Assembled Arguments (My Comments on Your Blogs)

Hey, at heart I’m an investigative, problem-solving blogger with dogmatic tendencies. Unfortunately, I also have a very compassionate empathy with people who are barking up paid-for trees, or howling after an old and stale scent, while the fox(es) are throwing parties elsewhere and toasting their cleverness.

Over time, I’ve spread a lot of “show and tell” commentary (and links) that’s MY time involved — on so many blogs in a fairly limited field still, of people attempting to report on the disastrous custody courts faster than the powers that be can figure out how to consolidate “new, improved, collaborative, unified, healing holistic, therapeutic, child-centered, and efficient (because of course the courts are swamped)” forms of wasting public funds and people’s prime work years.

Sooner or later one figures out how they are doing this. One: On the public dole. Two: sponsored in addition by philanthropic foundations and trusts pouring funding into the cause of (further centralization of power and wealth) whose ORIGINAL fortunes many times, were made when not by some cartel or illegal monopoly, or by the profits of war or genocide (this happens to be literal, I’m posting it elsewhere), or slavery, or slave-labor-wages with threats of job-loss (yada, yada). In short — how come the public, individually and collectively, continues to lose ground in this fiasco? We are the proverbial hamsters on the wheel, the frogs in the well, etc.

There’s probably a better technological format, but being only one blogger, I decided to quit pouring so much efforts into commenting on others’ blogs (trying to raise the dead, at least metaphorically speaking, on these issues). These blogs tend to dramatize the very real custody issues, child support issues and trauma issues all generated from this primary source. I’ve been through plenty also, as a women, as a woman who had to evict a batterer while our children were still young (domestic violence) in order for all of us to stay alive — and just because my life was worth more than this, and the children’s lives were also worth more than spending their childhoods watching that stuff.

Too large a system with too much money to screw around with, and it’s too much fun screwing up others’ lives for fun and profit. Apparently it’s kind of like chess — fun (and a living) for some. For others, it’s a form of religion. And for yet others, it’s just plain hell.

It was at least a ladder out of hell (partially) to understand the game, and since then I continue to sometimes do a quick lookup in someone else’s jurisdiction to illustrate what COULD”VE been done (or learned) rather than post the problem, and leave it to the authorities, follow the local adovacy trail and wonder what happened.
The first time I dedicated major time to “show and tell” (including the links and commentary) on someone else’s blog, the blog was closed down and I lost it. Nice try. Other times, there has been some censorship, and most times, it’s just plain bad manners to flood another person’s blog with “helpful” information they are clearly not about to follow up on (as blogs already illustrate the point of view, and attract like points of view).

Or sometimes, a mainstream on-line may simply limit (i.e., with the goal of getting you to subscribe for a fee) comments. Others are clearly censoring or sanitizing opposing view. The first one I saw do this was the Connecticut “Mirror” when several of us were protesting the confirmation of a certain GAL to a judgeship, given that she was in the role as GAL covering up severe and medically evidenced child abuse.

Another time, it was even more extreme — I got out only ONE Disqus-supported comment here in support of
Finding Ground Zero in Connecticut (= a guest post over at the Washington Times Communities, finally linked to and discussed in spring 2013 on my Family Court Matters blog — after the system just kept booting me off the second I clicked on Comments. (I notice there are only 30 comments total on the Washington Times article, a ground-breaking one really, that it posted the billings of a high-profile custody case involving child molestation /allegations thereof. There were almost 300 responses. I suspect I wasn’t the only person bounced off. Note: My small quote below IS FAIR USE under copyright law. …

This article dealt with the billings history of a little boy called Max:

Thursday, February 28, 2013 – A Heart Without Compromise; Advocating for Children by Jerome Elam
Jerome Elam
The following post is by guest author, Aine Nistiophain
(from that post, <a href=”“>Finding Ground Zero in Connecticut)

The Money Trail

Understand that when you are sued, you cannot opt out of participating in the legal process, nor can you take your business with the law elsewhere. When Max reported to authorities that his father had raped him, the Judge Munro awarded sole custody of him to his father. Suddenly, Max went from living with his mother full time, to seeing his mother a few hours a week in supervised visitation run by strangers armed with clipboards, then no contact at all.

$1.5 million in litigation fees later, the invoices show that Max himself was probably a stranger to the professionals paid to decide his fate. Perhaps the bills can tell us what Max could not.

In 2010, the court appointed Guardian ad Litem (GAL) Attorney Maureen Murphy to represent Max’s best interests and wishes. Murphy billed at a rate of $300 per hour, collecting over $100,000 in fees from Max’s home,[1] yet I cannot confirm by looking exclusively at the invoices whether Murphy ever met Max in person.  While Max’s name is referenced on the RE: line on the first page of each bill, Max’s time with Murphy is never clearly referenced in the bills.  According to the invoices, Murphy’s time was largely spent reviewing court documents, talking to the visitation supervisor and other court affiliated professionals–but never with Max alone.

$100K in Fees is a nice bundle, I’d say — and that’s from ONE child’s case.
Maybe we should take another look at the financing of the organizations pushing so many GALs for children. I did take a quick look at one (NACC) and found it got $600K of HHS grants over a short period to help establish a program of certification in children’s welfare law. Interesting group.

Here’s a few paragraphs from This GAL (now Judge), Judge Maureen Murphy,’s confirmation. The on-line is the Connecticut Mirror. Although she was famous for her role in legalization of same-sex marriage in Connecticut, professionals involved with the above little boy (Max)’s case where she was GAL, showed up to submit their confirmation protests. (The protests were pretty much railroaded, but that’s another story):

“A judicial Confirmation Hearing goes off-script” The Connecticut Mirror, 2/22/2012, by Mark Pozniokas. (I see it now only has 2 comments. censorship/suppression of comments at the time also).

The Malloy administration prepped Maureen M. Murphy for her judicial confirmation hearing Wednesday with questions about her sexual orientation and the pivotal role she played in the legalization of gay marriage in Connecticut.

But the legislature’s Judiciary Committee endorsed her nomination to the Superior Court on a 31-9 vote without a single comment or question about her advocacy of gay rights or the landmark litigation that led to same-sex marriage.

Perhaps they were too distracted.

. . . .[Background]:
After college, Murphy was a programmer and research assistant at the Rand Corp. She volunteered with disabled children in New Mexico and in Connecticut, then received a master’s degree in special education. She became a lawyer relatively late, at age 35.
[[Likes working with disabled and vulnerable populations. Interesting, after working as a programmer.]]

Murphy worked for the attorney general’s office, representing the state Department of Children and Families in special-education hearings and state universities in civil litigation. As a private lawyer, her practice included the representation of gay, lesbian and transgender clients in family and discrimination cases.

She was a founding member of Love Makes a Family, the gay rights group, and a member of the legal team that brought a lawsuit that yielded the state Supreme Court’s 4-3 decision legalizing same-sex marriage in 2008.

In the past five years, Murphy took on more cases as a court-appointed guardian ad litem, a lawyer responsible for watching the child’s interests in custody and other family law cases.

{{It mentions the testimony of Eli Newberger, MD who made a statement about the coverup of sexual asbuse of the little boy. Here’s how the Legislature responded – not to even postpone the vote to consider the matter}}

Rep. John Hetherington of New Canaan, the ranking House Republican member of the committee, asked to delay a vote on Murphy’s nomination to allow more time to examine the record. Without more time, he warned that some members would vote against confirmation.”I’ve never voted no on a judicial nomination. It is not my desire to vote no on this nominee,” he said.

Rep. Arthur J. O’Neill, R-Southbury, said if public hearings are to mean anything, the committee must look further into the allegations against Murphy.

The committee rejected a postponement, 21-16.

I had put up, and lost, about two days worth of directly-related write-ups (including connecting THAT judge to an AFCC courthouse and a related personnel to a Children’s Law Center which had “NACC” written all over it. For those terms, see other blog). However, at some point in time Washington Times (which FYI, we should know is a publication formerly with Unification Church support), and alas — truth and evidence has required me to demonstrate — the Unification Church has poured money and influence into many of the problems in the collectivist “Unified Family Courts” theme, meaning, they are into the Marriage/Fatherhood field that provides programming that these courts can help dispense. )

So for now, and FYI, I will be posting “My Comments Your Blogs” somehow, here, to provide an overview of others, i.e., who has been told what, when, on which blog.

My purpose is to save lives and reduce the foster care industry not by speeding up the adoption industry, as overseen by the legal industry and paid for by, in part the public (the CHILD SUPPORT industry being a major factor as source of program pilots and funding).

I am almost as disgruntled and disturbed as not the BLIND leading the BLIND, but the BLIND who are following them. There are some of us lone wolves howling in this wilderness now to ALMOST assemble a pack, however we tend not to run in packs. If we did, we wouldn’t have stood back, said “WTF?” and found out what we did.

RE: Adrienne McGlone — from Family Court In America

(two links in the title there).

Initial post on that blog Oct. 2012; my response (now in moderation) April, 2013.
I do not know this justice (although within 20 minutes I knew more about her than before), or this case. I know how to look things up, and A quick look at the mothers’ response is that she had not yet learned that the family courts aren’t concerned about following the law, their own rules, or about little kids. Possibly because Mom had served 19 years in the military(it said), but most likely because of the I CAN’T FIGURE IT OUT mentality behind too many (mothers, specifically). (For some reason this passive helplessness, being also culturally acceptable within marriage and of course many Judaeo-Christian religious groups, is ruling the day. So I just did this in response to an ongoing dialogue with “Julia Fletcher” (acknowledged to be a pen name) over the matter of not connecting the dots, and why don’t the authorities do something? talk.

Why is because the authorities themselves are the problem. …. I know that conversation wasn’t going anywhere soon, and so (from the same page) simply decided to look up another story of loss and distress and show how something else could (EASILY!) have been made of it.

It also makes me angry that no one is telling enough of the public how things work. Here in Massachusetts, this is an AFCC judge, and that organization practically helped design the systems everyone is so complaining about, yet no one wants (well, except me, and some FEW rogue reporters) wants to explain the significance).

So this began as a show and tell. I did learn something and am saving it below. See different color background for how much was the comment:

Presiding Justice of Massachusetts Family Court gives a Six Year Old Girl a “tour of duty” in Foster Care

(There is a longer response from 4/24 yesterday in moderation). The authorities have too much authorities and have long been consolidation it, and they do this because they have been allowed to, we are not an economic force to withstand this, and it is like taking candy from a baby anymore to take a child — or a home — from an individual, particularly a mother.I decided to look up this October 2012 posting from Adrienne (mother of Alexis Needs Help, below). I don’t see any follow up after several months (unless there’s some elsewhere on the post). This is all the more outrageous because the mother, it says, served 19 years in the military. Please review the two links, and see how the mother attempted to handle the situation — cite legal violations, recuse judge, complaint to Judicial Commission on the judge in question, and contacting the FBI. She has also posted letters obtained in response (but no links to any court orders or the docket.).

This little girl was born about 10 years after welfare reform. IN 2006, another big dose of responsible fatherhood/healthy marriage grants went out. Moreover, in Massachusetts, as I recall, AFCC drops all pretenses and simply puts a link to itself right on the family court site!

With educating each other consistently on some of these matters, by now, mothers could be prepared in what is going to happen, what won’t work, and how to FIND any money used inappropriately in their case. They should know that complaints on judicial commissions are sandbagging situations, and WE shouldn’t all have to keep running into the same brick wall.

Adrienne should’ve known. We also should be knowing by now how to post links for others to check out what’s being said; as a reader in a hearsay situation deserves (upfront) some documentation, even if we’re empathetic. ..

This case is clearly trying to get and did a little girl (of color) into the foster care system, there is clear mark of access/visitation policy and there is most likely fatherhood money active in the case. Supervised visitation has been turned on the mother AFTER she went through the hell of not knowing where her little girl was for 27 days (as have many mothers; I did too, for both daughters right after custody switch) and so forth:

Any case is a wealth of understanding IF someone does the followup and understands the general schematics are economic, not psychological. HOW do judges network with each other.

Because I looked it up, I know that the above Oct. 2012 post is in a saga that started (sounds like) January 2012, and that this post was actually on-line back in MAY 2012. Why post something about a little girl who has been returned home (but the Mom jailed since), months later in October 2012?

See Adrienne’s comment: Para. 3 between 1st and 2nd sentences, in the ALEXISNEEDSHELP blogpost, it shows this revealing comment (right after “halfway house” and right before mother requesting home studies”).

“The county judges orders have been forcing the Mother to allow unsupervised visits or pay the father $1,000 per missed visit. To date, the Mother has paid the father in excess of 18,000 to ensure the child’s safety.”

This sounds like Max Liberti case in Connecticut (Finding Ground Zero), they are bankrupting the mother, let alone terrorizing.

We are talking, a little, six-year old girl. She was removed without cause January 6, 2012, and by Jan. 2017, someone (Mom, probably) had this post out. She was returned May, 2012, after apparent failure to interest the father in visiting his little girl in foster care. Then in July they ordered the MOTHER imprisoned (suspended) apparently something surrounding supervised visitation: (See link)
Alexiss’ whereabouts were not known to Alexiss’ family for the first 27 days of her incarceration.
“DCF returned Alexiss to her family May 14, 2012, after many pleads to the courts to remove the care and custody transfer.  DCF explained it was unlawful for Alexiss to be in DCF care, as there are no care and custody issues with Alexiss or Alexiss’ family.  Alexiss is from a homogenous family with a mother, father, and older siblings.

~ ~
There’s basic information which should be obtained on any local jurisdiction, and on presiding judges — this could be shared upfront for parents going INTO this information so they are not learning while in shock. It’s a battle; where’s the boot camp training beforehand? Telling people it’s a battle, or letting them understand what the strategy is, where are the supply lines, and in general what’s the agenda?

Justice Paula Carey (here) being sworn in 2007, and again in 2012. Her colleagues think she’s great…FathersandFamilies (Ned Holstein) think she’s not all that bad either.

Justice Carey’s public judicial profile does NOT list AFCC among her affiliations, that I can see.

However, I often just will search the justice’s name and “AFCC” and it will pull up their membership, presentations, etc. In a sense, that’s not really honest, as AFCC is also a professional association, and it has a viewpoint which heavily promotes parental alienation. In the off-the-radar associations, these judges, attorneys, etc. mingle to plan how to find more customers (cases) that could be labeled estrangement, high-conflict, or alienating… Here’s a Winter 2012 example for Massachusetts branch of AFCC: See page 2, roundtable on how to locate more alienation cases that aren’t DV (etc.). This is where they are schmoozing, among other things. If it were on the public listing of the same justice — more people might explore the organization. But it isn’t.

(Page 9 of this AFCC Fall 2007 newsletter features her appointment as presiding Justice). These newsletters tell a lot — On the same page, it shows AFCC member “Susan B. Carbon“** being elected to the prestigious NCJFCJ, a National Family & Juvenile Court Judges association. From there, (speaking of domestic violence issues); she was before then a New Hampshire family court judge. SHe is now (or, last I heard) presiding over the OVW which has an influence in grants assigned for Violence Against Women issues. (*[[==link to her Feb. 2010 confirmation as head of “OVW” by Eric Holder])

Public profile doesn’t mention this Why not?

Susan B. Carbon oversees (or oversaw) a $400 million budget, having been nominated in 2009 by President Obama. Extensive March 2012 FORBES interview with her, probably doesn’t mention the AFCC connection either.

While I’m on it, FathersandFamillies is now “National Parents Organization” (namechange) which while based in Boston, was found associating with a Southern California PAS-promoting group, recently. They claim to be gender-neutral.

See for yourself:
National Parents Organization. You can see that it’s a fairly new name-change (the site’s not even complete yet) and to look at the Board, there’s Glenn Sacks, and a whole lot of Harvard, MIT, etc. individuals involved. Ned Holstein is “Harvard, MIT, Mt. Sinai school of medicine.

{{ADDED [not on my original comment:] People who understand the makeup of Association of Family & Conciliation Courts has strong ties to Canada, Australia and New Zealand, including at the Board of Directors level (let alone the UK) will recognize the attempt to standardize and align the family courts GLOBALLY despite the USA having one form of constitution, and Canada another, not to mention the concept of “Commonwealth” FYI, Canadian courts has PAS-promoting outposts too, and have been known to model US courts (as directed by AFCC). Hopefully you get my point …. }}

The Governor of Mass now has a “Working Group on Child Centered Family Laws This is an international concept; Canada is doing it too.
which (see the National Parents site, which lists them or look it up) has THREE (3) fathers’ groups representatives (AND Chief Justice Carey, and etc. — but NO ONE representing the voices of distressed mothers being forced onto supervised visitation, the male — not the female — side of protesting the courts, is represented. There is LGBQT representation (Kauffman). Moral of the story — pay attention to Task Forces!

Justice Carey is the same justice who signed for a six-year-old girl to go get a “tour of duty” in foster care…. (I looked that up — it’s on-line), and according to this mother, violating all kinds of laws and procedures in the process.

Robin Deutsch (AFCC Board, well-known) is also on there, from which I learn about the Massachusetts School of Professional Psychology (MSPP) who announced it.

This is relevant because when the conciliation (and family) courts were first formed, the whole idea was to get the behavioral /mental health / psychologists into the mix; and it’s these personnel often causing much of the problems. That 2nd link re: Robin Deutsch (last para) talks about her AFCC connection and how she helped write laws for certain things, like Parenting Coordination. That is a “HOW” — it shows HOW these practices were passed in a state.

[[So, here’s a woman presiding justice (Family & Probate), longstanding, dealing with the judge on these boards and with special interest groups (specifically fathers’ rights) in her close association]]

Taking a break from submitting this comment. I’m showing that we ALL should be aware of how the courts work — ALL parents!! and ALL taxpayers.

Is not that a WEALTH of information? But it took less than one-half hour to gather it, thanks to prior practice in where to look and what to notice. See original link for my earlier attempt to explain to blog author that language counts. I also explained in another comment (yesterday, and not shown) that WHO YOU HANG OUT WITH counts, with an analogy of how I learned some new skills, through desire, practice, hanging around with people better than me at it, aka exposure.

More, Just Talking here….

Rest of the Discussion HERE.

In comment format (comments are supposed to be short, right? — just comments, not essays!), it sounds like a rant. SAME THING when we go into courtrooms, with all this to report — yet we don’t understand the courtrooms themselves well enough.

It’s unfortunate that mothers, as a class, have been encouraged so much to submit, to follow, to look up to authority, and to only function in groups. They can tell their stories, but they are not really supposed to (in THIS context) lead. If you look at major groups facing the divorce and custody distress — from the perspective of “Batterers (or Molesters) Getting Custody,” I mean — on my other blog, I do identify several, and am seeing them continue to form up — in cases where a surviving mother IS the leader, and the group has got some purchase (some publicity), a closer look shows that this mother is not following the money trail (at all), but typically is following a strong nonprofit of some sort who is NOT run by survivors, but either by a group of professionals (LEGAL: DVLEAP; PSYCHOLOGICAL: The LEadership Council (a modest title if I ever heard one)….

One reason why, possibly — divorce and custody cases can last over a decade. Some mothers are fleeing the country (with or without children) after taking a harder look (or under threat of incarceration if they don’t fork over their kid for further molestations). Being IN a case isn’t always the best platform from which to start a nonprofit and go flying around the country to present one’s cause.

Moreover, doing so can get a woman a gag order, or retaliation in less time than it takes for you to read this post. ERGO, this leaves the field open for others, who will publicize their stories, but come with pre-set agendas, or agendas from the 1970s, and 1980s — failling to address what the courts did in the 1990s and 2000s.


Leave a Reply. More Background at

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s