In Chess Psycholoyg: The Will to Win, William Stewart recommends playing the Stonewall Attack as white. This recommendation is one of a set of openings that are very similar and are therefore suitable for player's who don't want to memorise a lot of opening theory. (The other openings are the French Defence against 1. e4, and the Schallopp Variation of the Slav Defence against 1. d4.)
For the Stonewall Attack, Stewart describes the classical structure (1. d4 d5 2. e3 Nf6 3. Bd3 c6 4. f4 Nbd7 5. Nbd2 e6 6. Ngf3 Bd6 7. 0-0 0-0 8. Ne5 ...), how to play against 2. ... c5 (e.g. 1. d4 d5 2. e3 c5 3. c3 Nc6 4. dxc5 e5 5. b4 a5 5. Bb5), how to play against an early 2. ... Bf5 or 3. ... Bf5 (e.g. 1. d4 d5 2. e3 Bf5 3. c4 ...), and he recommends adapting to the King's Indian Defence with a Zukertort set-up (e.g. 1. d4 Nf6 2. e3 g6 3. Nf2 Bg7 4. b3 d6 5. Bb2 0-0 6. Be2 Nbd7 ...).
What is missing, since the book is not intended as an opening handbook, is what to play after 1. d4 f5. Is it best to continue the normal Stonewall set-up or is it better to deviate, like in the case of the King's Indian Defence? (The best response may even be a totally different anti-Dutch approach, but that's a different question.)