Very few countries in the world have started to take a long hard look at children's rights from children's perspectives. We only ever look at children's rights from adults' perspectives (in particular, the rights of parents).

Even then, the terms of reference on child abuse and any other form of negative treatment of children tends to be filtered through the lens of families under extreme stress - divorce, custody battles, poverty, domestic violence etc. We don't have adequate terms of reference for the rights of children per se.

We pride ourselves on being one of the world's forward thinking democracies. Yet, even in Australia, the one form of physical assault that is still legal is a parent's 'right' to hit his/her own child. If an adult hits another adult, it's called assault. If a spouse hits his/her spouse, it's called domestic violence. If a person hits an animal, it's called cruelty. But if a parent hits a child, it's called discipline. Even when such 'discipline' leads to physical injury, there is little that our social watchdogs can really do other than register it and then send the kid back home.

If all children are required to live by this unfair exceptionalism, is it any wonder that at the extremes of society, we are letting them down?

Cornflower

'I suppose that is why Japanese mothers initiate sex with their sons, or why in some cultures mothers masturbate their children to pacify them?'

If you happened to write anything halfway decent after this little gem of multicultural understanding, I wouldn't know ... as I stopped reading your post at that point.

JamesH

'When children are abused by members of either gender, it is not a mens or womens issue, it is a human issue.'

No. It's a power issue. There's a difference.

As usual someone comes up with the idiotic response that smacking children is child abuse. Usually the same people defend artist 'right; to strip young boys and girls naked and photograph them in sexual poses for money. They also ignore the simple fact that the less we have smacked our kids the more violent society has become. Many of the juveniles who bash old people for small amounts of money have never had a smack in their lives. That is half the problem. They know they can get away with almost anything without consequence. Anyone witnessing the tantrums of those children whose parents refuse to smack rebellious children can see how pathetic the weak uncaring parents are. No wonder we are breeding such a violent generation when we have swallowed the lie that discipline is child abuse. At least some can see how ridiculous this notion is.

"In a front page news story in The Australian recently, a mother who had abducted her preschool child to another country, was being hounded like a criminal following Family Court of Australia decisions"

Good. She is a criminal!! The only question that remains is if her crimes are justifiable in an Australian court (my intuition tells me they are not). Parental abduction is child abuse. It's no small suprise that courts tend to look unfavorably on kidnappers that are sent back to their home country for custody proceedings under the Hague Convention.

I am the left behind father of an internationally abducted son. I have no doubt that merely by stating that there are those that assume I am an abuser. It is a bias I have faced from the begining of my ongoing struggle to bring my son home. My wife didn't even have to make allegations of abuse. Society makes them for her. Stories like this make me sick. There is no conspiracy or bias to rob mothers of their children and place them in the hands of abusive fathers. In most societies mothers are shown a huge, often undeserved, deference at every level. The only abuser I see here is the mother. Parental abduction is child abuse, plain and simple. As an American citizen I have a tremendous deal of respect for Australia's handling of both outgoing and incoming Hague cases. While the US does a good job of handling incoming cases it stands to learn a lot from Australia's hands on approach to finding and returning abducted Australian children.

http://hagueabductions.com

It is interesting to see people vigorously defend adult rights to commit physical violence on children on a topic which has children's safety and survival at its centre. Sweeping claims that those who commit violence have never been sufficiently hit as children are grounded in ideology not empirical evidence. Developmental neurobiology is unequivocal that children whose development takes place in a context of abuse, violence, stress and chaos experience neuro-developmental injury. The more they are exposed, the more risk they carry. These impacts adversely affect their capacity to learn, to cope with new people and situations, to form relationships - and they carry forward the stress-related health risks - hypertension, cardiovascular disease, cancers.
The family law system currently has no capacity to investigate, determine or monitor children's safety and well-being under the orders or agreements made. So children die and are seriously injured.

The defensive men on this issue would be better served by acknowledging the necessity for children's safety to be improved in the family law system instead of bleating on about feeling accused. If you don't use violence or abuse then get on with working for its elimination and reduction and if you do, give it up.

"Developmental neurobiology is unequivocal that children whose development takes place in a context of abuse, violence, stress and chaos experience neuro-developmental injury. The more they are exposed, the more risk they carry. These impacts adversely affect their capacity to learn, to cope with new people and situations, to form relationships - and they carry forward the stress-related health risks - hypertension, cardiovascular disease, cancers."

I love it when someone takes common sense throws in some technical jargon and claims to have proven something. So, what you're saying is that kid's who are abused have problems later in life? That's deep, but what does it have to do w/ the price of tea in China?

It's interesting to see you vigourosly generalize a single post that suggests children aren't disciplined frequently enough as representative of the "sweeping claims" of all the men who have posted.

This article unequivically demonstrated a profound bias in favor of a female abductor. At no point was evidence of alleged abuse presented so why the assumption that it exists? An assumption you have made while accusing fathers of "feeling accused", well gee, I wonder why we might fell that way. While you bleet on about the revelance of neurobiology you may want to do what any self-respecting critical thinker would do and examine your assumptions. Anecdotal evidence was presented that children have been harmed during visitations with their fathers. Instead of providing real evidence we get an emotional appeal that generalizes from the exceptions that fathers killing their children during visitations is the rule that should dictate public policy and family law.

"If you don't use violence or abuse then get on with working for its elimination and reduction and if you do, give it up."

You can help us eliminate child abuse by not being an apologist for child abductors that happen to be female.

Parental abduction is child abuse:
http://www.prevent-abuse-now.com/unreport.htm

Well done, guys! Take a bow. The Dispossessed Fathers Anonymous faction has well and truly conquered this commentary thread.

I have to admit though ... for a minute or two there, I actually thought a couple of posters were going to manage to make this a discussion about children - like, you know, as the author intended it to be.

Silly me. Children? What children?

This thread is now well and truly about the menz - poor menz, divorced menz, dispossessed menz, bitter menz, a whole legal system against poor menz, and ex-wives from hell who make life awful for poor menz.

I don't know how you do it so effortlessly, guys. Without so much as a 'pardon my bias' blink or 'is my misogyny showing?' flicker of conscience. Perhaps it's the accumulation of thousands of years of having the universe revolve around the needs of poor menz. I guess it's just too hard to kick the entitlement habit.

Mog

For what it's worth ... nice post.