While Family Courts favour of the Rights of the Parents to have equal access to the children, over the Rights of the Child we will continue to see children abused physically and emotionally.
Many Courts also insist parents attend mediation sessions before any Hearing in the Family Court. While a useful tool it becomes a wasted effort where one or both parents are still fighting after many, many years of separation or divorce.
One reason for the bitterness through the Court might be as a result of one parent’s attempt to protect the children from further abuse, after experiencing abuse that led to the marriage breakdown.
The children become the victims of the Family Law, continuing to suffer abuse in all forms.
The rights of the child should become the priority, followed by the rights of the parents to have access.
Twenty years ago, the Convention on the Rights of the Child became the first legally binding international treaty to affirm human rights for all children.
Australia has ratified this convention but is yet to legislate and bring it into Australian law.
A document I recommend is; Melinda Jones; Faculty of Law University of NSW, called Myths and Facts on the rights of the child in Australia; http://www.aifs.gov.au/conferences/aifs6/jones.html describes many of the false and unreasoned arguments causing delays.
Children in Australia continue to suffer. After 13 years since the Review (1997-2010), little progress appears to have been made.
A Community Advocate, I was recently involved trying to have a Child Protection Order put in place to protect a young family.
The mother’s request had been refused. I took the matter up. The outcome was:
• The Child Protection department refused to impose an Order to pre-empt abuse.
• When the children returned, complaining of abuse and showing evidence.
• Child Protection was contacted to investigate the abuse.
• The request for an Order and investigation was refused, despite evidence of abuse.
• Instead asked, “Are the children safe in the care of the fulltime parent”. Told yes the department refused to take action, stating it would close the file.

continued

The children had contacted the Children’s Helpline before access saying they did not want to go on the access visit and gave their reasons. The response: Advised to contact the Helpline when they returned from the holidays.
They did and during the lodgement of their complaint they said they might not have enough money on the phone and it might run out before they completed their complaint. They had given their name and telephone number, yet the Helpline did not return the call despite being told they were running out of money and despite advising Helpline of the abuse.
Speaking with a police officer on another matter, I expressed my disgust at the lack of interest and failure of Child Protection to act.
He asked had I been in contact with SOCA. I asked what this was and was told that this was a unit set up to investigate claims of sexual and other abuse. When I asked wasn't it part of child Protection he told me that it wasn't. It was part of the Police Department.
This raises an interesting question.
If child Protection was unable or unwilling to do anything, then why did it not refer me to the SOCA UNIT?
I asked an investigation to be undertaken, as I would lodge the complaint as the mother had been refused any help. The Unit contacted me, then the mother; interviewed the children and an investigation is in now process.
The law needs amending so that children are no longer treated as property of the marriage, but as individuals with the same rights as any other citizen. Australia, although it has ratified the Convention of the Rights of the Child, it is dragging its feet legislating these rights.
Another case involved a homeless youth under eighteen who has been many years seeking help, pushed from pillar to post without help, and contacted the Crisis line. Depressed and suicidal, he sought help from the Crisis Line. Asked whether he had attempted suicide before. When he replied no, they told him they could not help. What sort of help is this!

Severin, my preference has always been for shared care arrangements. In our case it became very difficult because my ex chose to leave the area. Our son's living with me most of the time was at my ex's request. We are currently making changes so that our son spend's more time with his mum. I've also made it clear that I'd be Ok with a change in residency if it's agreed by the adults involved that it's in his best interests (and we have an external counselor involved).

There was a time when I considered my son to be in harms way living most of the time with his mother but I think that's passed now. The harm was primarily from a lack of boundaries and a child that did not cope with that.

Shared care does add some disruption but I suspect that the impacts of that issue are overplayed by the maternal bias crowd. The benefits of time out to the parents well being and emotional state don't seem to rate much mention.

I get the impression that much of the debate is about stereotyping the worst of the other side and trying to fit the stereotypes to all opponents.

We all know that there are men who don't do hands on parenting but that does not mean that all or most men wanting shared care after separation are the same group. There will be some overlap, property settlement and CSA will ensure that but my guess is that for every man wanting more care on that basis there is a woman somewhere doing the same.

I really don't want this thread to become another debate about feminist conspiracies, that tends to polarize debate along predictable lines with little benefit to anyone.

R0bert

R0bert:"Shared care does add some disruption but I suspect that the impacts of that issue are overplayed by the maternal bias crowd. The benefits of time out to the parents well being and emotional state don't seem to rate much mention."

In my experience, for young children the disruption is minimal and can be easily managed, but it can become an issue as the children get older. now that my daughter is in high school, her social activities have become more extensive, especially "sleepovers", which I feel are best supervised by her mother, rather than me. Whether we like it or not, a single man is not regarded as an appropriate chaperone for teenage girls by most people.

When combined with other factors, such as the more "feminine' environment provided by her mother, the lesser standard of discipline that her mother enforces and so on, she tends to spend more time at Mum's these days than with me. My son, OTOH, for precisely the same reasons, tends to spend more time with me.

What is most important, I believe, is to allow these situations to evolve as naturally as possible, so that the kids do not feel pressured by their parents. Cooperation between the parents is essential, although a close relationship is not. I deliberately maintain a "no contact" policy with my ex, which evolved as a self-protective strategy during the nasty court-going days before her legal aid ran out. We communicate via email and the occasional short conversation when our paths unavoidably intersect.

Another vital factor is the absence of any external pressures that distort the relationship between parents. The CSA has been an extremely destabilising influence which I hold principally responsible for the conflict early on. Any scheme that rewards one parent for keeping the kids from the other parent is a disgrace and I have to commend the Howard govt for getting rid of it.

One further factor in ensuring cooperation is that she now works full-time. Less time on her hands means less aggravation for me and some appreciation for sharing the burden.

Antiseptic is correct when saying that, for the most part, the disruption to young children's lives is a little less upsetting than that of teenagers after marriage breakup.

Teenagers will want to continue their social lives despite where mum and dad live!
However, we should never under-estimate the effect that a parents marriage breakdown has on young adolescent teenagers.

Just as they are beginning to think about the other sex, and relationships, and their own rapidly changing bodies etc, these teenagers then have to come to terms with the relationship breakdown of the two people they love most in the world.

For my siblings and I, we were all wary of relationships and having children. Of the four of us (now in our forties) there are only two grandchildren for our parents!

However, you can't spend the rest of your lives blaming your parents for everything.
Now I have my own daughter, I understand them so much better.

R0bert

Apologies for not returning to this thread sooner. I really appreciate your info regarding arrangement with your son, I understand that this is personal but I do have a clearer picture.

What I would really like to know is more general - how you feel about the current 50/50 legislation in the situations where parents do not get along and children are at risk? From what I understand children have been placed with abusive parents simply to comply with this rule. I think this is what Barbara Biggs was getting at. Blaming which gender inflicts the most abuse does not solve problems - clearly both genders may be at fault. Which is why children's requests must be considered along with investigation into parents' suitability. There is no magic answer with such an emotionally loaded issue, for example, where one partner feels loss of control when denied custody - where custody is perceived more as a competition than one of the best outcome for children.