All Years, All Recipients, All etc..

I usually cannot get the chart to confine itself to the margins of this post — it goes off into the “blogroll” area and becomes unreadable.

It’s better to view the original site; to this end, welcome to a research tool.  Don’t you want to know WHY some fathers are committing homicide/suicide in desparation over the economy, or (overentitled?) outrage at being ousted, or because they have been publically humiliated in some fashion their psyches could not or would not handle.  Why a decade after this started, can’t we keep up with the family fatalities before the next generation of irresponsible (because, and ONLY because, according to this viewpoint, they were) fatherless Dads is born? 

(Present CEO of the nation that styles itself as leader of the ostensibly Free World excepted).

NOTE:  Mothers are used to being put down, humiliated, forced to beg, and treated like second class citizens for so long, we are not typically going off the deep end over loss of social status by murdering our kids, our spouses, or if they’re not available, someone else associated with them will do.  Women as a whole or men as a whole are not culprits.  We come in different colors, income levels, temperaments, and psyches.  ON THE OTHER HAND, given this, a governmental attempt to define us, our relationships, and our children, is going to be resisted.  It’s a recipe for ongoing conflict, and economic drain.  I suggest ALL U.S. Citizens take a serious look at this.  Here’s ONE underestimated tool.  

In almost seven years in the system, I didn’t find ONE entity apart from this site, point me to this federal department.  One humble but FULL website did.   http://www.nafcj.net.  The site didn’t get my attention (no gov’t grants helped its design, or press), but what it said did.

MOST organizations that say “prevention of violence” in them or “stop abuse” or “battered women” or even “family court reform” or something similar, don’t even mention this TAGGS site or point us to investigate its activities.  Father’s groups naturally wouldn’t, or they could no longer claim that concerns about certain social epidemics just “emerged.”  They did nothing of the sort — they were urged, publicized, promoted, and proclaimed, from Top Down, in typical government style.  I have now gotten to the point of finding out UP FRONT before I deal with any nonprofit or “let us help you” group, who is funding them.  You should too.  Ignorance ain’t bliss.  And it’s got to be a sin (faith-community or no faith-community) to fail to inform women in trauma filing protective orders about all the cooks in the kitchen.

SO . . . .. 

ARE YOU A U.S. CITIZEN OR RESIDENT?  THEN

THIS PAGE IS YOUR FRIEND — PLEASE GET ACQUAINTED

 IT IS A RHETORIC RADAR.  IT IS A DOGMA DETECTOR.  

IT IS A GULLIBILITY REDUCER**

EDUCATE THYSELF!

http://taggs.hhs.gov

**

For example, when Glenn Sacks, Jeffrey Leving, Esq.   Sen. Evan Bayh, or President Obama — or any noble-sounding nonprofit (or government agency) such as American Coalition for Fathers and Children  [Doesn’t THAT sound worthy, and united and concerned about, well, FAMILIES??] — writes, blogs, or receives high-profile press coverage stating that we need MORE money to stop the woefully underfunded fatherhood movement (as if this was a new crisis the U.S. (i.e., taxes) hadn’t already poured millions into, without addressing, for example, how the US being the world’s largest jailer MIGHT relate to why SOME kids are fatherless) you will realize when they are simply lying.  

Or, whether they are actually quoting each other and playing Good Cop, Bad Cop {{pretending to fight with each other and be more separate in intent than they actually are}} to confuse the viewers (see ACFC link above).  Broad allegations and statements are made without links or cites, such as this, (date, 2007):

AUTHORS:  Glenn Sacks, Mike McCormick:

The biggest problem with the Responsible Fatherhood Act, however, is that it reflects its authors’ misunderstanding of fatherlessness. Obama says he seeks to “make it easier” for men who choose to be responsible fathers, but his bill ignores the biggest roadblock fathers face—CLAIM: a family law system which does little to protect the loving bonds these dads share with their children.

FACT:  The duty of any COURT system [[HINT:  JUDICIAL branch, not LEGISLATIVE — remember this??]] is to protect the existing laws, not re-write them.  To determine and allocate consequences for people who violate laws, especially intentionally and repeatedly.  

To make sure that due process happens and evidence is considered as to whether the EXISTING laws have been (a) observed or (b) violated.  There are also RULES for many courts, to aid in the process.

FACT:  The primary characteristic of the “family law SYSTEM” is the prominent use of outside the courtroom decision making.  Even the Acronym of this organization “ACFC” is modeled after another organization “AFCC” which title means “Association of Family and Conciliation Courts,” an international organization of dubious tax-compliance history until someone caught them operating out of the Los Angeles County Courthouse without a separate EIN (IRS Tax) # — i.e., until they got caught in an audit — and drenched with psychologists, mediators, & custody evaluators holding international!! conferences, with judges and attorneys (conflict of interest there, anyone?) publishing, promoting, and proclaiming all kinds of theories (and making alliances) that the average low-income litigant is naively unaware of, not invited to, and not encouraged to know about.   All of this is patronizingly, ostensibly, for the greater good, or the country, the families, and I suppose apple pie, too.  As such, these experts don’t trouble to tell ignorant litigants about their alliances, or how much profit is made from the conferences, books, trainings, and publications. 

IRONICALLY, IN 1992, per this source, the courts are drenched with:

2.Due Process Violations 

a. Lack of procedural and evidentiary due process,since the Family Code was 

separated from the Code of Civil Procedure and the Evidence Code in 

1994. 

b. Attorneys quit prematurely in violation of procedural and ethical laws. 

c. Orders issued after ex parte hearings an/or in chambers meetings or upon 

the judge’s discretion without proper notice and evidentiary hearing. 

d. Removal of testimony from the court (where it should be) under the guise 

of mediation and evaluation.There is no control over the mediation and 

evaluation processes, no public debate of the issues, and no record of evi- 

dence. Once an evaluation report is issued, the court makes few discre- 

tionary decisions and rubber stamps the report. 

e. Presumption that the parents are “equal” upon dissolution in spite of evi- 

dence to the contrary

 

Or, whether (possibly) having used one of themselves for a specific purpose, they then turn and backstab the same person.  Kind of like a high-conflict, divorcing bitter spouse might.

Now you, too (I ALREADY DID), can have a catharsis (SHOCK) of understanding of WHY there is “Disorder in the Courts” and certain systems appear broken, when they aren’t really.  They are doing exactly what they were designed to do — create a cash flow and ongoing transfer of wealth from the taxpaying public into the hands of the “experts” and away from two working parents (whether cohabiting, married, or not) to children, their offspring.

 

Here’s the “TAGGS”  site.

Tracking Accountability in Government Grants System

(You didn’t expect to pass Big Brother 101 without learning a few acronyms, did you?)

Welcome!

The Tracking Accountability in Government Grants System (TAGGS) is an extensive tool developed by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Grants. The TAGGS database is a central repository for grants awarded by the twelve {{12, count’em, 12}} HHS Operating Divisions (OPDIVs). TAGGS tracks obligated grant funds at the transaction level.

NOTE:  To actually find out what those transactions were used for will take a little more legwork, locally.

 

What’s New

Several new search pages have been added and grouped under the new Search menu.

 

  • TAGGS FY 2008 Annual Report – The TAGGS FY 2008 Annual Report is now available on the Annual Reports Page. The annual report contains summary information about the HHS Grants Programs tracked by TAGGS. The annual report is available in Microsoft Word format.
  • TAGGS Advanced Search – The new TAGGS Advanced Search enables a very refined search through more than 500,000 grant awards. Criteria include keyword, award title, recipient name, agency, type, title, recipient name, and many other selections in a variety of combinations. Search results can be output and downloaded in Microsoft Excel format.
  • Abstracts Search by Keyword and Advanced Search – The two new Award Abstract Searches provide a search through more than 85,000 Grant Award Abstracts by keyword or by using the Advanced Search. The TAGGS Abstracts Search by Keyword search performs a full-text search of each available abstract based on the entered keywork. The TAGGS Abstracts Advanced Search enables search criteria such as keyword, agency, type, year, and state to be used in many combinations.
  •  

     

    A search of all states resulted in nearly 1,500 results, which I doubt wordpress could handle the pageload.

     

    I find the pattern below (try this link for a better view — OR, select the CFDA #s 93597 & 93086 ONLY, for California, and with the column titles you see below (scroll to bottom of the Advanced Search page to select) and it should come out the same).

    Before you actually LOOK at this, consider yet another Fatherhood “whine,” dating to (originally) 06/30/2007 — after Father’s Day THAT year…):

    Yet most child custody arrangements provide fathers only a few days a month to spend with their children, and fighting for shared parenting is expensive and difficult. Custodial mothers frequently fail to honor visitation orders, and while the United States spends nearly $5 billion a year enforcing child support, there is no system in place to help enforce visitation orders. {{False}} In such cases, fathers must scrape together money for an attorney so they can go to court , and even then courts enforce visitation orders indifferently.

    According to the Children’s Rights Council, a Washington, DC-based advocacy group, more than five million American children each year have their access to their noncustodial parents {{male, or female?}} interfered with or blocked by custodial parents.”

    WHERE ARE THE LINKS TO THOSE ALLEGATIONS?

    This is from:

    Mike McCormick is the Executive Director of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children

    Glenn Sacks’ columns on men’s and fathers’ issues have appeared in dozens of America’s largest newspapers. Glenn can be reached via his website or via email at Glenn@GlennSacks.com.

     

    ACFC Washington Office 1718 M St. NW. #187 Washington, DC 20036 
    Telephone: 800-978-3237

    @@@

    Results 1 to 81 of 81 matches.

    @@@

     

    Fiscal Year Program Office Grantee Name City County Award Number Award Title CFDA Program Name Award Activity Type Award Action Type Principal Investigator Sum of Actions
    2009  OCSE  CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL  SAN FRANCISCO  SAN FRANCISCO  0910CASAVP  FY 2009 STATE ACCESS & VISITATION  Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs  SOCIAL SERVICES  NEW    $ 942,497 
    2009  OFA  Council of Orange County Society of St. Vincent De Paul  ORANGE  ORANGE  90FR0003  THE ST. VINCENT DE PAUL ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM IS A RESPONBLE FATHERHOOD PROGRAM PROMOTING HEALTHLY, MARRIAGE, PARENTING AN  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  OTHER REVISION  EDWARD C HARTMANN  $- 148,172 
    2008  ACF  BILL WILSON CENTER  SANTA CLARA  SANTA CLARA  90FR0096  RESPONSIBLE FATHERWOOD WORKS- PRIORITY AREA 3  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  SPARKY HARLAN  $ 243,469 
    2008  ACF  Brighter Beginnings  OAKLAND  ALAMEDA  90FR0099  PROMOTING ADVANCES IN PATERNAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND SUCCESS (PAPAS) PROGRAM  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  BARBARA BUNN  $ 250,000 
    2008  ACF  CAMBODIAN ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC  LONG BEACH  LOS ANGELES  90FE0065  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  KIMTHAI R KUOCH  $ 450,000 
    2008  ACF  CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF ORANGE COUNTY, INC  SANTA ANA  ORANGE  90FE0080  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  REGINA LINDNER  $ 550,000 
    2008  ACF  CENTERFORCE  SAN RAFAEL  MARIN  90FR0004  HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECT  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  CHARLES GREENE  $ 481,554 
    2008  ACF  CHILDREN`S INSTITUTE , INC  LOS ANGELES  LOS ANGELES  90FR0076  PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  HERSHEL K SWINGER  $ 500,000 
    2008  ACF  CHILDREN`S INSTITUTE , INC  LOS ANGELES  LOS ANGELES  90FR0088  PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD, COMMUNITY ACCESS PROGRAM  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  HERSHEL SWINGER  $ 1,000,000 
    2008  ACF  CHW DBA CALIFORNIA HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER  LOS ANGELES  SHASTA  90FR0071  PROMOTING REOPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  VICKIE KROPENSKE  $ 250,000 
    2008  ACF  California Healthy Marriages Coalition  LEUCADIA  SAN DIEGO  90FE0104  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 1  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  DENNIS J STOICA  $ 2,400,000 
    2008  ACF  Comprehensive Youth Services of Fresno, Inc.  FRESNO  FRESNO  90FR0053  POMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  LISA M BROTT  $ 250,000 
    2008  ACF  EAST LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY UNION  LOS ANGELES  LOS ANGELES  90FE0056  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION GRANT PRIORITY AREA 2  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  JOSE VILLALOBOS  $ 1,100,000 
    2008  ACF  HOOPA VALLEY BUSINESS COUNCIL, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT  HOOPA  HUMBOLDT  90FN0001  INSTITUTE WRAP-AROUND SOC WITH INTERAGENCY COLLABORATION TO DEVELOP STRATEGIC PLANS, EARLY INTERVENTION, PRESERVATION EM  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  LESLIE M COLEGROVE  $ 146,750 
    2008  ACF  Imperial Valley Regional Occupational Program  EL CENTRO  IMPERIAL  90FE0075  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  MARY CAMACHO  $ 515,615 
    2008  ACF  Metro United Methodist Urban Ministry  SAN DIEGO  SAN DIEGO  90FR0016  SAN DIEGO’S RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  JOHN R HUGHES  $ 268,349 
    2008  ACF  PERSONAL INVOLVEMENT CENTER  LOS ANGELES  LOS ANGELES  90FE0092  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 3  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  TANYA MCDONALD  $ 550,000 
    2008  ACF  PITTSBURG PRESCHOOL COORDINATION COUNCIL, INC.  PITTSBURG  CONTRA COSTA  90FE0012  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  FRANCES GREENE  $ 550,000 
    2008  ACF  Relationship Research Foundation, Inc.  IRVINE  ORANGE  90FR0058  PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  M.P. P WYLIE  $ 250,000 
    2008  ACF  Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project  SACRAMENTO  SACRAMENTO  90FE0015  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  CAROLYN R CURTIS  $ 549,256 
    2008  ACF  THE DIBBLE FUND FOR MARRIAGE EDUCATION  Berkeley    90FE0024  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  CATHERINE M REED  $ 550,000 
    2008  ACF  VISTA COMMUNITY CLINIC  VISTA  SAN DIEGO  90FR0024  VCC CLUB DE PADRES  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  BARBARA MANNINO  $ 250,000 
    2008  OCSE  CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL  SAN FRANCISCO  SAN FRANCISCO  0810CASAVP  2008 SAVP  Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs  SOCIAL SERVICES  NEW    $ 957,600 
    2007  ACF  BILL WILSON CENTER  SANTA CLARA  SANTA CLARA  90FR0096  RESPONSIBLE FATHERWOOD WORKS- PRIORITY AREA 3  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  SPARKY HARLAN  $ 243,469 
    2007  ACF  Brighter Beginnings  OAKLAND  ALAMEDA  90FR0099  PROMOTING ADVANCES IN PATERNAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND SUCCESS (PAPAS) PROGRAM  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  BARBARA BUNN  $ 250,000 
    2007  ACF  CAMBODIAN ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC  LONG BEACH  LOS ANGELES  90FE0065  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  KIMTHAI R KUOCH  $ 450,000 
    2007  ACF  CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF ORANGE COUNTY, INC  SANTA ANA  ORANGE  90FE0080  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  REGINA LINDNER  $ 378,020 
    2007  ACF  CENTERFORCE  SAN RAFAEL  MARIN  90FR0004  HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECT  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  BARRY ZACK  $ 474,555 
    2007  ACF  CHILDREN`S INSTITUTE , INC  LOS ANGELES  LOS ANGELES  90FR0076  PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  HERSHEL K SWINGER  $ 500,000 
    2007  ACF  CHILDREN`S INSTITUTE , INC  LOS ANGELES  LOS ANGELES  90FR0088  PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD, COMMUNITY ACCESS PROGRAM  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  HERSHEL SWINGER  $ 1,000,000 
    2007  ACF  CHW DBA CALIFORNIA HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER  LOS ANGELES  SHASTA  90FR0071  PROMOTING REOPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  RICHARD N HUME  $ 174,034 
    2007  ACF  California Healthy Marriages Coalition  LEUCADIA  SAN DIEGO  90FE0104  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 1  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  DENNIS J STOICA  $ 2,400,000 
    2007  ACF  Center for Children of Incarcerated Parents  EAGLE ROCK  LOS ANGELES  90FE0085  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  DR DENISE JOHNSTON  $ 384,951 
    2007  ACF  Comprehensive Youth Services of Fresno, Inc.  FRESNO  FRESNO  90FR0053  POMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  LISA M BROTT  $ 250,000 
    2007  ACF  EAST LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY UNION  LOS ANGELES  LOS ANGELES  90FE0056  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION GRANT PRIORITY AREA 2  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  JOSE VILLALOBOS  $ 1,100,000 
    2007  ACF  HOOPA VALLEY BUSINESS COUNCIL, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT  HOOPA  HUMBOLDT  90FN0001  INSTITUTE WRAP-AROUND SOC WITH INTERAGENCY COLLABORATION TO DEVELOP STRATEGIC PLANS, EARLY INTERVENTION, PRESERVATION EM  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  LESLIE M COLEGROVE  $ 146,750 
    2007  ACF  Imperial Valley Regional Occupational Program  EL CENTRO  IMPERIAL  90FE0075  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  MARY CAMACHO  $ 399,253 
    2007  ACF  Metro United Methodist Urban Ministry  SAN DIEGO  SAN DIEGO  90FR0016  SAN DIEGO’S RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  JOHN R HUGHES  $ 268,349 
    2007  ACF  PERSONAL INVOLVEMENT CENTER  LOS ANGELES  LOS ANGELES  90FE0092  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 3  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  TANYA MCDONALD  $ 550,000 
    2007  ACF  PITTSBURG PRESCHOOL COORDINATION COUNCIL, INC.  PITTSBURG  CONTRA COSTA  90FE0012  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  FRANCES GREENE  $ 550,000 
    2007  ACF  Relationship Research Foundation, Inc.  IRVINE  ORANGE  90FR0058  PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  M.P. P WYLIE  $ 250,000 
    2007  ACF  Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project  SACRAMENTO  SACRAMENTO  90FE0015  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  CAROLYN R CURTIS  $ 549,256 
    2007  ACF  THE DIBBLE FUND FOR MARRIAGE EDUCATION  Berkeley    90FE0024  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  CATHERINE M REED  $ 550,000 
    2007  ACF  VISTA COMMUNITY CLINIC  VISTA  SAN DIEGO  90FR0024  VCC CLUB DE PADRES  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  BARBARA MANNINO  $ 250,000 
    2007  OCSE  CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL  SAN FRANCISCO  SAN FRANCISCO  0710CASAVP  2007 SAVP  Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs  SOCIAL SERVICES  NEW    $ 950,190 
    2006  OCSE  CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL  SAN FRANCISCO  SAN FRANCISCO  0610CASAVP  2006 SAVP  Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs  SOCIAL SERVICES  NEW    $ 987,973 
    2006  OFA  BILL WILSON CENTER  SANTA CLARA  SANTA CLARA  90FR0096  RESPONSIBLE FATHERWOOD WORKS- PRIORITY AREA 3  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  SPARKY HARLAN  $ 207,469 
    2006  OFA  Brighter Beginnings  OAKLAND  ALAMEDA  90FR0099  PROMOTING ADVANCES IN PATERNAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND SUCCESS (PAPAS) PROGRAM  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  BARBARA BUNN  $ 250,000 
    2006  OFA  CAMBODIAN ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC  LONG BEACH  LOS ANGELES  90FE0065  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  KIMTHAI R KUOCH  $ 450,000 
    2006  OFA  CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF ORANGE COUNTY, INC  SANTA ANA  ORANGE  90FE0080  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  REGINA LINDNER  $ 550,000 
    2006  OFA  CENTERFORCE  SAN RAFAEL  MARIN  90FR0004  HEALTHY MARRIAGE AND RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD PROJECT  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  BARRY ZACK  $ 481,555 
    2006  OFA  CHILDREN`S INSTITUTE , INC  LOS ANGELES  LOS ANGELES  90FR0076  PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  HERSHEL K SWINGER  $ 500,000 
    2006  OFA  CHILDREN`S INSTITUTE , INC  LOS ANGELES  LOS ANGELES  90FR0088  PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD, COMMUNITY ACCESS PROGRAM  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  HERSHEL SWINGER  $ 1,000,000 
    2006  OFA  CHW DBA CALIFORNIA HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER  LOS ANGELES  SHASTA  90FR0071  PROMOTING REOPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  RICHARD N HUME  $ 249,034 
    2006  OFA  California Healthy Marriages Coalition  LEUCADIA  SAN DIEGO  90FE0104  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 1  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  DENNIS J STOICA  $ 2,342,080 
    2006  OFA  Center for Children of Incarcerated Parents  EAGLE ROCK  LOS ANGELES  90FE0085  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  DR DENISE JOHNSTON  $ 461,186 
    2006  OFA  Comprehensive Youth Services of Fresno, Inc.  FRESNO  FRESNO  90FR0053  POMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  LISA M BROTT  $ 250,000 
    2006  OFA  Council of Orange County Society of St. Vincent De Paul  ORANGE  ORANGE  90FR0003  THE ST. VINCENT DE PAUL ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM IS A RESPONBLE FATHERHOOD PROGRAM PROMOTING HEALTHLY, MARRIAGE, PARENTING AN  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  EDWARD C HARTMANN  $ 388,193 
    2006  OFA  EAST LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY UNION  LOS ANGELES  LOS ANGELES  90FE0056  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION GRANT PRIORITY AREA 2  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  JOSE VILLALOBOS  $ 1,100,000 
    2006  OFA  HOOPA VALLEY BUSINESS COUNCIL, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT  HOOPA  HUMBOLDT  90FN0001  INSTITUTE WRAP-AROUND SOC WITH INTERAGENCY COLLABORATION TO DEVELOP STRATEGIC PL  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  NORMA MCADAMS  $ 146,750 
    2006  OFA  Imperial Valley Regional Occupational Program  EL CENTRO  IMPERIAL  90FE0075  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  MARY CAMACHO  $ 479,031 
    2006  OFA  Metro United Methodist Urban Ministry  SAN DIEGO  SAN DIEGO  90FR0016  SAN DIEGO’S RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  JOHN R HUGHES  $ 268,449 
    2006  OFA  PERSONAL INVOLVEMENT CENTER  LOS ANGELES  LOS ANGELES  90FE0092  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 3  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  BENJAMIN HARDWICK  $ 550,000 
    2006  OFA  PITTSBURG PRESCHOOL COORDINATION COUNCIL, INC.  PITTSBURG  CONTRA COSTA  90FE0012  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  FRANCES GREENE  $ 527,664 
    2006  OFA  Relationship Research Foundation, Inc.  IRVINE  ORANGE  90FR0058  PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  M>P> WYLIE  $ 250,000 
    2006  OFA  Sacramento Healthy Marriage Project  SACRAMENTO  SACRAMENTO  90FE0015  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 7  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  CAROLYN R CURTIS  $ 549,256 
    2006  OFA  THE DIBBLE FUND FOR MARRIAGE EDUCATION  Berkeley    90FE0024  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 8  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  CATHERINE M REED  $ 549,999 
    2006  OFA  VISTA COMMUNITY CLINIC  VISTA  SAN DIEGO  90FR0024  VCC CLUB DE PADRES  Healthy marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants  DEMONSTRATION  NEW  BARBARA MANNINO  $ 250,000 
    2005  OCSE  CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL  SAN FRANCISCO  SAN FRANCISCO  0510CASAVP  2005 SAVP  Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs  SOCIAL SERVICES  NEW    $ 988,710 
    2004  OCSE  CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL  SAN FRANCISCO  SAN FRANCISCO  0410CASAVP  2004 SAVP  Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs  SOCIAL SERVICES  NEW    $ 988,710 
    2003  OCSE  CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES  SACRAMENTO  SACRAMENTO  9801CASAVP    Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs  SOCIAL SERVICES  UNKNOWN    $- 250,805 
    2003  OCSE  CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES  SACRAMENTO  SACRAMENTO  9901CASAVP    Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs  SOCIAL SERVICES  UNKNOWN    $- 139,812 
    2003  OCSE  CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL  SAN FRANCISCO  SAN FRANCISCO  0310CASAVP    Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs  SOCIAL SERVICES  UNKNOWN    $ 970,431 
    2002  OCSE  CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL  SAN FRANCISCO  SAN FRANCISCO  0210CASAVP    Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs  SOCIAL SERVICES  UNKNOWN    $ 970,431 
    2001  OCSE  CA ST DEPT OF CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES  RANCHO CORDOVA  SACRAMENTO  0001CASAVP  SAVP 2000  Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs  SOCIAL SERVICES  UNKNOWN    $- 987,501 
    2001  OCSE  CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL  SAN FRANCISCO  SAN FRANCISCO  0010CASAVP  SAVP 2000  Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs  SOCIAL SERVICES  UNKNOWN    $ 987,501 
    2001  OCSE  CA ST JUDICIAL COUNCIL  SAN FRANCISCO  SAN FRANCISCO  0110CASAVP  SAVP 2001  Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs  SOCIAL SERVICES  UNKNOWN    $ 987,501 
    2000  OCSE  CA ST DEPT OF CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES  RANCHO CORDOVA  SACRAMENTO  0001CASAVP  SAVP 2000  Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs  SOCIAL SERVICES  UNKNOWN    $ 987,501 
    1999  OCSE  CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES  SACRAMENTO  SACRAMENTO  9901CASAVP    Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs  SOCIAL SERVICES  UNKNOWN    $ 987,501 
    1998  OCSE  CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES  SACRAMENTO  SACRAMENTO  9701CASAVP  SAVP 1997  Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs  SOCIAL SERVICES  UNKNOWN    $ 1,113,750 
    1998  OCSE  CA ST DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES  SACRAMENTO  SACRAMENTO  9801CASAVP    Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs  SOCIAL SERVICES  UNKNOWN    $ 1,113,750 

     

     

    Does the word “Demonstration” raise an eyebrow for you?  Are you curious what a “Demonstration Priority Area” is, and whether your residing (if so) in one either aided or compromised due process in your particular family law case (if such be), or exercise of your civic duty of fatherhood (if such be).  

    I wonder why a subset (Program Office OCSE) of a subset (OPDIV “ACF” — and ALL of these grants were ACF grants) of a subset (HHS) of the Executive Branch of the United States Government (Legislative, Executive, Judicial)– which the “OCSE” (Office of Child Support Enforcement) indeed IS — it IS in the Executive Branch of the US Government — is doing distributin cl

     

    I wonder whether this information is posted at courthouses, or child support offices, like an “under Construction” would be at other sites?   I didn’t realize til, well, recently, that the last X years I spent in the family law system were part of someone else’s Demonstration Grant.  This is what we get for minding our own business, and failing to secure enough excess time in our daily schedules to ALSO mind the business of our elected representative governments, both Federal and State.  

    We farmed out government to the government have ended up (our children, basically, and incomes) becoming someone else’s family farm.

    Suggestion:

    If fewer categories (column titles) are chosen, a search will produce interactive recipient names, or grant #s, and this will tell more about

    the individual activities.  And gets pretty interesting . . . . . 

    . . .  Dang it, I just slipped into bureaucratic passive and Impassive; the language is like a pheronome, or like stale air, if you hang around it too long, you begin exhaling in the same manner:  categories are chosen (I didn’t act), searches (not my choices) produced, just like a domestic dispute “arose” between two individuals, during a, er, ACF-facilitated “ACCESS” exchange between parents. 

     

    I find it interesting that the “OCSE” is administering these grants designed to help noncustodial parents get more time with their children.

     

     OCSE is the “Office of Child Support Enforcement.”  I thought it wasn’t about the money, but about the best interests of the children, who need both parents in constant contact with them.  For example, nonpayment of child support is NOT a basis for withholding visitation of a child from the noncustodial parent.  Women are certainly told that loud and clear when pursuing child support arrears.  

     

    Unfortunately, some parents can’t be trusted alone with their children.  For example, some kids get killed or stolen on overnight visitations which are not supervised.  On the other hands, some unsupervised parents (mostly Moms) also supposedly cause severe emotional distress to their children by actually following through when child abuse or other violence is reported, causing more “high conflict’ between the parties.  Which is “bad.”  “Bad” protective parent:  Here, let us order some parenting classes for you….A common, but costly solution appears to be switching the custody to the other parent, and forcing the reporting parent to pay to see her offspring.  

    But one way to withhold visitation from a designated parent is if she (most likely)  cannot afford to pay to see her own children in a supervised visitation situation that arose AFTER something else (such as child abuse, or other domestic violence-related issues) has been reported or investigated.  I know mothers who cannot afford to see their children, after a custody switch. It does not seem to work both directions AFTER a custody switch (possibly enabled by some of these grants’ services).  Where’s the “healthy families” in that scenario?

     

    If these whole movements (Healthy Marriage, or Responsible Fatherhood & Access Visitation, meaning, it supposedly takes a Village to raise a Child and BOTH Parents (especially Dads) to also do this, which the taxpayers should then fund) are about the CHILDREN and our SOCIETY, then somehow it seems a little odd that the agency entrusted to do this is the CHILD SUPPORT branch, not another one.

     

    The fact, and that history of the matter is that it went kind of like this, as to finances:

     

    1.  OOPS!  Welfare roles are too high!  (Personal Work and Responsibility welfare reform)

    2.  Let’s go Collect Child Support — get those paternity tests and those deadbeat Dads.

    3.   OOPS!  A lot of them are in jail, and others just don’t want to pay, they’ve moved on in life?  What can be done?

    4.   Enter “Access Visitation” grants, in hope that more time with kids will result in more child support collected.  It’s all for the kids, after all.  If they get more time with the children, we will (artificially) “flex” the amount of child support actually due.

    4B.  And the multiple assorted professionals all along the way, all of who are also of course in it for the kids and not the money.

    5.    Who picks up the tab, in the long run, and what is it?  When custody switches are involved, then a parent who historically had been struggling or learning to manage a life (including a work life) around the children will then restructure the life differently, while the parent who just GOT the child will either restructure his (or her) work, or delegate the care of the child to someone else.

    6.  Did I mention Head Start yet?

    By the way, a lot of the funding below is what i call “Designer Families,” i.e., the US Government is actually studying US families (at the expense of the same families) to determine what they DO look like, to run some tests (see “DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS” below) and then report back (not to the consumer — to the experts, of course) on what the tests showed, and then expand the scope of the practice.  This, FYI, is business (perhaps not YOUR employer, but government) business as usual.  Something you don’t learn in grade school, or often in high school, unless your parent was a Senator or a Sociologist.  

     

    Well, two can play that game.  Who wants to come out and play?  

    Want some answers?  

    Want to have some fun analyzing the analysts?

    Let’s do it.

    At least it would make some more interesting dinner conversation (assuming you still have dinner), or at a commuter bus stop (assuming you still have a job) than the latest office politics, or doom and gloom.  You can say, “Did you know that I now spend one-quarter (one-tenth, etc. — adjust according to your payscale) of my work day, which keeps me away from spending quality time with my kids, earning money for the government to spend getting other people who won’t or can’t pay child support to spend more time with their kids, in hopes that they will?  Or to keep them married when otherwise they’d divorce? Or just leave?”

    Or you could say, “Where do you think the HIGHEST grant for reducing abuse, poverty, drug use, and other social ills (i.e., promoting healthy marriages) went to in our state?  

    They’ll probably name Los Angeles,  San Francisco, Oakland, Richmond, Sacramento (or other  urban area known for its homicide rates, or radical agenda).

    And then you can surprise them with your inside knowledge:  

    No:  “Leucadia.”

    Leucadia?  You’re kidding!”

    “No, I’m not.  California Healthy Marriage Coalition, out of Leucadia, California got $2,400,000 last year alone to, er, well — well, they’re not in favor of same-sex marriages, let’s put it that way.  I don’t know where they stand on domestic violence, but they say — well, another group run by the same person says — he needs unconditional respect, and she needs unconditional love.  And those dang feminists, you know, are putting CONDITIONS on how he expresses his love, or whether they continue respecting him, in the form of these anti-violence allegations, and so forth….”

    “In 2006, The California Healthy Marriages Coalition (CHMC) received a five-year, $11.9 Million grant from Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families (HHS/ACF), the largest grant ever awarded by HHS/ACF in support of Healthy Marriages

    {{{FYI:  “Through this funding, CHMC partners with a network of 23 faith- and community-based organizations (FBCOs) throughout California.  Each of CHMC’s funded partner organizations is a coalition consisting of many other FBCOs through which they deliver Marriage Education and Relationship Skills classes, enabling CHMC to reach California’s diverse population by traversing the key demographic dimensions of geography, ethnic/cultural differences, and agency-type FBCOs. “}}

    As a result of these efforts, CHMC expects to see a decline in the divorce/marriage ratio, a reduction in child abuse, domestic violence, poverty, criminal behavior, and an improvement in physical, emotional, and mental health.”

     

    HEY!  IF I SAY I EXPECT TO SEE SOMETHING, CAN I GET A FEDERAL GRANT, TOO?  

    I WILL MAKE UP A NICE NAME, AND USE BIG WORDS, STARTING SMALL WITH A DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM, AND THEN EXPANDING NATIONWIDE.  SEE BELOW FOR A TYPICAL PATTERN. . .

    Now I’m curious.  Let’s see where they are on the $11.9 million….   In 2006 I was definitely on the wrong side of the politically correct agenda, obviously, in that I was trying to get UNMarried, complete a safe separation begun years earlier…. and retain housing . . . .  (Searched on “Principal Investigator,” pulled up an unrelated “Stoica”).  Well, maybe not a relative…)  (the name “Stoica” I picked out arbitrarily — well, actually because of the size of the grant — from the larger chart below).

     

     

    Fiscal Year Program Office Grantee Name City Grantee Type Award Number Award Title CFDA Number Award Action Type Principal Investigator Sum of Actions
    2008  ACF  California Healthy Marriages Coalition  LEUCADIA  Other Social Services Organization  90FE0104  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 1  93086  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  DENNIS J STOICA  $ 2,400,000 
    2007  ACF  California Healthy Marriages Coalition  LEUCADIA  Other Social Services Organization  90FE0104  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 1  93086  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  DENNIS J STOICA  $ 2,400,000 
    2007  NCI  GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY  WASHINGTON  Junior College, College & University  R03CA117467  AKT1 AND ERBB2 – NEW MOLECULAR TARGETS FOR HORMONE RESISTANCE IN BREAST CANCER  93394  NON-COMPETING CONTINUATION  ADRIANA STOICA  $ 75,350 
    2006  NCI  GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY  WASHINGTON  Junior College, College & University  R03CA117467  AKT1 AND ERBB2 – NEW MOLECULAR TARGETS FOR HORMONE RESISTANCE IN BREAST CANCER  93394  NEW  ADRIANA STOICA  $ 77,600 
    2006  OFA  California Healthy Marriages Coalition  LEUCADIA  Other Social Services Organization  90FE0104  HEALTHY MARRIAGE DEMONSTRATION, PRIORITY AREA 1  93086  NEW  DENNIS J STOICA  $ 2,342,080 
    2005  OCS  California Healthy Marriages Coalition  LEUCADIA  Other Social Services Organization  90EJ0064  COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM  93009  NEW  DENNIS STOICA  $ 583,475 
    2005  OCS  Orange County Marriage Education and Training Institute  ANAHEIM  Other Special Interest Organization  90IJ0201  COMPASSION CAPITAL FUND (CCF) TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM – HEALTHY MARRI  93009  NEW  DENNIS STOICA  $ 50,000 
    2004  OCS  Orange County Marriage Resource Center  ANAHEIM  Other Social Services Organization  90IJ0121  CCF TARGETED CAPACITY BUILDING – MARRIAGE  93647  NEW  DENNIS STOICA  $ 50,000 

     

     

    The next RESPONSIBLE CITIZEN behavior then might be to ask, for example, what a particular grant recipient is doing with some of the funds, either on line, or hey, give them a call!  Say, “Hey!  $50,000 is more than I make per year, and a good part of this is being garnished to pay child support already.  Can you tell me what your group did last year with YOUR $50,000 — and who’s on the payroll?  I’d like to see a line item listing, or a few cancelled checks perhaps.  I mean, I work hard (yes, I’m sure you do), and I’d just like to know where my taxes are going.  Thanks!  Send the printout to _________________).” (And then install a security camera….)

    Note:  In the example above (where I picked  one of the larger grants in the big chart, and searched on Principal Investigator)

    In the next post (or so), I will, possibly, show how well all this Healing Families and getting Dads responsible has reduced Violence Against women SO much (in the same time period) that we really don’t need (?) VAWA to keep funding shelters, and other things to help them stay alive, or in one piece.  The momentum of the emerging (still???) Fatherhood movement and Responsibility Movement and Shared Parenting Movement, has really worked, and we now have significantly less separation violence, fewer family wipeouts, and children in the care of the other parent, with help in care of possibly a new girlfriend, or boyfriend, are faring better.  Like the 7 year old boy who was just taken off life support in Massachusetts, after his Dad came back into his life, possibly under one of these programs (although I didn’t investigate further on that one, I admit), after only 8 weeks summertime fun with his father.

     

    In the matter of Designer Families by Federal Fiat, I think we do need to take a closer look.  How’s your state doing?

    “Wife fought off Pa. man killed in shootout.” Maybe–MAYBE, Forget the Restraining Orders, Remember 2nd Amendment? Or, toss a coin…

    with 2 comments

     

    Part II of II on “Responsible Citizenhood” is in labor.  

    The waters have broken, and there is a flood of information and synthesis of concepts gushing forth on many topics, and my brain is dialating.   They will have to be posted in stages.

    Translation:  I am being a Responsible Citizen (see prior posts) and exploring who is my Congress, the Constitution, who is funding whom, and finding all kinds of juicy information on whose idea was it to reinstitute a national religion called Fatherhood, funded by all of us.  I have also located a few new (to me at least) search tools How many thoughts have been provoked!

    But, this (relatively) recent news alert reminded me, that Part of Responsible Citizenhood might entail learning how to handle a gun, and being willing to use it during a home invasion.  Even a home invasion by an estranged husband:

     

    Wife fought off Pa. man killed in shootout

    by Michael Rubinkam

    Let’s look at this headline again.  This woman fought him off, and neither she, nor any of her offspring got killed.  If you look up the articles and read the details, she made a mistake, which, if you read below and see how WIGGLY Pa considers the “PFAs” when it comes to what they mean, is almost understandable.  But once the situation became clear, she took QUICK action to protect her children, get free, and call for help.  

    This is not, folks, how it often plays out.  Who knows whether, God, fortune, or luck played a role, but we DO know this woman didn’t stop to debate, and she also didn’t panic and go dysfunctional.  May I propose that this woman listening to her INSTINCTS and acting on them may have prevented a higher body count.  LESSON ONE:  Don’t jerk around with someone who has just crossed a boundary.  Don’t second guess instinct.  And (next time) don’t compromise one INCH on an existing protective or restraining order — it sends a mixed message, and could lead to this.

    May I propose something else?  I suggest that lawmakers and courts consider that women are people too, and smarten up to having us believe the fiction and play the slot games with any intimate partner who has been battering us in the home, or threatening to, etc.  May I suggest that instead of — or in addition to — DISarming him, they somehow ARM her, and if she’s not trained how to do so, get her some professional responsible training.  It could be mace, it could be pepper spray, but constitutionally, it could be a gun, too, at least in the home.  

    Given the options, she has hope, luck, prayer, and walking around the neighborhood with her instincts on alert, her antennae up, and then trying to also rebuild a life.   “LIFE, LIBERTY, and PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.”  Now what was that first one again?  

    Detriment:  May give a whole new picture of “motherhood” to “fatherhood” people who don’t believe women should be allowed to separate, do not have equal rights, and VAWA should go back to where it came from.      

    In this above statement, I omitted the comma between “fatherhood” people and who don’t believe.  This is generous on my part, because I am conceding that there could be people all excited about and promoting fatherhood who DON’T believe these things.  In fact, I don’t really believe this.  I think that what the “fatherhood” movement is about is that the genetic / gender / biological composition of a family and household (one man, one woman, both married) is more important than the character or behavior of such families.  I am not the only person who believes this.  Some data is here (hover cursor for my comment.  Note:  This dates to 2002, almost 7 years ago.      .http://www.canow.org/fam_report.pdf. 

    Now, when I married, I picked someone of the opposite gender, rather than someone of the same gender and, when it came to wanting children, either adoption or a sperm donor.  This is probably because of how I like my sex, and the other versions didn’t concern me.

    However, when I realized that my opposite-gender person’s main concern was my gender and household function ONLY, and not me as a person — and began physically punishing me for showing up as a person like him, and expecting to pursue some personal goals, not only the laundry/cleaning/nursing/f____ing role (in addition to supporting him in his business, and — if I wanted necessities — also working myself in and/or outside the home for pay) — I made a determination that behavior was the determinant, not gender, or a two-parent status.  The MAIN reason I did this was because we had children, and it was a damn lousy role model they were being exposed to.  The children were of my gender, and they were being taught how this one was somehow inferior and equipped with fewer rights, if any, and no boundaries or ability to say NO without taking retaliation for it.  THAT’s a lousy role model, and he got himself evicted, not after several warnings.  

    I suppose you would like me to get to the story here, how THIS woman saved her life, her children’s life, but alas, not the pursuing policeman’s life, or her husband’s (although I lay that one as his responsibility — no one forced him to threaten his wife with a gun or kidnap his child, or place himself above a clear law he knew was in place upon him).

     

    YATESVILLE, Pa. (AP) — Hobbled by a broken ankle, the estranged wife of a man killed in a shootout with Pennsylvania state troopers managed to fight him off as he threatened her with a gun before he kidnapped their 9-year-old son, the woman’s friend said.

     

    The order of events is a little jumbled in the paragraph.  The AP wanted it out fast, I guess, and so we get this:

    • A. Her ankle was broken
    • B. She was estranged from her husband
    • C.  He was killed by PA state troopers in a shootout (i.e., he was shooting back).
    • D.  1.  She fought him off 2.  while he threatened her with a gun.
    • E. He kidnapped their 9 year old son.

    Having been through a FEW of the events above (not including the shootout), let me put it, I suspect, chrono.

    • B.  Cause of broken ankle — don’t know and probably not relevant.
    • D.2 He threatened her with a gun
    • D. 1 THIS MOM FOUGHT BACK.
    • E. THEN (having been fought off), he grabs their son and dashes off (probably in a car).
    • C. State troopers, apparently, caught up with him, and I’ll gol-dang bet he shot first.  Predictably, they shot back. 
    • Thank God the state troopers had some firearms training, so HE got killed, not his wife and not the son he kidnapped, this time.

    First of all, let’s deal with the grammar dishonesty (gender bias?) with B.  “She was estranged from her husband” which has an element of the truth, and distorts the actual context.  This is such common press practice in domestic violence homicide (or incident) reporting:

    LEGALLY, it appears he’d acted first, and she had responded with a “protection from abuse” order.  Unless the news disagrees with the judge that is THE most relevant factor in the case, apart from this incident.  It most certainly is prime factual,  legal and emotional dynamic CONTEXT of the incident.  “She was estranged” could’ve been, she got tired of his dirty socks around home, she wanted to pursue another affair, or he did; he refused to work OR was an alcoholic, she was bored, he was using drugs or alcohol, or they had other “irreconciliable differences.”  “She was estranged” already must minimized the truth.  If a protective order was in place, and these reporters are not aware enough yet that this produces LOTS of hot news leads in the form of crime reporting, they need to review the job descriptions — or their editors do.  (To tell the truth, I didn’t notice this the first time through the story myself, although I have always thought it an odd phrase).  

    B.  THEY were estranged.  or, better,

    B.  “In _____ (date) (or how recent), she obtained a PFA (say it:  “protection from abuse“) order (in what court, or county), forcing him to leave the family home.

    It is so typical of abusers, abuser enablers, and for that matter, the bulk of the family law system, to IGNORE THE ACTIONS and TALK ABOUT WHO “WAS” WHAT RATHER THAN WHO “DID” WHAT.  IT”S PSYCHOLOGY NOT EVIDENCE.  THIS IS NO ACCIDENT!

    From the 2002 California Family Court Report (link above):  (under “Loss of Due Process”)

    A. Lack of procedural and evidentiary due process,since the Family Code was 

    separated from the Code of Civil Procedure and the Evidence Code in 

    1992. 

     

     

    Alas (and the emphasis of other articles on this event) — – Mad Dad was not in a compromise mood, and shot at responding officers.  Terribly, he got a cop, too. Again — and these officers WERE brave, and they DID stop a kidnapping in process.  

    That’s about a recipe for suicide by cop.  Whether or not he had thought THIS far ahead, one thing is clear:  He’d pre-meditated far enough ahead to bring a gun and point it at his wife.   

    I experienced a decade of being exceedingly afraid of my husband in the home, being traumatized, and eventually being sure enough (because he talked about it often enough, fantasizing about this, and telling me, so, or otherwise bringing it up casually in conversation:  “I’ll just have to kill you.”  At this time, both our children were under 8 years old.)  This has caused economic devastation upon me, my daughters, and people associated with both him, and us.  It has wasted taxpayer funds year after year (in family law, where our case shouldn’t have been at the time) and taken almost 20 years of the prime working years of my life and trashed them repeatedly, under threats, stalkings, intimidations, sudden appearances at my home, and in general, one hell of a mess.  He is still only working part-time, if that, doesn’t pay taxes (I don’t because I don’t earn enough), he is not financially independent yet and, because of this and unfortunately, neither am I.  Our state is broke (supposedly) which is headline news, and is getting people very short-tempered in general.

    I wonder, and I DO reflect — SUPPOSE I HAD FOUGHT BACK, AND NOT ONLY THAT, THREATENED BACK:  IF YOU EVER DO THIS AGAIN, YOU’LL BE MISSING A BODY PART.  OR DEAD!    And then dropped everything until I had learned self defense.

    Or, I had told been less committed to my marriage vows, and dumped his ass out on the street — in other words, brought it to a head earlier.  WHY did I not do that?  (a number of reasons:  #1.  VAWA and awareness of DV laws was not commonplace.  #2.  I’d never had a similar experience where I had to set a boundary with a violent man before, and wasn’t acquainted personally with such situations.  #3.  self-defense and handling a gun is not a typical part of the public school education, and not exactly promoted, as in, exercising 2nd Amendment rights, in general.  We are not hunting our food, but buying it, for the most part (or growing it).  I was not raised in urban areas, where awareness of guns and gun violence was commonplace, but in more rural; people shot deer, or sometimes squirrels, not people!  I also wasn’t raised on TV.  

    School rewards taking orders and obeying rules, at least theoretically.

    And that’s not “feminine” behavior.  

    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

    WHAT IF MEN UNDERSTOOD  – – – REALLY UNDERSTOOD  – – – THAT EVEN WITHIN A RELATIONSHIP, A SMACK WILL BE SMACKED, BACK, HARDER, BECAUSE IT’S SO OUT OF ORDER?   WHAT IF WOMEN WEREN’T SO DESPERATE TO SURVIVE ECONOMICALLY, OR FOR SEXUAL ATTENTION, OR TO HAVE A MAN ON THE ARM, THAT NONE OF THEM COMPROMISED?

    WOULD THERE STILL BE FAMILIES AS WE KNOW THEM NOW?

    Maybe the fatherhood guys are “right.”  Maybe  (from that perspective) if men are not needed to provide for and protect women,and defend them from other suitors, stalkers, or rapists, or to help them, particularly when they are more vulnerable, pregnant and raising young kids, the differences between the sexes (as to functions in life) would so blur, that, well, the drive to achieve and provide would diminish, the wheels of the economy would crumble (and a lot of faith institutions also), and life just wouldn’t have that same glow, or afterglow.

    Without the primal urge, there would be no skyscrapers (9/11?) or cathedrals, and no empires, multi-national or otherwise.  Maybe.  life just wouldn’t have that zest and drama.  Newspapers would need to find other ways to sell the products, if there weren’t crises to report. 

    Well, that’s a larger topic.  But it seems a natural question:  If the nuclear family ain’t what protects, and provides for its young, the only alternative is for equality of income.  NOW, Papa Obama and the majority of  Head Start, Zero to Five, Administration for Families and Children, (sorry sir to pick on you, this wasn’t your idea to start with) might be out of work.  ONLY if the ONLY way to produce income is a “job” that MUST be done outside the home, ONLY then is it essential to have the other functions of raising a family:  care, daytime feeding, and education — to be done by someone else, institutionally.  

    However the people so vigorously promoting this solution ONLY (and highly suspicious of, say, the homeschooling option which is a lot more fluid, lets mothers network and find each other’s long suits, collaborate locally to find the best teachers (including some of each other, as well as hired professionals), and fire the lousy ones — now THAT’S a plus) and actually have a better understanding of who their children are, and possibly better relationships with them, not rigidly defined ones) — these people — and I coudl show you, or you could look for yourself — are THEMSELVES either inheriting wealth, or have sufficient assets to go fund ggovernment policy, publicize and drive various programs through and teach THEIR young how to own businesses and produce passive cash flow, themselves.

    Then who would work in the businesses they own?  There has to be a steady population — and the majority of the population — that does NOT know how to live independently from the government, or the “employee” situation — or life would, well, it just wouldn’t work right.  Who would work the factories, produce the many, many terrific products we enjoy in this country, the material prosperity, the varities of fast foods (and agencies pronouncing that fast foods are bad for you), and all that?

    (Along with the domestic violence kidnappings, suicides by cop, traumatized kids, and sometimes dead people, that go along with when this doesn’t work out so well…..).

    Well, that dialogue is what I get for thinking.  It’s Monday night quarterbacking, I guess, “what-if” scenarios.  I cannot turn back the clock in my own case.  The fact is, if I hadn’t been who I was, probably the genetic and particular DNA of my two wonderful daughters (who are probably not reading this, yet), and with whom I am NOT spending any more time, would not have been born.  I have already determined (and she’s spoken with me recently) that woman number two was targeted for a certain gullibility and in a certain venue, for use to get the kids away from me.  He’s out on the loose again, troubling me, because I’ve been contacted, and her, because of what that indicates.  

    HOWEVER, the rest of this post, below, shows how the local Women’s Resource Agency describes why women should keep coming, keep asking for “PFA” orders and keep playing the odds, because, it’s after all, only about ONE out of THREE cases that violates these orders, and “NOT ALL” do “WHAT HE DID.”

    Well, in school, 66% is not a passing grade.  Last I heard, 70% was.  We are talking 66% success rate when the other 33% (add your decimal points later) might get killed and result in this.  We’re not talking about graduating from high school, but living out a normal lifespan, and not in terror, trauma, or having to before a child is ten, witness a homicide.  Or two.  Or being kidnapped.  About officers NOT having to make that sacrifice, and THEIR children lose a Daddy also.  How is THAT “promoting responsible fatherhood.”

    I think that the time of restraining orders may have passed, and that we probably need to focus on both attitudes, cultural values and self-defense techniques (including weapons if necessary) that make it ABSOLUTELY clear that any such violation of a personal boundary in the form of a HIT will be met with equal, and to make a point, slightly greater responding force to emphasize the unacceptability of it.

     

    I think local communities will have to figure out processes, not “states” they wish to achieve.  And this requires being realistic about restraining order and a valid understanding of what abuse IS.

    I have one:  ABUSE is violating personal boundaries (and, most time, state criminal laws) in order to establish a “giving orders” situation between what should be intimate partners.  As such, it qualifies as “two-year-old” behavior and should result in the adult who has regressed to it, and thinks that 2009 is, in fact, closer to 1920 (when women finally got the vote) should be treated like the two-year-old mentality of, the world should conform to you when you don’t like it, without your submitting to some process of negotiation, compromise, or humility.  I would like to add that, as I recall this, I always wondered why our daughters didn’t go through the famous “Terrible Twos” {is this an Americdan term only?  I don’t know…}  rebellious stages. I remember this at the time also.  It could be that we weren’t dumping them off in daycare, where they needed more attention, oir it just possibly could’ve been that we had a much larger Terrible Two in the home, in the form of their father, and they knew this.

    Only when it’s UNacceptable throughout society to beat women, and terrorize anyone, will this stop.  The only acceptable reasons for doing anything like this in defense of life’s essentials — and these do not include maintaining a status quo in which the abuser’s world is perfect, and his ego cannot handle rejection, the need to apologize, or occasional value conflicts.  The heart of any really good intimate relationship would do real well to closely resemble what’s written in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, which most of us (and our legislators) have apparently forgotten.

    I happen to be a Christian, and my faith tells me about when this will, and will not happen.  I have had to often re-evaluate the duality (us/them) and domination (Christ came once and was humbled/crucified voluntarily, but will return in authority as king and by force put down all rebellion, bringing in world peace), and I assure you, in the many, MANY years I have been around and working (through music) in several faith institutions, the music is terrific, but within white (in particular, but not only) Protestantism, nondenominational especially, equality of women is “anathema” and these places are producing wife-beaters and wife-killers.  They do not communally or prominently acknowledge the laws of the land in their hearts, and many (those who do not ordain women, or and hate even the concept of them in leadership, let alone of gays, or lesbians) , despite sometimes sheltering a battered woman, or helping her (i’ve been helped a few times recently), they will NOT stop sheltering the doctines and attitudes that produce more batterred women, and more overentitled men.  this is behind the “fatherhood” movement, and it produces a form of social schizophrenia, in which we have a public school system where “God” is not allowed, or prayer, yet public policy where “faith-based” advice and policies are promoted.  Well, which is it, folks?

    That’s all the psycho- social-analysis for this post.  What’s below (written earlier) relates more directly to this particular domestic violence double-homicide, kidnapping, assault, and tragedy which began with “she was estranged,” and a look at the neighborhood response.

    What probably kept that woman and her children alive was her willingness to fight back.  What put her at risk was compromising the existing restraining order (including drop off at curb), and (possibly) her not having the means or intent to, at ALL times since it was issued, NEVER compromise it AT ALL.  ONE means might be for her husband to have understand that she understood her 2nd Amendment right to self-defense, and having it in the home, AND her willingness and intent to act on it, if even 3 yards of  a restraining order was violated.  This sends a clear message, and would put that man back in a place to reconsider whether he wants to test the limits, or can talk or plan, or manipulate his way out of obeying that order.  

    The courts need to do more to communicate this necessity to women who have just separated.  They need to understand that NOW, it’s OK to take a personally aggressive stance and back it up with a willingness to act if boundaries are violated.  That IS, after all, WHY the “United States of America” is no longer a British colony, or any other colony (so far), and we might do well to keep communicating this principle to our young, boy and girl alike. Not to belabor the point, but our schools absolutely do NOT, do this at this point, and I say, intentionally so. You can’t “manage” people so well who understand their self-worth.

    However Susan Autenreith may have been raised, at the crucial time, she found something within herself to say No, and stand up to this.  Having made a mistake, she didn’t condemn herself or try to talk out of the situation.  Gun meant FIGHT BACK, YELL DIRECTIONS TO HE KIDS, &  CALL FOR HELP.

     

    How Logical Is This?

    ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    About that MOM?  

    Let’s go chrono, OK?

    Not all (female) readers have been through the process of, say,

    (1) childbirth,

    (2) being assaulted, threatened, intimidated, battered, and in short abused, or other situations which tell you “Danger! Danger!,”

    (3) filing and getting a PFA (domestic violence restraining, or etc.) order with kickout, indicating “Danger!  Danger!” to all and “STAY AWAY!” to Dad, (and, you can’t buy guns, either, or own them), and then 

    (4) IMMEDIATELY after these at least actions (applying for a temporary, filing with judge, getting it signed, serving the husband (which then in effect throws him out of the house in some manner), going to court for a hearing to have it made permanent, having it made “permanent” (i.e., facing the ex in that court hearing), and meanwhile attempting to explain this to one’s children in terms they can understand why he can’t live here anymore, then — with a restraining order in effect — typically the NEXT stop is the mediator who will then proceed to act as though there wasn’t really, any serious domestic violence (other than, meetings may be separate) and say, “OK, so long as it’s peaceful communications around the children” and then design some visitation plan any other divorcing couple might have, even the most amicable divorces.  Which appears to have happened in this place.

    In 1992, Jack Straton, Ph.D. (NOMAS:  National Org. of Men Against Sexism) recommended a cooling off period.

    So far, no one has figured this out, evidently.

    (5) Agreeing, after this, to a custody/visitation exchange plan which basically has a split personality:  

    Hey, he  was so dangerous, you had to get a judge to tell him  to stay away, and order no weapons in the home, BUT . . . .. BUT . . . . . it’s OK to give this same, by now pretty distraught or indignant/upset man access to the fruit of his loins, regularly . . . .  After all, what about a child’s right to bond with both parents?  

    This, I say, gives the man, the woman, and the children a mixed message.  I have also learned (the hard way) since, the courts ALSO are getting contradictory messages (and funding) about these matters.  IS domestic violence a crime, or not a crime?  

    And so we get cases like the Autenreiths, where Dad didn’t LIKE having that protective order in place, and made this clear with a 9mm.  His girlfriend helped him get a gun.  Again, his girlfriend.

    WHICH BRINGS UP THIS POINT:  Telling a man to not own weapons, and get rid of any he does own, doesn’t prevent him — in the least — from grabbing one from a friend who has one (or in this case, a girlfriend buying one for him.  I believe this is called a straw purchase, and laws exist to address this, but still, it points out that generally there is a way around the law for those who intend to find one).

     

    (How long were they separated?  How hard is it for a man with a plan to get around a piece of paper?)

    in order to STOP the cycle of abuse which, without intervention, generally does one thing — escalate, until someone is killed, or more than one, 

     

    WHAT ARE THE ODDS?  HOW WELL DO YOU KNOW THAT MAN?  HOW WILL HE RESPOND TO THE PFA?

    =======

    HERE IS THE RESPONSE REGARDING “PFA’S” TO THIS PARTICULAR ASSAULT, BATTERY, CHILD-KIDNAPPING, THREATS, CAR CHASE AND DOUBLE-HOMICIDE.  I HAVE EMPHASIZED ANY AREAS  THAT SHOW UNCERTAINTY, LOOPHOLES FOR DANGER:

    WOMEN’S RESOURCES OF MONROE COUNTY (PA):  PFA’s WORK IN MOST CASES

    By Andrew Scott

    Pocono Record June 12, 2009

    A protection-from-abuse order [“”PFA”] may be just a piece of paper unable to stop the likes of Daniel Autenrieth, the Northampton County man who threatened his wife at gunpoint, kidnapped their son and led police on a high-speed chase that ended in a fatal shootout in Tobyhanna.

    {To review:  PFA, then:

    • DEAD PEOPLE — 2, OFFICER, MAN
    • WOUNDED — 1, OFFICER
    • VERY TRAUMATIZED — 9 YEAR OLD SON, MOM, OTHER KIDS}}

     

    The fact remains that most people with PFAs filed against them comply with those court orders and don’t do what Autenrieth did. So although PFAs aren’t absolutely guaranteed to stop someone who’s unbalanced or really intent on doing harm, people who are being physically abused or feel threatened with physical harm in relationships still should apply for PFAs.

    {{Perhaps they should also buy a Lotto ticket?}}

    That was the message at a Thursday press conference at Women’s Resources of Monroe County in Delaware Water Gap. Women’s Resources is part of the Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence, which provides a network of advocacy, legal, counseling, medical and other support services for domestic violence victims.

    . . . 

    In Pennsylvania, PFA violators can face up to six months in county jail and fines of up to $1,000, depending on the severity of the violation, said Wendy Bentzoni, a detective with the Monroe County District Attorney’s Office.

    If a woman requests a PFA against her husband and he consents to the order’s terms

    •  Being evicted from the home he/she shares with the plaintiff/victim and having no contact with that person.
    •  Being evicted, but being allowed to have contact.
    •  Being allowed to stay in the home as long as there is no physical abuse or threat of physical abuse.

    In Pennsylvania, a PFA can be in effect for any length of time up to three years, depending on what a judge rules or what the parties involved consent to in each individual case. If the defendant doesn’t violate the PFA, the order simply expires when its time is up.

    In Pennsylvania, a PFA can be in effect for any length of time up to three years, depending on what a judge rules or what the parties involved consent to in each individual case. If the defendant doesn’t violate the PFA, the order simply expires when its time is up.

    Of the 450 PFAs granted in Monroe County last year, more than 125 were violated by defendants, Bentzoni said.

    {{OK, Let’s look at that.  Suppose it was 150.  150 violated out of 450 is 1 out of 3.  That means for every 2 that WERE kept (as far as they know — by whether or not a violation was reported or not) 1 was not.  How do you like them odds?  Your PFA has a 33.33% of being violated (in which case, see above for potential risk/fallout).  

     

    In some cases, getting a PFA filed against an abuser can worsen the victim’s situation because the abuser sees it as the victim trying to take power away from the abuser{{WHICH IT IS INCIDENTALLY}}, she said. Desperate to retain that power over the victim, the abuser might become even more dangerous.

    “Against someone with no fear of the law or jail, a PFA might not be the best action to take,” Kessler said. “In that case, we explore other options with the victim. The goal is to get the victim out of a vulnerable position.”

    If the abuser is the sole breadwinner for the victim and their children, fear of losing the abuser’s financial support also might deter the victim from applying for a PFA, Kessler said.

     

    Well, I know in my case it sure delayed getting one.  Often economic abuse can precede physical.

    Economic abuse can precedes and enables the physical AND IS PRE-MEDITATED.  If the targeted person can’t afford to get away, or see how they could conceivably do so, they will take their chances staying, possibly.  What a great choice — homelessness or increasing domestic abuse.  

    So, it seems to me if we want a less violent world, the most sensible thing would be focus on teaching children and young people how to become economically independent.  In a wonderful contradiction of intent, we DON’T!  The entire public schools system in the U.S.A., for the most part, consists of teaching children how to be submissive and take orders, leave the thinking up to the experts, who will grade them, and prepare them for this:  College, and Jobs.  Not, College and BUSINESSES.  Or College, and understanding the economic principles that would help them become business owners, investors, cash-stream producers, foundation producers, and independent thinkers.  How hypocritical.  

    And that includes independent thinking about how to survive financially should they choose to have children, or should they not choose to have children, but set up housekeeping (and sleeping) with a partner that might become sick, injured, or — face it – incarcerated.  They should not have to go nurse off Dad, or Mom, or Big Brother the Welfare State, in this case.  The goal should NOT be lifetime jobs, but lifetime progression towards financial independence.  They cannot do this if they aren’t studying people who have accomplished this, and the basic principles of wealth.

    We should also teach them not to let any partner or potential partner disarm them economically — whether it be job, or bank account, or credit, or access to transportation etc.  That any such action is aggression, and dangerous to their welfare, creating an artificial co-dependence.  They should know this going into relationships.  

    Now right there, we have a SERIOUS problems.  Many world religions don’t accept this, and are not likely to.  

    Well, maybe they should, in the US, then lose their tax-exempt status.  Believe me, I’ve thought of it.  Because if they are contributing to the climate of “It’s OK to dominate a woman by any means (or weapon) that comes to hand, because it makes you more of a man,” then they should have to fork over the taxes that society might need to take care of the resulting mess.

    And I’ll tell you another “secret” (not a real secret) — one I’ve been thinking about more recently.  The majority of these institutions are in a co-dependent and domination relationship within their own ranks.  If they didn’t dominate and under-educate them on their own sacred scripts (men and women alike), in the US, at least, many people would not be so dependent on spiritual, social, and emotional nourishment on the weekends and maybe ONE weekday.  But that is another post, and probably, blog.  

    We ought to teach, besides, reading math writing, sport and the arts (to put it roughly) the PROCESSES and VALUES OF:

    Self-sufficiency, Self-defense, and self-discipline, to the point of in-depth excellence and mastery in one primary area.  With that I believe will come sufficient self-esteem not to enter into too many co-dependent relationships. 

     

    I recommend reading John Taylor Gatto’s short book called Dumbing Us Down:  The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling, in which he says, plainly, that the seven lessons he, as a teacher (and at the time NY State Teacher of the Year” actually is teaching is not “relevance” and “interrelationship” of subjects, but the exact opposite.  Specifically, in order from the chapter:  “The Seven Lesson Schoolteacher,” they are:

    1. CONFUSION
    2. CLASS POSITION
    3. INDIFFERENCE
    4. EMOTIONAL DEPENDENCY
    5. INTELLECTUAL DEPENDENCY
    6. PROVISIONAL SELF-ESTEEM
    7. ONE CAN’T HIDE.

    The next chapter is called the “psychopathic school” after which he details his efforts of getting a little girl who read beautifully out of a class of bad readers.  The girl (reading aloud beautifully) tells him how the administration had explained to her mother that she was, in reality, a “bad reader who had fantasies of being a better reader than she was.”  Then, the author relates how the principal tried the same thing on him:  how was he, a substitute to know whether or not this child could read.

    MY EXPERIENCE:  This actually is at the heart of the educational AND the family law system of “experts.”  My “sin” was homeschooling the children, and having fantasies (as do many single mothers leaving abuse) that we could make a sound decision on behalf of our sons and daughter, after we’d made just about the soundest one around — LEAVING the situation!  

    Consider this:

    Our form of compulsory schooling was an invention of the State of Massachusetts around 1850.  It was resisted — with guns — by about 80% of the Massachusetts population, the last outpost being Barnstable on Cape Cod not surrendering its children until the area was seized by militia and children marched to school under guard.  (p. 25, 

     

    There is more, but as I review those 7 lessons above, I can’t help thinking about the uncommon similarities between abuse — even it’s definitions — and the family law system, as well as the concept of using another abusive system to handle abuse by one person towards another in the presence of children.

    Is ALL conflict bad?  No, conflict involving true self-defense, or boundary violations.

    Is marriage, or an “intimate partner relationship,” a person as property contract?  A relationship as property contract?  I believe the law calls it a FIDUCIARY relationship.  As such, no one has a right to commit what in other context would be a crime, to protect loss of contact with this former sexual partner, parent of one’s children, children, or the breakdown of a relationship.

    WHEN IT GETS TO THE POINT OF PFAs and RESTRAINING ORDERS, the enforcement should be thorough, immediate, clear, and strong.  The dialogue above illustrates why, in practice, it ain’t.  SO the conflicts go on, and escalate.

    I have taught lots of children (and adults) in lots of venues and classrooms, and non-class situations.  There are always rules ,and in-progress negotiation about common standards, there is always a dynamic flexibility within the group, there is the matter of consensus and critical mass.

    The superb choir that got me going into music was about 40 in number, and we stood in mixed quartets, holding our own parts, produced records, soloists, and in general moved mountains and kicked butt musically.  It was powerful stuff.  We rehearsed almost daily and worked to pay for some of our own needs (including uniforms, painting the room, and going to conferences).  We associated after school (and sometimes before) and in other venues than school; we ate, played, and attended concerts together.

    Since then, I have sung in (and sometimes directed) choirs numbering from approximately 12 up to over 100.  The ideal size (and one of the best choirs I was in) was about 18, or very maximum 20, if they were professionals and unified.  I have had a little choir of only 11 do amazing things, because it was small enough to be responsive.

    I have always thought it odd that the top ensembles are generally smaller than a typical public school classroom, and many of them not much larger than a large family, with a cousin or two.  It brings out the best when there is a unified goal that is reasonable (but still stretching limits) to the people involved.  The best choirs also were VOLUNTARY, not compulsory.  They chose challenging music (to keep the participants growing) but always taking into account that the audience might not feel so esoteric in general.  They mixed and matched, but they HAD to set a fairly high standard technically and musically – or in portrayal.

    How does this relate to the Wife who Fought Back?

    The system they were ensared in was too large, and is ruling and prognosticating by “the odds.”  MOST people (translation: men) do not violate the PFAs, after all, just over 125 out of 450 did in this particular area.  Therefore, the women should keep on coming, because what else could they do? It MIGHT not result in this, after all, NOT ALL men do what Mr. Autenreith did.

    And we have this growing crisis of “fatherlessness”?  That’s a fatherless family, and it just made a peace officer’s kids fatherless, too.  I wonder what kind of father the nine-year old will make, should he become one.

    I think the doctrine is becoming a little self-defeating, if not downright dangerous.  I mean, this is all about the children, right?  It’s all because children in single-parent families are at risk.


    Well, yeah, with some vigilantes running around the place . . . . . However, if she’d been armed and determined…

    I think we (Responsible Citizens) need to take a serious look at the Seven-Lesson Schoolteacher and ask, is this what we are willing to be taught, as adults, by our elected officials?  I mean, the same values ARE shared, it is the “Hidden Currriculum” overall, I’d say.  And it’s downright un-American, including “parenting classes.”  The government already had a shot at the majority of the children in this country, through the public school system.  If it were my kids, and the teachers failed, I’d go find me a new teacher and system.

    OH, I FORGOT TO MENTION — I DID.  AND MY CHILDREN WERE STOLEN ON AN OVERNIGHT VISITATION (UNSUPERVISED) PRECISELY BECAUSE I DID.  AND PUT BACK IN THE SYSTEM, BECAUSE THEIR MAMA HAD ALREADY FIGURED OUT THAT THE 7 LESSONS WERE BOGUS.  

     

    This is a system that brooks no competitors.  It allows some, but scoops up any stragglers, and family law is a great place to find them, and weaken them for the snatch.




     

    How bad Is it? ~ Skirting the Truth at Cairo, Telling it in America, Turned Down at Brown, Left to Tell after Rwanda

    leave a comment »

    I was told to shorten my titles.  This was the original:

    In Cairo, Obama Delicately Skirts the Issue of Islamic Violence Towards Women, but Chesler (Honor Killings), LetsGetHonest (DV and Christianity), Ayaan Hirsi Ali (Infidel), Nonie Darwish (They Call Me Infidel), Immaculee Ilibagiza (Left to Tell, 91 days in a Rwandan bathroom) shoot from the hip on the dangers of ANY pride/shame/hate-based culture

     

    Note:  Of the above “notables” obviously President Obama’s OFFICE outranks the rest of us, but I’ve put 4 famous female voices (& mine) to 2 male to underscore, well, who and what the others have downplayed

    Note:  LetsGetHonest’s voice here doesn’t mean she considers herself on a par with these feminist &/or COURAGEOUS for Truth women, but that my experience resonates to elements of their voices.  I have many role models, but these are among them, particularly Imaculee with her faith and Dr. Chesler with her decades of feminist writing & reporting, including on some matters regarding the courts.  
    The two “Infidel” Books (“Infidel” and “They Call Me Infidel”) describes aspects of polygamy which  – – strangely — spoke the inbred emotional truth of my own family line, in ganging up against a grown, literate mother to (try and!) teach a lesson about authority, and the punishment being removal of children and “excommunication.”  (and my family line identifies itself, with apparent pride, as NOT believing in God, this is for supposedly inferior intellects and emotionally weak individuals).  

    [Have been told to shorten the posts, too, not just the titles.  Working on it!]

     This post, July 2 (2 days before “Independence Day” USA)  had been on hold. Unlike several women featured here, I added my voice to theirs, telling it like it is, then self-censored out of fear:  I felt MY contribution was too radical, too out-spoken, and too indignant.

    Well . . . . 

    BUT, I have noticed the headlines since July 2nd — a litany of murder/suicides, family annihilations, and slaps on the wrist for men punching, stalking, kidnapping or threatening to kill women, after which they then kill.  I had my children stolen for daring to report abuse, violations of court orders, and for refusing to “submit” to arbitrary orders on how to dumb down my smart daughters.  I know what “shunning” is.  I know what “enabling abuse” is.  

    I have never experienced fundamentalist Islamic violence against women, but the sense of the Christian version of it over here is starting to feel like a sort of ritual purging process.  It is starting to ffeel like “No Exit” unless there is a miraculous parting of the Red Tape, a CLOUD covering my behind and a FIRE leading the way.  We already tried the “appeal to reason” paradigm, or the “appeal to law” ONE, ALSO.  We also did the “it’s not in your best interest” reason, but some people will pay a lot of money for the privilege of refusing to stop abusing.  Like they say, truth is on the auction block, and was sold cheap, Lies fetched a higher price.

    I pay attention, and have SEEN Protestant so-called Christian Caucasian men drilling young men how to dominate women twice their age in the name of their god, and been subjected to this as well.  Recently.  Yeech — Retch!  What kind of “sanctuary” is that??

    However, now that a suburban California back yard finally released ,29-year-old Jaycee Dugard and her 11 year old and 15 year old girls fathered by the man who kidnapped HER when she was only 11, I felt this post is quite appropriate:

    This case is shocking for its combination of statistics (18 years! Missed opportunities!  “We never knew!”  “But they looked like a nice couple!”  “I spoke with Jaycee on the phone, she was courteous and professional” (She was not only a sex slave, but also supported this man’s business while living in shack-like conditions in a back yard with her kids).  A WOMAN called the police reporting that people were living in the back yard.  Like my calls and reports to police that another man, their father, was going to kidnap MY daughters, her voice was not heard.

    Are we willing to listen and change behavior YET?  The behavior “we” need to change is to get smart and act on hunches.  While people who take the scriptures too literally are castigated and censored, disdained in public media, how about some of us in the U.S. start taking the 3 charters of freedom:  Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights literally for a change?  Starting by knowing their INtents based on their CONtents!  And then recognizing that humanity is a DNA thing, not a color thing or a gender thing!  And the usage of “all men are created equal” in the first was NOT “men vs. women” and did not say, although it was so practiced, “all Caucasian landowning males.”  It meant ALL EQUAL and not to be colonized, or, like Miss Dugard (sr.) was, pimped.

     

    I am United States citizen by birth, and was never beaten, or degraded because of my gender before I married.  Nor was I forced into marriage.  But women of faith or no faith nowadays who attempt to leave, risk being stripped of children, or killed, for the act of — leaving their marriage and asserting legal rights they already have.

    While our current President has described the angst and sense of loss he felt not having his father in his life growing up, the rest of us describe some of what it’s like to be a target of violence and punishment for the crime of having been born without a Y chromosome, for some, a life sentence punishable by death.

     

    President Obama, pre-election, helping out Senator Bayh in Indiana, with some more Mother-Omission:

    2006 – EVER TRYING TO RAM THROUGH ANOTHER BILL, FINE-TUNING & REDEFINING FATHERHOOD AND HEALTHY MARRIAGE

    As one of my fellow-bloggers commented in Indiana Mothers for Custodial Justice:  Evan Bayh is not his Father’s Son,

    Senator Evan Bayh’s (fatherhood-promoted) own father Senator BIRCH Bayh, was in favor of equal rights for women:  so much for a chip off the old block, and passing down values from father to son, politically.  

    According to this post (Verifiable Here) both Senator Evan and then-Senator Obama co-sponsored  YET ANOTHER “Healthy marriage and Responsible Fatherhood” bill, which was defeated in 2006.  

    Like this Senator, and another well-known FR attorney from the Chicago Area,  both the Senators also remembered all the Hoopla around Father’s Day, Fatherhood, Father Celebration, and etc., etc. (can we say “patriarchal?”) in June PR (June is Father’s Day month, FYI), but forgot the same on Mother’s Day, in May.  Actually, in 2009 and (I found) 2008, PR around now-President and then-Senator Obama eclipsed this acknowledgement of where they came from, literally (they  had mothers, right?), as the word “Mother” has become, as I blogged elsewhere, virtually invisible linguistically in connection with “families” on the whitehouse.gov site.  The preferred term, for those of you not in the know, is “Parent” when it comes to the divorce situation, and “Women” when it comes to who’s having violence (including murder) perpetrated against them by, often enough by the father of mutual children.

    ~ ~ ~ ~

    It is difficult to control a population aware of their “unalienable rights,” not intimidated by verbal derogatory talk, or economically dependent upon abusers or captive to them by the threat of death as they leave.  Now one factor that often gives a mother courage and motivation to LEAVE abuse is precisely her motherhood, so no wonder it would be threatening to any:

    Fear/Shame/Pride-based culture or religion.

    The mother/daughter/son bond, culturally needs to be degraded and broken (stepmothers will do) if we are to have a truly sheepish culture that will do what they are told without protest.  Family Court venue is GREAT for this, and I happen to believe was designed for the purpose, despite all the hoopla from under-funded (??), under-recognized (????????) fathers, especially those who like to minimize their own violence towards their own women, often prompting separation, which even that bill (above) recognizes is a primary cause of separation!

     

    @@@

    The link “parsing Obama” caught my attention, and led to an article from “Real Clear Politics” on the Cairo Speech.

    I have just written on “Women” vs. “Mother” and the weak (# occurrences) presence of both when it comes to Family Issues being discussed under the current US Administration’s “White House” page.  Not only were the words barely absent, but their usage (which I didn’t analyze and post — but noticed) was also weak.  In looking for the word “mothers” I would have to assume that after the age requiring home nurse visitations, we don’t exist.  For example, the President’s own mother was transformed into the word “parent” in a  sentence highlighting absence of a father.  To people who haven’t been through systemic prejudice against their “mothering” it may not register, but when examined, it’s blatant PR omission.  It undermines the credibility of the whole page.  (granted, the month was the month of Father’s Day, however, if someone has a record of this page during May and wishes to countradict my post, please feel free to comment).  

    SIMILARLY, when it comes to speaking in this nation, Egypt, the mention of Islamic violence (not bias, but violence) toward women, the omission is just as loud.

    So, I just slapped up the article, with someone else’s commentary on it, for your consumption.  Then I searched out and pasted up interviews, articles or book reviews from several women who do NOT Delicately skirt the issue of violence towards women, and hate talk in general.  Two of these women came to America, and one of them, since coming, has converted from Islam to Christianity.  

    A third woman from Rwanda didn’t convert, but was already Christian.  Her story isn’t about gender violence, but it was another “can’t put down” book of survival in the face of hate, and refusal to hate back.  The individual verbal abuse or hate talk that often DOES escalate to physical domestic violence got me (in marriage, after marriage) sensititve to moods and fluctuations in language that might indicate an “event” about to erupt also precedes genocides or attempted genocides.  The speech sometimes works the speaker or groups of speakers up, or justifies the abuse.  Whether the Holocaust or Rwanda, hate talk is a danger sign.  Just as PTSD from domestic violence does indeed have similarities with PTSD from actual war.

    So, this had me also noticing books and commentaries on the languages preceding genocides or attempted genocides; Rwanda had caught my attention earlier from the book on which the movie “Hotel Rwanda” was based.  This book details times when pastors protected, and times when pastors betrayed, those that were being hunted down.  So I include the “Left To Tell” book because it seems relevant.

    And I added my two bits.  And a few links indicating that this fatherhood stuff is turning to vigilante behavior, unfortunately.   And pointed out, again, what our Declaration of Independence was about….

    On my blogroll to the right, is a little Youtube showing just how low my President bowed, casually, quickly, to the leader of a Muslim country, in the company of Queen Elizabeth and a G20 meeting.  This disturbs me, and was of some serious debate in a blogtalkradio dialogue (as I recall the source, anyhow) moderated by Dr. Phyllis Chesler and Marcia Pappas of NYS NOW.  Is he the leader of the free world, or at least part of it?  Then what’s that obeisance about?  Would he kneel to the Pope to be politically correct, kiss the ring and insult all those boys and girls abused by priests, and the concept upon which this nation was founded, Bill of Rights Number I?  

    I myself am VERY disturbed at how domestic violence killings are starting to take on a vigilante nature, as if in retaliation to a woman leaving a family, or exposing a sin, how DARE she?  As a mature woman and mother who has been dumped by the roadside by a combination of my own family and my ex-batterer, apparently for — again, exposing family something or other — I am thinking about:  

    • How
    • Why
    • Who ARE these people?
    • What IS this world?

    How many OTHER myths have I believed about life, my country, my family, the legal system, etc.?  I will tell you one I have let go of:  “The American Dream.”  I have switched this my dream from anything material, and am changing it to a character issue, a personal one with myself.  

    I am calling upon the combination of my God (NOT the one that is a respecter of persons, or genders, or legalistically profiling and whimsical in judgment, that I have seen in certain places), and my courage, and putting my intellect a good bit lower, respectively, than it used to be.  Plus, from within, my emotions of concern and compassion for others, and whatever picture I can imagine.  Indignation about injustice only goes so far, and as the injustice basically never stops, another motivation must be found.

    I think part of the trouble around here is that people pretend to be neutral and detached (a high value) when they aren’t anything of the sort.  They can incite to violence, ride roughshod over families, due process, and civil rights, as easily as any other nation or culture, but claim this is based on “evidence-based practices.”  In one place on this post, I included a Rwandan woman — the issue was not on men versus women, but the same principles:  hate talk towards a certain group of people (Tutsis) and how quickly it ignited. 

    We have become an incredibly morally bankrupt place (as well as fiscally — and they are related), while drowning in certain materials and products.  However, the solution to this is not to be found in the institutions, but rather in the people who are aware that these institutions are not going to replace human basic functions of:  produce, protect, educate, alleviate, CREate (when it comes to arts, ideas, concepts, etc.), that which we have procreated.  If you’re new to this blog, you’ll notice that when I have a strong emotional reaction to a certain thing (or idea), I pile on labels, like sauce on a hamburger, or whipped cream on a milkshake, or, . . . . or. . . .    

     

    I was referring to the churches, some of which I left voluntarily, and one of which I got thrown out of last month for being female, having understanding of a Biblical passage, and speaking up (even with permission).  How dare I think I knew something!  

    See:

    Family Values” Pundits not so upstanding themselves.

     

    This is a new site to me:   REAL CLEAR POLITICS.  This dates to June 2009

    I simply posted the whole article.  Any italics are my emphasis, some (not all) of the other style changes are mine, too:

     

    Did Obama Say Enough About Women’s Rights?
    Posted by Cathy Young | Email This | Permalink | Email Author

     

    As I said in my previous post, I had a largely positive reaction to Obama’s Cairo speech.  However, I agree with David Frum’s criticsm of Obama’s comments about women’s rights — which should have been a key part of an “outreach to Muslims” speech.  In contrast to Obama’s strong affirmation of the principles of democracy, his discussion of women’s issues and Islam was too general, too weak, and afflicted with excessive even-handedness.

    {{with which “even handedness, as I have beLABORED in previous posts, the Whitehouse.gov agenda on families is not even remotely afflicted.  It flat out ignores the fact, practically, that mothers exist.  Period.}}

    Here is the passage in its entirety:  (OBAMA):

    “The sixth issue that I want to address is women’s rights

    “I know there is debate about this issue. {{“debate”?!?}} I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality. And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well-educated are far more likely to be prosperous.

    Now let me be clear: issues of women’s equality are by no means simply an issue for Islam.

    {{EXCUUUUUSE me?  Is this or is this not a dodge, or an understatement?  Was there a political or safety reason for this understatement at this particular conference?

    http://www.phyllis-chesler.com/211/are-honor-killings-simply-domestic-violence

    I have posted an excerpt below.  And photos.  OK, now you may continue reading President Obama’s speech…}}}}

     

    “In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia, we have seen Muslim-majority countries elect a woman to lead. Meanwhile, the struggle for women’s equality continues in many aspects of American life, and in countries around the world.

    Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity – men and women – to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice. That is why the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams.”

    Frum takes issue, in particular, with Obama’s remarks about the head-covering issue: he points out that not only “some in the West,” but many women in the Muslim world regard the hijab as a symbol of female submission (not to God but to man), and that many women who “choose” to cover themselves (sometimes not only their hair but their face) do so because of coercion and intimidation either by family members or by radical Islamic militias.  I do believe Obama was right to affirm a woman’s right to choose hijab; quite a few Muslim feminists regard it as a legitimate and positive form of religious expression, no different from the Jewish yarmulke, and quite a few moderately traditional Muslims are alienated by the categorical rejection of the hijab as oppressive.  However,  it would have been fitting to balance his statement with an assertion of a woman’s right to choose not to cover their hair — a right that, in some countries, they are denied not only by informal pressure and harassment, but by law and official policy.

    As for the rest of this passage, it was nice of Obama to assert the importance of educational opportunities for girls and women, but that’s about as uncontroversial as it gets: who, except for the Taliban, disagrees?  In all too many Muslim countries, the main problems facing women are far more severe: forced marriage, vastly unequal treatment when it comes to divorce and child custody, and socially sanctioned violence.  How can one talk about women’s rights in the Muslim world and not mention honor killings?  Or the horrific recent public flogging by a Taliban militia in Pakistan of a 17-year-old girl whose apparent offense was to have stepped outside her house without a male relative escorting her?  Or cases in which Islamic courts have sentenced rape victims to death for fornication or adultery when the rape could not be proved under a stringent standard requiring two male witnesses?  (While we’re at it, how about the fact that in Islamic courts, the word of a female witness is officially given half the weight of a man’s?)  What about female genital mutilation?  Against the backdrop of these genuine horrors, literacy programs and micro-financing for young women’s employment look like a rather feeble response.   How about first ensuring that the girl who participates in a literacy program doesn’t get brutalized for showing a strand of hair in public?

    In this context, Obama’s comment that “the struggle for women’s equality” is also a problem in America is also, to say the least, unhelpful.  Yes, there are still gender disparities in the U.S., though I think many of them are due to, as Obama put it, women not making the same choices as men.  But to mention what sexism still remains in American society in the same breath as the violent misogyny and patriarchal oppression still pervasive in much of the Muslim world today is a truly misguided attempts at even-handedness.  It’s a bit like saying that of course it’s a bad thing that of course it’s a bad thing that Joe locks his wife in the closet, beats her senseless, forbids her to talk to any other man and monitors every penny she spends, but hey, Bill spends only half the time his wife does on housework and child care and treats his own career as more important than his wife’s, so if he voices disapproval of Joe he’d better mention his own failings too.

    Yes, of course it’s not only in Muslim countries that women face severe oppression.  (The issue of women being elected to lead in deeply patriarchal cultures is a separate, and fascinating, one, but I don’t think it’s a good measure of the overall status of women in society.)  And I know there is a vigorous debate about whether Islam is inherently more female-unfriendly than other major religions and whether an Islamic feminsm is possible.  Nonetheless, the fact remains that in recent decades we have seen a rollback of women’s rights in many societies — sometimes a drastic rollback — due to the influence of Islamic extremism.  Obama’s failure to mention this fact was extremely disappointing.  Talk about a missed opportunity.  In my previous post, I said that Obama’s comments on women’s rights deserved no more than a B-.  Analyzing them now, I’m lowering the grade to a gentleman’s C.

     

    I give it an “F.”  See below:

    PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE:  I PASTE ENOUGH TO ENCOURAGE YOU TO GET OVER THERE AND READ IT!

     

    Dr. Phyllis Chesler:

     

     

    Are Honor Killings Simply Domestic Violence? (title is URL)

    by Phyllis Chesler
    Middle East Quarterly
    Spring 2009

     

    Families that kill for honor will threaten girls and women if they refuse to cover their hair, their faces, or their bodies or act as their family’s domestic servant; wear makeup or Western clothing; choose friends from another religion; date; seek to obtain an advanced education; refuse an arranged marriage; seek a divorce from a violent husband; marry against their parents’ wishes; or behave in ways that are considered too independent, which might mean anything from driving a car to spending time or living away from home or family. Fundamentalists of many religions may expect their women to meet some but not all of these expectations. But when women refuse to do so, Jews, Christians, and Buddhists are far more likely to shun rather than murder them. Muslims, however, do kill for honor, as do, to a lesser extent, Hindus and Sikhs.

     

    {{Everything underlined here, was an issue in my Western, non-Muslim marriage.  I snuck education.  I was stalked, through my own family and individually for leaving to the point that I have had major fear to finalize this divorce, and have not;  I experienced retaliation consistently of engaging in activities outside the home, specifically anything that related to my former profession.  This retaliation could come in the form of interfering with me getting out the door, or sabotage — allowing me to start, but making it hard to complete, a simple season’s engagement; complaining about or withholding funding for something as elementary as a simple black skirt and shirt to perform in; display of weapons immediately after returning from a rehearsal, leaving the car with insufficient gas to get back from one, and other night-mare-inducing behavior.  This extended also to times my daughters were engaged in music as well; UNBELIEVABLE.  I have watched my piano be physically attacked, buried under virtual trash, and then I was mocked for not practicing it enough, which I barely could find time to do in a day.  I left home once, with an infant, in another state, for a week.  I was given extra tasks to complete before leaving, and I came back to a house that was dangerously trashed –NO dishes had been done, broken glass on the floor (and we had a baby), and a special plant/bush I’d given him had not been watered, and was dead.  Food in pots was moldy; I was stunned.  In subsequent (to marriage) public times, in court, he repeatedly talked about the condition of the house, as if I didn’t also work, or was solely responsible.  I had an unbelievable time getting access to a car, which was resented.  

    Finally, when I was able to leave the family home for two weeks, for a music camp, with daughters, when I returned, I’d been thrown out of the bedroom, a lock installed, and in short, this was when I determined to leave.  These TYPES of activities continued, to this day, post-separation.  Every decision I made that entailed putting daughters in a music class, or lessons, was permitted reluctantly, but eventually stopped.  Then public declarations were made that I was isolating and depriving them.  I attended a VERY liberal Midwestern college, and as a young person, was not restricted or berated for anything regarding my gender.  The place I met this man was not illiberal — it ordained women, we preached in teams, and sometimes lived together.  

    During this marriage, I began to doubt that I was indeed in America.  I had never heard of any experience like this, or known anyone who had experienced a situation like this violence, and abuse.  Speaking of it to the variety of people I did, indeed, come in front of year after year, few of them had words to describe this thing that was happening to me.  To this day, my “liberal” relatives will not use the word “domestic violence” or “abuse” in front of me, practically, and appear to be furious that I have actually spoken in these terms and insisted that this is indeed what happened.  The denial has taken it beyond the legal terms — there has been, within my family — a literal denial that any of the laws to protect people from domestic violence exist, apply, or have anything to do with our case, or my many difficulties. Experientially, it needs a name.  Now, gradually, through blogging, networking, reading, talking — and I have not been through ANYthing like the women below here — I have come to understand that this is a serious moral / emotional / social crisis our country is in.  There are powerful political factors that HAVE to say the words “domestic violence” with their mouths, because the cat is out of the bag, and the horse is out of the barn.  BUT, they are diluting, reframing, derailing the conversation and attempting, in many and disturbing ways, to turn back the clock on this matter of women saying NO!  You can NOT do this! and saying it through the courts.

    Every woman has to determine how she is going to respond to this shunning, when women in our world survive, and are emotionally supported primarily through their connections with others.  that is the value that is respected (often) with American women.  We are in our communities, we have children  OR, we have careers, or juggle both.  For women of my age (middle, OK?) to have both lost children AND career, and contact with their family, but not be a radical feminist, is indeed interesting.  We can come into the church perhaps as ministers, acolytes (so to speak), or servants supporting its infrastructure.  I, for one, no longer care to support the infrastructure of anything so dysfunctional.  I consider myself to be courageous and independent (in certain ways), but there comes a burnout level.  I have PTSD, and when exposed to more “women, get thee behind me, Satan” talk in certain denominations (many of them), I simply have to speak up, then leave.  I will not hang out there.  At least I have a few options.  

    To survive abuse, sometimes, one has to become two people:  a public one and a private one.  This includes sometimes with one’s spouse.  At some level, my soul was not going to show itself any more, for another verbal beating for mere existence.  Instead, I took the verbal tirades for being, supposedly, apathetic, wimpy, not caring and passive.  Well, being anything else got me physically assaulted, or some other form of escalation, sometimes involving property destruction, or attack on pets.  Children were in the home.  I just couldn’t keep that up, and guess what:  No one was backing me up.  No one was confronting this man, really.  At the end of the day, I had to come home to sleep.  He began accumulating guns, and large knives.  I don’t use these, or know how to, and it wasn’t too long (although more than a year) after this that I realized — we had to separate.  I cannot tell you the level of shame and embarrassment I had, with or without children, having to hide my mail, ask strangers for rides, or a few $$ to put in the ggas tank (if I had a car).  One night, I got stranded late at night in a downtown urban area after my night job.  I took a ride with what might have been a drug dealer to get to a gas station.  My ex came and got me, but with the news that someone had run over the cat that day, my favorite one (I always found this suspicious timing).  The concern for my personal safety was at zero level.  I kept journals.  My journals were targeted, and I had to remove them from the home for safekeeping.  He went after, and befriended the people keeping them, I got them back.  

    NOW:  Now, I cannot live that dual personality way, and will not. When I go into a church and am expected to adopt a certain demeanor — I won’t.  It’s like violence to the soul.  I am one person:  I will tell someone (in my family) if I am upset with them, and why.

    The Court System:

    The Family Court system in this country has become a charade.  It rewards short-term performance in front of evaluators, mediators, judges, and other people.  No one really looks behind the scenes — there is no interest, time or resources to fully check facts.  For the most part.  This system rewards the batterer “snake” personality:  Charming, manipulative, dissembling.  Or, alternately, wounded and looking helpless.  I have seen a (female) judge leap to aid my ex, to the extent of testifying for him, as if he could not speak.  I have watched him interrupt an attorney and derail the direct question, and get away with this.  When I go to court, I am primarily PTSD, although I try pretty hard.  All such a person needs to do is get through the next appearance with some person in authority, get their way, and afterwards, do whatever they want.  

     

    There are too many similarities between the hypocrisies and coverups of fundamentalist religion, and what I see in these courts.  It is going to take women, feminist women, to address it.  The other factor is, in this court, children are involved.  We are  not always 100% on board with the radical feminist regimes.  I cannot tell you how many women in my situation, leaving batterers, losing their kids to stand by helplessly as their kids are showing symptoms of abuse, including child sexual abuse, are themselves religious.  Many of them, their husbands or partners specifically targeted them in these circles — because the environment is male-domination-friendly.  

    When I say in my posts, that churches are NOT havens for women leaving violence, or necessarily shelters for them, I am absolutely in earnest.  i hope, in my way, to be able to speak to this and do something about the shameful failure to support — or even SPEAK about — the laws against violence towards women, and children — in these venues.  They are in their own ether, with their own agenda, and their own intents.  I do not believe this is the genuine religion of, in my case, the man Jesus Christ as I read about him in scripture.  I read nothing about his abusive or dismissive treatment of women; in fact it is the opposite.  I think what we have now is a charade of that.  For the most part.  I don’t think most people have the guts to do what he did, but some do.

    (WOW — where did THAT come from?  Well, I’ll post.  I may erase some of it another day…..)

     

    Amina Said (L), 18, and her sister Sarah, 17, were shot dead by their father Yaser at their home in Irving, Texas, in January 2008. Said was upset by his daughters’ “Western ways” and was assisted in the killing by his wife, the girls’ mother. The victims of honor killings are largely teenage daughters or young women. Unlike ordinary domestic violence, honor killings often involve multiple family members as perpetrators.

    Let’s Get Honest comments:

    In “ordinary domestic violence” family members could be either hostages, victims, OR enablers.  The truth is, it takes enablers for a PATTERN of domestic violence to thrive and grow.  There is denial, there is incompetence, there is scapegoating, there is helpless ignorance in what to do.  Many people in my culture have very strong emotions, but in certain classes and circles, this is not “socially acceptable.”  So they suppress them behind circuitous speech, evasive answers, or simply no answers.  When I got, out, I had some strong emotions (anger) as I began to stop hating myself (which was safer) and be angry.  My anger was noticed – his violence, and the danger this represented — was not.  I only recently simply decided to forgive, and do this entirely detached from any reason to, other than a decision, and a desire to be free from anger, and reactionary mode, which is typically either anger, or depression, when the insults, aggressions, etc. continue.  That’s how I am choosing to handle it at this point.  

    I am posting quite a bit here about Islamic violence towards women.  However, I am doing so with an understanding that forms of Protestantism (mainstream and nonmainstream) Christianity can still kill, destroy, and maim — physically and emotionally.  I am here to warn out country not to ignore this hate talk from governmental circles towards women.  In the lingo of domestic violence, denying it is a form of it (a.k.a. crazymaking).  Below, is a passage from “Infidel” about “baari.”  If I am able, I will find the passage from a Focus on the Family publication that sounds uncomfortably similar.  And I will say, the “shunning” and patronizing (social, psychological) takes a different form, but still exists, when a Christian woman throws out an abusive husband and then shows up in church unapologetic.  

    And expecting to be treated with respect. Or worse, looking for an opportunity to actually speak or teach the Bible (this was why I got thrown out of the last place, and I was entirely too submissive in that as well).  I finally came to the conclusion that it was safer outside those buildings.

    Another alarming trend, vigilante-style behavior  — AND TALK — around the issues of the family courts.  Continuing on the topic of Honor Killings, which was “skirted” nicely in the Cairo speech, above….

     

    The United Nations Population Fund estimates that 5,000 women are killed each year for dishonoring their families. This may be an underestimate. Aamir Latif, a correspondent for the Islamist website Islam Online who writes frequently on the issue, reported that in 2007 in the Punjab province of Pakistan alone, there were 1,261 honor murders. The Aurat Foundation, a Pakistani nongovernmental organization focusing on women’s empowerment, found that the rate of honor killings was on track to be in the hundreds in 2008.

    There are very few studies of honor killing, however, as the motivation for such killings is cleansing alleged dishonor and the families do not wish to bring further attention to their shame, so do not cooperate with researchers. Often, they deny honor crimes completely and say the victim simply went missing or committed suicide. Nevertheless, honor crimes are increasingly visible in the media. Police, politicians, and feminist activists in Europe and in some Muslim countries are beginning to treat them as a serious social problem…

    (SO WHY ISN”T OUR PRESIDENT?)

     

     

    PLEASE ALSO, READ THESE TWO BOOKS.  OK, THREE.  I DID.  I COULDN’T PUT THEM DOWN, IN FACT.  AND I FELT I WAS READING ABOUT MY OWN FAMILY.  I LIVE IN THE WEST.  I LIVE IN THE USA.  I DIDN’T EXPERIENCE, PHYSICALLY, AT ALL THE SAME AS THESE WOMEN.  WHY DID IT FEEL FAMILIAR?  

    I FEEL AS THOUGH OUR FAMILY HAS BECOME LIKE A POLYGAMOUS CULT, AND WE ARE A SMALL, NUCLEAR, PROFESSIONALLY INVOLVED FAMILY, ABOUT 3RD GENERATION IN THE COUNTRY.  NO ONE HAS BEEN JAILED.  WHY DID THE BEHAVIOR SOUND SO FAMILIAR, AND WHAT’S GOING ON?  I BELIEVE THAT IT IS THE EMOTIONAL, SPIRITUAL CONTENT OF THE BEHAVIOR WHICH IS THE SAME, FROM CULTURE TO CULTURE, EXPRESSED DIFFERENTLY.  HATE IS STILL HATE.

     

    This book, and woman, are so well-known, I don’t think there is too much to be added.  However, if not, READ.

    WIKIPEDIA:  (evidently not fully current)

    Ayaan Hirsi Ali (Nl-Ayaan Hirsi Ali.ogg pronunciation (help·info)Somali: Ayaan Xirsi Cali; born Ayaan Hirsi Magan 13 November 1969 in Somalia)[1]is a Dutch feminist, writer, and politician. She is the estranged daughter of the Somali scholar, politician, and revolutionary opposition leader Hirsi Magan Isse. She is a prominent critic of Islam, and her screenplay for Theo Van Gogh‘s movieSubmission led to death threats. Since van Gogh’s assassination by a Muslim extremist in 2004, she has lived in seclusion under the protection of Dutch authorities.

    When she was eight, her family left Somalia for Saudi Arabia, then Ethiopia, and eventually settled in Kenya. She sought and obtained political asylum in the Netherlands in 1992, under circumstances that later became the center of a political controversy. In 2003 she was elected a member of the House of Representatives (the lower house of the Dutch parliament), representing the People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD). A political crisis surrounding the potential stripping of her Dutch citizenship led to her resignation from the parliament, and led indirectly to the fall of the second Balkenende cabinet.

    She is currently a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, working from an unknown location in the Netherlands.[2][3] In 2005, she was named by Time magazine as one of the 100 most influential people in the world.[4] She has also received several awards for her work, including Norway’s Human Rights Service’s Bellwether of the Year Award, the Danish Freedom Prize, the Swedish Democracy Prize, and the Moral Courage Award for commitment to conflict resolution, ethics, and world citizenship.[5]

     

    HERE IS A LINK TO A 2007 Interview (NY Mag Review of Books).  “The Infidel Speaks,” by Boris Kachka, Feb. 4, 2007

     

    SHE SAYS SOME EXTRAORDINARILY RELEVANT THINGS.

    I THINK IT EXTRAORDINARLY REMARKABLE THAT MY PRESIDENT DIDN’T MENTION MUCH ABOUT THE TREATMENT OF WOMEN, OR ANY OF THESE EXTRAORDINARY ONES, WHEN VISITING A MUSLIM COUNTRY.  NOTE (AS TO “CAIRO SPEECH”), NONIE DARWISH, BELOW, FLED EGYPT FOR THE USA, AND CONVERTED TO CHRISTIANITY.  HER YOUTUBE AND A PARTIAL INTERVIEW IS BELOW (SO LABELED:  THIS IS THE SOMALIAN SWEDISH AMERICAN WOMAN HERE:

     

     To her admirers, Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a maverick, bravely defying the Netherlands’ political correctness to address Europe’s growing cultural rifts. To detractors, she’s a charismatic bomb-thrower with as little regard for her adopted nation’s safety as for her own. Both sides would have to admit that the former Somali-Dutch politician is a master of self-reinvention. After a rough childhood (circumcision, daily beatings) in Kenya, Ethiopia, and Saudi Arabia, she escaped to Holland from a forced marriage, eventually joined the Dutch Parliament as a Muslim criticizing her own culture, and made a provocative film with Theo van Gogh that got him killed and sent her into hiding.

    This is why I think that, just perhaps, President Obama might have been a little remiss to simply not address this issue in a Muslim nation.  Nonie Darwish’s father was killed in jihad, and she left Egypt for the US.  Now here is an American leader back in Egypt, speaking on this topic, and nothing substantial?

    When a rival threatened to revoke her citizenship, the resulting furor toppled the governing coalition. But Ali just moved on, resigning and moving to Washington, D.C., where she now works for the American Enterprise Institute. It’s all retold in her eloquent new memoir, Infidel. Stopping by Soho House recently, she spoke with New York about life and politics in her latest adopted land.

      

    You’ve been here for six months. How do you like the U.S.? 
    That is the question they all ask! I love it. The most comforting thing is the anonymity. I’m not allowed to talk about security—to tell you who in this room is security and who is not—but the pressure cooker of Holland is over. I am now just one individual in the melting pot.

     

    You’re at a conservative think tankperhaps an odd place for a harsh critic of religion in political life. 
    I consider myself nonpartisan, but I’m a liberal—not in the American sense, because Americans seem to refer to communists as liberals. What we see in Europe, because of the welfare state, is government pretending to provide all sorts of services they shouldn’t be providing.

     

    Let’s Get Honest comment:  My point EXACTLY, in many of these posts! 

    But what do you make of Christian conservatives in your ranks? 
    No one in the American Enterprise imposes their beliefs. We clash, and I think that’s what the West is all about.

     

    But you’re with them on the whole “clash of civilizations” thing? 
    When I was in Holland, the idea was, all cultures are equal and all are to be preserved. My idea was, no, all humans are equal but not all cultures are equal. In the culture of my parents, we never seemed to be able to succeed in such basic issues as getting food, interacting and living in peace with each other, or adapting to our environment, and the West, they’ve succeeded in all those. I’d been taught Western culture’s only bad. Maybe that’s good for your self-esteem, but it wasn’t taking us anywhere.

    This woman comes from WHERE?  And she understands the Declaration of Independence (principles) better than we do?  It’s not the CULTURE, it’s the HUMANS:

    When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

    THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENTS.  NOT DISHING OUT HAPPINESS AND HEALTH, BUT SECURING THOSE RIGHTS!

    That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

     

    LOCALLY SPEAKING, SOME WOMEN NEED TO DISBAND THEIR FAMILY UNIT, TO SECURE THEIR SAFETY.  WHO THE HELL IS THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES TO UNDERMINE THAT DECISION BY GOVERNMENTAL DECREE, AS HAS BEEN DONE IN THE FATHERHOOD RESOLUTIONS, GRANTS, INITIATIVES, AND TASK FORCES ??  ???  

    THE MAIN QUESTION IN THESE MATTERS IS WHETHER OR NOT WOMEN ARE INCLUDED IN THE INCLUSIVE NOUN “MEN”  NOW, WOMEN HAD TO FIGHT FOR THIS, BUT IN 1920, AFTER SLAVES, WE MANAGED TO GET THE RIGHT TO VOTE.  THIS WOMAN CAME FROM A RELIGION, THE NAME OF WHICH MEANT, “SUBMIT.”  THE NAME OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT, PER DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE FROM GREAT BRITAIN, ABOVE, IS IN ESSENCE, PERMIT.

    NOW AS TO FAITH-BASED INITIATIVES, I’D LIKE TO CITE THE PRIMARY CHRISTIAN VERSE USED TO JUSTIFY WIFE-BEATING:  


     

     

    You’ve dismissed accusations that you’re lashing out because of childhood traumas. So why write a memoir graphically detailing the abuse you and your siblings suffered? 
    It became important to say, “Okay, you guys keep accusing me of using my past. Let me tell you my story, and my story shows that I do not blame the death of my sister on Islam. I do not blame female genital mutilation on Islam.” My whole awakening was triggered by the eleventh of September, and it did not affect only me, it affected a lot of people.

     

     

    Do you regret certain things you said about Muhammad—like that he was a pervert and a tyrant? 
    I don’t regret that. I’m still convinced that for Muslims to integrate fully into modern society, we cannot avoid discussing the prophet. We didn’t only deal with communism militarily, but we said it is a bad idea. The works of Karl Marx were discussed.

     

     

    Maybe academia would have been a better—and less dangerous—venue. 
    Politics is not a good thing for me. But I wanted to bring out the issue of Muslim treatment of women in Holland, and I could only accomplish that in Parliament. If I had been a professor, it would just have disappeared in a cabinet.

     

     

     

     

    “the Territory that is now Somalia was divided between the British and the Italians, who occupied the country as colonizers, splitting it in two.  In 1960 the colonizers left, leaving behind a brand-new, independent state.  A unified Somalia was born.”  

    Page 12 of her book “”Of course my mother had no right to a divorce under Muslim law.”  “a woman who is baari is like a pious slave

     

    “If in the process of baari you feel grief, humiliation, and everlasting exploitation you hide it.  If you long for love and comfort you pray in silence to Allah to make your husband more bearable

     

    Page 13 of her book

     

     

     

    AND:

    “They call me infidel”. Ex-Muslim Christian Nonie Speaks out

    This was of interest to me because the author had experienced a regime change within her home country, and then come to America and experienced a change of religion.  So she spoke of the qualitative differences.

     (11/20/2006)

    Egyptian-born Nonie Darwish is “too controversial” to speak at Brown University, where her invitation to speak was just taken back. The title of her new book about says it all Now They Call Me Infidel: Why I Renounced Jihad for America, Israel, and the War on Terror . Good luck with that one. Here, where we’ve been attacked by jihadists, we don’t like to hear about the enemy we face.

    (THIS IS AN INTERVIEW.  EXCERPTS, HERE:)

    LOPEZ: Are the majority of Muslim women oppressed? What can be done for them?

    DARWISH: The majority of Muslim women are oppressed and that is due to Islamic sharia law which severely discriminates against women. Even the most educated and powerful Muslim women are faced with a legal system that is very discriminatory against women. Muslim women start the marital relationship from a weaker position. The Muslim marriage contract itself is unfair to women because Muslim men can add three more wives if he wishes. That changes the dynamic of husband/wife relationship even if a Muslim man does not exercise this right. Polygamy has a devastating impact on families. There are chronic social ills and tragedies stemming from this single right.

    The court system is designed to oppress women, without a doubt.
     

    {{Commentary:  I read her book.  She talks about how polygamy (one man, many women) pollutes relationships not just between the man and the woman, but also between women:  backbiting, whispering, intrigue.  I remembered my own case, which has many women involved in protecting a single man, vigorously defending his behavior, which was criminal, as though it were honorable, and I were the criminal for speaking up.  I could not put this book down, asking WHY? does this sound like my family?  I think these are spiritual issues, and that while the West does NOT endorse polygamy, within the court systems, at least, many of these dynamics are at play — first wives, second wives, etc.  They are used against each other, undermining ALL women.  }}

    LOPEZ: How prevalent is “honor killing”?

    DARWISH: According to Islamic law sex outside marriage is prohibited and the penalty for that is often death. The woman is always to blame because she is regarded as the source of the seduction. Muslim men’s honor is dependent on their women’s sexual purity. It does not matter how honorable the character of the Muslim man; but if his female relatives commit any sexual taboos, Muslim society will dishonor him. Arab culture is based on pride and shame** and a Muslim man cannot survive with this kind of shame unless he kills the source of that shame which is the female relative who have had sex outside of marriage. It is not known how common this crime of honor killing happens since it is often goes unreported and the police often looks the other way, but I believe it is common in certain parts of the Muslim world if the girl is discovered to be no longer a virgin or pregnant. That is why most girls in the Middle East remain virgins till marriage and there are very few births out of wedlock in the Middle East.

    {{**I am concerned about the culture of “manhood” in the west being based on the same things.  It is not a good basis.  I also believe that, despite the level of indoctrination being nothing of the like, this same BASIS of education in the U.S. exists — and that is not a good basis for human behavior.  Rather, how much better, to respect accomplishment in a variety of life situations.  But school is NOT a variety of life situations, it is ONE of life’s many situations.  To teach people to be puffed up, or feel inferior, based on their grade performances (although it is good to study and learn, and be able to have those skills), is simply wrong.  How much better to be, rather engaged in the process of learning, and let that be the intrinsic reward.  We will have better people.  

    I believe (opening up a bit here) that what happeend to me in music was, I was allowed to be more expressive, and less analytical, also less about, producing a grade.  I didn’t value grades — already had them.  They did nothing for me socially and weren’t hard enough to earn.  They di dnot increase my sense of self-worth at all, as an adolescent.  I learned to be ashamed about things that had no basis in shame, including my (good) grades, and so forth.  The act of going to and from a classroom is not exactly a major accomplishment in life.  The ability to help others learn to do something, or to engage as a human being; to build something, to design something, to perform something.  But to fill in the correct multiple choice answers on a test sheet according to data you were fed in a textbook?  That’s nothing; it’s for the convenience of the school comparing you to everyone else.  . . . ..  I remember failing on purpose, just to see what it felt like.  I still graduated at the top of my (public high school class).  The skills needed in college were entirely different.  Thank God, there were pianos and there was singing, which led to different types of social interactions.

    I believe that what I noticed about this book was when she spoke about the intense hatred, rivalry and bitter suspicious, ongoing, between women in particular.  I have been dealing with this for the many years since I left my ex-husband, after the difficulties while dealing personally with him in the home.  It really is wearing to the soul, and saddening.  I am still seeking and believing for some of these family issues to resolve, but I feel sad when I see that, for the sake of eradicating my world view and values, my children were, literally, uprooted from contact with me, as if I might contaminate them somehow, with self-confidence, and the courage to be different.  The courage to expect a woman to have equal legal rights to a man, in America, our country.  So far, “NO DEAL”!!}}}}

    LOPEZ: What’s it like to be a journalist in Egypt? Worse than life under the Patriot Act?

    DARWISH: I was a journalist in Egypt in the early seventies when I worked at the Middle East News Agency in Cairo, Egypt. I was an editor, translator, and censor. As a censor I decided what was to be allowed for publication and what was not allowed. Egyptian media outlets at the time were controlled more or less by the government. Journalists were not really journalists in the Western sense of looking to expose government corruption and internal problems; they were more concerned in blaming the outside world. Military information was totally off limits in reporting. I once said to a fellow journalist that I met a Jew in one of my trips and that that was the first time I met a Jew. The colleague warned me that Arab journalists who communicate with Jews in foreign countries come back to Egypt in a box. Very few Arab journalists were even aware of the true role of media in a society. As to Western life under the Patriot Act, I think it the opposite Arab government controlled Media. In the West it has often become Media controlled government where freedom of the Press (having too much of a good thing) often comes before other important things in Western society, such as for example national security. Sometimes Western media has no tolerance for any restrictions and that can help America’s enemies.

    LOPEZ: 
    What made you leave Egypt?

    DARWISH: I always regarded America as the land of hope, equality, and opportunity and that was my motivation. I also wanted to leave the Middle East with its problems, its jihad, its pride, anger, and anti-Semitism and above all the constant state of war with Israel.

    I CAUTION, the United States of America, I CAUTION them to monitor the “us/them” mentality in every area of life.  I CAUTIOn them to keep a lit on this vigilante return to Fatherhood, and the farming out of any conscience, guidance, and education of their young to anyone such as those in those in the Executive Branch of Government, who are presently engaged in establishing, on one hand a national religion (through a variety of means) and on the other hand, a totalitarian system in which choice is the heresy.  Opting out of government involvement in the basic processes of life is a heresy.

    There are aspects in which the fatherhood movement — as practiced, reminds me of the KKK.  It is the same type of hate speech.

    I am going to talk about another, very uncomfortable genocide I have read in some detail about (it just came up, and I continued reading, OK?  It’s what I DO!)  Rwanda.  This is of interest to me because some churches protected, and some betrayed.  Here is a personal, amazing story I ran across.  Again, it is told by a woman:

     

    LEFT TO TELL

     

     

    In 1994, Rwandan native Ilibagiza was 22 years old and home from college to spend Easter with her devout Catholic family when the death of Rwanda’s Hutu president sparked a three-month slaughter of nearly one million ethnic Tutsis. She survived by hiding in a Hutu pastor’s tiny bathroom with seven other starving women for 91 cramped, terrifying days. This searing firsthand account of Ilibagiza’s experience cuts two ways: her description of the evil that was perpetrated, including the brutal murders of her family members, is soul-numbingly devastating, yet the story of her unquenchable faith and connection to God throughout the ordeal uplifts and inspires. This book is a precious addition to the literature that tries to make sense of humankind’s seemingly bottomless depravity and counterbalancing hope in an all-powerful, loving God.”
    -Publisher’s Weekly, Starred Review, March 2006

     

    We all ask ourselves what we would do if faced with the kind of terror and loss that Immaculée Ilibagiza faced during the genocide in her country. Would we allow fear and desperation to fill us with hatred or despair? And should we survive, would our spirit be poisoned, or would we be able to rise from the ashes still encouraged to fulfill our purpose in life, still able to give and receive love? In the tradition of Viktor Frankl and Anne Frank, Immaculée is living proof that human beings can not only withstand evil, but can also find courage in crisis, and faith in the most hopeless of situations. She gives us the strength to find wisdom and grace during our own challenging times.” 
    -Elizabeth Lesser, co-founder of the Omega Institute, and author of Broken Open: How Difficult Times Can Help Us Grow

    “Left to Tell is for anyone who is weary of the predictable “eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth” trance most of the world suffers from. Immaculée Ilibagiza breaks that spell by bravely quelling the storm within, and contacting a force so powerful that it allows her to calm the storm “without,” and more important, to forgive the “unforgivable.” Her story is an inspiration to anyone who is at odds with a brother, a nation, or themselves.”
    -Judith Garten, teacher and counselor of The 50/50Work© and a child of the WWII Holocaust

     

     

     

    (As far as I got on this post July 2, 2009

    Causal vs Casual relationships in single mother households, Violence, Poverty

    leave a comment »

     

    Dear Silent Visitors,  

     

    I have some more news for you.  Actually, this is over 4 years old in Australia, but apparently news to large sectors of America (North, USA):

     

     

    UNLIKE  Family Violence Prevention Fund, or, say,

     

    White House.Gov (Issues – Family)

     

     

    Australia actually USES the word “mothers” in conjunction with the words “Families” in a public forum.

     

     

    When I saw, I was so excited, I had to post it.  

     

    I have also some more initials for you:

     

    NCSMC 

     

     

     

     

    (Australia: 2005, NCSMC, Inc. writes SCFHS, Gov. (Say, Huh?)

     

    http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/fhs/reports.htm

     

     

    22 April 2005 

    SUBMISSION NO. 108 

    AUTHORISED: 9 2OS~QS I 

    Committee Secretariat 

    Standing Committee on Family and Human Services 

    Parliament House 

    CANBERRA ACT 2600 

    fhs.reps@aph.gov. au 

     

    Dear Secretariat, 

     

    Please find attached the submission of the National Council of Single Mothers and their Children to 

    the Commonwealth Parliamentary Inquiry into Balancing Work and Family. 

     

    This submission specifically addresses the second term of reference in relation to single mothers. In 

    particular, we would like to draw to the committee’s attention how experiences of violence impact 

    on single mothers’ transitions from welfare to paid employment. We note that this is an area that is 

    largely unexplored and urge the committee to consider the need to rectify this. 

    NCSMC would welcome the opportunity to make oral submissions to the Secretariat in support of 

    this submission. 

     

    If you have any need for further information with respect to the issues raised, please contact myself 

    or the Executive Officer, Jac Taylor. 

     

    Yours sincerely, 

    Dr Elspeth Mclnnes 

    Convenor 

     

    NCSMC National Council of Single Mothers and their Children Inc. 


    220 Victoria Square Tarndanyangga Adelaide SA 5000 Ph: 0882262505 Fax: 0882262509 

    ncsmc~ncsmc.orc.au http://www.ncsmc.org.au 

    1

    About NCSMC 

    The National Council of Single Mothers and their Children Incorporated was formed in 1973 to 

    advocate for the rights and interests of single mothers and their children to the benefit of all sole 

    parent families, including single father families. 

    NCSMC formed to focus on single mothers’ interests at a time when women who were pregnant 

    outside marriage were expected to give up their children for adoption by couple families and there 

    was no income support for parents raising children alone. Today most single mothers are women 

    who have separated from a partner. Issues of income support, child support, paid work, housing, 

    parenting, child-care, family law, violence and abuse continue as concerns to the present day. 

    NCSMC has member organisations in states and territories around Australia, many of which also 

    provide services and support to families after parental separation. 

    NCSMC aims to: 

    Ensure that all children have a fair start in life; 

    Recognise single mother families as a viable and positive family unit; 

    Promote understanding of single mothers and their children in the community that they may 

    live free from prejudice; 

    To work for improvements in the social economic and legal status of single mothers and 

    their children. 

    This submission will focus primarily on the second term of reference: 

    Making it easier for parents who so wish to return to the paid workforce. 

    NCSMC wishes to highlight that existing legislation does not allow single mothers on income 

    support to choose the circumstances of return to work as they are compelled to undertake certain 

    activities as part of their “mutual obligation”. It would appear that the Australian Government 

    intends to significantly increase these obligations, making choice even more limited. Thus, 

    NCSMC wishes the committee to note the double standard that currently applies where single 

    mothers face compulsion to undertake paid work, compared to couple mothers who may choose 

    their involvement.1 

    Parental separation and violence 

    Single-parent households comprise more than one in five households with dependent children in 

    Australia and comprise one the fastest growing family forms (Wise, 2003). Most single parents are 

    1 Refer to Appendix A for NCSMC’s Guiding Principles to further welfare reform. 

    2

    mothers, with nine out of 10 children living with their mothers after parental separation (ABS 

    1999). The rise in single-parent households is primarily attributable to the rising rate of separations 

    between parents, and violence is implicated as a strong driver of relationship breakdown. Recent 

    Australian research into the reasons for divorce found that, after general communication 

    breakdown, violence and addictions were the most common reasons women gave for ending the 

    relationship (Wolcott & Hughes 1999). 

    This reasoning is supported statistically in the ABS (1996) survey of women’s safety, which found 

    that single women with an ex-partner were the most likely to have experienced violence, and the ex- 

    partner was the most probable assailant. The population survey found that 23% of adult women 

    who had ever partnered had experienced violent assault by a current partner or former partner, but 

    single women who had previously been partnered were at highest risk of experiencing assault, with 

    42% reporting violence at some time during their relationship (ABS 1996, p. 51). Family court data 

    indicates that 66% of separations involving children have violence or abuse (Family Law Pathways 

    Report 2001). 

    The data reported in the submission are drawn from a doctoral research project undertaken in South 

    Australia in the 1 990s (Mclnnes 2001), which compared the family transition experiences of single 

    mothers who left violent relationships with those who did not have to content with violence.2 

    Interviews were conducted with 36 single mothers, which included separated and divorced mothers 

    and women who had given birth outside of an established partnership. Of the 29 women 

    interviewed who became single mothers as the result of relationship break down, 18 reported that 

    their relationship ended due to violence. Abuse was self-defined by respondents and always 

    included physical violence and sometimes included sexual, social, financial and emotional abuse. 

    The violence typically formed part of the relationship dynamic in which the mother and children 

    lived in constant fear and anxiety, rather than a single explosive event. 

    Labour market participation 

    Only 4 of the mothers interviewed had never participated in the paid workforce, and 28 of the 36 

    women were either undertaking paid work or study at the time of interview. Thus for the majority, 

    paid work and/or study formed an integral part of their identity and daily experience. 

    Single mothers who separated from violent relationships were less likely to be in paid work, but 

    more likely to be studying, than other mothers at the time of interview. Of the 20 survivors of 

    childhood and/or adult violence, 70% were mainly reliant on income support. Two-thirds of the 

    3

    mothers who were mainly reliant on income support were studying at the time of interview and 

    three out of four single mother students had left violent relationships. This fits with existing 

    research that found that divorced women who had been exposed to severe abuse were less likely to 

    be in the paid workforce than other divorced women (Sheehan and Smyth 2000). 

    The differences between single mothers’ paid work and study status according to their exposure to 

    violent relationships indicates that analysis of single mothers’ economic participation cannot be 

    reduced to infrastructure needs such as childcare. Women’s exposure to gendered violence and their 

    responsibilities for care of children combine to qualitatively change their access to the paid 

    workforce. 

    Gender and working parents 

    Australia’s paid workforce is highly gendered, where women’s work is predominantly clustered in 

    low-paid part-time service work (Baker and Tippin 1999; Edwards and Magarey 1995; Pocock 

    1995; Sharp and Broomhill 1988). Women’s increased participation in paid work has not produced 

    a proportionate decline in their share of domestic and family work relative to men (Bittman & 

    Lovejoy 1993; Hochschild 1997). Thus gender remains a clear determinant ofworkforce 

    participation, reflecting women’s unpaid caring responsibilities, and the higher rewards of work 

    available to men. 

    Current family policy increases the risks ofunemployment for single parents. Current family policy 

    pays higher rewards to mothers in couple families withdrawing from the workforce, through the 

    non-means tested payment of FTB B to single income families. When mothers are not partnered 

    they become subject to new participation requirements to maintain access to a subsistence income 

    support payment. Current family policy is thus incoherent and inconsistent by paying some mothers 

    to stop work and requiring other mothers to start work. The best protection against unemployment 

    for single mothers is to enable all parents, couple and single, to make structured transitions in and 

    out of the workforce as caregiving needs require over the life course. This means consideration of 

    initiatives such as maternity leave and paternity leave, quality affordable child care services, 

    retraining packages and subsidy entitlements for caregivers returning to work. 

    2 All identifying information has been removed to protect the privacy and confidentiality of respondents. 

    4

    Single Mothers and Paid Work 

    A study comparing return to work programmes for low income mothers across Australia, Canada, 

    New Zealand and the United Kingdom concluded that the variation in levels of workforce activity 

    required of mothers affected the level of difficulty experienced by families, but did not essentially 

    change the degree or scope of poverty of single mother households (Baker and Tippin 1999). 

    Along with responsibility for dependent children, low paid work in insecure jobs in a gender- 

    segmented labour market prevented single mothers from gaining access to economic independence. 

    Only well-paid, secure full-time jobs would enable parents to support their children on a single 

    income, without any reliance on income support. 

    In the Economic Consequences of Marriage Breakdown study, McDonald (1986) found that being 

    in the workforce at the time of separation was the most important factor influencing post-separation 

    workforce participation of mothers with dependent children. Women who had undertaken paid 

    work during the marriage, particularly after the birth of the second child, were the most likely to 

    continue paid work participation. Women with professional occupational experience had a higher 

    workforce attachment, and better access to secure working conditions. Reporting these findings, 

    Funder (1989:82) noted that decisions taken during the marriage about the gender division of paid 

    work and child rearing responsibilities strongly influenced women’s post separation employment 

    prospects. 

    Recommendations: 

    NCSMC recommends that government policy be reviewed to address inconsistencies that 

    “encourage” single mothers, on the one hand, to enter paid work, and couple mothers, on 

    the other, to stay at home. 

    NCSMC recommends that family support policy be reviewed to introduce paid maternity 

    leave and paternity leave, quality affordable child care services, retraining packages and 

    subsidy entitlementsfor caregivers returning to work 

    Factors such as the women’s level of education and history of paid work also affect their likelihood 

    of paid work participation. A relatively high wage was needed to compensate for work costs and 

    the loss of income support, as well as rent increases for mothers living in public housing. Research 

    in Australia into sole parents leaving the income support system, has confirmed that access to well- 

    paid employment with family-friendly workplace conditions and appropriate affordable childcare 

    was the most sustainable path out of poverty for single mothers (Chalmers 1999:45; McHugh & 

    Millar 1996; Wilson et al. 1998). 

    5

    Factors identified in previous research as producing the highest incidence of reliance on income 

    support were: 

    Being out of the paid workforce at time of separation; 

    Not being involved in the decision to separate; 

    Having an income lower than the benefit level paid; 

    Having less than Year 12 schooling; and 

    Not re-partnering within five to eight years (Funder 1989:85). 

    The number of children in the family also affected a mother’s labour market participation with 

    participation in work declining as the number of children rose (Funder 1989). In Mclnnes 2001, 72 

    percent of the sample had one or two children, and four out of five of these were working or 

    studying. None of the respondents with three or more children were in the paid workforce at the 

    time ofinterview, although seventy percent of these were studying. 

    p 

    Paid work and caring responsibilities 

    In the study by Mclnnes 2001, parents felt torn between their parenting and earning roles. The dual 

    demands of being the only available parent and income earner made participation in paid work a 

    balancing act for many women. While mothers expected to work and earn their own income as 

    their children grew older, a lack of alternative care meant they could not easily work outside 

    standard office hours. 

    If you have a partner it~s much easier to stay back at work. Childcare finishes atfive thirty and you have 

    to be there to pick the child up. I always had to leave early to pick her up I missed out on hours of 

    work. Iwas only paid by the hour (Juanita, 41, 1 child). 

    It would be very difficult doing shifi work. There~s lobs that I’ve had that I wouldn’t be able to do now, 

    like when I was working with young disabled people 8 hour sh~fis over a 24 hours period seven days a 

    week and I]ust wouldn’t be able to get child care (Ann, 40, 1 child). 

    I couldn’t possibly see howl could keep a night-time job. Childcare was something that wasn’t available 

    at night in those days… My mother was prepared to have the children but only ~fItook them to her house. 

    She had no room set up for them. I had to pick them up at 11 o’clock at night, take them out and put them 

    in the car, and drive home (Kerry, 31, 2 children). 

    Respondents stressed that being able to meet their children’s needs came first, and their ability to 

    undertake paid work had to fit in around these needs. However, they did sacrifice their own needs 

    especially in relation to recreation and leisure time, leading to increased isolation and stress. 

    Work made me really very isolated because I was losing my energy I was coming back at about seven 

    o clock in the evening and trying to cook something for her. She was screaming because.. she spent 

    between ten and twelve hours in a day-care centre so she was miserable (Sasha, 42, 1 child). 

    6

    When Ifirst came back, because I was so tired and getting so little sleep, I was bursting into tears all the 

    time and Ifound it very hard to look professional… I’ve had to go home during the day and have sleeps 

    because I was just so knackered (Ann, 40, 1 child). 

    Where mothers had made the transition into paid work some found themselves having to return to 

    income support due to illness, lack of child care, lack of transport and stress. 

    I can’t nurse any more I’ve got registration however I’m not able to work any more as a nurse because 

    I have to take care ofeverybody including my ex. I had to accommodate my life to suit his 4fe because he 

    refused to do it (Sasha, 41, 1 child). 

    Recommendation: 

    NCSMC recommends that ‘welfare to works policy must enable easy and fast transition between 

    paid work and income support to ensure single mothers are able to meet their children ~sneeds. 

    Despite their efforts to find ways to work, single mothers’ workforce participation remained 

    subordinate to the demands of family for a number of reasons: P 

    There was no other present parent to share care for children; 

    Mothers barely saw their children when they worked full-time; 

    Working full-time meant risking exhaustion; 

    Children needed their remaining parent’s attention. 

    For those mothers who had experienced violence, their family demands were higher due to the 

    continuing impact of trauma on their own and their children’s health. Taft (2003) notes that there 

    are strong links between intimate violence and damage to women s mental health, including 

    depression, anxiety, substance misuse, suicidality and post traumatic stress disorder. 

    Child Care 

    The single mothers in the sample (Mclnnes 2001) drew on both formal and informal sources of 

    care, with the most advantaged mothers being able to draw on a wider range. Informal sources 

    included relatives, friends and the other parent and had the advantage of being both flexible and 

    cost free. For women who had experienced violence their choices were far more limited as they 

    were often isolated from both informal and formal sources of care. 

    Consistent with other research (Swinbourne et al. 2000; Wijnberg & Weinger 1998), the women in 

    the sample with close relationships with family found this the best form of alternative care. But not 

    all women could rely on family support, especially migrant women. Women who had experienced 

    7

    childhood violence could not rely on family, and those who had experienced violence as an adult 

    had been forced to move away from their ex-partner and were thus isolated from family. 

    Only 13 mothers (3 6%) in the sample (Mclnnes 2001) had regular contact with their ex-partner. A 

    study of labour force capacity of sole parents who shared care with the other parent found that 

    mothers who shared care in a regular, co-operative, flexible and satisfactory arrangement with the 

    other parent were considerably more likely to be in paid work than single mothers who did not 

    share care (Dickenson et al. 1999). However, where mothers did depend on ex-partners for care 

    while they undertook paid work, ex-partners were able to continue to exert control over mother’s 

    activities, echoing other research findings that partners decided whether to ‘allow’ mothers to work 

    in couple families (Eureka Strategic Research, 1998:68). Full time work by mothers could also 

    create barriers to regular contact with the non-resident parent. When mothers were working full- 

    time, weekends were their only opportunity to spend leisure time with their child, competing with 

    non-resident fathers’ time. Access to care by the other parent was not possible for the women 

    whose ex-partners were absent, and not in the child’s interest when the other parent was abusive. 

    Survivors ofviolence thus had less access to this source of care. 

    A third source of alternative care was neighbourhood networks, providing the convenience of 

    locality. Like family, friends were an important resource out of hours, or when children were sick 

    and could not attend school or childcare. Relocation after separation created barriers to women 

    sustaining the neighbourhood friendships that had developed before their relationships ended. 

    Women fleeing violence were often forced to move away form their neighbourhoods. Those who 

    were able to remain in their homes during and after the separation were more likely to have access 

    to neighbourhood support networks that could replace or extend family support. 

    Most commonly, formal child care was used. Less flexible and more expensive, it was more 

    reliable for mothers to meet work and study commitments. Survivors of violence and migrants 

    were more reliant on formal childcare services. However, child care usually had to be booked in 

    advance, creating difficulties for women who worked casual hours and were unsure of their child 

    care needs. Cost limited mothers’ use of child care. Mothers who had experienced abuse of 

    themselves or their children were often distrustful of childcare. Overall, survivors of violence 

    experienced relative disadvantage in access to all sources of alternative care. 

    Despite the limitations, high quality affordable, accessible childcare was important to reducing 

    isolation among survivors ofviolence, migrant mothers and others who did not have ready access to 

    informal care sources. The data indicate that accessible, affordable, safe child care remains 

    8

    fundamental to enabling single mothers to participate in paid work, particularly for migrant women 

    and those who have survived violence. Identification and awareness of the needs of parent and 

    child survivors of violence could provide considerable support to women seeking to improve their 

    workforce opportunities. 

    Recommendation: 

    NCSMC recommends that government fund affordable, accessible, appropriate, quality child care 

    places, in numbers sufficient to meet demand. 

    Workforce motivations and barriers 

    Poverty Trays 

    Gaining financial rewards from work was important to justify the additional cost and effort of 

    workforce participation for mothers, however, poverty traps undermined respondents’ motivation to 

    work. Respondents in this research (Mclnnes 2001) calculated the impact of market eamings on 

    their income support payments and felt there needed to be greater financial incentives to enter the 

    workforce, particularly for those living in public housing, when earnings also increased rent. 

    I was earning maybe one hundred and fifty extra but I had to cut it down to part-time and it just wasn’t 

    worth it. Housing Trust put your rent up. Social Security takes away money and I was aboutfive dollars 

    better off (Bonny, 28, 3 children). 

    My rent went up over sixty dollars a week when I started working and when I complained about that they 

    said ~youare already in subsidised housing what are you complaining about’ (Laurel, 38, 3 children). 

    The combination of low-paid, insecure jobs with high effective marginal tax rates in income tests on 

    public rental rates and income support payments, provided no economic benefit to families in public 

    housing to compensate for the time pressure and the financial and family costs of going to paid 

    work. Poverty traps did not as severely affect single mothers in private rental housing or 

    homebuyers as earnings did not directly increase their housing costs. Survivors of violence and 

    mothers without wage income capital assets were more likely to be living in public housing, and 

    were thus more severely affected by poverty traps than other mothers. The paradox of poverty traps 

    is that mothers with higher income earning capacity and assets are less severely affected than 

    mothers living in deep poverty, in public housing, with poor income prospects. 

    Recommendations: 

    NCSMC recommends the removal of quadruple income test (Youth Allowance, Family Tax 

    Benefit, Child Care Benefit and Child Support). 

    NCSMC recommends federal and state governments cooperate to address the public housing 

    rental / market earnings poverty trap. 

    9

    Access to transyort 

    A key dimension of poverty and isolation among single mothers was their access to private 

    transport. The study or workforce prospects of single mothers without access to private transport 

    were limited, compared to those who held a driver’s licence and could afford to run a car (Mclnnes 

    2001). Getting children to child care or school on public transport and then getting to workplaces, 

    often required mothers to rouse children at dawn. Women living in non-metropolitan areas were at 

    an even greater disadvantage due to limited services. 

    I would have had to drop him at somebody’s house atfive in the morning, having got myself up and the 

    baby up it would have to be a house close by… I would have to have him there including weekends when 

    there was sh~fl work and it~ harder to find child care on rotating shifts (Judith, 34, 1 child). 

    I had to take her in the morning on the bus, then catch another bus, with the pusher, with her bottle, her 

    nappies, everything, to the child care. I then had to walk down to the day care centre, then come back 

    and walk to my classes and then back to pick her up. Whew! I was walking. It was a slavery (Sasha, 42, 

    1 child). 

    I was catching buses. I didn’t have a licence. I was leaving home at quarter to six in the morning to be at 

    work by seven and I wasn’t getting home tillfive thirty at night (Judith, 34, 1 child). 

    Women’s life histories of income status, relationships, culturally scripted gender roles and 

    motherhood formed part of the context in which some had not been able to learn to drive. Some 

    women had grown up in low income households without a car, others had lived in relationships in 

    which only men were drivers, and therefore controlled women’s mobility. Gaining a driver’s licence 

    meant gaining freedom to move. 

    Recommendation: 

    NCSMC recommends that government provide funding to single mothers on income support to 

    cover the cost of driving lessons and purchase ofdriver ‘s licence. 

    Post Sevaration Violence 

    Despite the widespread belief that leaving the relationship stops domestic violence, a number of 

    survivors of violence reported continuing harassment, stalking, threats and physical attacks by their 

    ex-partner (Mclnnes 2001). Mothers who had to maintain contact with a violent ex-partner for 

    child contact found that management of their ex-partner’s violence changed, but did not necessarily 

    stop after separation. Their actions were still constrained and conditioned by the need to manage 

    and reduce the risk of further violence against themselves and their children. 

    I still have to appease his moods. Even though we are apart I have to be careful about what the children 

    might say on the phone to him so as not to rock the boat in order to protect myself to protect the 

    children (Mabel, 36, 6 children). 

    10

    There was ofien conflict at exchange at access so we have been through the Family Court and had 

    restraining orders put in place and conditions of access and that sort of thing (Tare, 36, 2 children). 

    In cases of continuing contact between children and abusive fathers, both mothers and children 

    were unable to work on recovery from their trauma, remaining hostage to the potential and actuality 

    of ongoing violence. Mothers whose children had been abused by their father were presented with 

    a no-win situation in which they had left the relationship to protect their children from abuse, yet 

    they were required to cooperate with presenting their child for contact with the alleged perpetrator. 

    Recommendations: 

    NCSMC endorses the Family Law Council (2002) and Every Picture Tells a Stoiy Report 

    (2004) recommendations that a national child protection service be established, improving the 

    quality of child abuse investigation and evidence available to the Family Court. 

    NCSMC recommends that the Family Law Act be amended to privilege child(ren) ~ safety in 

    determining his/her best interests. 

    Education and Work Histories 

    Those in the sample (Mclnnes 2001) with little education had mainly held low paid, part time jobs 

    such as cleaning, retailing or food and hospitality services. The mothers with post-secondary 

    qualifications were more likely to be