mog,

Well, read my first post. It's refreshing to see you have dropped the man hating for one post.

ChildAdvocate, spot on.

It would also help if the courts had some kind of informal review process. Someone who would do at least a basic check of concerns raised about the legality of judgements without the person raising the concern having to fund an appeal. Particularly so while the courts remain adversarial.

R0bert

Thanks for making me smile childadvocate.

In terms of improvements to a dysfunctional system.... all my friends believe that a certain kind of system already exists...where children are interviewed by kind child abuse experts, they play with dolls, say things and lo and behold are believed.

There is a belief that abused children are generally treated with care and respect and from truth comes protection. The first problem is the illusion that this state of affairs currently exists.

This sanitisation of the reality seems to be perpetuated by the spokespeople of the Family Court and the media.

It is an unbelievable shock that the standards of the general community don't exist in the Family Court when it comes to child abuse.

Second - the illusion needs to become the reality. Safety, quite sensibly to most people, should be the reality and priority. Words like 'childs best interests' should mean safety. 'Risk of abuse' should mean before it happens, not long term damage to the child has already happened.

Kind play therapists with years of experience in child abuse do exist. But in the hearts of men/women there is another game being played. I doubt I'll ever hear the kind and knowledgable judge say, "this is terrible what has happened to this child this must be stopped at once". But it should, it should be like that.

I think child abuse cases should be heard by child abuse experts or that a child abuse expert should 'sit in' with Judge and inform him/her. This expert should be able to override Judge who is an expert in legislation only.

There are many, many knowledgable people in our society with ideas to make this system work for children, they just need to be listened to.

Also ask the children ...they might know.

Child advocate your point that children know what is happening to them is a very good one. The trouble is that when children disclose abuse to family law system people such as family report writers and child protection workers in the context of family law proceedings, the usual mythology appears - that the children are saying what they have been told to say by their (alienating) parent (usually mother) because they are 'enmeshed.' Currently the risk that the children are telling the truth about thier abuse is borne by the children, in private, away from scrutiny. Another part of the problem is the belief amongst decision-makers that if a wrong decision is made it is worse to wrongly deprive a child of a relationship with a non-offending parent, than to subject a child to continuing abuse by an abusing parent. A Justice of the court is in print to this effect. Child abuse literally destroys children's lives. Separation from a loving parent is a sad loss for a child, but one that is not mourned when fathers go to war or work overseas or away from home. Relationsips recover. The toll of child abuse won't stop while the family law system forces children into the control of abusers.

mog,

' the usual mythology appears - that the children are saying what they have been told to say '
I find it very hard to believe that this is the defaut position, and no investigation is entered into.

'but one that is not mourned when fathers go to war or work overseas or away from home. '
So you're suggesting that a fathers relationship with the child isn't as important as the mother's relationship with the child?

In the end, it still seems you would like all allegations to be treated as truth, and the burden of proof on the accused? No risk to the children, where there's smoke there's fire, better to be safe than sorry sums it up for you.

That's open slather for false accusations. Whoever gets in first with the allegations of abuse gets custody, as the accused cant prove it didn't happen.

There has to be some disincentive for false accusations.

I recognise that it may be hard to believe that it is the default position to disbelieve children and blame mothers - trawl through judgements, read the transcripts and reports, talk to parents who have been through it. Those of us who have done so have repeatedly seen the evidence.
There is no proper investigation process when a family report writer interviews each parent for an hour and the benefit of the doubt never falls on the side of safety. Safety does not necessarily mean no contact, it means no opportunity for further physical or psychological injury.
Children mourn the loss of either parent. The point is that children can more readily survive separation from a parent than being physically, sexually and/or pschologically abused by a parent. The criminal justice system and mental wards and morgues are populated by people seriously abused as children by their parent. Sometimes it is their mother, but the most common context is domestic violence. In the state I live in, 85% of deaths of babies under one occur in households which child protection has identifed as domestic violence.There is no safety if they stay or if they leave in this family law system- all that awaits is a childhood of continuing abuse if they survive.