Malicious Mothers now targeting Grandparents against Shared Parenting
Life Insurance Quotes - Get Life Insurance Now, Fast Efficient and Reliable. Protect your children's tomorrow by preparing for their interests today. Life Insurance Quotes Australia
THE Family Court is “creating a new stolen generation” by placing children with their estranged grandparents.
An angry Adelaide mother claims federal laws eroded the rights of parents and favoured grandparents, who had the time and money to fight long, expensive legal battles.
She said the system left children as young as four at the mercy of neglectful older relatives, risking their psychological wellbeing.
“The family law system is driven by money and if you cannot afford it, then you have no hope of justice,” she said. “Why should any mother be forced to give their child to a person they do not trust to keep them safe?”
In 2000, the Howard government changed the Family Law Act (1975) to emphasise “shared parenting” of children. Amendments gave grandparents the right to seek overnight, partial or total custody of a child.
Parents are required to leave children at “contact centres”, monitored by social workers, so a relationship can develop with the grandparents.
Those who refuse risk jail and appealing against a Family Court decision costs in excess of $6000.
This month, a grandfather was given access to his dead son’s daughter – a child he had not seen since the day she was born. His application was granted despite the objections of the girl’s mother.
That decision has prompted another mother – who cannot be identified – to speak out. “The court is creating a new stolen generation due to the forcible removal of children from their parents,” she said.
“Why are children as young as four being forced away from their parents in confusion?”
She has written to federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland, asking that he change the law so grandparents cannot seek custody until children turn 12.
“The law as it stands gives a grandparent power and control over a parent’s life,” she said. “At a time a person should be raising their child, they are consumed with fighting to prevent parenting orders being given to a stranger.”
SA Law Society president Ralph Bonig said imposing age restrictions would harm, not help, children.
A spokesman for Mr McClelland said the Federal Government was “confident” the system “adequately” catered for the individual circumstances of each case.
- Sean Fewster
- From:The Advertiser
- January 28, 2011
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
you too Zac
[Reply]
I just read Olivers statement above, I don’t think charging for time with the kids in any circumstance is relevant, relevant to the wellbeing of the kids should not be based on what you get out of it, it should be what the kids get out of it, if it benefits them, it should happen provided it doesnt interfere with the wellbeing of the other family members.
Money chooses motivations that blind folk
[Reply]
This site is against accountability of Public Offices:
This site does not like any publications that might inform others of how to cause Public Officials of the Law (Police, Judges, Magi’s and the like) to be accountable for their wrongful misbehaviours.
Craig it sounds like what youi had: misrepresentation of a power they do not have and/or abuse of the power they do have by misrepresentation of the power they do have.
Prays (by PET IT ION) to the Parliament of your State, Territory or the Commonwealth is the last course of action regarding Public Office misbehaviours.
Prior to that are Ethics Committees and complaint procedures available on the web site of the Public Office you are wishing to complain about.
So who moderates this site to conceal Public Official wrongs maybe we need to look into their behaviour and position in the Government.
[Reply]
Carol (Craigs Fiance) Reply:
February 4th, 2011 at 1:21 am
Thanks again Ian
[Reply]
She has written to federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland, asking that he change the law so grandparents cannot seek custody until children turn 12.
This statement shows how fearful some mothers are that they might lose control over their children if a good or honest person is allowed to interact with a child under 12.
Children over 12 often have their own ideas formulated from the mothers poison hence the need to prevent the relationship from being established in the first place.
Our 13 yr old daughter is an example of this.
[Reply]
Carol (Craigs Fiance) Reply:
February 4th, 2011 at 1:37 am
exactly Ian, and i’m not going to make them go back next time they insist on staying, geez the 14 year old turns 15 tomorrow, and the 13 year old didnt want to go back this time, ‘m over this crap, i’m over the trauma it causes them, they only ge one shot, and like i said before, thank you ad zac and others here, I have learnt so much…… I used to drive by a sign on Henry Lawson Drive Sydney, it was on a bridge, it said F4E.com.au then Fathers for Equality in bold writing, I drove past it a hundred times at least, then one day I decided to look it up, and here I am, the sign isnt there anymore, but I wonder who among us placed that sign there, I would like to thank them too !!!!!!
[Reply]
Carol (Craigs Fiance) Reply:
February 4th, 2011 at 2:04 am
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/8206393/zahras-stepmum-married-seven-times
[Reply]
there was not court orders, sorry for the typo
[Reply]
Craig Reply:
February 1st, 2011 at 2:02 am
ok 3rd time lucky,
no court orders on any level, kids want to stay with me
twice state police took them from me
hope that simplifies the issue, sorry
[Reply]
Craig Reply:
February 1st, 2011 at 2:03 am
oh they took them on supposed recovery orders by the local court
[Reply]
That Spt was preset because I asked for DOCS or some community welfare representative to atted because my girls were so traumatised, so they got him there, now i know why. So we got scammed huh…………. Wonder what recourse is available for that action.
[Reply]
Ian Mack Reply:
February 1st, 2011 at 2:43 am
A complaint to The Police Conduct Unit (Complaints and Compliments) of the Ethical Standards Department is the Order of the day Craig.
They can be contacted at Level 2 Tower 4, 637 Flinders Street Docklands 3008, or by telephoning 1300 363 101, or facsimile 9247 3498 or by email at – ethical.standards@police.vic.gov.au
Or follow this link: http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content.asp?Document_ID=11933
Now what I am working on is: you are claiming there was no Recovery Order by the Local Court and the Officer in Charge on that day attended to assure you an Order was being sought or obtained.
Did you save their Business Card and the Cards of the other initiating Officers who attended?
If you go down this track you will need to prove your case like you are in the Court or they could charge you with filling a false complaint.
You are putting Police Officers under review for their duty, behavior and actions you will be challenged with boots and all, so make sure you have your facts straight before you go gung ho.
Names, dates and witnesses are your best friends in this sort of issue.
[Reply]
Ian Mack Reply:
February 3rd, 2011 at 7:14 pm
Ian Mack Reply:Your comment is awaiting moderation.
February 1st, 2011 at 2:43 am
A complaint to The Police Conduct Unit (Complaints and Compliments) of the Ethical Standards Department is the Order of the day Craig.
They can be contacted at Level 2 Tower 4, 637 Flinders Street Docklands 3008, or by telephoning 1300 363 101, or facsimile 9247 3498 or by email at –
[Reply]
Ian Mack Reply:
February 3rd, 2011 at 7:14 pm
email at – ethical.standards@police.vic.gov.au
Or follow this link: http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content.asp?Document_ID=11933
[Reply]
Ian Mack Reply:
February 3rd, 2011 at 7:16 pm
Ian Mack Reply:Your comment is awaiting moderation.
February 3rd, 2011 at 7:14 pm
email at – ethical. standards @ police.vic.gov.au
Or follow this link: http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content.asp?Document_ID=11933
[Reply]
Ian Mack Reply:
February 3rd, 2011 at 7:18 pm
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
February 1st, 2011 at 2:43 am
Now what I am working on is: you are claiming there was no Recovery Order by the Local Court and the Officer in Charge on that day attended to assure you an Order was being sought or obtained.
Did you save their Business Card and the Cards of the other initiating Officers who attended?
If you go down this track you will need to prove your case like you are in the Court or they could charge you with filling a false complaint.
You are putting Police Officers under review for their duty, behavior and actions you will be challenged with boots and all, so make sure you have your facts straight before you go gung ho.
Names, dates and witnesses are your best friends in this sort of issue.
zac Reply:
February 4th, 2011 at 10:28 am
I think Craig needs NSW police ethical standards Ian.
Carol, it’s a disturbing story about the murdered Australian girl’s U.S. step-mom that you posted. …..I have a mate who escaped NSW after his ex smashed her car into his when he said they were finished (police attended NO charges), she said she had cancer (false), threatened suicide, alienated their son from his dad and only last week threatened him via voicemail that his business would be ruined when she drags the property settlement out for two years. This voicemail was a breach of an AVO. My mate sent a brilliant ‘last chance’ reply which has stopped the rot for now.
As one longtime police sergeant in child protection said to me once, “People do some horrible things to each other.”
Craig Reply:
February 5th, 2011 at 1:22 pm
Ian im just a nobody who knows little, but when i’m done sorting out my mess, and the kids are more settled, i hope in some small way i can help you acheive what you are doing
This is nothing new, a malicious mum will act like a lioness towards the paternal grandparents and the kids will more than likely pick up on this..mine did after their mother shunned my ‘career teacher’ parents, whom my children love. My parents felt obligued to engage a lawyer and spent a total of $40k solely because of the ex’s lies.
[Reply]
Ian Mack Reply:
January 30th, 2011 at 8:27 pm
Was there ever a costs application submitted by your parents?
Until the AG gets section 117AB of the Family Law Act revoked if they can prove your ex made false statements (lied) to the Court like in affidavits then the Court is required to make an Order that your ex pay that least some of your parents cost.
Why do woman lie in Court so often and judges encourage them to do it? Because most men will not seek costs against the ex for her lies (false statements).
[Reply]
joe Reply:
January 31st, 2011 at 10:19 am
Ian, women lie because the FCA will not punish a mother(typically) that makes a spurious ‘notification’ of ‘alleged’ child abuse…Child protectors are worried that reporters will not come forward if there is too much scrutiny of their claims, so they protect TO THE HILT the notifier…this must change…unscrupulous mothers have been riding this wave for many years, you know this, i know it and child protectors know it..AT LEAST 20% of notifications of child sexual abuse are deemed to be false reports associated with custody battles according to former Victoria Police SOCAU (Sexual Offenders and Child Abuse Unit) member (Det. Sgt.)…
Yesterday, our new premier, Ted Ballieu, has announced a $1.5m enquiry into child protection in Victoria, returnable this November. I hope that people can speak up about the false notifications and help to quash a good 20% of notifications overnight…we wish.
Remember Ian, my ex simply said that our 10 yo daughter informed HER (an Allied Health professional/ Bioethicist) of molestation by me. My darling 10 yo (now 15) told me that she knew that her mother ‘made up’ a report (affidavit) she escaped her lying mother but was escorted back to her by police, only to self harm at her mother’s house twice within two weeks after being refused a visit to my house…So then my ex blamed me for our daughter’s self harm..source FOI CAMHs (Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service)
Will Premier Ballieu’s inquiry improve the lot of children in custody battles in the future? Let us hope so. It should be the job of Government to instruct the courts to deal with perpetrators of FALSE NOTIFICATIONS as this has created an expense which is not only monetary, the problem ITSELF puts children’s lives at risk…my daughter being one.
[Reply]
Ian Mack Reply:
February 1st, 2011 at 2:46 am
Was there ever a costs application submitted by your parents?
And when did this occur?
Please answer what I have asked or have to believe you are talking a load of crap.
joe Reply:
February 1st, 2011 at 11:06 am
No Ian, My parents have never lodged a costs application against my ex-wife, they are too dignified and non vindictive. This is despite them both hearing my ex on speaker phone trying to minimise her three day old (child molestation) ‘first’ affidavit as not meaning to read that way, “It’s not sexual abuse!”, she said..as my daughter was trying to arrange for me to rescue her from her lying mother.
We don’t all have fighting blood like you do Ian.. there’s got to be some peaceful living and would a costs application and more tension be in the “best interests of the children” now 15& 11. I don’t think so…
.and none of this is ‘CRAP’,as you intimate, there are files at Vicpol, CAMHs, DHS, CASA, CAFS, Relationships Aust, Centacare, WRISC, ICL(Legal Aide),schools and G.P’s clinic supporting all these FACTS so that should be enough to make it real. It’s also my ongoing nightmare which has been going on for four years!
I never claimed Family tax benefit for the 2 Girls that spent half their time with me until recently. The time frame is over 2 years. Their Mother claimed it. I was accused of rorting the system. I will now let Centrelink know about the balance of my care, I never had money as a motivation, and I still don’t, I will not however allow manipulation of others to perceive I did wrong, I will let the government know how often those Girls were in my care, and the truth will be know to all. The result will be not that I was guilty of fraud, the result will be others will be aware, including my Daughters, that I was not guilty of the character assinations, the Family will know, the friends will know, and the tables will be turned.
[Reply]
zac Reply:
January 30th, 2011 at 10:28 am
Craig, you can claim your % share of FTB backdated to the time that the orders were made…it’s your entitlement…it’s yours.
It’s the CSA who would even things up if she claims that you’re not contributing (or the girls are ‘refusing’) or that you’re “rorting” when you are clearly not…so take your money until someone tells you that you must hand it on. Cheers..Be cool.
[Reply]
I had my two younger Girls take off me by police using a recovery order before a order was made, months later I have 50% care and the Mother has allowed just a smidgeon of more time with me. The Eldest lives with me. The reasons for taking them off me were I was abusive. The contradictions here are not rocket science.
I am going to appeal on the grouds my Gilrs want to live with me and are old enough and the original recovery orders were not legal (unless someone can prove otherwise).
Any imput on this decision would be apprecitated, I would prefer not to be engaged in negative outcomes, but more optional ideas, thank you !
[Reply]
zac Reply:
January 30th, 2011 at 10:19 am
Craig, For your girls and to save money, I would be telling them (the default FCA judges) that they are welcome at your place anytime and that they should come over whenever they want to.. and you would much prefer spending real money on them than giving it to a lawyer/ court. I still feel ill at the $70,000 I paid to lawyers.
I am puzzled that your daughters were removed before a recovery order was made,,seems like grounds to lock the police out of your house…I don’t think that it is a crime to support your daughters wishes(when contrary to the orders) and to teach them to use their voices. Save your money and be patient, I say.
[Reply]
Ian Mack Reply:
January 30th, 2011 at 8:21 pm
I am puzzled too if the police were State Police. They have no jurisdiction in regard to Family Court Orders until a Recovery Order is made, it sounds like they played a bluff on you and you fell for their criminal agenda of supporting the mother with total lack of care for the children.
Only Federal Police can attempt to cause Family Court Orders to be complied with and even then they have no power of entry or retrieval unless you say they can come into your home. If the children are crying and saying they don’t want to go then they normally will not take them without an Recovery Order of the Court.
The fact the police heard the child say they do not want go to mum or they want to stay with dad is admissible evidence in the Court.
Anytime police attend for any reason you must get their details (usually their Business Card with their badge number on it), if they don’t want to give it then there is something they are not doing or doing that could cause them issues later.
Remember:
IO, AVO and the like family violence Orders are State Police jurisdiction only.
Family and Federal Court Orders are Federal Police jurisdiction only.
And the two don’t cross without an Order or request from the Court.
[Reply]
Craig Reply:
January 31st, 2011 at 1:47 am
Thanks Ian and Zac, firstly, there were no orders at all ZILCH ZERO , there was no court hearing, nothing, on a local state or federal level. When it got to local court, the judge fell for the mothers story, i wasn’t able to say jack shit, the judge said “it doesnt matter what I do here, I’m going to upset someone” that was the second judge that day, as it was adjourned and handed to another courtroom, the first judge was suggesting he didnt like the recovery at all, then the second judge took them off me for two months, then Familyu law court allowed (with the mothers blessing) every second weekend and half holidays, federal law court allowed me without the mothers blessing 50 %
Craig Reply:
January 31st, 2011 at 1:51 am
Superintendant Macquarie Fields Police was present, and it is noted in Family law court
zac Reply:
January 31st, 2011 at 10:40 am
The Supt. was present because he knew that his troops had erred. I’d be writing him a letter Craig saying not to disturb your peace again until their paper work is correct.
Craig Reply:
February 1st, 2011 at 1:48 am
ok Guys Ian and Zac especially but anyone and Females are encouraged here to reply, my understanding is now looking a little closer is, you dont realise there was any court orders in place before the Girls were recovered from me by state police, this happened on two occassions………………. please help me to understand the implications of this, considering the Girls did not want to go and, I now have FLC orders allowing me 50% time with them.
zac Reply:
February 1st, 2011 at 11:19 am
In that case a police ‘welfare check’ would determine whether the children were happy(safe warm and fed) and content to be with their father and maybe an inquisitive cop would ask (age appropriately) why they didn’t want to return to their mother.
If you don’t enjoy 50% you could make a recovery order application, but they are useless if your 13yo+ children have learnt to vote with their feet. All the best.
If I remember the cost were about $3,000 per party on the day for each day or part day of hearing plus the cost of transcript of about $2,000 per day of transcript plus about $3,000 per party in ledal pretrial costs and about $3-5,000 for the Appeal Books was it not if lawyers were used for other than the publishing of the Appeal Books.
Plus the Courts fees which depend on the Court and your $’s available.
This to me for an Appeal of a 1 day final hearing =’s about $17,000 for a 1 day Appeal of a 1 day Final Hearing if you have money to win the Appeal.
[Reply]
joe Reply:
February 1st, 2011 at 11:49 am
If I had a spare 17k I would have a week in Paris. FCA judges and Family Lawyers get to Paris, on FCA combatant’s money.
[Reply]
brezza Reply:
February 17th, 2011 at 1:55 pm
How come Legal Aid does extend funding for the poorer party? So the rich wins. My ex is taking me to final court hearing costing her 45k and I have been denied funding because have reached my cap of 12k already with Legal Aid. It all came down the family report which was a load of biased rubbish. Seems have choice but to use what money I have to get consent orders drawn up which are not what I want.
[Reply]
Good to see there is probably another good Judicial Officer out there who see’s through the bluff and bulling of woman who should not have the sole care of a child.
As I understand it, the laws for Grandparents were put there because so many mother’s who knew they were doing wrong by their children were refusing to let the father’s parents spend any time with the children.
I am reminded of the matter, I believe Mushin punished Newspapers for publishing.
That is the matter where a Family Court judge in Perth returned a child to a mother who was a drug addict and her boyfriend was prosecuted for child pornography.
When the Grandparents in Tasmania won principal care of the child, Mushin went on the War Path because the wishes of the mother went out the door dsue to Public Interest in the matter.
Maybe we need more Newspaper Reporting of Family Court Final Judgements and the Reports veiw of the judicial determination. no laws stopping it, only “Judicial Abuse of Power” to close an open hearing to Reporters.
The welfare of the children have rarely been shown to me as the primary focus of the Family Court and more often than not, only when dad has the $’s to say the children come first, NOT MUM.
Can this Judicial Officer be cited?
There is no law preventing the citation of the judiciary only parties and their children.
So who is this Judicial Officer?
Although I have said what I have said, I say it with tongue in cheek because my ex’s mother was 1 of those Grandmother’s from hell you sometimes hear about.
We must keep an open mind to whether or not the Grandparents were doing this to replace their children who have now left home or as per the requirements of the law of “the Best Interests of the Child” must prevail.
I would suggest to the mother she heal her rift with the Grandparents, nurture a good loving relationship with the child and Grandparents then when provable seek 50/50 care if practicable in about a year’s time.
In answer to the mother’s question “Why should any mother be forced to give their child to a person they do not trust to keep them safe?â€Â
For the reasons similar to why so many father’s are forced to give up their children to unsafe mother’s.
The evidence to prove the mother is unsafe is not available to the Court.
In this instance the evidence was available for the Court to say the mother was an unsafe parent for the primary care of the child or the Court would not have gone against the mother’s wishes.
Mother’s, as a rule, do not need to prove the father is not a safe parent for the mother to take primary care only those challenging the child’s safety in the mother’s care must have proper evidence in support of the mother is other than safe.
Look at the cases where the child was sent to foster and other care because the father proved the mother was unsafe for the child.
Can we find who this Judicial Officer is and or their published “Reasons for Judgmentâ€Â.
Maybe there is some case law there that we father’s can rely on for more fair findings in our matters and give this Judicial Officer a pat on the back if warranted.
[Reply]
“…appealing against a Family Court decision costs in excess of $6000.”
It seems a zero might have dropped off this figure. It would cost $6000 just for the security for costs application to be heard.
If one overcomes this financial & status quo hurdle expect to pay the other party & ICL costs when Dad inevitably loses the appeal.
This is a serious problem with the FCA where discretionary power becomes absolute, with inevitable abuse, without effective redress of appeal.
[Reply]
…I was expecting the classic finishing quote from this mother, being:
“If the grandparents want to see MY child, they should be paying me.”
I think when you remove all the hubris from this story, its simply comes back down to money for the single mother.
After all, why should someone get the enjoyment of YOUR property, without you being paid for the privilege? :-/
[Reply]
What a load of crap !
[Reply]
Craig Reply:
February 1st, 2011 at 1:27 am
the above “what a load of crap was set by my Fiance Carol, I am not worried or ashamed or bothered by her comments, but I it is important, as we seemed to be dogged by stalking and bugging and people seem to know things going on in our house that are not said outside, that it is important I mention who said what……….. call that paranoia…….call it what you like………… I call it belated wisdom
[Reply]