What is wrong with people like Barbara who use such a tragedy to drive home their own agenda. All of a sudden Darcy's father is a violent man, supposedly suffering from parental alienation. Where is Darcy getting these facts from, because they certainly are not in media articles anywhere, all we know is Darcy was in her fathers care and the parents were separated.

Where were your similar opinions Barbara when the young mother in Perth attempted to kill herself and her young son just over 2 years ago. The little boy died yet the mother survived, with the excuse of Post Natal Depression, and the judge on naming a sentence of time served, used the words "where justice ends, compasion begins".

The most recent AIC research shows that 11 mothers killed their children last year, 5 step fathers killed a child and only 5 biological fathers killed their children. The online report uses the term "male family member" but a simple email to the report writers will confirm this.

Of the four cases last year where the perpetrator committed suicide after the homicide, 2 were mothers and 2 were fathers. These numbers are extremely small if you consider there are over 1 million children on the CSA books.

I find your opinion at the least SICK, almost verging on perverted with a taste of hatred for men.

What must this man have been going through, that something as simple as a traffic jam, could have been the trigger that pushed him over the edge, it must have been very similar to Post Natal Depression on an emotional level. I think its very strange that it was only the female child, why not all 3, were there some allegations about the father involving the female child? Your allegedly the journalist here, how about some unbiased research into this case, put aside your own personal child abuse you may have suffered.

I happened to be in Melbourne on that day, and listened with horror to the first-hand stories.

I still haven't been able to process it fully. I'm not sure I ever will.

But a couple of observations, if I may.

There appears to be an automatic assumption that "we" as "society" should somehow be able to "do something" to prevent random tragedies from occurring.

Many reports, I am sure, will be commissioned, and written on the Darcey Freeman tragedy.

There will undoubtedly be recommendations made, by a number of well-meaning bodies. And it is inevitable that many of these will conflict, given the possibility of almost infinitely extreme positions to be taken, and defended.

Quite possibly, in the fullness of time, some adjustments will be made to the way in which the law, and its administrative support systems, manages marital conflict. Which is fine, as long as it does not rely upon tragedies such as this one, as evidence for this or that action.

Because...

Can anyone here actually contemplate, in their wildest imaginings, what was going through that man's mind when he did what he did?

I doubt it.

If we cannot do that, then we will be powerless to formulate any kind of response, legislative or administrative, that will protect anyone from such horrific acts in the future.

Quite simply, events like this are so distant from normal contemplation, that they can only be treated as massive, standalone, personal acts of total madness.

The question "what pushed this man to this point" does not help.

Because the same circumstances that "pushed this man to this point", when faced by 99.9999% of the rest of the population, would not have had the same result.

It's called generalization from the particular, a trait that tends to lead us away from, not towards, a genuine solution.

350 words, what a crock Barbara's article was well over 100 words

How do explain the extremely high (compared to population research) numbers of allegations of domestic violence or sexual abuse that are raised in FCA?

I see your words here as endangering children who may be in that risk category, it will stop men seeking help from support groups, like Dads In Distress, www.dadsindistress.asn.au/ Lifeline Mensline etc.

Leigh, I tend to disagree, if someone makes allegations of abuse that are untruthful in family court (quite often on legal advise that wont be admitted by lawyers) surely that person or group must hold some of the responsibility when a child dies at the hands of the parent. By your standard even PND should not be an acceptable excuse.

Barbara, Parental alienation has been recognised by no less than the Bryant CJ and its used by fathers and mothers in FLC cases.

Ross M,

It is we, the posters, not the contributors, who are restricted to 350 words. But, we can make two 350 word posts immediately, then none for 24 hours.

I accept your point about both parents taking some blame. And as a bloke, I do thing men often get a raw deal. But in this case, there can never be any excuse for what this father did - in my opion, that is.

The real question is how do we protect children from abuse? These decisions are made by officials who can only make a judgement on the evidence before them. They may not always be endowed with the wisdom of Solomon.

Rather than turn this into a gender war, what are some solutions that might make the system better for children and parents. What measures will weed out the chaff (liars or abusers).

We all know abusers are out there, but how do you prove that abuse has occurred without being labelled a liar? And how do you defend yourself should a charge of abuse be levelled at you when you are innocent?

It is no wonder that rationality and reason are often the first casualties in a relationship breakdown and this in the rarest of circumstances can have tragic consequences.

Situations like the Darcy case, may occur regardless of whether a parent was abusive. Maybe the incident was the first time the father had 'lost it'. We know none of the details of this particular incident and should wait for the findings before casting any judgement other than to say it was a tragedy that should not have happened.

The solution lies in negotiated custodial and visitational agreements reached after assisted sessions with Family Court Counsellors.

At all times, the Counsellors need to remind the parties to the negotiations that the interests of the child will be the deciding factor.

The children should also be interviewed in non-intimidatory surroundings as to their preferences.

I have experienced the system in action. I was awarded sole custody of our 5yr old son after my estranged wife moved out with an interloper.and then after a couple of months filed for custody.

I made every effort to reach an agreement during counselling sessions but my wife resisted reaching a reasoned agreement putting the interests of our child uppermost, because there was no obligation on her to seriously participate. She was of the belief that because the interloper was financial enough to engage a QC, she was bound to obtain sole custody on her terms.

The horrific act that killed little Darcy could well occur again if the Family Court does not demand parents reach working arrangements acceptable to both parties without the adversarial presence of lawyers.

The irony in my case was I had to press my wife to take up her options for access.