thanks for agreeing that there needs to be proper investigation - hallelujah - you got it usual suspect!

mog:"I suggest you examine some of the recent cases of child murder by their fathers and the Court decisions to award those fathers custody of those children."

I suggest you read up on the far more common cases of children murdered by their mothers instead of letting your man-hating prejudices show so blatantly.

mog:"the play of taunting those who identify themselves as falsely accused abusers"

If you're referring to me, that should read "men who have been falsely accused of abuse". Glad to have cleared that up for you. Perhaps you could clear up for the rest of us why you presumably find it so much fun to taunt people who've been victims of false accusations

ChazP:"allegations by children, that they are being abused by their fathers on contact occasions, are necessarily `false’, only unproven"

Entirely right. It is up to the Court to determine whether those unproven allegations can be substantiated. That task is made harder when it is a parent making the allegation, not a child claiming to be a victim. If a child does make such an allegation, the Court has to have due consideration for the fact that children may often be easily lead, both intentionally and inadvertently. I'm sure that mistakes are made in both directions. In any case, it's a far more common scenario that a child is abused by a someone with no biological relationship, especially the de facto partners of their "single" mother. I'm not sure of your grounds for suggesting that Family Report writers and ICRs are acting outside their fields.

ChazP:"difficulties faced by children in having their allegations meet the standards of proof required by Courts."

I'm sure there are many others, as well. One of the problems is that such an allegation, if proven, may lead to criminal charges. The Family court is not the place for criminal matters. Such matters require a much higher burden of proof than a mere "balance of probabilities". If such a criminal matter is raised, it is likely that it would take precedence over pending Family Law matters, since it may significantly affect the grunds for any decision made in the Family Court. Therefore, it is important for all responsible parties to ensure that diverting a case to the criminal courts is not done lightly and that means that claims of abuse must be treated somewhat sceptically. Please note, that doesn't mean they should be disregarded, merely examined properly.

Even without all that, the possibility of advantage accruing to the one who makes the allegation is enough to mean any accusation must be greeted with caution. It's a fraught issue, buti still don't see that Sunita has made her case.

“That task is made harder when it is a parent making the allegation, not a child claiming to be a victim.” – any allegation of child abuse has to originate from the child by either physical evidence, complaint, or disclosure or a combination – all that a parent can do is to report such allegations and without distortion or embellishment – the child is the victim of the crime.

“it's a far more common scenario that a child is abused by a someone with no biological relationship,”
– No they are not. Natural fathers and grandfathers are the most common perpetrators of child abuse. Abuse by de facto partners are far less common.

..” such an allegation, if proven, may lead to criminal charges” etc.
And therein lies the rub. It is immensely difficult to prove child abuse to a civil court standard and even more so in a Criminal Court. The evidence that the child has been abused is often present and allegations are not therefore false in any sense, but requires some form of corroborative evidence which may be difficult to obtain. Even against previously convicted abusers. That is why the vast majority of instances of child abuse cannot be proven to a legal standard and are unpunished. The best that can be done is to try to protect the child against further abuse while the perp is acquitted.

“. I'm not sure of your grounds for suggesting that Family Report writers and ICRs are acting outside their fields."
Many Courts are appointing psychologists/ psychiatrists as Family Reporters. Their job is to diagnose mental disorders (and there are some who are diagnosing mental disorders which have no scientifically based research and are not generally accepted by the relevant professional community e.g. PAS/ Dissociative Disorder/ Repressed Memory Syndrome etc.) They are not educated nor trained nor experienced in investigating child abuse yet are permitted to do so by Courts. Child abuse is therefore not within their area of expertise and any of them doing so should be reported to their respective professional Disciplinary Board.

A paper on "Responding to children and young people's disclosures of abuse" http://www.aifs.gov.au/nch/pubs/brief/pb2/pb2.html

A number of other papers can be found at http://www.aifs.gov.au/nch/pubs/brief/menu.html

Plenty of other resources available from other parts of the AIFS site.

R0bert

A large part of the issue is the fact that the Family Court is an adversarial court and not an inquisitorial court. As long as it remains adversarial, the involvement of liars erm I mean lawyers will ensure that mistakes will be made and children will be subjected to abusive situations. Remove the lawyers (who are licensed to lie without consequence in order to win) and most of the problem is solved. Read on:

A Sydney barrister, Stuart Littlemore QC, stated client-based ethics
accurately when interviewed on television by Andrew Denton in October
1995.
Denton: ‘It's a classic question. If you're in a situation where you are defending someone who you yourself believe not to be innocent - can you continue to defend them?’
Littlemore: ‘Well, they're the best cases; I mean, you really feel you've done something when you get the guilty off. Anyone can get an innocent person off; I mean they shouldn't be on trial. But the guilty - that's the challenge.’
Denton: ‘Don’t you in some sense share in their guilt?’
Littlemore: ‘Not at all.