I agree Shadow- I propose that there be more measures to ensure that

1- any protest physically obstructing access through a bridge, tunnel etc be punishable by jail.

2- all victims be allowed to sue for lost wages, petrol expense, and a thousand or two extra for wasting their time. EACH

3- As he threatened violence- he should be charged for that on top of the other offenses. But then again, he arguably was committing a violent hostage situation (Sydney's commuters), threatening violence- so I would have no qualms if somebody just shot the bastard off his perch and ended it in a few minutes.

If he is mentally ill, he should be stuck in an asylum and cared for, instead of allowed to run loose (supposing we still had any open in this state).
I *would* say that parental access would make a fair case- but I don't think DOCS would have a hard time explaining why this disturbed individual is being denied access.

I guess it should boil down to if the children WANT to see him, however. If they do, it should be their right to demand it over a third party's.

The ones who caused the disruption and suffering are the police, not Fox.

Under the guise of a "protest", the man's real intention was to show the world how fit he is - and he succeeded.

The most reasonable response would be to ignore him. He would eventually be brought down without fuss by the calls of nature and very few would have even known this ever happened!

Shadow

While it would be better if he didn't disrupt so many people, he shouldn't have to. These dads have had to fight far too long for a fair go. The threatened violence increased the effectiveness of the protest, without actually hurting anyone.

Suze

If any of us were unable to see our kids for four months because of a court decision, we would become mentally unstable too. The fact that Mr Fox pulled off this stunt doesn't necessarily prove that he had mental issues back in January, or that he is an unfit parent today.

Ammonite,

I said personality disorder, not mental disorder. He is perfectly aware of what damage he is doing, it is just he feels far more important than us mere mortals.

The courts have two functions, one is remedial to get the best help for Mr Fox, the other is to provide a deterrent. If Michael Fox gets a slap on the wrist and what he wants from this stunt, there will be a queue of disgruntled sociopaths lining up to block the bridge, tunnel, airports etc.

". . . , there will be a queue of disgruntled sociopaths lining up to block the bridge, tunnel, airports etc.

Posted by Shadow Minister, Sunday, 15 May 2011 2:12:05 PM"

and it won't be hard to do and probably there won't be anyone to stop them.

Benk, I agree with you. Like you, we can only speculate because we don't have all the details of this guy's case.

Not many parents who get a decision from DOCS that they don't like, will go ahead and stop traffic for hours or threaten violence against innocent people will they?
The issue here is whether he should be penalized for his tough-guy stunt on the bridge.

Shadow Minister is right in saying the courts should come down hard on this guy, whether he is mentally ill or not, or we will have mad acts happening from others with an axe to grind.