Editor: The author has asked to remain anonymous.
In New Hampshire, family courts have outwardly been a two-decade battleground between parents and the legislature—those striving to restore due process and accountability, while others are committed to continuing an irretrievably broken system. Unsurprisingly, meaningful corrective provisions for due process, appeals, and redress options are notably absent in family court, parents are forced into the tribunal. Meanwhile, the legislators who help uphold this profitable system interfere with reform and prevent the enterprise from being dissolved. HB652 will instill a fair system of due process while helping cut state expenses. This is a crisis of a national scale where state actors profit from their position and associations.
Parents and their children are driven into financial ruin and subjected to damaging restrictions that weaken or sever their natural parent-child relationship, all to fabricate predictable outcomes and profits for state actors. All states are validating the scope of potential fraud filtering through the family courts and the considerable damages caused.
AZ Senator Mark Finchem recently told The Center Square, “The only people that are being served by the system are the people that are lining their pockets by raiding the wealth of the family that is supposed to be going into raising the child.”
Since 2022, Representative JD Bernardy has recognized the critical importance of reform and is leading the push to pass NH’s HB652 in 2026. “It is our duty to restore constitutional due process and integrity to our state for the people,” he said. Every legislature should uphold the right to a jury trial before children and parents are deprived of their rights. An administrative judge lacks both the accountability and the authority to make such decisions. We should never rely on the arbitrary recommendation of a disgruntled administrator or ever allow the predictable financial gains on a fabricated case to run their course for years until the children age out. This is equivalent to warehousing families for the personal benefit of others.
NH’s administrative family court system was enacted through legislation and can only be repealed through legislative action. This entity is a self-governing administrative system where subjective rules and preferred opinions are applied, rather than laws and evidence. The U.S. Supreme Court decisions—Loper Bright v. Raimondo, Corner Post v. Board of Governors, and SEC v. Jarkesy—exposed the limitations of administrative court tribunals that were implemented to deal with technical or scientific case matters. If applied to people, basic logic could predict the unimaginable harm. Parents and children have been left unprotected from the administrative court contracts and contractors, without any viable means of recourse.
Bernardy stated, “When I hear grandstanding about appeals, I see it as a superficial and hollow assertion, since there isn’t any guaranteed due process upon entering family court.” An appeal is a costly and time-consuming process that drains parents of their finances and assets—often amounting to tens of thousands of dollars or more—only after they’ve already exhausted resources in family court. The system thrives on constructing a case profile tailored to specific funding criteria. And after throwing around the veneer of appeals in name only, stakeholders verbally blame the family for the resulting fabricated circumstances that arise.
When agencies like BCSS, DCYF, and YDC have their own court and a broad network of independent family legal service employees, the purpose of the separation of powers and integrity has disintegrated—at the expense of families. NH Representative JD Bernardy asks, “What is the one thing these three entities have in common?” He answers, “The family court.”
This enterprise style system seeks to secure child support funding under Title IV-D by designating at least one parent as the absent parent—despite both parents being fully involved. It also forces one parent into a child support contract, using access to the children as leverage, whether the family wants it or not. This deprives both of precious childhood years as time ticks away. Similar fabricated case processes are used for BCSS, DCYF, and YDC.
In fall 2024, after two years of hearings within a narrowing scope, the ‘CFL special committee’ under the leadership of Rep. Mark Pearson failed to produce a meaningful family court report. Instead, opting to perpetuate a sense of normalcy, rendering unremarkable conclusions lacking in merit while allowing the committee to use derogatory terms, such as “babies”, “idiots”, and “dummies”, to describe parents who speak out against the system.
In the regular CFL committee, Pearson appears to frequently present himself as an authority figure, yet his expertise is fundamentally tied to his personal interests and his roles on the Health and Human Services and Children and Family Law committees. In a recent display of striking irony and clear tone-deafness, the Children and Family Law (CFL) Committee continued to tout their expertise and grandeur, as if their words can hide the fact that they are fully aware of the family court business model, its operation, and the prevailing harm, but have chosen to continue the status quo bureaucracy.
Since 2022, CFL legislators have wasted approximately 206 hours and 15 minutes in committee hearings and sessions, neglecting their fundamental duty to serve the people who elected them. Instead of taking meaningful action to repeal harmful laws or craft legislation that genuinely benefits parents and children, they have remained complacent. Interestingly, some members possess extensive experience in leveraging grants and incentives, with their personal businesses connected to family law, mediation, and therapy. The CFL Committee has proudly acknowledged that they have been hearing these same complaints for 20 years. This boast reflects poorly on their purpose, as they have failed to take meaningful action on behalf of the people and appear intent on perpetuating the harm and bureaucratic delays.
The NH family courts’ custodians know how to exploit families for profit, reducing parents and children to mere commodities. For decades, a consistent group of legislators and lobbyists has advanced the business model for the family court agenda, under the guise of justice and compassion for children. Now, with HB652 on the House floor January 7, 2026, your local legislator’s vote will reveal their true allegiance: public servant or complicit accomplice.
Family court survivors continue to emerge, many now as adults. Recognizing the volume of families harmed and the oppressive nature of the data, Bernardy, “It’s unconscionable! This is not a partisan issue, nor is the system salvageable.” “Any system that claims to prioritize families ‘best interest’ should actually prioritize the family, not commoditize them.” “Families spend years in administrative courts without discernible cause.”
Bernardy continued, “To put this into perspective, about 80% of all NH family cases settle amicably without ever appearing in the courtroom.” The remaining 20% are adversely affected by this process each year. That is a minimum of 6,000 parents and children or 18,000 cases, who are harmed per year. “This affects families of all income levels and demographics, challenging the very flawed notions of what constitutes family needs.” He emphasized, “The process is largely fabricated, void of truth and imposed on unsuspecting families who do not realize it’s not a court of law.” Like most administrative systems, it profits from expanding services even if unjustified. If parents resist, they can face retaliatory actions.
Parents consistently report patterns of systemic behaviors—such as unwarranted surveillance, unauthorized access to communications, unnecessary services and other disruptive tactics—appearing to intentionally create chaos to destabilize and isolate family members. Complaints describe a process that employs coercive tactics that strip away rights, freedom of movement and resources without due process, using access to children as leverage.
While family court stakeholders focus on their relevance and resources, parents refer to their children, time, family and community relationships as their most valuable resources. Representative Bernardy has become the leading advocate for the nation’s first bill calling for a comprehensive dismantling of the administrative tribunal system handling family legal matters. He asserts, “The administrative courts were intended for specialized technical matters and have always been ill-suited for any family legal matters.”
“Any system that overrides individual protections and constitutional guarantees is not a system of justice. This should never have been normalized as acceptable in NH. When justice is bypassed, it is justice denied for parents, children and our communities,” Bernardy asserted. This isn’t just harming the parents and children; this unchecked enterprise is harming the state.
Authors’ opinions are their own and may not represent those of Grok Media, LLC, GraniteGrok.com, its sponsors, readers, authors, or advertisers.
Got Something to Say, We Want to Hear It. Comment or submit Op-Eds to steve@granitegrok.com
We need your donations to keep truly independent New Hampshire-based media alive. Our operating costs are up and we need your help and support. Please note that we are not a non-profit, we are an LLC, so while your donations are not tax-deductible, THEY ARE ANONYMOUS.
