The Shared Parenting Disaster

Remove the perpetrator, not the child

2009-10-19T16:28:00.001-07:00

A recent case in the Australian where the family court decided that a child should be removed from their mother because of the boyfriends history was just another judgement that adds to the long line of ignorance that leads to stupidity when making decisions on family violence. I make no concessions at identifying a situations for what they truly are: Stupidity. That is what the Howard governments shared parenting bill was all about and thats what its remnants are about too. Ignoring the fact that for many years, organizations addressing family violence have often suggested how inappropriate it is to remove a child from the home instead of the perpetrator, the family court decided that it was better to punish the child and the mother for another persons actions. They at least did get one thing right, they were concerned that the man heading this family might induce similar circumstances as he did in the past in another family setting. The question remains as to why the family court would address this issue so hastily with a reversal of custody and yet when it is the mother who is concerned about the care of the child in the fathers hands - she is wrong. We have all heard about the customer always being right. In this situation it is the case of the mother always being wrong and if she does not like that - they punish the child. It is rare that the family court decides to protect children and why there has been a recent inquiry, why there are mothers walking around with no children because the family court ordered them to their deaths and why there are motherless children walking around because the court ordered them to their deaths too.

Laws for pedophiles are designed so that they cannot live near kindergartens and schools. So why do we not have laws that prohibit abusers from moving in with children? That is a smarter way to deal with this than to blame, shame or punish the mother and the child. Neither one of them chose to kill his child. The mother was doing exactly what society teaches through our justice structures and how our media draws sometimes undue compassion for perpetrators. We've all been their and felt sympathy for someone who did not deserve it and we are not to blame or deserve to be punished because of that. The criminal justice system gives criminals a second chance, the family court doesn't scrutinize step mothers in the same way and in fact has been a historical pattern of judgements. Before mothers were acknowledged as human beings before the law after divorce, children were the property of men but their mothers were often replaced with step mothers. Step mothers are in fact are more likely to perpetrate child abuse more than step fathers. the fact remains still as to why the perpetrator was not removed from the home.

Relief for families as tyrannical laws are on their way out

2009-10-18T15:49:00.000-07:00

Shared parenting laws on way out

Caroline Overington | October 19, 2009

Article from: The Australian

THE Rudd government is planning to roll back the controversial shared parenting law passed in the final term of the Howard government, enraging men's groups, which say the laws have finally given them access to their children after separation.

Six inquiries into the shared parenting laws are now under way, which men's groups have interpreted as a sure sign that change is under way, too.

In a message to supporters, Sue Price of the Men's Rights Agency, has described the planned rollback as the "most sustained and concerted attack" on shared parenting that she has seen in 15 years.

Ms Price said the laws did no more than encourage "reasonable contact between perfectly good fathers and their children" and she is urging supporters to "convince the Rudd government that there are a million votes at stake" if they roll back the shared parenting changes.

"War has been declared and now is the time to protest the changes," Ms Price said, adding that planned changes were an attempt to "deny children shared parenting" and "an attack on a child's right to be loved and cared for by a dad on a shared-care, equal basis".

Attorney-General Robert McClelland, in concert with the Minister for the Status of Women, Tanya Plibersek, flagged a change to the law after a small child, Darcey Freeman, died after allegedly being thrown from the Westgate Bridge in Melbourne earlier this year. Her father, Arthur Freeman, has been charged with murder. In a committal hearing, the court heard that the mother had been terrified of her former partner, and told neighbours and others that he was certain to kill one of her children. Read More

Hero Mother: Her Story

2009-10-16T17:39:00.001-07:00

In 2003 my abuser forged my signature and had it notarized on a court stipulation giving him "50/50" custody and all back child support dropped, this is a paternity case. The notary was his real estate/insurance agent. The only reason I found out about the forgery is that he tried to remove our daughter, Michaela from daycare and they contacted me immediately.

I filed a police report regarding the forgery, the DA, Jay Conley, he said that "even though we know who the likely suspect is there was no proof that my abuser, Craig Hensberger, did this". Even though no one else would benefit from such an arrangement but the "likely suspect". I got a handwriting analysis done on my own and presented that evidence to the DA, he stated that only "proved it was not my signature", he refused to do anything.

I went to court in front of Family Court Commissioner, Frank Calvert, of Oconto County, who just happened to be the GAL on my divorce/custody proceedings in 1997 who recommended custody to my ex abusive husband, John Fetterly. It was also Mr. Calvert who made sure that in his recommendations that in order for me to have primary placement with my older three daughters I was to have a "stable living environment away from Craig Hensberger". In 2003 Mr. Calvert moved up in ranks from lowly GAL to Family Court Commissioner and even with me expressing to him my concerns of his ability to be impartial I was ignored, chastised and intimidated by him. He refused to hear or see any evidence regarding the forgery and kept it as is, "50/50" custody and ordered child support in the amount of $25 per week based on 50/50 custody even though the father had placement every other weekend.

The weekend of Fathers Day in June 2005 my daughter was in the custody and care of her father. On Saturday of that weekend he was arrested for his second DUI in less than a year with our daughter as a passenger in the middle of the day. At this time I had decided to move out of the state and per the county rules sent a certified letter to my former abuser to notify him of our move. He refused the certified letter and it was returned to me, although he was alerted that I was planning on moving and then filed an objection to my move. We again went in front of Frank Calvert who appointed GAL, Aaron Krzewinski. They ordered that my child stay in her current school but that Craig's mother was to do all the transportation and supervision of placement. This was when my former abuser anger began to escalate and he vandalized three vehicles of mine which rendered them useless as well as loosening all the lug nuts on my tires which could of killed me as the tire fell off while traveling to work one morning.

Finally in October 2005, I moved in with my mother who lived well within the 150 mile radius I was allowed to move without notifying him. In December he served 20 days in jail for his DUI w/our daughter (the minimum is 30 days) and he also was allowed out on "Huber" so that he only had to report to jail at night when he was done working or not working. After he did his time he filed a motion to enforce placement when he was in jail for most of December. Again FCC Frank Calvert chastised me in court for not have legal representation and stated that if he could make me move back he would. He then gave my former abuser every weekend custody and ordered that I drive roundtrip every weekend because my abusers license was suspended. He stated that it wasn't "his fault I moved, it was mine". He also refused to review child support and the $25 weekly was upheld.

In August 2006 I moved back to Oconto County with my then fiancé' soon to be husband, Chad Tipton. It was the Labor Day weekend and we were set to drive her for visitation with her father. My daughter stated that she was scared to go because her father was putting his finger in her "butt crack" down her pants, she made a motion of up and down. She made this revelation and stated how uncomfortable it was to her. I immediately contacted Marathon County CPS who interviewed my daughter. They did make a TPR and advised that Oconto would then handle it when we moved there after that weekend.

During the first weeks of September 2006 my daughter was met at her school by Oconto County CPS worker Carrie Silbernagel. After not hearing from Ms. Silbernagel I contacted her and she was very volatile towards me. Stating that she didn't believe my daughter, that she believed she was "coached" and that she had children younger than my daughter who could provide specific details such as smells, times of days, etc. but my daughter did not. She stated that she knew of my "history with CPS" and reporting false allegations of sexual abuse. I asked her to explain as I had never made any other report to CPS regarding sexual abuse. She referred to another CPS worker that I had allegedly spoke to in 2004 regarding my older daughter. She made comments that she "knew ALL about me" etc. When I pointed out that my daughter is in danger as her fathers history of driving drunk. She then stated that "driving drunk with his child didn't make him a bad father, he made a bad choice". She refused to take any action and the matter was closed.

In May 2007 my former abuser decided to file for sole custody of our daughter as his behavior was to the point of madness since I was getting married on July 7, 2007. It was during this time that FCC Frank Calvert recused himself finally after I had filed a complaint against him with the Wisconsin Judicial Commission regarding his impartiality and biasness. By this time he was already facing charges of endangering safety with a dangerous weapon as he tried to run my then fiancé' and 13 yo daughter in a grocery store parking lot one night as he waited outside for us. During that summer he was given every other week custody and they kept it that way until school started. Every bad behavior he gained more and more custody as the GAL was continually getting more money.

By January 2008, last minute he agreed to joint custody and dropped his sole custody claim. In February 2008 my daughter came home and said that her grandmother had forced fed her soup and then her vomit while threatening to beat "her ass" with a wooden spoon if she didn't eat it. I contacted CPS and was told that the same CPS worker Carrie Silbernagel whose last name was now Burke as she married would contact me. After I told her of the force feeding incident she stated that she wanted to get down to the bottom of this "once and for all". She suggested to take my daughter to a neutral third party who would interview her, I agreed. Although she only needed one parents permission she made the appointment at the Child Advocacy Center when it was the fathers placement time to avoid any of my 'coaching' etc.

On February 25 my daughter was picked up by Carrie Silbernagel Burke and had my child interviewed by Sara Schumacher who was a forensic interviewer for child abuse victims. The interview was recorded and transcribed. During the interview not only did my daughter tell of the soup incident but once again how her father sexually abused her. She told both Sara Schumacher and Carrie Silbernagel Burke that he father had instructed her to lie that day to them. By that afternoon I received a call from Carrie telling me that they were substantiating the abuse and placing my daughter with me. I thought that the nightmare was finally over. The CPS worker advised my husband and I that it would be a good idea if we left town for the night, get a hotel room as when she contact Craig he was extremely upset. She also advised that we should immediately file a child abuse restraining order for the TPR would not help protect my daughter very long. She explained that they would be filing a CHIPS (child in need of protection) petition and she would be in contact with us.

The next day I filed child abuse restraining orders against Craig and Betty Hensberger and it was granted by Oconto County Richard Delforge for 30 day pending the CHIPS petition. By March CPS was already back pedaling and we were advised by Carrie Burke that Corporation Counsel, Robert Mraz, stated that I was already "protecting my daughter in Family Court" when in fact there was no such order but only the one in which she was to go every other week. Then CPS offered for both parties to sign a stipulation agreement for "co-parenting" classes for both parents. They never even ordered any alcohol or drug assessment for Craig whose history of alcohol abuse was severe. My attorney at the time, Michael Perry, advised me not to agree to the stipulation and also my former abuser refused to sign.

Also in March he was acquitted of his charge of endangering safety with a dangerous weapon. Somehow my former abuser contacted my ex husband and had my older daughters recant their statements. When this was brought forward to the DA, Jay Conley of possible witness tampering, he stated it wasn't because Craig only talked with my ex husband.

On May 21, 2008, my daughters 10th birthday, an Administrative Appeal was held by recused FCC Frank M. Calvert. My lawyer and I were not privy to this hearing in which my former abuser, his attorney, Corporation Counsel, Deputy Director of Oconto County CPS Greg Benesh and Carrie Burke were a part of. The only reason my attorney learned of this hearing was due to my abusers attorney, John D'Angelo, sending a copy of the hearing in which Mr. Calvert unsubstantiated the sexual abuse allegations. My attorney advised me to get the recording from the hearing and I did. What I heard was chilling as my character and credibility was more of an issue than the actual abuse. Especially in which Mr. Calvert snickers and makes fun of me that he's "well aware of the difficulties with Ms. Fetterly-Tipton". My lawyer instructs me to file a complaint with the judicial commission as Mr. Calvert had recused himself and he had no right to hear that case. When I requested the CD recording of the hearing Mr. Calvert's assistant Julie Depouw stated that perhaps Calvert "forgot" he recused himself. A complaint was filed with the judicial commission regarding the ongoing bias and unethical practices of Frank M. Calvert.

In July 2008 my former abuser wanted his placement times back. We went to court and after my two witnesses testified, Sara Schumacher and Greg Benesh, Judge David Miron ordered a recess. My lawyer, my former abuser's lawyer, GAL Krzewinski met in chambers. My lawyer returned to say that the judge was not going to hear any more testimony because so far we had not proven that there was any substantial change in circumstances for change in placement. He also stated that due to her father subpoenaing my daughters counselor, Jennifer Werner, her supervisor wrote to the judge to tell of his disdain that she was being 'used' as a pawn in this proceeding and she had no knowledge of the ongoing custody dispute (her counseling records do not reflect that). My lawyer stated I had to agree to two supervised visits, one overnight unsupervised, one weekend unsupervised then back to week on week off, providing that GAL Krzewinski and newly appointed counselor, Mike Mervilde, found no reason for that schedule, and they didn't.

When I had tried to make further appointments with Mike Mervilde I was thwarted by saying that he was only court ordered to see her twice. When I requested copies of her counseling records I was told that my daughter wasn't the patient, her father was.

By the very first unsupervised visit my daughter came back stating her father was drinking and driving with her. Every other week she was coming home from his home with lice. CPS said that wasn't neglect. My daughter refused to go for visitation and in October her father filed his first of three contempt motions on me. I was found in contempt by Judge Miron and it was ordered that my daughter be forced to live with her abuser for five weeks straight, I was not allowed visitation. This was when I was first accused of PAS, a.k.a. 'brainwashing' her. The judge stated that he believed that I had "poisoned" my daughter against her father. When I shook my head slightly the judge yelled at me to not shake my head at him.
She left on 10/31/09 and returned on 12/05/09. During that time she was tormented and tortured by her father and grandmother. My daughter still says that was the worst time of her life.

In February my daughter came home and said her father caught a 8lb Walleye and kept it alive in his 100 gallon fish tank for two weeks. He then proceeded to use her and sign her up for three different fishing derbies in one weekend with the same fish. He told my daughter if she told no one she would receive an ipod. The total of $150 of prize money that was won in my daughters name she never saw one penny or an ipod.
Her father was caught in his lying, cheating and stealing but blamed her for "ratting him out". This was the turning point that my daughter lost any last respect for her father, she would ask me, "why would he do this to me?", I had no answer, I still don't.

She missed a weekend visit in March, by Monday he went to her school with the police to pick her up. She refused and the Gillett police officer, Gary Pemmrich, threatened my daughter that he would take her down to juvenile hall, she would be placed in foster care, she would never see me again and that she would have to go to a new school.
It was after this hat my former abuser brought me to court again for contempt, the judge did not find me in contempt and dismissed it. This was when Judge Miron made a threat that perhaps neither parent was fit and maybe he would put her in foster care.
He then changed the order that each parent could pick up the child directly from school rather than the police station as the drop off.

Shortly after she returned from her week placement stating how cold she was at her fathers, stating his electricity was "broken". The next week it was the same, finally CPS was alerted that there was no electricity, running water/plumbing, refrigeration for food etc. They then began staying at his mothers small two bedroom home, my daughter was given a choice of either sleeping on the living room floor or the unfinished basement. By August my daughter had been frightened several times by her grandmother driving her drunk, specifically one occasion where they took her out with them to the bar and as the grandmother stumbled out of the bar she proceeded to get into the wrong vehicle and then drove them home, drunk.

My daughter asked to stay at my home on his weekend 8/7/09 due to her older sisters coming for a visit. She kept saying how relaxed she was, how well she slept in an actual bed in her own room. She called him and told him she would not return to his mothers house because she had no bed or bedroom there. By 8/12/09 he filed a motion of contempt on me but waited until last minute 9/18/09 to have me served. Due to the untimely notice it was dismissed, He soon filed another contempt. At no time after school started did he ever go to school to retrieve his daughter. In court on 10/14/09 he and his mother perjured themselves that she has her own room, I'm brainwashing her, they don't drink. When asked why he didn't go pick her up he would say he was "working" or he was "busy" but I was being held accountable. On 9/4/09 we drove up to the grandmothers house for my daughter to retrieve her clarinet. We requested the assistance of Oconto County Sheriffs Deputy Ryan Zahn, who happens to be the nephew of Craig Hensberger, grandson of Betty Hensberger. At no time did the grandmother attempt to keep my daughter at her residence, her father according to his testimony was working.

Judge Miron found me in contempt and ordered me 30 days in county jail, with it stayed and ordered that my daughter be picked up by her father on 10/16/09 after school. I was also found in contempt and ordered 30 days in county jail for claiming my daughter on my taxes even though he has an order to do so the IRS will not allow him to since he unlawfully claimed her from 1999-2007. Also because she lived with me exclusively from Feb 2008-August 2008 which the federal government agreed I could claim her. Judge Miron also made his threats again that maybe he would "contact CPS because neither one of us is a fit parent and maybe he should take he away from both of us". He stated that maybe foster care was the best place for her.

Since the contempt motion being served on 9/18/09 my child has began sleep walking, having night terrors, and was placed on Xanax for her sleep disturbances and anxiety issues brought on by her father. She has stated she is not going with her father ever again, she can't and won't. She won't be in school tomorrow due to her flu and is adamant that nobody can make her go, not even me.

Fathers Rights Hit Rock Bottom: The Killer Maniesto

2009-10-16T17:31:00.000-07:00

If there was any lower they could go, they have just gone there. Whilst Australian fathers rights sympathize and support a man on trial for the murder that shocked Australia, in New Zealand, a man yells out, "Bang! Bye bye son. Bang bye bye daughter". This is just one of the appalling reasons as to why these terrorists should never be given a platform.

They are in nearly every country in the world, intimidating women and children on their so called, "Court watch", making threats and supporting murders.

We don't just have an angry movement, these are every countries problem: homegrown terrorists.

Australia had the black shirts intimidating and stalking women and children for what they believed was the right thing to do. In UK, Fathers 4 justice, threatened to abduct the prime ministers child and held a minister captive whilst they stood on her roof. Throughout the history of the fathers rights movement, they are have not been strangers to guns and bombs. There has also been some liaison between their group members and islamic extremists. The question is no longer what is to be done, but rather how long shall we tolerate such behavior?

Dad demands rights for fathers

By ANTONIO BRADLEY - The Manawatu Standard

Last updated 12:00 03/10/2009

Text Size

BEN CURRAN/Manawatu Standard

MASCULINIST: Protester Benjamin Easton shouts for fathers' rights outside the Palmerston North court house yesterday.

Fathers' rights were shouted to the streets of Palmerston North yesterday.

Five placard-waving people protested against the Family Court's systems outside the Palmerston North court house.

Protester and anti-Family Court activist Benjamin Easton said he wanted better representation for non-custodial fathers, whom he claimed were treated unfairly by the court system.

People passing the protest stopped and talked. Some signed the placards in support with messages such as "it's not fair" and "good luck".

Others called the megaphone slogans noise pollution.

As part of their protest, four other protesters went into the court house and sat on the floor.

Staff told them they could not protest inside the court or outside the main entrance's steps. The protesters complied with their request to move.

Mr Easton said non-custodial fathers loved their children, but court-ordered separations could smash fathers' lives in an instant.

"Bang! Bye bye son. Bang! Bye bye daughter," he shouted through a megaphone.

Mr Easton had an unhappy experience with the Family Court in 2000.

Two of Mr Easton's fellow protesters said separation from their children led some men to depression, alcoholism and even suicide.

"It just haunts you," one supporter said.

"You can't escape it."

Palmerston North Courthouse manager Marcus Vettise said he was advised of Mr Easton's "Paint the Complaint" protest in advance.

"We take a neutral stance ... people have a right to freedom of expression."

Parents Seeking Access to Avoid Child Support

2009-10-16T16:35:00.001-07:00

In a submission which closed today, parents told the Attorney General they would rather forego child support payments if it helps them to keep their children safe.

The Family Court Violence Review was instigated by the Attorney General Robert McClelland after the tragic death of Darcey Freeman from the Westgate Bridge after the family said the Court had failed them.

The National Council for Children Post-Separation (NCCPS) has asked that child support payments be decoupled from access.

Currently, if a parent wants to save their child from unwanted contact visits by foregoing child support payments, they are financially penalized by the Child Support Agency system, losing some of their Centrelink payments.

'What we are hearing is that violent or controlling ex-spouse are demanding equal time with their children to avoid having make child support payments,' said Barbara Biggs, Convenor of the NCCPS.

'The trauma involved in access visits, for both the child and the exiting spouse, simply so one parent can avoid CSA payments, is an unfair and unnecessary burden on the child. Protective parents, often victims of domestic violence are telling us they don't want the money at the expense of putting their child in danger of abuse.'

Almost 4000 parents have signed a petition calling for changes to the Family Law Act where domestic violence and abuse is a problem.

In it's submission, the NCCPS also called for access post-separation to take into account whether or not parents have demonstrated in the marriage they have cared for the child in a signficant way.

'Some parents abandoned their spouse while pregnant and years later seek shared care when the child does not even know the parent. This is traumatizing for the child, especially if they are pre-school age,' said Ms Biggs.

Justice For Darcey Freeman

2009-10-07T22:47:00.000-07:00

By Special Guest Writer Akasha Mc Donald

The dead cannot speak. They cannot cry when there is no justice.

"Take me away" Arthur Freeman said.

The defense lawyer continued to shift the focus on the words that were not spoken, the food that was not offered and the CTV camera that did not record. Well dressed with a shiny purple tie, sat Arthur Freeman carefully following the movements of the lawyers, calculating the sum of words, expressions and moments nearing the end of a two day committal hearing at Melbourne Magistrates Court. His lawyer did well to convince others that Arthur Freeman was not guilty, that he was mentally ill and not fit to stand trial. There was more than just a few flaws that became the thread undoing the blanket of defense. Without saying the word "catatonic", the lawyer gnarled away with questions establishing a lost cause even after it was confirmed that Mr Freeman had spoke. It is an empirical fact in trauma studies that perpetrators suffer from trauma post the incident. This has been well documented over many years. The behaviors Mr Freeman displayed after the act, sounds just like text-book trauma.

Towards the end of the hearing, the judge spoke directly to Mr Freeman informing him of the consequences of pleading guilty and not guilty throughout the trial. As if gratified by knowing that his victims would be tormented by the case dragging out and the possibility of it twisting into a great injustice, he stood proudly and said, "Not Guilty". Silence filled the room, followed by an echo of pens in unison furiously scratching away at paper. His face was devoid of all emotion but a twisted sense of triumph that spread across his face. After all, it is the last opportunity he has to torment his ex wife and family.

Family Courts Lab Rats

2009-10-06T20:59:00.001-07:00

Perhaps another strategy to avoid liability, the Family Court announced Shared parenting as a "social experiment". What they didn't tell you was the fact that the participants were not by consent and the grave risks that were involved. Thats in the fine print of the law that appears only the fathers rights groups have had access to. It wasn't until Dr Judith Reisman questioned Kinseys findings that we began to know about the trail of destruction left behind. Most people now shudder at the mere mention of table 34. The children who were abused for the sake of "research" were in the hundreds, yet their plight remained within the shadows whilst Kinsey was glorified as a hero to this day.

How very easy it was to shamelessly tell half truths in the spotlight to the australian and american people on what shared parenting was about. If there were any real justice, those who lobbied for it should have at the very least been sued and those who participated in the mass abuses of women and children should be held in the international criminal courts for committing this crime against these people. If they announced that they were going to subject mothers and children to family violence and order them to endure and remain silent about it, it would be an outrage.

Many practitioners and shared parenting advocates have played the ignorant card and claimed that there is no research on shared parenting to anticipate whether there would be any harm.

Based on her 30 plus years of research and experience with children of divorce. Dr. Wallerstein explains:

Joint custody arrangements that involve

a child going back and forth at frequent

intervals are particularly harmful to

children in a high-conflict family, ...The

research findings on how seriously

troubled these children are and how

quickly their adjustment deteriorates are

very powerful

One only has to look at the type of groups behind this ideology to understand why it is failing. We have religious groups where they shouldn't be, preaching about how important it is to stay married and much like the other groups, lacking any responsibility in confronting the hidden issues behind divorce. In many religions today, the ideal of family means that the mother is required to be accountable for her husbands actions and carry on the shame if he abuses her. The only time that rape seems to be an issue with the churches is when it is a stranger and most of the blame is still directed at her. I admire those who can still be religious and make an effort within churches to fully acknowledge the stupidity of these expectations. Some churches have managed to move forward with our times, whilst others have joined on the mass bullying hymn, denouncing the worth of single mothers as an ill of our society under the masquerade buzz word, "Fatherless". All part of the work aimed at undoing the work of women in their plight to achieve equality.

Apart of the undoing of women's rights has also been a push in the undoing of children's rights. Children's rights only came about through the work of feminism. It is one of the gravest reasons why this backlash in all levels and fronts is far from a good move. By doing such a thing, one is welcoming the pedophiles and batterers to the table to have a mass feast on our most vulnerable. On each child and mothers merits, they have done courageous things in the face of appalling cruelty, yet the laws, policies and theories that led to the justification of these inhumane practices should never have come about.

Drug companies, biologists and other specialists are required by law to thoroughly research and provide a significant amount of evidence that it causes no harm before novice practices are distributed to the population. Shared parenting advocates provided little of this and a lot of advertising. There are at least a million mothers and children who are treated as lab rats without their consent. Anyone who enjoys the study of trauma, have more than enough fresh meat. All they have to do is join the local courts research body and make a sale or two on its findings. Perhaps even pass it on to the military, so that they can get the latest on psychological warfare along with the findings on coercive control and all of the other torture orientated papers. There is no need to study the effects on POW camp survivors anymore as there is a fresh batch available at your local family court. One would hope that there are a few decent human being that might put these blood tainted papers to good use and collate this evidence as a reason why it needs to just stop once and for all. In the mean time, you can do one thing to help stop this madness and it is only a click away. Sign one of our petitions to help bring about more protections for women and children experiencing family violence.

AFCC: The Man behind the Curtain

2009-10-01T10:25:00.001-07:00

AFCC: The Man behind the Curtain

AFCC was at one stage a judges slush fund of where bribes perverted the course of justice in California's family Court. Not only did it serve as a platform for corruption, but was also became the loudspeaker of Dr Richard Gardeners work in the 70s and 80s. The trail of devastation for victims was left behind with few who held accountable and more who profited upon these ills. Dr joan Kelly, co-founder of AFCC and CRC Authored "Reformulation of Parental Alienation Syndrome" as an attempt to revive Gardeners theories, so that it were more acceptable to its readers with the same custody outcomes, but omitting the obvious quotes that revealed the motives behind his work. She was also on the advisory panel of Children's Rights Council along with Warren Farrell who was featured in penthouses, "Incest The Last Taboo". He states,

"the incest is part of the family's open, sensual style of life, wherein sex is an outgrowth of warmth and affection. It is more likely that the father has good sex with his wife, and his wife is likely to know and approve -- and in one or two cases to join in."

Parental Alienation Syndrome created lavish lifestyles for those who promote and advocate for its existence for many years and so it is no wonder attempts to revive it were made. The reason why it was beyond controversial, was the fact that this syndrome led to many deaths. Nathan Grieco a 14 year old boy who did not want to see his father and alleged abuse by him. Gardner was an expert in his case and ordered what he referred to as, "Threat therapy" where he threatened the child with jailing the mother if he failed to go. Shortly after, Nathan committed suicide.

Thanks to one of the many decent fathers who spent $100,000 investigating California courts for his daughter to unravel why his grandchild was rendered motherless without reasonable cause, we know that this organization was used in this manner.

Much is left unanswered on why the environment of most family courts contain an automatic contempt for mothers, but hopefully this article will shed some light. CANOW, provided an extensive report on the activities of the AFCC and how it was creating a system of abuse and corruption.

The AFCC have denied promoting pro-child abuse and violence against women material, yet the content of their conferences tell a different story. Below is a training session where it trivializes empirical studies that verify the damaging effects of not only exposing the victim to the perpetrator, but also children. It distracts away from the safety of women and children to mislead practitioners into believing that there is a guaranteed method to separate those who are "just being abused" to those at imminent risk of death. There is no credible method in the world and to boast such a tool is clearly negligent.

Just in case the inevitable becomes obvious with the increase of deaths due to negligence, they provide an answer to that too. Below is a course on how to avoid accountability and continue backyard methods on treating victims of family violence and child abuse.

Here is a prime example of how Gardeners perspectives are very much alive and unchallenged in this organization. The whole topic is dangerously superficial, misogynist and trains professionals to look at the mother as the issue, instead of looking into why she might be
concerned about the child being alone with the father.

Again, another training session on how not to be accountable and promotion of Gardeners theory.

More promotion of Gardeners concept where the victim is perceived as mentally ill and distorted as the perpetrator.

Instead of providing a genuine focus on prevention of risk and subjecting victims to further trauma, professionals are trained on how to avoid accountability and attribute further injustice to their clients.

Below is advertisements on the typical fathers rights agenda translated in the language of academia. Despite years of research on the harm of infants spending minimal to little time with their mothers, below is advertisement on how to encourage maternal deprivation.

Below is a conference from AFCC last year with more about maternal gatekeeping. Whilst "Violence Against women" topics are omitted from these conferences, "Maternal Gatekeeping" appears to be a popular event.

More disturbing was this article found on an AFCC website instructions on how to use the legal avenues on forcibly adopting out children if the mother does not comply.

Below is a questionnaire targeting alienation. Note how child abuse factors are not assessed.

This is one of AFCCs conferences on "Differentiating" domestic violence cases. In other words, a how to expose the children and women to violence unless it is extremely obvious that they are at imminent risk of death. When they refer to "Situational Violence" this means that if there is only one recorded incident, then they can justify ignoring the victim of further concerns and continue exposing them to risk. At present, evidence of one episode of violence is not enough in family court law. They require several incidents of brutality before they decide to order supervised contact and in some cases, nothing is done at all.

For anyone who has had contact with fathers rights groups, they are anything but silent. Again it is another example of the organizations lacking neutrality leaning towards the context of the mens movement. The presenters here are mimicking intimate partner terrorism victims to skew the experience and thus generate encouragement to foster undue control over women parallel to the nineteenth century child custody experience - where children were the property of men.

Again like every other fathers right organization, they are promoting shared parenting without considering much on the consequences.

AFCCs Influence on the Psy-Law Community in United States
In "News Today", the article claimed that there was "new research on maternal gatekeeping" that, "Mom needs to know when to let go". Again, its deemed the mothers fault for fathers taking less of an active role pre and post separation. When the mother does in fact resist visits, its usually for a good reason. Surveys on mothers have often reflected contrary to these beliefs that mothers do want their children to spend time and know the father, but not when it he poses a threat to them.

The influence of AFCC in united states is ingrained in the Family Court system. Lundy Bancroft explains this well in his publication:

JANET JOHNSTON'S TYPOLOGY OF BATTERERS AND THE AFCC RISK ASSESSMENT:
THE QUEST FOR SIMPLE SOLUTIONS
Efforts are underway nationally to ease the complexity of assessing risk to children from
visitation with batterers by placing batterers into distinct types, based largely on the work of
Janet Johnston. For example, a risk assessment distributed nationally by the Association of
Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) draws heavily from Johnston's work. The types Johnston
posits are as follows:

Type A: "Ongoing or Episodic Male Battering"
Type B: "Female-Initiated Violence"
Type C: "Male Controlled Interactive Violence"
Type D: "Separation and Postdivorce Violence"
Type E: "Psychotic and Paranoid Reactions"
(These types are called by slightly different names in the AFCC risk assessment, but are exactly
the same in other respects.)
Type A is considered the real batterer; he is very frequently and severely violent, and he
uses violence to control his partner.
Type B is violence that is initiated by the victim; she gets hurt because she is smaller, but her behavior is the problem.
Type C is violence caused by
"mutual verbal provocations," and again the woman is the victim only because she is physically
smaller; she is considered equally abusive.
Type D is violence that results from the stress of
separation and is completely uncharacteristic for the abuser.
Type E is violence resulting from a mental health problem.
This typology contains more problems that can be covered here. The types were preconceived,
with researchers instructed to assign each case to one of the categories. The research
has little external validity; her types have no relationship to any patterns observed by domestic
violence professionals in the clinical setting. Relying on these categories leads to serious errors in crafting visitation plans. Risk to children can be assessed, as we will see, but not by this
approach.

  The great majority of batterers do not fit any of Johnston's types, because they exert
"chronic pervasive control," but it is not accompanied by the most severe or frequent violence.
The most common batterer is one who uses violence two or three times a year, whose partner has never been hospitalized with injuries, and who shows no evidence of sadism. Nevertheless, his partner and children exhibit trauma symptoms due to their fear of the abuser, the repeated denial of their basic rights, and the pattern of psychological attack. Assessing the risk to these children from unsupervised visitation is a complex process, and the danger varies greatly from case to case.
  These categories encourage us to assess the victim rather than the abuser. The "A" type of
batterer is considered the only real batterer; he is described as having a victim who is severely
traumatized, who is passive and withdrawn, and who rarely starts arguments or challenges the
batterer. A woman who is stronger, angrier, or generally more unpleasant to interact with, would
be likely under Johnston's approach to be seen as mutually abusive and provocative, the "C" type of relationship; she would thus be considered largely responsible for the man's violence. In
reality, most abused women, even those who are terrified, do not give up all forms of fighting
back, and continue attempting to protect their rights and the rights of their children. The more
that the victim refuses to submit to the abuser's control, the more likely he is to escalate his
violence. Under Johnston's typology, the more courageously a woman attempts to defend herself and her children, the less responsibility the abuser has for his actions. Using this approach serves the batterer's interests well, but endangers the children. The result of this approach is that some of the most dangerous abusers, those who are the most determined to dominate at all costs, are ironically declared to be the lowest risk to their children.

AFCCs Influence on the Psy-Law Community in Australia
If you think that this organization would not have much influence on the culture of the Family Courts, think again. The Australian Institute of Families, a research body for the family court quotes references from their conferences throughout their publications and many of its members have presented and joined the organization. The Family Court of Australia advertises upcoming conferences to the family law community and many judges and court personnel have been members and presenters to the conferences.

  An appalling example of how the australian government dealt with our indigenous community. Rather than provide more services to ensure the safety of women where statistics of family violence are much higher, this program was funded based upon "Maternal Gatekeeping". A term used to divert the focus away from the reason why she is concerned about the child being left alone with the father.

Sadly Child Protection in Western Australia jumped on the band wagon to preach on how they not only believe that fathers are safer with children than mothers, but that they are "Maternal Gatekeepers".

In the Australian governments family relationship clearinghouse were a series of articles for and against the use of parental alienation syndrome in family court context. The fact that it was even listed in the library endorsed junk science and may have mislead readers into believing that such a syndrome was prevalent above child abuse and family violence. On the last pages of the CANOW report, the American Psychiatry Association verifies that PAS is not a syndrome, that it is not being considered for the diagnostic and statistic manual in the near future as there is no real scientific validity.

On Lawlink.gov in NSW, a link to Parental Alienation Syndrome is listed which refers to Gardeners books. By even linking to it is another endorsement from the Australian government that using junk science to conceal family violence is acceptable. Considering that not only does the syndrome target victims of domestic violence as "alienators", it also promotes sending the child to the abuser.

Internationally, AFCC has grown and so have fathers rights movements coinciding this culture. one of the major problems is that a majority of its material erodes protections made available for victims and cultivates a closed patriarchal environment that mothers are at the mercy of. Whilst outside these courts, women's freedoms are welcomed and accepted, but behind closed doors, she is perceived as a shameful act. The Family Courts are the last institution that practices values belonging to the nineteenth century. They do not respect nor value the lives of women and children in their research that could be easily compared to the propaganda authored by nazi researchers that were used to endorse genocidal goals. The courts need to rely upon more balanced institutions research such as the world health organization that acknowledges violence against women as a major problem, but also provides research on both genders without hidden agendas.

   Organizations that research violence against women and children need to be wary that due to the fact that abusers are cross class and cultures, they will work towards undermining their protection by any means and monopolizing laws and psych culture, they are able to continue unchallenged. That is why it is crucial that every organization considers the opportunities that intimate terrorists may have in engaging in terrorism on a larger level whether it be in groups of like minded or by abusing the powers within professions. This needs not only to be researched, but desperately addressed, before we have more laws that hurt women and children.

Abusers vs The Abused

2009-09-27T22:54:00.001-07:00

There is no logic in tip- toeing around the subject of who these movements are and what they really are about.
On one side we have the movement that promotes the following messages:

Children are brainwashed by their mothers(Parent Alienation Syndrome)
Statistics on violence against women are false(RADAR)
Pathways to full custody for fathers(Shared Parenting)
Mothers are mostly abusers(RADAR)
Abused Children and Mothers are liars(false allegations)

On the other side we have a protective movement that promotes the following messages:

False allegations are a small factor in the Family Courts
Violence against women and children is on the rise and acknowledged by Untied Nations as a world wide issue across all cultures and classes.
Shared Parenting is inclusive of violent fathers
Fathers are responsible for the most dangerous forms of abuse that lead to death and disability.
Most allegations are not investigated in Family Courts and this process is often halted and sometimes legally barred from access to investigations in other courts.

The Family Court supports:

Reporting cases to the media that are aligned with the first movements interests.
Patriarchal models of family where the mother must do all of the work to foster relationships between the child and father even if they are abusive.
That the Father is always right and the mother is mentally ill if she disputes this.
Full custody to abusive fathers if the mother voices her concerns.
Unsupervised access to fathers regardless of criminal histories of pedophilia, murder, drugs and violence.
Punishing the child for speaking about abuse.
Punishing the mother for trying to protect her child.

Family Court psychologists support:

Using diagnosis's that have not been approved by any scientific organization in the world.
Recommending abusive practices such as Gardner's, "Threat therapy" which involves threatening the child with isolation from key-stakeholders that can document and provide evidence of abuse.
Nineteenth century recommendations on the model of family.
Coercive control of the mother for the sole goals and purposes of ensuring that she will eventually break down.
Using tests that are confirmatory bias towards mothers.

We have three movements that are aligned against one movement. This one movement has managed to not only survive but thrive regardless of the stakes. The reason why they have survived is that all actors strive to ensure that the facts that are circulated are correct and the motives are child focused with a secondary concern for mothers. in cases of family violence, the issues of abuse for both the mother and child are intertwined. The priority for the safety of both members are crucial, but not nearly enough to reach the status of protected from further violence and permanent damage from the current climate.

It is largely a case of organizational abuse where women and children in already vulnerable situations go to the family court believing wholeheartedly that these courts will provide orders to protect them. The problem is that most of the key-stakeholders are men that are fathers and some who have abused or are currently abusing. The best way to understand how these interests have dominated the family law practice is to look into previous cases of genocide and how large organizations aligned to commit it. One of the most well known cases is the holocaust, where thousands of members of the jewish community were murdered. It all began with the gold star, documenting how many there were of them and then isolating them into an area where they were tortured, murdered or enslaved. The techniques that were used back then were primitive, but effective in carrying out their goals. Today, we have a more complex world with more of an ability to monitor the masses more effectively.

Networking to achieve goals are now at our fingertips and thanks to facebook - we can track who is loyal to who. Compilation of information in the wrong hands could lead to future genocides. Most of our private information is available to anyone and in some countries people can find out where you live just by googleing your name. In the family court system, women are required to inform the courts if there is any violence or child abuse often at the beginning. The catch is that throughout the proceedings, lawyers(including yours), child protection workers and family consultants will work in unison to undermine your claims and even destroy the evidence that you have provided them.

On a mental level, they will they will often say that you don't have evidence even if you have provided them hospital reports, affidavits from specialists and the abuser has a criminal history. Sometimes, they might include processes that don't exist or obey only processes that were pushed in by the abusers movement. Most Family Courts have too much power to make decisions upon their own accord similar to the old, "at her majesties pleasure" which leaves alot of room to instigate what some have considered an act of torture. Each case is often isolated to lead the victim to believe that they are the only one and that they will"help" protect the child. It is often too late before the victim discovers that the members worked together to not only diminish your ability to protect yourself and your child, but to ensure that either no one will know or that no one will believe you. That is why a majority of mothers that lost custody were for the reasons of mental illness and is not consistent to the average statistics of mental illness out side this organization.

A majority of the cases are only diagnosed by one practitioner - the family courts practitioner. In the process of pursuing information on what appears to be deciding on the best interests of the children, the information that is most valuable is often how much you might be aware of psychology, whether you could prove them wrong and how many people outside of the court community knows about your case. In cases like these, one of the first instincts are to go to an authority about it. Most authorities are so ignorant or involved that these cases are often ignored. Thus continues the monopoly. The next instinct is to contact the media, but family courts can either order suppression of the case by using the child as a justification or in some countries use a general law that prohibits any discussion without the courts approval. This means that only cases that compliment the courts interests are getting out in the mainstream media. It also means that deaths that were a result of court orders are also withheld, causing more pain to families. So what we have here is a silent genocide. where children and mothers are being killed and no one knows who and why they are dead. The manipulation that goes on to ensure that grieving families do not speak out is abhorrent, but all too common. Like the Holocaust, the ones that are not dead are often tortured by their abuser and isolated from the only one that can help them - the mother.

Each time protective groups try to advocate they have the family courts abusers lobby group either bullying the media or threatening the advocates into silence and oppression. Maternal alienation was a grooming strategy that began with pedophiles in order to lock in the abuse. It is now a widely used systematic tactic to not only alienate the children from the mother, but deprive them for life. This is because they know that the earning potential when a protective mother has lost custody is more than the father as we know that fathers often give up a lot sooner and thus not as much revenue from court attendance and lawyers. They know that a protective mother will continue to return to the courts begging them for the children, especially when concerns for the child is amplified by the abuser. Keeping this extra business concealed from the public is a major priority that these courts will often attend to and worth investing in. It does not surprise me to see shared parenting councils have a public relationship with chiefs of courts or the government funding fatherhood programs that they know continue to harvest family violence. The downfall is that they often expect that survivors will indulge in the feeling of being beaten down or that they will forever be afraid of the laws that violate universal laws. More and more mothers are now discovering that breaking this silence is saving not only their childrens lives but also the lives of others. People who never knew what the inside of court room doors are beginning to know what is actually happening.

The united nations is beginning to work on divorce for families affected by violence and reporters have learned that the courts cannot stop them from reporting if everyone reports it in synchronicity on the internet. The propaganda that has been spread out by the abusers is falling apart because it simply does not match the masses experiences. We've all been touched by family violence in some way or another. Not one person I know has not had a mother sister, daughter, gran-daughter or aunt affected by it as it is that common. As a society, we have just begun to learn the consequences of giving feeding abusers and now more and more people are making an effort to stop it from occurring. It is about time that family courts start to move with the rest of the world and let go of the interests that harm. If you are a human resources worker, then you have the power to change this by changing the culture of the courts so it reflects a real sense of transparency. If you are one of the law makers, then you have the opportunity to be the first to role model best practice laws in protecting children and women from violence. None of them are working as there is always a loophole that transform into a gateway for the abuser to the abused. Really listening to the women and children that have been affected by it is the first step, putting in tough laws that protect them and provide equal access before is the last step towards stopping violence from continuing and a conviction that you and your country do not tolerate violence against women and children. Only then do western countries honestly say that they do not tolerate it and have conviction when they ask other countries to do the same.

Family Court Ordered Murder - Why Are They Dead?

2009-09-19T15:59:00.000-07:00

http://theanonymums.com/Why_Are_They_Dead.php

Family Court Ordered Murder

The Untied Nations definition of Genocide set out in the Convention on Genocide is:

Article 2

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

In the news, it is common to see these murders blamed on the economy or the stress associated with divorce.

Unless you are a keen researcher, you are not privy to knowing what academics and even the UN knew for years

A silent but deadly genocide against women and children where authorities have had many opportunities to eliminate the root cause, but chose not to.

In every case these deaths are a result of child custody disputes where the court knows of a violent history, but decides to gamble with their lives for the sake of "fathers rights".

The Outrage: Contact With a Father Who Murdered Her Baby Brother

2009-09-06T22:15:00.000-07:00

Its beyond a simple sin of the conduct in the way that the Family Courts have treated mothers and children. No words describe the psychological, social and organizational abuse by this court towards the young girl and mother. Before walking through those Family Courts, I assumed that there was a civil line and expected that there was a limit as to how much a mother and a child is forced to endure. Clearly, it was incorrect for me to simply assume that such civility is existent beyond these court room doors. There is no line, no justice in what appears to be a sick game of the weakest link where the sociopaths, narcissists and psychopaths all join in to have their take on pleasure to a child and a mothers detriment. There is no justification for the despicable act that took place upon this court day. Nor is there justification for the countless violations of human rights against women and children that are not available to read under the judgments section. This case is extreme mental and emotional torture that should never have taken place in a democratic country, a place where Australians use to utter the word, "Free".

The Father Murdered Her Baby Brother

In 2004, previous orders that are not listed on the legal database compelled the child to have prison visits with the man who bashed her three week old brother to death.

"[7] Z started to grizzle really badly. You stood up. You walked around the kitchen holding him. He sat in your elbow with his face towards you. You had his head cupped in your right hand. He started screaming. That made you feel even more frustrated. You said: "For fuck's sake, will you just be quiet." You put your left hand around the back of your right hand. With the pressure of two hands you pushed in on his head. You are a strong man, and you knew it. Z's skull was soft bone, and you knew it. You were angry, because you wanted to sleep. Through your fingers, you felt something go click at the back of his head. You had crushed in his skull, causing bleeding that inevitably led to his death. Not immediately, but within a short time, you alerted S. The two of you rushed to hospital, but it was to no avail. Resuscitation measures were commenced. Before long, they had to be terminated. "

Mothers Pleadings for Protection

In 2005, the dawn of Australia's Shared Parenting Bill occurred one of the most horrific cases I have ever read. Two years after the father killed his three week old son, the family court entertained contact with the older child. The mother begged the court not to continue contact, describing every detail of grief and past actions of his violence towards the older sibling.

"I am terrified that, if S has contact with B once he leaves prison, that he will hurt her as he hurt Z. "

" Throughout our relationship, the respondent frequently lost his temper. This usually took the form of him suddenly losing his temper and yelling and roaring at me. At other times, he also manhandled me, grabbing me by the upper arms and shaking me or even just pushing me out of his way."

"Especially in the last three years of our relationship, I lived in fear of the respondent losing his temper. I was very frightened of him when it happened."

" The respondent was also very controlling of me. He dictated where I went, who I'd see and make sure that I ran messages for him. If I didn't do what he wanted, he would blow up and lose his temper with me."

Another occasion involved the father advising the mother that he had smacked B "so hard that she did not know what had hit her"

Paternal Grandparents Betrayal

What appeared to have been a clear case of no contact until the child was eighteen twisted into a living nightmare for both of them. Whilst the father was in jail(only three years for manslaughter), the paternal grandparents had used their contact with the child to maintain contact between the child and the father whom had a complete disregard of his violent behavior and threat to the child.

"I am satisfied that Mr C Snr consciously disregarded the wishes and concerns of the mother when he permitted B to speak with the father by telephone. I am satisfied that the incident shook the mother's confidence in the paternal grandparents' preparedness to respect her wishes and follow her directions, over and above those of their son. "

".....S is a very kind and loving man. He couldn't even hit his child, she was at my place one day and she was being naughty and I said you should give her a smack, anyway he did give her - it was not smack, it was a tap, and she loves him so much and she thought I can play on this, so she broke her heart and the next minute he was crying, I said don't cry, you are supposed to be reprimanding her."

Previous Judge Who Ordered Contact
The judge who made this order in 2003 was none other than the current Chief Justice of the Family Court, "Diana Bryant" known back then as FM Bryant.

"29. On 13 October 2003 orders were made by CFM Bryant (as she then was) providing that the father's contact be reserved and that the paternal grandparents have leave to intervene in the proceedings."

The Court Reporter

The support for contact with this father was overwhelming as they all sidestepped the uncomfortable realization that this man was a danger and it was reckless to even put this mother through mental torture. An undertaking is a note that is not held as strong as other parts of the order. It is simply making an unofficial promise to the court. This is what the court reporter suggested,

"I recommend B commence contact with Mr D C and Mrs C one weekend a month from Friday to Sunday for the above mentioned reasons. If this contact is granted then I recommend Ms O attend counselling to assist her to deal with this issue, as it is necessary for B that she encourage and facilitate this contact. I recommend Mr D C and Mrs C give an undertaking they will not allow B to have contact with Mr C if there is no Order made for contact."

In other words, the child would unofficially be seeing the father. Just recently, a father who was supposed to have been supervised during contact had killed himself and his children in a car crash suspected murder - suicide. This is how far they will go to ensure that the fathers wishes supersedes everything else - including the children and mothers lives.

" It is my view that B has through her childhood years developed a warm and close relationship with Mr C. Given this, it is my view that B should be given an opportunity to have contact with Mr C in prison. If this contact is granted, I recommend Mr D C and Mrs J C be the only people to take B to the prison for contact."

The following statement is obvious in its negligence and lack of knowledge in Family Violence:

"If the Court grants an Order for an observation session at the prison, I again recommend Ms O attend counseling to assist her to deal with this."

The Courts Psychiatrist

"B needs treatment for what she will have to deal with."

"The alternative pathway is to allow this man to serve his sentence, and to await the passage of time. Time is a great healer. It may even enable everybody to gain some emotional perspective with regards to the future. If the father has treatment in goal of a serious nature, than when he is released he will be in a better position to argue that having paid his debt to society, both in terms of imprisonment, and psychotherapy, that her fears are no longer justified. In these circumstances I think that Ms O could at that stage benefit from treatment."

"He is the one who will need to take the lead, in my opinion, to have meaningful treatment before his former mother will be able to accept that eh does have in fact a capacity not to harm children regardless of whether or not he is remorseful at this stage. "

"Doctor Kornan assessed Mr H as being an uncomplicated personality "a salt of the earth, simple sort of guy who seems what I would think of as a very sort of nice fellow...".

The Judge Dismisses The Mothers Concerns
After reading quite a number of judgments, it all becomes the same after a while. More than the law itself, judges know every verbal trick in the book on how to dismiss, diminish and confuse the concerns that mothers raise. The training of judges associated in these strategies date back to the early eighties when the Association of Family and Conciliation(ACCC ) Courts launched worldwide conferences training judges with bizarre beliefs. promoting materials of Dr Richard Gardiners infamous "Parental Alienation Syndrome". Researchers have linked a higher level of corrupted cases usually against mothers and children where AFCC have established chapters. Justice Graeme Mullane of Newcastle is an Australian director in this organization. This explains the large number of corruption reports from Newcastle's Family Court including a documented internal case where the courts counselors refused to implement domestic violence policies and an interesting relationship with the lone fathers association.

"I found the mother's evidence as to the risk of physical harm to B in face-to-face contact visits at prison to be objectively unreasonable."

"My impression of the mother is that she jumped to a conclusion that B's sleep disturbance was attributable to the possibility of going to prison to see the father"

" The father denied any inappropriate discipline of B and I accept that evidence."

"I am satisfied that there is no risk of physical harm or violence to B if she has contact with the father in gaol. As I assess the evidence, the risk to B is psychological and will arise from the alleged inability of the mother to cope with her personal anxieties in relation to B going to gaol. Further, that B may suffer as a consequence of the mother's impaired capacity to parent her."

" I do not consider that B is at risk of becoming involved in domestic or family violence or that she has previously been exposed to any such violence. B's half-brother was a victim of violence and paid the ultimate price"

"For these and my consideration of the other factors referred to above, I will make orders that B have no contact with the father until further order - by which I mean until the court looks at the matter afresh when the husband makes application based on his release from prison as a change of circumstances.
"I am satisfied that the orders identified at the start of this judgment are in B's best interests."

How Could Anyone Ignore These Beautiful Children?

2009-09-03T21:14:00.000-07:00

Another Court Ordered Tragedy of which police believe is a suspected murder-suicide. For two years, Suzanne Dillion did what we all did. She begged the courts to protect them. Those beautiful pictures of once happy children were wasted in a thoughtless act. The Family Court is growing a dangerous game of Russian roulette on our children and mothers. Experts say that most murder suicides occur because he believes that the women and children are his property to use and toss away as if it is no use anymore. Human life - a precious commodity is being side track for a christian ideal. As if were imprinted in the bible, various groups have pressured and won the right to commit the greatest crimes of all time. When they mentioned dads commit suicide repeatedly, they forgot to mention that where there are suicide rates innocent children are also taken along with their ex wives. In NSW Australia, he has been given the legal ability to murder her by strangulation,

It is just before fathers day in Australia, a time when some of the greatest murder suicides have occurred. If you have to send your children away at this time, be sure to give them a big hug and tell them how much you love them - just in case. Celebrating fathers day needs to only apply to those that do not abuse such a title.

Fathers with a history of violence and mental health are the greatest killers of our children and their ex partners. The problem lies in the leaders we seek in government, business and corporations - the corporate psychopaths. They make our policies, dominate our industry and drive the economy into the multifaceted system that we use today. They are the reason why our mental hospitals are filled with victims of torture, cruelty and abuse. Psychopath was a diagnosis to describe our serial killers that reside in our jails, but more studies have revealed that they adapt to a society that is less tolerant to confrontational violence and thus succeed in the art of initiating tactically hidden physical violence within the workplace and at home.

In United Kingdom of which Australian law is based upon, new research shows that men abuse more, but women are more likely to be arrested and women use more weapons to protect themselves.

In United States where similar laws are ingrained, murder suicide has peaked over the years to the stage of epidemic proportions. This is because the family law trends that are currently being reviewed after the west-gate bridge tragedy shocked the nation originated there dating back to the early eighties when DR Richard Gardner held his conferences claiming that the major problem in "high- conflict"(a term often used to trivialize and conceal family violence) cases the mother was at fault for reporting and must be punished. Of course his language in establishing these conclusions was masqueraded in the realm of academia and whilst he officially coined the term, "Parental Alienation Syndrome", he specifically targeted women and children. His work was largely debunked in the scientific community, but in the family courts he was worshiped as an expert god on post separation research. His work was sensationalized as gospel in court reports and family law conferences. His fame gratified fathers rights groups and created the family court rackets that run in the US courts today. Accounts of bribery rings have hit the headlines over the years, but the chain of perverting the course of justice is yet to be fully unearthed. Suspicions of similar operations are amounting as reports of evidence being destroyed or as they liek to say, "missing" has been nearly every single case in Australia. These are some of the signs that the Family Court is far from being transparent, but may be due to the barrage of media attention that fathers groups have received over the years.

Ask any average Joe blow and they will tell you that men have had the worst deal in family courts and that women lie about child abuse and domestic violence. This is the biggest urban myth that has been circulated for over two decades - since fathers rights groups began. The plight of the noncustodial mother(often battered into giving up the children) has been largely ignored and sometimes even scrutinized as though it were her fault for being beaten. Again, the perpetrators have won yet another ticket away from the exposure of the spotlight whilst the victim is left to deal with the aftermath. If you are a mother going to the family courts right now in Australia, expect to be shafted, silenced, humiliated and legally degraded to the status of a glorified babysitter if the father allows you such a privilege. This is the daily going ons to the the court unless you have or your children have been beaten so badly that no one can conceal it. The legal definition for "mother" in family law, usually refers to doormat. It is not really fatherhood we need to be worried about, its is motherhood and her concerns for the children that are in crisis. Cases where mothers and children that are being protected are now currently being flaunted as trophies on the family court website in hope that the general public will be apathetic in digging deeper. Even the search function is designed so that it will be difficult for you to find cases where the the parent has murdered the childs sibling. Before they provided a "do not allow google bot" script, I was able to find such a case. It was disturbing to read that the family court reporter had scrutinized her for denying access to the father who was in prison for bashing to death her three week old baby. I was appalled to learn that even after the judge had stated, "I do not think it is appropriate for this child to have contact with the man who murdered his younger brother", he had decided to allow the opportunity for this to be reconsidered after the murderer was released from jail. Do you think that either the child or the mother are going to feel safe conducting future handovers with a man who has been in prison for the murder of the younger sibling? It is why this case is more difficult to search as the pressures of the outside community beginning to learn how insanely cruel this court has become are amounting.

The mentality in the closed court doors is brutal towards women and children, perhaps an indicator that the culture has become somewhat a psychopaths paradise. The best way to counter such a culture may not be within the laws itself, nor from the constant campaigns from victims advocates, but in the mental health system. If there were a major overhaul in the mental health system where its triage targeted people that posed a significant harm to the community instead of the victims, we would have a decline in workplace bullying, domestic violence and child abuse.

One of the most significant benefits that the mental health system has is the ability to detain someone without their permission based on three factors:

They pose a threat to themselves or others
They are rejecting treatment.
They are unwell.

The perpetrator cannot use the money that they ruthlessly acquired to perverse the course of justice and from inside jail(where human rights heavily monitor) proceed vexatious and frivolous court proceedings. Most of the drugs used in psychiatry usually sedate patients and thus converting a potential danger into a living zombie. The justice system has never really been well structured to appropriately address behavior as much as the mental health system has.

The following mental illnesses are currently not a priority, but reaking havoc on our community:

Psychopath
Narcissism
Borderline
Paranoia

If these became a mental health priority, the community would have the following benefits:

More stable workplaces
A decline in homegrown terrorism
A stable economy
Reduced costs in health and thus less insurances costs all round
Reduction in violence against women and children
Low crime rates
More transparency in organizations and institutions
Decrease in incidents of workplace bullying

With such benefits, government is more resourced with the ability to invest in restructuring this system into treating them effectively and reduce the overflow of victims that are currently trapped in this system. Feel free to add your comments below:

Shared Parenting: Children, the property of men again...

2009-08-30T10:06:00.001-07:00

From the beginning, Children and women were the property of men. Throughout history of child custody, the pendulum has never really swayed in the mothers direction as it has in the fathers, let alone what the children want. In the book by Colin James written in 2004, "Winners and Losers: The Father Factor in Australian Custody Law" a detailed history of Child Custody demonstrates the harsh conditions that mothers have endured in the last century raising children under the control of the father, if she were not replaced by another women. The contributions of motherhood have been badly devalued if not devoid of any consideration at all. Her plight enduring violence and records of murder suicides that date back to the turn of the century reveal who is indeed devoid of rights.

Lately, there has been a lot of backlash from some of the original campaigners about changing the shared parenting laws. Some of these people have been accused of abuse and violence themselves openly admitting as if it were they who were victim to the greatest tragedy that ever lived, beyond violence, murder and horrific cases of child abuse. They have so far been quite successful at keeping up such a visage. After all, the family court does restrict publication of cases where violence and abuse is alleged. How convenient...

We have heard the constant pleas, rants and rages of, "fatherless". Distracting away from the violence epidemic that leaves children permanently motherless. The posters that is mostly heard by the women who know all to well that the only way out from the violence that they endure can be a body bag if they do not do something now. They are burdened solely to provide evidence to prove that they need this protection, that this protection may well save theirs and their children s lives.
Imagine finally getting the courage and resources to leave with hope that there will be help on the other end. During the Howard/Bush era, after the shared parenting laws, mothers began to learn just what our countries leaders meant when they approved campaigns and funding for women services: A band aid solution for a gaping wound. A wound that is clearly not healing, but infecting the masses with a new form of golden-staff: Abusers Rights. I make no mistake at re-naming the mens or fathers rights movements as I know truly what this group is all about.

For nearly two years our group has been watching them closely. Sometimes it might be peering in from the room next to the mens meetings or it might be watching an email list that refers to victims of domestic violence as, "the seething bitch brigade". Other times it might be reviewing their unquestioned articles or hearing complaints from professionals of their conduct. The conduct of the abusers rights groups has been something all too often overlooked until that person experiences a certain level of engagement. There is a pattern of behaviors that victims of violence know alll too well. For those who have been lucky not have endured the horrible experience of intimate terrorism or child abuse, can only see from the outside as the cracks begin to show. The cracks are the fact that this group who call themselves fathers rights, brainwash men into their indoctrination of abuse and control are lobbying and will not stop until no women and child is free from their clutches.

Whilst Carol Nadars piece delicately spirals into diminishing abused mothers and children s experience of the Family Court by highlighting one case where a women was able to prove that she needed protection. The evidence required in the family court is often more than what is required in a homicide case. The injuries must be so obvious and indisputable that the court would be highly vulnerable to a case of negligence, given the proof that has been presented before them.

We support the work of many other groups that have united to prevent child abuse and family violence in the family court system, but stand alone when we disagree on the current judicial stance. It is not enough that this review is conducted by a single researcher, it is in fact pitiful considering that less people died before a royal commission was conducted in the Victorian Bush fires. It is not enough to simply "dance around the issues" for the sake of appearing politically attractive in front of others. Its not a popularity contest when you have children and women dying because of court orders and a group of very angry men who want even more silent and violent laws.

Lateline was far more honest in providing more of a scope of the issues. For far too long abusers lobby groups and popularity contestants have dominated the spotlight, leaving the rest to endure this in silence and oppression. It took an angry man to hurt his child in front of one hundred witnesses for the plight of children and their mothers to be heard.

What did the mothers and children do to deserve the shared parenting laws?

Without the violence, the whole situation is absurd to say the least. Children having no place to call home. We as a society look down upon families who move too much as "unstable" and selfish towards their children s needs. In the real world, families move on an average of four years and have to consider the break away of routine from the community, school and activities that they participate in such as sports and dancing. Children who have separated parents and children who have their parents together are severely divided in the schoolyards and playgrounds as one group is privileged to stay in a regular routine and keep up with their activities.

Young people are shocked and outraged by the orders that imprison their lives into rigid court regimes whilst their friends are able to attend social events and keep in the loop without hinder. Parents have a hard enough time negotiating with independence and teaching responsibility on top of having to explain why they must follow a court order that was made by a bunch of angry bitter men. Imagine being seventeen and being told that you must go to your fathers or never see mum again. The youth workers, teachers, counselors and doctors are unfortunately the ones having to pick up the pieces of an unfortunate system. Most don't really know what to do, even though they are suppose to. What does one do when they see the scars of a violent past and a once bright future getting darker by the minute as Family Court has become a negative realm of their lives? With the bullying type behavior arising out of the mens rights groups, most have unfortunately kept silent about their experiences. One women I had spoke to had not talked about her experience for 10 years - to anyone. Intimidated by the courts, the ex and even her own lawyer - it is no wonder it took so long. Breaking the silence is not easy when there are manipulators, political strategists and the abusers lobby with their bag of tricks. There are always tricks, but never the real love it takes to protect your child from the harm that society dishes out on their carnivorous platter.

For all you psychopaths out there - Humanity is not a survival of the fittest, but rather an interaction that occurs on many levels depending on how one wants to perceive it. Many of the dying cultures eaten away by western civilization, have survived for hundreds of years worshiping the most humble rather than the one who seeks the top for cheap thrills. They lived for many years in harmony and peace. Our major problem is how we worship the most powerful, the one who seems strong brave and "Knows what to do". Some without question bow down and simply agree with the leadership, whilst others worship the other power hungry jerk just because he is good at lying about how he will "fix things and make life easier". I once met a social worker who told me she scored very high in the psychopath range. Instead of using for harm, she attempted to resolve it by ensuring that she had engaged in risk taking activities and would use her "manipulative" skills to influence people to get their lives together and get away from drugs. The gratification of helping others(In a liberating manner) was more than power over others could offer. Perhaps the score was wrong or perhaps it was the fact that she was also a mother who may have developed empathy through becoming a mother that made the difference.

In the "Art of happiness" written by a psychiatrist based upon the meetings with the Dalai llama, he wrote about how compassion for others had prevented mental illness, increased a biological immunity chemical and increased life longevity in general was such a vital human factor. Also the complete opposite of those who seek the path to continue power over others. The ones who do make it to the top as described in the book, are left with nothing but paranoia for those who they harmed to achieve this status.

Most non-violent fathers do not attend these courts and fathers that are barred from seeing their children are in two categories:
1. They annoyed the court(wrong on the courts behalf to react this way - see judgements).
2. They were so obviously violent that no one could conceal the long road of devastation left in their wake.

These groups have gone too far in pursuit of "rights" and clearly have violated those who have to endure these laws whether it be under duress, violence or instability. They violate many human rights than these groups can draw to justify. When those who were adopted and could not pursue the records of their parents wanted the right to know both parents, they never would have dreamed that it would be abused in such a manner.

Shared Parenting Spotlight from Lateline

2009-08-27T17:24:00.000-07:00

Read the full article here.

Just to Hurt Mum...

2009-08-26T23:21:00.000-07:00

A father who received shared parenting of the children:

1. Left a 14yo and 9yo alone in the home to see his girlfriend regularly.
2. Threatened to deprive them of their mother, if they told.
3. Took all of the furniture out of the house, leaving them with a few clothes and blankets.
4. Is relying on depression as an excuse of his negligence.

In the article, it states:
"Duty solicitor Mark Dollimore said the man was suffering depression, had not felt able to look after his children, and wanted to co-operate as much as he could."

Then why did he go to the Family Court and battle it out for Shared Parenting?

Just to hurt mum

Why would he leave them in such poor conditions?

Just to hurt mum

If he could not have cared for them, why didn't he just phone the mother?

Oh.. that's right, he is busy hurting the mother.

Fact is that the Family Court has been and is continually used as a weapon against mothers resulting in the harm of children.

The people who made the shared parenting laws are bitter angry fathers who wanted the legal power to hurt not only their ex wives, but all mothers through the children. They see them as nothing more than a commodity or a tool to use and spout their hatred for all women.

Through the same charm and wit they used to lure these women into destructive environments, they used to promote this bill.

Hence every mother who goes through this system, is forced to endure the suffering this shared parenting mob inflicted.

The question is not how much suffering every mother can endure knowing that her children are at risk or are being abused and neglected. The question is now, what is the government going to do about it? How long do they have to endure this genocide? How many idiots are they going to listen to before we are heard?

No matter how much you try to bury the truth rather than act, it will not only shine through but be sure there will be justice.

Herald-Sun Hijack: Fathers Rights Reporter Laurie Nowell?

2009-08-23T00:28:00.001-07:00

Laurie Nowell, supposedly a Family Court Reporter of the Herald Sun has written once again in favor of the fathers rights groups. Not only the agenda they promote, but includes stories from their perspectives denying that they were abusive or that they stalked their ex partners. Considering how difficult it is to prove when a parent is unsafe towards the child with the current laws in place, it is of great concern as to why this perception of events is being promoted. Despite the myths floating around the community that mothers make false allegations of child abuse and domestic violence to win child custody, research over the years has proven that the majority of cases where child abuse and violence is raised are in fact true. Furthermore, the majority that make false allegations are fathers. It is no surprise to learn this after many fathers rights advocates have often said over the years that "lying in the family court is easy". For them perhaps as the entire court revolves around their needs.   How so, if there are more single mothers? The answer is in what the father wants being the first priority above all else. Most families separate outside of court and dad chooses to be a weekend dad and in a lot of cases - he becomes a deadbeat. During the shared parenting campaigns, mothers were mislead to believe that the courts were going to ensure that fathers had to participate in raising the children in an ideal child - focused setting. No work in this area was done apart from adding further pressures and constraints on the mothers ability to parent her children. With the current laws, the mother is entirely responsible for maintaining the relationship between the father and the child.

Very few cases allowed mothers to relocate(even to another suburb), protected her from physical abuse and in some cases restricted her from taking the child to a doctor. Since the eighties, laws in the Family courts have diminished the status of mothers to the point that her rights reflect nothing but a glorified babysitter. Even less of a role in the decision making process are the rights of children. Most cases where the child has raised child abuse are perverted to portray that the child is brainwashed into making false allegations. In countries where these laws have been established for a longer period, murder suicide rates are higher and children are the property of men often to puppeteer the mother into submitting into his demands. There is even a motion in the states where the father can demand that the child reside with him or go to foster care.    Cases like these almost always begin with shared parenting, well known amongst fathers rights advocates as a gateway for full custody.

Anyone who tries to interact with them and raise concerns about child abuse or intimate partner terrorism is often abused or labeled. We have all heard and seen them vocalize their complaints about not receiving adequate rights, matched with their justifications. What the general public have not really observed enough is the fact that even when they had been given what they wanted on a platter - it was not enough and have not ceased demanding for more.    A good example of this is what they said about the reporter Laurie Nowell after he wrote in their favor:

"F--k me sideways. What a joke.
We'll have to start our own media." Nick Martin(Norsaint publishing)

The same rhetoric is in the media again regardless of the truths and virtues it violates. The Christian lobby is urging Tasmanian Christians to write in and stop a bill that stops sperm donors of same sex couples from interfering and the fathers rights are busy making submissions against same sex marriages in the Marriage Act. The cause appears at first glance "black and white" as if the evil government is denying children fathers, but on the campaign webpage it is pretty clear that they are yet again trying to make laws that reflect their values and incite hate towards same sex couples. Again, its all about "keeping mothers on that leash" as if they were cattle. By allowing religious laws, we open up the flood gates to an emergence of more extremists who may want to introduce similar laws to that of the Black Shirts or encourage perhaps the "religious freedom" to execute women for "honor". What is a further disgrace is that the Christian lobby has been accepted as a balenced news source for google news engine along with Mens Daily News and other extremists.
Our news sources need to keep these agendas out and report without bias on the experiences that have barely been touched upon.

The list of articles in fathers rights favour:

Banned dad's agonizing loss

Dad jailed over card

Family Court 'flawed' says Michael Lermontov-Midgley

Tough love needed for kids, says mother of violent

against women:

Victoria is Australia's abortion 'capital'

A thoroughly modern muslim

(click here to see why)

The public Link between Laurie and Fathers Rights Groups:

The announcement email sent out to him amongst other figures seen as "Fathers Rights Friendly"

Violence Against Women Deniers Beware - Your Propaganda Could Land You Jail Time

2009-08-13T05:00:00.001-07:00

Holocaust denier Fredrick Toben to serve time in jail

By Tim Dornin | August 13, 2009

Article from: Australian Associated Press

HOLOCAUST denier Fredrick Toben has been taken into custody to serve a three-month jail term over publishing offensive material on the internet.

The 64-year-old was taken from the Federal Court in Adelaide by Australian Federal Police today after losing his appeal against his conviction for contempt of court.

The Full Court of the Federal Court also ruled that his jail term, originally imposed in May this year, was in no way excessive.

"In our opinion, the sentence of three months cannot, on any stretch of the imagination, be considered excessive or unwarranted," the three-judge panel said.

The judges said Toben also had a disregard for the orders of the court and had acted to undermine the authority of the court.

Earlier this year, Toben was found guilty on 24 counts of contempt for ignoring a previous court order preventing him from publishing racist material on the Adelaide Institute website. When he later imposed a three-month sentence, Justice Bruce Lander said Toben had continued to breach those 2002 orders, which prevented him from publishing specific anti-Semitic material.

The 2002 orders stemmed from a racial discrimination case brought against him by Jeremy Jones, a former president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry.

In his final submissions today, counsel for Toben, David Perkins, suggested the material published on the Adelaide Institute website, which questioned whether the holocaust even occurred, was just a "drop in the bucket" compared to the amount of revisionist material available on the internet.

But in their verdict, the judges said the case before them was not about the holocaust, gas chambers or the execution of Jews during World War II. They said it was about whether or not Toben had complied with orders of the court.

"Obedience to the court is not optional," they said.

As the court rose, Toben asked if he could say something to the judges, only to be cut off by Justice Jeffrey Spender who simply said, "No".

From Rights For Mothers.com

2009-07-27T07:09:00.000-07:00

July 21, 2009

Tennessee Murderer of Six People Suspect Called His Exwife "UNFIT" and Tried to Take Custody of Children

Hey Mark Godbey of "Father's Parental Rights", are you covering this since you hijacked the domestic violence category???

Violent, abusive fathers….no surprises here. While Ned Holstein and Glenn Sacks are running around the country whining about "why didn't Steve McNair's murder get called domestic violence" and "women are so violent," I DID call McNair's murder domestic violence (even if it wasn't by definition). I haven't seen them criss-cross the country about all the families being murdered. It is these violent men that try and take the children from their moms (and are usually successful, thanks to stupid, corrupt judges). But if that doesn't work, just pull out the shotgun…or just keep beating them any way you can.

Hey, here's an idea: let's just stop calling all of this domestic violence and call it what it is….murder, assault, child rape, etc., etc., etc.

From The Huntsville Times:

Suspect had called ex-wife unfit; has at least 3 children

Tuesday, July 21, 2009

By Niki Doyle

Times Staff Writer niki.doyle@htimes.com

Jacob Shaffer

The man accused of killing six people, including his wife and her 16-year-old son, once tried to take custody of his two children away from his ex-wife by claiming she was an unfit mother.

According to court records from August 2008, 30-year-old Jacob Shaffer claimed his ex-wife, Elizabeth Shaffer, was "neglectful in the welfare and well-being" of the couple's two children, 9-year-old Arianna and 7-year-old Justin.

The case was promptly dismissed in December when Shaffer failed to pay the $382 in court costs, records show.

Shaffer has been charged with murder in Lincoln County, Tenn., in connection with the brutal slayings of his current wife, 38-year-old Tracie Shaffer, and the woman's father, brother and son, along with the son's friend and a Huntsville man.

Tennessee Bureau of Investigation officials said Shaffer spared his own 4-year-old daughter, who was in the home with his wife at the time of the killings. According to court records and family, Shaffer has at least three children – the two from his marriage to Elizabeth Shaffer, and the 4-year-old girl from his marriage to Tracie Shaffer.

Jacob Shaffer claimed less than a year ago that his oldest daughter thrived in his household, earning better grades and showing more involvement in Sunday school than when she lived with her mother.

Shaffer said his ex-wife had been living with her boyfriend and left the children in his sole custody for months, neglecting to pick them up at scheduled times, according to court records.

The claims went unanswered, and the case was closed in December after a Madison County judge denied Shaffer's request for a waiver of fees based on financial hardship.

The 2008 civil case was the second chapter of a custody battle between Shaffer and his ex, who sued him three years earlier for $7,375 in back child support for their two children.

Shaffer teetered on the brink of a 110-day jail sentence for failing to pay 80 child support payments since the couple's divorce in 2003. Shaffer put down a "large good-faith payment" after the civil court claim was filed, causing the judge to withdraw the order that could have sent him to jail.

Also see: Man in custody in six slayings in Tennessee, Alabama

Comments (1)

Australias Spotlight on Family Law and Safety Holes

2009-07-26T21:34:00.001-07:00

Australian media has broken the silence on some of the untold views on the holes in child custody laws. Its too ideal and nice to simply wish that these tragedies do not exist and that we can all simply, "sweep it under the carpet" and perhaps pray that "shared parenting" will somehow conceal the blood stains that are beginning to show in one of the greatest crisis's children and women are enduring today.

Xue 'singled out for murder potential'

Tamara McLean

July 27, 2009 - 9:29AM

The Chinese man who killed his wife and dumped his child in Melbourne had been singled out as a potential killer a year before he murdered.

New Zealand family courts are in the spotlight after it was revealed police had warned that martial arts expert Nai Yin Xue would kill his wife if released on bail over a 2006 conviction.

Chief Justice questions parenting laws

Michael Pelly | July 27, 2009

Article from: The Australian

FAMILY Court Chief Justice Diana Bryant has described the contentious shared parenting laws as "problematic" and the expectation of parties as "a concern" as the government embarks on three inquiries into family violence.

The Chief Justice also says punitive costs orders for those who raise false allegations of violence have been counter-productive and that women fear being branded "unfriendly".

Her comments yesterday followed the announcement on Friday that former Family Court judge Richard Chisholm will head a review of the entire family law system, with an emphasis on how it handles violent situations.

The Australian Law Reform Commission has also been asked to develop a national legal framework to tackle family violence and the Institute of Family Studies is due to deliver its reviewing of the shared parenting laws in December.

Attorney-General Robert McClelland has cited the case of three-year-old Darcey Freeman, who was thrown from Melbourne's Westgate Bridge by her father in January, as a reason for the review. There has been considerable disquiet over the Freeman case inside the Rudd government. Leading the charge has been Housing and Status of Women Minister Tanya Plibersek, former shadow attorney-general and Minister for Health Nicola Roxon and the Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs Jenny Macklin.

Chief Justice Bryant said "nothing was raised before the court about violence".

She said there were many ways to bring concerns of violence to the attention of the court. "A Form 4 (which gives notice of child abuse or family violence) was not filed and there was nothing on the file to suggest one had tried to be filed."

The Chief Justice said the shared parenting provisions of the act -- section 65DAA and 61DA -- were "problematic".

Appeal for national strategy on family violence

Carol Nader

July 27, 2009

STATE Attorney-General Rob Hulls has urged other states to follow Victoria's lead in expanding the definition of domestic violence and has backed a national register of intervention orders.

The call comes as former Family Court judge Richard Chisholm prepares to conduct a review that will consider the way the Family Court responds to allegations of domestic violence.

Mr Hulls told The Age that the definition of domestic violence should be expanded to include economic, psychological and emotional abuse if a truly national approach was to be adopted.

"I think family violence can take a whole range of forms and I think other states need to follow what we've done in Victoria by ensuring they have a comprehensive definition of domestic violence," he said.

"If a person is abused emotionally and psychologically in one jurisdiction they should be dealt with in the same way if such abuse occurs in another jurisdiction."

He also backed the move to a national register of intervention orders, a subject that will be discussed next month at a meeting of the country's attorneys-general.

"It's absolutely important that we have a national system to recognise intervention orders that have been imposed in each jurisdiction, and we do that in Victoria," Mr Hulls said.

"A corresponding family violence intervention order from another state or territory or indeed New Zealand can be registered with a Victorian court. That order is then enforced as a Victorian order.

"The idea of a national register of family violence intervention orders is something that I fully support. I think we have to make it as easy and as simple as possible for victims of family violence who have been granted an intervention order to have that intervention order enforced anywhere in Australia."

The contentious question of whether there is any link between the presumption of shared parenting wherever possible, introduced by the Howard government, and domestic violence will be investigated as part of Professor Chisholm's review.

"I will be interested to try and find out whether that presumption of shared parenting has any connection with family violence," he said.

Darcey tragedy to help violent law review

By Ben Packham

Herald Sun

DARCEY Freeman's mother will be invited to share her story in a review of family violence laws.

The head of the federal review, retired Family Court judge Richard Chisholm, said he hoped to speak to Peta Barnes, whose four-year-old daughter died after she was allegedly thrown from the West Gate Bridge on what was to have been her first school day.

Darcey's father, Arthur Freeman, has been charged with her murder, the Herald Sun reports.

"The Darcey Freeman case is of course very distressing," Prof Chisholm said.

"The questions I will be looking at will be whether there was some way the system might have predicted that something like that was going to happen, or whether the system fell short.

"If members of the family wanted to talk to me, and have some views to put to me about how the system might be improved, I'd be keen to speak to them."

Fighting Dirty - Now they are sending trojans

2009-07-25T06:21:00.001-07:00

WARNING DO NOT GO TO ANY OF THESE SITES:

DADS ON THE AIR, DADS IN DISTRESS or THE FAMILY LAW WEB GUIDE

I am not even going to link to their websites anymore.

Enclosed is a list of trojans on one of our staff members computers.

This was a direct result of visiting them. A email claiming to know who we are was send through a foreign site stating that they believe that they know who we are. The email contained a malicious code that destroyed one of our staffs computers. We will be taking legal action for this. It is also noteworthy to know that one of the leaders of the Family law Web guide has a high degree of IT experience and may or may not be behind this as a way to hurt the current campaign.

Asylum Hopes for Battered Women

2009-07-21T05:03:00.001-07:00

New Policy Permits Asylum for Battered Women

By JULIA PRESTON

Published: July 15, 2009

The Obama administration has opened the way for foreign women who are victims of severe domestic beatings and sexual abuse to receive asylum in the United States. The action reverses a Bush administration stance in a protracted and passionate legal battle over the possibilities for battered women to become refugees.

Skip to next paragraph

Enlarge This Image

Richard Boswell

Rody Alvarado sought asylum in the United States after fleeing abuse in Guatemala.

Case Documents (PDF, portions redacted by lawyers representing L.R.): Supplemental Brief | Declaration of Support

Readers' Comments

Readers shared their thoughts on this article.

Read All Comments (84) »

In addition to meeting other strict conditions for asylum, abused women will need to show that they are treated by their abuser as subordinates and little better than property, according to an immigration court filing by the administration, and that domestic abuse is widely tolerated in their country. They must show that they could not find protection from institutions at home or by moving to another place within their own country.

The administration laid out its position in an immigration appeals court filing in the case of a woman from Mexico who requested asylum, saying she feared she would be murdered by her common-law husband there. According to court documents filed in San Francisco, the man repeatedly raped her at gunpoint, held her captive, stole from her and at one point tried to burn her alive when he learned she was pregnant.

The government submitted its legal brief in April, but the woman only recently gave her consent for the confidential case documents to be disclosed to The New York Times. The government has marked a clear, although narrow, pathway for battered women seeking asylum, lawyers said, after 13 years of tangled court arguments, including resistance from the Bush administration to recognize any of those claims.

Moving cautiously, the Department of Homeland Security did not immediately recommend asylum for the Mexican woman, who is identified in the court papers only by her initials as L.R. But the department, in the unusual submission written by senior government lawyers, concluded in plain terms that "it is possible" that the Mexican woman "and other applicants who have experienced domestic violence could qualify for asylum."

As recently as last year, Bush administration lawyers had argued in the same case that in spite of her husband's brutality, L.R. and other battered women could not meet the standards of American asylum law.

"This really opens the door to the protection of women who have suffered these kinds of violations," said Karen Musalo, a professor who is director of the Center for Gender and Refugee Studies at the University of California Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco. Professor Musalo has represented other abused women seeking asylum and recently took up the case of L.R.

The Obama administration's position caps a legal odyssey for foreign women seeking protection in the United States from domestic abuse that began in 1996 when a Guatemalan woman named Rody Alvarado was granted asylum by an immigration court, based on her account of repeated beatings by her husband. Three years later, an immigration appeals court overturned Ms. Alvarado's asylum, saying she was not part of any persecuted group under American law.

Since then Ms. Alvarado's case has stalled as successive administrations debated the issue, with immigration officials reluctant to open a floodgate of asylum petitions from battered women across the globe. During the Clinton administration, Attorney General Janet Reno proposed regulations to clarify the matter, but they have never gone into effect. In a briefing paper in 2004, lawyers for the Department of Homeland Security raised the possibility of asylum for victims of domestic violence, but the Bush administration never put that into practice in immigration court, Professor Musalo said.

Now Homeland Security officials say they are returning to views the department put forward in 2004, refining them to draw conditions sufficiently narrow that battered women would prevail in only a limited number cases.

"Although each case is highly fact-dependent and requires scrutiny of the specific threat an applicant faces," said Matt Chandler, a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security, "the department continues to view domestic violence as a possible basis for asylum in the United States." He said officials hoped to complete regulations governing the complex cases.

The new policy does not involve women fleeing genital mutilation.

Any applicant for asylum or refugee status in the United States must demonstrate a "well-founded fear of persecution" because of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or "membership in a particular social group." The extended legal argument has been whether abused women could be part of any social group that would be eligible under those terms. Last year, 22,930 people won asylum in this country fleeing all types of persecution; the number has been decreasing in recent years.

Because asylum cases are confidential, there is no way of knowing how many applications by battered women have been denied or held up over the last decade. The issue is further complicated by the peculiarities of the United States immigration system, in which asylum cases are heard in courts that are not part of the federal judiciary, but are run by an agency of the Justice Department, with Homeland Security officials representing the government.

The government has not disputed the painful history that L.R., now 42, recounts in a court declaration. The man who became her tormentor first assaulted her when she was a teenager and he was a physical education coach, 14 years her senior, at a high school in the Mexican state of Guanajuato. He and his family were regarded as wealthy and influential because they owned a restaurant in town, L.R. said.

Over the years, he made her live with him, and forced her to have sex with him by putting a gun or a machete to her head, by breaking her nose and by threatening to kill the small children of her sister. Once when she became pregnant, she said, she barely escaped alive after he had poured kerosene on the bed where she was sleeping and ignited it. He stole the salary she earned as a teacher and later sold her teacher's license.

Local police dismissed her reports of violence as "a private matter," the court documents said, and a judge she turned to for help tried to seduce her.

"In Mexico, men believe they have a right to abuse their women because they are like a possession," she said. With three children born from her involuntary sex with the man, who never married her, she fled to California in 2004.

An immigration judge denied her asylum claim in 2006. In its new filing, the government urged that L.R.'s case be sent back to the immigration court for further review, suggesting she might still succeed. But the government also injected a caveat, insisting that "this does not mean that every victim of domestic violence would be eligible for asylum."

Domestic Violence Everywhere

2009-07-19T07:06:00.001-07:00

Domestic violence: Marin's most prevalent violent crime

Jennifer Upshaw

Posted: 07/18/2009 10:33:46 PM PDT

This 49-year-old Mill Valley mother of two, a domestic violence victim, said she can relate to Danielle Keller, whose slaying hits close to home. (IJ photo/Jeff Vendsel)

The stigma of domestic violence is so great, the 49-year-old mother of two from Mill Valley didn't want her name used. But she said she can relate to what happened to Danielle Keller, the young mother who authorities said was killed last Sunday by her abuser.

"It's scary, of course it hits close to home," said the woman, who in May 2008 left an already troubled marriage after her drunken husband kicked down the door to their son's bedroom and then pushed her down on the bed and repeatedly struck her. Her teenage son, she believes, saved her from further harm by calling the police.

"I'm very sad for the family," she said of Keller's family. "I have to wonder about the child. What's going to happen to the child? As a mother that's your first instinct. For me, I was lucky and not everybody is that lucky."

The death of Danielle Keller has turned the spotlight once again on domestic violence, the most prevalent of violent crimes in Marin County, accounting for 50 percent to 55 percent of nonvehicular homicides in the past five years, according to the district attorney.

So far this year, two of Marin's three homicides have been domestic violence-related.

"Yes, obviously it disturbs me," said Marin District Attorney Ed Berberian. "We've got to address family violence and domestic violence."

James Raphael Mitchell, 27, of Pittsburg, son of the late San Francisco porn king Jim Mitchell, was charged with first-degree murder, domestic violence, kidnapping, child abduction

and child endangerment in the July 12 baseball-bat beating death of his former girlfriend, 29-year-old Keller, and the kidnapping of their 1-year-old daughter.

The incident occurred despite a restraining order against Mitchell and a string of violent incidents, according to court records. Such incidents are not uncommon.

Addressing domestic violence

In the past five years, 88 percent of the 4,569 cases referred to the Marin district attorney's office by law enforcement agencies have

Facilitator Bill Eichhorn leads a discussion during a batters intervention educational class held at the The Mankind Program in San Rafael. (IJ photo/Jeff Vendsel)

involved domestic violence, according to statistics provided by the nonprofit advocacy group Marin Abused Women's Services.

In addition to the Mitchell case, prosecutors are preparing for a preliminary hearing Aug. 31 in the matter of Chet Turner, a 48-year-old man accused in the April stabbing death of Avril Clary, 46, of Sausalito, with whom he shared a home on Bridgeway. The suspect told at least three acquaintances he killed her, authorities have said.

The death of 9-year-old Melody Osheroff is being prosecuted as a homicide but is not a domestic violence case. Edward John Schaefer, 43, is accused of riding intoxicated into a crosswalk on May 27, hitting Melody and her father, Aaron, who is recovering from his injuries.

Berberian said his office spends about $1.3 million of its $16 million budget on domestic violence cases. A specially created family violence court established about a year ago deals only with individuals who have pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges. A family violence prosecution team also has been established with specific attorneys assigned to cases. A more aggressive stance on misdemeanors has been developed, although such cases can be difficult to prosecute, Berberian said.

"When it gets in front of a jury it gets more difficult to impress upon a jury the danger of the situation because they don't see the injury results," he said. "In domestic violence, in particular, you many times have a victim that does not cooperate for all sorts of reasons.

"We have to try to," he added. "We're not going to just drop these cases because we have an uncooperative victim. We're going to try to press on if we can."

Provincial attitudes about the problem have improved somewhat but still exist, prosecutors said.

"Unfortunately there are still people that have that attitude, 'Well, this is just a domestic.' Well, these domestics turn into what we saw last week and you just can't ignore them.

"It's happening in Ross, it's happening in Novato, it's happening in Belvedere, it's happening everywhere," Berberian said.

"It's just very tragic - the cost to the family and to our community."

Help from MAWS

At Marin Abused Women's Services, a 30-year organization that assists about 3,000 victims of domestic violence annually, requests for emergency shelter have been increasing and there is a growing waiting list for transitional housing facilities, officials said.

In 2008, the MAWS hotline received 1,918 calls. The group provided 5,548 nights of emergency shelter; 17,338 nights of transitional housing; advocacy and assistance to 568 women who needed restraining, protective and custody orders; and training for domestic violence prevention practitioners throughout California and the nation through 81 workshops reaching more than 1,332 participants.

Media coverage depicting the Mitchell family history as tragic and the incident as a "crime of passion" have been frustrating and distract from the societal problem - the "continuum of abusive behavior," said Donna Garske, MAWS founder and chief executive.

"Domestic violence is a deliberate action," she said. "It's a clear intention and a behavior of choice.

"There are a lot of people that have rough lives and don't commit acts of violence," Garske said.

Progress, particularly since the 1994 passage of the Violence Against Women Act, has been made, but "you can have the best darn coordinated system in the country and still have domestic violence," Garske said.

"Early intervention and prevention is really key to getting this problem to stop," she said.

Family law court

Some critics continue to point to the family law court at the Hall of Justice, where several judges and a former district attorney were targeted years ago in an unsuccessful recall campaign. The critics claimed Marin's family law court was a cesspool of cronyism and corruption that favored well-connected lawyers in child-custody disputes.

Indeed, the system for years has been plagued by favoritism, and domestic violence cases can fall victim to it, said Barbara Kauffman, a San Rafael family law attorney and vocal critic of family law court in Marin.

"If the alleged abuser is: A, wealthy; B, white; and C, has representation by a favored attorney or a popular attorney, I don't see the restraining orders being issued," she said, adding that she has heard that more have been issued as of late as public scrutiny has intensified.

"I think because the heat is being turned up there may likely be and I hear people saying there are more restraining orders issued now," she said. "I do think they are making more of an effort. I think especially in cases where money and politics aren't involved they really are issuing a lot more.

"I think all cases should be decided fairly based on the facts and the law - not based on money or race or any of those outside factors," said Kauffman, who said she believes a changing of the guard on the bench could bring about positive change.

A new venue would help too, she added.

"What is a criminal issue is being decided in the family courts and it's inappropriate," Kauffman said.

Could be, said Charlotte Hideko Huggins, a family law attorney who represented Keller.

"Perhaps if these cases were not handled in family court, and they were handled in criminal court, maybe they would be taken more seriously," she said.

"For every 10 cases that are just maneuvering between couples and their relationship there is this one deadly person out there.

"I have to say in my experience domestic violence victims are very difficult clients to convince to stay away," she said. "The abuser first beats down your self-esteem so you think you are not worthy of anyone but him, (gets you in his) financial clutches, and then cuts you off from everybody.

"I think there has to be full enforcement of these orders," Huggins said of restraining orders and orders of protection. "This is where the counseling comes in.

"The victims need to understand that this is a serious issue," she said, adding that she had great difficulty convincing Keller to stay away.

"She was a sweet young woman. Even with all the abuse there was a level of naivet that I couldn't break through," Huggins said. "You have to be consistent and you have to say no."

GETTING HELP

For domestic violence help and information, call the women's 24-hour hotline at 924-6616. Spanish speakers can call 924-3456. The men's 24-hour hotline is 924-1070.

BY THE NUMBERS

50-55

Percent of nonvehicular homicides attributed to domestic violence in the past five years in Marin

Percent of cases referred to the district attorney's office in the past five years that involved domestic violence

2 of 3

Number of Marin homicides this year that have been attributed to domestic violence

Contact Jennifer Upshaw via e-mail at jupshaw@marinij.com

Now The Family Court is going after the women's refuges

2009-07-11T07:45:00.000-07:00

The Family Law has gone beyond the violating human rights of women and children - they may as well be the ones with the guns in their hands. This is NOW not only a crucial time to be writing to your politicians, but to the united nations before we have another genocide. Naming the refuges, means that any perpetrator with access to weapons can walze up to a refuge and eliminate the entire facility. The Family Courts consistent tyranny against women, women's shelters and forty years worth of research is enough to establish who is giving the directions to these angry mens groups. I have had it on good authority that the mens movements are internal to the family court and part of the evidence is within the mapping of Dr Michael's Floods work on this subject. Evidence has amounted in many places, but obviously becoming less of a requirement due to this factor becoming highly visible to the public anyway. Case by case, women and children have been ignored on their safety concerns and deaths have been largely ignored and contained from public view. The views of the court may be dressed in a variance of use of language, but the beliefs, motives and culture is parallel. The determination to diminish acknowledgement of a connection between family courts and family violence is the courts top priority. The article below is just one example. Remember, the women who died earlier this year was released to the public as this is part of UK law - not australian and the statistics the court released can be obscured to meet their purpose of minimizing this genocide.

Court puts women in danger

Threatened ... the woman, who cannot be identified, is being forced to reveal the name of the women's refuge. Photo: Janie Barrett

Leesha McKenny

July 12, 2009

A WOMEN'S refuge was forced to change its name after its identity was revealed during a child custody case before the Federal Magistrates Court last week.

The organisation running the refuge said it feared for the safety of its residents after the location of its head office became known, through court documents, to the father trying to win custody of his two children.

The court is now deliberating whether to compel the mother to disclose the address of the Sydney refuge as the potential pick-up point for the children. He had previously picked up the children at a local shopping centre.

The woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, said she sought refuge after her children were exposed to sexual abuse through her ex-partner's family. He had also made threats to her safety.

If she is forced to reveal the refuge's location, refuge manager Christine Bird said the mother and the two children would be required to leave for breaching an agreement not to disclose the address.

Ms Bird said two other families at the location, identified by police as homicide risks because their ex-partners had access to firearms, would be exposed to danger. "As sympathetic as I am to her situation . . . I've got to think about the other women, which the court doesn't."

The woman said she was forced to move between temporary accommodation five times in three months before the Department of Community Services referred her to the refuge a year ago.

Ms Bird said the court did not consult the refuge before including its details in a court order given to the woman's ex-partner last week. "They're making decisions that affect our organisation, our residents, our program without us having any representation or involvement," she said.

Dr Elspeth McInnes, a researcher in family law at the University of South Australia, said there was a lack of co-ordination between state and federal systems, with the Family Law Act placing its emphasis on the right of parental access ahead of safety.

"I don't think it's in the Family Law Act that they have to consider the safety of parties who are not party to proceedings, and will put it down to the mother's responsibility to find an appropriate home for the child," she said.

A spokesman for federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland said that a review of the Family Law Act's shared parental responsibility provisions would be delivered to the Government in December.

Cat Gander, chief executive of the NSW Women's Refuge Movement Resource Centre, said a key cause of homelessness in Australia was domestic violence.

"A woman doesn't stay in a refuge for the fun of it," she said. "And I'm outraged that the family law system these days facilitates contact [with children] over safety."

Murderer fathering from behind bars

2009-07-10T19:24:00.000-07:00

A major breach of security occurred in NSW prison where a murderers sperm was smuggled out to his girlfriend.

Whilst three staff members have been fired, the damage has already been done. If the couple separates, there is a potential where the child could be a candidate for family law proceedings that currently overrepresent the interests of mens rights groups.

Just recently, a mother was forced to flee after a judgement acknowledged the fathers interests above the child. Even when the baby was breast-fed, a baby was deprived of access to breast-milk to accommodate the fathers time with the baby.

The Shared Parenting Scam

2009-06-27T05:11:00.000-07:00

Dad accuses DOCS of ignoring abuse

2009-06-20T17:00:00.000-07:00

Lisa Carty NSW Political Editor
June 21, 2009
THE father of a boy who was sexually assaulted by a Government-approved foster carer has accused the Department of Community Services of ignoring continuing abuse.
The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, has pleaded with DOCS to remove his two young sons from their mother's care after what he claims is a series of mistreatment. He recently detailed to DOCS an incident where the boys were deadlocked in their home by their mother while she went to visit a fortune teller.
The boys had also complained of living in filth, being hit on the back of their hands with knives, and assault at the hands of one of their mother's boyfriends, their father said. A DOCS foster carer who had minded the boys for their mother in a private arrangement has been convicted of sexually abusing the younger boy and will be sentenced in August.
DOCS sent seven troubled children to stay with the man for "weekend respite care" in the more than four years it used him as an approved foster carer.
A spokeswoman for the Community Services Minister, Linda Burney, said the man, who cannot be identified, was accepted by DOCS to care for kids in crisis in February 2004 after he applied for the role. "He underwent standard departmental foster-care training and assessment, as well as thorough checks regarding his background," the spokeswoman said. "All potential carers must undergo these checks … All checks … came back clear.
"The department immediately suspended him from being a carer on hearing the allegations in April 2008."
The spokeswoman said further investigations show no evidence has been found of "abuse of any of these other children".
The father raised concerns about the man with DOCS in September 2006, but was ignored until he took his son to police last year. They subsequently charged the man with a range of offences including having sex with a child under 10.
The father said: "DOCS ignored me when I told them my sons were at risk from a man who was acting like a classic pedophile - now they are ignoring me again. Do my kids have to be brutalised before they will do something? It seems emotional abuse and risk of harm is not sufficient to make DOCS act. The only people DOCS are concerned about protecting is themselves."
The father is pinning his hopes on a Children's Court-ordered psychiatric assessment of his former partner, which he says was promised by the DOCS director-general, Jenny Mason, in a meeting more than a month ago.
Such a report could help his custody case in the Family Court.
But Ms Burney's spokeswoman said a psychiatric assessment had been discussed, not promised.
"It was raised as one of a number of possible options available pending a full case review and investigation of his concerns," she said.
"The department is taking the father's concerns very seriously, and has launched a thorough investigation in response.
"The department is maintaining regular contact with the family to ensure the children are well supported. At this point in time, there are no immediate concerns for the children's safety."
Source: The Sydney Morning Herald

California Court Puts 58,000 Children in Harms Way

2009-06-15T20:42:00.001-07:00

Scandal Illuminates Troubled Family Court System

By Byron Williams

The family court system has, in theory, operated on the question, "What is in the best interests of the child?"

But the findings articulated at a one-day workshop hosted by Alameda County Supervisor Gail Steele and the Center for Judicial Excellence suggest that question is more theory than practice.

If the statistics are accurate, the frequency with which children are allowed to have unsupervised contact with physically or sexually abusive parents after divorce in this country is alarming and worthy of the public's attention.

According to the Center for Judicial Excellence, "Not since the Catholic Church pedophile scandal has the United States seen this level of institutional collusion and corruption harming innocent children."

This may sound like hyperbole, but the comparison holds if, in fact, most family court professionals know the system is broken and are allowing the most vulnerable members of society to potentially suffer lifelong consequences.

It is indeed a broken system that allows 58,000 children each year to be placed in harm's way simply because the abusive parent also possesses the resources to hire a bevy of professionals who plead his/her case to judges, mediators and other family-law professionals.

Heavy caseloads, bad judges and unqualified mediators, who evaluate families sometimes based on no more than a one-hour meeting, can add up to decisions that permanently
affect families.

As one parent shared with me, "I wouldn't believe my own story if I didn't live through it. We trust the courts to do the right thing, but it's just not that simple."

Those who are not directly involved trust the system to work — but there was a consistent message at the workshop that it does not work, and children are paying the price.

Are these simply the musing of parents and attorneys who did not get their way? No, there is more than enough data to suggest there is a problem that warrants investigation. The primary charge finds that many judges, for reasons ranging from being overworked to becoming jaded by the system, have placed an inordinate reliance on court appointees such as mediators, evaluators, investigators, and minors' counsel, who may or may not act in the best interest of the children.

This has created a scenario whereby individuals who have no understanding of the law often sway the individual who is appointed to administer justice.

Steele also cites a level of dishonesty that she states is pervasive throughout the system. "It's not just mediators but social workers who are not telling the truth," she said.

The workshop featured experts in the field and parents sharing their gut-wrenching, first-hand testimony and offering solutions to the problem-plagued system in California.

State Sen. Mark Leno and other members of the Legislature are calling for an audit that will evaluate the magnitude of the concerns expressed over a number of years.

A number of participants also made it clear the problems they cite are not emblematic of the whole, maintaining there are indeed a number of good judges within the system. But there are enough bad ones who are not held accountable, causing the system dysfunction.

Steele should be commended for her willingness to bring attention to an issue that has flown under the radar for years. Investigation is long overdue.

Byron Williams has served as pastor of the Resurrection Community Church in Oakland since 2002. As the only pastor/syndicated columnist in the country, Williams writes a column which appears in 10 publications and several progressive web sites across the country.

Posted on June 15, 2009

Father Helped Daughters Rapist

2009-06-15T19:16:00.001-07:00

Mum hired hitman to kill molester

Article from:

Font size:Decrease Increase
Email article:Email
Print article:Print

Elissa Hunt

June 16, 2009 12:00am

A MOTHER who hired a hitman to kill the man who molested her child has been jailed for at least three years.

The mother of three, who can't be named, was found guilty by a Supreme Court jury of incitement to murder her stepfather, who had abused her 12-year-old daughter.

"Your natural parental instinct to protect your young daughter seems to have developed into a desire to take revenge," Justice Elizabeth Hollingworth said yesterday.

After learning of the abuse in September 2007, the mother asked her former partner if he could help find a hitman.

The former partner instead contacted police and the mother was introduced to "Dale", an undercover policeman posing as a gun for hire.

Justice Hollingworth said the stepfather, who was convicted over the sexual abuse, was never really threatened.

She set a maximum term of six years and ordered that the mother serve at least three.

Share this article

End Violence Against Women And Children in The Family Courts

2009-06-14T21:45:00.001-07:00

End violence against women and children

13 June 2009

NEWCASTLE — Fifty people marched on the Newcastle legal district on June 10 to protest changes to the Family Court system initiated by former PM John Howard.

The marchers presented letters to representatives of the police, and the federal and state courts to protest the inability of the system to protect women and children from domestic violence.

Convicted Sex Offender Granted Custody of Four Children

2009-06-13T18:05:00.001-07:00

For some time, politicians have been avoiding the topic of how far they will go in handing the children over to the father. The situation here speaks for itself. Whilst the article does not draw attention to previous cases like this, it is not uncommon for courts to allow convicted sex offenders unsupervised contact with children. For as long as the courts, family reporters and children's lawyers rely upon the junk science of Parental Alienation Syndrome(also referred to as "Parent Alienation"), cases like these will continue to rupture the lives of children.

Pedophile granted child custody

Article from:

Font size:Decrease Increase
Email article:Email
Print article:Print

DAVID NANKERVIS

June 13, 2009 11:30pm

A FAMILY Court judge has granted custody of four children to their father - a convicted pedophile and rapist.

The mother of the four youngsters, all aged under 15, requested custody at a recent Family Court hearing in Adelaide.

The unsuccessful application was made not long after the children's father was found guilty in the Adelaide District Court of multiple sex offences against a minor.

A transcript of the Family Court hearing shows the presiding judge was aware of the father's convictions and that he was on bail awaiting sentencing.

Further details, including the names of the family, cannot be legally reported. The mother and her current husband also both have criminal records.

However, child support groups have condemned the idea that a convicted pedophile could be granted custody of any child.

Victim Support Service SA said the community would be "alarmed" at a situation where a pedophile was allowed to care for children.

"Our organisation would be worried too about that, and we would want to know about the reasoning and rationale behind such a decision and what steps are in place to protect any child in such circumstances," the service's chief executive Michael Dawson said.

"I would think it is inappropriate for someone with a previous history - through conviction of crimes against children - to be provided with the opportunity to supervise children.

"From my personal experience, I've never heard of any such case before."

The Australian Childhood Foundation also expressed serious concern about the risks pedophiles pose to children, particularly in an unsupervised environment.

"Convicted pedophiles can't work as a teacher, be a foster carer or footy coach, because society recognises that past behaviour is the best indicator of future risk," foundation chief executive Joe Tucci said.

"So as a matter of principal, children shouldn't be in unsupervised contact or custody of an adult with convictions for sexual assault against children."

Mr Tucci said courts should err on the side of caution and treat convictions of sexual assault against children as a "red light" when deciding what is in a child's best interest.

A spokeswoman for the Family Court said judges could only award custody of a child to those parties who applied for it.

"If a judge has concerns about a child's welfare, they cannot make an order that a child be put in the care of the state," the spokeswoman said.

"A judge can ask but not compel a state welfare department to intervene if they believe a child is at risk of abuse or neglect."

The Department of Families and Communities said the Family Court may advise it of any "child protection concerns (the court has) about a child".

"Families SA assesses the notification like any other and takes action if necessary," a department spokesman said.

"Also, the Family Court may make a formal request that the Department of Families and Communities become a party to a case.

"If DFC accepts the request and becomes a party, it then makes representations to the court about what is in the best interests of the child or children."

Family First: Keeping It In The Family

2009-06-13T06:30:00.001-07:00

Its no secret that Senator Fielding has extended support to Fathers Rights groups and became one of the major political key figures in establishing Australia's shared parenting bill. As many christian movements believe that "God" can tame the wild beast of domestic violence with christian family values, women begin to drop off and the children become motherless. Having spiritual beliefs does help the person in a crisis feel empowered to take action, inspire those who devote their faith and efforts to be more compassionate to others. There are those benefits. They are the reason why those who choose not to believe do not hold believers in complete contempt and why religion is not recorded in the diagnostic and statistical manual as a delusion. It is truly where one wants to take it and what they do with it that matters. Telling a victim that "God" can heal violence against her if she holds christian values is as dangerous as asking a man to pray instead of taking his heart medication. In a christian dialogue, a moderate might say that "God helps those who help themselves" and others may interpret the horrific lessons in life as a way that God is empowering her to find her strength and find the light in dark times of our life's.

But these journeys that we take in life are ones that we must take alone. If "Family" was all what was set in text by religions, there would be no domestic violence at all. Sometimes domestic violence is used within the context of God as a reason to perpetrate it, sometimes it is allah. Again, it is where one interprets religion. Violence against women and children is a heavy burden of our times and apart of families. Many women have mistaken the belief that they could resolve it, perhaps if they had more humility or compassion. I cannot recall one occasion where a women had not made an effort to resolve the violence against them. Its not her that needs to resolve it and that is why it continues to go on. The person who is harming needs to stop and whether they choose to is something that no one can interfere with. The problem with forcing someone to do something is that it will always fall apart. Keeping her in the family under a new marriage contract is no different than being a human trafficker. The only difference is that one women travels and the other is under house arrest by the law. That is why human traffickers get caught and this law is falling apart. Noone was able to conceal Arthur Freeman when he threw Darcey Freeman off that Bridge. No one could hide the accumulating experiences of terror whether it be the mother distraught over the abuse of her children or the trauma of violence used against her during contact handovers.

No there is so much more to the picture than just, "Fatherlessness" and "scornful women". The truth begins to shine through and not until some time has passed that a judge might recognize it and sometimes it is just too late. It was too late for Darcey and others too. They say that single mothers are strained and stressed by the lack of assistance available, Thats not going to change with a man who is driven by hate for all women. Single mothers need the rest of the community regardless of what culture they are from to stop turning their backs on her and the children. perpetrators are also complex human beings. If they all walked around being as aggressive out of home than they were in the home, perhaps they never would have become fathers.

The shared parenting bill brought into Australia is one of the major fathers rights and church influences upon the law. A law that is imposed upon 45% of the population who are non believers and 93% of the christian population that do not regularly attend church. What if this was Sharia Law instead? In fact we are now not so far away from that considering that Shared Parenting ties women to men.

Senator Steve Fielding stated on the 13th of March in 2006,

Family First believes it is important to discourage false reports of child abuse or family violence.

If a court determines, based on evidence presented to it, that an accusation of child abuse or family violence is false and the person making the accusation knew it to be false at the time it was made, the court may impose a reasonable financial penalty. That penalty should not exceed all costs incurred by the party accused as a direct result of defending the accusation, and reasonable lawyers' fees incurred in recovering the sanctions, against the person making the accusation.

No one is at risk if their allegations are true or if they believed them to be true.

A malicious false report of child abuse or family violence would be grounds for a court to consider restricting the parent/child relationship between the child and false accuser.

Family First understands the Australian Institute of Family Studies is undertaking research into violence and family law and some people have argued this issue should not be addressed until that research is published. I do not want to discount the importance of that research, but there will always be research underway and there will always be an excuse not to act. The research can be taken into account in future amendments.

I ask Senators for their support for the amendment.

No such amendment was made for the person who denied the violence and the hell they put their victim(s) through during the process of pursuing false allegations. Leaving the court to decide whether it was false or not left the flood gates open to target every victim who did not manage to acquire enough evidence(Perhaps that might be because if they were to take any longer, the only exit would be in a body bag). The court already has the supreme power to decide what is enough and sometimes what was required to determine a murder case was not enough. The extreme torture that these children and mothers endure because of such bias is horrific. For quite some time before the shared parenting laws, it was difficult enough to bring forward a case of family violence and even then there was the ordered exposure to risk. Since the 1980s in Australia, when the concept of parent alienation was introduced the survivors were legally ordered back into the situations that they had intended to escape from. This entire experience is because the people who initiated these theories held a deep hatred towards all women and desired to have more rights over both her and the children. This is why domestic violence is still prevalent in the community and why there is one organization that can legally continue the cycle going throughout generations.

Addressing family violence requires more than just ideals. It requires full commitment to break the cycle altogether. Its not the women, her advocates that cause the problem of divorce. it is the attitudes that support the violence, the blame that is misdirected towards her and the children. The greeks were correct when they perceived evil was really ignorance and ignorance is what is producing some devastating consequences. It is the cheapness of mothers and children's lives that are discarded all for the sake of the nuclear family. Only a small percentage of allegations are proven to be false. The studies that refer to 5% cover a larger population and more history of family court proceedings including joint custody. This research was available prior to the shared parenting bill and such statistics were overlooked in favor of "saving Marriage" but failing to thoroughly deal with the deep rooted problems that cause divorce.

There was no domestic violence homicide review team in Australia at that stage and even now there is only one in NSW. The ability to use such statistics to proceed with caution on this bill were not available. Lives of women and children were discarded for the sake of "solving fatherlessness". What was available was years of peaking murder suicides that infested Untied States after similar legislations were introduced. They are now looking at changing these laws after a long hard costly lesson. We cannot bring back those lives. We cannot revive the children who hung themselves because it was too painful to endure another beating, we cannot take away the bullets that made thousands of children permanently motherless. What we can do now is truly understand what is happening to our children, their mothers and provide adequate protections for them.

Stop The Responsible Fatherhood Bill

2009-06-12T04:42:00.001-07:00

"All I ever wanted was supervised" a repeated phrase amongst family violence survivors. The Family Court has come under recent scrutiny over unsafe contact and the controversial use of Parental Alienation Syndrome a diagnosis that has not been accepted by any scientific organization globally. The bottom line is that children are ordered by the court to attend access visits where the parents are abusive. If the mother objects, she risks losing the children altogether. That is the state of not only the Family Court in Australia, it is an international problem.

Until recently, there were few groups that were advocating for children and far too many groups advocating for such forced contact. "Pro Contact" culture is really just being polite. "Contact No Matter what" Cult, is more appropriate considering the facts that there is no limit as to who they wish children to have contact with.

Cult definitions coined from 1920 onward^[1] refer to a cohesive social group and their devotional beliefs or practices, which the surrounding population considers to be outside of mainstream cultures. The surrounding population may be as small as a neighborhood, or as large as the community of nations. They gratify curiosity about, take action against, or ignore a group, depending on its reputed similarity to cults previously reported by mass media. -Wikipedia

Bizarre punishments against mothers are initiated by the courts if they do not comply without consideration for the impact that the children suffer.

Some of these punishments include:

"Isolating The Child From The Protective Parent"

"Orders inhibiting the Child From access to Counseling"

"Removal of The Mothers Passport'

In cases where the parent has a mental health condition that is one of the leading causes of homicide, the protective action is often minimal. Some orders are for the parent to take their medication and see their doctor, but left entirely to the device of the patient and the potential victims are left restricted by the court order and helpless to what might come about. The Court evaluators who make the decisions that the judges often solely rely on are often untrained for these cases, but overtrained in the area of "pro - contact' and too well understand the terms of "maternal gatekeeping" "Alienation" and "False Memory Syndrome". They believe that the child is not unsafe in relationships with sex offenders if they "just accept it" without the interference from mothers.

This is due to the fact that in the early 80s, Dr Richard Gardner coined the term, "Parent Alienation Syndrome" and travelled the world with the help of Association of Family and Conciliation Courts(AFCC). Many conferences were held indoctrinating lawyers, psychologists and judges into the belief that children are better off with abusive parents. This belief was also supported by the international Child Emancipation, a lobby group for pedophiles.

Cases where there is not enough evidence to support Family Violence are often referred to as, "False Allegations" and in most cases the victim is required to pay costs to the alleged perpetrator. This goes against studies that support the notion that in 95% of child abuse cases are true. Clearly it is the interference that the victims receive during the court processes that leads to the lack of evidence that is able to be provided.

Like the German Lebensborn organization, they said, "Best Interests" but the intention was to reintroduce laws that tie women to men and diminish any concerns regarding child abuse and violence against women. The current family law regime reduces the value of children and mothers compared to men and promotes the cycle of violence continuing through to another generation. Like a genetic disease, our children have been infected with family violence.

The German Lebensborn organization was similarly cruel in its time. In the context of the German welfare system, it was considered that it was the "best interests" of the child to be German. By abducting babies of other origins for German families, "Best Interests of the child" was created to serve the purposes of racial intolerance. Today in the context of Family Law, "best interests of the child" refers to the amount of time spent with a parent no matter how abusive they may be.

Although there have been more efforts to protect mothers and children affected by family violence with the Violence Against Women Act and the introduction of the Protective Parent Bill, PAS is still alive in the US court system and have progressed to a point where they are supporting it through the "Responsible Fatherhood Bill". Like best Interests, it is aimed at enforcing contact with fathers regardless of the rise to epidemic proportions of murder suicides. In sect 2, "Findings" it states that the reason to provide fathers with billions of dollars in funding is due to:

6) Children who live without contact with their biological father are, in comparison to children who have such contact--

(A) 5 times more likely to live in poverty;

(B) more likely to bring weapons and drugs into the classroom;

(C) twice as likely to commit crime;

(D) twice as likely to drop out of school;

(E) more likely to commit suicide;

(F) more than twice as likely to abuse alcohol or drugs; and

(G) more likely to become pregnant as teenagers.

(7) Violent criminals are overwhelmingly males who grew up without fathers.

The findings stated here is derived from a confirmitory bias. If you look deeper into the research, it becomes obvious that:

Children were economically abused by the fathers and the state for withdrawal of financial support of children. It is in fact written in the convention on The Rights Of The Child:

Article 26

1. States Parties shall recognize for every child the right to benefit from social security, including social insurance, and shall take the necessary measures to achieve the full realization of this right in accordance with their national law.

2. The benefits should, where appropriate, be granted, taking into account the resources and the circumstances of the child and persons having responsibility for the maintenance of the child, as well as any other consideration relevant to an application for benefits made by or on behalf of the child.

The "Violent males who grew up without fathers", were in fact infected prior to the separation by witnessing the actual violence. According to Amy Coha:

Boys who witness domestic violence are more likely to batter their female partners as adults than boys raised in nonviolent homes. Of the children who witness domestic abuse, 60% of the boys eventually become batterers.
Sixty-three percent of boys age 11-20 who commit homicide, murder the man who was abusing their mother. In 50% of the time, if the wife (mother) is being physically abused, so are the children.

Teenage pregnancy is an old sexist phrase that draws the need to look at the pregnant women as the problem. Contraceptives apart from the condom are directed at her as entirely responsible for the pregnancy. According to Rape Abuse and Incest Network(RAIN):

Girls ages 16-19 are 4 times more likely than the general population to be victims of rape, attempted rape, or sexual assault.

Victims of sexual assault are:⁷

3 times more likely to suffer from depression.

6 times more likely to suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder.

13 times more likely to abuse alcohol.

26 times more likely to abuse drugs.

4 times more likely to contemplate suicide.

The fact that in some states, the perpetrator can apply to the Family Court to stop the abortion and continue these attacks on her suggests that women and girls are considered by the state as objects rather than human beings. If such a bill were to pass, it would be a greater violation to the already eroded human rights of women and children.

Child Goes To Killers Family

2009-06-11T22:24:00.001-07:00

Thursday, Jun. 11, 2009

Comments (0)

JODY BARONE DEATH

Father's family gets custody of daughter

By Sara Ganim

- sganim@centredaily.com

Williamsport Judge Richard A. Gray has decided to give primary physical custody of the child who lost both parents in the Easter 2007 murder- suicide to the father's family in Williamsport.

Ben Barone shot and killed his wife Jodi Barone during a planned custody exchange of their daughter April 8, 2007.

The decision ended a two-year, three-way battle between the grandparents of the now-5-year-old child, who will start school in the fall.

Jodi Barone's mother, State College resident Vickey Warshaw, had been fighting for primary custody of the girl against Ben Barone's mother, Victoria Barone, of Williamsport.

Both parties were in court in Centre County on Wednesday because Victoria Barone was asking to have Jodi Barone's estate moved to a Williamsport bank, claiming it was more reliable than the State College bank that has the account.

Judge Thomas King Kistler denied the request, but during proceedings Vickey Warshaw's attorney said that Warshaw plans to appeal the custody ruling by the Williamsport judge.

The order gives Warshaw some custody on weekends, holidays and summers, and says both grandmothers will make decisions about the child's future together.

Sara Ganim can be reached at 231-4616.

Fathers Rights above Children leads to death of 14 year old

2009-06-11T16:25:00.001-07:00

Did system do right by the children?

By Karen de Sá
San Jose Mercury News

Yahoo! Buzz

E-Mail Print

Comments (11)

Recommend (0)

Text Size:

SAN JOSE -- Powerless and tormented, a Campbell mother awaits the story her daughter's bones will tell.

The remains of Alycia Mesiti, 14 when she vanished in August 2006, are in the hands of toxicologists and coroners. Since March, when cadaver-sniffing dogs found her body buried in the unkempt yard of her father's former home in Ceres, detectives have scoured for evidence from the girl's petite frame.

Last week, Mark Edward Mesiti was charged with the murder and rape of his daughter. He remains in a Los Angeles County jail on $205,000 bail on unrelated charges of child endangerment and running a methamphetamine lab.

Girl's dad accused of murdering Ceres teen in 2006, as well as drugging, molesting her

With a lengthy criminal past, the 41-year-old still was granted custody of Alycia and her older brother in Santa Clara County Superior Court less than a year before the girl disappeared.

The death of the smiling teen, who loved horses and the singer Shakira, lays bare the intractable choices that Family Court judges face every day, but the tragic outcome has everyone who worked on Alycia's case looking back wondering what more could have been done.

"Dad's story was he was getting phone calls periodically" from the missing girl, said Ceres police Sgt. James Robbins. "But it doesn't appear she ever left the house."

Legal thicket

The family's legal history is a tangle of allegations traded through restraining orders and court filings. A court investigator described Alycia's mother, Roberta Allen, now 39, as an unfit mother who had battled with depression.

Alycia and her brother, now 19 and in the military, were placed in Mesiti's care by the Family Court in November 2005. During the previous seven years, court records show, Mesiti had been convicted of state and federal charges, including bank fraud and drunken driving. He was charged with domestic violence and ordered to attend anger-management classes after pleading guilty to a lesser charge. After failing to comply with court orders to attend drug and alcohol programs, he landed in prison for violating probation.

Nonetheless, Allen described her yearslong legal battle as "very angled toward Mark. I couldn't afford an attorney. He had one."

Over the nine months the children lived with their father before Alycia disappeared, police and child welfare workers fielded repeated warnings of danger in their single-family home in a neat, unremarkable Ceres neighborhood.

Beginning in 2005, the children's court-appointed lawyer, Jonnie Herring, reported her concerns, recommending only a supervised, temporary placement with Mesiti because of "sufficient issues and risks to these minors." In 2006, she reported that Mesiti had failed to comply with court orders to enroll his children in school and remain in touch.

"I am deeply concerned about both minors, especially Alycia," Herring wrote in a report to Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Vincent Chiarello.

Allen said she also reported that the children often were hungry, subject to abuse and unable to call their mother despite her court-ordered visitation and contact rights. Police confirm they made visits to the home.

Clearly, the Family Court had a complex case on its hands with few ideal options when Chiarello granted Mesiti custody. The legal battle had raged for eight years without resolution. The children had been bounced between aunts and grandparents and, in a reflection of the case's complexity, the judge appointed Herring to grant them an independent voice in court. Their parents had gone through mediation, counseling and psychological evaluations.

Children are not Alienated, they are abused

2009-06-11T15:15:00.000-07:00

'Deprogramming' alienated children is science fiction

Text Size: A | A | A

Print this Article Email this Article
Sign up for text alerts

Respond to this Article

By JOAN DAWSON

June 10, 2009

In the past few decades, a term called Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) or Parental Alienation (PA) has been used in family courts to describe a situation where one parent poisons the mind of the child against the other parent.

While it is true that some mothers (and fathers) intentionally bad-mouth their spouses or partners, several reasons can explain why the child fears or distances him- or herself from a parent. It has long been recognized that children experiencing divorce can exhibit aggressive behavior or depression. Children can react angrily to their parents' separation and may even be reacting to the conflict and violence they've witnessed.

But there is another possible explanation for a so-called alienated child. The child may have been abused and, as a result, fears or exhibits hostility toward the "target" parent. PAS, then, can shift the attention from an abusive situation to that of a protective parent's "alienating" behavior. Abusers, who, not surprisingly, deny allegations or call them "false allegations" (and actually get the spouse punished with fines or jail time), are more likely to seek custody than nonviolent parents. And, often enough, they get it.

While PAS has many proponents, most credible agencies do not support it. The American Psychological Association says PAS "lacks evidence" and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges refers to it as a "discredited" syndrome. The American Prosecutor's Research Institute says, —¦ PAS is an untested theory that, unchallenged, can have far-reaching consequences for children seeking protection and legal vindication in courts of law." Despite opposition, PAS is still used widely in courtrooms across the country.

In the past decade judges have felt compelled to rectify claims of alienation. Some have sent children to "deprogramming" or reunification centers in attempts to undo hostile feelings. According to the Leadership Council on Child Abuse, therapy usually involves confining the child to a location away from home and isolating the child from the parent to whom the child is most attached. The attachment to the favored parent is challenged, while encouraging the child with intensive sessions to re-accept the rejected parent.

Since abusers can use PAS as an excuse, some children are reunified with a parent that physically, emotionally or sexually abused them. The child may react to this reunification with increased symptoms, suicidal ideation, or even suicide attempts.

Recently in Ontario, a judge ordered two teenage boys to undergo deprogramming treatment after allegedly being brainwashed by the father. An 18-year-old sibling stepped in and sought custody for his younger brothers, both of whom were diagnosed as suicidal. Newspapers reported him as saying, "My brothers have ended up being committed in a hospital against their wishes, committed to live somewhere where they do not want to live, exposed to psychiatrists, who have attempted to carry out experimental therapy with them at the risk of severe harm to them."

Deprogramming treatment raises important ethical and legal questions. Do children have a right to their own thoughts? Do they have a choice in forming their relationships? Do parents' interests trump children's? Can legal strategies be employed to challenge children's fear and hostility? These are complex issues that deserve careful evidence-based approaches that preserve the integrity of children's rights while balancing those of the parents. If any treatment is court-ordered, we owe it to our children to use the ethical guidelines set out by the American Psychological Association to guide us in our decisions.

Deprogramming treatment for children, at least for now, should be confined to the realm of science fiction and not to courtrooms.

Joan Dawson is a public policy assistant at the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence and is a member of the Family Court Reform Coalition, which seeks to help protective parents, including many battered women, gain custody of their children. The American Forum is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, educational organization that provides with the views of state experts on major public concerns in order to stimulate informed discussion. Dawson is a public policy assistant at the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence and is a member of the Family Court Reform Coalition.

Outrage: Sex Offender Dad Ordered, "Community Work" For 18 Months

2009-06-10T18:27:00.001-07:00

Dad to be listed as sex offender

10/06/2009 11:29:00 PM

A 44-YEAR-OLD man found to have 14 child pornography movies on a computer he bought for his daughter will be listed on the sex offender registry for eight years, a court heard yesterday.

Mark Robison, of Sebastopol, pleaded guilty to knowingly possessing child pornography at Ballarat Magistrates Court in April.

Magistrate Kay Robertson yesterday convicted and sentenced him to an 18-month community-based order with 120 hours of unpaid community work.

Ms Robertson described the offence as very serious but told Robison he was not a hardcore child pornography user.

Police seized the computer after searching Robison's home on June 19, 2007.

The court had earlier heard Robison's daughter downloaded a type of software allowing networking

with other computer users.

Robison then searched for items including pornography but he did not know they would be saved.

In sentencing, Ms Robertson took into account Robison's guilty plea, his co-operation with police and the small number of files on the computer.

More on the Journalist Backlash...

2009-06-09T18:37:00.001-07:00

Latest comments on Caroline Overingtons Article:

"And of course these bitches refuse to express milk during the week to be frozen so that the father can feed the baby it's own mothers breast milk for the week the child is with him...Women like overington are deliberately pushing this bullshit out there and they expect that the public are too dumb to realise the above facts." Peter, Fathers4Equality

"Naturally these breastfeeding stories are Caroline's continued attempts at hyperbole". Jason, Fathers4Equality

Caroline Overington, a brave journalist submitted several articles that were against the tide of the usual fathers rights rhetoric and provided coverage on how shared parenting was harmful to children and women. Fathers Rights groups retaliated with a denigration campaign against her and sent out an alert that reached international groups in an attempt to attack her career. Our team has been infiltrating these groups for quite some time and were able to report on the emails that were sent out to the Australian Press Council. To their credit, they have complained to the F4E group for attracting over 60 submissions against her.

This is not the first time that professionals have been attacked by these groups for speaking out against these groups. In fact this type of behavior was consistent throughout the period when the shared parenting bill was passed. The first stunt of the fathers rights movement in Australia began with the black shirts.

Last week the law caught up with John Abbott. The leader of the Blackshirts fathers' group was found guilty in the County Court of stalking, and given a four-month suspended jail sentence. It came two years after Abbott, 58, shocked the city by leading posses of masked men to protest outside the homes of often terrified women.

Smiling as he walked from the court, the most extreme figure in the men's movement vowed to continue his vigilante action, and to launch a new political party. Despite looming prison time if he breaks the law in the next 18 months, Abbott said: "I'm not deterred in the least. It only strengthens my resolve."

The new party, Southern Cross, will, he says, champion men's rights and stand candidates at future federal elections. As for the demonstrations, they will go on. Abbott still has the rack of black shirts he used to evoke fear, and will employ them to shame the women he blames for marriage break-ups.

More at the dads on air website

Subsequently, laws under the guise of a shared parenting bill were introduced in parliament by mens advocates that barely concealed the same ideals as Mr Abbott. It was reported in another news report that Mr Abbott had a registry of 300 members. Links between the mens movements today and those involved in the black shirts are yet to be brought forward. There is no denial that the shared parenting bill is just a new marriage contract and that the black shirts were gratified for their bullying tactics.

Our team at Anonymums would like to challenge the Australian government to see these groups for what they truly are:

ter⋅ror⋅ism

[ter-uh-riz-uhm] Show IPA

–noun

1.	the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.

2.	the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.

3.	a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government. Find out more on how we have been able to define these groups as such here. Reporter is Being 'Vilified' for Coverage of Family Law

Letters Blog | June 10, 2009 | 11 Comments

MEN'S groups are urging people to lodge complaints with the Press Council against Caroline Overington for her coverage of issues relating to shared parenting in Family Court legislation. The reality is that some Family Court judges have made decisions that could not possibly be in any child's "best interests". Overington is to be congratulated for having the courage to expose what has been happening ("Lives torn asunder", Features, 9/6; "Court allows mums to take kids overseas", 9/6).

For far too long the media has been too afraid of Section 121 of the Family Law Act to investigate and disclose some of the court's bizarre decisons. For example, a mother secretly imprisoned for refusing to hand over her child to the father who broke into their home, bashed and raped her in the presence of children; a child placed with a father who had not disclosed HIV/AIDS to the mother and had two convictions for child sex offences and one for violence; a boy removed against his wishes from his grandparents and his father to live far away with his nightclub stripper mother, whose partner had just been released from jail for downloading a record number of child-porn images; and children removed from fathers to live with drug-addicted mothers and their sexual-abuser boyfriends.

This is not, and should not be, a gender issue. Child advocates, both women and men, are demanding that children's safety should take precedence in the Family Court. It's sad that one of the few journalists prepared to expose child protection and family law issues is being vilified by men using other branches of the media.

Freda Briggs
Adelaide, SA

REGARDING Caroline Overington's recent coverage of the shared parenting laws, it's refreshing to see views other than those of the fathers being aired. For 15 years it seems that fathers' groups have been able to set the agenda, claiming most allegations of abuse against fathers are false without supporting evidence, when there is much research showing that more than 90 per cent of allegations of abuse in custody cases are true.

These groups also claimed five fathers a day committed suicide because they lost access to their children after divorce. They have not produced any credible evidence of this and yet the shared parenting laws were introduced because of their claims.

Children are suffering. The best interests of children are not being served. While fathers continue to fight for their rights, the rights of children are being trampled.

I applaud Overington's attempts to balance this and wish more journalists would consult experts and research in their reporting, as she is doing.

Barbara Biggs
Convenor, Safer Family Law Campaign
Greenwich, Vic

Murder in The Family: Fathers Rights attitudes are deadly

2009-06-09T04:45:00.001-07:00

Sisterhood is powerless

0

Rate Article:
(1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)

Posted by Mirror Man | Posted in Feminism, News | Posted on 08-06-2009

How feminism has made men's lives safer — and women's more dangerous.

By Jennifer Foote Sweeney and Alisa Smith

Feminism, real or imagined, has long been praised and blamed for a whole pile of societal developments, crises and trends. But it has emerged recently in unlikely quarters: as a major factor in the "intimate" murders of women and as a saving grace in the lives of abusive men. In a devastating twist, feminism, while improving women's lives in many obvious ways, may also have made their lives more dangerous. At the same time, by offering escape and support to battered women, it has saved the lives of abusive men.

Much has been made of the fact that, in the past 20 years, the number of homicides in the United States has sharply declined. That is good news, especially for abusive husbands, who, statistics show, are living longer because their wives and girlfriends are taking advantage of shelters, hotlines and other services for battered women. In other words, feminists have invested decades fighting domestic violence as part of the battle for women's rights and their work has paid off — by keeping batterers alive.

But there is bad news too. Only one category of homicide has failed to decline at the same rate as the rest. In fact, in some regions, it has not declined at all. It is "intimate homicide," in which a man kills his girlfriend or wife, often murdering the rest of the family too. In about one-quarter of the killings, the man then kills himself.

While psychologists, social scientists and historians have various explanations for the stubborn nature of this gruesome trend, most agree that feminism, or at the very least what it is seen to represent, plays a role in the motivation of men who commit intimate homicide or familicide. And when it is not a motivation, it is frequently an excuse.

"Batterers are very into making excuses and presenting themselves as victims. They really see other people, particularly their partners, as abusing or attempting to control them. It's the way to rationalize, minimize or deny their own behavior," says David Adams, co-founder of Emerge, one of the earliest treatment centers for battering men, in Cambridge, Mass. "They see women's gains as being at their expense."

Though we assume that attitudes toward women have changed dramatically since 1976 — when authorities began to keep detailed records of "intimate" homicides — the number of murdered wives and girlfriends has not changed much since then. On average, the rates have been going down 1 percent per year, from 1,600 in 1976 to 1,307 in 1998. That year, 32 percent of the 3,419 women murdered in the United States were killed by "intimates," according to the FBI, which reported that just 4 percent of male homicide victims in 1998 were killed by intimate partners.

In a majority of incidents in which a man kills his wife or girlfriend and children, familiar motives are cited. The killer might believe he has lost control of his partner and needs to reassert it. Or he fears losing his partner, upon whom he is deeply dependent. This confusing feeling evokes intense rage in those threatened by it. Usually such men are consumed with anger and a desire to blame as they kill.

Just last year, one man strapped his 3-year-old daughter and 2-year-old son into their car seats and shot them point-blank after his wife took out a restraining order against him. Another pretended that his 3-year-old son had been kidnapped by someone who would not return him until he, the killer, married his girlfriend. Eight days later, the boy's body was found in a black plastic bag. The crime, the murderer confessed, had been an attempt to coerce his girlfriend to marry him. In July, one week before Atlanta day trader Mark Barton killed nine people and wounded 13 others in his shooting spree in two brokerage firms, he killed his wife and two children in a classic case of familicide.

Barton blamed his wife, Leigh Ann, for his troubles, but professed great love for "my honey, my precious love," in his suicide note. The pair had been separated and were attempting a reconciliation, without great success. "She was one of the main reasons for my demise," he wrote.

One could argue that the number of men who kill their wives and/or children would have remained more or less constant even without feminism. A certain percentage of men, so this argument goes, will always possess that deadly combination of insecurity, rage and self-righteousness found in so many who commit intimate homicides — and they would end up killing even in the most repressive, patriarchal societies. Clearly, there is no way to resolve this question. But it seems inescapable that many of feminism's laudable consequences, both tangible and intangible — from increased opportunities and greater earning power to a diminution of the traditional male role as head of the family — have contributed to male violence against women. And when it is not an aggravation, many murderous men unquestionably use feminism as a rationalization, researchers say.

Linda Langford, who analyzed underlying factors in five years of domestic homicides in Massachusetts as her doctoral dissertation at Harvard University, believes that some men — particularly abusive or potentially abusive men — see themselves as victimized by recent changes in traditional male and female roles.

"We are in a social transition from more fixed roles to more fluid rules," she says. "Women are gaining power in more generalized ways. People with more traditional values have a problem with that.

"There's a sense in which men's proprietaryness over women and their children is being challenged. The fact that women are gaining independence might send them into a greater panic. But it's not what anybody else does that makes them the way they are — they are what they are, and they find excuses to justify their behavior."

And the excuses, if not for brutality then for collective outrage, are increasingly stated with barely concealed hostility, by certain men's groups and fathers' rights organizations, often on the Internet.

Hundreds of Web sites dedicated to fathers' rights openly blame the women's movement for their unjust oppression.The Fathers' Manifesto, for example, calls for the repeal of most family court decisions that grant custody and child support to women:

"The present feminist concept of women's 'independence' really means a government-enforced entitlement to be paid for the rewards of being a mother, without the responsibilities that go with it: to men, to children especially, and ultimately to the world at large," says the manifesto.

"We vow," it continues, "to remove all government involvement from family matters by the establishment of the father as the head of the family, under God."

It is when a man's control over his family is threatened that his rage can lead to murder. To be reminded of an intense dependency on a woman while losing control of her becomes an insurmountable emotional task, say experts. Acceptance is out of the question; reassertion of control, by whatever means necessary, becomes the alternative.

"It's 'I'm going to annihilate my family and myself, if this woman is going to leave. I'll kill her before I let her go,'" says Nancy Isaac, co-author with Langford of the Harvard study.

"Something that signifies the relationship is over — that sparks a killing spree," says Mindy Mechanic, psychologist at the University of Missouri, St. Louis, and an expert in post-traumatic stress in abused women. "They feel like they can't survive without the woman — as though she's the lifeline. If you realize everything you have and want and need is unattainable to you, what do you have left?"

Children are not usually the primary targets. They might be substitute victims, if the woman isn't available; or they are seen as obstacles to the man's relationship with the woman; or they could be revenge victims, killed as a way of hurting the woman in the worst possible way.

"If you think about domestic abuse, it's a system of power and control," says Langford. "The children are a tool of that control."

And there is sometimes a perverted "Father Knows Best" element when a man slays his own children. The neatly typed note left by Barton before his murderous Atlanta rampage showed that he had persuaded himself that he was protecting his children by killing them.

"I killed the children to exchange them for five minutes of pain for a lifetime of pain. I forced myself to do it to keep them from suffering so much later. No mother, no father, no relations," he wrote.

(He "spared" them by bludgeoning them with a hammer in their beds.)

It's a form of "righteous slaughter," a concept spelled out by UCLA sociology professor Jack Katz in his book "Seductions of Crime: Moral and Sensual Attractions of Doing Evil."

"When people do impassioned killings, they think they're doing something righteous by upholding some universal value," says Katz. "At that moment, they think that everyone would agree with the action they're taking."

David Adams of Emerge interviewed a man convicted of killing his estranged wife after luring her to their former home to watch videos with their children. The man made sure she had too much to drink, got her into bed and then, once she was asleep, bludgeoned her with a baseball bat and stabbed her in the neck.

Adams asked the man a series of questions, including whether he felt a woman who disobeys her husband deserves to be beaten.

"What if you believe she shouldn't be beaten, but she should be killed? the man asked.

"What do you mean?" asked Adams.

"I don't believe in hurting a woman — that's why I waited for her to fall asleep," the man replied. "But I believe you should take the marriage vows seriously."

And, oh, yes, the man added, he'd had sex with her before he killed her. He knew the coroner would discover his semen inside her body. He wanted the man he suspected his wife was seeing to know that he, the estranged husband, had been the last to have her.

Clearly, even when women leave, they are not safe, particularly if they can be lured back under false pretenses. But their departures, while likely to incite rage or even violence by the estranged men in their lives, create a safer environment for those men. Statistics show that women who leave abusive men are primarily avoiding deadly encounters in which their husbands would have been the victim. Women apparently can sense their own murderous impulses but not those of their mates.

Studies show that the numbers of women killing their husbands and boyfriends have plummeted. Women killed 1,357 intimate partners in 1976. They killed 430 in 1997. The decline was most dramatic in the 1990s, and researchers took serious notice of it a couple of years ago, when the Bureau of Justice Statistics published a landmark paper on intimate homicides.

As is often the case with statistical reports generated by government agencies, only numbers, not explanations, were offered in the report. Since its publication, researchers have scrambled to flesh out some theories. They have come up with three main reasons why intimate murders committed by women have decreased by more than 300 percent in 20 years. Feminism is wrapped up in all of them, whether it be the shelter movement and progressive laws, lower marriage rates or women's improved status.

The bottom line, it seems, is that women now have more options for leaving abusive relationships and finding support away from home. "Women now have a means of escape from violent relationships, such as shelters," says Juley Fulcher, public policy director of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence. When they can leave, they don't have to fight back.

In fact, the decline of intimate murders by women confirms what many researchers have said for decades: Women kill their spouses mainly in self-defense. For instance, one pioneering study by Jacquelyn Campbell in the early 1980s showed that 75 percent of women who killed their partners had been previously abused by them. The study was based on police reports filed over a five-year period in one city, long before investigators were trained to be sensitive to such issues.

"No matter who gets killed, it's wife abuse. That pattern has held up in current studies," says Campbell, a professor at the John Hopkins University school of nursing. "People have found that in states with good domestic violence laws, there are lower rates of men killed by intimate partners."

In addition to shelters and other means of escape from domestic violence, legal advocacy for battered women has played a key role as well, says Laura Dugan, professor of criminal justice at Georgia State University, and co-author of a forthcoming study on intimate homicide in 50 U.S. cities from 1976 to 1996.

Legal advocates, who range from volunteers to full-time paid staff, sit in on battered women's cases when they hit the courts, and guide women through the difficult process. "As opposed to shelters, where the women have to make the first move, legal advocates are reaching out to a large pool of women," Dugan says. "Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be an effect in saving women's lives."

Women's increased status and independence also have had an impact on their ability to leave abusive spouses and boyfriends, says Richard Rosenfeld, professor of criminology at the University of Missouri, St. Louis, and Dugan's co-author on the 50-city domestic violence study. Women today have higher incomes, education levels and workforce participation than they did 25 years ago. This allows them to leave abusive men they might have otherwise killed. Marriage rates, too, have significantly declined, allowing unsuitable mates in the volatile under-30 age bracket to split up before their differences turn into violence.

These changes, says Rosenfield, are particularly noteworthy among African-American women.

In 1976, the per-capita rate of intimate homicide among blacks was 11 times higher than among whites. Twenty years later, it was only about four times higher. "This is very good news," says Rosenfeld. By 1998, the murder of black husbands by their wives had the most significant drop of all categories of homicide, about 75 percent.

"Black women have become closer to black men on all the status indicators, and are in fact even more likely to have a higher education level," says Rosenfeld, who, with Dugan, is the first to explain this trend.

One parallel phenomenon they uncovered tempered the mostly positive changes. Decreasing welfare payments has led to an increase in intimate homicides, and particularly in those with male victims, says Rosenfeld. "We may think of the AFDC [Aid for Families with Dependent Children] as inducing independence, and it may — but not on abusive men!" says Rosenfeld. In the absence of welfare support, impoverished mothers may choose to stay with violent mates.

"We might have seen an even greater decrease in spousal homicides if welfare benefits hadn't declined," he says. In fact, Rosenfeld notes that since the federal government axed AFDC benefits in 1996, there has been something of an upturn in intimate murders. "It could just be a squiggle, but it's there, especially among African-Americans," he says. "We hope and urge that policy-makers look at welfare reforms, especially as the economy downturns, as it must."

And so, in the world of dysfunctional relationships, survival becomes a matter of luck and timing. A woman linked to an abusive husband might get out in time to save his life. To save herself, she must find a way to evacuate herself and her children before he realizes that she is ready or able to do so. Unfortunately, it can be deadly for a woman to be long-suffering or optimistic.

The emphasis now, researchers agree, needs to be on identifying abusive men as well as creating programs to help them change. "What those programs might be remains a very open question," says Rosenfeld. "Judges are starting to make [violence counseling] programs a condition of probation for men convicted of domestic assault. But no one yet knows the effectiveness of these programs."

Indeed, counseling violent men may not be enough. "There needs to be new ways of raising our boys. We have to challenge the belief that men be tough, non-emotional and in control," says Ty Schroyer, men's program coordinator for the highly regarded Domestic Abuse Intervention Project in Duluth, Minn. "Because of male socialization, they're just not reaching out [for help]. They may not even recognize that they have a problem."

For her part, Jacquelyn Campbell is working on a major study of homicide data from across the nation to determine what specific warning signs to look for in abusive men who go on to kill their female partners.

"Stalking is huge," Campbell emphasizes. This applies whether the couple has separated or is still together. Other factors that appear to contribute: The man threatens to kill her; the perception that he is capable of killing; extreme jealousy; forced sex; abuse during pregnancy; and increasing frequency or severity of abuse. For a woman who is deeply invested in a relationship, this litany of seemingly obvious precursors to murder can be hard to distinguish from plain abuse.

It would be hard to believe that a woman could endure a single instance of any of the factors that Campbell lists if it wasn't so easy to understand the reason that many women do not flee. It is because they believe, as one might, that the men who love them could never kill.

That, perhaps, is the greatest sadness in the statistics. Even as they have battled for the means to get out of abusive relationships, women have not found a way to survive them. When she leaves a disintegrating relationship, a woman may save her partner's life, but she endangers her own. As powerful as sisterhood can be, it cannot always save lives — at least not the lives of women.
salon.com | March 14, 2000

Freelance writer Susan Caba contributed to this story.

The Shared Parenting Disaster

Remove the perpetrator, not the child

Relief for families as tyrannical laws are on their way out

Shared parenting laws on way out

Hero Mother: Her Story

Fathers Rights Hit Rock Bottom: The Killer Maniesto

Parents Seeking Access to Avoid Child Support

Justice For Darcey Freeman

Family Courts Lab Rats

AFCC: The Man behind the Curtain

Abusers vs The Abused

Family Court Ordered Murder - Why Are They Dead?

Family Court Ordered Murder

Article 2

The Outrage: Contact With a Father Who Murdered Her Baby Brother

How Could Anyone Ignore These Beautiful Children?

Shared Parenting: Children, the property of men again...

Shared Parenting Spotlight from Lateline

Just to Hurt Mum...

Herald-Sun Hijack: Fathers Rights Reporter Laurie Nowell?

Violence Against Women Deniers Beware - Your Propaganda Could Land You Jail Time

From Rights For Mothers.com

July 21, 2009

Suspect had called ex-wife unfit; has at least 3 children

Australias Spotlight on Family Law and Safety Holes

Tamara McLean

Carol Nader

Fighting Dirty - Now they are sending trojans

Asylum Hopes for Battered Women

Related

Case Documents (PDF, portions redacted by lawyers representing L.R.): Supplemental Brief | Declaration of Support

Readers' Comments

Domestic Violence Everywhere

Addressing domestic violence

Help from MAWS

Family law court

Now The Family Court is going after the women's refuges

Leesha McKenny

Murderer fathering from behind bars

The Shared Parenting Scam

Dad accuses DOCS of ignoring abuse

Lisa Carty NSW Political Editor

California Court Puts 58,000 Children in Harms Way

Father Helped Daughters Rapist

Share this article

End Violence Against Women And Children in The Family Courts

Convicted Sex Offender Granted Custody of Four Children

Family First: Keeping It In The Family

Stop The Responsible Fatherhood Bill

Child Goes To Killers Family

JODY BARONE DEATH

Father's family gets custody of daughter

By Sara Ganim

Sara Ganim can be reached at 231-4616.

Fathers Rights above Children leads to death of 14 year old

Legal thicket

Children are not Alienated, they are abused

Outrage: Sex Offender Dad Ordered, "Community Work" For 18 Months

More on the Journalist Backlash...

ter⋅ror⋅ism

Murder in The Family: Fathers Rights attitudes are deadly

0

Rate Article: (1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5) Posted by Mirror Man | Posted in Feminism, News | Posted on 08-06-2009

Rate Article:
(1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)

Posted by Mirror Man | Posted in Feminism, News | Posted on 08-06-2009