Divorce in Connecticut: BARRY GOLDSTEIN OF THE SAFE CHILD COALITION DECRIES THE CUSTODY SWITCHING SCHEMES RESULTING FROM HHS/ACF MARRIAGE PROMOTION AND RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD GRANTS!

Thursday, October 17, 2013

BARRY GOLDSTEIN OF THE SAFE CHILD COALITION DECRIES THE CUSTODY SWITCHING SCHEMES RESULTING FROM HHS/ACF MARRIAGE PROMOTION AND RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD GRANTS!

Preface: The California Protective Parent Group recently met with our representatives in Washington, D.C. to submit documentation regarding the damage protective mothers experience as a result of HHS funded access and visitation programs. The following is the cover letter to that material as well as the documentation. See below:

October, 2013

RE: Wasteful programs through Department of Health and Human Services/Administration of Children and Families

Dear Congress Member:

During this time of sequestration and fragile economic recovery, it is important to eliminate wasteful Federal funding for useless or harmful programs. We are concerned that certain Department of Health and Human Services, Administration of Children and Families programs under the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program not only waste taxpayer dollars, but lead to fraud and may harm the very citizens whom the programs are designed to assist.

SOME SOCIAL PROGRAMS HAVE NO IMPACT OR EVEN CAUSE HARM

On July 17, 2013, a hearing titled “What Really Works: Evaluating Current Efforts to Help Families Support their Children and Escape Poverty” was held by the Subcommittee on Human Resources of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Congressman Dave Reichert (R-WA) said, “[I]n some cases, high-quality evaluations have revealed that some programs previously believed to be effective actually had no impact. In other cases, social programs expected to improve the lives of low-income adults or children actually caused harm – meaning those who did not receive the service or benefit avoided the detrimental effects caused by the program because they did not participate.” http://www.waysandmeans.house.gov

Both failings identified by Chairman Reichart are amply demonstrated by the Healthy Marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood programs under Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (part A of Title IV; 45 CFR Section 603), and Office of Child Support Enforcement (part D of Title IV; 45 CFR Chapter III).

HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROMOTION

Marriages and divorces have been steadily declining in the same ratio to each other since 1975, (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005044.html) according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (www.cdc.gov/nchs). There is no evidence that Healthy Marriage Promotion funding has made any difference whatsoever in improving marriages, despite massive federal spending since 1997. None of the well-intended funded programs seem to have shown any real or lasting effect, including public advertising campaigns and education on the value of marriage; marriage skills training, divorce reduction programs, marriage mentoring programs, and reduced disincentives to marriage.

This $75 million grant program is a waste of taxpayer dollars and should be eliminated.

RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD

On the other hand, active harm has resulted from the Responsible Fatherhood Initiative. Social engineering programs designed to turn irresponsible fathers into good fathers have failed to benefit, and unintentionally endangered, children. Despite the goals of promoting responsible fatherhood, enhancing relationship skills, controlling aggressive behavior, disseminating information on the causes of domestic violence and child abuse, education, counseling, encouraging child support payments, providing work services, a massive media campaign for fatherhood and a special and questionable focus on ex-prisoners, there is no evidence that children are better off. In fact, there is evidence that children are being increasingly harmed by the interventions.

Although some programs may help fathers get jobs and pay child support, other programs appear to encourage fathers to get custody and receive child support. These are not ordinary good fathers being encouraged to become involved with, and get custody of, nursing infants and small children. These are drug abusers, batterers, child abusers, rapists, convicted pedophiles, convicted child pornographers, and other dangerous felons. One of the irresponsible fathers who received support from fatherhood initiative funded programs was John Mohammad, the Beltway Sniper. These fathers cannot be turned into upstanding citizens by uniting them with their children. Nor can children be expected to turn them into good fathers.

Such irresponsible and violent fathers appear to be referred to aggressive attorneys by some programs, and successfully receive custody and child support 70% of the time, according to research. The mothers are frequently not represented. The purpose of the fatherhood funding is to improve the lives of children, but being removed from a safe primary parent and forced into the care of an abuser or criminal is not an improvement. Custody litigation has become a multi-million dollar industry that encourages fraud due in part to large fees charged by unregulated private professionals appointed by courts. Children’s human rights are being violated and many are maimed and killed by irresponsible fathers. The long-term negative consequences to these children create exponential costs to society, in suffering of children, in dollars and cents and in the health of our society.

This $75 million grant program is a waste of taxpayer dollars and does harm, and should be eliminated.

NEED FOR GAO AUDIT OF PAST HEALTHY MARRIAGE PROMOTION AND RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD GRANTS

There have been multiple audits of the $16 billion TANF program. In June 2012, GAO director Kay Brown wrote:

“In fact, in fiscal year 2011, federal TANF and state expenditures for purposes other than cash assistance totaled 71 percent of all expenditures. This stands in sharp contrast with 27 percent spent for purposes other than cash assistance in fiscal year 1997, when states first implemented TANF. Beyond the cash assistance rolls, the total number of families assisted is not known, as we have noted in our previous work…While states have devoted significant amounts of the block grant as well as state funds to these and other activities, little is known about the use of these funds. Existing TANF oversight mechanisms focus more on the cash assistance and welfare-to-work components of the block grant. For example, when states use TANF funds for some purposes, they are not required to report on funding levels for specific services and how those services fit into a strategy or approach for meeting TANF goals. In effect, there is little information on the numbers of people served by TANF-funded programs other than cash assistance, and there is no real measure of workload or of how services supported by TANF and state TANF-related funds meet the goals of welfare reform.” http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-812T.

We need a full GAO fiscal and performance audit of past Healthy Marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood $150 million grants to determine if tax dollars were wasted, if fraud has been committed, and if children were placed at risk with abusive fathers as a result of these expenditures. Are TANF goals met by such items as a media campaigns or home maintenance counseling, for example? It seems unlikely. Is marriage promotion appropriate and, if so, is there measurable success? It appears not. Are job programs, domestic violence and parenting programs provided by other programs? It appears these are duplicative programs. This is not good governance.

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT

In most, if not all states, the amount of a child support award is directly influenced by custodial time share, thus making children into financial commodities. Child Support Enforcement, in turn, creates a perverse financial incentive to use children for financial gain, since an increase in parenting time for a non-custodial parent equals a decrease in his/her support obligation. Likewise, a decrease in parenting time for the non-custodial parent equals an increase in child support to the custodial parent. This linkage of child support and custodial time share instigates custody litigation for financial gain, often leaving children in custodial situations that are not in their best interests. This outcome not only wastes resources, but greatly harms children and families.

There is a simple solution to this problem. Federal funding should be withheld from any state that does not pass laws to terminate the linkage between child support and parenting time. Such laws would reduce costs for Child Support Enforcement, save taxpayers money, and benefit children and families by reducing custody litigation.

CITIZEN EXPECTATION

Citizens presume the Federal government will use taxpayer dollars wisely, to do measurable good and not do harm. We expect an efficient, effective government. We expect our taxes to be well-spent. We are shocked by the lack of oversight and accountability in these programs and strongly urge you to disallow funding.

We call for a thorough investigation into the waste, fraud and abuse of these Department of Health and Human Services programs through the Office of the Inspector General, along with Congressional oversight hearings on the systemic failure to ensure custodial safety of abused children.

Sincerely,