The so-called "War on Women" is raging, and billions of your tax dollars are being misused to fuel it via the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The solution is to remove the middle class from the welfare roles and do away with gender-based funding incentives.
The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 and the Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF) program it created transformed welfare policy by drastically reducing and shifting federal assistance away from the homes of mothers and children and into the homes of violent offenders. In an article entitled "How Federal Welfare Funding Drives Judicial Discretion in Child-Custody Determinations and Domestic Relations Matters" fathers and rights activists Lary Holland and Jason Bottomsly explain that this policy has backfired because the incentives are structured so that the state will only benefit if children are removed from loving homes:
"In essence, the federal guidelines wanted the states to function as collection agencies, recovering financial support from parents who had willfully abandoned their parental responsibilities to their children. The result, however, was different from the intent and has caused the state welfare programs to adjust their environment to have a greater need, which has caused the program to collect from willing parents that would ordinarily provide a loving environment for their children absent a court order limiting a parent's involvement. Despite the original intent of the IV-D welfare program, it now provides an incentive for the states to use their family courts to produce forcibly absent parents in order to increase the states' IV-D welfare caseload."
These HHS policies created a new breed of dangerous Welfare Kings through HHS Office of Child Support Enforcement when it began subsidizing the homes and legal battles of the unfit, unwilling, and violent fathers. At the beginning of a custody case, only the offender is sick, but if one violent offender gets custody, the whole family needs treatment. Consequently, it is also not uncommon for dozens of family court mental health and legal professionals onto the case to sustain his deadly custody rights through HHS programs.
The top 5 HHS programs endangering women and children are:
1. Child Support Enforcement (Access and Visitation Programs and Responsible Fatherhood Initiative) A 2011 report from the Office of the Inspector General demonstrates that the States are collecting child support, but not disbursing it to the children it is intended to benefit. So where is the money going? Although previous graduates include mass murderer D.C. Sniper John Muhammad, the 2012 HHS budget reflects President Obama's $1 billion endorsement of the fraud-riddled fatherhood industry.
Using the virtually unregulated child support system as a vehicle and the father's will to evade prison time as collateral, the fathers are told they can risk their liberty and property attempting to pay down arrears, or alternatively, sue the mother for custody using a variety of federally funded "supports." Unlike the welfare programs for women and children which had restrictive income eligibility requirements, HHS Responsible Fatherhood program benefits are not needs based and are available to all fathers-even billionaires. Benefits from Responsible Fatherhood programs to abusers include:
While many upstanding fathers honestly complain about TANF programs and the courts victimizing them, the dirty little secret in the fatherhood industry it that the grant recipients who train court personnel, social services, and child support personnel are often fathers rights groups like the Fathers and Families Coalition, the Children's Rights Council (Founder David Levy sits on the board of the Supervised Visitation Network) and the National Fatherhood Institute.
Clearly, judges understand the danger abusers pose, which is why their courts are guarded with armed deputies and not unarmed social workers. HHS programs are actually a deadly investment given that (a) abusive men win custody of their victims 70% of the time when they ask for it, and (b) regardless of the gender of the victim, it is a public safety issue when DOJ studies show men perpetrate more than 95% of violent assaults against women. A 2011 CDC study also shows that men are raped by other men more than 93% of the time, and women are raped by men more than 98% of the time.
2. Incarceration/Reentry Programs. The purpose of these programs is to recruit violent offenders who are still incarcerated directly from prison, then help them gain custody of victims. It is unclear to me how a child benefits from the dangerous influence of a violent offender insofar as it reduces support to the home they are recovering in. The program paints the offender as the victim and domestic violence as a disease they are afflicted with, curable by the removal of witnesses to their crimes.
Although violence is a voluntary act, HHS now invested our tax dollars into rehabilitating the incurable who choose to assault the most vulnerable members of society. Studies of male DV perpetrators show that 50% of them are sociopaths and another 25% have sociopathic tendancies. Psychopaths are people who feel no emotional connections to others and have zero regard for the rules and regulations of society, they do not respond to therapy, and cannot be rehabilitated. Dr. Robert Hare reports that psychopaths make up 1% of the general population, but 25% of the prison population:
"Violence is not uncommon among offender populations, but psychopaths still manage to stand out," he says. "They commit more than twice as many violent and aggressive acts, both in and out of prison, as do other criminals ... The recidivism rate of psychopaths is about double that of other offenders ... The violent recidivism rate of psychopaths is about triple that of other offenders."
Recipients include:
3. Foster care. Despite the fact that the National Center for Child Abuse and Neglect found that children are six times more likely to die in the State's care than those with their parents, it is assumed by some politicians that if you are poor, then you must need the US Department of Health and Human Services programs to tell you what's best for your own family.
4. Center for Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. With an annual budget of more than $20 million, the Center gives grants directly to religious groups exempt from anti discrimination laws, such as churches and mosques, as well as nonprofits affliated with them. Often partnered with the above-referenced Fatherhood industry programs, the Partnership's purpose is to "build and support partnerships with faith-based and community organizations in order to better serve individuals, families and communities in need." HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius explains that:
"Faith leaders are trusted partners in local communities. You have a unique ability to reach people, especially the most vulnerable, with the tools and information they need to get healthy, stay well, and thrive."
The consequence of this policy is that unsubsidized secular nonprofits that provide community services such as childcare, education, and healthcare cannot compete with the radical anti-woman nonprofits the Obama administration gives preference to. Examples include:
Domestic violence is a multibillion dollar industry complete with its own ambiguous gender neutral lingo often causes victims in profitably dangerous homes. The CDC estimated that in 2003 Americans spent $8.3 billion on the domestic violence industry, which does not take into consideration the nearly 8 million work days per year that victims miss as a direct consequence of being assaulted, nor the costs associated with the children they care for who might also be abused. With as much as $585 billion also spent subsidizing the child abuse industry, so it's no wonder some unethical abuse industry professionals cash in by keeping the public in danger and placing children in dangerous homes.
Rep. Gwen Moore: State Waivers for TANF Can Provide True Pathway Out of Poverty
CPS SHOULD BE AUDITED, FROM THE ORIGINATION OF THE FUNDS to the families it destroys and these children should be RETURNED TO THEIR MOTHERS AND THEIR FAMILIES POST HASTE, BEFORE ANY MORE CHILDREN AND FAMILIES ARE DESTROYED BY GREED AND CORRUPTION, that we call CPS... They are in the news enough already, but there is no focus on the good families that are suffering and the CHILDREN THAT WANT TO GO HOME TO MOMMY AND DADDY!!!
Please, please be one of those who care and want to see the truth. We are all experiencing PTSD and it is tearing us apart to have our little babies at risk and no one will listen... i hope you will...
thank you for all you do... I, we, will be waiting for a hopefully prompt response...
best regards,
deborah parks
I want my kids back NOW
My daughters need to be at their brother's graduation
I want reimbursed my losses since the 2004 filing to have custody switched.
I want my license reinstated (not at my expense)
I want my support forgiven as I should not have to pay for my children to be abused.
I want these fathers to get help if you love your children you do not do this to them.
When a stay of execution was filed Judge Enquist granted it as the court was in contradiction, and Judge Tidball denied. Since March of 2009 my kids have been held with a ransom that increases by approximately $800.00 a month.
My son was incarcerated in 2009 for defending himself and after 30 days Scott Storey granted him a habeas corpus. He is now with me and is not allowed a relationship with his sister as a result.
I have recorded phone calls with Dan Welch (head of Colorado Human service grant monies) that my ex- husbands are monsters
and Katy Smith (head of Jefferson County child support) Stating they had no grounds to incarcerate me over the child support. Continued
Thank you so much for this article. Unfortunately, this is only the tip of the iceburg of what is happening in the courts in cases of domestic violence.
My own case is in Spain, and in retaliation for having denounced my ex-husbands violence the courts have defrauded me of every cent I have (in collusion with my Spanish lawyers) and prevented me from seeing my two children for over 4 years; all in their attempts to intimidate and silence me.
The US State Department's stance.... "this is a private affair", even though Inter-American Courts on Human Rights have found the USA guilty of human rights violations (Gonzales vs. USA) in their failure to protect victims of domestic abuse. This is the 3rd case (A vs. UK and Velasquez vs. Honduras) where a State has been found guilty of human rights violations under the principle of due diligence and State and non-State actors duty to protect victims.
DOMESTIC ABUSE AND VIOLENCE IS A HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION AND NOT A "PRIVATE AFFAIR" OR "CIVIL DISPUTE"!!
ONCE AGAIN THANKS SO MUCH FOR THIS ARTICLE!!
Quenby Wilcox
Although the source(s) of your information is unclear, with respect to Mr. Komisarjevsky's prison visitors subsequent to his 2007 arrest, it appears inaccurate. As you no doubt appreciate, bad information makes for bad policy.
Todd Bussert
In order for the justice system to work, all defendants, including your client Joshua Komisarjevsky, require a fair trial before an unbiased jury and a rigorous defense. For doing your job as a lawyer I don't fault you.
The source of the information on Komisarjevsky's visitors is your co-council according to the embedded link to the ABC 20/20 News article dated 11/23/2011 entitled "Girl, 9, Testifies in Bid to Save Her Dad, Home Invasion Killer Joshua Komisarjevsky, From Death Row."
http://abcnews.go.com/US/girl-testifies-save-dad-home-invasion-killer-joshua/story?id=15017721#.T7J0He33AUt
QUOTE:
"But Jeremiah Donovan, one of Komisarjevsky's attorneys, said that showing the videotape was important because it would allow the jurors to see his client as a loving father who, records show, has seen his daughter 55 times during his incarceration -- instead of seeing him as just a cold-blooded killer."
Were you and Donovan paid with public funds to defend Komisarjevsky? Who brought Komisarjevsky's daughter to the prison 55 times and who paid for it? Was the daughter molested by other family members, and how is she doing? Is she still required to go to the prison?
What benefit did Komisarjevsky's 9 year old daughter receive from the 55 visits insofar as the visits were ultimately exploited at trial to help disguise a psychopathic pedophile rapist and mass murderer as a productive member of society safe to be around children?
With respect and regards, Anne
Noting that Mr. Komisarjevsky received court-appointed representation, as the Constitution requires for all indigent defendants, is a red herring. The suggestion that state funds were used to transport any of Mr. Komisarjevsky's personal visitors to the institutions at which he has been held is completely baseless. Your intimation, by inquiry, that his daughter has been sexually abused is outrageous. It is informative, however, of your policy perspective, as is your apparent ability to render psychiatric diagnoses.
Shauna