Archive for the ‘Who’s Who (bio snapshots)’ Category
[Published June 29, 2014; Post in edit mode late July-Aug. 2014; expanded to almost double the size,nearly 24,000 words; with background info….In most posts, a lot of the length is simply quotes, my style is not just tell, but “show and tell.”]
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.
These parades, charades, and facades have become a problem for the people who match the profile of what they claim to represent, “Protective Parents” and/or “Battered Mothers,” specifically. I am among that class and a witness of the practices, tactics, and censorships of dialogues involved. I believe collectively the groups involved comprise a cult, and exhibit all primary cult practices.
Before a few mental circuits of distressed parents disconnect, or melt from the heat of in “righteous indignation,” (“But my children were abused; I am an incest survivor” etc.), this post is not about whether or not incest or abuse took place in those cases, or children are being placed in the care of batterers or dangerous parents. I’m a survivor, and I know that plenty of times, abuse, sometimes incest did take place and children ARE being placed in the care of batterers. Mine were….
It’s about what kind of parents are taking a road trip (real, or virtually) with ANY advocacy organizations whose articles of incorporation (if any) boards of directors on their tax returns and patterns of incorporation, charitable filings they have not yet even identified (let alone read and understood), and what’s worse to a destination they have not evaluated as sensible, based on analyses of those organizations in the larger context.
It’s about the dangers of tunnel vision. Focus is one thing, but tunnel vision, an entirely different thing. it’s about how even spending days, weeks and months on a combination of social media, group -emails, individual emails, and even supplemented by various published articles on a certain topic can still be like eating white bread and peanut butter only, and wondering why you can’t make it through the marathon.
It’s so easy to get a sense of TIME (date of origin of a group), PLACE (where did it originally incorporated, and if it’s one of those state-skipping chameleon corporations, make a note of it, and find out where it’s been before), SIZE (for that, see the financials), and POSITIONING (who else is it interlocking agenda with; and — this is important — is it talking from a religious-exempt institution, or from a law school, or center/institute (etc.) at a university, or individually. Universities, hospitals, government represent considerable clout, prestige and authority, and lesser accountability for said “Center” or Institute” when it comes to tracking the funding = tracking the influence. Is it a regular HHS grantee? On which federal funding streams?
Does it file separately — or has it got another organization as its fiscal agent? If that status changed (example in this post), when, and probably why?
It’s about followers failing to set standards and keep leaders ethical.Consider: if as a parent, you would NOT want your kids to get into a strange cars with smiling strangers and start hitch-hiking with them, for years, recruiting others as you go, why have you demonstrated this same behavior by failing to do basic look-ups, and obtain those fiscal identities and trade-association connections?
[Example: Child-Justice, Inc. (Eileen King, fall 2012] connections to First Star = connections to NACC = connections to AFCC. Another: Battered Women’s Justice Project [“BWJP”] connections (ongoing) to AFCC AND to Duluth, MN’s “Domestic Abuse Intervention Programs” [connection to Ellen Pence, the HHS and DOJ-funded DV industry programming] AND recently, presenting at “BMCC” (Battered Mother’s Custody Conference). Why would BMCC (and Mr. Bancroft and Mr. Goldstein) keep a ten-year silence (as if they were unaware of its existence) on what has been a $150 million/year federal since 1996 financing program around marriage and fatherhood promotion by way of diversions from Title IV-A, welfare, or the $10 million/year since 1996 (though first financed in 1988) Title IV-D (re: child support enforcement incentives, including percentage-based quotas) access visitation grants? Possibly because out of some of this funding comes the batterers intervention and supervised visitation networked industries, with solid income streams from court-ordered services, courtesy US taxpayers and privately, individual, extorted parents?
One significant “Why?” unanswered ought to indicate something seriously “off,” but there are many — far too many — significant unanswered questions in this company. Suggestion: Come to a decision on the “why” and act on it. Insist on answers as a condition of telling your stories through these channels, lending credibility as the voice of the victims. As a condition of attending rallies, or advertising rallies, etc.
WHO are the friends of those empathetic friends? WHO are they leading you to?
Get the group identity first (the process is simple)! Assess size and special interest groups, and steer clear of groups which refuse to incorporate, or which refuse to submit state-level charitable returns when states require this — on time. And which attempt to censor conversations about areas of common interest, or refuse to educate followers about it in communications or in websites.
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 preplanned 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 unacceptable to teach or 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 into producing certain custody-outcomes, by state, and by gender, and related quotas
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 stemming from 1996-forward (Welfare reform) , to specific organizations, or any searchable terms or names which might better alert women, definitely primary 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.
Read the rest of this entry »
Bypassing the Legal Process in Baltimore: HOW and for WHOM Maryland got its “Family Divisions” in 1998.
This blog is published as-is, both formatting and editing. In my own defense (from its embarrassing look) — I have to type in half HTML, half “Visual” mode, with frequent “Preview” mode to check and correct… WordPress “Visual” mode is NOTHING like actual — as to paragraph breaks, spacing, and even font and line-height, unless I manually (copy & paste, or type in) controlling HTML style codes.
Meanwhile, I am engrossed in the subject matter, and this work is neither contracted nor hourly. It’s Christmas Eve, and I’m posting anyhow.
Major lesson? Want justice? It has to be economic justice, and through self-education (that means, put one’s time into something else), unless the country gets out of the business of war, which basically causes business contracting with the US Government to wage it, which then with this wealth (and while soldiers die on both side, and landscapes are blown up, new drugs are used for warfare and then to repair the injuries and trauma from war) foundations enable the wealth from war to be used for PR and — as it actually turned out, probably, in this case — a certain foundation wants the nation to function differently, which it has been. (Oh, the benefits of Billionaire BIG).
Also whatever illness one of the fortune-family’s kids have, that’s the disease that gets the research for the cure (how about healthier lifestyles and less poisoned food supplies, and fewer drugs for us all?)
Generation IV of the exact same heir’s name, ALL of them knowing they have enough wealth to throw it around and make the rules, is behaving badly, pays off the ABA to set up a center to create Unified Family Courts (including this one in Baltimore), the ABA keeps up the good work, and eventually a judge concedes. [Read the whole article for another take on how wealth is acquired; the word “strangulation” was used in this one, coercion, under duress signing over businesses one helped develop, etc.] Bullies into Healthcare, Health Research and Family Justice….
The wealth has also probably affected the family line, which contains a number of high-profile (that’s the level they exist at) celebrity disasters, reported in 2010 when one of the daughters died of drug overdose in squalid conditions. Family members cut themselves in or out of the business, or wealth, affecting future generations of their own, only larger-league.
The courts also order families into therapy they don’t need; sometimes involving drugs (i.e. anti-psychotics). The foundation just so happened to be a major pharmaceutical, one of the world’s largest. And from 1988ff a major contributor to Republican party, causes, and candidates, particularly future President Bush.
And we expect JUSTICE from this model?…Merry Christmas indeed, and for my NEXT Christmas, I’d like a website with an embedded style chart I don’t have to do manually, my children to understand some of these truths, AND I’d like to see them again too, would be nice…. might even re-instated the practice of observing or participating in holidays, MAYBE. If you’re not up for the narratives, just look at the links….
Again, I am only sampling a field that was sent in place decades ago, has major foundations supporting it (one should ask WHY) as well as the many resources of the HHS, and the “yeah, man — right up our alley!” of one too many tax-exempt religious foundations. Or, as you will, faith-based.
TAGGS.hhs.gov on this group (I searched by its EIN# — which is below).
|Recipient Name||City||State||ZIP Code||County||DUNS Number||Sum of Awards|
|INST FOR RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD & FAM. REVITALIZATION||WASHINGTON||DC||20019||DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA||$ 2,549,350|
Before we get too far into the economics of this field, I’d like to post a sample of what some of the DYNAMICS of it are about. This 2001 Appeal is interesting because it incorporates how the court responds to evidence of injuring a child on visitation and severe violence (breaking a woman’s sternum and grabbing her by the throat) — that woman being the 2nd wife // stepmother — and because the man in question is on the board of (another — not the above) Fathers’ rights group based in WDC (ACFC). This is one child — a girl, born in 1989 (divorce, 1991, first evidence of post-separation bruising of the girl, ca. 1996) and it covered two states, Michigan and Louisiana. It’s a short-double-spaced read, and I hope you do. Because at least in part — no offence to non-abusive Dads — this is also what the “FR’ movement is about — that FR are FR even when these things happen:
Appeal from 3rd Judicial District Court, Parish of Lincoln, Louisiana Trial Court No. 43,428~ Honorable R. Wayne Smith, Judge.
(Dad, see very far below same photo, looks like a very upstanding man):
Similar personnel to the ACFC group (far below) found on this one also: Baskerville, Semerad, Mike McManus (who wants to do away with no-fault divorce), etc. Click on link:
Dads of Michigan Related site, it says (read to see the spheres of influence involved & connection with another WDC organization, “ACFC”):
Rebuilding heterosexual marriage as the social norm is the necessary structural foundation for successful American socioeconomic reconstruction.
Among this testimony we can see both parents being court-ordered to attend a class, one of the (3) experts calling “parental alienation” but the testimony of the others (who felt the child to be credible, and not coached, esp. with the bruises) were concerned. Moreover, it appears that the same father had literally broken the stepmom’s sternum and grabbed her throat’ they were divorcing. he lied under oath about that event and had a new girlfriend to whom apparently the daughter was exposed. It appears that the court’s response is simply to adjust the supervised visitation, not terminate it! This Appeal in question comes fully 10 years after their divorce. Get the picture?
Seriously, it’s a short read and covers many typical issues in family court these days in a case which divorce pre-dated welfare reform but still had the PAS charge…