Blame shifting is what it is about. Discuss anything but the root cause.
It goes to show you that this sort of discussion will NEVER find a solution. Only curtain things are talked about, and other things are not mentioned. Very selective.

579:”Blame shifting is what it is about. Discuss anything but the root cause.
It goes to show you that this sort of discussion will NEVER find a solution. Only curtain things are talked about, and other things are not mentioned. Very selective.”

Was that an example 579? Do you ever say anything? Mostly I see you dash in and out of threads inserting a couple of throwaway lines and generally not adding anything to any discussion.

CNW:”So much talk and blaming about a theory. Meanwhile real children suffer and are killed- because of a dis-credited theory. Some culture we live in.”

True, they are out there and they are suffering horribly but to be fair these suffering children are not in the homes of those commenting here (or I hope not) so the focus of conversation is likely to drift. I am extremely concerned about children here and know that in other threads I am inclined to slant the conversation towards children because of it.

But this thread, I am sure it is actually about children.

I do really appreciate R0berts comments and he has the ability to get me thinking and considering different opinions and certainly the male perspective. Custody issues between parents aren’t something I think about a lot and the more I read about family court the clearer it becomes that both parents are suffering within the current process along with their children.

Sorry I lost you there Benk. :P

I agree Pelican, “…we should be addressing is how to avoid wherever possible children being exposed to abuse whether it is via the mother or the father.”

No idea how you get the female and male groups to somehow truce so we can get on with it

All you are doing is talking around in circles.
The title says; Towards better outcomes for children.
You have not addressed the problem.
before you can address the problem, you must admit there is one.
And once you admit there is a problem, you will know how to fix it.

579:”All you are doing is talking around in circles.
The title says; Towards better outcomes for children.”

That is what we have been talking about the last couple of pages, PA and its uses and if it is real because it does affect outcomes in court regarding children.

And your opinion on PAS? Do you believe children commonly translate negative input of a parent into a belief that the parent is bad, the one saying it is bad or they themselves are at fault? Because that will directly impact on how the court should be viewing this syndrome and whether or not they need to address it at the childs level.

The article is suggesting the children are part of the decision making process in court. If they can be alienated it could well be pointless.

579:”You have not addressed the problem.
before you can address the problem, you must admit there is one.
And once you admit there is a problem, you will know how to fix it.”

So the problem has been admitted and addressed on several levels but I hardly grasp your link between once there is an admission that the problem exists that a solution appears.

This isn’t first day of drug rehab.

Jewely thanks for your earlier comment. It's appreciated.

Ignoring the PA discussion for the time being one of the things that sticks out in a lot of the material on child abuse, fatal assault of children etc is that the demographic factors are large.

Something that often seemed to be skipped in the rush to make these issues more universal. Child abuse, fatal assault of children, child sexual abuse, fatal assault of a partner etc do happen in homes across all demographics but the risk factors are much higher in some demographics.

- a criminal history
- substance abuse
- poverty
- aboriginality (I think because of the previous items)
- stress (not a demographic but people under stress are far more likely to take extreme actions than those in a better place).

I don't know that there are any easy answers to working with that but trying to understand the risk factors has got to help.

R0bert

Jewely,

google "Maternal gatekeeping"

Me thinks problems get exacerbated. On one hand the definition of DV gets expanded, and now includes all sorts of behaviours and there is a strong denial of the complicity of female behaviour in this issue.

After the definition gets expanded, the fall back position resorted too is physical violence. I know for a fact that alcohol and other drugs can and do play a large part in this.

Add the additional stress of a relationship breakup which is bad enough to deal with, when there aren't any children, and once children are involved, the family court and a vexatious ex and there is a recipe for big trouble.