well Sylvia,

depends WHOSE case you speak of being "about"

here is summary

1. bloke is done over

2. lawyers see money and get mens groups to pass round hat

3. lawyers put case [not] to court to help femmos do more blokes over

4. Howard jumps in to amend nothing to get votes

winners - lawyers polies femmos and mens groups

losers - blokes, espec Liam

Whilst I believe that Mr Magill was well and truly done over emotionally by his wife, I don't believe that trying to ease his pain and suffering is something that the courts can do.

His wife, without conscience, had an affair, without either contraception or any measure to prevent STDs, thus actually putting Mr Magill's health at risk, after all, the wife didn't know who else her lover was bedding over that time. Having said that, Mr Magill did not own his wife's body, and he had no exclusive claim to its use for sexual gratification.

Unfortunately, no one seems to have bothered criticising the real father of these two children. As they say, it takes two to do the horizontal tango. This man must have been aware of Ms Magills marital status, but only thought of his own sexual and emotional gratification. He must have also had some questions as to whether he was the father.

Which comes back to the male versus female aspect of this discussion. Many men have conducted long term affairs with married women. I don't read any criticism of them here - something of a double standard I would say.

If the Courts were going to get involved in these questions every wronged wife would be able to sue her husband, or her husband's lover, for pain and suffering.

There are some areas in which people cannot let go. They live their lives through litigation, either in the State Courts or the Family Courts. Unfortunately this is one of those cases, where a wronged man cannot move on, but feels that by having his ex publicly crucified he will feel better.

The courts are littered with vexatious litigants who will spend huge amounts of money to try to prove that they are right, often amounts that far exceed any damages that may be awarded. The pain, however does not go away, and just triggers another round of litigation, like an addiction.

Sorry Mr Magill, the solution to your pain and suffering is not going to come through the law, and it never was.

I shake my head sometimes when I read some of the opinions that are posted. But you are all intitled to air your views based on the limited information that is avaialble. In fairness most people only have newspaper articles and the transcripts from the web site on which to form their opinion. The Magill case is complex, spans 7 1/2 years. How can one be expected to sum up Liam Magill's case which has been at foot for so long. One thing for sure, he sold his own modest home to fund the 1st 2 years of this case. He does not regret doing this. The money subsequently raised through donations would not have even paid a Barrister for one day in court. In all since 2000, Liam Magill has had the services of 1 Solicitor 3 Barrristers and one QC. No funding was provided to Liam Magill's legal team until he went to the High Court this year. That quota of the allocated funding for the High Court Appeal in April 2006 was paltry and the legal team were made to jump through hoops to obtain this assistance. On the other hand Meredith Magill has been fully funded since day one. Victorian Tax payers and Clayton Utz. Brian (DD)you don't have any of the facts. You will have to wait and buy the book. Cheryl King Melbourne

This case is not about adultery, who owns what body or contrapception. It is about the lives of a man & 3 children being used as toilet paper by our wonderful system & those who know how to exploit it. It is simply not fair to talk about women's rights in the context because there is nothing to suggest Liam did anything but trust & respect his wife. We also know he takes responsibility for his children. The point is that he suffers as result of fraud & should be compensated. If the system wishes to protect Meredith from liability for whatever reason, it must compensate Liam itself.
Howard had ample opportunity to act prior to Liam's case reaching the High Court & though his current rhetoric is merely vote-chasing, it does recognise an ill. If we wind up with genetic equality great, but Liam has to be given the right to rebuild his life. It is not enough to say "we are going to change the law". Each time I've read or heard something to that effect lately, I have wondered how it would help the poor bloke actually living the nightmare we are talking about.
And what about his little boy? Does Liam deserve the resources to give his son a decent life? The court knows there is a reasonable percentage of cuckolded fathers out there & that a precedent in Liam's favour could open the flood gates. Otherwise, the finding would have been different.

No human court can override the laws of nature.

This is true for paternity fraud as well as any other form of fraud.

Without a spiritual perspective, the tangle of human life has no meaning or solution, so no amount of words or legalities can bring any good.

The only way of being safe from fraud in the long term is to refrain from stealing and hiding the truth from others. By doing so, the truth is revealed and not hidden from oneself either.

When falling "victim" to fraud, rather than run to the courts, one should rejoice and seize the opportunity to grow: it is an opportunity to ask oneself, "where and when have I concealed the truth from others? how can I improve and eliminate these tendencies in myself?". One should also be grateful at the opportunity to pay back for one's old deceits. One should understand that the deceiving partner was only an instrument for receiving what one deserves, and thank them for that.

Yuyutsu

I can understand what you're getting at but...

'When falling "victim" to fraud, rather than run to the courts, one should rejoice and seize the opportunity to grow:

Yes you can grow, you can also grow more cynical and mistrusting too. This is a perfectly natural thing to do but it hurts society as a whole. I've met people who've been ripped off and have closed in on and live only for themselves. They're not necessarily bad or selfish people and they'll have no more kids, don't help charities, they don't harm but they don't help either. It's passive resistance and more and more people are doing these days.

'One should also be grateful at the opportunity to pay back for one's old deceits.'

It's better to do this yourself consciously with a good heart.

'One should understand that the deceiving partner was only an instrument for receiving what one deserves, and thank them for that.'

Or the deceivers could control themselves, not deceive and stop the vicious cycle there.

Remember also that this case involves young children who have no say in the matter. At least leave them out of it.