This book is destined to become standard reading for reformers, politicians and, of course, obstructionists in all countries and at the UN.

Australian family law reforms are the gold standard by which other countries assess their legislation. Australia serves as the international beacon of hope which is why it has been targeted by regressive forces internationally in order to roll back this “social experiment” under whatever political pretext, notwithstanding that 81% of Australians support the reforms.

This is a book whose importance transcends national boundaries for it has become evident to the international community that as goes Australia, so go the hopes of the global community for family law reform.

Congratulations to John Stapleton, and congratulations to all Australians whose native pragmatism brought the first instalment of common sense to family law.

George Piskor
Canada

Congratulations to John Stapleton for writing this much needed book about the continuing chaos in family law. No gender has a monopoly on vice and sadly more mothers kill their children than biological fathers. The gender violence on both sides must stop. The sad reality is that we are losing the battle to keep a civil society, because we are losing the battle for love.

You see love begins in the home and is cemented when a man and woman say "I do" and pledge their troth "till death us do part". I have been married for 35 years more my wife's credit than my own. If our marriage was based on Moral relativism and feelings we would have divorced long ago or finished up living apart as my parents did. But we were both determined to let love have her way. Five children and three grandchlidren later it is starting to pay off.

You see love is a decision. We need a love revolution a marriage revolution www.marriagerevolution.org.au if you will. Mother Teresa was right to say "World peace starts in the home", indeed it is the only place that world peace can start. While we pursue the greater cause of a love revolution we need to find a way to preserve the basic right of a child to an ongoing relationship with that child's mother and father.

Every child needs a mother and a father. To allow the most anti male amoral institution in Australia to continue to judge that right is moral lunacy of the highest order. The new family violence legislation proposed by the Gillard government while well intentioned will in the hands if the already morally bankrupt Family Law Court become a handy tool for the further destruction of families through the proliferation of unjust accusations.

Hopefully Johns book will help provoke a wide ranging moral debate about the need to reject moral relativism and build a society where mothers and fathers and children are treated with the dignity and love that they deserve.

ChazP wrote "Additionally that there must be careful assessment of the pre-separation involvement of each parent in the child's development."

Who on this list considers the above as code-speak for ignoring the full time wage earning that fathers contribute to thier child's development? is this not a way of saying that how the married parents seperated labour must always the case for eternity, even post separation?

This sinister phrasing, mooted to be included in new family law ammendments, is designed to say "once a money contributer, always a money contributer" and conversely, "once a full time hands-on carer, always the full time carer"

In other words if the dad wasworking to earn money for his child pre separation then he will be considered a deadbeat who didnt show much "hands on" care because he was "elsewhere". Due to not being a hands on dad, the courts will continue that by Court Order.

And some thought the 2006 ammendments lent themselves to misuse!

JamesH – you argument seems to be that because children die for other reasons, that the (preventable) deaths of children following parental separation is acceptable to you. I cannot share your moral indifference.
Benk Yes we do change the road rules when deaths reach unacceptable levels – have you not noticed the increase in speed cameras to curb dangerous driving causing deaths. The present Act permits children to be important only as a means of evading having to pay for them and for vengeful responses to rejection, and such reactions are unconscionably high.
EmilyG – Family Courts do not have the expertise nor resources to competently investigate allegations of domestic violence or child abuse which is why so many cases result in incorrect and inappropriate decisions. The proposals in the legislation are precisely designed to avoid the circumstances you describe. I do not act with any self-indulgent thought of how history may judge me, only to protect children from the horrendous abuses and deaths they now suffer under the current Sharia Parenting Laws. You on the other hand, do not sound like a loving caring parent concerned for your children, only a sore loser in a bitter battle.
George Piskor – the book will certainly provide more ammunition for the Patriarchalists and Male Supremacists who forced through the 2006 amendments in Australia in order to restore their position of power and domination over women and children which they enjoyed in Victorian times. (see Goods and Chattels legislation and No Votes for Women). The 2006 Act re-introduced such inhumane and degrading treatment of women and children.
If, as many of you claim, mothers abuse and kill children more often than fathers and are equally responsible for the domestic violence, why are you not supporting this proposed legislation which is designed to protect children regardless of the gender of the assailant?. You seem to be more concerned with apportioning blame than protecting children. Or is this just about protecting your own advantageous financial positions and children are of no concern.?

" in order to restore their position of power and domination over women and children which they enjoyed in Victorian times"

Oh dear ChazP.

You finally let it slip.

So its not about the children after all. Its about the perceived "power and control", a mantra repeated over and over by the feminist brigade, and instilled into younger minds during feminist brainwashing classes.

Taking fathers from their children was to break their "power and control".

How sick.