(Con’t)
Your own experience that “the mere allegation of violence was enough for 7 months of interim orders keeping me from contact with my kids” is not believable today’s FC. If this happened to you 30 years ago you may some basis but not since 1995.
You claim as the accused that “there were no allegations of physical violence of any kind in the allegations” is not the basis for innocence on your part- my father said the same.
You claim that there “never was any kind of physical violence, merely mutual arguments.” How convenient, but verbal abuse is psychologically more damaging than physical abuse. My father also claimed that he and my mother merely “argued.” Your posture, like my father’s, is that of minimising and denying your abuse because you ostensibly did not hit? That makes you a very poor and reliable standard for analysing the problems in the Family Court.

I have not had an excess of feminist ideology, you merely denigrate me personally with this accusation because it’s what you have revealed yourself to do- the verbal personal attack. Quote- “Wake up to yourself, Patricia. You're not unintelligent, but you're very misguided. Unfortunately, I suspect an excess of feminist ideology and a lack of critical analysis, which is a toxic mix at the best of times.”

I am a woman whom you do not know and have no personal connection with, yet because I don't agree with you, you have attacked me personally and put me down, denigrated me, and insulted me. If you are prepared to do this to me whom you do not know, what did you do to others that were?

I completely agree with you Happy when you say, "..because I don't agree with you, you have attacked me personally and put me down, denigrated me, and insulted me. If you are prepared to do this to me whom you do not know, what did you do to others that were?". There is a very different story to be told by Antiseptic's ex thats for sure. If Antiseptic dared to put up the reference pseudonyms on Auslii then we could all get a more accurate picture.
He clings to those child abuse statistics like a drunken man clings to a lamp-post, for support rather than enlightenment. He's already shown himself to be less than adequate in critically analysing statistics and data and doesn't have the wherewithal to analyse statistics and data, simply beating on about his stats being right, and everyone else's being wrong. When the reverse is true. And there is obviously a very deep misogynistic streak with his paranoid obsession with RadFems. I do hope his ex has regained some of her sanity after she rejected him, and that his children aren't too disturbed by their experiences and are benefitting from their much needed counselling.

Jacksun - " I don't really understand what you are suggesting. ChazP that's frightening, that they can't change. What brings them undone?". Sociopaths/psychopaths have permanent neurological malfunctions which result in frequent episodes of psychotic behaviours. Sociopaths/psychopaths are estimated by psychiatrists to represent 3-6% of the male population, whilst such disorder is rarely present in females. (Note the similarity in the percentage of fathers who apply for custody/contact in high conflict situations!). It is genetically determined and incurable and does not respond to any known form of psychiatric treatment.i.e. surgery, medication, or talk therapy. Until about 50 years ago they were usually locked up in mental insitutions but because they are untreatable and were occupying hospital beds, psychiatrists argued for their release into the community and for them to be subject to due process of law if they offended. Of course they have devised very clever means of evading being caught in criminal activities and inflict their violence where they can be least detectable. They are also very highly skilled at `Grooming' professionals such as lawyers, Family Reporters etc and manipulating them to achieve their ends. They can take a small grain of truth and twist it into a treatise of argument and of course they are never wrong, or to blame, or at fault (from their own twisted perspective). Sociopathy/psychopathy can be seen on a continuum with minor violent offenders (cruelty to animals) at one end, and serial killers at the other. Your sister's ex would appear to be towards the severe end of the scale. Because they do not have emotions and feelings they tend to place themselves in dangerous situations, e.g.fast and reckless driving, violent confrontations on the streets with other violent men, severe drug/alcohol addictions which may lead to early death, numerous sexual partners some who have severe STDs such as HIV/Aids etc etc. If they are finally neutralised and lose their power and control, they frequently kill themselves and this is why so many fathers who are barred from contact with their children and ex-partner commit suicide. Their power and control has gone.

happy:"If this happened to you 30 years ago you may some basis but not since 1995."

It happened in 2004 and it was the Magistrates Court, since the Family Court defers to the Magistrates' Court in such matters.

Perhaps your information is Canadian (oh dear) in origin?

happy:"because I don't agree with you, you have attacked me personally and put me down, denigrated me, and insulted me"

Actually, it's your views and the way they are arrived at that of which I've been quite rightly critical, as well as your lack of "inclination" to read quite straightforward reports that disagree with that POV.

I've been quite complimentary of you personally. I even called you intelligent. I'm prepared to acknowledge my mistake. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

ChazP:"I hate that antiseptic cos he's a man and he's horrid"

Yes dear, we know. Surely you should be down at the beach making sure there are no perverts lurking around the change rooms or whatever it is you do to fill your holiday? Just trun up in a bikini - that should do the trick.

Happy has at least revealed to us what drives her obsessive and dangerous need to attack man and undermine any concept of fair treatment for fathers in family law.

"Don't give me your rhetoric that fathers need "safeguards"- it doesn't fly." - at least we know why it does not fly with you.

Happy you might consider that all men are not your father, you have let your own history override any sense of decency and balance because of the scaring from your own life.

R0bert

Antiseptic. I dont give a rats whether you believe me or not. I see that anything that doesn't fit the model of your own limited but ever-so important experience, must be trivialised. ChazP could be right about a little narcissim there. As for the 'sausage'put down, let's not get into a competition there as you sound like a man with small man syndrome, and I am not a fellow sufferer.

I had read very little about the family law, or winning in court until this happened. I have not studied feminism. I read a webguide that was very 'how abusive men should act to win'. I found the references to those people I mentioned from my sister, who was apparently also uninfluenced by your approved reading list. We found so much that mirrored my sister's case that I was excited to get some confirmation that we hadn't landed in some other universe.

The point of engaging in the conversation was to gather useful information and I have done that. I can now see why so many men will fight to stop any law that might call their abuse for what it is. (Anti)no, still Septic - no one believes you were dudded. Your behaviour is like a spotlight which lights up your poor me story with clarity missing from your version.

We will continue to fight for Adam's wellbeing, thanks to those who cared to help