Raise Your Voice, Lose Your Child
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
“He raised his voice at me, and I was frightened he was going to hurt me and the kids.”
That’s it. That’s all it takes for a man to lose his children in today’s hyper-sensitive landscape of domestic violence prevention.
This sea change can be traced to the days and months following the tragic death of Nicole Brown Simpson, when the public outcry by the domestic violence lobby moved beyond confronting actual physical altercations and began focusing on the perceived threat of violence. By casting such a wide net, centered almost entirely on male against female domestic violence, there have been unintended consequences that play themselves out in Family Court every day.
With nothing more than a woman stating, “I was frightened he might hurt us,” a court can remove a man from his home and prevent him from seeing his children for a minimum of three weeks. Often the court will also order either an anger management or a batterer’s intervention class and generally grant the demand by his ex-spouse that he have supervised visitation.
The intrusion by the courts into family dynamics has become so extreme that the domestic violence laws are no longer being used to protect potential victims, but rather to victimize potential abusers.
Let me be clear about this: in the eyes of the court, all men are considered to be potential abusers. No matter his history, if there was any provocation, or if he was in fact the abused victim. This last point is made even more interesting when considering that female-on-male domestic violence make up 50-percent of all cases, yet it is the man who is singled out as being potentially dangerous. And while as an attorney, my professional life is predicated on “innocent until proven guilty,” and “all” is a word to be carefully considered before using, I will say that due to O.J. Simpson’s horrific, inexcusable, and deadly behavior, a shadow has been cast on all men in all cases.
The courts no longer believe there is any appropriate expression of anger and, in essence, have outlawed the emotion. We have made it strategically impossible for a person to display anger in any form, whether a mental health professional would label it a “healthy expression” or not, without the line being automatically drawn to an actual act of physical violence.
But the fact is that humans have a full range of emotions. We get happy, we get sad, and yes, we get angry. And while it is absurd to think that our judicial system could legislate our happiness or sadness, it appears to gladly accept the notion that expressing anger in any fashion should have legal consequences.
In states across the country, if one parent is determined to be an “abuser”—and in California that means a raised voice—that person is no longer presumed to be a fit parent. The “victim parent” is now presumed to be a better parent and has an advantage when the court makes final determinations of child custody, visitation, and move-away plans to new cities, states, or countries.
This has created the unintended consequence of the strategic domestic violence restraining order. When one parent wants to take unfair advantage in a divorce or paternity case, all that is needed is the granting of domestic violence restraining order and the court will automatically suspend the other parent’s parental rights—usually for a short period. But to the cut-off parent, that brief time can seem like an eternity.
If the court determines that there are grounds for a permanent order, the cut-off parent may be forced to endure a 52-week batterer’s intervention course. The problem with this is that in the flimsy guidelines of what defines domestic violence these days, almost any fact pattern can be twisted to create “violence.”
For fathers who are required to have a monitor to see their children, which is becoming a more common occurrence as a requirement due to the domestic violence allegations, they may be unable to see their children. The costs of a paid monitor can quickly become prohibitive since the man will also be ordered to pay child support, often spousal support, the cost of the batterer’s intervention or anger management classes, and he has to find his own apartment since he’s been evicted from his home.
Domestic Violence Restraining Orders originally were meant to be a protective measure by the courts. But they have become a fast track process by which unscrupulous parties gain sole legal and sole physical custody of the children.
And, as is typical in “win at all cost” child custody cases, it is often the child that suffers the most. The “victim parent” strategy may yield short-term results for the accusing spouse, but the bad lessons learned by the child may last a lifetime.
Fathers who are truly guilty of domestic violence or child abuse should be viewed as criminals and treated as such. But in our rush to avoid these types of tragedies through a “zero tolerance policy,” we have gone against the most important tenet of the law: Innocent Until Proven Guilty. And the result is that we are creating and perpetuating a new type of abuse—the marginalization of fathers.
JULY 20, 2011 BY DAVID PISARRA
Fathers4Equality would like to encourage you to forward this excellent article to the following paternal-Abuse deniers.
Email: Tony.Windsor.MP@aph.gov.au
Email: senator.bob.brown@aph.gov.au
Email: R.McClelland.MP@aph.gov.au
Email: Kate.Ellis.MP@aph.gov.au
—
Discover ways of managing family discipline through authority books and management books
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.
I read all the blogs here today and in hindsight I must say. You all got sucked into this John Ramses character. He is a convicted child molester of 4 counts. He writes a good story to ‘make you believe’ what is right but the truth is not so from him. go to http://www.americandownunder.com and read from his own words how he blames everyone for his own doing and what he put that poor family through that he has now devistated. He is a scammer and a prolific lier.
[Reply]
Fatherslove Reply:
September 28th, 2011 at 3:56 am
Thank you so much ‘Truth’ for posting this about John Victor Ramses. What a looser this guy really is. To the moderator of this page and blog, I suggest that in some way you make this monster an example for trying to make something of himself in a good light when all he is, is a scumbag at best. I read his page and how he does indeed blame everyone from the judge who laid sentence on him to the lawyers and even his poor ex wife. Creeps like this feed off the fact people might feel sorry for them and you can see that in his writing very clearly as he demonstrates this. John Victor Ramses or by what other name you wish to go by , you are now facing the music and where you are justice is being served you sick person you.
[Reply]
Paw Reply:
September 28th, 2011 at 12:39 pm
I had a look at that link you supplied. Not sure what it is you want us to see.
And also, where is the evidence that he is a convicted child molester?
The other thing I do have to say is, let’s not all be too hasty in judging this guy who has blamed the judges, lawyers and his ex wife.
Heck isn’t that what we have ALL done and do!!!
Isn’t it true in just about all our cases that the dirty rotten slimy judges and lawyers do whatever the vindictive nasty ex wife wants them to do, just so they can keep the case alive and keep their money rolling in?
There are a huge number of us who are falsely accused in court or have had false police reports made, about us sexually assaulting our children.
This is the trump card the rotten women pull when they feel they may be losing their husband bashing battle.
Once they make the claim about sexual abuse, the father will not see the child/ren for at least 18 months to 2 years, if he is lucky.
It is highly likely he will never see them again.
So, knowing that many men have been charged and also imprisoned for sexually abusing their children, when they have never touched their kids, I again have to ask you, where is the evidence to back up your claims he is a child molester and how do you know he wasn’t stitched up like most fathers are?
[Reply]
Vengence Reply:
October 14th, 2011 at 12:53 pm
Its all said and done, aka John Victor Ramses real name John Michael Plattner found guilty on 4 counts was sentenced to 6.5 years no parole. The evidence was overwhelming as he not only abused one child in the United States 20 years ago but also another innocent child in Australia. There are too many who claim they are innocent of crimes but indeed, there are those such as John Michael Plattner who are guilty as sin. We can only hope he gets his in Jail from his peers. They all cry “I am innocent” when they have been caught!
[Reply]
I’m an American, living here in Oz eleven years now (the last year due to my now ex wife). The laws I see Australia pushing on the Aussies, and which affect me as a father of a daughter born in Australia, are the very same which the US courts pressed on us 20-30 years ago, and which, as a result, caused my divorce to a woman whom I loved – and she loved me.
The tactic back then was to transfer authoritative powers to children under the guise of child protection. It was bullshit from the start. Children could – and did – call the police to report thier father’s had grounded them, disciplined or just plain said NO to them. Father’s were being dropped like flies in a cloud of Raid spray. especially if they were teenagers. Especially if they were teenagers inherited from a second marriage. Her eldest son, who never left home, woke up one Sunday morning believing my house was his and ordered me out or he would call the cops. tired of it all I told him to do it. He did. They came. He was arrested and removed (thank god). But it was routine for the kids to call and report me whenever I said no to something.
Kids are given this power solely to undermine the family structure and leave a nation vulnerable. Woman are the spenders, not men. Women were granted powers as a result. Not men. Children were needed to grow up like mommy and be also dysfunctional to fill an array of other agendas. It destroyed America. That was the first step in doing so.
Now Australia’s turn. It’s big enough now, population wise.”Families Are Forever” is blasphemy to Family Courts who earn billions through family crisis and divorce and knowing a father will fight for his kids. Its just the Stolen Generation by a new name, operated by the same criminals.
The children are too naive to understand. Mothers think they have power. The entire structure is designed to ruin mothers, fathers and children collectively. We learned the heard way in the States.
I see laws being passed where ‘sneezing’ is abuse, saying ‘no’ is abuse, raising your voice is abuse, and men are always the target. The fact that mothers welcome such laws and use them as weapons demonstrates their inability to properly, maturely and responsibly raise the children alone. There is not one case I cannot argue and prove where a single mother successfully raised her children alone -with the exception of perhaps losing a husband to death, or illness. That does not demonstrate the typical single mother type.
These laws are vile, and self serving and most certainly NOT in the best interest of children nor a mother, but just the opposite. It’s all been done before. Look what happened. America was strong 20-30 years ago. It began to go down the very second these laws were installed. It was by design.
A man may plant a seed into the earth and the earth may nourish and grow a healthy fruit therefrom. But without the man continually caring and pruning and protecting the fruits it is left to grow wild, open to predictors and will rarely produce strong offspring in generations to come. The fruit needs both the man and the earth to serve equal parts in raising them up. As a child needs both father and mother to successfully raise the child. One is strong, protector, teacher, provider and one is nourishment and emotion. Both love what they produce. Females are always comparing themselves to ‘mother earth’. Yeah, we’ve seen what mother earth does lately when she has her little episodes. Tidal waves, earthquakes, extreme weather, millions is damages.. The sun on the other hand just keeps on shining….until we’ve had enough. Then we either cause an Ice Age or Solar Flare. But as far as long term stability is concerned, my money’s on the Sun.
Well.. just had to vent somewhere!
[Reply]
get a life Reply:
July 25th, 2011 at 1:41 am
@ john Victor Ramses go home yankie what would you know about Aussie women you should be thankful you are living in the best country in the world move on there is plenty of single women downunder
[Reply]
Paw Reply:
July 25th, 2011 at 2:37 am
Hold on a second ‘get a life’, JVR has as much right to post here as you do!
He is only passing on his experience with his own country, which by the way is true. I have many friends in the US who can attest to what he has said as being true.
As for you. Can I ask are you a man or a woman? And are you only here to vilify any male you disagree with?
Because there are women who do come to this blog and hide behind fake IDs and say all sorts of nasty things to try and disrupt this site.
If you are a male, then please explain further what you mean, so that we can all understand your point of view.
Yes there are many single women here in Aus, but are many of those single women the type of women men can feel safe marrying?
Going by the statistics today through the family court, I would suggest that there are single women today in Australia who pose a serious risk for any man to marry, because out of the 100% who end up in the family court, I think it’s around 88% will get full custody, the home, car and all the finances, plus the future earnings of the father for the next couple of decades.
Not a very safe option for a young man to take nowadays. The risk is huge, which is why there are so many single women out there today. Most men are becoming more wary of marrying today, because most know that they have a 50/50 chance of losing their children and everything else they own.
[Reply]
Paw, I am not Ash. I am one of the rotating moderators.
If I have assumed too much, then I sincerely apologise.
I, like many fathers, work two jobs in order to support my kids, and I get little time to do much else.
As such, I may have rushed my response to your post.
However, can I stress that we need to be clear that we view, and rightfully so, women not as our enemies, but as our allies.
I just get worried that those against us look for any comment on this blog, regardless of whether it is well meaning, as ammunition against fathers on the whole.
So, I have erred, I accept, but the point of us needing to be super careful with the words we choose stands.
This naturally includes me, and next time I will take more time before jumping to conclusions myself.
My apologies.
[Reply]
Paw Reply:
July 24th, 2011 at 12:46 am
Admin,
No problems. I am not upset by your comments/criticism. Just need to clarify my intent, because as we all know, many things can be taken the wrong way and the nasty femininsts out there who run websites that are full of man hating material, troll websites like this to get anything they can to post to their own vile toxic website.
No need to apologise either, because you make no more mistakes than I do.
That being said, I should not need to always feel I ‘have’ to butter up the women who frequent this blog, everytime I write a stinging criticism of some rotten woman/women who abuse children.
In fact, I will refuse to do that, because I don’t do it if I criticise men.
Even though there are some, and I have to disagree with you about the number of women you state, but even though there are some women here who are allays to the push by family groups here in Australia against our Communist Govt, and these evil changes to an already evil law, I still have to ask why is it that the vast majority of women in Australia are dead silent over this tragedy of human misery that is occurring here in Aus in the family court system?
There have been a lot of men/fathers crying out for 3 decades, but very few women/mothers.
Anyway, I’m glad we are on the same page and that you understand that I am not and have never tried to wage a campaign against women. I’m not interested in that sort of thing.
[Reply]
This is a great article. The sad thing is that no matter how violent, abusive, negligent os malicious a mother might be, it is extremely rare for to her been seen as such. The law might see all men as abusers, but it also is apparently incapable of seeing that women are exactly the same. As the author states, 50% of violence is female-on-male. I would suggest the actual percentage is much higher, but regardless, the courts will not prosecute violent women, instead preferring to find a way to either wipe the allegations, lessen the outcomes, or simply divert the attention to the father. Mother don’t have to say anything like “I’m scared”. I have heard magistrates put those words into mother’s mouths. “He made you feel scared, didn’t he”… a Victorian Magistrate said in a case I was watching in 2009.
[Reply]
Paw Reply:
July 23rd, 2011 at 3:50 pm
Yes Yanta, the evil and corruption runs deep among the lawyers, judges/magistrates and politicians.
They heave and squirm like morbidly obese Pigs, as they have their huge snouts buried in the trough that is filled with the swill of rotting marriages.
These, the lowest form of humanity, along with the women (and few men) who use the system to destroy innocent men/fathers and children, will all suffer the ultimate punishment on the Last Day.
Make no mistake you evil creatures, your days are numbered and all the blood and tears that are spilt by your innocent victims, have all been noted down by The Son, who is the Just Judge.
And here they come, all those who will criticise me as a Religious freak. I feel sorry for you, because you are so so lost!
[Reply]
admin Reply:
July 23rd, 2011 at 6:17 pm
Paw, given the same opportunities and circumstances, just as many men as women would abuse the system.
Its not a gender thing. Its part of the human condition.
Bad laws provide opportunity for people to misuse laws for malicious purposes. Its not women and the few men who are to blame here. Women are no different to men, and men are certainly no better than women.
It is reckless and unbalanced law that provides opportunity for misuse.
Blame the law and the politicians, but please refrain from generalising against women.
Apart from a few seriously hateful women of influence, the vast majority of women are our allies and our greatest supporters, so please give recognition where it is due. (30% of our subscribers are female, and 60% of the letters sent to Tony Windsor recently were from females). remember that point!
Also take note that over 80% of Australians support shared parenting legislation, so this clearly includes a large chunk of women.
We will however a family code straight from the archives of a police state, thanks to the likes of Julia Gillard, Robert McClelland, Tony Windsor, Rob Oakshot, Kate Ellis, Bob Brown, and the rest of the male hate brigade.
So please target your venom to these disgraceful betrayers of Australian fathers and children.
[Reply]
Paw Reply:
July 23rd, 2011 at 7:40 pm
Ash or whomever you are,
I have never as you say, made generalisations about women. Where on earth do you get that from?
I am speaking of specifics!
The specific is the facts as they exist in our country today, where the whole issue is based on gender and it is indeed women who are not only the major perpetrators, but are also the major beneficiaries of the white collar criminals who have set up this system to feather their own nests.
Please don’t even attempt to whitewash this issue and say that it is not about gender!
I disagree with little of what you say outside of the above.
As for male perps of the same crimes, we have not been discussing any issue with regard what men might do if given the same opportunities.
Nowhere in your blog have you recently put that article up on this topic. If you had, you would have found me posting in agreement and putting my views forward.
Indeed, I belong to a US based Parental Alienation support group, where the majority of members are women. These women have been abused by evil men and a system that somehow has been manipulated by these men to do whatever they wish. These women no longer see their children. I am aware of the fact that ‘evil’ shows no gender preference.
In all, AND I DO MEAN ALL, my posts to this blog site, I have always, and that is ALWAYS, paid homage to the good women out there. For you to say I have not and that I have or am engaging in some kind of anti-female campaign and targetting my “venom” at them and not others, is not only wrong, it is fatuous.
I am a staunch supporter of this site, of the women who choose to fight this evil on behalf of children, but mostly of the thousands of fathers who, like me, agonise over the loss of children they love.
But I am never going to sit silent and not publicly point the finger at rotten women/mothers, politicians, lawyers, judges or indeed rotten fathers. I have never targetted women in general.
You may disagree with that, based on several of my posts to this blog site. I may have harped on a similar theme. This is because in all the last 10 years that I have been involved in fathers and family groups, I have seen support groups for men implode and disappear to ZERO, because political correctness and women were introduced to the group. Remember F4E?
This is the point where men are told they cannot openly criticise women and if they do, they will suffer the consequences.
What you have said to me in your post, is the same things that are said to men everywhere if they make any statements about the bad behaviour of bad women.
But you, and many other men, will not say the same about anyone, women included, for publicly speaking out against the bad behaviour of bad men. You seem to protect these women, just as the nasty feminists protect their own rotten sisters. You need to allow criticism that is done in the proper manner, where names are not used and people are not vilified.
I am asking that you remain honourable. Stop protecting criminal women or their organisations. Stop attacking men like me who choose to make the hard statements about the behaviour of these criminal women.
Again I acknowledge the great women out there who choose to do the right thing post separation, or whom are supporting a push against this Communist Govt we currently have.
Please, give me a break and stop accusing me of something that is blatantly not true.
If you wish to stifle a man’s right to free speech, then by all means ban me from this blog site and I will go peacefully.
At least I state I am a man. I am not here posing as a man as some women are, and then try to do damage to this sites reputation like these women have been doing, and like they did to your past fathers group called Fathers4Equality.
Peter Peterson Reply:
March 8th, 2012 at 5:28 pm
Your a man after my own words! Most of the time we make our own beds! Then blaim others when we can’t lie in them! I like to stand back! and take in the hole picture! Stops me from putting my foot into my mouth! Well! most of the time anyway! lol! Soladarety Brothers! Be ware or the femanist pig! They stink and reek of hapocracy! If you get a chance! sabatarge their broom sticks! lol!
Great article from David Pisarra.
I only have one addition that I would like to see, is the addition to his comment: “Fathers who are truly guilty of domestic violence or child abuse should be viewed as criminals and treated as such.”
He should have put Fathers AND Mothers who are truly guilty ……….
Because indeed mothers who abuse are criminals also!
And my other statement about this issue is, I am so blown away by the number of people who post to this blog site and to other sites, bleeting out their pro-feminist statements that none of this is about gender.
That we should never say one word about the ‘bad’ women who abuse children and fathers. That we should not make public statements about these women nor point the finger at their behaviour, when we very publicly point the finger at the behaviour of bad men.
I am blown away at the double standards not only here in this blog by some posters, but also throughout all society.
It is okay to highlight the behaviour of bad men, but it is seen as an evil to highlight the behaviour of bad women.
Time to grow up peoples and start forcing criminals of either gender to take responsibility for their actions and to also do something about govts, lawyers and judges who seek to use gender based politics and laws to facilitate their lustful campaigns to make obscene amounts of money.
[Reply]