TPP. not quite sure what you mean by a generation ago it was the menfolk enjoying this advantage, i can't recall any time in recent history where the family courts have given fathers greater rights to their children than mothers and rewarded them as hansomely as mothers are rewarded today. Perhaps you can enlighten me. As regards DOCS case workers, i vividly remember chatting to a female worker at the family court once when i was waiting for some paperwork to be processed, her words were, " that would be them, they jump in when there is no need, and when there is a crying need they sit back and do nothing, they ALWAYS get it wrong ". In her job she must have seen lots. You say that not one of you girls is responsible for the law or government policies yet SJF has stated quite plainly that the feminists have lobbied for decades to get more support for single mothers, you must have seen yourself her reply, "tell it to some one who cares", a completely different attitude to your own. People like SJF would rather pour millions of dollars into propping up those single mothers who don't care about their children than just place them with a father that does when one is available. They freely point out government statistics that support their views then ignore or deny those that don't. And as i've said elsewhere they are quite prepared to accept innocent children like my daughter left, with an abusive mother, as collateral damage to be sacrificed on the altar of feminism. I can't believe that as a foster carer you could agree with that.These same people are now actively seeking the repeal of the shared parenting laws introduced by the previous gov't, citing a few high profile cases of child murder perpetrated by fathers, while at the same time ignoring the much more numerous case of child murder abuse and neglect perpetrated by mothers and their new BF's.

Hey Eyeinthesky, I messed up the threads last night, managed to mix this one and the father one up and replied to your message over in the in the love revolution topic. Sorry about that.

I went and read stuff on feminism, it’s actually quite interesting. Although female I think I may be “pro feminist” rather than a feminist, and reading it I get where Anti started calling them “grrls”. Men see this movement as “anti-male” but I couldn’t see where that is part of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism

Main article: Pro-feminism

Pro-feminism is the support of feminism without implying that the supporter is a member of the feminist movement. The term is most often used in reference to men who are actively supportive of feminism and of efforts to bring about gender equality. The activities of pro-feminist men's groups include anti-violence work with boys and young men in schools, offering sexual harassment workshops in workplaces, running community education campaigns, and counseling male perpetrators of violence. Pro-feminist men also are involved in men's health, activism against pornography including anti-pornography legislation, men's studies, and the development of gender equity curricula in schools. This work is sometimes in collaboration with feminists and women's services, such as domestic violence and rape crisis centers. Some activists of both genders will not refer to men as "feminists" at all, and will refer to all pro-feminist men as "pro-feminists".

Then by the definitions you cite, i must be pro feminist myself.I believe in equal work for equal pay, i do not advocate violence against women, i'm against sexual harrassment in the workplace and i believe in job placements being made on merit not gender. The problem is that the modern feminists are not interested in equality they are about superiority. They are not interested in so much furthering womens rights as stripping men of theirs especially in the arena of family law. As in this article they are interested in getting quota's of women on company boards and in government instead of things being decided on merit. I wonder if they would support more and equal numbers of men in the currently female dominated fields of child psychologists, social work, relationship counselling etc such jobs being filled because the applicants are men not because they are any good at it. Feminists were instrumental in bringing in no fault divorce with the result that at least 70% of divorces are now initiated by women, yet they still expect special treatment when it comes to child custody,this despite rock solid evidence that far more mothers abuse kill and neglect their children than fathers.They advocate spending millions on supporting single mothers who abuse their kids rather than advocate that a child live with a loving father.Plenty of courses in womens studies around, i don't see too many for mens studies. Currentlt all a woman has to do is just say she is afraid her husband might harm her and that man will summarily be romoved from his childs life, if the allegations are found to be malicious lies nothing will happen to the mother but the fathers life will be blighted for ever. Even as i write diana bryant is attempting to bring in legislation so that even costs wont be awarded against a mother even if she commits perjury like this. I wonder what her attitude would be if i posted in the media that she was a lesbian paedophile who bashes kids, what do you think it would be.

Eye:”Then by the definitions you cite, I must be pro feminist myself. I believe in equal work for equal pay, I do not advocate violence against women, I’m against sexual harassment in the workplace and I believe in job placements being made on merit not gender.“

I know it’s so weird. I am guessing like in any “group” there are extremists. I think I am happy being called pro feminist; I wouldn’t know what the description for the other side is “pro masculist”?

“The problem is that the modern feminists are not interested in equality they are about superiority. They are not interested in so much furthering womens rights as stripping men of theirs especially in the arena of family law. “

I think there is also a group called the “accidental feminist” where if they are advocating for something that comes from a female perspective then a label is flung at them no matter what the context. I am sure you will find some that are about superiority, you would find the same types within the male community. Humans are pretty predictable in that respect.

To me this article looked as though females were frequently overlooked because they weren’t having any merits acknowledged.
I don’t’ know about how things work here Eye – It is a tricky one. Like if a kid says something bad happened to them the first thing to do is believe the kid and sort out the facts afterwards, it is the only way it should happen initially. I’d say the length of the process afterwards is what causes so much grief.

I found this:

The Family Law Act 1975 established the principle of no-fault divorce in Australian law. This means that a court does not consider which partner was at fault in the marriage breakdown. The only ground for divorce is the irretrievable breakdown of the relationship, demonstrated by 12 months of separation.

What is wrong with it?

As for the rock solid evidence about who abusing who, I am still dubious of stats and the story they don’t tell.

Benk,

You're probably right, they may not be impartial. But unlike the CSA, the solicitor acting as CA risks his job if that can be shown.

Currently, The CSA claims to be acting in the child's interest, yet will throw that out the window rather than fix a simple error. The CSA has other interests than the child's interest, A CA has no other interests.

In any case, simply having another person in the room helps to reduce the air of secrecy about all their procedures, always a good thing.

Rusty

TPP. I am not saying that there is anything wrong with what you posted about the family law act. What i am saying is that while THAT area of the law underwent what at the time was a radical change, there was no commensurate change in the associated area of law which covered child custody and access. In effect the feminist lobby got to get their cake and eat it too, while many fathers in effect have only got to eat a few stale crusts. As you say regarding females being frequently overlooked because they wern't having any merits acknowledged, so it is the same in the family law system except that it is the fathers who are being overlooked, the figures [85% of mothers getting custody] speak for themselves. I know that,as you say, i would find some within the male community that advocate male superiority, i have seen just as many of these websites as i have seen man hating feminist superiority sites.