Archive for November, 2011
Australian Parliament Rolls Back Children’s Rights to Their Dad
Attorney General - repealed children's rights to their dad.
The long-anticipated roll-back of children’s rights in Australia has happened. The Australian Parliament has passed the bill aimed at scuttling the 2006 amendments to the Family Law Act that promised children greater access to their fathers.
The Howard government’s modest attempt at making shared parenting the rule in Australia was met with a firestorm of protest from anti-father forces across the country. Lacking any comprehensive data for their claim, they nevertheless argued that the 2006 reforms endangered children. That of course was premised on the notion that fathers are uniquely harmful to children. The fact that, in Australia as in the United States, mothers commit more abuse and neglect of children than do fathers is a concept the anti-dad crowd preferred to ignore. They shouted to the skies their narrative of paternal violence, irrespective of known science.
Court makes remarkable Apology to Malicious Mother who poisoned children against their Father
Editor: The below article is about a disgraceful act by Australia’s Family Law Courts, to completely destroy any shred of child protection provisions left in Australia’s Family Law act, by making an unprecedented apology to a malicious mother who has alienation her children against their father.
This is the Court, at its highest levels, over-turning a sitting Magistrates decision and rewarding a Mother who has engaged in Parental Alienation to an extreme degree, for no apparent legally justified reason.
You have to seriously ask why the Family Law act was amended by the Gillard Labor government recently when the Judiciary has already interpreted out any provisions designed to promote a child’s meaningful relationship with both parents.
Another Bridge Protest Against Disgraceful Child Custody laws
A un-named man who was charged over a risky protest against Australia’s Child Custody laws on Brisbane’s Story Bridge, has walked free from court on bail.
Police sought to have bail conditions imposed on the 31-year-old Ormeau man, who was charged with performing an unregulated high risk activity, but the request was denied.
Lawyers acting for the man said he had made his point through the high-profile protest against Australia’s discriminatory child custody laws, however he did not intend to repeat the activity.
The man was bailed to appear again in court on December 19.
According to statements made by the man, a father of 3 who has spend over $88,000 to gain visitation to his children, his protest was against the Australian Family Law Courts and their complete disregard for the rights of children.
Shared care dead as mother stands firm on no access
A QUEENSLAND father has been banned from having any contact with his five-year-old daughter until she reaches 18 after the Family Court accepted that the child’s mother would “destroy” the relationship rather than agree to shared care.
In a decision that suggests the “shared care” law introduced by the Howard government was effectively dead, a full bench of the Family Court said “the mother would ignore any order for contact” and, as a result, it was pointless to order her to co-operate.
Shared care of children after divorce was a policy goal of the previous government, but the law is now being rolled back, with key changes to the Family Law Act (1975) passing through the Senate this week.
Under the old law, mothers were sent to prison or lost custody of children when they refused to allow them to have contact with their father. While this is still possible, the full bench of the court has now said that in some cases there is nothing it can do.
The full bench ruled on the matter after a father, known as Mr Summerby, appealed against a 90-page judgment by a Brisbane federal magistrate, Keith Wilson, which effectively ended his relationship with his daughter.
Mr Wilson agreed that the loss of the girl’s relationship with her father “would be distressful in the short term and may also be emotionally damaging to her in the long term”.
Labor’s Male-Hate anti-Family Law amendments become LAW
Knowingly false allegations of child abuse will now become a legitimate reason to deny children any contact with their father in the event of separation, under controversial new laws passed by parliament today.
The government has made changes to family laws compelling family law courts to consider all allegations of family violence, even irrational, malicious and knowingly dishonest allegations.
The law rolls back reforms made under the Howard government that encouraged shared parenting responsibilities.
The legislation also aims to change the definition of family violence and abuse under the act to include a host of alleged behaviours, that are now to be determined by what the alleged victim claims to have feared, rather than what occurred, was witnessed or can be proven.
It will allow the court to deny contact, in most cases with the children’s father, based on nothing more than a claim that the mother “fears” abuse, whether or not there is any history of abuse, or whether any threatening behaviour occurred or is likely to occur.
‘Hate Male’ laws an international epidemic – Israel is no exception
Jerusalem, Israel — November 21, 2011 …. A civil protest took place in Tel Aviv, Israel on November 8, 2011 against Family Court Judge Rivka Mekayes’ participation in an Israel bar’s conference on the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Rivka Mekayes is described by many divorced fathers in Israel as being perhaps the most notorious, gender biased family Court Judge in Israel responsible for disengaging fathers from children and thousands of parental alienation cases, created by herself, as she believes that women’s independence means sole custody of children with mothers.
Mekayes was scheduled to speak at the Israel bar on November 8, 2011 on the children’s rights during divorce.
This is “too late and too crooked”, said the Coalition for the Children and Family in Israel and Fathers 4 Justice Israel, fighting for fathers’ and childrens’ rights. It is most ironic for this Judge in Israel to lecture on Implementing Child Participation in Family Court Proceedings”.
Michael Flood – when equality becomes the new enemy of Feminism
Well known for unethical behaviour
Editor: I just want to preface this excellent article with our own experience with Michael Flood. He has on a previous occasion mis-represented himself as a separated father in order to unethically and fraudulently gain access to our resources that we had struggled to make available for the benefit of distressed fathers.
He then proceeded to misuse these facilities and send out offensive letters in the name of Fathers4Equality to every member of the Australian federal parliament, in an effort to discredit and undermine our efforts and reputation.
We conclusively tracked down this misuse of our facilities to Michael Flood, at his campus office at James Cook University. We then contacted him and confronted him with this misuse of such important resources for separated and distressed fathers.
He initially denied and refuted his involvement in these bizarre actions, but in the face of overwhelming evidence he finally accepted that it was his actions, and his alone, and he apologized for these unethical acts.
It actually beggars belief that this man is supposed to be an impartial professional researcher in this very important field of gender equality, and yet he has behaved in a way more akin to a professional fraudster.
It goes without saying that anything you hear or read from Michael Flood should be seriously questioned, if his history of deception and fraud is anything to go by.
Pregnant women continue to smoke & drink, study shows
Editor: The relevance of the below article to the topic of this blog, for those who may not see the connection, is to emphasise the unfortunate circumstances in this country where an enormous amount of resources are being targeted against an entire gender (men), in the name of preventing child abuse, while the most prevalent abusers of children (being single mothers, as represented by all Crime Reporting bodies in Australia), are being effectively ignored and in many cases encouraged.
If one was to take a results-based appraisal of all the forms of child abuse in this country, including abortion, paternity fraud, substance abuse during pregnancy, child abductions, child neglect, parental alienation, denial of contact with father, relocation away from father, and all other forms of abuse, then one can only conclude that there is something fundamentally wrong with Australia’s action against child abuse, which is selective at best, but at worst is simply an illusion of protection that in truth protects the vast majority of child abuse culprits by ignorance, complicity, and government support.
Take our Poll:
Should it be illegal for pregnant women to drink or smoke?
- Yes, a child's health should be the only consideration (58%, 42 Votes)
- No, a woman has the right to choose herself (32%, 23 Votes)
- I am not certain. Both children and women have equal rights (10%, 8 Votes)
Total Voters: 73
Loading ...Article Start: WEALTHY, older women are most likely to drink during pregnancy while poorer, young mums-to-be have the highest rates of smoking.
Despite repeated health warnings, nearly 40 per cent of pregnant women drink alcohol and 18 per cent light up, an Australian Institute of Family Studies report says.
A Stunning Family Betrayal: UK children to be denied right to see their divorced father
UK PM - betraying children
Fathers and grandparents will not be given any legal right to see children after a break-up, under the biggest changes to family law in the UK in a generation.
In what was immediately denounced as a ‘betrayal’ of the family, a major report today rules against giving men shared or equal time with their children when a relationship ends. It suggests fathers will even be denied the legal right to maintain a ‘meaningful relationship’ with their families, as this ‘would do more harm than good’.
UK PM - betraying children
The review also kicks into touch Coalition pledges to make it easier to maintain contact with grandchildren when parents separate, a problem that usually affects those on the father’s side.
The long-awaited Family Justice Review was branded a ‘monstrous sham’ that undermines David Cameron’s pledge to lead the most family-friendly government in history.
The independent report was commissioned by ministers to examine the case for reform of a family law system repeatedly accused of putting rights of mothers over those of fathers and grandparents.
But its proposals – likely to form the basis of future government family policy – sparked an immediate Cabinet revolt.
Judicial Fraud and Entrenched Discrimination: Labor Govt stays silent on Serious Allegations
Serious Allegations of Judicial Fraud unanswered
It has now been over 5 years since Australia’s High Court delivered a stunning judgment in the Magill v Magill paternity fraud case in Australia, effectively creating two remarkable precedents in terms of the perpetuation of fraud in this country.
According to Anti Paternity Fraud Advocate Cheryl King, “Paternity fraud was effectively endorsed by Australia’s highest court, the High Court, denying the plaintiff Mr Liam Magill any legal recourse against the woman who fraudulently deceived both Mr Magill and two of his three children into believing that he was their father.”
King further stated that “this deception continued even after separation, involving financial fraud which the Court deemed as not required to be re-paid”.
King alleges that in the second, another type of fraud was exercised by one of the presiding judges, Justice Susan Crennan.
