<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. > ChapZ

Nice try, and typically distorting my point. Very much like how a politican operates.

Guilt tripping, done enough of it in my life, to say that your are a really dirty fighter, trying to hit below the belt.

I never said or implied that the deaths of children were acceptable, that is your distorted and rather sick interpretation.

Like I said that for custodial mothers, it has nothing to do with child safety, this focus on child welfare, is more about power and control, and children are a mere tool used by single mothers groups.

ChapZ, you wrote that the amount of child interaction that the father had pre separation, should be THE determining factor in how much contact that they should have.

This flies in the face of what happens in intact relationships, where the amount of interaction a parent has with a child fluctuates and is not static.

Google

"Kathleen Folbigg"

Thankyou

Chaz

Changes to road rules are based on evidence, not whatever you call your rants. Kids have never been safer than they are now.

ugh...the generalisations borne from childhood hurts, anger, frustration and individuals' partnering experiences [married or not]. These are only some of the reasons illustrating the complexities of family law court decisions and for those reasons 'no parents, lawyers, government agencies or groups' will ever be happy or satisfied achieving the objectives, they seek, to ensure that all children spend loving peaceful equal time with their biological or non-biological parents.

One shoe or legislation does not fit all as separated Mums and Dads have experienced.

Be honest and reflect back to the time of immediate reactions during the initial 18 months of your own separations. Q: Did your children feel or express safety and reassurance? Did your children witness violent outbursts and feel threatened? Were your children in a serious threatening situation whereby their lives were in real danger at the time whilst you were undergoing a life change or feeling totally rejected?

If one is not completely honest after reflecting and clearly recalling those feelings and anger at the time of their separation and reflecting upon the following incidents, then one is setting up our future childrens lives [ie future separating parents with their childrens lives] at REAL risk via some changes made to legislation.

Amending or changing legislation is excellent for children who are not at real immediate risk around a parent or parents, of violence and/or their death, particularly during the initial few years of separating parents.

However, changing legislation to suit and give the opportunity for parents who are violent and selfish, threatening to take their childrens lives and/or ex-partner's life, during the initial few years of a separation, will increase and encourage a controlling parent, during their initial grief, to be given the tools to carry out their threats more easily.

Nevertheless, I feel there is one major point that many parents [I have lived and experienced it] fail to identify and comprehend after the initial 12-18 months of separation however.

[Part II Posting forthcoming if allowed]

[Part II]

A residential parent must allow for the grieving process to be experienced by a parent who is not seeing their child/children, and grieving process to be worked through during the initial 18 months, of the parent coming to terms with the loss of their children, spouse and home environment.

I have experienced the whole situation in every shape way and form. Each family is different, however one thing I do know, and that is people have short and convenient memories, regarding the initial shock, bewilderment and grief symptoms exhibited during the initial 18 months of separation.

The point here being is that both parents must allow for the fact that the grieving angry parent on many occasions, will later take control of their anger and be safe around their children after the initial 12 or 18 month grieving period; time and timing are the key.

Thousands of teenage girls now in their twenties and thirties have missed out on knowing and receiving any love or acknowledgement from their separated Dads.

Best of wishes with the book and concepts John.

DOTA has been the main voice for justice in family issues for years - it is great to see print media also being used to highlight the inequities in the system around family law. I don't have much hope of a change for the better, however, as the discourse around family law (CSA etc) is dominated by irrational ideology. Extensive research within and outside Australia shows a number of common factors that should be considered in formulating changes in Family Law, but are ignored by Robert McClelland, our AG, as he seeks to placate the rabid ideology of feminism that influences sections of the once admirable Labour Party. Some of the main points have been covered in this Forum (i.e. data shows children are more at risk of harm - including homicide - by mothers than fathers; women do lie and fabricate allegations to achieve their goals). Other points that should have been considered include the findings that children (especially daughters) suffer psychologically and socially as a result of father absence; and that Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is found in 3 times as many women as men. BPD is characterised by violence, impulsivity, manipulation, and failed relationships. Many of the women (and some men) in "highly conflicted" couples in the Family Court probably suffer from BPD. Such women are also more likely to harm their children - why didn't Robert McClelland ask for a research report on this disorder? These 3 cases of mothers killing children all show signs of this disorder:

Mother who gassed children found guilty of murder of 3 children
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/mother-who-gassed-children-found-guilty-of-murder/story-e6freoof-1225832377694
The Courier-Mail 25/02/10

Mother took baby on fatal bridge leap&#8232;
&#8232;&#8232;http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,25720825-5006785,00.html&#8232;&#8232;
The Australian&#8232; 2 July 2009&#8232;&#8232;

Sentencing of Dean Shillingsworth's mother will provide closure
http://macarthur-chronicle-campbelltown.whereilive.com.au/news/story/sentencing-of-dean-shillingsworth-s-mother-will-provide-closure/

Thanks to John Stapleton for being a heretic, and refusing to accept that the earth is flat, or the Family Court fair.