Agreed that there are some big flaws but I doubt that we will see Elspeth and her supporters working to reduce a whole bunch of risks where resolution would not result in more power or money to women.

They don't seem to want to work at reducing the adversarial nature of family law and child support. They don't want to work at getting rid of the winner takes all issues around child residency that leave parents figting over residency because the stakes in outcomes are way too high.

They don't seem to want to talk about safeguards for dads with an ex versed in playing the system regardless of any concepts of right and wrong.

They do want to perpetuate and play on the perception that its almost only mums and children at risk from abusers.

They do want to ignore a lot of the realities of the dynamics that lead to family breakdown in persuit of agenda's that in reality have little to do with child protection and a lot to do with their own agendas.

If they were or are in any way serious about helping kids then start working to lower the stakes for people when relationships go bad, work towards some protections for the accussed so that they can't have their lives devestated by the flow on effects of false or unsubstantiated allegations. Start including some examples that don't always imply the baddynis the male when you write.

In the mean time it looks like more of the self serving sexist rubbish of people trying to use kids to gain an unfair advantage for themselves in the aftermath of family breakdown.

Wolf,wolf, wolf they cry then wonder why when there is a wolf its not always believed.

R0bert

This is the modern world we live in.

When women consult clairvoyants, and that is accepted in court, to deny children their right to a father it is nothing short of vile.

When will women grow up and start putting the needs of children first not their own narcissistic desire to punish men?

Happy, you come across as smug as can be. And I understand why. You and people like you have successfully cut men out of the lives of their children just to satisfy your own sociopathic egos.

Your comment about fathers having no rights to their children is chilling. If you have children, I feel sorry for them.

Then when someone calls it for what it is - absolutely vile - the comment gets deleted because it offends the egos of the narcissistic sociopaths who feel children don't need a father.

I think it's time men started to stand up to people like you and Dr. Jekylls here.

dane I saw your earlier comment, I doubt very much that it was deleted "because it offends the egos of the narcissistic sociopaths who feel children don't need a father" rather it was straight out abusive.

Whilst I don't have any liking for the spin, lies, misdirection and using kids that the mum's first lobby use to push their agenda's and I have some sympathy for the frustration generated by dealing with that sneaky form of abuse responding the way you did is not an approach that's ever going to work to make your point in a public forum.

I don't really know what does work, I was very tempted to leave the sisterhood to it but silence in the face of wrong never seems like a good tactic either.

We will never convince the cheering crowd of gender warriors but with a reminder other will notice the things that Elspeth and others won't address, the causes of tension for separated families that all their activities are likely to increase rather than decrease and some will see the problem. Some will see how self serving it all is, well I hope so anyway.

R0bert

...There lurks, mostly unheeded a “simplicity” in separation, too easily and often overlooked by all parties involved: The right to personal happiness.

...If people could grasp the simple logic associated with happiness, as the intended outcome in all aspects and individual issues associated in divorce cases, what a happy world it would be; for children and adults alike.

...At what point in the developmental cycle does the priority of happiness warp into an overpowering need for hatred and vindictive counter attack?

...I pondered on this point again a few months ago, when the young neighbour (40 YO) swung by the neck on a rope, no more than 20 meters away, for two days, before discovery by his poor bewildered Mother: This was the culmination of a messy divorce, where he was excluded from access to his own children.

...I know this to be true, Brian occasionally alluded to the problem, in discussions over the common fence before the sad event.

So now the interpretations of family violence have been widened. Hmmmm. Witholding of CS payments is now considered to be family violence. So i presume if a MOTHER spends the CS on getting her nails and hair done and going out to hotels etc (as happened in my own case)instead of spending it on the child, then it follows that the mother is perpetrating family violence on the child. It is now considered to be family violence if a husband/father tries to dissuade his partner from seeing her friends. So i presume that if a woman complains constantly about her partner going for drinks with his friends after work, then that must also be family violence. Similarly if a wife/partner threatens to leave and take the children, then that must also be family violence. IF the family court EVER treats both genders equally then people like Ms Mcinnes have really opened a Pandora's box here. While most would agree that it is men who perpetrate most, but not all, physical violence, women are equally, if not more, adept at emotional blackmail and the like.

ok so now the argument is that stopping children from being forced to spend time with an abuser is going to make the abuser kill themselves? Abusers tend to direct their violence towards others. Some kill themselves as well as their partners and/or children but many don't. People who kill themselves are often suffering a mental illness. The appropriate care is a mental health service,not care of children. Mental health services in this country are very poor and I know a number of people discharged from acute care who killed themselves. If you want to support suicide prevention then advocate for more services, better access, longer supported care.