Updated: 3 days ago
In 1963 the first AFCCnet.org conference was held to set up the collusion between judges, court commissioners, attorneys, minor counsel, guardian ad litem, social workers, psychologists, mediators, custody evaluators, counselors, financial planners, forensic and private investigators, etc. basically anyone privately tied to divorce and juvenile dependency court who makes their living from it. This conference was specifically designed to bring all of these professionals together to establish relationships and thus control the family and juvenile dependency court system from the time a parent first steps foot in one of these courts until the AFCC decided to let them leave, with or without their children. The AFCC organization quickly became international and it doesn't shy away from promoting themselves as the leaders in expert witnessing and court "services". If you are a mental health professional, and if you're not in it, you won't be getting business from it. An AFCC member sets up the team that will control your case from the time you walk into one of these courts until the time you leave with essentially all your financial resources left behind in AFCC members' hands. Per the AFCC, "the attorney-dominated referral-based model is the most prevalent and the simplest way to formulate a team"..... Who decides policy for the United States family and juvenile dependency courts? The AFCC. What is that policy? If the parents don't settle their case out of court against the other parent, or against the state, they will pay for it dearly. In fact the AFCC loves to promote its "conflict resolution" services and then exacerbate the litigation with their self-serving policies. More importantly, the AFCC will continue to exercise their unwarranted governmental interference over your minor child with the help of their favorite family or juvenile dependency court judge, who are also members of the AFCC, trained by the AFCC, and past presidents of the AFCC.
The $50 billion a year that the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts claims to bring in for colluding judges, attorneys, psychologists, custody evaluators, court commissioners, mediators, therapists, social workers, forensic evaluators, etc, is for "most of the leading practitioners, researchers, educators and policy makers in the United States family courts" and the AFCCnet is correct; but only for now. RaiseYourRights has its own researchers looking into how AFCC members in high level state positions are shifting federal grant monies (in addition to the money the family and juvenile dependency courts bring in from litigants) to support its unconstitutional practices of separating children from parents under the guise of "conflict resolution".
Huffington Post contributor Anne Stevenson revealed that a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) grant from a program called Devoted Dads was part of a Washington-based demonstration project overseen by Jessica Pearson of the Colorado AFCC. Pearson is also president of Center for Policy Research, a primary consultant to Office of Child Support Enforcement in HHS, which puts her in a position to steer hundreds of millions of dollars in fatherhood grants, including $10 million in yearly federal Access and Visitation (AV) grants to AFCC members only.
Jennifer Olson is executive director of the Protective Parents Coalition, a Texas-based family court reform group, and she says all AV Grants in her state are run through the office of Anita Stuckey, an AFCC member who is also the state’s AV Grant Contract Manager and State Access Program Coordinator for the Texas Attorney General’s Office. Olson found that in her home Tarrant County alone, state AV grant funds dwarf federal funds with three grantees (New Day Services, Legal Aid Northwest and Tarrant County Domestic Relations Office). Stuckey has long been known to offer contracts exclusively to AFCC members. “I want to ensure wide distribution of this opportunity for Access and Visitation services,” Stuckey wrote to an internal AFCC email list in 2006.
In the United States, jury trial rights have been shown to be much more effective in settling cases in all aspects of criminal and civil law than anything and everything the AFCC has done in its 57 years of existence. In Texas, the attorneys in the family and juvenile dependency courts would join together with the other residents of that state to stop Texas from removing jury trial rights from parents. Why? Jury rights help settle cases out of court, especially family law cases involving false allegations to gain advantage over the other parent.
To find out more about the control the AFCC has over our nation's family and juvenile dependency courts, federal and state grants, stayed tuned. They aren't going away anytime in the near future.