Let's Get Honest! Blog

Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family –and "Conciliation" — Courts' Operations, Practices, and History

My Posts, Just the List (from April 23, 2014… back to Sept. 24, 2012)

leave a comment »

Table of Contents — Simplified

Timespan: April 2014 . . . . . . September 24, 2012.

The blog is my continuous learning curve, a literal “show and tell.” It goes back to spring 2009, but references individuals and writings exposing major aspects of Family and Conciliation Court Operations Practices, and History from the early 1990s and earlier.

There are some valuable posts 2009-2010-2011 also. I will add earlier Table Of Contents to the posts and links as I can.

I have several other related blogs focusing on specific topics, but have not maintained them so long, or developed them so fully. Some of the others are listed on the footnote of this recent “pdf” sent as part of an informal, emailed and web-based debate on fiscal accountability practices for someone in the running (last I heard) for State Treasurer of California under the Green Party.   9 Easy Questions for Green Party Calif State Treasurer Candidate from %22Let’sGetHonest%22. [2/1/2014; see also three links at the end of the 3-page pdf).  The May post "Accounting Literacy Matters, Cause-Based Doesn't" followed up on that type of conversation].  This candidate for state Treasurer is a California attorney, Ellen H. Brown, has been pushing public banking as a solution to national debt, and is doing this under “Public Banking Institute” whose fiscal agent has been a noncompliant nonprofit formed by four UCBerkeley PhD’s.  So either public (state) banking is a godsend to save us from ourselves (i.e., from the national debt) or it’s a “you can kiss the United States goodbye.”

I am only one person, and to attempt to maintain all blogs (none of which are set up as income-generators) would be insane. They set out enough basics.   They seek to start some conversations around those basics, as does, if you look at it, this Table of Contents chart below.

Meanwhile, this unwieldy blog, combined with personal networking, on-line commenting, and in general being willing to discuss this topic with anyone who will listen, will have to do as a platform.

There is no political party which particularly represents, I believe, the best interests of the people living in the United States.  When it comes to the hot topics also of religious or not, or of women or men, fathers or mothers, or children, I don’t think any group has a particular edge on altruism, charity, or protecting the defenseless — let alone on common sense, OR ethics.  

The ones with abstracts, to give an overview….I guarantee, so far, you will not find this type and such a synopsis of this type information elsewhere regarding our courts, or our government — but we should have by now…. and should be teaching others.
Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

April 24, 2014 at 9:23 pm

New Here? A Roadmap with some Chronology, Links, Issues (Sidebar-Plus)

with one comment

WIDGETS:  This post contains essentially two or three of this blog’s sidebar text-boxes (“widgets”), each designed for total strangers, novices, and/or followers.  They are to alert, expose new readers to key concepts and themes by immersing them into the narrative, and leaving footprints (links) for the curious. And to keep remind us of basic information which has been forgotten through advocacy-group neglect over (as of 2014) a period of 15-20 years minimum.

To understand this information is also to get a grasp on the essence of the relationship between “government” and the individual, and to call more individuals to wise up to how this works.

Citizenship is an economic contract; it is a concession of power for implied mutual benefit. The party entering (or even born, but then became adult under) this contract has no excuse for failing to monitor the other party to the contract.  Ignorance may be the cause, and ignorance of the significance of welfare reform, or of simply paying taxes, doesn’t exempt one from the consequences of it.

Be assured one side, the public, is being monitored MORE than adequately, with tools they have helped fund through taxes and consuming services (wanted or mandatory) to develop the tools (the technology, and the salaries of to staff the offices, and contracted vendors, who are keeping count.  

Private tax-exempt foundations such as the Annie E. Casey Foundation (based on originally UPS corporate wealth), which tax-exemption IS a benefit, are also keeping counts and based on their results, demanding political and justice (child welfare and juvenile) systems change. Click the logo to read the summary:

Read the rest of this entry »

Get Real(itybloger)! — Call In, Read the Links on CAFRs, Review Regularly.

with 3 comments

post revised/expanded (see especially bottom of post) 1-29/30th, 2014;

C.A.F.R. =  Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.

Governments issue CAFRs ANNUALLY.  How many governments ARE there, besides states and counties, and federal?


Like I said recently in a post….there is even a US Census of Governments defining their count (which cited a 75% response rate, so adjust upward for error? add the ones legislated into existence since the census was taken. . . . ).

I also found some HHS grant to a health district (to my recall) in Nebraska which having been replaced with a more regional one, was thereby no longer valid.  Tell me what else was new in how can the federal government dump wealth into fiscal black holes and then go back to the taxpayers, “Please (well, “or else….”), more taxes or fewer services WHICH do you prefer?”???  [hit me with a comment if you want the reference, it's several weeks back...]

Who is going to change the conversation without a solid reading on the what’s in our government’s back pockets, and being currency, accounting, history AND government illiterates?  Because, this is about changing the conversation, not following the scripts.   

When you see talk of “budgets” in the media, or coming from a politician’s mouth, generally you will not find a reference to the collective holdings of that govenment entity (federal, state, or other) or other nongovernmental funds these mentioned alongside them.  This is a deliberate standardized form of government accounting which has (like any form of accounting) a deliberate purpose, namely, to justify ongoing UNjustifiable taxation for “budget-balancing.”

This topic is something individuals have to decide to bring up and discuss among themselves — or just go deaf, dumb (literally), and logically disabled.  The topic cannot have been handed on much more of a silver platter than some of these bloggers have already done and is a statement about what time of day it is in the USA.

[Revisions 1-29-2014:]If you want to see what happens when someone intent on talking about it engages with someone intent on discrediting or minimizing the concept (that any that the CAFR issue represents and strategical (conspiracy) to defraud), check out Walter Burien (former)  simply taking on Ellen H. Brown (the latter) in 2010’s attempt to change the conversation.  One of the two is an attorney, want to toss a coin on which one was more accurate and honest?

I did a follow-up on the same attorney’s proposed solutions — and you should see what THAT revealed (and will, if I get it past draft form) when it comes to deceitful accounting practices by progressive nonprofits…Ms. Brown wants Public Banks (and the following year chose a very “strange” nonprofit with six PhD’s and several MA’s (or so it says) as their fiscal agent (Inquiring Systems Inc.) which has made it clear what it thinks of Americans in many ways, most obviously by failing to file properly as a nonprofit until caught and told to (ca. 2009/2010 — they incorporated in 1978) and with a kazillion earth-green-progressive-oh-so-altruistic projects under the one head, most of which have the same individuals on the board, or advisory board.


Organization Name Registration Number Record Type Registration Status City State Registrn Type Record Type
INQUIRING SYSTEMS, INC. 034547 Charity Delinquent SONOMA CA Charity Registration Charity

EIN# 94-2524840.  (see California Charitable Trusts Registry for filing history (such as it is).  Samples: InquiringSystemsInc CharitableReturnsDetails shows 9years of Nonfiling (per Calif Law)!! ~ InquiringSystems 2nd California Charities (OAG)Delinquency Ltr 2010 March 481595 ~ ISI,EIN#94-2524840, TaxReturn2011(YE 6-30-12) showin $980K gross receipts, 1545 volunteers, and presumably Public Banking Institute along with all the others to improve the human condition by serving as a fiscal agent  (after being confronted and forced to cough up some charitable registrations and tax returns to the State of California for many years (PBI (Public Banking Institute) was added as one of the many projects,

Inquiring Systems CA 2012 990 28 $304,285 #94-2524840
Inquiring Systems Inc. CA 2011 990 30 $537,191 #94-2524840
Inquiring Systems Inc. CA 2010 990ER 1 $147,295 #94-2524840

This led (simply through a normal follow-up process) to seeing the UN/NWO connection, however I was a few years behind on that one also (follow-up by WB date 9/2010… explains what the concept of “public state-run banks” means in plain English (contains the phrase “you can kiss the United States goodbye” and “New World Order signed, sealed, and delivered.”)  Quote added to bottom of this page, stay tuned…

[about one month later — interesting Advisory Board with a London School of Economics connection, I’d just like us to understand what rooms this conversation is taking place in, and in that light WHY it really does matter, to get basic identities on the conversationalists, not meaning their personal style, but their choice of colleagues associates, choice of corporate identities, which collectively is going to affect worldview (or reveal it).


9 Easy Questions for Green Party Calif State Treasurer Candidate from %22Let’sGetHonest%22  [A series of email exchanges took place around late Jan - early February 2014. 3 pages only].
Read the rest of this entry »

ORPHANS: Where The Great Commission meets the Military-Industrial Complex

with one comment

NOTE: this 3,000 word (you’re welcome!) post is out of sequence — belongs back with the “On the Road to Emmaeus” and “”Christian Social Services: Replenishing the Ranks of the Faithful (Bethany Christian Services posts, ca. Eastertime, 2013.

6723 Whittier, McLean, VA (Always Look Up Street Addresses!!!)**

File under, if you notice the details, What’s wrong with this picture?

I dare anyone to connect the dots and tell me what the American Petroleum Institute has to do with the Christian Evangelism by Adoption Trade, and why so many Congresspeople are all excited about putting every adoptable infant into a nice Christian home. While travelling the globe to get them, sponsored by known connections with the very forces that make them.

Orphans, that is.

I know why certain kinds of Christians are interested. They believe (have been indoctrinated into) Matthew 28:18 “The Great Commission” –

I also can kind of deduce why the Board Members of the Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute (CACI) might be heavily interested in maintaining close connections with Protestant Evangelical Franchise Operations and their mighty networks, and expertise at creating nonprofits under the religious umbrella.

The next question that comes up — why are you and I funding and tolerating this?

Read the rest of this entry »

CDRC and Friends: Ever Wonder How All that Mediation, Alternate Dispute Resolution, etc. got passed?

with one comment

This is a combination of what I took OUT of “Flipping Cause and Effect” post — when the website I was reviewing brought up “Jay Folberg” as Dean of USF Law.


The promotion of Mediation, Alternate Dispute Resolution, etc. — in the family court arena — was not an accident.  It was an organized lobby.  I talked about this in some detail, starting with the Northern California Mediation Center (Joan Kelly) — and I show corporation records and conferences; including how many copycat incorporations showed up when, in California, to take advantage of and contribute to (you decide) the momentum — Sept. 2012 post, here.  While We’re There, the Northern California Mediation Center….”   …

[And after again reviewing the incorporation documents, and some of the'NCMC paperwork available on-line, THIS came up...the "Rodney Stich" factor... which may re-arrange one's understanding of what the family law system is in place for, to start with, i.e., swift and merciless asset transfers, to silence whistleblowers on something completely unrelated?]


I only discovered the link 3/19/2014 (on updating this post) and after one-half hour of reading it, lights, bells, and whistles are sounding internally which make sense of the continuing pattern I’d already noticed in case after case after case (an corporation after corporation) within California, and outside it — CONSISTENTLY, some of the most prominent court-reform groups are displaying signs of complete disrespect for the state-wide rules governing corporations, and governing charities which many are registered as.

And, they are getting away with it, not even a wristslap.  I have no question HHS at the highest level is involved.   I do not think we HAVE a justice system, but we are supposed to believe that we do.  I also rest my case that’s it’s worth the extra effort in checking some basic details on ANY group which is trying to run, or reform, the family, custody, divorce, AND violence prevention fields.  Particularly if a civil servant has formed the nonprofit, and a judge is on the board.  There IS a system to it!

Please read (download, save the material) on this site, throughout, and I would like to talk about this with others.  Many times, a family court case may have nothing to do with the issues on the tableat all.


[Oh.  My. God.]  “Lawless and Bizarre Scheme to Halt Corruption Fighting Whistleblower

As to promoting Mediation, ….

I knew Jay Folberg had more connections than this, and looked up my previous posts on the CDRC (California Dispute Resolution Council).  CDRC became the “Unified Voice” of all these dispute resolution professionals — unbelievable how they stepped into line once it (apparently) became clear someone was going to help them set up a nice pyramid? scheme using public funds, as satellites to the county courthouses, etc.

This has links to two earlier September, 2012 posts (herein), some more AFCC newsletters (1993, 1997– put also as links on the side) and I learned that William and Flora Hewett Foundation have been very nicely supportive of AFCC and CDRC.

I also learned that these guys figured someone was going to sue them, because they planned ahead for liability insurance for the profession. All in all, it’s a very interesting set of information — and possibly demonstrates how lobbying happens, in the court systems.   It shows the use of the nonprofits (and foundations, whether private, or large ones funding nonprofits), coalitions of nonprofits conferencing together — all that — it shows how they get their business accomplished.

Public service may be a collateral side-effect, but I doubt is the primary purpose. These are people who have invented and protected their own profession, with advance planning. AFCC professionals ARE involved, and you have to look at some tax returns. Tell a friend…. Thanks! 

The promotion of Mediation, Alternate Dispute Resolution, etc. — in the family court arena — was not an accident.  It was an organized lobby.  I talked about this in some detail, starting with the Northern California Mediation Center (Joan Kelly) — and I show corporation records and conferences; including how many copycat incorporations showed up when, in California, to take advantage of and contribute to (you decide) the momentum — Sept. 2012 post, here.  While We’re There, the Northern California Mediation Center….”   I wrote, underneath its website, and above its state nonprofit filing (where it’s “DELINQUENT”)
Read the rest of this entry »

A Stunning Validation by Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson: The Assault on Truth, The Origins of Psychoanalysis

with 15 comments

A key issue in the courts includes sexual assault and violence towards women and children. This has also been a key issue with psychoanalysis. Cummings is a psychoanalyst, or has been one.

The key, or leading edge, feature OF these courts includes therapeutic jurisprudence, attempting to resolve conflict through addition of behavioral health professionals, the field Dr. Cummings has dedicated much of his life to preserving the business and economic well-being of, to the point that a Wall Street Journal article reported, not too many years ago, that — doctors and hardcore professionals aside, among the top highest paying professional jobs, including the benefits and actual hours worked to earn the pay, were: Judges, and (with a doctorate) psychologists.

He is also well-informed in his field, has been a psychoanalyst, and very likely knew of this other psychoanalyst’s, Mr. Masson’s, 1980s allegations of Anna Freud’s censorship of her father’s letters, which cast an entirely different light on what “The Etiology of Hysteria” is.

Time to read this statement of “The Assault on Truth, The Origins of Psychoanalysis .

(I notice the Cummings Foundation site also got a facelift since my last visits).

I feel it’s only fair to warn people which path they are going down. If they want to ignore the warnings, then it’s not my problem, other than when it’s draining attention and energies from more critical analyses — which this movement IS, and is probably intended to do.

As soon as I saw the January 2012 advertisement (at the SF Center for Psychoanalysis) of an upcoming March 2012 “FREE TRAINING IN ARIZONA” I blogged it, Our Broken Family Court” isn’t. It ain’t “Ours” and it ain’t “Broken.” That phrase is a “tell.” I’ll tell you why…. [excerpt:]

Donner authored an excellent article {bold added} by the same title in Psychoanalytic Psychology. Contact him (HERE) to request a copy of “Tearing Children Apart: The Contribution of Narcissism, Envy and Perverse Modes of Thought to Child Custody Wars.” [see FN3 LGH, below]

Our broken family court system: Free training in Arizona

Another free training geared toward child custody evaluators is coming up March 16-17 [2012] in Phoenix, Arizona. Co-sponsored by the National Alliance of Professional Psychology Providers and the Nicholas and Dorothy Cummings Foundation, it features a cast of well-known experts, including:

More information and online registration is available HERE.

How much of this “Broken Courts” buzzwords (spoken by the people who have the answers, which naturally involves buying certain products, trainings, and consultations, by the same, on how to fix it) — is enough?

When is anyone (else) going to actually, literally, develop the habit of running background checks on charming, or wealthy strangers who approach them (or into whose strong, authoritative, and competent, OPEN ARMS someone is tempted to dash for sympathy and protection — or for money). Wasn’t that, ladies, part of what got you into an abusive relationship to start with? Handsome strangers, charming, eloquent and INTERESTED IN YOU?

I do this consistently. It’s been a great source of learning, enriched my understanding of this vital field, and moreover, helped me screen out the liars and dissemblers (those who don’t quite lie, literally, but systematically “forget” to reveal who they really are, and what is the agenda, which you get to find out later — after the situation is further compromised, you have less time, money and energy left, and in some cases, in which it’s just plain too late to extricate onesself – – or one’s kids). I will explain this further, separately.

FYI, I found the material on Freud’s Archives/Jeffrey M. M. while looking up the background of the Cummings Foundation and Nicholas Cummings.

One thing about investigating, looking things up: be prepared to have world view turned upside down (or the sense that something IS upside down, or backwards as presented in public confirmed). In this case, regardless of who this man was personally, at the point of insisting to publish about the Freud coverup, he was acting in the public interest.

Post-Published Note. First published Feb. 2013.

In Dec. 2013, realizing in ongoing conversations and further readings how central this topic is to the family and conciliation court systems, including possibly why we even have them to start with, I re-arranged, moving a major section to the top of the post. Therefore further introductory sections may seem out of sequence.

I think EVERYONE concerned with the courts, even though I know I primarily focus on the economic factors, should read this material. Jeffrey Moussaieff Masson was highly qualified, had access to the Freud archives, documents how censorship of his work after 1897 continued even up to the 1950s, when the letters were compiled (including by his daughter Anna), constituting “The Origins of Psychoanalysis.”

Quote First, Commentary below. Especially read if you’re considering signing up for psychoanalysis!

So who is that guy? Briefly,

Read the rest of this entry »

Exposing and Prosecuting Judicial Corruption through Common Law Discovery (1997 Interview)

with 8 comments

This Post is Sticky (one of about 5 sticky posts) and stays near the top. Others are below. Also, I just moved the “Supervised Visitation” section to a separate post (and of course expanded that one) on 6/6/2013.

File this Article under “What a Difference One Person can Make, if that person:

Has Guts, Will Obtain Evidence, Look at Evidence, Come to Logical Conclusion regarding Evidence Obtained AND Publicize It!

Includes Marv Bryer’s discoveries, especially in the mid- to late 1990s.

Exposing and Prosecuting Judicial Corruption Through Common Law Discovery

1997 interview with Marv Bryer.

[I ASK READERS: ] Can you read 7 pages “for the cause”? And think about it?

If given a brief pop-quiz of about 10th grade level on what it’s talking about, how much of the vocabulary or ideas could you remember?

Marvin Bryer’s discoveries began when his daughter was involved in a custody battle for her son. Apparently a judge received a bribe to rule against Mr. Bryer’s daughter, and as a result Mr. Bryer discovered a judicial slush fund bank account, and a common law discovery for overcoming judicial immunity.

Right away, we are in the financial category: Bribe, Slush Fund, Bank account, overcoming judicial immunity.

Underneath this, I also pointed out that (for example, in California) the shifting of literally trial courts, to the state level away from the local, AND of the workforce (county employees) of the courts to become instead trial court employees — moves the entire power structure up to the state level — but under Administration (“AOC”).  What does this mean?  How about shifting the bureaucracy of court operations up to the State level, where it’s harder to sue (see “immunity”).  It also centralizes power and control — and for this matter, I have not note that “AFCC” is very active at the state level under this particular Judicial Council’s AOC.

Table is repeated below:

Report From Judges Blasts California Court Bureaucracy By MARIA DINZEO  ShareThis        SAN FRANCISCO (CN) – In a sweeping call for reform of the Administrative Office of the Courts, a report from a committee of judges found the agency has been operated as the director’s fiefdom, has strayed far from its original path and has been deceptive about finances and personnel. The judges also criticized the bureaucracy as top-heavy, overpaid and badly organized.       Their long-awaited report proposes a drastic reorganization that includes cutting the staff by one-third and moving the agency from its lavish San Francisco headquarters to a cheaper space in Sacramento.

In the 221-page, 11-chapter document, the Strategic Evaluation Committee also recommended cutting high-level positions, closing regional offices and eliminating entire divisions of the vast bureaucracy that sits atop the court system.      Based on a year-long investigation, the massive, crisply-worded report does not pull its punches.

That 221 page document should be read– it shows the centralization and expansion of control in the administrative sector.


Read the rest of this entry »

Yes, Broken Courts, Flawed Practices, and the Parade of Fools: (Pt.1(a) Intro, Context)

with 6 comments

 [post in edit mode late July-Aug. 2014;  expanded to almost double the size; background info....]


Between “Pts.1″ [1a and 1b] and “Pt.2″ I expect to post more material on the Family Court Enhancement Project (“FCEP”), which I understand is all the talk about town (i.e., on the internet in these circles (use your search function to find some of it…).   So the title of this blog refers to a series.  It is a natural continuation of the recent (and from May 2012) “Parades, Charades and Facades,” and my posting this is keeping a personal promise (to myself) for the year 2014, to expose what’s underneath the rhetoric.


Because it’s become a problem for the people who match the profile of what they claim to represent, “Protective Parents” and/or “Battered Mothers,” specifically.

I have for years attempted to have intelligent conversations on the money trail and the matter of court-connected corporations, not to mention the more than obvious federal marriage/fatherhood promotion grants, with mothers who have been wrapped up in blogging their, or someone else’s personal stories — without running basic background checks on who they’re doing it for.

However, the leadership and by association followers have habitually refused to discuss these topics properly, timely, or thoroughly, remaining focused on the apparently pre-planned solutions to the crises — essentially, get better trainers (i.e., themselves:  a self-defining mixture of professionals, nonprofits, some groups absent any corporate identity and enough mothers who tell their stories to lend the experts credibility. For example, see in recent “Parades, Charades and Facades” post, or find and read a typical newsletter or press release from one of the members).  Unless you look at other sources of information, on the same topic it is less clear how self-defining and discussion-limiting the conversations are.

These are professionals whose background and skills are in the fields of persuasion, experienced in group situations and guided-group attempts at behavioral modification [seeking to persuade the court, persuade the public, or persuade the legislature towards system change, or persuade people to refer services and advertise product].   People who have obtained PhDs, published, conferenced, been professors, and many (not all) still are.

And there’s been definite “guidance” on what is and is not acceptable to talk about in these life and death matters.

Like, the money trail, from the United States (Executive Branch) Departments of HHS and DOJ.  And private wealth pouring funds to produce certain custody-outcomes, by state, and by gender.

Like, nonprofit trade associations that populate judge-ships, head family court services, and organize nationally to favor their members interests.

So, the “Broken Courts, Flawed Practices” the court reform group’s leadership it seems was all along as “the professionals” setting their sights on becoming the subject matter experts for this exact type of FCEP project, i.e., public recognition and with it, potential related spinoff income from close association with the “source,” i.e., with people managing the funding stream out of the USDOJ (among other places)’s  Office of Violence Against Women  $400 million budget, and direction of public (federal) money funding grants stemming from the VAWA (Violence Against Women Act).

(Announcing the project June 2013 on facebook and responding to comments)

Barry Goldstein The courts’ response to sexual abuse issues is particularly horrible and I hope that is included in the practices adopted by some of the courts. It is included in the best practices discussed in a few chapters for my next book with Mo Hannah.

I have been watching the promotion of this book since before it was first published in 2010 and noticed how relentless Barry is on the matter, and how followers of the Crisis in the Courts crowd do this as well, reblogging.  Readers take note:  Similar behavior for the book promoted about ten years earlier, same basic circles, by “Our Children Our Future Foundation” which corporation barely existed for two years.  (See recent post “A Different Kind of Attention“).

The book here is meant to sound so authoritative, but it isn’t!  It is anything but complete on the subject matter and its deliberate avoidance of reference to the money trail, to specific organizations, or any searchable terms or names which might better alerting women, definitely some of the target readers, to the scope and context and history of HOW “custody of abused children going to batterers” actually happens.

Track the organizations* promoting this book, and you will find a very speckled and incomplete trail of corporate and nonprofit filings with a literal obsession with intervention at the federal level while ignoring how the federal grants factor are already in place to intentionally produce certain custody outcomes. In other words, they are a significant factor in the problems to start with.  Track the people promoting it, and most likely you’ll find a presenter, a nonprofit associated with, or a “poster-child custody disaster” case associated with the “BMCC” conference group in New York, which since 2013 seems to have moved its business to Washington, D.C. (2013, 2014 so far).

[*Some are corporations and nonprofits, however some are not but through associations  masquerade (i.e., whose public writings imply) as if they were a legitimate corporation without actually having filed and maintained as required by state laws the paperwork to become one.

Another neat trick, discovered by simply looking this up, is that some talk "small, oppressed, needy and helpless" but on closer examination are hooked up by association with groups with powerful international connections, including to powerful law firms or lawyers].  Like fish and other oceanic species, each occupies different places on the food chain (which here is the publicity/information/funding), and some relationships are “symbiotic.” ]  By now, and with the announcement of the Family Court Enhancement Project [FCEP] stages,  I hope it’s absolutely clear why the omission of the money trail; the Barry Goldstein/Mo Hannah (editors) book had a strategic purpose related to its editors’ professional positioning on court reform purposes — although it was clear to others earlier, some of who turned away in disgust, or having been wiped out by the system, quit trying to talk across, shout past the PR, or otherwise out-social-media this bunch.

In other words, when one plans to be collaborating with certain groups already higher on the food chain (taking HHS and DOJ grants and private foundation sponsorship) as consultants, evaluators, or reforms, it wouldn’t really do to be exposing those themes AS primary themes with a negative impact on the family courts! (i.e., don’t bite the hand that might be feeding).


Whoever heads the OVW is the “liaison” between that funding stream and other governments (federal state, tribal) in the subject matter of “Violence Against Women.” The theme song of the Broken Courts crowd is that the family court judges and custody evaluators, etc., just can’t recognize real domestic violence when they see it (but that blindness can be trained out of them, of course, with proper professionals such as ourselves).  This viewpoint dovetails neatly with how the OVW has been set up to do “technical assistance and training” nationwide.  (Why deal with peasants and commoners, and their tough questions or opposing viewpoints, when you can bypass that, get to Congress, and just start turning a private philosophy into a nationwide one?)

Since 2003, the Battered Women’s Custody Conference has been habituated by membership from domestic violence professionals — but somehow 10 years of conferencing and “telling our stories”  produced the sudden awakening of the USDOJ/OVW’s sleeping moral conscience and compassion for the  Crisis in the Courts???  And what other fairy tales (folklore) are we supposed to subscribe to?

Principal Deputy Director of the United States Department of Justice Office on Violence Against Women (OVW).

In her role, she serves as the Photo of Beatrice Hansonliaison between the Department of Justice and federal, state, tribal, and international governments on matters involving violence against women.

She is responsible for developing the Department’s legal and policy positions regarding the implementation of the Violence Against Women Act and overseeing an annual budget of nearly $400 million.

She has served as OVW’s Principal Deputy Director since May 2011.

The budget may be $400 million but since 1995, when the OVW was established to implement “VAWA” act technical assistance and training, and national leadership regarding that act, it has handled (distributed) “nearly $4 Billion in grants and cooperative agreements.”  (from a 2010 announcement):

From a 2/16/2010 USDOJ press release on a former director of the OVW, more below.

The Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) provides national leadership in developing the nation’s capacity to reduce violence against women through the implementation of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). Created in 1995, OVW administers financial and technical assistance to communities across the country that are developing programs, policies, and practices aimed at ending sexual and domestic violence, dating violence, and stalking.  Currently (2010), OVW administers two formula grant programs and 17 discretionary grant programs, which were established under VAWA and subsequent legislation. Since its inception, OVW has awarded nearly $4 billion in grants and cooperative agreements to communities throughout the nation.

From what I can see, this FCEP project is, or will be, pretty much more “business as usual,” i.e., the DV movement making token gestures  towards cleaning up about two dozen years of dumping cases into the family court system, after having years ago already cut compromise deals by sponsoring and recommending (nationwide, and of course with related nonprofit associations named after this) such things as:  supervised visitation, batterers’ intervention, and “train-the-judges” policies to start with, through organizations set up, some of them, as early as the 1980s.  One of those organizations in Duluth, Minnesota now has “BWJP” or Battered Women’s Justice Project,” but also runs family visitation center, and trainings for both fields (supervised visitation/batterers intervention), taking public grants to do so.

The slight difference here is merely that the “protective parents” people finally got their names down as subject matter experts on the roundtable, and now will be providing a ready-made “excuse” if the USDOJ/OVW is again approached about this matter — “but we’re working on it, we have a task force!”

As it turns out, when I looked up where Bea Hanson, Principal Deputy Director of the OVW worked previously (“Safe Horizon” in NYC) — this astoundingly connected and networked organization is already hooked into the divorce/family/mediation business as well as the domestic violence, shelters, and other treatment for victims of trauma business), which from what I can tell, is BIG business.
Read the rest of this entry »

Parades, Charades and Facades — Mother’s Day and Beyond

leave a comment »

[about 3,200 words, plus a section on the Guggenheim Family and Foundations = about 3,000 more, making it about 6,000 words...  It links to  post on another of my blogs "The Family Court Franchise System," quoting parts of it here. As I often do, the original writing is closer to the bottom of the post, and the top part is context. I brought in the philanthropy  examples in preparation for specific situations in upcoming posts, and not just in a random reference.]

Seeing as it’s almost Father’s Day, I thought it was time to put out a post inspired this past May, 2014, on Mother’s Day, after revisiting one I’d drafted on a different but related blog in 2012.  The basic dynamics it described haven’t changed.

Along the lines of the recent post Accounting Literacy Matters.  Cause-based Literacy Doesn’t (even though it’s dealing with a different topic), I then looked again (hindsight sure does help) at some of the players helping compile various Judges’  or Attorneys’ ToolKits” which, I guess, we are to hope might function as some magic wand, or special panacea, if  waved around in hearings for custody and visitation matters after having separated because of domestic violence, or for general knowledge.

Excerpt, and basically about:

How California Protective Parents Association  Doesn’t — and Why

It was drafted in 2012, and finished, of course, supplemented, in 2014. Related “exhibit”

The fine print (footnotes) to that sheet revealed  “good cop/bad cop” discussions in one put out by the ABA Commission on Domestic Violence.  As usual, taking a second look leads to more information about who’s been backing all the policy studies, for example the Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation *backing a well-known social scientist at the University of Pennsylvania, who also turns out to be AFCC-friendly:

*Harry Guggenheim established this foundation to support research on violence, aggression, and dominance because he was convinced that solid, thoughtful, scholarly and scientific research, experimentation, and analysis would in the end accomplish more than the usual solutions impelled by urgency rather than understanding. We do not yet hold the solution to violence, but better analyses, more acute predictions, constructive criticisms, and new, effective ideas will come in time from investigations such as those supported by our grants.

The foundation places a priority on the study of urgent problems of violence and aggression in the modern world and also encourages related research projects in neuroscience, genetics, animal behavior, the social sciences, history, criminology, and the humanities which illuminate modern human problems. Grants have been made to study aspects of violence related to youth, family relationships, media effects, crime, biological factors, intergroup conflict related to religion, ethnicity, and nationalism, and political violence deployed in war and sub-state terrorism, as well as processes of peace and the control of aggression.

[from "FAMILY" hyperlink on the site ] All men are not violent, and all violent men are not alike. We encourage more research into typologies of violence and the implications for treatment of distinguishing different types of batterers. However, explanations for spouse abuse must also recognize that two people contribute to a dysfunctional marriage, and the dynamics of family relationships should be explored to understand family violence more completely. The ways both masculinity and femininity are understood in particular cultures should be explored in order to explain how male dominance and marital violence are “normalized” in different and similar ways across cultures. …

Does that not shed some light on why certain people would rather study domestic violence perpetrators and batterers than actively separate them from their victims, PERIOD, sending a public policy message to others that this is socially unacceptable?   And why some are prone to publishing where the grants money is (“let’s characterize batterers and provide and evaluate treatment interventions”) than expecting it to stop by separating the batterer from the battered, as a deterrent, and sending a message that it’s completely unacceptable? (including if women are perpetrating….)

Read the post to find out which Pennsylvania sociologist I’m referring to.


Would I have known this if I didn’t look behind the rhetoric?  NO.  I read.  I never heard of “Harry Frank Guggenheim” foundation, although the Guggenheim family are well known as philanthropists.  Harry Frank (1890-1971) was born into this family of eight sons and wealth from various industries, especially smelting.

The Guggenheim Family (Jennifer Schaub, Grand Valley State grad student, 2005):

The Guggenheim Family left a strong mark in the industrial smelting industry of the early 1900’s. By 1918 Forbes reckoned that the Guggenheims were the second richest family in America (Kaufmann 2004). However, they are more widely remembered as a long line of philanthropists. Five key philanthropists have emerged from this extensive family. By creating a series of foundations, the family is credited for promoting the development of individuals {{??}} by funding research and the development of scholarly thought.  . . .

Historic Roots

Meyer Guggenheim (1828-1905) was a tailor of Swiss-Jewish decent who immigrated to the United States in 1847 (John Simon Guggenheim Foundation, Oppenheim, 2002). He and his wife had eight sons. Meyer created the family fortune in the late 19th century beginning with 300,000 from an investment in railroad stocks (Oppenheim, 2002). From there he moved to importing Swiss embroidery and then eventually into the production of metals including silver copper and lead (Infoplease, the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation). Meyer started the Philadelphia Smelting and Refining Company, and eventually took over American Smelting in 1901. At one time the Guggenheim family was said to control 31 industrial, import, and farming companies in the US and abroad (Wooster, 2005) ….

Daniel Guggenheim (1856-1930) was credited for shaping much of the family business; he combined and presided over, the Guggenheim and American Smelting companies. Solomon Robert Guggenheim (1981-1949) was also active in the family business creating mining strong holds most notably in Colombia (The John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation). Simon Guggenheim (1867-1941) was for a short time, a Republican Senator for Colorado, and the chief ore buyer for family factory. He worked in Colorado for a number of years overseeing the Leadville mines (American Israeli Cooperative Enterprise)….

Harry Frank Guggenheim (1890-1971) was the son of Daniel Guggenheim. Harry fought in two world wars and was the ambassador to Cuba from 1929-1933. Harry was also the co-founder, along with his wife Alicia Patterson, of Newsday Magazine (Newsday.com).

Peggy Guggenheim (1898-1979), the daughter of Benjamin, was an art collector and gallery owner. Noted as one of the most important art patrons of the 1930s and 40s. She owned and operated 3 galleries in the US and Europe. Her New York gallery, Art of This Century was one of the first to show such artists as Rothko, Pollock, Dali, Moore, and Brenton (The Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum).


As a philanthropist, Daniel Guggenheim is best known as an aviation pioneer. Along with his wife Florence, and their son Harry, Daniel Guggenheim created the Daniel Guggenheim Fund for the promotion of Aeronautics in June 16, 1926 (Wooster, 2005). While the fund was operational, it invested 2.6 million for the creation of aeronautical schools and research centers at 11 different universities. By conducting competitions to create innovations, and funding the research of individuals, projects sponsored by Daniel Guggenheim are said to have increased the safety of Aeronautics …

[para. out of order]

  • Robert H. Goddard (1882-1945) was a physics professor whose contributions to rocket science included a rocket that could travel in a vacuum, and one of the first high altitude rockets. For these and other aeronautical innovations, Goddard has been named one of Time’s 100 Most Important People of the Century. Goddard’s research was funded by Harry Guggenheim for 4 years and the Daniel and Florence Guggenheim Foundation for 11 years (Kluger).

Although Harry Guggenheim also financially contributed to the Daniel Guggenheim fund he began his own foundation, the Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation, which was formed to contribute critical thought and analyses of the world issues of violence and conflict (The Harry Frank Guggenheim Foundation).

Solomon Guggenheim began collecting non-objective paintings in 1929, and began the Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation to purchase and increase the appreciation of modern art. After beginning to amass a large collection, Solomon began plans to create the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in New York Solomon died before his project was complete and Harry Guggenheim saw to the completion of his Uncle Solomon’s dream (The Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum).

[[…Also the Guggenheims, or their foundations, funded:  composer Aaron Copland, artist Jackson Pollock ["American Abstract Expressionism"] , and Charles Augustus Lindbergh.]]

[...obviously this is just a sampler of information ...]

The world we now live in has been vastly influenced by industrialists of last century; of the late 1800s and early 1900s.  Some of them were challenged on their monopolies and faced anti-trust actions; any biography of such families shows how they acquire their wealth, diversify often, and set up major foundations, in part as great public relations (sometimes necessary considering how the wealth was acquired), and in return for this, get to restructure the world and institutions we live in — because their wealth and influence enabled them to.

When it comes to a MAJOR aspect of the family courts, ordering treatment for abnormal or violent behavior (or, originally, to avoid divorce) — we can see today that many of the professionals and professors of course owe their studies, and sometimes the centers or institutes, or even schools at which they teach and research — to philanthropists.

We should be looking at this.  When I saw this connection, I better understood what’s the fascination with “treating” everyone, including “batterers,” and families.  It makes NO sense to me to continue dialogues “pretending” the professor/researcher classes are not themselves funded by either private foundations, or government grants, or both, and that we are all on an equal playing field when it comes to setting major policies in the courts, without discussing the power and money behind them — and the power of private wealth to direct public policy.

FOR EXAMPLE — in SAN DIEGO, and regarding GALs:

In the field of Child Welfare Law — here’s an example.  The group “Children’s Advocacy Institute,” which I will post on shortly — has influenced family courts through, with others, pushing for more “counsel for the child” in contested custody cases, a.k.a., adding GALs wherever possible.  Previously, the same professor was NOT interested in family or children’s issues at all, but instead public, environmental, energy (utility) laws.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

June 12, 2014 at 2:53 pm

My Challenge: Talk Sense, or become an OxyMORON (and Someone Else’s Dinner)

with 2 comments

This post was drafted  March 2014, and is posted June, 2014. Although it has some oddball illustrations — like the duckbilled platypus– and it references distraction techniques of cults (which, FYI, you’re in it), below  all that are some references you might want to bookmark re: FMS.Treasury.Gov (excerpt in 2nd box yellow with teal-green border.  This shows combined US government receipts & outlays, by source, in numbers and in a pie-chart, which is easier to remember.

Show your friends reading the morning newspapers about how broke we are. We who?

This is also 7,000 words, and has multiple formats.  [Insert Standard Copyeditor's/Proofreaders' Nightmare Disclaimer for anyone who's expecting a proofread, copyedited vision of perfection.]   I am one person struggling with a free wordpress blog and having to compose what I’ve personally investigated and written up, in a triple-view format; sometimes in “Text” (html) mode, others in “Visual” (the post editor) and neither bears ANY true resemblance to “Published” (or Preview) mode.  However, I do consistently deliver other goods that I know has helped some people not go bonkers during their custody cases, get them out of trauma mode by giving some objective information (not standard predigested rhetoric) on these operations.

Anyone who doesn’t like it can go find this information elsewhere [good luck with that...], or hit the Donate button (on the sidebar) or, if that’s not within your ability range (or wish) consider signing the petition I’ve included on this post.  Now would be a great time, too! Or be patient and understanding the purpose of this blog.  It’s not my attempt at an academic dissertation. I have my degrees already.    It’s about laying out some information as a NOTICE that this information exists.  And that people who have been badly traumatized (and I have been; and know plenty others who are being) can get out of that mode.

Sometimes you just need other information to get your bearings. What’s more, it’s interesting and relevant to all of us where our taxes are being spent, and who’s running our courts.

Sometimes you may think I’m ADHD (the formatting issues don’t help) when actually I’m using a variety of symbols and analogies to describe what I have seen, in detail, over time, and across a wide spectrum of places (states, jurisdictions). If  a certain analogy doesn’t work for you — so what?  Look at the material and figure one out that does.    This time, I used duck-billed platypus.  in other posts, I’ve used Giant Squid (I think it applies), “The Thinker Sitting Over the Gates of Hell” (I don’t even remember why — but it seemed relevant at the time).  I’ve used the analogy of “bait balls” and plenty of references to where on the food chain of the ocean one wants to sit.

You understand things not just by experiencing — but by having experienced them, comparing the unknown to the known and developing a comprehension.  AND, a way to tell others about it.  it so happens I can do this better by phone or in person, than to a broad audience on a blog.  I began writing to compile the information a previous generation should’ve compiled, but didn’t.  I also continued writing to address more than one state — and because to tell the truth, for too many years of the past too many years, there were seasons where I felt my life was in danger.  As a parent, I wanted my kids to know…when they’re ready to hear it.



Updating the Table of Contents post, I just had to say this (what’s in this post). Having said it, I had to then move it elsewhere, as I really do want people to look at the Table of Contents!

Having then moved it, I thought about it some more, added some illustrations and warnings.

        I am fishing for people that don’t want their children, or themselves, to become dinner for a family court professional, judge, social services program, jail, or welfare category; who also want to keep themselves (and their kids) alive and unmolested.  The odds are increasingly NOT in favor of this happening to anyone who doesn’t stay married, and within some marriages (such as mine was) for those who did attempt to stay married.

I am also doing this while handling an extremely challenging personal situation which feels, in many ways, as if I have tangled with Scientology (people who got out have a lot to teach us stuck in the courts), or the Unification church. ** I can document the Sun Myung Moon influence (since realized it ca. 2010) involved in the family court system, but I am beginning to question if this isn’t simply the United States of America, period; and even moreso in this century.


The boundary line between collective identity of FAMILY, of CULT, and of COUNTRY (our allegiance to the concept of continuing to sacrifice for the group identity of the USA when, like cults and abusive families, the self-appointed leadership doesn’t even subscribe to it, or display such allegiance) — can be very blurred.

Written in draft March 13, 2014, after which I went public — with my personal situation — on Care2.com This is the aftermath of a domestic violence situation, a family court situation (children aged out) and one of the participants exploited the first, incited (as best I can tell) the second, leaving me now in my THIRD decade of direct abuse by family members — all over a pot of something, and what else “control.”

**Sign Some Petitions, Identify the “mystery” oddball blogger Let’s Get Honest…!! 

FYI, If you respect this blog, and understand what fires refined it, then consider signing this petition to save my life and save tax dollars.  A Facebook Campaign, “Not a Private Matter” is definitely pushing my social media skills, adds some more general info, but so be it.  On petition “Update #2″ is link to an updates page, the first paragraph under the blog  title summarizes it well enough, which blog I call Jean Pfann Up Close and the “pages” on that blog contain more general information which I hope may help others caught in the same ropes.

What we are looking at is — how do people, especially women who are tending to live longer, and whose lives and work lives have been devastated through the courts, perhaps their children badly harmed, continue growing older and survive?  Does it ever go away?  Is it better to be completely impoverished or not, for those who just don’t get out and remarry (or perhaps even want to)?  No one LIKES poverty, but if being four steps away from it for people who have already been marked for destruction through the courts (or by the people who hauled them into the courts) brings more abuse — then what options are left?  This is literally how abusive domestic violence (coercive control) happens.

Jean Pfann is my sister.  She is a talented artist, but was unable to accept the change of dynamics when I, a single mother (she’d bypassed that role) started showing independence and initiative; I guess spoiling the “party” of being a needed aunt for the abused mother.  Or, who knows what (possibly just greed)…Others, particularly her spouse, were involved.

I am the petitioner to get her out of my life and off the funds which, after two decades of abuse, are there for me and after me, young adult children, and are needed.  It is a sorry world in which sisters, if one is married and the other left an abuser, cannot continue functioning as adult sisters without This Blue Jay picture is reminds me of taking flight and being freethis degree of separation.  I also note that as great as marriage is supposed to be, a number of (religious) married men participated in the first decade of my domestic violence, either intensifying it, or “justifying” it – and this included physical assaults and economic sabotage.  This included one even who was flown out from another state to help stalk, harass including by phone at work a few times, and monitor me, a married woman with children working full-time nights whose husband, apparently, needed a break from his controlling behavior, in addition to his significant breaks from a  work life.

His wife, who I knew from a different context, I called out to for help, didn’t or couldn’t intervene.  The man was flown out a second time, and having been warned ,that time I was able to get out of town for the weekend. (Jean and her spouse helped us for a weekend in a hotel). This man, a “Promise-Keeper” later apologized and I heard has since died.

Please note:  Jean Pfann was aware of the situation, and of the physical violence in the home since the start, but had nothing to do with stopping it, referring to outside sources for help.  I think women who leave abuse expose just how abusive some other nearby marriages are, which shakes them up a bit.  (Who knows exactly, but….)

The initial time this other married man on leave from his home state (?) was out in our home as it turned on something like a fugitive DUI from the other state.  He wanted me to shut down bank account (but keep working and turn over the paycheck to my ex to show I trusted him, which I didn’t and for good reasons…), but then discussed (in front of our kids, with me as if I wasn’t there) “should we have her quit her job?”  It wasn’t too long after this fiasco and being literally forced out of that otherwise very decent job, that I managed to file the restraining order and start setting a life back in order again.

Back to present: FYI after I went public (April 2014) there was the anticipated blowback — only this time it’s dealing in the same originals and a few more completely different venues.  My sister has finally decided to resign (probably never would’ve without the petition) but is attempting, with her attorney, to do so with continued coverup of improper activity — or continue to inflict pain and distress.  All along I’ve said, they messed with the wrong woman.  See petition summary for more information and reconsider clicking on that Donate Button; thanks!

Apparently it has become just too dangerous to be an independent and competent adult woman since the 2000s, which I find a shame after the changes of the 1960s and 1970s. OK, back to the regularly scheduled post….




If across the US, our independent, and species-survival alertness and thinking has been either disabled, or is being culled [and by personality types, sorted and sifted] for use in the administrative population control professions (the “behavioral change modification” professions which are funded from “on high” (corporations, universities, the US government), and/or the science and technology for yet BETTER population control (and, when it comes to military, systematic decimation of other countries’ populations, while increasing the incarceration rates of our own by the various wars), then I will forget the consciousness-raising herein, and just look for a better place (and that means country) to inhabit.

From “FMS.TREASURY.GOV” here’s a pie-chart of “receipts” for 2013:

Total receipts increased by $324.9 billion, totaling $2,774.0 billion in fiscal 2013. The graph below shows receipts by source.

Translation of “$2,774.0 billion,” other than “a lot” is:   $2,774,000,000,000.  Hundreds, Thousands, Millions, Billions, and another way of putting this would be $2.774 Trillion — that is, for 2013 only, and that’s the federal government of the US, only.  Anyhow click to see what the largest piece of the pie, and the second-largest, is.

And to see more (from 2013), try the “Combined Statement of Receipts, Outlays and Balances” website.  Outlays by Function.  Don’t forget the “Dear Citizens of the United States of America” (we’re doing better, but you’re still screwed) letter.

  • PDFPDF file Commissioner's Letter (208 KB)

Commissioner’s Letter (see references to “Deficit”)

What the government means by “Deficit” refers to its own definitions, which, given who is holding most of the assets (and holds the power to enforce more collections, in the form of taxes) — guess who sets the rules unless someone else starts re-setting those rules?  You got it, the government.  How long (as long as this is tolerated by the people).

(This chart is repeated below). Read the rest of this entry »

Amazing and False Assumptions about the Family Courts…

leave a comment »

This post is essentially draft, notes.  I’m just injecting, FYI, some different  talk into the tired old (while still relevant) conservations about what the courts are doing, and have done to our little ones, the next generation. ~  It’s at least as reasonable as what’s out there now. No big deep conclusions; I just wanted to point to other information, information worth giving up one’s security-blanket support groups for.

And for those who are curious, and make it through  enough paragraphs, I’ve thrown in a link telling readers (finally) my name.    WHY?  My situation is not safe (it has really become life-threatening, again, and from the attrition) and I’d like to take credit for the considerable effort put into this blog, while still alive.  And if you’re concerned, remember there’s a Donate Button Here, and a Petition there.

  Some people who have witnessed my personal situation now for over 10 years, and I truly hope that younger people, and in-bound  men and women to the family law system will recognize just who they are  dealing with, and abandon the false prophets flying around hawking their wares as if it were just one nice big family with a few communication problems any real  (well-trained) expert could straighten out.

I have paid attention to networks, and been networked, and around long enough to see “denial” mode kick in when people are presented with the uncomfortable information that they’ve been betrayed as badly by those showing empathy for their distress as by any original “abuser” who got custody.   

While I’m extremely stressed this past month, after going public (with my case) for the first time in April, I have like many been since Year 2000, to the top and back down through the justice system, the agencies, and the personalities.   I have spoken with extremely intelligent men and women and qualified, who continue hoping to extract some justice. I’m interested in extricating my LIFE and a future, with the least damages and compromise, particularly for my two (daughters), who I miss very badly these days, as well as all along, but see no way to get to, in the current situation.



You’ve probably been hearing this more and more around the internet, as propagated by people who want us to believe it’s even relevant to the family law code in state after state.  We may want this — naturally, as human beings or parents, or others — but how does what we want relate to what the existing legal system says about this area of law? Time and again, people complain that the family courts aren’t keeping their children safe, and demand that they do, thinking (without evidence) that the courts are on the same page with the parents. since when did any family court venue say that this was its reason for existing? Does even the family code indicate this is its purpose? Now, there’s a push for The Safe Child Act by certain people who, shamelessly (and probably knowingly) call the courts by their wrong names and push the theme of “more scientific practices to recognize child abuse, ” etc.  If you’re a parent, it’s hard to resist the appeal to pathos and the assumption that better subject matter expertise would turn the family courts (often called mistakenly “custody courts,” simply an inaccurate term) into safer places for children.  Here’s a segment, catch the phrasing:

Of course protecting children’s health and safety requires more than a goal of making this the courts’ first priority.  The court cannot rely on generalized professionals who understand mental illness and psychology unless they have specialized expertise in domestic violence, child sexual abuse, substance abuse, medical diagnosis and treatment. Court professionals must be familiar with current scientific research so they know that exposure to domestic violence, child abuse and other trauma results in a lifetime of greater illnesses and injuries.  As the Saunders’ study demonstrates, courts must avoid relying on unqualified “experts” who focus on the myth that women frequently make false allegations; unscientific alienation theories or the belief that mothers’ attempts to protect children from frightening fathers are actually harmful to the children.

Yeah, well guess which group of professionals, a fairly tight-knit, self-referencing court-reform community saw the opportunity to become the next generation of experts in the courts, a long way off, and is NEVER going to give up this talk — and realized that if the mothers actually refocused their emotional energy on something different than “Abusers getting custody,” they might (like I eventually did) figure out a thing or two…See very recent post “A Different Kind of Attention Leads to Sound Judgment” for more information).

This information doesn’t take long to figure out — that the language is focused on better professionals, not operational structures. Well, the rest of this post, I’d just rather look at some different terminology; a bit about commissions that draft codes, what’s a code versus a statute, and face it — the Family Code is the new kid on the block, and you probably still have less than enough understanding of how tightly this country (and each state) is organized around the profession of law. And it doesn’t take too long to figure out that, whatever else most of us may want to believe about how vastly important we, and our children are to the world — this entire system is just not about them.

I haven’t written much lately because longstanding dealings with my own situation (<=<=yes, that is me, my petition.  Now you know….) the family court case that never closed, and its aftermath) required attention. I have been dealing right along with two or three attorneys (NOT on my side) in matters directly affecting my safety — and doing this without stable income or a full-time or even consistent job history. (You try to have a stable job history after your kids disappear from your life overnight….). A fourth one was brought in recently, apparently just for fun — and it’s become clear what the next agenda.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

June 7, 2014 at 10:19 pm

Accounting Literacy Matters. Cause-based Literacy Doesn’t. (Spring 2010, Ellen H Brown tangles with Walter Burien’s info, or at least tries to.)

with 3 comments

This blog has been sitting in draft since January. I cleaned it up, fleshed it out and am publishing. Meanwhile, I’ll be over at Cracking the Cult of the Constitution by Clint Richardson, and tell you why when I get back. Particularly on the topic “Corporations Sole.” (3 part series from August 2013).

Look for these two colors in a side-by-side column format to see the conversation that inspired this post.  I’ve added material to a middle section one day after publishing this post (added Sun. 5/4/2014) because I think it’s relevant.  Alternating color scheme (dark green/light-beige with red fonts) section is more about the particular institute set up AFTER the conversations of 2010.

I wouldn’t bother with this, or all the pretty colors, except that attempting to communicate CONCEPTS through the cognitive dissonance of people who mis-understand why “government” and its “social services” and “justice systems,” aren’t solving the problems, even when the word “problem-solving” is appended (like “problem-solving courts.”), is getting old.

Half the understanding is a matter of basic vocabulary, and paying attention to others’ speech. Here, I’m listening in. For followers who are just interested in “the courts,” — too bad. The courts are part of government, and if you don’t get that, I can’t help you. I did my part!! (see blog).

I find the colors, and the conversation, interesting.  Hope you do too — but the point isn’t this person, or that person.  The point is, how to make sound judgments (it shouldn’t take that long) and assessments when authority figures, or would-be authority figures/leaders, start talking.  And notice what happens after you do NOT get a straight answer.

Some months ago, I also got entangled with the “Web of Debt” conversation; not because of CAFRs, in particular, but because I also live in California and wanted a few answers I wasn’t seeing on the site. 

The strange response to a single comment on a blog (from someone I was a complete stranger to) led to my further inquiries about “Inquiring Systems, Inc.” and some of the issues below.  What I see is someone trying to sound more intelligent than he or she is (see below), and trying to seem more concerned about the disenfranchised 99% (us poor slobs) than the associations and behaviors would indicate.

Which one was the attorney, well keep reading.


Remember, you cannot judge a book by its cover?”
Well, you can’t judge a corporation by its website, or by what causes it’s in favor of.
Yesterday (well, about 1/23/2014), I got another good, fast, one-day lesson on the Environmental/Green Progressive/OneWorldOnePlanet (Our planet = Our Plans) movement by simply paying attention to a passing conversation, and then follow-up.
See How and When to Change, Ditch (or Track) the Conversations of Public Interest Crusades.  While the public is supposed to be entranced by their messages, networks, and international connections, we should habitually change the focus BACK to the accounting practices, and then talk about it — and with these as the subject matter.
Don’t be so easily distracted like children (which we are being treated as in this matters)!!  Insist that people you hang with also grow up. The art of distraction has many purposes, but often it’s for the purpose of stealing, and that is what has been done from individual people subject to income taxes, who do NOT play this game in the manner those seeking to rule the planet have been playing it.
I almost left the conversation (follow up on this conversation):”Know Misdirection / Omission when seen:  Ellen Brown CAFR article” — however when it began with misquotes, led to mis-use of nonprofit status to shield others groups …(all charging fees and taking donations) to do the same all over California (in particular), and  an advisory board reaching to a progressive Congressman from New Mexico attempting to start a public state bank . . . and another to the United Nations Environmental Programme and its Financial Initiatives starting with a “small group of” (multinational) banks — I felt there was a reason the one individual “couldn’t” (didn’t) want to understand, or follow through with what Mr. Burien has been saying — and where he disagrees with Gerald Klatt, who put up the cafrman.com website and disagreed with Ms. Brown.
That is a ONE-page conversation, easy to read. I place the 2010 conversations side by side, and note that after NOT answering Burien’s corrections, Ms. Brown went off and hooked up with another group to promote “The Public Banking Institute” (2011).

Read the rest of this entry »

A Different Kind of Attention develops Sound Judgment

with 5 comments

To my 259+ “Followers” who just received an email notification of this trust (and other viewers)…. You were just mailed a post in DRAFT status, when yours truly hit “Publish” instead of “Save Draft” while editing it.  Right now, my version of wordpress, or my input device, simply will not let me put a published post back into draft or pending status.  When I attempt, the system simply refreshes all windows.

{{As of Mon 3/24/2014, I have continued adding to and editing this post; it has now doubled and is about 16,000+ words long.  Please scroll through the material if you only plan to read part — I tend to add material to the middle and introductions, when revising; meaning some of the original topic (after first stating it) is moved down towards the end. Or, I will split it off.  

To put it bluntly — I’m an investigative blogger (and DV survivor, mother, etc.).  I don’t publish in professional journals, and my former profession was not based around getting federal grants to write up others problems in a scholarly manner.  Rather, I provided genuine services, real-time (and involving considerable focus, preparation, and practice) to a local community, based on demand for those service, NOT forced consumption by the local courts and the federal child support or welfare system — making it a win-win situation (if not necessarily producing wealth, it was a healthy lifestyle for sure. So — obviously this is not “AP” (or any other) editing style  When I get to it, I’ll split this post, maybe.  In the meanwhile, everything I wrote goes into a storehouse ALSO called memory (awareness of  trends, systems, groups and to a degree, personnel).

Therefore, I pretty much blog it as a write it — with about 2/3 more posts in draft, and consistent communications (networking) by phone and email as well.}.

However, even incomplete and in draft, this post on this material is still timely, and relevant. It proves who (by group name, including Executive Director), while valiant in reporting troubling matters,  was still systematically and uniformly covering up, or had abandoned from all significant public discussion the role of the federal grants (access/visitation  in particular) in influencing INDIVIDUAL  custody cases where child abuse had already been identified.

The information surrounding the creation of the family and conciliation courts, plus its relationship to “welfare reform” is significant enough it puts an entirely different light on the whole subject matter. There are  MANY corollaries (logical conclusions) from the information about the Who, What, When, Where, How and even Why  that make sense of the current situations in the court and enable people paying attention to  even see, document , changes continuing to happen along the same lines.

There is literally  NO EXCUSE for this degree of  OMISSION from DISCUSSION of THIS MUCH relevant information.  

This post also again PROVES that the organization in question, through  its at least 2004 Executive Director, and as I have asserted often enough in person (email, phone) and I believe on this blog, has had access all along — and chose to siderail that information, if not eliminate it from their email alerts, co-sponsored conference topics, summaries of the situation and assessments — as do the professionals and other organizations they tend to support, promote and help publicize.

With the information from Liz Richards nafcj.net alone, a logical  conclusion  would QUICKLY lead [as it did me] sensible people to understand (better) the events leading up to and following from the 1996 PRWORA welfare reform and, by NAMING them, which significant organizations and individuals were restructuring not just the courts, but the entire US Government (economically, through radical changes to the Social Security Act). Please note, from NAFCJ.net website, front page: “Fifth Step – Change your Reaction Mode” which is still good advice!

Fifth Step: Change your reaction mode: Learn how stop being fooled and manipulated by dishonest people who are supposed to be helping you ! Learn about unique responses to this problem.

I’m not sure I agree at this point with the recommended responses, which could and have produced retaliatory action (extreme) upon individuals.  I DO, however, agree with researching and finding out WTF is going on — in those areas!

Also see, June 2010 Testimony Liz submitted to the House Ways and Means Committee prior to another fatherhood bill authorization (I alerted the group emails I was on at the time to this, not having regular internet access (or a laptop, or a car, or income) at that particular season)….  Read “An Expensive Remedy in Search of a Legitimate Problem”  And, in June 27, 2012, Anne Stevenson, as an individual (not representing a nonprofit or organization) gave another fantastic testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee, <=<=<=VERY well documented!  Anne since then has begun to take the AFCC apart at the seems, and properly so, as individuals did in prior years.

There is a full generation (at least) of ignorance to dispel in this arena — meanwhile (since), I’ve come to learn (too much) more about who’s been backing this particular nonprofit and have come to my own conclusions about WHY marriage/fatherhood programming was set up to start with (and it’s not, FYI, just for custody matters.  It’s about the system change!! And not the good kind).

[So, Liz R. wrote in 6/2010]

My research and findings have been included in a DoJ study on the negative impact of the fathers rights movement on domestic violence victims. My group is also listed on the Department of Justice, National Criminal Justice Resource Center (NCJRS) web site as an official resource.

(http://www.ncjrs.gov/app/topics/Topic.aspx?topicid=36 )* All the evidence I’ve observed indicates the Responsible Fatherhood programs are merely a cover for recruiting bad dads with offers of child support abatements into high-conflict litigation, giving sole custody of the children to the father and getting the mother out of picture and forcing her to pay excessive child support obligations to him

**scroll down to the bottom..National Criminal Justice Reference Service

Right on top of that link is a link to AFCC.net.

So, “Congratulations” for the Protective Parents Movements that don’t want to deal with EITHER of those websites, and follow the evidence to some logical conclusions…  In 2013, the Battered Mothers’ Custody Conference (BMCC) invited a participant that AFCC calls one of its “partners” — and AFCC is promoting PAS that BMCC protests.  This is beginning (once you look at the details) to look more and more like a farce (carefully scripted puppet show) in the macro view.  But that will not become clear without sorting through organizations, corporations, and their relationship to each other (and federal government).  

At this point I am no longer dealing with Liz by phone or email; one reason had to do with compromise of confidentiality on email lists; another was, basic phone courtesy, (i.e., listening to at least one complete sentence before shouting it down), and a few other reasons.  I also do not know what is the current information loop of people who contact NAFCJ.net with the justice system; and I do not buy the many excuses for not blogging this material so that other mothers could see it closer to the beginning of their court cases, and be warned. But essentially, at least she put out valid, LIVE information that others had sought to coverup, AFTER it had been exposed, and published!

By the time people have gone through the “protective parents” material and figured out something (possibly including their children) was MISSING from the information provided them about PAS (like, which groups were pushing it, by name), and run across NAFCJ.net (or now, other material we have been blogging consistently), the cases are going, going, GONE!

It truly takes a network of “don’t and won’t talk about it” conferences, professionals, and social media experts to keep this many women (and men) this clueless for this long. I think reform has to come from OUTSIDE the legal and psychological professions — and one standard I have is, anyone or group who has participated in censorship or derailing of conversations for personal or professional profit, is a “no-deal” proposition.  

Judging by conference materials of collaborating groups since (i.e., the Battered Mothers’ Custody Conference/”BMCC” which met from 2003-2012 in New York, which met May 2013 in Washington, D.C. and who for Year 2014 is (I gather) doing a “mini-BMCC” again in D.C., while Mo Hannah (one of its two co-founders) takes a year off, there is still NO INTENTION on the part of  this collaboration of advocacy groups  to concede any  past errors, to relinquish any undeserved credibility as having the best interests of:

Battered Mothers, Protective Parents, Abused Children, or Courageous Kids and Incest Survivors at the center of their concerns, rather than retaining “NextGen Expert Status” and getting a personal piece of the federal grants pie.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Let's Get Honest

March 23, 2014 at 9:26 am

American Spring

Solidarity. Unity. People.

Family Court Injustice

Mom & Kids Need "Just Us" to Fight Family Court Injustice

The Espresso Stalinist

Wake Up to the Smell of Class Struggle ☭

Spiritual Side of Domestic Violence

Finally! The Truth About Domestic Violence and The Church

Legal Schnauzer

Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family --and "Conciliation" -- Courts' Operations, Practices, and History

Legal Schnauzer

Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family --and "Conciliation" -- Courts' Operations, Practices, and History


Advocates for Change: Tell us about your JUDGE, ATTORNEY (pretender), or CPS...


On Governmental Cashflow, CAFRs, and Economic Coups


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 297 other followers

%d bloggers like this: