ChazP,
Firstly your response to bowspearer is ridiculous. Why do you talk about matters from over a century ago instead of the reality of today? ‘Goods and Chattels’ indeed! Get real!

As a child of a broken family myself, as a step-parent, as an adoptive parent, as an innocent non-resident parent by force, and as an independent investigative reporter, I assure you that I have an understanding of many aspects of broken family life and childcare. More that you seem to demonstrate from what you claim is a more legal background.

I am arguing against a gender-based approach to family violence. You are saying I am wrong and implying that children can be tossed casually from one mother's lover to another without harm and that is better than the constant attention from any single parent. PROVE IT. Show me the studies that illustrate that a child cannot happily, even gleefully, adapt to living in two homes. Across much of Europe now, as well as Australia, joint parenting is becoming more widespread as it is seen to be beneficial for the child.

As to your assertion that "proven and convicted" (oh, sure, you're sounding like a true solicitor, there!) paedophiles have been granted custody, it is probably true that the law needs amending in this area, though the matter is not so clear-cut as media hype and knee-jerk reaction would imply. However, what I AM certain of is that it is not just male paedophiles who should be considered to be unsuitable for custody of children but the greater number of female paedophiles, too.

You blame me for wanting an egalitarian approach in the laws and the way they are implemented. You highlight issues as though they are gender-specific. They are not. Mothers and fathers should both be treated fairly and the child should be granted access to both as much as possible.

@Douglas - "Surveys show that the worst ratio of domestic violence is in lesbian relationships - are women in these relationships not to be protected just because there is no man to blame?

As it is, the incidence of female violence is about as high as male violence. Anyone pretending otherwise is stating that the genders are so different that they make a mockery of the past several decade's attempts at gender equality. If the genders really are so very different, then why is this not recognised throughout the legal system and all equality laws scrapped?"
Posted by Douglas, Friday, 14 January 2011 2:13:28 AM

This is just not true. Read my earlier posts(thursday) that have excerpts from a recent survey into DV. While many reports all acknowledge, that DV occurs in same sex relationships (that means gay relationships also?not just lesbian ones) the overwhelming incidents occur in hetrosexual relationships, with the males being the perpetrators in at least 80% of them.

Anyone who refuses to acknowledge this plain simple fact is not interested in speaking the truth. They have no desire to engage in adult discussion etc. They just have a hatred of women - perhaps themselves too! Who knows!

It reminds me of a scenario, where a person refuses to believe that the sun is shining. Even when they're led outside, with the warmth of the sun on their faces, they shut their eyes tightly, and protest, that there's 'heaters on' all around them - not the sun!
In that instance, it's impossible to make someone see something of which they have no interest in seeing! Same here!

You omit to mention, that there's been investigations into the lives of kids raised by a sole parent, the mother, which results in the the fact, that children function, achieve academically in a 'mother' only environment. I'd suggest, that there's more damage done to a child who's living in an abusive environment, even if they do not witness it directly. Just hearing it is defined as child abuse.

@Douglas - As to your reference re joint parenting, may I suggest, that the majority of relationships that break up result in an adult and positive structure that involves both parents. Only a small minority end up in the Family court. As a result of Howard/Ruddock's joint parenting Laws, too many kids were forced to spend time with an abusive parent - usually the father. so much so, that the Federal Attorney General announced prior to xmas, that these Laws were being investigated, and changes would be made where 'deemed necessary' or words to that effect.

Too many women/mothers were being intimidated or down right bullied in the Family Court when they raised issues of abuse of their kids, either physical/emotional/sexual or all three. There's been too many incidents where chn have been damaged further. As the greatest threat to kids of abuse is either their father/step-father/grandfather/uncle etc, the AG is mindful now of the 'gaps in the law' that were only reinforcing abuse. Anyone could probably go on to that website to peruse his media releases etc.

The most recent (Australian) Report that I know of, is the one released by Vic Health - the one I referred to in my posts of Thursday - they are excerpts from this 80 page report. I suggest you down load it and read it!

Liz, who do you think you're fooling?

@bowspear - You have NO credibility. You're not interested in the truth. I bet you didn't even read any of the posts of Thursday from me. They're not my words, they're the result of investigations by about 10 Australian people, perhaps more! You are quite remarkable!
You'll keep on asserting that women are at best as violent as men or worse, and you'll go down screaming your prejudices! You're as blatant as the day is long! All the AG's in this country have got it wrong have they? The United Nations has it wrong too! All women are liars, and men are duped and treated badly!

As I've said before, I really don't care what you think of me. I know the truth, and more importantly, I know the truth of what happened to me. I hope you're never called up for jury duty - for any case, but certainly not one that involves a woman/women as victims of violence.

I know who bashed me. I know who tampered with my car so it wouldn't run, and among other things, I know who used a feather duster on my 13 month old baby, and to all of them, the perp was not me!I know that the perp who sexually molested me when I was 12 was the the guilty one, as well as others after him. What that showed was not that I was a "professional victim" but there were/are too many men out there who use their positions to abuse others - they're usually in positions of trust, and in all cases, they're criminals!
So get stuffed! I've been bullied by experts! You don't even come close!
What I also know, is that I was a loving, caring and responsible mother. If I'd lived in a respectful relationship with a decent man, I'd probably have been a better mother. I wouldn't have had to spend so many hours trying to pre-empt the actions of a sociopath; I wouldn't have had to suffer the physical and psychological repercussions of his violence - migrains, concussions to name just two!

Quoting Liz45: "Too many women/mothers were being intimidated or down right bullied in the Family Court when they raised issues of abuse of their kids"

Too many women/mothers lie and exaggerate when reporting abuse and in courts dealing with family matters for the purpose of gaining legal advantage. We need stiff perjury laws. If a mother does not prove her abuse allegation beyond reasonable doubt, then she should be forced to pay both parties costs.

The default situation should be that if a mother unilaterally decides to walk out of a relationship she does not take off with the father's children. The father if innocent of any offence, should have the say as to what access/custody the mother has.

Government agencies including the Family Court should butt right out of it. Fathers need to be far more outspoken about sticking up for their rights. The business about the "best interests of the children" is just a red herring used to deny fathers natural justice.