Jackson it sounds like your sister's story is a bad one but it's not reasonable to extrapolate from that as you appear to be doing to misrepresent what we are saying or to assume the the reverse is the case. One of the problems is that the mothers wants advocates have been so determined to pretend that new or no women would lie about those issues, to pretend that violence is always about men controlling women that it's become the case of the boy who cried wolf.

Rather than working to put any safeguards in place they claim that there is no need, claims of abuse get either lied about or overstated so frequently that anybody not actively promoting the women first agenda's begin to get skeptical about the whole thing.

There are a number of way's claims can be false, outright lies, exaggerations and one sided representations (leaving out one side of the story).

Just because the Happy, Chaz and others insist on miss representing what we are saying does not make it necessary for you to believe them. I'm certainly not against proper investigation of abuse allegations, what I do want is some safeguards in place to prevent an allegation having long term impacts on the accused if the allegation is not substantiated.

I'd also like to see way's of reducing the triggers for additional conflict in the process and reducing the personal stakes involved in child residency as far as practical. What in that do you oppose?

R0bert

I do find these stories of "no one believed me" when there is evidence of injury very hard to credit. My experience is that the mere allegation of violence was enough for 7 months of interim orders keeping me from contact with my kids. I know that there were no allegations of physical violence of any kind in the allegations, because there never was any kind of physical violence, merely mutual arguments. So I know that courts take such allegations very seriously, on the precautionary principle.

What concerns me is how to catch the genuine cases without unfairly prejudicing the parents who may be subject to malicious or simply mistaken false allegations.

Patricia's suggestion of an inquisatorial court doesn't sit too well with our judicial system as far as I can see, although it may have something to recommend it. The ICL/Famliy report system is meant to be addressing a lot of that and seems to be fairly successful from what I can tell.

I think that what is needed is a lot less hysteria around the subject. The constant efforts to whip up an emotional frenzy don't assist in making clear decisions about the best way to proceed.

Jacksun – your sister’s case is very typical of many dozens of such cases across Australia and which come before the Family Courts. (One in three women will experience domestic violence during her lifetime). The FR mob want to play this down of course and have convinced the Courts and those associated with Court proceedings that it isn’t happening. That is why your sister was not believed. When it comes to the Family Courts the Courts don’t have the expertise or the resources to investigate such happenings as in your sister’s case, so her allegations are dismissed. This is what is happening in the Family Courts every week across Australia and why this legislation is so urgently and desperately necessary.
Yes, as you say, children are suffering all kinds of horrors from such events like your nephew and will grow up with severe personality damage (but of course according to the FR mob will still need his ‘Loving Dad’ because single mums cause most child abuse.
No, your nephew’s word will not count because again the FR mob have convinced everyone that children lie and are coached by their mothers into being alienated from the `Loving Dads’ . So rarely will the Court Reporter or `Expert’ psychiatrist actually talk with your nephew to obtain his views or maybe at best give him a 15 minute chat about how he’s going at school. The CR will then tell the Court that he needs to see his `Loving Dad’ and if Mum doesn’t agree or refuses to cooperate, then your nephew should be removed from her and put in the care of his `Loving Dad’.
That is the typical daily scenario in the Family Courts of Australia with many cases less serious than your sister’s but a great many far far worse. Even paedophiles and child sex molesters have been given custody and contact with children by Family Courts.
It is these cruel and brutal `Loving Dads' who the FR mob are defending and are trying to stop the legislation.

Jacksun – Don’t be put off by Antiseptic’s complete inability to cope with anything with an emotional content or his passive-aggressive sarcasm. Express your feelings freely and let them guide your thought processes – that is normal. It is abnormal to repress your feelings in the ways Antiseptic tries to impose. His children obviously do need very considerable counselling as does his ex for her PTSD. If the counsellor considered it unnecessary then s/he would have stopped it long ago, especially as it was taking them away from studies. His children have of course to tell Antiseptic what he wants to hear so his version of their statements can be taken with a very large pinch of salt. And Judges don’t stop contact for six months unless the allegations were very serious. In fact his “no one believed me” sarcasm is a projection of himself, that he must always be believed because of course he always believes he is right (except when he can’t even analyse statistics and data in research and has paranoid obsessions with RadFems under his bed).
Keep your comments and statements full of emotions Jacksun and let Antiseptic and the world know how it feels to be physically, emotionally, and mentally beaten down and constantly oppressed and tormented. Its Antiseptic’s problem and that of many in the FR groups, that they can’t cope with emotions, and not yours.

From The Planned Destruction of the Family, by Erin Pizzey

http://fathersforlife.org/pizzey/planned_destruction_of_family.htm :

"Because men looked upon the refuge movement as a 'woman's issue', newspapers sent women journalists to attack me. I addressed a conference of radical feminists and asked them why, when I respected their right to practice their politics and define their own sexuality they denied me my rights to my heterosexuality, my right to live and work to preserve family life and to enjoy being at home with my family. That I think being a mother and a grandmother has given me more joy than any other achievement. I was screamed down and met with utter hostility.

When I published 'Prone to Violence', a book about my work with violent women and the children in the refuge, I was picketed by hundreds of banner-waving women. 'All men are bastards!' read some of the banners. 'All men are rapists!' shrieked another. 'If those banners said Jews or black people, you would have arrested those women,' I told the policeman who had come to say that I had to have a police escort all around England for the book tour. "

Now off you toddle dear, I'm sure your grrlfriends down at the coven are wondering where you've got to.

Well, it seems some of you have some idea what real violence is like, it's secret nature,the criminal systems failings, the family court's determination to let dangerous dad have his share no matter how it continues the threat and abuse. I have a mate who is a police gay and lesbian liaison officer. Yep, he's gay. A good bloke who likes football,cricket, meat pies and a beer. he tells me that the rate of violence amongst gay men is really high, but higher where an allegedly heterosexual man is caught in a delicate situation, and decides to bash his way out of it. Kids are often present. He doesn't personally see so many lesbian women, but the female officer who does says the violence there can also be bloody, but the general way it is done isn't so vicious. Not all of course - there are exceptions irrespective of gender.

Antiseptic. Quoting Prizzy - one woman whose ideas were laughed at and scorned by women in the refuge movement that allowed women to have somewhere to go (not enough - my sister couldn't get into one) is not counterpoint. Why not quote Sue Price or Bettina Ardnt - they are equally held up to ridicule for good reason, because they throw out the baby with the bathwater as you seem to want to do, in order that the risk of a low-level abuser isn't punished. If you are at all interested in those near the edge of physical danger, read some Barry Goldstein and Mo Hannah or Lundy Bancroft. Frankly, your 'I find it hard to believe' awareness of what really goes on, unhelpful as i imagine anyone trying top identify the real issues - safety for kids (and their other parent/family if there is one)would also do. You seem well read - read something that speaks to the reality for my nephew.