This discussion has deteriorated int a “What about me?. Look what happened to me!. This is all about me!” diatribe. With odd bits of obscure literature thrown in as an attempt to bolster `me’-based arguments but which are not generally applicable. Anything that will denigrate men or women in some form.

You are largely all victims of a flawed and dysfunctional system which is in need of serious reforms. Its like watching victims of a car smash fighting among themselves as to who is most injured and which of them’s fault it was, while children still lie injured and dying under the car and the driver is grinning because he knows his vehicle was unroadworthy and had poor brakes but that he wont be blamed as long as the victims point accusing fingers at each other.

This thread has become unworthy of any further contributions.

ChazP, the discussion was always about the use of allegations of harm to children being used to bolster a parent's claim in custody matters.
The OP and her barrackers have not made their case so far. You have been vocal with platitudes about "the children", but you seem unwilling to engage seriously on the subject. There have been several posts from R0bert and myself that have gone directly to the OP's claims and she has not seen fit to debate us on those posts.

In trying to censor a thread that has not gone the way you would like it to go, you show yourself to be shallow at best and your position to be ill-founded.

There are a lot of interesting points made by a wide variety of people here. a few points that havent really been raised here so far:

1. How much of the "false" accusation is driven by concern that there is something bad happening, but that this is the only way to get concerns listened to? I'm not saying that this is justified BTW, just raising the possibility.

2. How much of PAS or PA is a "lioness" reaction? We all know that in nature most mothers are fiercely protective of their offspring - how much is it wired in? Again, no comment as to whether good or bad, but if we recognise it, it might be manageable.

3. How much of PA is simply poor communication and misunderstanding? My daughter now regularly comes home from her grandparents stating that various people dont love her. For a little while I was tempted to blame my mother-in-law for telling her directly, but once I stop being angry about it I can rationalise that its probably a case of her saying "but XXX doesnt love you as much as nanny does" and it being misunderstood (which I am still ticked off about, but its a lot different to it being malicious). Men are quite capable of it as well, including unintentional undermining -my husband's a star (picked it up from his mother). I've been guilty myself of muttering comments when fuming, but because I am aware of the damage that it can do, make the effort to sit down with the kids later and explain myself and put it in context.

Kids pick up on all sorts of things that we dont give them credit for.

This discussion was intended to be about the ways in which a system (in this case, the Family Court of Australia and its associated industry, The Magistrates Court) is once again failing to protect children in need.

My heart goes to those protective parents who have spoken up about the injustice of losing your children to the care of the parent who hurts them due to the actions of inept report writers, lawyers and judges who ignore the evidence placed before them and choose instead to parrot non evidence based dogma in order to make the protective parent into the unfriendly parent.

Within the law circles, it is known that certain report writers have simply been around too long, their views are entrenched and being human they are not able to self reflect in cross examination and instead become hostile and defensive so will not shift their views. Bad luck for the kids concerned. Lawyers see it as a matter of hoping that their client gets a good judge/report writer/psych/sep rep. The lawyer gets paid regardless of the outcome as does the judge, the report writer etc etc. The parents pay regardless of the outcome, in financial and emotional terms.

Leaving the welfare of the next generation of this nations leaders to chance and hope is ridiculous. A fair, well functioning system does not rely on hope and chance. Our kids and their parents deserve a much better system designed with the welfare of the whole family in mind, not an adversarial process designed to break the family apart even further.

Suggestions on actions which may result in a fairer system for all are welcome.

Are these flawed and perverse decisions by Courts and their officials widespread?. It does appear that the incidence of such decisions occur in certain States, certain cities and towns, certain Courts and Judges/Family Reporters. How far can they be identified?. Can the entire Family Court system be condemned for the actions of a minority?. Or does it require major changes in the Family Law and the operation of the Courts system?. It does seem that there is a high level of incompetence, including serious biases and prejudices, among Family Reporters in several States.

"Suggestions on actions which may result in a fairer system for all are welcome.'

1/ Remove as far as practical the links between child residency and finances. It gives cause to some people who don't really want involvment with their kids to see them to reduce the impacts of CSA and or property settlements and cause to parents with the residency to try and keep them away from the other to maximise CSA, FTB and property settlements. The stakes for the adults involved can be to big to rely on the childrens interests always being at the forefront.

2/ Have consequences when a reasonable case can be made that a claim was clearly false (not that a claim can't be proved).

3/ Introduce whatever truth detection technologies are available into the system, they are not perfect and apparently coaching can reduce their effectiveness but should be better than nothing.

4/ Find a balance in the way that complaints are treated, if it's too formal and too much a part of criminal law that may disuade many from lodging a genuine complaint, too lax and it's ineffective at getting to the truth. I don't know what the best balance is on this, too thorough and it will be backlogged, to much at the surface and perceptions will rule more than facts.

I don't know about the Family Report writers, my impression is that the process involving them is deeply flawed but I've not been close enough to it really tell for myself.

We are dealing with a situation where people often have strong emotional issues of their own, where the outcomes can make a massive difference to their own situation and where kids can an do get caught in the middle of conflicting loyalties and confused messages.

R0bert