Issues
ISSUES
Historical Shift and the Impact on Checks and Balances
Over fifty years ago, the New Hampshire Supreme Court shifted the balance of power among the three branches of government, shifting authority away from of the Executive and Legislative branches to serve as the check and balance on the Judicial Branch (Supreme Court Opinion, Unification of the New Hampshire Bar, 109 N.H. 260, 1968). In it's petition to the NH Supreme Court, The NH Bar Association highlighted, "An integrated Bar will be able to publicly express the views of a majority of the lawyers of the state particularly with respect to legislation affecting the administration of justice and the practice of law. See Lathrop v. Donohue, 367 U.S. 820, 844." Once established, judicial dominance prevailed, is unchecked, while undermining both the separation of powers and accountability.
Problems of the Administrative Family Court System
Since 2005, New Hampshire has operated an oversight-free administrative family court that obviously undermines accountability. Marketed as family-friendly, it functions within the executive branch—relying on paid opinions and overriding law and constitutional rights. While it mimics a judicial process, it sacrifices rights, integrity, and transparency. The court consistently strips parents of their rights and freedom of movement, separating families without proper due process—a violation of the 150-year-old constitutional recognition of movement as a fundamental right, beginning with Paul v. Virginia (1869). Family legal service providers openly collude to fabricate cases, creating meritless long-term processes and child support contracts. The more unnecessary services imposed, the greater the financial gain. Enforcement involves interagency agreements that manipulate a sector of the population, separating parents. The three main family court agencies use severe tactics and rights removal to fulfill fabricated financial contracts, stripping parents and children of guaranteed freedoms without due process.
Profit Motive and Its Consequences
The family court’s administrative proceedings activate Title IV providers—including BCSS, DCYF, YDC, and contractors—whose focus is driven by profit and keeping relevance. This revenue-driven model prioritizes financial gain over family welfare, fueled by taxpayer-funded programs and unlimited billing for unwarranted orders and manipulated case management practices, at the expense of the NH parents and children it is supposed to serve.
The Basics: Family Court Pyramid
The Family Court Product: Human Commodities
Circuit Court l Family Division
Administrative Family Court (Enacted by Legislation)
**Administrative Family Courts Operate on Paid Preferred Opinion and Rules, not Law**
**Administrative Family Court Sole Purpose:
Enact HHS / SSA: Title IV-D Child Support Service Contracts
by Creating Written Administrative Recommendations** (Create one absent parent per case minimum)
JUDICIAL BRANCH
Created the Family Court Rules (Judicial Branch Does Not Make Law)
DEPT. of HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
Bureau of Child Support Services (BCSS) Sole Source Provider Contract Title IV-D, Title IV-A
Division of Children, Youth, and Family (DCYF) Sole Source Provider Contract Title IV-B
Youth Detention Center (YDC, Sununu Center) Sole Source Provider Contract Title IV- E
PRIVATE and STATE CONTRACTORS
Guardian ad Litems Therapist Independent Investigators State Agency Investigators Attorneys
Administrative Court Judges (Marital Masters, Referees)
Retired Judges ( Active from Retirement can only be Referees)
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS (ENFORCEMENTS)
Dept. of Transportation/DMV Sheriff Offices Fish & Game Professional Licensures
Government Passports Employers Courts Law Enforcement Counties
Banks Credit Bureaus Federal Registries Municipalities
EXECUTIVE BRANCH
TIER 1
TIER 2
TIER 3
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
The Pyramid represents a culmination of policy, process, procedures and implemented changes utilized to operate the NH Administrative Family Courts & related issues. Copyright © 2025 All Rights Reserved.
Money Movement Overview
Overlap: Contracts, Contractors and Family Legal Service Providers
ISSUE
Values: Rewards Over
Due Process Rights
-
Legislation Enabled
-
Uses Judicial Branch Rules
-
Does Not Use Due Process or Law
-
Prioritize Profit Margins
-
Prioritize Family Case Projection Pipeline
-
Prioritize Human Commodities
-
Children Centric
-
Chase Financial Incentives
-
Warehouse each case for maximum case protraction and debt creation over years
-
Create Absent Parent on Paper, to meet Title IV Grants and Incentives Requirements
-
Fabricate HHS service needs on families
ISSUE
Financial Distributions
Family Case Warehouse
-
Contracts/Contractors
-
Contracted
-
Independent
-
Keep Family In System Without Due Process or Evidence
-
Per Case Financial Pipeline Goals
-
Put Children and Family into Services on Hear Say and Case Fabrication
-
Warehouse Children
-
Cooperative Agreements
-
Unwarranted Enforcement on Artificially Contrived Family Recommendations
ISSUE
Driven by Federal Funds and Striving to be Relevant
Over 20 Years of Profit Posturing:
-
BCSS, DCYF, YDC
-
Family Legal Service Providers: Guardian ad Litems, Attorneys Therapists, Attorney Firm Investigators, Private investigators,Paid Family Visitation Centers
-
Cooperative Agreements by Executive Council
ISSUE
Administrative & Constitutional
-
Agencies Strive to Maintain Relevance
-
Enacted by Legislation
-
Constitutional Created
-
Unconstitutional Operation
-
Operates on Judicial Branch Rules NOT, Legislated Law
-
Judicial Branch Does Not Make Law
Historical Impacts
-
Unification of the New Hampshire Bar, 109 N.H. 260, 1968
-
New Hampshire Family Court is RSA 490, 1981
-
Re form of the Family Court, 490-D:1 Judicial Branch Family Division Established (HB 1322; July 1 2005)
ISSUE
Parents & Children Loss of Rights and Freedom
Family Courts:
-
Court of Deference
-
Justifies Harm with Hearsay
-
No Due Process
-
No Evidence
-
Forced on Services without Proven Need
-
Justice Denied
-
Typically Take Child from Protective and Nurturing Parent
-
Put Children in Abusive Control Scenarios
-
Deny Harm Happening to Children and Parents
-
Blame Parents and Children
-
Take Freedoms w/o Due Process
ISSUE
Independent Family Service
Providers
Driven by:
-
Federal Funds
-
Unlimited Billing Opportunity
-
Long-Term Billing Options
-
Unnecessary Social Services
-
Family Therapy Providers
-
Unwarranted Investigations
-
Unauthorized Access to Communications
-
Parents Must Pay to Get Back Rights Taken without Due Process
-
Maintaining Self-Importance
-
Easy Money
ISSUE
Income Potential Targets
Pro Financial Pipeline
Parents and Children are Captive and Have No Meaningful Recourse in this Power Dynamic
-
Financial Projection of Parents and Children per case (Human Commodity)
Primary Goals
-
On Paper: Create One Absent Parent
-
Create HHS Agency Needs
-
Unwarranted Mandates
-
Withhold Children
-
Separate Children if Possible
-
Push as Many Services and Hearings as Possible
Case Financial Goal
-
Use Age of Youngest Child as Maximum Financial Projection Point
ISSUE
Banking on Partisan Politics on a Nonpartisan Issue
-
Best Interest Standard Absent and Intentionally Subjective
-
Family Court Unchecked Discretion
-
Operate on NHJB Created Rules, Not Law
-
NH Rule 2.2, 2.1
-
Missing Transparency of Family Court Providers
-
25 Years w/o Public Audit
-
Generate Money for State
-
Generate Money for Financial Stakeholders
-
Ignore Taxpayer Liability for Family Court Misconduct
VOTER ACTION ITEM
Our NH Families and Our State Needs HB652 to Pass in 2026 Because...
The Administrative Family Court is Operated on NH Judicial Branch Rules, Not Law. Unregulated Sharing of Private Information Among Contractors allow Collaboration to Create a Narrative for Each Family that Benefits the Stakeholder Financial Interest, Not the Best Interest of Children and Parents. This Impacts Both Taxpayers and Families if it is Allowed to Continue to Accumulate Harm. Passing HB652 Will Stop the Accumulation of Victims.