Formersnag <"But still "pelican" & all the other FauxMANistas continue to promote the neglect & abuse of children."
Where is your evidence of such a nasty statement Formersnag?

Why is it that we have to have an 'us and them' situation when discussing children of broken marriages/partnerships?

Why can't we all just work together to do what is right for the children in each different families situation?

I agree we shouldn't have the 'one size fits all' scenario that we have now with regards to family law.
We should go back to the days when children stayed with the most appropriate parent at the time.
We should not just be dividing them up equally between each parent unless that is what is best for the kids.

In my opinion, if there has EVER been any definite evidence of abuse of any kind towards the children before the marital breakdown, then the kids don't go with that parent.

Courts these days are trying to be far too politically correct when allowing children to go and live with an abusive parent (male OR female), just because some militant groups in our society say it should be EQUAL parenting, no matter what.

Children have been dying because of this problem.

Pelican
“Sure bring on more honest statistics but don't be surprised if you don't get the statistics you are hoping for, the final word has to be for the protection of kids.”

I would think the rates of welfare dependent children in de facto relationships and single parent families should be made known to the public.

I would think the rates of poverty for children in de facto relationships and single parent families should be made known to the public.

I would think the rates of neglect for children in de facto relationships and single parent families should be made known to the public.

I would think the rates of homelessness for children in de facto relationships and single parent families should be made known to the public.

I would think the rates of fatherless children in de facto relationships and single parent families should be made known to the public.

In fact, I would think the rates of alcoholism, drug dependency, domestic violence, infidelity, and STD’s in de facto relationships and single parent families should be made known to the public.

Such statistics should not be hidden away because de facto relationships and single parent families are a part of the political goal of certain people in our feminist society.

G'day All,

Look, we the Labor party have a moral imperative to make this economy stronger because we're the workers party and we have to give 'em jobs and big salaries and GST and Power and Power and .. The only way we can DO it is by massive immigration which costs massive amounts of money and life shattering inconveniences for all. All of which which we don't want to pay for or know about.

A few kiddies get murdered or abused by mum or dad? Who cares, its just one EXRTERNALISED cost of doing business in the best economic performing country in the World today. And there'll be a LOT more of it before I'm through.

So we tell a few lies to cover it up. So what? We have to tell lies to make it palatable to the apathetic Anglo or Aussie born electorate who are still 53% of the bloody population who still could vote us and immigration out the door if they were awakened.

The BEST lie of them all: It really costs $300,000 in admin to settle each and every migrant plus $300,000 infrastructure costs they will need. For example,
200,000 migrants per year times $300,000 is $20billion a year that should be spent on electricity infrastructure alone. If migrants were really paying their way and carrying their weight we could all have cheap electricity, less stress on parents an thus fewer cases of the externalised costs of an economic great Nation being violently passed onto the tiny lives of no-hoper's children . But if we charged migrants then no one would want to come here and oopsy .. no Nation building and no economic and no political bounty.

So you can see our dilemma. But don't worry, our courts will mop up the mess. We'll put all the stressed-out murderers in Gaol. And that just makes our Government look all the stronger. How clever!

So take a pill (http://www.smh.com.au/world/science/racist-angry-the-answer-may-be-in-a-pill-20110407-1d5c9.html#poll), get used to it, Labor's here to stay .. and YOU and your bloody kids will PAY and Pay and PAY!

Ghoullia Shillard

PM

One of the problems is sorting out what is actual fact and what is someones paranoia.

Secondly there is the escalation, subtle sabortage, I think Erin Pizzey nailed it when she wrote about the family terrorist.

Defining someone with a personality disorder can be extremely difficult, usually personality disorder have a large number of supporters and enablers. It can some times can take a number of years before it becomes apparent.

From my experience there are more than a few custodial parents who are more than happy for the non-custodial parent to be absent.

James:”From my experience there are more than a few custodial parents who are more than happy for the non-custodial parent to be absent.”

Well they’re crazy, non-custodial parents are usually the ones that give you a few days off. My experience was the custodial parents really looked forward to handing them over and having a break.

Do we have the stats on how often through family court a parent does not want their ex having any contact with the children rather than asking for the majority of custody?

Kaep, what is a migrant?

pelican,

'That is another aspect of accountability worth further investigation given the high level of support services for women.'

That's a brave statement. BLAMING THE VICTIM! I suppose you have more scope to say such things as you're a woman.

'Do you accept that this 'demonisation' is the greater public perception. The claims are highly overstated IMO and those negative views written about are more imaginary than any reflection of widespread opinion.'

Those two sentences seem contradictory. I'm confused.

As I said, every heinous act by each individual man is included in a continuing narrative of 'men', and 'men's attitude to women' in the media. The whole 'culture' of men must be changed, even bringing the responsibility for one man's actions in his private life onto his employer and team mates in the case of the NRL or AFL. In that StKilda girl scandal, nobody even considered that the club shouldn't have any responsibility at all. In fact the girls actions were motivated by a societal assumption that the club should do something because her 'relationship' didn't work out with one of it's 'players'. The 'male dominated' institution is more responsible for it's members than a female dominated one that's for sure.

Like that white ribbon lot attempting to shame me into accepting responsibility for others my gender. I have no more responsibility for others of my gender than women do.

Every male dominated group is derided as if the very presence of all that evil testosterone makes it inevitable men will revert to their innate abusive, exploitative, violent, abusive women hating ways. This puts the responsibility on all men for an individual man's actions.

You never see that with female dominated areas of society. Nobody thinks it's in any way dangerous for the oestrogen meter to overheat. Women as a whole aren't responsible or assumed supportive of an individual woman's actions.

BTW: I agree men are more violent, and stats that show women up as more abusive need to be viewed with respect to how many more women are the primary carer.