My Personal Assessment and Insights Concerning Family Court Reform Gilbert T. Tso

Background Commentary: A few months after relocating to Denver, I met some local people meeting to discuss family court reforms. I attended some meetings and expressed my interest in helping, and suggested the local grassroots effort would benefit from affiliation to a larger, national coalition such as National Parents Organization. They welcomed my volunteer support but openly expressed that they were not interested in a national affiliation because they did not want to lose control over the agenda. Subsequently, I composed the following piece on 9/11/13, and presented it to a few folks from this local Denver parent activist group. Ironically, this was also written months before the debut of “DivorceCorp – The Movie,” which I learned of two months later and viewed in a Denver theater in January 2014. The following is this piece, with local references to parties redacted.

If after peer review, and editorial input this piece is considered “article-worthy”, I’m happy to edit it for release.

My Personal Assessment and Insights Concerning Family Court Reform Gilbert T. Tso 9/11/13

“The other night, I referred to the Green Dragon Tavern analogy; we face the same dynamics the American colonists faced when trying to organize against the tyranny of Mother England; when delegates were drafting the Declaration of Independence; when the first Congress was crafting the Constitution of the United States of America, and later when debating the Bill of Rights; the French revolutionaries; the Russian Bolsheviks; the Chinese under Sun Yat-Sen; and the split in philosophy between Martin L. King and Malcolm X … from the perspective of human organization, these dynamics are what makes it a monumental challenge to change or remove a corrupt system.

If we are to be effective and not repeat past mistakes in organizing a coalition to reform family court and the divorce industry on child custody and support, we must face and accept the facts.

a) It’s a fact that individual victims of the family courts and divorce industry perceive the situation from their own personal tragedies – it is their reality and no one is going to tell or convince them differently about who the villains and perpetrators are.

b) It’s a fact that when organizations attract fringe elements, they risk losing credibility among moderates; most Americans are conservative-leaning moderates.

c) It’s a fact that when arguments become personal or emotional, objectivity is often lost.

The system is broken, as evidence by the countless stories told by victimized parents and children. Making this a personal fight may lead to a few convictions of judges, lawyers and/or other players, but the system remains intact and is wiser for how to defend itself against other reformists and activists; in fact, it may serve the opposite of our reformist goals by given the system an opportunity to claim it is not broken after all, and that it will indeed punish its own in the system who “stray” from the “rules.” So then, how many personal fights will it take to bring real justice and reform? … Good luck to our grandchildren!

To me, what is so heinous about the family court system is the profiteering that goes on under the color of law, social and human services, and the so-called “best interest of the child.” For example, a psychological crisis is intentionally inflicted on a parent when his/her children are removed without cause from them – studies have established the emotional and psychological distress a parent encounters when a child is kidnapped, as well as the extremes the parent will accept in order to assure safety and return of the child. This is judicial kidnapping and legalized extortion.

It is my personal belief that until people realize and accept the following allegations, if not basic truths:

1) Divorce, state child support and custody administration are industries designed to profit off families in crisis and citizen’s tax dollars; and

2) Children are the currency used to propagate the machinery of wealth transfer from families to private and state interests, we will largely remain a “special interest,” and likely be labeled by our opposition as a group of “disgruntled litigants.”

If we can’t first successfully convince the public, and then legislators, of these truths, we will never truly reform or eliminate the family court system we have today throughout this country. It’s a nationwide problem and a societal cancer.

Our society is setting ourselves up for major social crises in our teen and young adult populations when generation after generation of children who’ve been compromised by the system become emotional and psychologically damaged adults (addictions and drug dependencies, teen pregnancies, teen suicides, psychological damage and low self-esteem, tendency toward domestic violence and abuse as adults, etc.).

The system is designed to perpetuate itself on the argument for continuing and expanding the need for government and institutional intervention and services, state and federal, to address problems created by the very same government and institutions a generation or two earlier, when it became acceptable to separate children from fit and loving parents; and a system was created to monetize this process of family destruction for the benefit of those operating the courts and divorce industry.

If you agree with my assessment of the Prisoner’s Dilemma as helpful in looking at our situation, then I’ll add the following to hopefully stimulate the discussion on defining “our identity.”

I was just made aware of the passing of Nobel Laureate Ronald Coase, former professor at the University of Chicago (where I got my MBA). Coase wrote a paper, “The Problem of Social Cost,” that led to an entire field of Tort and business theory. Briefly, in law and economics the Coase Theorem states (source: Wikipedia – Coase Theorem):

“‘If trade in an externality is possible and there are no transaction costs, bargaining will lead to an efficient outcome regardless of the initial allocation of property.’ In practice, obstacles to bargaining or poorly defined property rights can prevent Coasian bargaining.”

Putting this in family court reform speak, the Coase theorem may read like the following:

“If after separation or divorce, the parents are left alone to negotiate custody, parenting time and child support, and there’s no intervention by the family court judges, lawyers, GALs, PRE/CFI’s, CSE, etc., the parents will bargain and negotiate an efficient outcome reflecting the parents’ own standards of what’s in the best interest of their children, regardless of the property settlements or even agreed to custody determination arranged during the divorce settlement. In practice, the intervention of lawyers, judges, PRE/CFI’s, CSE, DHS, etc. create uncertainty and confusion for parents confronted with the very real chance that they may lose meaningful contact and relations with their children, thereby causing irrational and non-optimal results most likely not in the best interest of the child, but to the party gaining the most economic benefit from the outcome.”

I believe what we are truly dealing with in the family courts is not necessarily a renegade judicial system, but rather a well-designed legal machine to capture wealth from the transaction costs this legal machine established through laws, and which it can impose through the judiciary on families in crisis seeking a resolution to a domestic and family matter.

I believe we need to reach out beyond victimized parents and recruit into our membership sociologists and social anthropologists who’ve studied child development and families, economists who can speak to the connections I’m making to what’s happening in family courts and wealth transfer; and church and community leaders who can speak to the devastation of families and the impact on their communities due to divorce and forced single-parent homes. With such a core group, our organization can then formulate our platform and develop a focused and comprehensive argument for reforming the family court and divorce industry. Then we bring in lobbyists and legislators, and launch a media campaign targeting the American Bar Association, the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, state and county bar associations, large national family law firms, state child support collections agencies, etc..

This isn’t a dad’s rights, children’s rights or mom’s rights issue – this is more like Upton Sinclair and creating public awareness and impact with a novel, The Jungle, which brought about massive reforms in slaughterhouses and meat packing factories, immigrant labor reform, and created was is today the FDA.

Luckily for us, in our generation we have the Internet, social media and social networks … back in Upton Sinclair’s days, they were still sending mail by trains and horses.”

GTT – 06/01/14

Contact information:

Strong Families for a Strong Colorado And a Strong America

Gilbert T. Tso, Co-Chair
Executive Committee, National Parents Organization of Colorado

Across our beautiful State of Colorado, indeed across America, the idea of family has evolved in very dramatic ways since the founding of our State and our nation more than two-hundred years ago. Today we have married families, divorced and blended families, single-parent families, and adoptive families throughout Colorado and America.

What remains immutable, however, are the core elements of what constitutes “family.” Throughout history, “family” is universally accepted to be a group consisting of parents, their children, and their descendants, all sharing in a common bond that is uniquely distinct and separate from other groups of people.

We believe that as Americans, we have a fundamental liberty interest to “family”, and the rights of individuals to “family” are not only individual rights, but natural rights protected by the Constitution of the United States of America. Indeed, our Constitution guarantees our right to “life, liberty and property.” Only under the most extreme of circumstances are these liberty interests denied to a citizen, a person, and only when fair and impartial enforcement of due process and equal protection have been dutifully administered.

Parents have a liberty interest to exercise their right to parental access, parental authority, parental care and a relationship with their children. Children have a liberty interest to enjoy the love, care and protection of their parents, and a relationship with their parents. Grandparents and extended family members have a liberty interest and right to enjoy the fruits of their labor and share in life’s blessings that are embodied in simple acts like teaching their grandchildren family traditions and family history.

Due process and equal protection guaranteed under the Constitution applies to all American families, regardless of the individual family’s circumstances; this is true for married families as it is for divorced families, for single-parent families as it is for adoptive families, and so on. Why? Because these guarantees are attached to the individual and thus carry over to the groups they belong to. Indeed, time and again the Supreme Court of the United States of America has upheld and reinforced the principles that our judicial system must ensure due process and equal protection for all citizens.

The National Parents Organization of Colorado, together with parents and concerned citizens of the State of Colorado, seek reform of Title 14 of the Colorado Revised Statutes – DOMESTIC MATTERS, DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE – PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES, such that Colorado statutes and social policies concerning our children are truly in their best interest.

Parental rights, and children’s rights to a relationship with their parents, are liberty interests protected under the Constitution of the United States of America. Where children are at issue, the U.S. Supreme Court, guided by the Constitution, has repeatedly issued decisions that clearly set restrictions on the State’s right to intervene.1,2,3,4,5 The State is limited in its reach and intrusion into the liberty interests of American citizens, and can only do so when a clear and overriding State interest exists. (Parens Patriae) The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that where the interests of children are at issue, these

are best determined by fit and responsible parents and not the State. Indeed, social science and research support

Family members, most importantly parents and their children, visited with the misfortune of a divorce or separation should not be denied their liberty interests simply because of changes to the family’s circumstances. In America, various estimates indicate that between 33% to 45% of marriages will eventually end in divorce.6 For divorces involving children, this is a significant issue.

In the absence of child endangerment, neglect, abandonment, or relevant addiction, § 14-10-124 CRS – Best Interest of Child, should presume that each parent is equally fit, and presume the right of each parent to equal access and exercise of their parental rights, and the right of the children to equal access and exercise of their rights to both parents. The exception would be when the parties agree to a different arrangement, or when one parent expresses serious and verifiable reasons why the other parent’s liberty interests should be denied, thereupon due process and equal protection must be applied in an evidentiary hearing to establish endangerment, neglect or relevant addiction before the parent’s fundamental rights and liberty interests are denied.

Also, we believe the wholesale use of custody evaluations does not necessarily serve the best interest of the child or family. We strongly believe custody evaluations should follow strict protocols and standards of evidence, as with criminal investigations that follow felonious charges. Respect for and protection of an individual parent’s liberty interests has to be the highest priority when what is at stake is the denial of the fundamental rights of a parent and the children. Only when strict protocols and standards of evidence are applied should an evaluator’s recommendations be allowed into court for consideration.

Reform will significantly reduce custody litigation, leaving predominantly those cases where child endangerment, neglect, abandonment, and/or fitness of a parent are justifiably in question.

It is with these beliefs and Constitution-based principles in mind that we, the National Parents Organization of Colorado, a group of concerned parents and citizens of the State of Colorado, are petitioning our State legislators to examine and amend Title 14 of the Colorado Revised Statutes – DOMESTIC MATTERS, DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE – PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES. Specifically, we are respectfully asking our representatives in the Colorado legislature to amend Title 14 of the Colorado Revised Statutes to ensure that all citizens, parents, children and their families, who are proud to call Colorado their home, have their liberty interests, natural rights and civil protections guaranteed under the Constitution of the United States of America, be affirmed and protected under our Colorado statutes.


1 Troxel vs. Granville, (2000)
2 Stanley vs. Illinois, (1972)
3 Santosky vs. Kramer (1982)
4 Eisenstadt vs. Baird (1972)
5 Meyer vs. Nebraska (1923)
6 The New York Times, Dan Hurley, “Divorce Rate et seq”, April 19, 2005

GTT – Orig. 06/01/14; Rev. 9/21/14

For more information please email:

Modern Family

Modern Family, not just a television show, it has become the face of the 21st family!  The “modern” family today as seen in this particular TV show has many different looks. We have the blended household, the traditional natural family, and same-sex domestic partners. According to today’s culture, Welcome to the New American Family!

When you watch the show, you see how far from the traditional natural family we have come. We have broken marriage, weak fathers, women who run the family and a male couple who are both a bit a clown. Is this show funny, yes; however, what is not amusing is that this has become natural, the norm. To be thought of as natural you must conclude that this is a result of nature, however, this belief has been proven to be false. The meaning of natural according to is: existing in or produced by nature: not artificial.  

The traditional families have been adversely affected with the mindset of anything goes! What seems right must be right! Not so, quite the opposite!

The question is, what does the natural family look like? Not what we are witnessing, divorce rates have skyrocketed over the last decade; blended households seem to be more prevalent than those who stay together for the long term as we saw with our parents and grandparents. We have created a throwaway mentality.   Not comfortable just leave and find another to partner up with.

Laura Ingraham radio icon speaking about fathers and the importance of their presences in the family concludes, as a single parent herself is not the ideal situation. She is in agreement that the father plays an essential role in raising the children in a two-parent household. Which consist of one father one mother together united raising their children is the healthier way. The father is fundamental for the emotional well being of the child. While many excellent single mothers are raising their families, it is challenging for all involved; it is not the ultimate situation. Today’s mothers are stress from having to do it all alone! In many cases, children are raising themselves. We see in the inner cities results of what an absentee father does to development of the adolescent.

“In 1960, only 10% of children were raised without a father in the home.”

“Today, 40% are.”

“There are many reasons behind this sobering statistic. The clichéd case of a man knocking up a woman, and then leaving town never to return certainly still occurs.”

“But sometimes a man’s ex-wife petitions for primary custody of their kids, and sympathetic corrupt family courts unjustly grant this request about 80% of the time.”

“Yet despite the trend in popular culture towards greater acceptance of single motherhood, study after study empirically demonstrates that dads play an extremely important role in a child’s well-being and success. Below we list a few studies that show exactly how much fathers influence their children’s lives.”

“Children With Fathers Are Less Likely to Live in Poverty”

“Children Without Fathers Are More Likely to Do Jail Time

Youths in father-absent households have significantly higher odds of incarceration than those in mother/father families. This was even true after controlling for different income levels. Young people who never had a father in the household experienced the highest odds of doing jail time.

The Department of Justice surveyed 7,000 inmates in 2002 and found that 39% of them lived in a mother-only household before being locked-upIn a similar study that surveyed nearly 14,000 female inmates, more than half grew up in a single-mother household.”

“Children With Fathers Are Less Likely to Abuse Drugs and Alcohol”

 You cannot dispute scientific facts! There are verifiable studies from many different theoreticians who are saying the same thing; the father’s role is significant for the healthy development of the family. The consequence of his role positive or as we have seen the negative over the past years, reflects in the overall condition of the nation.




Negative Results From Fatherless Families

We see around us more and more disturbing results of mass killings, teen violence, and teen suicide. Broken children are becoming broken adults. What do many of them have in common? A fatherless home, not my opinion but proven facts, let us look at some statistics.

What I am going to conclude does not in anyway lump all single families together. However, there are indisputable facts that a fatherless family is hurting both the natural family and in return society, we must acknowledge this before there can be any positive change. If you do not understand the symptom, you cannot implement the cure! Laura Ingraham a well know radio, tv political commentator, and an author has herself agreed that even though she is a single mother of adopted children, it would have been better if there was a father in the picture.

According to According to Getting Men Involved: “The Newsletter of the Bay Area Male Involvement Network, Spring 1997:
63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census
90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes
85% of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes (Source: Center for Disease Control)
80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes (Source: Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, p. 403-26, 1978.)
71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes (Source: National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools.)
75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes (Source: Rainbows for all Gods Children.)
70% of juveniles in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Special Report, Sept 1988)
85% of all youths sitting in prisons grew up in a fatherless home (Source: Fulton Co. Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. of Corrections 1992)”

“Fatherless Kids More Likely to Suffer Mental Health Problems!”

“There have been several studies finding that children from single parent homes (mostly single mother homes) are more at risk. But this is the first study (The Lancet, 25 January 2003) that covers almost an entire national population and takes into account social factors that could distort the outcome.”

Even after adjusting the data to statistically eliminate economic differences, children with single parents were still twice as likely to have psychiatric disorders, attempt suicide, and abuse alcohol, and three to four times more likely to use narcotic drugs.

These statistics are from many years ago, how much more have those numbers raised? How many of these fatherless children became mass shooters, committed suicide, or repeated the cycle of fatherless families?

According to the Bullelephant: “The one common thread among all the recent mass shooters is they are children of single of mothers. These young men had no male role models in their homes. For 50 years, our society has encouraged women to be single mothers despite all the research proving it is detrimental to a child to be born into a home without a father. Children born to single mothers are twice as likely to become delinquent. “

From the National Review,

“Harvard sociologist Robert Sampson has written that “Family structure is one of the strongest, if not the strongest, predictor of variations in urban violence across cities in the United States.”
His views are echoed by the eminent criminologists Michael Gottfredson and Travis Hirschi, who have written that “such family measures as the percentage of the population divorced, the percentage of households headed by women, and the percentage of unattached individuals in the community are among the most powerful predictors of crime rates.”

Our latest, Las Vegas mass shooter Stephen Paddock also came from a broken home. His brother recently has been arrested for child porn. Too many consequences, wouldn’t you agree?

Society teaches you do not need an intact family to raise healthy children. Statistics say differently. You cannot argue with the numbers or what you see before you!

Having an intact family consisting of one male, (father), one female, (mother), working together in a committed marriage to raise their children to have a healthy natural family; it is unnatural to raise children without both parents together.

Excerpt from an article written in The Federalist proving this very point:

According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “Fatherless children are at a dramatically greater risk of drug and alcohol abuse.” How about guns? Two of the strongest correlations with gun homicides are growing up in a fatherless household and dropping out of school, which itself is directly related to lack of an active or present father.

There’s a direct correlation between fatherless children and teen violence.

It’s no coincidence that, much like the number of fatherless children, the number of mass shootings has exploded since the 1960s. Throughout the entire 1960s, six mass shootings took place. That number doubled in 1970. Heck, 2012 alone saw more mass shootings than the sixties did.”

What is the cure; to take back the natural family? We cannot change the past; we can, however, change the future. We need to educate our leaders, our parents, and future adults. We must encourage families that it is detrimental to their children not to give them the security of an intact family. Society has made it too easy to walk away from our commitment to marriage. Laws need to change, and before you end your commitment to your marriage to your family, you must go through counseling with professionals who believe in the sanctity of marriage, and the negative results divorce brings the family. The consequences have been too high thus far.

We have reached a time in our culture where we must return what has been natural for thousands of years, to put the family back into its original order or face the extinction of the family altogether as well as society at large!


By FloNation

The Communist Agenda To Destroy The Natural Family

The following is a small portion of the communist agenda for American to bring to light their hidden directive to destroy the natural family:

Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

 Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio and TV.

.Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, and healthy.”

Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

 Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.

For years, the Socialists had been trying to get the federal government to take over all major industries and socialize the country, but this attempt at peaceful legislative reform had failed. Then suddenly, in November, 1917, these people heard that the Russian Bolsheviks had used revolutionary violence to seize power and had thereafter socialized their country overnight. This was promptly accepted by the left wing Socialists as the formula for America. They immediately determined to form a Communist party and use violent revolutionary activity to sovietize America at the earliest possible date.

The 45 goals of Communism132 were first published in the 8th edition of The Naked Communist in March 1961. They were gleaned from testimony given to Congress by various scholars and from the writings of current or former Communists. In 1963, these 45 goals were read into the Congressional Record by Albert S. Herlong, Jr., (D-Florida), and since that time, they have been shared world-wide. 133

The general thrust of the 45 goals was to attack the Judeo-Christian underpinnings that had long prospered and protected freedom, and to replace them with the bricks, mortar and top-down force of a purely socialistic society

 Disconnecting America’s institutions had to be approached surreptitiously—with excruciating patience over time as they worked to degrade the culture, break down the family, destroy rule by law, politicize judicial relief, erase traditional values, and eliminate private property ownership.

Skousen, W. Cleon. The Naked Communist: Exposing Communism and Restoring Freedom (The Naked Series Book 1) (Kindle Locations 5029-5030). Izzard Ink Publishing. Kindle Edition..

 We are seeing this coming to fruition. Communist are in the government, mental health industry, educational system, news media, the entertainment industry all aspect of society who now call themselves “progressives.” Together they are working towards a common goal to eradicate the natural family for the sole purpose of taking control of the country and destroying our constitution. Their agenda has been in the works for many years, however, to complete this, they must destroy the family institution. It is clear how crucial the traditional family is, intact; we are a danger to their objectives.

Clifton’s pieceThe “Traditional Family” is Officially Dead, concludes:

So perhaps it’s time the debate end over what constitutes a “traditional” American family. People live in families of birth and in families of choice: What matters most is having a network of love and support.

As is more and more the case, Clifton, and other liberals like him, seem to be in such celebration over the death of the traditional family that those who fit the traditional mold are left feeling isolated and perhaps illegitimate. And isn’t that antithetical to the liberal mantra of diversity and inclusion?

The success of a revolution,” V.I. Lenin 

Equating marriage with slavery. Lenin and his feminist lieutenants, particularly Alexandra Kollontai, the first female commissar in the Soviet government, considered much of what the suffragettes were fighting for, including voting rights and equal protection under the law, “bourgeois convention.”

What they had in mind was something far more radical: An all-out war on “old and outdated” institutions like marriage and family so dominance of the state could be achieved. Instead of marriage, there would be more disposable “unions of affection and comradeship.

The first salvo in the “liberation” of the family was easy divorce, established almost immediately by the Bolsheviks. Abortion on demand — until then illegal in every country in the world — came in 1920.

“The family is ceasing to be necessary either to its members or to the nation,” Kollontai wrote that year. But capitalists, she said, “are well aware that the old type of family, where a woman is a slave and where the husband is responsible for the well-being of his wife and children, is the best weapon in the struggle to stifle the desire of the working class for freedom and to weaken the revolutionary spirit of the working man and working woman.

These above statements are exactly what the communist have been striving to do here in America.

The nature family institution may be on life-support but it not officially dead, not yet there is still hope. To change this, we must educate, hold our leaders accountable and begin the mission of rebuilding the family again.


by Flo Nation 




Hello world!

We are back and bring with us is the Natural Family which is the Foundation to every successful society/culture in history.  We will bring some of that history to light on this site.  We we bring news activities and information that will help us bring the natural family back to its potential  level of influence in our local, state and national governments.  This is our vision…