Suzanonlie,

Those statistics come from The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.

They are put together from data collected by the child welfare agencies, not from data collected by the Family Court or from feminists harboured by universities.

Interesting that if emotional abuse and neglect are combined, (and they are in many countries), they are 3 times higher than physical abuse and 5 times higher than sexual abuse.

But of course the Family Law Court and feminists harboured by universities focus on physical abuse and sexual abuse.

As I have said, neglect and probably emotional abuse are mostly associated with child poverty, and the quickest way to child poverty in our society is through de facto relationships, single parent families and fatherless children.

Feminists harboured by universities and the Family Law Court must be proud.

Vanna, Prof Parkinson agrees

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life/decline-in-marriage-blamed-for-neglect-20110905-1jubo.html

"'Governments in Australia cannot continue to ignore the reality that two parents tend to provide better outcomes for children than one, and that the most stable, safe and nurturing environment for children is when their parents are, and remain, married to one another,'' the report says."

and
"Among the signs of deteriorating well-being are:

- a tripling since 1998 in the number of children notified for abuse or neglect;

- a doubling in 12 years in the number of children in out-of-home care;

- a 66 per cent rise between 1996-97 and 2005-06 in the rate of hospital admission for self-harm for 12-14 year-olds;

- a rise from 28 to 38 per cent in the rate of female students experiencing unwanted sex,

- a doubling in the rate between 1998-99 and 2005-06 of hospital admission for intoxication for women aged 15-24.

The report says myriad explanations could be offered, including child sexual abuse and family violence. But the main demographic change is the rise in the number of children who by the age of 15 have spent time not living with both biological parents.

About 25 per cent of children born in 1981-85 had either been born to a single mother or experienced parental separation by the age of 15, nearly three times the rate of baby boomers. They had also spent three times as many years living in a stepfamily."

WOW....refining human-nature and the age old thinking's.

Time for refinement in the case of the 21. Thats all the clue:)

The play card of the ( wounded female is getting a bit....we/us wont here with-in laws of LAW its-self.

A BAD female can/and will use the ( Its not me, its him ) I would do the same thing, when knowing the court system, as is.

All humans lie. I have seen it, and I have seen it, and I'll see it, and some.

Females do and will LIE.......Just like males will, and that's why humans try in most cases, and fail! Thats why we have a court of process....

And I know most can play:) sexes:)

Is a female fully taken as trust......and its No more different to the male with he same..........both will and both wont, and will do, in the eyes of the LAW.

Thats why its there:)

cactus

Here's the full summary of the report by Professor Parkinson. He's a real expert who actually knows the Law, being a Professor of the subject.

http://sydney.edu.au/law/news/docs_pdfs_images/2011/Sep/FKS-ResearchReport-Summary.pdf

"There is a canary in the coal mine that provides early warning about the extent of social problems we are facing, and this is in the child protection system. There has been a dramatic increase in the last 15 years in the numbers of children who are reported as being victims of, or at risk of, child abuse or neglect, the numbers of children where that abuse or neglect has been substantiated after investigation, and the total numbers of children in state care."

and
"If one examines only the individual statistics on issues such as the rise in reported abuse and neglect, or the increase in hospitalisation of adolescents for self-harm or alcohol intoxication, then there are a myriad different explanations that might be offered – including attempts to explain away the adverse trends."

and

"While it would be simplistic to posit just one or two explanations, if there is one major demographic change in western societies that can be linked to a large range of adverse consequences for many children and young people, it is the growth in the numbers of children who experience life in a family other than living with their two biological parents, at some point before the age of 15."

and

"Children whose parents live apart are also exposed to a greater number of risks and difficulties than children in intact families. They are significantly more likely to be subject to reports of abuse and neglect than intact families. Two of the most significant reasons for this are the presence of new partners who are not biologically
related to the children, and the financial and other stresses of lone parenthood. Girls in particular are at much greater risk of sexual abuse from the mother’s new partner than from their own father. Single parents, and especially those who are working to support the family, also have less time to monitor and supervise their children."

I agree with those paragraphs taken from Professor Parkinson's report, the greater risks to children come during and after divorce. The best thing for children is for their parents to stay together even if the marriage is not absolutely perfect. However, it is not always possible, especially if there is violence.

It is not the reality and that is what policy concerns itself with by and large. Unless of course, we introduce draconian laws that force people to stay married what is the alternative? It seems we cannot hope that the minority who create problems might mature and grow up and not use their personal resentments against their ex-spouses or children. And that children are put first not last next to the mother or father's next girlfriend/boyfriend.

I note, unlike Warwick Marsh, Professor Parkinson isn't blaming single mothers but the repercussions of divorce. Divorce is the issue and the failure of people to work at it for as long as is feasible. It is not the fault of women or men if their spouses leave them, or if there is mutual agreement about separating.

What if the biological father is abusing the kids and nobody believes the mother because it is assumed to be a bogus claim?

There are bad mothers and bad fathers - the difficulty is protecting children from abuse both emotional and physical during divorce proceedings.

The following paper mentions divorce and other issues like parental drug/alcohol abuse and depression and effects on children particularly in 'early transition to adult roles'.

http://www.fahcsia.gov.au/about/publicationsarticles/research/socialpolicy/Documents/prp42/sprp_42.pdf

Instead of wasting time on blaming and demonisation which is clearly not assisting these matters why not work out ways to ensure kids are not victims of their parents divorces. How can this be avoided or minimised?

Pelican,
There has been virtually no research undertaken into divorce in this country, even though divorce has such a profound effect on the health and economics of our society.

The last study undertaken on divorce by the Australian Institute of Family Studies was in 1999, and at the time the study was heavily criticised as being biased, and of misusing and corrupting data.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:VqQ1mMPKl94J:www.aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/WP20.html+reasons+for+divorce&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=a

There has been no other study conducted since, (which makes social science even more contemptable), and the closet we have to go as to why people get divorced would be the regular survey conducted by Relationships Australia.

http://www.relationships.org.au/what-we-do/research/australian-relationships-indicators/relationships-indicator-2011

Time after time that survey finds problems such as financial stress and communication problems as the main reasons for relationship breakdown, and reasons such as abuse and alcohol or drugs are hardly relevant at all.

The reasons for divorce or relationship breakdown are basically solvable, and the marriage can be repaired.

But in our society there is a culture of divorce and a culture of belief that marriage is not required anyway.

That culture of belief was mainly spread by feminists within universities, and now society pays the cost of believing it.

Children within the country are also the greatest victims of that feminist misinformation.