Hi Foxy, Jayb, Shadow Minister and everyone else.

Jayb "What I call 'Dolly Syndrome' Some little girl played with another little girls Doll & that little girl has never forgiven her, 40 years later the little girl still hates the other little girl for touching her Doll."

Ok Now your RED HOT
It's blown the lid off and now the kitchen is on fire.
Call the fireys.
Great Job.

Foxy you spoke on another thread about being picked on when you were younger, surely you know what we're talking about?

Yes I'm done here too.
-But there are some take-aways.

Firstly, in regards to the current protocol there is obviously some issues that hold merit, because otherwise other forum members wouldn't agree with me.

This shows that your experts are not the experts they claim to be,
They're entrenched in their beliefs and they are preventing change for the better.

Secondly I want you to know there is a path to creating better policy.
You just witnessed it, it's a process.

I think I want to close this out with something I wrote earlier.

The way to get to the truth on any issue is to separate the arguments that do hold merit from those that don't.
Policies need to be foolproofed, that is face the scrutiny of every possible argument that holds merit.
It needs to be done this way because there's a lot at stake.
At best 'bad policy' has the potential for people to be treated unfairly;
And at worst the policy is open to exploitation by those who would deliberately do so for their own or others benefit;
- And all the consequences that can result from that.

Dear Ac,

What is a concern is that on the 16 March 2017 a
Committee of the Australian parliament adopted an
inquiry into how Australia's federal family law system
can better support and protect people affected by
family violence. The inquiry was referred by the
Attorney-General Senator the Hon, George Brandis, QC.

The Committee aimed to make recommendations that will
improve the system for ALL participants. 33 recommendations
resulted.

Then the Australian Law Reform Commission Report -
released just this year - made 60 recommendations to the
government.

The government has not responded to either of those reports.

We can argue until we're blue in the face.

However it shall be a government decision as to what action
if any is taken.

See you on another discussion.

I wrote about the ALRC review above, namely,

Recommendations for

(1) the repeal of the Presumption of shared parental responsibility (and thereby the legislative trigger to consider equal, substantial or any time with the children)

(2) that the other biological parent be replaced by significant others, (i.e. the mother's new partner) to be in the best interests of children.

And

(3) 40 recommendations for more funding to the DV industry and litigation profit for lawyers

There's plenty of other feminist goodies hidden in the 500 pages.

Clearly, these thinly veiled sole maternal custody amendments would guarantee more "fight to the death" custody battles and hence the multitude of funding recommendations that Foxy is so concerned about.

The ALRC report is so extreme that the National Parenting Organisation in the USA chose to respond to it in 3 parts.

1. Australian Commission Wants Shared Parenting Law ‘Scrapped’
https://nationalparentsorganization.org/blog/24308-australian-commission-wants-shared-parenting-law-scrapped

2. Australian Law Reform Commission Finds Shared Parenting Inconvenient – For Judges!
https://www.nationalparentsorganization.org/blog/24309-australian-law-reform-commission-finds-shared-parenting-inconvenient-for-judges

3. The Final Report of the Australian Law Reform Commission reads like it was written by opponents of shared parenting. Indeed, it may have been. Chaired by academic feminist extremist Helen Rhoades
Australian Law Reform Committee Report, Part Three
https://www.nationalparentsorganization.org/blog/24310-australian-law-reform-committee-report-part-three

If these so called "reform" recommendations were implemented the murder / suicide rate would skyrocket, there would be mass criminalisation / incarceration / pauperisation of men and massive $20BN welfare cost increases to taxpayers dealing with the pathologies of mass fatherlessness.

Most of which goes directly into the war chest of the feminist left for more domestic violence propaganda and electing their preferred candidates …. for more funding for more social engineering through the courts supported by massive commissions to the lawyers of the ALRC

HB: Chaired by academic feminist extremist Helen Rhoades

It's these very people that have an intense Bias against men that should be Bared from having anything to do with Reforms. They are the very reason, & Lawyers, why there are so many with the Family Law Courts.

Foxy,

I read through the 33 recommendations and am not surprised that the feel good waffle was ignored. Also none of the recommendations had anything to do with determining the validity of DV claims.

Secondly, if anyone is serious about gender equality, there should be no assumption that children are better off with the mother

Shadow Minister,

Ideally there should not be any pre-judgement.

But with the current chairs - that is going to be
extremely difficult to accomplish.