“Father’s rights campaigners also claim that allegations are raised by women in the Family Court simply because they want to deny separated fathers access to their children. They allege that women routinely make “false allegations” of domestic violence, that accusations of child abuse are in “epidemic” proportions, and that women are just as violent as men.”

Exactly why are these claims wrong? Prove that they are wrong. Be brave.

“Barry Williams from the Lone Fathers Association has stated that “official statistics on family violence ... used by the Family Court, academia, law societies and other professional bodies, are incorrect”.

What are the correct figures? Show some courage and post some statistics that you have the courage to stand behind. Be careful, look at what happened to Dr Floods reputation when he was economical with the truth.

“ Obviously, the experts are not producing the results that the father’s rights campaigners want to see”

Yes, they are, you just won’t read about it in this article.

I’m one of those people who thinks that Family Courts do have a bias against dads. I need to see good solid arguments why I may be wrong. This article was based on two hand-picked case studies and a bunch of aspersions about fathers groups that the author didn’t have the guts to back up with solid arguments, explanations or statistics. The author has adopted a small target strategy, making as few specific claims as possible. To win the debate, she needs to take these fathers groups on with rational arguments and specific claims.Have a crack, see how you go.

We will never get past the sexuality-based arguments as long as the Family Law Act and the Family Courts give absolute paramountcy to parent's rights and give so little importance to children's rights. The children's rights to be protected from abuse and exploitaion must be given paramountcy in the law and the Courts, as must their right to have their views and wishes seriously considered. The presumption that having continued contact with both parents after separation and regardless of how toxic and dangerous a parent may be, is grossly irresponsible and false. The Tasmanian case and so many others nationwide, illustrate these points perfectly.
The label of Borderline Personality Disorder cannot be ascribed to anyone except by a qualified and experienced psychiatrist who would advisedly and in accordance with standards of ethical professional conduct, have carried out a very thorough and careful assessment of the individual over a period of at least six months before making such a diagnosis, bearing in mind the very serious impact such a diagnosis will have on that person's life. Any other person who makes such an assertion is making a slanderous statement and without such an assessment the label has neither validity nor utility. Courts should therefore rule such allegations as inadmissible.

Houellebecq,

I agree with you. In our society womens problems are medicalized while mens are criminalized. Witness mens versus womens incareration rates. If women suffer greater mental illness than men then why do men kill themselves so much more often? Women have long achieved equal rights but are a long way from equal responsibility.

As for the author, she obviously has issues with men. Perhaps her ex isn't paying her the money she feels 'entitled' to.

'One answer may be because there has been a long-standing vociferous accusation against the Family Court by campaigners of fathers’ rights that there is a “bias” against fathers.'

Isn't there an issue that needs to be addressed before we examine these effect of these accusations of bias on the Court - that is, the changes made to Family Law under the Howard government that require the Court to make Shared Parenting Orders, wherever possible?

This was an obvious victory for the fathers' rights advocates - this recent case shows that the victory has been at the expense of children.

The Author makes some gaint leaps of logic as she tries to spin the stats. The simple fact of the matter is 70% of cases are decided in favour of the mother. So when Women rightly talk about a wage bias, however when you look into the facts women tend to work less hours then Men. Therefore nothing to worry about.

"95-96 per cent do not end up in the Family Court. That also means that the accusations that the Family Court is biased against “fathers” in general cannot be accurate, "

Or most women who are sexually assulted don't report it, therefor women like being raped.

Clearly not true, There are reasons why Women don't report rape maybe ther could there be reasons why fathers don't go to court?

I think this Author has a bias, do you?

This opinion is full of anecdotes, anecdotes, and more anecdotes...the reality is that it is easy to cherry pick a convenient example to support a point of view. Andrea Yates is no poster child for the mother's movement either.

Anyhow, someone asked for facts, so I dug some up, albeit using the most recent information from the US on child abuse and neglect (see: http://www.nis4.org which is The Fourth National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect conducted by the US Department of Health and Human Services and endorsed by 18 major organizations on child welfare). Data were collected over a six month period in late 2005 and early 2006. Results have been annualized.

The study estimated that 4.4 children in 1000 suffered physical abuse, 1.8 children in 1000 suffered sexual abuse, and 4.0 children in 1000 suffered some form of physical neglect during the study period. In terms of severity, 0.03 children in 1000 *DIED* as a result of the abuse, and 6.6 in 1000 suffered serious harm. NOTE: there are about 4 million children in Australia.

SEXUAL ABUSE
Children living with two married biological parents were sexually abused at a significantly lower rate (0.5 per 1,000) than children living in all but one of the other conditions. The exception is children living with unmarried parents whose incidence rate of sexual abuse does not differ from that of children living with married biological parents.
In addition, children living with a single parent who had no cohabiting partner had a lower sexual abuse rate than children living with other married parents and than children living with a single parent with a partner in the home (2.4 versus 4.3 and
9.9 children per 1,000, respectively).

In conclusion, the author proposes circumscribing the presumption of shared parenting when it is clear that child sexual abuse is a) a rare occurrence (0.18% per year), and 2) is *less* likely to be initiated by a biological parent than a step-parent or mum's live-in boyfriend.