Family Law Event
One Rule for Politicians, another rule for Separated Fathers
Extract: Unless you have been living under a rock, you would be well acquainted with the saga of Australian Labor MP Craig Thomson, whom Fair Work Australia has recently found to have misused his Union credit cards to pay for the services of prostitutes, amongst other misuses of union funds.
In the Australian legal system, people are supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, however the evidence against Mr Thomson is by most standards overwhelming. Fair Work Australia has found a striking coincidence between the use of the credit cards in Mr Thomson’s possession, at least one signature on the brothel credit card dockets, phone calls between Mr Thomson and the brothel, and a number of other highly suspect pieces of evidence that in my opinion would be highly unlikely to lead to any other conclusion, other than that Mr Thomson himself actively sought and paid for these services, with union funds.
According to Prime Minister Julia Gillard, politicians SHOULD HAVE a presumption of innocence, even if the facts of their guilt are overwhelming. As such she has steadfastly defended Mr Thomson, claiming that she thought he was innocent and that she would not expel him from the party. In response to media pressure and the prevailing community belief that the evidence stands on its own, she finally relented and expelled him from the Labor party, while still claiming he was innocent, and still accepting his vote in Parliament. The thinking behind this is obvious, as Gillard is acting in her own self interest, damn the ethics at play. But any way you play it, Mr Thomson has received remarkable leniency in this sorry saga, even having his legal fees in defence of these allegations paid for by the Labor party.
However, as many Australian fathers would be well aware by now, Julia Gillard is quite selective as to how she applies the principle of a presumption of innocence.
As in abundantly clear from Gillard’s recent Family Violence amendments to the Family Law act, she believes that even though Craig Thomson should be presumed innocent, should keep his job and should receive hundreds of thousands of dollars in free legal funds to fight his case in Court , separated fathers however do not get such privileges, and in fact should be considered the ‘HAVE NOTS’ in application of the principle of a presumption of innocence.
Not only do separated fathers lose their house, the majority of their life insurance and all other assets, but in most cases, as presumably intended by these amendments, they lose meaningful contact with their children, even if they are completely innocent of any wrongdoing. They are also in many cases prevented from accessing Legal Aid, and certainly never get their legal fees paid for by an organisation for apparently no reason.
Read the full article on Ezine4males.com
Tony Abbott, a Conviction Politician with a Blind Spot for Fathers
EXTRACT
Not since the Constitutional crisis of 1975, when an elected Australian Prime Minister was spectacularly sacked by the very same Governor General that Labor itself appointed, has a Labor-led government limped from one self-inflicted crisis to another, in such monotonous repetition, as it does today.
For many reading the papers of the last few days, one would be forgiven for the misconception that Labor’s woes began with Julia Gillard’s broken promise on the Carbon tax, or her lack of political judgment on the asylum seeker situation, or even her political assassination of a first term Labor Prime Minister.
In fact the seeds of Labor’s demise were sown well before Julia Gillard even became Prime Minister……….back to when Kevin Rudd as Prime Minister blinked on the carbon Tax mark I, while Opposition leader Tony Abbott, who many thought was on a hiding to nothing given public opinion at the time, kept his eyes wide open.
……..For a politician openly reviled by the ugly underbelly of many of Australia’s liberal/feminist organisations, one cannot deny that Tony Abbott has shown tremendous courage in staring down an at-the-time popular policy put forward by an at-the-time popular Prime Minister, and the outcome has left almost everyone surprised, except perhaps for Tony Abbott.
However, as a man and as a father, I must add that my opinion on Tony Abbott as a politician of conviction does not find favour in one select community within Australia, that being the ever growing list of separated fathers who have little or no contact with their children post-divorce.
Jake Roberts exclusively for Ezine4Males
Read Full Article at: Ezine4Males
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.
Help for Penrith fathers going through divorce or separation
FOR almost 40 years, Barry Williams has helped Australian families through the murky waters of divorce and separation.
The national president and founder of Lone Fathers Association of Australia (LFAA) became the first father under the Family Law Act of 1975 to win custody of his four small children after his wife walked out on the family.
In those days, no support was available to single fathers, so Mr Williams staged a hunger strike at Parliament House for five days.
The then prime minister, Malcolm Fraser, agreed to meet him and ended up changing the single mother’s benefit to the single parent’s benefit.
Mr Williams and his organisation have been championing single parents’ rights ever since.
Placing Children in harms way: Labor’s Family Law Fiasco
Most people by now would have heard the commonly-peddled Julia Gillard-Labor party claim that Australia’s current Child Custody family laws are in urgent need of amendment in order to protect vulnerable children from child abuse.
“Putting children’s safety first” is one of numerous newspaper headlines blindly towing this line, resulting in a growing perception that the existing 2006 Shared Parental Responsibility laws had openned the floodgates to rampant child abuse, in the guise of Shared Parenting arrangements.
According to one prominent Green, child abuse is “gendered”, and presumably as a result children should be denied contact with men, especially separated fathers, as a matter of policy. The fact that these same Greens support Gay (male) adoption makes one wonder how a political party that wants to be taken seriously can bring itself to support two completely incompatible policies when it comes to the safety of children.
The federal Attorney General, Robert McClelland, has himself been relentless in his portrayal of the 2006 Shared Parenting amendments as being detrimental to women, and he has vowed to change these laws in order to protect “women and children” from fathers.
Strangely, McClelland has vowed to do this by removing the penalties for false allegations and perjury in the Family Court, and by effectively dismantling measures designed to encourage co-operation between divorcing parents.
Labor Red-Faced as Parents rush to Shared Parenting
Tanya Plibersek - well earned reputation for her anti-male beliefs
Research published by the Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS) has shown that more children from separated families are now spending time with both parents than in the past.
The finding has been claimed as evidence that changes to shared care arrangements under the family law system were working.
Attorney-General, Robert McClelland said among new cases registered with the Child Support Agency each year, the proportion with a shared or near shared care-time arrangement increased from 9 per cent to 17 over five years.
Mr McClelland said that in addition, a survey of 10,000 parents who had been separated after the reforms for an average of 15 months found 16 per cent had a shared care arrangement.
However in a extra-ordinary statement that conflicts with the relentless efforts by Labor over the past two years, the Attorney General stated that: “The Government strongly supports shared care arrangements when it’s in the best interests of children”.
This is despite McClelland being at the fore of the complete roll-back of the 2006 Shared Parenting reforms, to the point where separated fathers will be prevented from having any meaningful contact with their children at all.
A father’s day gift from Labor and the Greens: increased Fatherlessness
Press Release: 2nd September, 2011
Virtually every major social pathology has been linked to fatherlessness: violent crime, drug and alcohol abuse, truancy, teen pregnancy, suicide – all correlate more strongly to fatherlessness than to any other single factor.
The majority of prisoners, juvenile detention inmates, high school dropouts, pregnant teenagers, adolescent murderers and rapists all come from fatherless homes. The connection is so strong that controlling for fatherlessness erases the relationships between race and crime and between low income and crime.
Many commentators, including the British Prime Minister, David Cameron, have laid the blame for the recent UK riots at least partially on the fact that many of the rioters were raised in homes without their fathers present.
The Gillard Labor Government Encouraging Extortion in Family Law
MEDIA RELEASE: The Gillard Labor Government supports extortion and single parent families.
A Bill called the Family Law Legislation Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2011 is currently before Parliament.
The Bill has recently received the support of the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee. The Senate Committee’s Report on the Bill was tabled in theSenate on Monday 22 August 2011 ( Hansard page 74 ).
There are two (2) parts to the Bill.
Labor Greens -Shared Parenting Rollback- creating a fatherless society
Media Release: Labor Greens ‘Shared Parenting Rollback’ creating a fatherless society
Monday 22 August 2011 at 6.30 pm, the Labor Green’s controlled Senate Legal & Constitutional Affairs Committee released their report on the ‘Shared Parenting Rollback’ Bill 2011 www.aph.gov.au/senate . The Green’s member, Rachel Siewert said, “ The Greens have consistently opposed the equal shared parenting responsibility legislation ” brought into law in 2006.
Warwick Marsh, Dads4Kids Fatherhood Foundation, said, “ The Senate report and the Green’s comments show what is driving this shocking new anti-child and anti-father legislation. Never before have major changes to Family Law been enacted on any other than bipartisan agreement between the major parties. This proposed legislation is opposed by the Opposition, and rightly so, because it removes the very wise friendly-parent provision, redefines family violence to mean anything anybody wants it to be, and removes any possible penalties for perjury and false accusation in the Family Law Court.
Senate Committee divided over shared parenting rollback
Press Release for immediate release: Senate Committee divided over shared parenting rollback
The Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee yesterday approved changes to family law legislation that will remove even more fathers from their children’s lives.
The Committee divided down party lines. Coalition members submitted a minority report rejecting the changes, but the Labor controlled committee agreed with the much broader definition of domestic violence, the removal of penalties for knowingly making false allegations and the requirement for parents to be supportive of each other’s role in their children’s lives, as contained in the Attorney General’s new Family Law Amendment (Family violence) Bill 2010. The Greens went further, suggesting the removal of shared parental responsibility provisions, previously known as ‘guardianship’ arrangements, illustrating their total disregard for fathers and our traditional family structure.
