This is the bigger picture.

The male brain is different to the female brain and the law has a huge job trying to work around that reality.

Domestic Violence and Family law as it relates to property are two separate matters.

Frank's first mistake was to use violence against Sri no matter how lazy and conniving she may be.

His second mistake was to order her out of the house when they have a child. The rights of the child to enjoy a violence free environment and a home take precedence over Frank's needs.

Frank's ability to convince a Family Court of the contributions each has made to the acquisition of joint property and the issue of custody of their child will determine what share of the property he will retain.

Frank should learn that violence does not pay

I was so pleased when I read the summary comments but the article seemed to be something different.

It talked about a situation where the physical violence was initiated by the male. From what I've heard there are enough situations around where men who have not initiated abuse suffered a similar fate.

It did not address one of the biggest consequences of misuse of DV laws - isolating a father from his children to establish a pattern of care. It reinforced a stereotype that all men care about is the money.

At no stage stage did the article demonstrate that a woman who had made similar choices would not be in the same situation.

The article talked about a situation where one party appears to have deliberately set out to create a situation, I suspect that in most cases it's more about good initial intentions but when things go bad one party finds themselves with some tools not available to the other party to gain the children, revenge, assets and an income stream.

The summary suggests that we need a radical rework of DV laws but does not give any suggestion regarding how we might do that to both protect against abusive partners and to stop DV laws being misused by the unscrupulous.

Roger suggests that in regard to violence against men - Australia says nothing. Almost true but what Australia mostly says is "she's probably smaller than you so is unlikely to hurt you. Get over it."
Possible an even worse message.

R0bert

I do not agree with violence in any form. But, I would suggest that this scenario is repeated many times over, I personally know of two such situations where the female from overseas has come into Australia got what she wanted, and taken the male to the cleaners. The males have been left with almost nothing and in both cases the female has been able to stay in the marital property.

I would suggest to all males "beware".

It could be argued that a man could apply the same laws to a woman who carries out “domestic violence” on the man.

But what would be the outcome.

A man phones the police and reports the domestic violence from the woman. The man is likely to get divorced, after which he is likely to lose nearly all contact with his children and only be allowed to see his children every second weekend. He will likely lose the house and have nowhere to live. He will also have to pay the woman over half of his assets, and also have to pay the woman a monthly sum (called child support) without any say in how the money is spent.

A woman phones the police and reports the domestic violence from the man. The man is likely to get divorced, after which he is likely to lose nearly all contact with his children and only be allowed to see his children every second weekend. He will likely lose the house and have nowhere to live. He will also have to pay the woman over half of his assets, and also have to pay the woman a monthly sum (called child support) without any say in how the money is spent.

Same outcome no matter who calls the police.

Modern feminism has nothing to do with equality.

Modern feminism is about power, money and the abduction of children from their fathers.

Perhaps Frank should have got to know this woman before marrying her and perhaps she should have done the same. Maybe Frank was looking for the stereo typical submissive Asian wife and perhaps she was looking for the stereotypical Weston husband sugar daddy. Maybe they both lied to each other. I find it hard to believe that Frank is as nice as this article portrays as I find it hard to believe that a marriage breakdown is all one person’s fault. If Frank did not want to have a child with this woman he should either refrained from having had sex with her, had a vasectomy or at the very least worn a condom. Simple. People like Frank should take some personal responsibility and blaming every-body else. Don’t want a violence order – don’t be violent. Assault is assault – whether inflicted by a person known to victim or a complete stranger. It is just so sad that a child has been conceived in such an obviously troubled relationship. Perhaps Frank should get some counselling for his problems and stop blaming them on the laws that protect all of us.