MHIRC

From the US Surgen Generals report into mental health.

"Some anxiety disorders, like panic disorder, appear to have a stronger genetic basis than others (National Institute of Mental Health [NIMH], 1998), although actual genes have not been identified. Other anxiety disorders are more rooted in stressful life events.

It is not clear why females have higher rates than males of most anxiety disorders, although some theories have suggested a role for the gonadal steroids. Other research on women’s responses to stress also suggests that women experience a wider range of life events (e.g., those happening to friends) as stressful as compared with men who react to a more limited range of stressful events, specifically those affecting themselves or close family members (Maciejewski et al., 1999)."

http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/mentalhealth/chapter4/sec2_1.html

The above is well known by feminists when carrying out fear mongering amongst women.

They will try and play upon the natural fearfulness of women by suggesting that if the father sees the children he will abuse the children, or kill the children or carry out “power and control”.

The ultimate aim is to remove fathers from their children, and will use whatever brainwashing or manipulation necessary to do so.

MHIRC,

You have highlighted the problem. Whenever a woman kills her children the media claims she suffered from mental illness and then prevaracates about the impact of mental illness and how sad everything is. The mother is not seen as responsibilte for her actions - we make excuses. When a man kills his kids, he is seen as evil incarnate and an example of why men should not be trusted with children. No excuses are made - he is expected to take responsibility for his actions.

The fact that more women kill children than men doesn't matter. Society just doesn't want to hold women accountable for their actions like men. And of course, women only want responsibility when it suits them. They don't want to be like men - they want to maintain and strengthen their privileged position in society.

Now let me see if I can get this right.

Over the years, women have often complained about how they are portrayed in the media, things like sex object come to mind, and in particular complaints about photographs used by advertising and suggestive poses.

Now when us guys complain about how men and in particular fathers are portrayed by the media, people like ChapZ, Suzieonline and others often accuse of many of us as being misongynists.

They insist that it is the utmost importance to protect children, but they are only display interest in protecting children from abusive men, this in its self indicates that the real issue is not about protecting children from abuse, but more as a means of dissing men, under the guise of protecting children.

The continually negative potrayal of men, by these women and the propaganda, serves to continually alienate. Alienation is a bullying tactic.

Excellennt article.

Another reason why we shouldn't buckle under attempts by liars to roll back the shared parenting laws. It is a complete myth that the 2006 laws have resulted in an increase in domestic violence or child abuse. Quite the contrary. Children are being spared the entrenched conflict of drawn out custody disputes.

The laws should go further and provide for a rebuttable presumption of substantial time with each parent. As a general principle, childen need both parents. I can't imagine why anyone would disagree with this notion in the modern age. We're not in the 1950s anymore.

To accompany the 2006 changes, many - about 50, federal magistrates were selected for their capacity to trivialise mothering over fathers. Any father - irrespective of whether that person was cruel and vile to his children and convicted criminals. The downside for good mums has been accusations of being mentally ill for reporting what the kids have disclosed, and this week, infront of one such magistrate, a mother lost her kids without any trial, with no right to be presumed innocent until 'proved guilty' , and without warning. She was simply told to go to the court and bring the kids. It was based on a Family report that she has not yet seen. That FRW simply decided the mother was a liar, that the abuse of the children (severe knock em across a room, drag them around by the hair, kick them violence) was an invention. As well as that the kids were 'over-attached to her' and she needed to be separated from them to bond with daddy, because he seemed so nice during the interview. In this case the kids are just as scared of the step mother as the father.

So, only now may that mother try to get help. She may go to a single parent group. She aint no feminist - well not yet.

She had applied for AVO's in the past, twice. But she removed them to try again to make the marriage work. So she must be a liar hey!

I do not doubt at all that some decent men have not seen their kids enough, or at all. I know some women are very violent and abusive and look around, many young women are now acting violently, more so than ever before. But the blindness on this list to what has been happening since the 2006 changes is astonishing. I have heard men screaming at the Magistrate, who ignores it, then who belittles a mum if she cries. I guess all that security in courts isn't there to keep the judges safe from the mums.

"I have heard men screaming at the Magistrate, who ignores it, then who belittles a mum if she cries."

I'm having just a bit of trouble imagining that as a regular part of court life. Magistrates, judges etc aren't generally noted for their tolerance of being screamed at in court.

Just how often have you heard it happen? I've not spend any time in family court proceedings since 2006 so I can't comment first hand on that aspect. I can say that so far those pushing for these changes have offered no evidence that risk to kid's (or mothers) has been increased overall by the 2006 changes.

I could accept that in some cases magistrates have got so tired of the routine of accusations being raised in the context of a custody dispute that the have missed ones which needed to be taken more seriously.

I doubt that there are any easy answers to that, the proposed changes will most likely increase the flow of accusations because they will become easy access to custody.

R0bert