Archive for February, 2012
Where Good Men Don’t Count: The Dire Repercussions of Ignoring Men’s Welfare – Story Bridge Murder/Suicide
In another case reflecting the lack of support experienced by separated fathers in this country, many Australians are now questioning the wisdom of Australia’s family support services which have focussed almost exclusively on the welfare and support of women, while ignoring  the needs men, resulting in a culture of vilification that has driven some men over the edge, with dire consequences for the innocent children of separated families.
IT WAS dark outside when Danielle Lees woke and reached for her mobile phone. It had only been hours since she last saw him, but something made her dial her husband to see if everything was OK.
By the time the call connected with Jason Lees’ mobile, both he and their son, Brad, were already dead.
Danielle, a psychologist, had been staying with her parents on the Gold Coast.
Neighbours say the couple appeared to have separated, but Jason, a teacher at Brisbane’s “Churchie” and a former rugby union referee, drove to meet her for lunch on Sunday.
He left again for home in the afternoon, taking Brad with him – the two-year-old attended his school’s kindergarten.
It was about 2am when Jason strapped Brad into the car, loaded his bike and drove from their Seven Hills home in suburban Brisbane to Kangaroo Point.
Rudd or Gillard – Who would your prefer as Australia’s Prime Minister? – Vote Now
He is incredibly hard to work with, has few friends in cabinet, swears a lot, is a persistent leaker and visits topless bars.
She is repeatedly dishonest, has an anti-male, super-feminist reform agenda, breaks agreements whenever it suits her, betrays leaders at a whim, is despised by the majority of Australians and has never been voted in as Prime Minister by the Australian people.
Two bad apples and its hard to choose between them, but here is your chance to tell us who the public prefers as Prime Minister, Gillard or Rudd.
Who would your prefer as Australia's Prime Minister?
- Kevin Rudd (94%, 430 Votes)
- Julia Gillard (6%, 26 Votes)
Total Voters: 456
Loading ...
Rudd v Gillard Divorce as Ugly as Labor’s 2011 Family Law Amendments
In true Labor style, the bitter and ugly dispute between Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard is tearing away at the very fabric of the Labor government family in Australia.
In true poetic fashion, this ruckus is playing out exactly as the Family Law (Family Violence) amendment act 2011 has destined for the majority of separating fathers and mothers in this country, with one parent losing everything, while the other enjoying the complete spoils of the gains that were earned together. Although perhaps in this case not for very long.
For the uninitiated, I am referring to Labor’s dead-of-night repealing of Australia’s 2006 Shared Parenting laws in November 2011, a law that was implemented in 2006 to ensure a child’s right of meaningful contact with both parents in the event of divorce, except in circumstances where child abuse was a reasonable fear.
–Poll – have your say, who would you prefer as Australia’s Prime Minister?–Vote Below
Invitation to join the Non-Custodial Parents Party (Equal Parenting).
If you would be interested in joining the Australian Non-Custodial Parents (Equal Parenting) party, would you please fill in the attached membership form.
Membership is free (as usual).
Our web-site is:Â http://www.equalparenting.org.au/ and our membership form can be downloaded from:Â http://www.equalparenting.org.au/membership-2/
Could you either then:Â 1. Â Scan the signed copy of the membership form and email it to me
or 2.  Fax a signed copy to me on (02) 4226 3510.
or   3.  Mail a signed copy to me at PO Box 57, THIRROUL. NSW. 2515.
As noted above, membership is free. Â Other family members and friends may be also interested in joining the Party.
There’s no such thing as a good divorce: but biased SMH Journalist beats the same drum
Editor: The following study is quite interesting, but in some of its finding is quite out-of-step with almost all previous studies.
The author of this article, Adele Horin, also puts an odd twist to this particular study, and I suspect creates a misleading impression, especially in the closing, that sole parenting is the optimal arrangement for children of divorce, even when the divorce is amicable, which is in fact quite contrary to what the Amato study found.
This is not surprising given the well-worn path of previous articles by Horin, who seems to obsess along the same lines, repeatedly, which I suspect says a lot more about Horin’s personal ideology than it actually says about the research itself.
In any case, one should more accurately interpret this study as suggesting, contrary to the foundation of the current family law act (2011), and in direct opposition to the shrill of many women’s rights advocates, that “conflict” during divorce does not impact children anywhere near the extent that the actual divorce does, nor the resulting loss of one parent. As such, conflictual divorces should play a lesser role in determining whether Shared Parenting should be provided for in the event of divorce, as divorce and sole custody are the two most significant stressors that children face, even in the face of benign and often temporary conflict.
ABS Releases Gender Indicators and Ignores Male Disadvantage
Today the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), Australia’s so-called impartial statistical body released its Gender Indicators report: “a summary of gender specific data in six domains representing Economic security, Education, Health, Work and family balance, Safety and justice, and Democracy, governance and citizenship”.
The ABS produced a media release about the publication. This release could have noted that:
- Across the board males fare much worse than females in the education system – most notably being 24% less likely to be enrolled in a bachelor degree or above
- Across the board males fare much worse than females in the health arena – most notably suffering death rates from cancer, heart disease, suicide, motor vehicle accidents and drug abuse between 1.6 and 3.4 times higher
Women bark, Men bite. The Apologist View of Child Murder
Editor: The below article is another piece of fanciful writing from a well-known journalist from the Sydney Morning Herald, Adele Horin, who can always be relied upon to creatively re-interpret the facts to absolve females of the same crimes that men are vilified for.
This insulting commentary on the automatic culpability of men in cases of child murder, even when the murderer is the mother, and the ”acceptability” of the murder of children, when committed by the mother, is a sad indictment on the extent that these feminist ideologues go to to sanitise all female mis-conduct, even at the expense of the best interests of children.
Horin relies upon a small sample of Child Murders, and selective interpretations of the reasons behind these murders, to paint a Mother’s murder of a child as an almost Saint-Like endeavour, worthy of praise, not condemnation.
But of course she does not afford men anything like the same type of sympathy, because Fathers after-all only murder children for selfish reasons.
New Bill to add Non-Discrimination Provision to Child Custody Law
SALT LAKE CITY-USA — Julie Anderson gulped back tears to explain to state lawmakers why they need to amend Utah’s child custody statute.
The Andersons believe had their son, Jared, had been awarded custody of his 3-year-old daughter Aubree Jo, the child would not have died in a car accident with her impaired mother behind the wheel. Toxicology tests found Oxycontin and marijuana in Brandi Stilke’s system when the single-car accident occurred on Feb. 23, 2011, in Harrisville.
“If we had been a bit more diligent, perhaps, it wouldn’t have happened,” Anderson told members of House Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Standing Committee Tuesday afternoon.
Anderson testified on behalf of HB88, which would add to Utah’s divorce statute a statement that the court may not discriminate against a parent based on age, race, color, national origin, religious preference or gender.
Parental Alienation Epidemic in Australian Family Law Courts, Expert finds
Editor Note: The premise that the Julia Gillard-lead Labor Government relied upon to substantially alter the 2006 Family Law (Shared Parental Responsibility) act, and in the process remove penalties against Perjury and Knowingly False Allegations, as well as removing the Friendly Parent provision (otherwise known as the Anti-Parental Alienation provision), was the insistence, as claimed by various womens’ rights zealouts like Michael Flood and Jen McIntosh,  that False Allegations and Parental Alienation were effectively a Myth, and did not occur at all (or only seldomly occurred) in any Australian Family Law proceedings.
This naive, incorrect and in many regards disingenuous claim has been slammed by many family law professionals, including Judges and Magistrates, who claim that the bulk of the work of all jurisdictions dealing with family law proceedings today are spent on just that, dealing with False Allegations, relating to Domestic Abuse and Child Sexual Abuse, and attempting to serve the best interests of children who have been significantly alienated from their parent, due to the ulterior motives of the other parent.
