Liz,
As an educator, you are not very illuminating, and have yet to adequately qualify what you say about fathers.

I am left to ponder on where you get your information from.

I heard recently on the ABC that a number of schools no longer celebrate father’s day. This is because so many children no longer see their fathers. But if these schools are honest and non-gender prejudiced then eventually they would have to stop celebrating mother’s day also.

So the systematic devaluing of fatherhood will eventually devalue motherhood also.

Countrygal

You are kidding yourself to think that as an accountant, if you do happen to be one, that you are the 'next stop' for someone going through a divorce.

Accountants do not counsel on divorce issues. They are not privy to ALL information shared by both sides in a divorce.

And again, you are giving an anecdote, that may or may not be true, presenting a divorcing woman in an unfavourable light, and therefore that is meant to back up your 'expert' status on the topic.

It's simplistic rhetoric you are so dogmatically gripping on to.

You're attempt to place some sort of professional 'expertise' on divorce issues is staggering in its ignorance.

Liz, at least she is providing some basis for her views. You continue to make claims that go completely against the reality of our family law system and I've not seen any place where you have identified your stake in this ir the basis for your own views.

R0bert

Liz, for business clients, often the first stop is the accountants and the second the lawyers. Business-people tend to treat their accountants as part of the family, and as a result we hear everything. Any major family event has an impact on the business structure and finances. Accountants are about much more than tax. We often hear if there is a suspicion that divorce might be on the cards, as people will act at that time to try to protect their assets (no good waiting until things are in motion!).

I really dont think that I showed the woman in the earlier example in a bad light. She isnt money-grabbing, she just doesnt understand the business and the true financial position. As a result she is going to end up very badly burned, which I dont think is a good thing. Because she doesnt understand it, she is listening to bad advice from her lawyers (I am fairly sure that she is not consulting an accountant, more's the pity), and is running up big legal bills trying to get money that is not there. I think its very sad for both sides. Another client is going through the court system at the moment fighting over the valuation of properties, which Sydney valuers put $1.6million on, but if were sold off now, even seperately as small blocks (generally more saleable and more valuable), they would be lucky to get $800,000 for. The lunacy of this just blows me away.

But enough of what I deal with on a weekly basis. As HRS asked, what are your qualifications for making observations about such matters? You are pretty quick to shoot down anyone else for not being qualified to comment, but very reticient to speak up about yourself. About time you came out with it.

Countrygal

My Dad was a CPA, with his own business. I never heard him speak with such authority on divorce matters such as yourself, nor attempt to promote some concept of gender inequality.

Having an accountant is one thing, as many people do. To treat an accountant as a confidante in a marital break up or seek advice is a fanciful claim.

It's quite extraordinary that you represent women as not knowing what the marital wealth is and further that they make unreasonable demands upon exhusbands or discuss these issues with their accountants.

I have heard of accountants helping one partner hide their money.

Liz,
I would think accountants get to know about what goes on within family law, as most of family law is about money, (or who gets what and who has to pay money to see their own children). That is family law.

But you have not yet qualified or substantiated your previous negative comments about fathers.

The following is interesting. It gives some information about a social science research project about to start that looks at fathers and their children.

“Involvement of fathers with their children is beneficial for children while they are growing up as it helps their developing self-esteem, learning and socialising," Ms Morel said.

There were also long-term benefits, such as helping children gain more satisfaction from their lives later on and being less prone to psychological distress.”

http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Study-examines-fatherchild-relations/2007/05/22/1179601392546.html

So this already seems to go against the research of the 103 1st year University students, who said that they regard their mothers as being more significant than their mothers. So the question now becomes :- “When will social science researchers ever develop consensus amongst themselves?”

Or maybe social science researchers do not want to develop consensus amongst themselves, but simply want more public funding so that they can carry out more research without ever developing consensus.