Separated Parenting Access & Resource Center
crazy gamesriddles and jokesfunny picturesdeath psychic!mad triviafunny & odd!pregnancy testshape testwin custodyrecipes

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Pages: 12 3 ... 29
Illinois State Forum / Springfield Reporter...
« on: Nov 12, 2004, 08:29:31 AM »
In last weeks newspaper, a reporter from Springfiled wrote on the new Grandparents Rights Law.

Maybe a few well written, polite letters will point her in the direction on the Class Action Lawsuit. Or at least our side of being a NCP.

The reporter is out of Springfield, Illinois. Her name is Stephanie Sievers.  Phone number, 217-524-5797. E-mail address, Sng2@Springnet1.com

"Children learn what they live"

Illinois State Forum / Can I e-mail you privately Dean?
« on: Dec 11, 2003, 09:08:51 PM »
Welcome to Sparc! We appreciate your input.

I have a question that I would like to ask. It is sensitive. May I e-mail you privately Dean?  

Child Support Issues / CS Action Alert
« on: Nov 19, 2005, 05:45:12 PM »
E-mail newsletter from Congressman Marsha Blackburn,
found they are very close to passing what looks like a major
improvement to incentives to states for their CS programs:

>Child Support Enforcement. Savings of $4.899 billion in 2006-10.
changes to Child Support Enforcement, some of which cost money by
increasing the amount of collections which are passed through to the
custodial parents. Two changes result in substantial savings. Those
eliminating the federal match when states spend CSE incentive
saving $1.6 billion; and phasing in a reduction in the federal
matching rate
for administrative expenses from 66% to 50%, which saves $3.8
Rep. Blackburn

The bill this is contained in is called the "Deficit Reduction Act of
2005".  The rest of the bill isn't related to family law, but it
good too.  This would be a great time to contact your congressman or
woman, and ask them to support this legislation, and also to
defund VAWA which is a waste of about a billion dollars a year.

Contact your federal representative:

"Children learn what they live"

Child Support Issues / CLASP INFO, A MUST READ
« on: Nov 10, 2005, 06:46:52 PM »

Child Support Issues / NEW FROM CLASP
« on: Oct 26, 2005, 07:13:11 PM »


Ways and Means Committee Proposes Deep Cuts in Child Support Funding
by Vicki Turetsky. The Committee on Ways and Means has proposed deep
cuts to the federal matching rate for child support services, which
would severely reduce states' ability to collect child support for low-
and moderate-income families. This brief outlines why the child support
program is a sound investment-collecting $4.38 in child support for
every public dollar spent-and how much funding each state stands to lose
if the proposed cuts are enacted. 3 pages. 10/25/2005

Child Support-Related Provisions in New Katrina Relief Legislation
by Vicki Turetsky. This paper outlines the child support-related
provisions of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
Emergency Response and Recovery Act of 2005, signed into law on
September 21, 2005. It also describes recent Health and Human Services
policy guidance and pending legislation that would clarify the law.
Finally, it recommends that Congress adopt additional short-term child
support measures to help states impacted by the hurricanes. 10 pages.

The Child Support Enforcement Program: A Sound Investment in Improving
Children's Chances in Life
by Vicki Turetsky. The child support program enforces the responsibility
of parents to support their children. The program's performance has
improved dramatically in recent years. This six-page report explains why
the program is a sound investment-returning $4.38 in collected support
for every dollar the government spends. 5 pages. 10/24/2005

State Strategies for Preventing the Accumulation of Child Support
Arrears and Managing Existing Arrears
by Paula Roberts. The publicly funded child support program contends
with over $100 billion in arrears, or outstanding child support owed by
obligated parents. To address this problem, a number of states revising
their policies and developing strategies to both prevent the growth of
arrears and resolve existing debt. This PowerPoint presentation
describes these efforts, and includes a comprehensive bibliography of
sources for further information. 49 pages. 10/25/2005

These publications and other resources are available at http://www.clasp.org

Sign up for the November 18 CLASP Audio Conference!

Better Business: Making Work "Work" for Employers and Employees
Friday, November 18, 12:30-1:30 pm (Eastern Time)

Many of the efforts to provide family support at the workplace have been
framed as either helping business or helping employees. However, a new
movement has emerged that is looking at the mutual benefits of making
work "work" for both employers and employees. The business reasons
behind this new movement are diverse, including the changing nature of
work, the economy and the workforce. And the business case includes the
attraction, development, retention of employees as well as community
economic development. What are some tips on how to get employers in your
community to make work "work"; what are the implications for low wage
workers of flexible work?

Learn about brand-new findings from two experts who bridge the worlds of
business and workers!

Ellen Galinsky, President, Families and Work Institute
Donna Klein, President & CEO, Corporate Voices for Working Families

Register online with a credit card and save 10 percent!


The Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP), a national, nonprofit
organization founded in 1968, conducts research, policy analysis,
technical assistance, and advocacy on issues related to economic
security for low-income families with children. For more information
about CLASP, visit http://www.clasp.org

Center for Law and Social Policy
1015 15th Street, NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 906-8000
(202) 842-2885 fax

Child Support Issues / Handbook on CSE
« on: Sep 05, 2005, 08:43:02 AM »

Child Support Issues / Child Slave Trade
« on: Jul 05, 2005, 09:13:24 PM »
July 3, 2005

Parents nationwide have complained for decades that their families were destroyed and children seized by corrupt child protection agencies for no other reason than to obtain federal funds for State governments. They have been telling the truth all along. Clear evidence has been discovered documenting how organized crime methods and procedures are integrated into juvenile and family courts. This documentation has been assembled through the combined efforts of independent researchers in California, Oklahoma, and Arkansas, researchers for the American Family Rights Association, and document research conducted by THE SOCIOLOGY CENTER.

Instructions for shaping judicial child and family protection decisions to maximize child protection system federal fund claims have been documented in the CALIFORNIA JUDGES BENCHGUIDES: BENCHGUIDE 200: Juvenile Dependency Initial or Detention Hearing (2004). The instructions are scattered throughout the Benchguide emphasized by the label "Judicial Tip." One example states:

Page 100-13
"JUDICIAL TIP: Failure to make this finding may cause permanent loss of federal funding for foster care. See discussion of other required findings in §100.36. The court may make this a temporary finding pending the continued detention hearing."

The full text of CALIFORNIA JUDGES BENCHGUIDES: BENCHGUIDE 200: Juvenile Dependency Initial or Detention Hearing is available at http://thesociologycenter.com/EvidenceBooks/Bench Guides SmallFile.pdf (35.1Mb)

A publication of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges titled RESOURCE GUIDELINES: Improving Court Practice in Child Abuse & Neglect Cases provides additional evidence that this represents national judicial policy and that strategies using juvenile and family judicial decisions to maximize child protection system federal fund revenue is a well known corrupting influence on the judicial system. Two example state:

Appendix C, Page 158, Note 15
15. Two commentators summarize the barriers facing judicial oversight:
[T]he authority of judges in these matters is often limited; they do not have the power to order the agency to provide services to an individual. In some states, the courts will make a positive “reasonable efforts” determination regardless of agency efforts in order to ensure federal funding. Judges are not trained in matters over which the juvenile court has jurisdiction and, because of rotation schedules, remain in the assignment for a short period of time. Consequently, they do not acquire the experience needed to handle these sensitive cases. While judges in some localities make a good faith effort to determine whether adequate services have been offered to the family, in many localities a positive finding is merely a matter of checking a box on a preprinted form.
Susan Goodman and Joan Hurley, Reasonable Efforts: Who Decides What’ s Reasonable? (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, D.C.) 1993, at 8.

Appendix C, Note 110, Page 162
110. In many jurisdictions the trial judge must merely check a box on a preprinted court form to indicate that reasonable efforts were provided in the case. Shotton, supra end. 3. In some other jurisdictions the court order forms simply include a preprinted statement that reasonable efforts were made, thus making the finding possible without the judge’s even checking a box. Id., at 227. In some states, courts and agencies have taken a cynical approach, seeking to assure receipt of federal funding without the court taking a meaningful look at reasonable efforts. In such states, words indicating the agency has made reasonable efforts are preprinted into court order forms used when removal of a child is authorized, and laws are structured so a judge cannot authorize a foster placement without a positive finding of reasonable efforts. Hardin, supra end. 7, at 54

The full text of RESOURCE GUIDELINES: Improving Court Practice in Child Abuse & Neglect Cases is available at http://thesociologycenter.com/EvidenceBooks/CANCCourtPractices.pdf (569.6Kb)

Six pages of examples cited from CALIFORNIA JUDGES BENCHGUIDES: BENCHGUIDE 200: Juvenile Dependency Initial or Detention Hearing and RESOURCE GUIDELINES: Improving Court Practice in Child Abuse & Neglect Cases are available at http://thesociologycenter.com/EvidenceBooks/SmokingGunAnoun.pdf

"Children learn what they live"

These countries do not vote here. But lets keep the CS coming and coming. Send us to prison if we don't pay...

June 12, 2005
Finance Chiefs Cancel Debt of 18 Nations
LONDON, June 11 (AP) - Finance ministers from the Group of 8 industrialized nations agreed Saturday to cancel at least $40 billion worth of debt owed by the world's poorest nations.

The British chancellor of the exchequer, Gordon Brown, said that 18 countries, many in sub-Saharan Africa, would benefit immediately from the deal to scrap 100 percent of the debt they owe to the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the African Development Bank.

As many as 20 other countries could be eligible if they meet strict targets for good governance and tackling corruption, leading to a total debt relief package of more than $55 billion.

"The G-8 finance ministers have agreed to 100 percent debt cancellation for heavily indebted poor countries," Mr. Brown told a news conference in London.

Aid agencies welcomed the deal, saying it would save the 18 countries a total of $1.5 billion a year in debt repayments that could now be used for health care, education and infrastructure development.

Finance ministers from the United States, Britain, Japan, Canada, Russia, Germany, Italy and France agreed to the package during a two-day meeting in London. The initiative was begun by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund in 1996.

"A real milestone has been reached," said Treasury Secretary John Snow. "President Bush's commitment to lift the crushing debt burden on the world's poorest countries has been achieved. This is an achievement of historic proportions."

Nations in sub-Saharan Africa alone owe some $68 billion to international bodies. Rich nations had long agreed the debt must be relieved, but the international community could not agree on a formula for tackling the problem.

The package agreed to on Saturday was put forward by the United States and Britain after talks in Washington this week between Mr. Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair.

Britain originally wanted rich countries to assume the repayments for the poor countries, to protect the lending groups' ability to create future aid packages.

But eventually, Britain agreed with the American position that the debts be scrapped outright.

But Mr. Bush agreed that rich nations would provide extra money to the lending groups, to compensate for the assets being written off. The agreement will initially cover 18 nations eligible for debt relief under the initiative, including Benin, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guyana and Mali.

Nine other countries are close to completing the targets for good governance set out under the initiative. They too would qualify once the goals are met.

"This is a great deal for people in many of the very poorest countries, it reflects well on Gordon Brown and John Snow and is a tribute to the growing global campaigns to beat poverty," said Jamie Drummond, executive director of DATA, a lobbying group that campaigns against AIDS and poverty in Africa. "This bold step builds serious momentum for a historic breakthrough on doubling effective aid and trade justice at the G-8 summit next month."

Britain has made tackling poverty in Africa and the developing world a priority for its presidency of the Group of 8.

Mr. Blair's approach has three prongs: increasing aid, eliminating debt and removing export subsidies and other trade barriers that make it difficult for developing nations to compete.

Aid agencies say the Group of 8 leaders must now focus on meeting Britain's target of increasing international development aid by $50 billion a year.

Some question whether agreement on that will be reached at the Group of 8 summit meeting scheduled for early July in Gleneagles, Scotland.

The United States and Japan both reject a British proposal to raise that money by selling bonds on the world capital markets.

Like the United States, Japan prefers its own bilateral aid programs, and France is pushing an initiative for an international aviation tax.

"Children learn what they live"

Pages: 12 3 ... 29
Copyright © SPARC - A Parenting Advocacy Group
Use of this website does not constitute a client/attorney relationship and this site does not provide legal advice.
If you need legal assistance for divorce, child custody, or child support issues, seek advice from a divorce lawyer.