Fatherhood.gov

Deconstructing Fatherhood Propaganda

The article “Deconstructing the Essential Father” by Louise B. Silverstein and Carl F. Auerbach of Yeshiva University, was originally published in the journal American Psychologist in June 1999.

“Deconstructing the Essential Father” was written as a criticism of David Blankenhorn and David Popenoe’s work, which claimed, “fathers are essential to positive child development and that responsible fathering is most likely to occur within the context of heterosexual marriage.”

In their opening statements, Silverstein and Auerbach noted how “this perspective is generating a range of governmental initiatives designed to provide social support preferences to fathers over mothers and to heterosexual married couples over alternative family forms,” and propose that the “neoconservative position is an incorrect or oversimplified interpretation of empirical research.”

The term “essential” in “essential father” refers to the concept of essentialism, that is, the idea that there are biological sex differences between women and men that create a difference in parenting methods and emphases between the genders. Feminists believe that this concept of “separate spheres” has been discredited since the turn of the last century.”

In opposition to the neoconservative position, Silverstein and Auerbach argue that neither mothers nor fathers are essential to child development, that parenting roles are interchangeable, that the significant variables in predicting father involvement are economic rather than marital, and that responsible fathering can occur within a variety of family structures. Over the past six years, they have studied the fathering identities of men who are actively involved with their children. They used a wide range of cross-species, cross-cultural, and social science research, including their own study of 200 men, to reach these conclusions. Those 200 men were divided into 10 different subcultures with U. S. society, including Haitian Christian fathers; Promise Keeper fathers; gay fathers; Latino fathers; White, nongay divorced fathers; Modern Orthodox Jewish fathers; and Greek grandfathers. They have concluded that children need “at least one responsible, caretaking adult who has a positive emotional connection to them and with whom they have a consistent relationship.” They have also found that “the stability of the emotional connection and the predictability of the caretaking relationship are the significant variables that predict positive child adjustment.” In the end, they examine why the neoconservative perspective has become so widely accepted within popular culture. They then offer social policy recommendations that support men in their fathering role without discriminating against women and same-sex couples.

Continue Reading: http://www.xyonline.net/content/deconstructing-fatherhood-propaganda

Advertisements

Fathers Day to the Nth Degree

Ad Council

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse and Ad Council Show Fathers the Critical Role They Play in Their Child’s Life
This 2010 Initiative is an example of how we are being polarized by the gender wars the family court system promotes. It’s also another example of government seeking to pursue an agenda of divide and conquer: If parents and other groups are kept in constant conflict, the attention is taken off the government entities that are robbing us blind through taxation.  Millions of dollars in funds are handed over to the States by the Department of Health and Human Services to family court connected nonprofits and GRANT DOLLARS = TAXPAYER DOLLARS! Continue reading about the HHS, National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse and Ad Council campaign below:

New Public Service Advertisements Inspire Fatherhood Involvement

Washington DC, October 18, 2010 /PRNewswire/ — Nine out of ten parents believe there is a “father absence crisis” in America, according to two national surveys by the National Fatherhood Initiative. To inspire fathers to become more involved in the lives of their children, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance, the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC) and The Advertising Council are launching a new series of public service advertisements (PSAs).  (Do we really need government telling fathers to become more involved in their children’s lives and more importantly, do taxpayers need to pay for it?)

“These new PSAs continue the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse’s tradition of delivering messages that inspire dads to give their children what they need to succeed: their time,” said Roland C. Warren, Media Campaign Director of the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse.

Created pro bono by C-E (Campbell-Ewald), the new TV, outdoor and Web PSAs emphasize to fathers that “the smallest moments can have the biggest impact on a child’s life.” The PSAs conclude with the campaign tagline, “Take time to be a dad today” and direct fathers to visit www.fatherhood.gov or call 1-877-4DAD411 for parenting tips, fatherhood programs and additional resources for fathers.

“We are proud to continue our work with the Department of Health and Human Services on this campaign that is helping fathers recognize the critical role they play in their children’s lives,” said Peggy Conlon, president & CEO of the Ad Council. “These lighthearted and touching PSAs will demonstrate to all fathers that the time they spend with their children can make a significant impact on their lives.”

“It has been our privilege to be a part of this worthwhile endeavor,” Bill Ludwig, chairman and CEO of Campbell-Ewald said. “We want to inspire a new commitment of active fatherhood with an engaging message to fathers that even the smallest moments can have the biggest impact on a child’s life, while capturing the hearts of viewers everywhere.”     (Give me a break!!!)

Health and Human Services

Through HHS, the federal government supports responsible fatherhood in diverse ways. Because engaged fathers strengthen families and contribute to healthy outcomes for children, many HHS programs integrate support for fathers. These include Head Start, child support programs, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. HHS also supports programs that focus on responsible fatherhood, such as the Promoting Responsible Fatherhood grant program administered by the Office of Family Assistance.

National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse

The National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC) is funded by the Administration for Children and Families’ Office of Family Assistance’s (OFA) efforts to assist States and communities in promoting and supporting Responsible Fatherhood. Primarily a tool for professionals operating Responsible Fatherhood programs, the NRFC provides access to print and electronic publications, timely information on fatherhood issues, and targeted resources that support OFA-funded Responsible Fatherhood grantees. The NRFC Website also provides essential information for other audiences interested in fatherhood issues. The address for the NRFC website is www.fatherhood.gov.

The Advertising Council

The Ad Council is a non-profit organization with a rich history of marshalling volunteer talent from the advertising and media industries to deliver critical messages to the American public. Having produced literally thousands of PSA campaigns addressing the most pressing social issues of the day, the Ad Council has effected, and continues to effect, tremendous positive change by raising awareness, inspiring action, and saving lives. To learn more about the Ad Council and its campaigns, visit www.adcouncil.org.

_____________________________________________________________________________


Don’t get me wrong, I’m all about the critical role fathers play in their children’s lives. What I don’t support is the role abusive fathers play in their children’s lives. I also have a problem with federally funded HHS grants that incentivize conflict for profit and the promotion of one gender over another.

The narrative that’s been pushed is that fatherlessness is THEE cause of poverty and the root of all social ills in society. Remember though. . .The issue is never the issue. An issue is only used if it furthers the cause of tyranny.

Marriage: America’s Greatest Weapon Against Child Poverty

The National Fatherhood Initiative (NFI), was founded in 1994, to “lead a society-wide movement to confront the problem of father absence”.  In 1995, former President Clinton issued executive orders that directed federal agencies to review and “modify” all family programs and initiatives serving primarily mothers and children, to include fathers and “strengthen their involvement” with children.

Welfare Reform 1996, drastically changed the way the federal government provided aid to needy families. This legislation stipulated that three out of the four purposes of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program created by the reform either directly or indirectly promote “responsible fatherhood” and “healthy marriages”.

In essence, the courts have been weaponized to destroy families and If we want to stop child abuse, we need to stop the systems that allow for money-laundering and gender-based funding incentives.  America is being destroyed while we engage in secondary issues which serve to divide us. Mothers and fathers are both being duped by the courts and we need to join forces to oppose the corruption in the systems and not each other. Government by private nonprofit is not part of the US Constitution.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Below are further examples of federal initiatives related to fatherhood

Fathers Supporting Breastfeeding: The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) provides educational messages to highlight the advantages of breastfeeding and how fathers can play a critical role in promoting the healthy development of their children and in strengthening family bonds. The WIC program also allows fathers to receive nutrition education, counseling, and referral services on behalf of their children.

Non-profit photographs men in breastfeeding  poses to raise awareness

Fatherhood Buzz: This Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Family Assistance initiative, through the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse, reaches out to dads with positive information through their barbers and barbershops.

Reconnecting Homeless Veterans with Their Children: This initiative of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Health and Human Services, along with the American Bar Association, helps homeless veterans gain permanent housing, assist them with child support obligations, and connect them with programs that offer employment and supportive services

.Transitional Jobs for Non-Custodial Parents: This Department of Labor grant program supports local efforts to prepare unemployed non-custodial parents for work through transitional employment, while assisting them to gain unsubsidized employment intended to promote family engagement and long-term self-sufficiency.

Building Assets for Fathers and Families: As part of a wider Department of Health and Human Services initiative to extend the benefits of financial education to individuals and families with young children, the Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) has provided seven three-year demonstration grants to encourage non-custodial parents to establish savings accounts and access other services to increase financial stability.

National Child Support Non-Custodial Parent Demonstration Projects: OCSE has provided five-year grants to eight states to link non-custodial parents with employment services.

The Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation in the Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, has a number of ongoing research projects focused on the implementation and impact of fatherhood programs. Two recent projects are the Ex-Prisoner Reentry Strategies Study, being conducted by the Urban Institute to document program implementation funded under the FY 2011 Community-Centered Responsible Fatherhood Ex-Prisoner Reentry Pilot Project grant announcement, and the Parents and Children Together (PACT) Evaluation, which is a formative evaluation being conducted by Mathematica Policy Research to document and provide initial assessment of selected Responsible Fatherhood and Healthy Marriage grantees.

 

Re-packaging the Same Old Schlock

SCHLOCK /SHläk/   noun  North American informal

Cheap or inferior goods or material; trash.   Synonyms:  bad, bargain-basement, bum, cheapjack, cheesy, coarse, common, crappy [slang],  Merriam-Webster

Image courtesy of khunaspix at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Let’s Get Honest! Blog

Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family –and “Conciliation” — Courts’ Operations, Practices, and HistoryCourtesy PRWORA, HHS, and Public Apathy, the Good Ol’ Boys Network with help from (speaking of which) Yale University is Re-packaging the Same Old Schlock, in this example, as “Male Involvement Network”

(After publishing any post, I review it, and may revise or clarify with added material, something posted. Anyone who receives the post through a tweet or as a follower is best served by going back to original link for must current version.This time I added a table of annual report filings (underneath the first logos shown below) and some links which didn’t make the “saved” version that was first published 6/8/2016 evening. Post currently runs under 10,000 words….Make that almost 12,000 words, after I added more details on the involved The Community Foundation for Greater New Haven” and its financials and the next paragraph explaining why I added that — and a dark-green background section about the CNCS and Social Innovation Funding…:):)

I may subtract that, later, but remember to keep an eye on “COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF [name your Metro/Regional Area, or major, particularly port city:  San Francisco, Baltimore, etc.]” (nationwide, and especially in metro regions, which also tend to have some high-profile universities (like, Yale…. in this case); they are fast-tracking “What Works” from federal/private power block to “community level” and are an identifiable part of the MACRO business model privatizing government, in preparation of course for “outflanking sovereignty through functionalism.”  These organizations have local credibility, significant assets obtained over the years, and significant connections to local power.  In addition through such things as the Federal “CNCS” (Corporation for National and Community Service) (URL: NationalService.gov)  helping the big guys pick their favorite programming and make sure the commoners (peasants and/or, low-income population, male and female, and whatever the ethnicity) are run through the “What Works” programs that Big Brother and Relatives have determined are best for all.  Notice that the Social Innovation Fund only dates to Year 2009:

The Social Innovation Fund (SIF) is a powerful approach to transforming lives and communities that positions the federal government to be a catalyst for impact—mobilizing private resources to find and grow community solutions with evidence of results.

With the simple but vital goal of finding what works, and making it work for more people, the Social Innovation Fund and its grantees create a learning network of organizations working to implement innovative and effective evidence-based solutions to local and national challenges in three priority areas: economic opportunity, healthy futures, and youth development.

Goodwill of Silicon ValleyIn just five years, the Social Innovation Fund and its private-sector partners have invested more than a $800 million in compelling community solutions. The Social Innovation Fund’s portfolio represents over $295 million in federal grants and more than $582 million in non-federal match commitments. To date, the SIF’s Classic program has made 35 awards to grantmaking organizations and 290 nonprofits working in 39 states and the District of Columbia. In total over 360 nonprofit organizations are being funded by the SIF to conduct diverse interventions and evaluate results through highly rigorous models. Through the SIF’s Pay for Success program, over 25 states across the United States are engaged in testing and implementation of Pay for Success projects. Across both programs, the Social Innovation Fund is committed to expanding the impact of effective community solutions to make a difference in the lives of more Americans.

Authorized by the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act in April of 2009, the Social Innovation Fund is a program of the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), a federal agency focused on improving lives, strengthening communities, and fostering civic engagement through service and volunteering. Together, service and innovation provide a vehicle to harness the power of ordinary people and unleash the potential of innovative ideas to help address our communities’ toughest social problems and transform lives.

Consider Yourself Forewarned to Pay Attention to the CNCS and what the Social Innovation Fund (Big Brother and Big Tax-exempt Foundation) have planned for our local communities.//LGH.)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4015970/

WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT THIS.  I’LL SHOW HOW I CAME ACROSS THE ABOVE LINK and “MALE INFORMATION NETWORK,” AND RE-ITERATE THE POINTS I WAS MAKING THREE YEARS AGO DURING AN UPDATE ON THE “NON-FILING” HABITS OF THE “ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS” (AFCC) AND ITS CHAPTERS (now not shown — the Connecticut Chapter).  AND AT THAT TIME EXHORTING MORE PEOPLE TO GET INVOLVED DOING WHAT I DO, ONCE THERE IS SOME MEDIA ATTENTION TO A SITUATION IN THE FAMILY COURTS — AND AT THAT TIME, PARTICULARLY REGARDING AFCC AS AN ORGANIZATION.

For example as to those filings of AFCC and its Chapters, on its website and IRS filings this (?) organization claims to be legal domicile Wisconsin (see Heading row ending in “M” Legal Domicile”) and having existed since 1963, but the State of Wisconsin only admits to the existence of a Chapter of AFCC, and that only since Year 2012:

ID Entity Name /Type Registered
Effective Date
Status /
Status Date
W060179 WISCONSIN CHAPTER OF THE ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY AND CONCILIATION COURTS, INC. 
06 – Non-Stock Corporation
10/15/2012 Incorporated/Qualified/ Registered
10/15/2012

Meanwhile, Illinois Secretary of State records the existence (still active) of a business entity since 1975, under two prior names, the current one matching the one on the AFCC logo below.

(Click for search results image: CyberdriveIllinois.com AFCC Search Results.  Use CyberdriveIllinois.com link to repeat a name search showing one prior name, and clickable to read details (including that it’s a “Domestic” Illinois organization originally filed 1975, with two prior names, dated 2001 and 2002 as I recall. Illinois has it File No. “50708497”).

 

 

 

 

I PUT AN EXTENSIVE UPDATE ON THIS PARTICULAR FIND ON ONE OF THOSE OLDER POSTS, WHICH EXPLAINS MORE FULLY WHY I GET TO USE THE WORD “SCHLOCK.”  ON THAT UPDATE I ALSO NOTICED THAT ONE OF THE KEY PARTICIPANTS IN THIS REPORT, ONE YEAR AFTER HAVING ITS NAME ON THE SAME, APPARENTLY QUIT FILING ITS TAX RETURNS.  While I’d like to further verify that those returns aren’t on some other database, even if they have filed, I noticed that this organization’s primary source of revenues three years ago was government grants, and primary use of those was on its own employees.  The grants are not being redistributed to anyone (individual or organizations).  Yet the website is still up and, looking quite nice and colorful, having its logo — it still features requests for funds:

A Partnership For Family & Community Empowerment.”

Here’s The Community Foundation Greater New Haven (from “GiveGreater.org“) soliciting for the above organization on a page “last updated 8/7/2015“

Feel free to explore that link, “Leadership and Staff” for from 1996-[8/7/2015]  CEO “Barbara Tinney, MSW” (only former CEO listed Mr. Mustafa Abdul Salamm**, 1991) and the comments at the bottom of its page about some excess administrative costs:

(Google search results on Mustafa Abdul Salamm, May 7, 1998 has him quitting after being accused of forging a signature to obtain Community Development Block Grants, on a different organization:  Neighborhood Agency Chief Quits After Forgery Accusation) (<==read!!)

May 7, 1998 by Johnny Mason, Jr. of the Hartford Courant:

Mustafa Abdul-Salaam, executive director of the Upper Albany Neighborhood Collaborative in Hartford, resigned April 17 after being accused of forging a signature on an application for city funds.

The resignation was triggered when Mustafa apparently forged the name of Gerald Thorpe, chairman of the Upper Albany Neighborhood Revitalization Zone, on a February letter recommending that the collaborative be given city Community Development Block Grant funds

Abdul-Salaam is the former executive director of the New Haven Family Alliance, a social service agency. A former captain of the 1975 University of Connecticut men’s basketball team, his name was Earl Wilson before he converted to Islam…

Abdul-Salaam, who became the executive director of the North End collaborative after a nationwide search, at a salary of $63,000 per year, was the agency’s fifth executive director in seven years. Florence Ehiboir-Cole, assistant executive director, is serving as interim director. The agency, at 1339 Albany Ave., has an annual budget of $325,000. Most of its funding comes from the Ford Foundation, but it also has received city funds.

Interesting as the Ford Foundation in general is heavily involved in promoting fatherhood studies and professionals in the field.

1) NHFA’s fiscal, administrative and programmatic infrastructure has not kept pace with its development and implementation of innovative programs and interventions. This is in part a result of limited non-restrictive, flexible funds. In response to this challenge, the agency is implementing the recommendations proposed in the FMA assessment report

2) NHFA needs to reduce administrative cost in order to stabilize its financial situation in 2015 and beyond. As part of this effort by the end of December, NHFA is moving its office to a less expensive, community based location in the Dixwell neighborhood.

Continue Reading: https://familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2016/06/08/courtesy-prwora-hhs-and-public-apathy-the-good-ol-boys-network-with-help-from-speaking-of-which-yale-university-is-re-packaging-the-same-old-schlock-in-this-example-as-male-involvement-netw/

Healthy Marriage~Responsible Fatherhood & Faith~Based Grants . . . We Know What the Game Is!

HMRF A

Let’s Get Honest! Blog

Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family –and “Conciliation” — Courts’ Operations, Practices, and History

Note To Readers: See New Page “Just HHS, Just Georgia, Just HMRF” grants

Publicizing my new pageHHS Grantees, Just Georgia, Just HMRF (CFDA 93086), May 13, 2016, Report Run. Take a look!  You will see it in the right sidebar, atop a list labeled “Vital Info/Links.” Scroll or “page-down” below a green-background rectangle of text (“Contributions Appreciated” section) to find “Vital Links.”

Also see this related (or, “what inspired it”) 5/12/2016 post:  Despite Truly Funky Tax Returns, HHS Remains Loyal (2010-2015) to One Faith-Based (under Two Diff’t EIN#s, ONE of which the IRS acknowledges#) in Stone Mountain–or is it Conyers?– Georgia

But first and FYI in the cream-colored, fine-print, maroon-bordered box right below, I also put a link to a “Congressional Research Service” (CRS) 12/11/2012 Report showing the Origins of HHS, certain Presidential Powers, and some Recent Developing Trends, and possibly already passed, House and Senate bills re-instituting those Presidential Powers (odd capitalization there deliberate).

Recommended Reading:  This CRS link, “Presidential Reorganization Authority, History, Recent Initiatives, and Options for Congress” (Henry B. Hogue, Dec. 11, 2012), has a Summary which explains a request to renew this authority was made January 2012 by President Obama, and explains how we got the “Federal Security Agency –>>  Health Education and Welfare ==> Health and Human Services  + (separately) Department of Education.

[An extended version of this box recurs below, while I talk some about the situation]…

I might start posting this link at the top of ALL posts until the message sinks in that existing federal agencies are in a state of constant transition, and sometimes re-organization, and we ought to get a basic read on where they came from — and in which direction they are now going.  For, example, does this direction EVER include reducing budgets based on having actually solved any problems they were set up to solve, or curtailing grants streams the grants streams were set up to resolve? And if not, does that not reflect (badly) on either the operation of, or perhaps even the original intentions of, those who pushed for the funding streams in the first place? (“Who” entails both individuals and corporate, often nonprofit “persons” run by certain individuals).

Or, are we going continue, as we do now, sponsoring an UNENDING stream of funding for the behavioral/mental health/social control categories** relating to the family court systems:

Batterer Intervention Programming seeking to further classify Batterer typologies, and simultaneously and opposing the concept that battering is actually “bad,” while attempting to behaviorally modify the batterers, AND, co-parenting coaching in an UNENDING stream attempting to change the behavior of the spouse or parent that protests battering, AND an Unending stream of grants encouraging teenagers to abstain from sex as a way out of poverty (using money diverted from funds that might otherwise more directly help their parents out of poverty, i.e., “TANF”) (“Abstinence Education”) AND so forth.[*as opposed to “medical research and development” or “curtailing the outbreak of contagious diseases” category under which the public health system originated..]

Thus, through these self-contradictory funding streams, the public is forced to separately fund under the banner of men’s rights (to their families, i.e., families as property rights), and women’s rights to not be assaulted or subjected to violence in the name of family (i.e., women, including mothers and the children they have given birth to NOT as an adjunct form of property owned by the men, including fathers), and the institutions (family courts) in which the staged custody battles take place, propped up in part (and — I do show this — the larger part) by Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood funding, and at that point NOT significantly protected by the Domestic Violence Prevention funding.

Meanwhile, as this built-in funding and “federal policy position” conflict facilitates generation after generation of children growing up witnessing abuse and experienced adults somewhat confused on whether or not it’s a crime, or a social disease, or the fault of their mothers’ or fathers’ lack of “communications skills,” obviously, there is from the USDOJ a Defending Children’s Initiative, plus Task force on Children Exposed to Violence.

Some of these children then, periodically, may run away, which then can be blamed on the mother and generate more criminal cases.  She can be hunted down, or they can be hunted down, at which point the Reunification Services can be ordered — a good deal, if you’re in that business.

The runaway children, and I’m talking now about those  running away from the abusive households to which the family courts “re-aligned” them under Promoting Healthy Marriage, Access and Visitation (etc.) at times MAY enter the foster care system (more HHS funding), OR, they may become runaway youth and end up, temporarily, in a transitional housing for youth shelter.  FYI, one of mine, shortly after reaching the age of majority and having apparently, outlived her fiscal and psychological utility for my “ex” (i.e., reducing significant child support arrears), the family court system (ordering more personnel — a GAL — into the mix, and engendering through poor decision-making, the “left-behind” parent’s [in my case, that was me, the mother] need to keep coming back to court hoping to regain contact with the separated children), which itself then “supports” the rationale to further streamline procedures, reduce legal protections to due process, based on “the courts are overloaded.”

Meanwhile, and I am still talking primarily HHS funding — the “smart ones” who may not necessarily have a strong overlap with the “honest” ones or those with a high personal sense of ethics regarding their own accountability, or understanding of the downside of diverting private nonprofits with private agenda — these “smart ones” (or, politically connected ones) — instead of choosing “just one of the above” can — and my Georgia-based page SHOWS (Excerpts below also validate in part) — are simply positioning themselves, AS ARE STATE AGENCIES, to say, “come through us, government — come to us, clients” and take Abstinence Education, Responsible Fatherhood/Healthy Marriage, AND Family Violence Prevention.

For a reminder (I did post on this in 2016), the “FVPSA” (Family Violence Prevention Services Act) dates back to 1984 and involves primarily the agency HHS.   By contrast, the Violence Against WOMEN Act, was in 1994, and is commonly associated in the public mind, and in general, with the USDOJ’s “Office of Violence Against Women” which exists to implement grants from that Act.  BUT, organizations are free to take from both the USDOJ and the USDHHS, as they are free to take from apparently equal and apparently opposing sides from the staged “gender wars.”

At a certain point, it’s time to call those in the game — at the highest levels, not the lowest levels– at this game, and let our Congressmen and women know that we know what is that game.

In order to do that, I recommend those approaching Congress not show up dumber-than-dirt on who is the HHS, what is “Presidential Reorganization Authority” historically, and a few things about 1996 PRWORA welfare reform as it pertains to HMRF funding as administered through HHS.

So, you might want to bookmark this link and get back to it, and you might want to also mark out some time to read my confrontational and, in general, NOT popular among the domestic violence groups OR protective mothers’ groups* BLOG.

*Why not?  After all, I am indeed a survivor of domestic violence, becoming through those court actions, a “protective mother,” and even though several years down the road, after it became clear that the family court would facilitate a state of ongoing disruption, minus enforceable safety boundaries from the same individual, until suddenly, and temperamentally, switching custody.  Right now, I just discovered leading feminist jumping in to promote the term “Mothers of Lost Children” (and her book) and the same professionals which I have documented, refused to seriously discuss the “HHS / HMRF” factor in between their laments about badly behaving judges, GALs, and custody evaluators.

I learned, over time, that to perpetuate any form of abuse — and economic control is essential to trapping people in abusive relationships, marital or other — the art of, pardon me, bullshitting the bystanders– is an essential part. They need to call it something else — like “Marriage” or “Family.”  There also have to be effective means, utilized at the same time,  of silencing future outcries (dissents), just in case, some bystanders might DO something about the abuse, and cut into the privilege — and profits– involved in exploiting other human beings in the name of some social benefit.

Recommended Reading:  This CRS link, “Presidential Reorganization Authority, History, Recent Initiatives, and Options for Congress” (Henry B. Hogue, Dec. 11, 2012), has a Summary which explains a request to renew this authority was made January 2012 by President Obama, and explains how we got the “Federal Security Agency –>>  Health Education and Welfare ==> Health and Human Services  + (separately) Department of Education.  It also explains the relationship of this particular authority to how forms of it were perpetuated under the Wartime Powers Act (for WWI and WWII) and that, among other things, such agencies as FEMA, the EPA and (as above) HEW were originally formed. This is a fairly neutral report, bipartisan, intended for members of Congress (CRS = Congressional Research Service) of the larger context of one of the largest grant making federal agencies, whose activities I continue report, particularly after learning how badly the policies compromised my personal family line, and kept them in danger, needlessly, for years, based on re-classifying “danger” from existing criminal definitions, to membership in a socially targeted as “dangerous” demographic group, i.e., single-mother=-headed households.


I do not know yet, whether Congress in 2012 did, in fact, reauthorize this “Reorganization Authority” but every thing I can see at the observational level is that a consolidation of federal DEPARTMENTS (HUD, HHS, etc.) programming is taking place under HHS programs targeted to HMRF funding — and the HMRF funding itself, along with funding to “Prevent Family Violence” — is also (at least in Georgia, this page shows) being centralized to go to just a very few organizations, with the former “Statewide Coalitions Against Domestic Violence” (CADV groups), themselves a symptom of centralized control of battered women’s shelters and services to help victims, are getting a small percentage of what the state agencies are getting.

Now, about that New Page, HHS Grantees, Just Georgia, Just HMRF (CFDA 93086), May 13, 2016, Report Run. Take a look!

That approximately 10,000 word PAGE (not post) is meant as an example, and a point of reference to how states are handling both the HMRF funding AND (as it turned out) the DV Funding, and just how centralized it is possible to become over time.  It currently is on top of my list of “Vital Links/Info” on the sidebar.

It is informative, and it does some detailed lookups on the very few grantees at this time, receiving straight CFDA 93086 grants.  As it turns out, some of these are also receiving the bulk of the “Family Violence Prevention/DISCRETIONARY” grants also, and as such have delivered coordinated control of that field over to the same agencies (and there are TWO referenced, which you will see, ONE of which also is handling the Healthy Marriage/Responsible Fatherhood grants).

Again, Title of the page:  HHS Grantees, Just Georgia, Just HMRF (CFDA 93086), May 13, 2016, Report Run. Take a look!

BY THE WAY — I could use some help looking up some of these corporations, from people willing to write-up and provide links to their efforts.  

Contact me through a comment if interested, but expect to make a time commitment if you’re serious about asking my time to again, review how to do this.  If this leads to other posts on this blog, that might also be good….

Why bother?

Well, it’s rewarding and enriching personally to SEE what is happening and there IS no better way to learn it than by starting to look at the evidence first-hand, and let that evidence speak to you.  Listening to the narratives of others who have looked it up and are talking about it, qualifies you as a second-hand witness, not an eye-witness.  Listening to others (including reading their accounts) is no real substitute for the real thing to get the “gray matter” working. It will raise some hard questions which, then, by even attempting to answer, will put anyone in a better position to understand more of current events in this country, including probably (especially, if you’re family-court-involved) in your life also.  There are all kinds of corollary benefits to following the money trail where public funds are involved. Understanding increases exponentially.

One of the hard questions that may come up should also include: “Why haven’t others — why haven’t “the experts” we’ve been reading advocating for Family Court Enhancement (or, Fixing), or about making family courts safe for children, or about stopping domestic violence, or about the issues of “parental alienation” either as a reality, or as an “unsound psychological theory” — talking about the same things Let’s Get Honest and just a few others, over many years, are talking about?

Ideally, if pursued, this might awaken one to the reality of how much national public policy is public relations-driven, i.e., the “Freud’s nephew factor” (Edward L. Bernays). This should then lead to a consideration of who controls the technology on which the media is based, which again, ought to lead RIGHT BACK to, “who owns this place, anyhow?” WHO controls it fiscally, WHO controls the operational infrastructure, and who controls most of the assets in the United States of America.

Continue Reading: https://familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2016/05/17/note-to-readers-see-new-page-just-hhs-just-georgia-just-hmrf-grants/

Agenda 21 Special Report

A21

Continue Reading: http://rangemagazine.com/features/winter-14/range-wi14-sr-agenda_21-stealth.pdf

SUBSCRIBE to RANGE (or request a sample copy) by calling 1-800-RANGE-4-U (726-4348).

RANGE is an award-winning quarterly devoted to the issues that threaten the West. It features rural families and the critters and country they care for. RANGE offers tough talk, amazing photos and real people, including a national resource–the American cowboy. RANGE is offered in PRINT only.

Conversation with Dakota County Commissioner Chair Nancy Schouweiler

 

Chair, Board of Commissioners http://www.co.dakota.mn.us

Nancy Schouweiler, District 4~Dakota Co.

Current term expires 2016
Served on County Board since 1999
Contact Information
Email: nancy.schouweiler@co.dakota.mn.us
 Telephone:
651-438-4430 (Office)
651-455-6440 (Home)
Mailing Address:
Administration Center
1590 Highway 55
Hastings, MN 55033-2343
Home Address:
4000 90th St E
Inver Grove Heights, MN 55076-3727

District 4 Commissioner Schouweiler is past President of the Association of Minnesota Counties and is a member of the National Association of Counties Justice and Public Safety Steering Committee. She also serves on the Minnesota State Advisory Council on Mental Health’s Subcommittee on Children’s Mental Health by Governor appointment.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

A call was made to Nancy Schouweiler, Dakota Co. Chair, Board of Commissioners on Monday, April 25, 2016 to discuss refusal to provide discovery/public data by Dakota County for Case No. 19HA-CR-15-4227.

Readers may recall that a complaint was filed on 2/21/2016 against Dakota County Attorneys James Backstrom, Philip Prokopowicz, and Kathryn Keena for illegally withholding evidence in my criminal case.(Click on documents to zoom)

BackstromBacdstrom 2Backstrom 3

 

 

 

 

 

Backstrom 4

 

Ms. Schouweiler indicated that she was ordered not to get involved in any individual cases by her “attorney”. What??? . .Why would commissioners have to be lawyered up? She also stated that the only function the county commissioners have over the county attorneys office is the budget

Well now, the way I see it is that the county will only do what commissioners authorize it to pay for. So, I would think that the budget is the main tool for affecting policy and managing county employees, which of course includes the county attorneys.

Excerpt From The ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA COUNTIES

County commissioners are elected officials who oversee county activities and work to ensure that citizen concerns are met, federal and state requirements are fulfilled and county operations run smoothly.

  • Coordinate activities of the county board, central administration and county departments with those of the independently elected officers, including auditor, treasurer, recorder, attorney and sheriff.
  • Oversee the county personnel system: authorize the number of county employees, establish salaries and conditions of employment, approve a county benefit, schedule, negotiate and approve labor agreements, supervise appointed county department heads, participate in and approve the recruitment and employment of key county employees, and oversee the implementation of the county pay equity plan and the county affirmative action/equal opportunity plan.

Image courtesy of Lion News

Image courtesy of Lion News

County commissioners also authorize the application for and/or receipt of funds from federal and state governments and their use within the county budget.

What are some of the federal funds that the county receives that led me to the criminal charges that were made against me? Well, as I’ve learned from my brilliant friend Victoria at familycourtmatters.wordpress.com, the family law system is incentivized to divert billions of dollars to unfit and unwilling fathers through the Health and Human Services Healthy Marriage, Responsible Fatherhood and Access & Visitation initiatives.

There is very little oversight of this money, which means that such programs have gotten away with using fatherhood funds to assist abusive and violent fathers in custody battles against protective mothers.

These fathers are told that they have two choices — risk jail for failure to pay child support, or embark on a custody battle to take the children from the Protective Mother and thus eliminate child support altogether. What would you choose? Thus, fathers who have had little contact with their children for years, who have physically and/or sexually abused the children and their mothers, often fathers just being released from jail, end up fighting and succeeding in getting custody with the collusion of family court services and mental health professionals.

THE SOLE REASONS that children are being stolen from their families and homes are the financial incentives associated with each child and circumstance. There is federal grant money given to states and child placement agencies to CREATE SITUATIONS THAT DO NOT EXIST TO GENERATE THESE FUNDS!

hmrf_logoPrograms

The Office of Family Assistance (OFA)  administers several key federal grant programs, including the Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood  Grants. These programs foster economically secure households and communities for the well-being and long-term success of children and families.

HEALTHY MARRIAGE INITIATIVES

Healthy Marriage and Relationship Education Program Overview

The Healthy Marriage and Relationship Education Grant Program (HMRE) is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Administration for Children and Families (ACF) efforts to promote healthy marriage at the community level.  The Healthy Marriage Program funds organizations that combine marriage and relationship education efforts with a robust effort to address participation barriers and the economic stability needs of their participants. The programs directly, or through the affiliates or partners with which they are collaborating, have a physical presence in a community, city, or county where services are provided.

RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD INITIATIVE

New Pathways for Fathers and Families Grant Program Overview

The New Pathways for Fathers and Families Grant Program (New Pathways) is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Administration for Children and Families (ACF) efforts to support responsible fatherhood. The New Pathways program funds projects that integrate robust economic stability services, healthy marriage activities, and activities designed to foster responsible parenting.

This is a picture of a father building a model car with his son.New Pathways programs provide services to promote responsible parenting (e.g., promoting positive father-child engagement, counseling, mentoring, and mediation; teaching parenting skills); to foster economic stability (e.g., job training, employment services, and career-advancing education); and to promote or sustain marriage (e.g., enhancing relationship skills; education regarding how to control aggressive behavior; disseminating information on the causes of domestic violence and child abuse)

New Pathways grantees must concurrently implement all three Promoting Responsible Fatherhood Authorized Activities (Healthy Marriage, Responsible Parenting, and Economic Stability).  All New Pathways programs are required to offer all three activities:

  1. Healthy Marriage – Activities to promote marriage or sustain marriage through activities, such as:
  • Counseling, mentoring, disseminating information about the benefits of marriage and two-parent involvement for children.
  • Enhancing relationship skills.
  • Education regarding how to control aggressive behavior.
  • Disseminating information on the causes of domestic violence and child abuse. (Here’s a thought. . . QUIT MAKING PARENTS CO-PARENT AND COOPERATE WHEN THERE IS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE!)
  • Marriage preparation programs.
  • Premarital counseling.
  • Marital inventories.
  • Skills-based marriage education.
  • Financial planning seminars, including improving a family’s ability to effectively manage family business affairs by means such as education, counseling, or mentoring on matters related to family finances, including household management, budgeting, banking, and handling of financial transactions and home maintenance.
  • Divorce education and reduction programs, including mediation and counseling.
  1. Responsible Parenting – Activities to promote responsible parenting, such as:
  • Counseling, mentoring, and mediation.
  • Disseminating information about good parenting practices.
  • Skills-based parenting education.
  • Encouraging child support payments, and other methods.
  1. Economic Stability – Activities to foster economic stability, such as:
  • Helping fathers improve their economic status by providing activities such as Work First services, job search, job training, subsidized employment, job retention, job enhancement, and encouraging education, including career-advancing education.
  • Dissemination of employment materials.
  • Coordination with existing employment services such as welfare-to-work programs, referrals to local employment training initiatives, and other methods.

FATHERHOOD REENTRY INITIATIVE   (WHERE’S THE MOTHERHOOD REENTRY INITIATIVE?)

Responsible Fatherhood Opportunities for Reentry and Mobility Project Overview

This is a picture of an African American father and his son.The Responsible Fatherhood Opportunities for Reentry and Mobility Project (ReFORM) is a part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Administration for Children and Families (ACF) efforts to support responsible fatherhood and ex-prisoner initiatives. The ReFORM program funds projects that offer community-centered pre- and post-release responsible fatherhood and supportive services to soon-to-be and recently released fathers and their families.  The projects focus on fathers who are within three to nine months of release from incarceration or a father who has been released from confinement for six months or less.

Program Components

With a funding level of up to $1,500,000 per year for five years, ReFORM programs are encouraged to develop collaboration opportunities with other federal resources, including the U.S. Department of Justice’s Second Chance Act grantees, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s local Public Housing Authorities, and resources from local offices of child support enforcement. ReFORM projects offer ex-prisoners reentry and support services to fathers returning from incarceration.  Services include responsible fatherhood and healthy relationship activities, employment, housing referral, case management (e.g., counseling, legal aid, and mentoring), transportation, substance abuse and mental health services referrals, and family strengthening activities. Grantees may offer other interventions designed to help stabilize fathers returning from incarceration to assist them and their families and that contribute to a reduction in recidivism and progressions toward self-sufficiency.

Marriage and family strengthening programs address a myriad of issues, which result from a fathers’ absence or involvement with the criminal justice system. The ReFORM programs differ from New Pathways for Fathers and Families programs in that the exclusive target population is incarcerated and re-entering fathers or fathers otherwise involved with the criminal justice system. All Responsible Fatherhood programs, which include New Pathways for Fathers and Families and ReFORM, are required to offer all three activities

Dakota County Board of Commissionersboard2015.jpgFront Row (l to r): Commissioner Kathleen A. Gaylord, Commissioner Thomas A. Egan, Commissioner Nancy Schouweiler (chair).  Second Row (l to r): Commissioner Chris Gerlach, Commissioner Mary Liz Holberg, Commissioner Mike Slavik, Commissioner Liz Workman.   

“Never underestimate the ability of government bureaucrats to play dumb about other peoples’ problems and exploit it to the hilt in the name of helping those people.”  www.nafcj.net

It’s time to make our public servants start acting as such or get them out of office. I’m just sayin!

Who Killed the American Family?

American Family Back

Who Killed the American Family? Hardcover – September 23, 2014

by Phyllis Schlafly (Author)


Kindle $8.99 Read with Our Free App

Hardcover $18.12  22 Used from $7.99 44 New from $11.97 1 Collectible from $20.13

American families are the backbone of this nation. The American family is the fundamental institution that provided the Founding Fathers with the emotional support and driving courage to face the tyrannical government that threatened their very existence. The American family used to be the fundamental institution of our stable, liberty-loving, and very successful society. It is the essential building block of a free society with limited government. In the last hundred years, the American family has been attacked, debased, maligned, slandered, and vilified by every facet of society. No family is safe from the official busybodies. At issue is a rebellion against any sort of moral code. Who Killed the American Family reveals the concerted assault on the American nuclear family by many forces – feminists, judges, lawmakers, psychologists, school districts, college professors, politicians offering incentives and seeking votes, and more – opposed to the traditional American nuclear family, each with its own raison d’etre for wanting to abolish it. The wreckage of the American family leaves us with the inability to have limited government because government steps in to perform tasks formerly done by the nuclear family. Veteran conservative activist and thought leader who lead the charge to successfully defeat the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970s;Phyllis Schlafly; explains how changes in the law, in court decisions; in the culture, in education, and in entertainment have eroded the once-precious institution. Any one of these factors would not have been enough to impact our families, but together they added up to a mighty force. Schlafly not only exposes the tactical charge the Left has implemented, but she offers hope and a plan for stopping anti-marriage incentives and how to restore in our culture the sacred nature of the family unit.

___________________________________________________________________________________

A CRUMBLING FOUNDATION

Who killed the American family?

Phyllis Schlafly: ‘It has caused the dramatic rise in government spending’

Published: 09/22/2014 at 7:42 PM

The British press just reported the result of a new study by academics from Oxford and the University of London that children raised in stable marital homes are better behaved than classmates brought up by unmarried parents. Children raised by married parents show lower levels of anti-social attitudes and hyperactivity

Recent U.S. surveys show that the U.S. taxpayers’ money appropriated to “close the gap” between higher-achieving and lower-achieving students has failed to achieve this goal. Contrary to conventional wisdom, poverty is not the principal cause of the gap, but whether or not children grow up in a family with their own mom and pop compared to kids who lack that advantage.

When the famous French commentator Alexis de Tocqueville traveled the U.S. in the mid-19th century, he wrote: “There is certainly no country in the world where the tie of marriage is more respected than in America, or where conjugal happiness is more highly or worthily appreciated.” Our society of nuclear families produced a prosperous middle class that was the envy of the world.

Much has been written about the decline in the percentage of Americans who live in a traditional nuclear family. The scholar Charles Murray has pointed out that the shocking rate of illegitimate births (now 41 percent) is the most serious social and fiscal problem America faces because it is the factor that drives everything else.

It has caused the dramatic rise in government spending. The nuclear family doesn’t need government busybodies to tell them how to raise their children or spend their money, but when mothers have no husband or father of their children to provide for them, they turn to Big Brother Government.

Who is responsible for killing the American family? My new book published by WND Books this month answers that fundamental question, and you may be surprised at the answer.

Many groups had a motive for wanting to abolish the American nuclear family. The feminists’ rallying cry from the start was “liberation,” and they meant liberation from husband, family and care for children because, they said, taking care of small children is a demeaning occupation for an educated woman.

In the 1970s it became popular to say that the “village” should raise the child. The liberal establishment defines “village” to include all sorts of government busybodies such as public school officials, hired consultants, psychologists, custody evaluators, women’s studies courses and especially family court judges.

The New York Times reported that judges routinely decide where the children of divorced parents may attend school and even attend church, whether they may be homeschooled, what medical care they may receive, and even whether they play soccer or take piano lessons. The system of having family court judges make decisions about the raising of children has become so universal that, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, Family Court judges now control the private living arrangements of 46 million Americans and have the power to transfer $40 billion between households.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/09/who-killed-the-american-family-2/#oq3lxp62dmUQLdO2.99