Talking about the factions opposing shared parenting...

1: Motivation
Basically the opposition to 50-50 shared parenting is all about $$$. This is a huge industry, and almost everybody in it are women. Even Accredited specialist Family Law lawyers are 50% women in NSW (so much for the feminist claim that the law is made for men and by men! Ha! ) Then the Child support agancy (C$A), DoCS, social workers in general, counsellors (especially Relationships Australia), Cenrelink, and so on and so on... All these poeople's careers and power come from maintaining the current high levels of conflict, litigation, C$A enforcement and creating dysfunctional households that require ongoing support from the nanny-state. These are all female-dominated and feminist controlled industries.

2: The factions
Johhny Howard is not stupid. When he wanted to prevent us becoming a republic, he cleverly framed the referendum question to split the republican vote... 1 : Do you want a Republic with a president John Howard selects?, or 2: do you just want to leave it how it is.

Not surprisingly, many republicans voted against the proposal.

The feminists have an unholy alliance of social workers, lawyers, journalists, policy officers and so on... who often have quite different agendas.

Howard has tried to split them with the "shared parenting" because this is clearly in child's best interest (watch this space in about a week) but the feminists oppose it as it prevents women from having all the power. They want the current approach which is simply Women get the kids... and whoever gets the kids gets everything else...

This split that Howard has attempted is struggling. The feminists still have the numbers against the 'best interest of the kids' and the 'loving dads groups' and the 'struggling second-wives club' combined...

Greetings from North Shore City, Auckland, New Zealand.

Firstly

Thank-you Michael for your words. Your encouragement has had good affect on me and many others for many years.

I have lived "Equal" Parenting in time since 1997

I have a Son Javan born in 1995

16March05 I finally got a Family Court Order called an "Equal" Parenting Order.

Althought the FC has been helpful over the years I beleive the slow progress has damaged our Son and promoted bad blood between his Mother and I.

Several years ago I put together "10 Complaints" about the process of the NZ Family Court. It was done from my experience and was open and honist.

Boshier our Chief Family Court Judge returned the valuable document to me with a turse letter telling me my thoughts were not welcome.

We, NZ have lost ground with "Equal" Parenting in the "Care of Childrens Act". The act specifically removes the teeth of a bench warrent to enforce detail in an "Equal" Parenting Order.

My experience has proved the value of "Equal" Parenting but underlined the fact that NZ, and other countries have a long way to go to actually achieve it for our Kids.

Please feel free to visit our website and to participate in the Forums offered

Onward
Jim

I would have to say that I admire any and all non custodial parents who like Col Rouge has put in the hard yards, to ensure their children have as close as is possible to a normal life.

In the end regardless of the court system, it is the parents of the children who can make a real difference, by deciding on equal contact time or as close to equal as is possible.

In this, one of many emotive areas, I do not believe in a "one size fits all" solution, and feel that every case should be judged on individual merit, i.e. some fathers are abusive, also some mothers are equally so, alcohol, drug, moral,and financial situation should be reviewed before such a descion is made. Having said that I believe this new situation is a huge step forward for estranged fathers.

The only issue I do agree with the PM on is that in an ideal world, children should have both parents, to guide and nurture them to adulthood.

Shared parenting baloney.
Shared parenting is what occured before the divorce when the parents were loving towards each other and to their children because it was the childen's minds and emotions that mattered.
Now the political and the State meaning and the Family Courts meaning is the smiley 'cheese' baloney meaning to the opposing chalk meaning above.
Sharing parenting to them is the physical meaning where the body of the argument is sawed or chopped down the middle from head to toe or across the middle in the waste of the argument. Some parents will get the head and some the bottom half. Some will be armless and some not so harmless in sharing their children with someone they hate. What will be the result: a sham where the children grow up to hate both parents instead of just one.

What you all fail to realise, is that this is John Howards little baby, and liberal party policy will rule, and none of our opinions matter one tiny little bit. Michael Green was a QC, and now he is a mediator, its his buisness to say what will make him the most money.

Every issue with regard to Family Law and Child Support should be put to public referendum, which has never happened, not even in 1975, when the FLAct was created.

The whole point of what I am saying is, no matter what anyone says, this is going through parliament, and will become law. I can only say it will be one big waste of taxpayers funds. If it doesn't by some chance get through, who is going to pay for money already spent in development of FRC.......

Well said "Albie Manton in Darwin",FAMILY. I have recently done some parenting courses where they talked about two families.

I have experienced shared parenting and it worked well(not legally binding)until the other parent worked out she would lose out in money. I stilled payed her child during the shared parenting as she threaten to not allow it to happen. For me all I wanted was to allow my son who was 6 at the time to see me on a regular basis to form a bond. Ever since the break in shared parenting it has been conflict after conflict.

When I was a kid I believed what my parents said. If one said something about the other I at least had the ability to judge myself as I had both parents.

Give kids and non custodial parents a fair go I say.

I have been luckier than a lot of other fathers but it has certainly damaged my son and I. If things do not change I fear the future.