Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Politics is Therapy & Death to Tyranny


That have I learned?

Politics keeps me in action.
Politics gets me out of bed.
Politics keeps me from starving myself to death.

I don't need a nice car anymore.
I don't need a nice house.

I need to attack the problem that is attacking me.
The politics is the thin line that keeps me alive.

The word has to get out: POLITICS IS THERAPY.
No more gripes and complaints.


This is a WAR and in WAR some people DIE. Their death certainly did not benefit them directly.

The suicide statistics for FATHERS is WAY UP.
Those are not the "bad parents" killing themselves.

Never WASTE your life. Never kill yourself.
Kill the problem and not the victim of the problem.
Kill the problem.

Do not fall on your own sword in this WAR.
Keep swinging that sword until you can go no further.
NEVER harm yourself: FIGHT THE WAR.

How will we win the war? FOCUS! FOCUS! FOCUS!
Put "FOCUS" on the wall in front of you!


DUTY TO CHILDREN: It is your duty to fight for your children.
Do the politics of this cause in the name of your children.

HONOUR: Have honour and be willing to die; be willing to die just because they are taking your manhood away from you and you will just not allow that to happen. Stay a man.

BROTHERHOOD! When you can not help yourself help your brothers.
If you effort never comes back to YOU directly SO WHAT; DO IT ANYWAY!


Your so-called "country" has betrayed you. The so called "government has conspired to take away your children.

Why WAS our government hijacked by extremists that do not want Gender Equality. A government without equality is a government without liberty.

A civilization without liberty is not civilized.
TYRANNY is not Civilization.

It is up to you to create civilization.
Recruit more warriors.
Invite them to join the group.
In every courthouse, at the probation department.
Everywhere, there are warriors waiting to be asked to join.

DO THE WORK! Forward this email around - see many times that it echoes back at you. . Send this to your list of warriors.

Recruit then; stop waiting for then to show up.

God Bless parents facing the heartwrenching predicament sadly alienated from their own flesh and blood CHILDREN , because of a corrupt, anti – father, cess – pit , two faced Kangaroo Court justice system, which is orchestrated and manipulated by sinister ideology’s built on the fear factors' and controlling measures of deception .

While the politician's promote minority agenda's they flourish in the comforts of madness, as the conniving feminists and nanny state liberals work continually destroying traditional family values .This is severely detrimental to the well being of the children, but they don't care as the big ISM snake just keeps on keeping on !

That is why New Zealand is out of step with the rest of the sane World regarding our Governments position on the family .

No wonder CHILD ABUSE is at record levels .

Proud to be a kiwi - not me mate .

Monday, October 29, 2007

Australia - Dads let down in parent wars .

October 30, 2007 12:00am

Bettina Arndt weighs up what the parties offer parents and to children's rights.

IS Kevin Rudd interested in men?

The answer, sadly, seems to be no.

Unlike John Howard, the Opposition Leader rarely talks about issues affecting many of his own gender, such as family law, child support, fatherless families, boys' education.

Indeed, this potential prime minister seems content to hand over the running on most social issues to female colleagues renowned for their anti-male bias.

For anyone keen to ensure men and boys receive a fair go, the prospect of a Labor government is all bad news.

As a prime minister, John Howard has been most unusual in his passion for social issues, his famous "barbecue stoppers" and his willingness to stick his neck out and speak about the role of men.

Remember the debate about single women's access to IVF?

While most politicians were cowed by the wave of women's rights rhetoric, Howard voiced the concern of many suggesting it isn't in our society's interest to encourage more fatherless families.

Picking up on community discontent about children losing contact with fathers after divorce, he set up a bipartisan committee to look into the "rebuttable presumption of joint custody", where parents share care unless good reasons preclude it.

But Labor's Jennie George and Jenny Macklin dug in and the committee was forced to water down their recommendations.

A 2005 survey of parliamentarians by Fathers4Equality showed 62 Coalition members likely to support a shared parenting amendment compared with six from Labor.

Yet, resulting changes to the Family Law Act have done much to ensure children's rights to contact with both parents.

Labor reluctantly supported the legislation, with Kevin Rudd expressing great concern about the changes.

He deferred to his then shadow attorney-general, Nicola Roxon, who played up the fear that children would be forced to spend time with dangerous dads.

Roxon previously dismissed the custody inquiry as "dog whistle politics to men's groups aggrieved by the Family Court". Labor's disdain for such groups is consistently demonstrated as Labor shadow ministers refuse to meet even the most respected of these organisations, despite strenuous efforts by a sprinkling of Labor backbenchers to encourage their party to take interest.

Labor MP Roger Price spent years tearing his hair out over his party's failure to implement the recommendations of the inquiry into child support that he chaired in the early 1990s.

It was the Howard Government that finally tackled this controversial issue, implementing far reaching changes recommended by an expert committee to make the scheme more equitable.

Yet, Labor's determination to cater to lone-mother lobby groups shows in their recent announcement that they are monitoring the scheme to ensure the primary carer is not disadvantaged.

They have also expressed concern about Government efforts to help lone mothers make the transition from welfare to work.

Both policies could well suffer rollbacks if Labor ends up in power.

Labor doesn't just have it in for men.

The party has consistently favoured women in the workforce over mothers at home with young children.

The last time Labor was in power, families relying on one income lost ground compared with other families, suffering an average 4 per cent drop between 1982 and 1995, according to the National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling in Canberra.

At the time, Joe De Bruyn, national chairman of the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees' Union blamed Labor's "femocrat advisers" for consistently refusing to support women who stayed home, choosing instead to promote child care to encourage workforce participation.

With more than 75 per cent of all families relying on one income when they have infants, Howard moved to increase their support. Between 1996 and 2001, a single-income, two-child family on average weekly earnings gained 16 per cent in disposable income.

Labor's more recent support for the babycare payment is a sign the feminist ideologues may be losing some of their grip on the party, but there are clear signs biases remain.

One major reason Keating lost power was the perception that Labor governed for some rather than for all.

The 750,000 non-resident parents in Australia are one group who should be wary that their interests have no place on a Labor agenda.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Fathers 4 Justice Global" group.

Sunday, October 28, 2007


A Lawyer runs a stop sign and gets pulled over by a Sheriffs Deputy. He thinks that he is smarter than the Deputy because he is sure that he has a better education. He decides to prove this to himself and have some fun at the deputies expense...........

Deputy says, "License and registration, please."
Lawyer says, "What for?"

Deputy says, "You didn't come to a complete stop at the stop sign ."
Lawyer says, "I slowed down, and no one was coming."

Deputy says, "You still didn't come to a complete stop. License and registration, please."
Lawyer says, "What's the difference?"

Deputy says, "The difference is, you have to come to a complete stop,thats the law.License and registration, please!"
Lawyer says, "If you can show me the legal difference between slow down and stop, I'll give you my license and registration and you give me the ticket,if not you let me go and no ticket."

Deputy says, "Exit your vehicle, sir."
At this point, the Deputy takes out his nightstick and starts beating the ever-loving crap out of the Lawyer and says: "DO YOU WANT ME TO STOP OR JUST SLOW DOWN?"

My rant about insipid lawyers who are just professional backstabber's !!

The ol' nightstick medicine is needed for the 50 oddball lawyers involved in my miscarriage of justice , especially Adrienne Edwards, Siobhan McNulty, Tony Greig , Chris Robertson, Paul Finnigan, Geoff Kean, Zoe Griffiths,Doug Taffs, Richard McGuire, Martin Sawyers etc..etc...etc..anyway my legal aid and crown law bill must be in the 100's of thousands of dollars , who cares eh , only hard earnt tax payer bucks lining the pockets of the smart arse lying lawyers !!

Children's Lawyer Adrienne Edwards- ( Counsel for Child -C4C ) is a particularly nasty piece of work , however more on this evil bitch later on. At present I am involved in a very sensitive matter which should see me challenging this barrister's credibility in the High Court ? Only time will tell. She has done horrible things to my good name and my family . I know you read this blog Ms Edwards , do have a nice day and I hope your RSI isn't too bad today deary . C4C plus Youth Court appointed lawyer . Did you all know as well as family court judges promoting the Edwards creature as a C4C on just under $400 an hour for her hateful work she is also in the youth court where everybody gets a free lawyer , usually Edwards . She has her finger in all the pies and makes the tea for the boys in the lodge at every meeting .Say no more , say no more , masonic' s are really nice friendly people . Really are racking the dollars in Adrienne !! My, my , my - do I have some dirt on you .By the way, A would like to hear from you - yeah right - lawyers made my stomach turn .

I will see you in Court on November the 9th Adrienne Edwards . I have already told my friend Richard at the Courthouse to attend, as I have something rather disturbing to report involving A .

You are history Miss Smart Arse Lying Lawyer .You are going down lady !

RIP Mum .

Friday, October 26, 2007

Wendy from Ifeminists' celebrates 7 years clean

Subject: Ifeminists' 7th Anniversary
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:08:58 -0500
From: "Wendy McElroy"

Hello Peter:

Last month marked the seventh anniversary of ifeminists.net: seven years of daily effort to promote a vision of feminism in which there is true equality of the sexes under just law. Neither privileges nor oppression under the law -- only the justice that is a precondition of good will between women and men. We both want to live in a society that doesn't vilify or elevate either sex; we both want a new generation of children to be raised with respect for themselves as individuals, not weighed down with collective guilt or other burdens. We are committed to actualizing that vision.

7 days a week,ten items a day of relevant news and commentary are fed into the ever-hungry mouth of the ifeminists.net newsfeed. It has become extremely popular with those who spread ideas through RSS. The brief editorial comments I often append to items adds to their political punch. This sort of daily grind is not glamorous; it does rouse a crowd the way a political ca! mpaign can but it is what sustains ideas and ideals through decades, long after the confetti of a political campaign has been swept away.

Recently, ifeminists.net expanded to include:

1. a blog that features the real world stories of those who have been victimized by gender policies and law -- for example, divorced men who have lost custody of children due to the court's anti-male bias and women who were almost literally coerced into bringing domestic violence charges against loved ones even though the fight that occurred was mutual. I want people to look into the face of those human being damaged by gender politics.

2. a selection of articles on "Ayn Rand: the Woman" in order to highlight the immense contributions of a woman who has been vilified by mainstream feminism. A giant(ess) among intellectuals, she has been dismissed largely due to her stress on laissez faire capitalism and individual rights. I want to correct this 'oversight'.

Of course, ifeminists.net also maintains a full slate of guest editorials and the other features to which you've become accustomed.

I believe the fate and hope of politics lies in grassroots movements that are driven by people (like me) who don't give up and who don't balk at the hard, steady work that change requires. Please consider contributing to the year-in and year-out effort of ifeminists.net to steer society toward sanity and benevolence between the sexes.

I ask you to donate to ifeminists.net either at the donation button at the top right-hand corner of http://www.ifeminists.net where credit cards are accepted or through mailing a check. For the latter, please contact me for mailing information.

I thank you,
Wendy McElroy

P.S. Many members have signed up for ifeminists.net and, yet, not for the free weekly emailed newsletter. Should you wish to receive the latter, please log into ifeminists.net and click on the! subscribe button on the front page.

Wednesday, October 24, 2007

UK - British Judge Forced to Resign Rather than Participate in Homosexual Adoptions

UK - British Family Court Judge Forced to Resign Rather than Participate in Homosexual Adoptions


Says he must consider best interests of children, rather than legal advances of homosexuals

Tuesday October 23, 2007
By Hilary White

LONDON, October 23, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Andrew McClintock is a British magistrate who resigned his position on a family courts panel in Sheffield rather than become involved in family cases in which children might be adopted by homosexual partners. He is appealing a tribunal decision that said he had no right to opt out of such cases.

The 63 year-old McClintock, a father of four, had written to his employers asking for an exemption just before a law allowing homosexual partners to adopt children came into effect in April. He said he was bound to consider the best interests of children, rather than the legal advances of homosexual partners.

McClintock is appealing a previous decision by a Sheffield employment tribunal that ruled he had not been the victim of discrimination. His appeal of that decision starts today. He is seeking reinstatement and the right to opt out of such cases. McClintock's lawyer, Paul Diamond, argued today that he has been the victim of anti-Christian secularising trends in the legal profession since his religious beliefs, in agreement with numerous scientific studies, hold that homosexual partners cannot provide the best environment for children.

Diamond told the tribunal that there are “rational grounds” for believing that it is not in the best interests of children to be placed with homosexual partners. In his first case, Dean Byrd, Vice-President of the US-based National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), gave testimony saying that strong statistical evidence shows children adopted by homosexual partners exhibit behavioural problems “not so dissimilar to those raised by divorced heterosexual parents”.

In his letter, McClintock told the South Yorkshire Courts Panel that the gains made by homosexual activists to allow "gay" adoption have been “an experiment in social science”. Mr Diamond said “It is possible to argue that a child can thrive in a same-sex household. What is more difficult to argue, however, is that it is anything but experimental. This is a judge saying, ‘I’ve got a duty - you wouldn’t experiment with medicine on children; show me the evidence’.”

“A sitting judge was put in the position where he had to stand down. There cannot be a religious bar to office,” Mr. Diamond told the tribunal. “People are religious and do carry their views with them.” McClintock had served as a family court judge for 18 years; he continues to sit in non-family cases.

Tuesday, October 23, 2007

UK - PM Gordon Brown's response to our petition regarding "Equal Parenting "



Dear All,

Earlier this year, Matt O'Connor created a petition to the British Prime Minister regarding "Equal Parenting" and "Opening Secret Family Courts".

On April 14 of this year, I signed this petition and the Prime Minister's response, received today, is set out below.

My thoughts at this time are completely unchanged and you already know what they are.........

Terry Lear - Toronto englishman@sympatico.ca

"The Quickest Way To End A War Is To Lose It" and "LOSING THE WAR IS NOT AN OPTION"

----- Original Message -----
From: "10 Downing Street"
To: "e-petition signatories"
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 12:30 PM
Subject: Government response to petition 'sharedparenting'

You signed a petition asking the Prime Minister to "Tackle Young Offending By Introducing A Presumption Of Shared Parenting And Opening Secret Family Courts."

The Prime Minister's Office has responded to that petition and you can view it here:


Prime Minister's Office: Petition information - http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/sharedparenting/

If you would like to opt out of receiving further mail on this or any other petitions you signed, please email:


23 October 2007

We received a petition asking:

"We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Tackle Young Offending By Introducing A Presumption Of Shared Parenting And Opening Secret Family Courts."

Details of petition:

"Britain is in breakdown. Family breakdown. The secret family courts are creating a 'Generation X' of children. Children who are turning to crime. A lost generation growing up without the love and discipline of their fathers. We the undersigned call for the urgent introduction of mandatory mediation before couples go to court, a legal presumption of shared parenting combined with a fully transparent system of justice that can restore public confidence in the discredited family justice system."

Read the Government's response:

Thank you for signing the e-petition concerning family breakdown, the legal presumption of shared parenting, mediation and the opening of the 'secret' family courts.

The Government know from research that where parental separation is handled badly the effects can be damaging for children. Where parents decide that they should end their own relationship, the Government aims to help them come to an agreement about the future arrangements for their children in a way that does not expose children to ongoing parental conflict. Where it is safe, the Government believes it is usually in the child's best interests that both parents have a continued parenting role in the upbringing and development of the child.

Research has also found that it is the nature of contact with the non-resident parent rather than frequency of contact that is most likely to make a difference to a child's well-being. Regularity and consistency, the relationship between the child and non-resident parent, the degree to which the non-resident parent engages in authoritative parenting and the degree to which the child is caught up in parental conflict are key factors in a child's well-being.

Regarding an automatic presumption in law of equal contact/shared parenting for both parents, the Government believes that the current legal position is right - the welfare of the child must be paramount in any question relating to their upbringing. We intend to retain this principle set out in section 1 of the Children Act 1989. This requires that, when determining questions relating to the upbringing of a child, the court must give paramount consideration to the welfare of the child. A legal presumption of 'equal' parenting would be putting parents' rights before the child's welfare. As the law stands, the courts can, and sometimes do, make orders for 50:50 shared residence, if in their view, that is in the best interests of the child concerned.

With reference to mediation, the Government supports mediation in appropriate cases and is actively encouraging its use as an alternative to contested court cases. The Government does not, however, believe that mediation should be made compulsory but is instead committed to ensure that everyone involved in family proceedings, whether publicly funded or not, is aware of the advantages of mediation as a means of resolving family disputes.

You might like to know that parties applying for public funding under the Community Legal Service are already required to attend a meeting with a mediator to consider mediation. This requirement may be waived if there are special circumstances such as domestic violence or the case is very urgent.

In addition, the Government will make changes to court rules and application forms to facilitate referrals to family mediation where the court considers this would be beneficial. Also, when the Children and Adoption Act 2006 is fully implemented, the court will be able to direct parties to attend a meeting to learn about mediation in cases where it considers this is appropriate.

In 2006 the Government consulted widely on the principles of openness in family courts. Children who had gone through the family court process told us that it is important that their identities are not revealed, and their right to privacy and anonymity is maintained. Therefore, we announced that the media will not be allowed into family courts as of right, but, along with any others with an interest, will be able to apply to the court to attend. Instead, the Government announced it would focus on the information coming out of family courts, and would test the costs and benefits of providing a copy of the full transcript of the judgement in certain cases to the parties involved, retaining it for the children when old enough, and making it available anonymously online.

A second consultation closed in October this year which asked questions about whether the law should be changed so that disclosure of information about family law proceedings heard in private will be permitted primarily for the purpose for which the information is disclosed rather than what information can be disclosed or to whom it can be disclosed. The Government also consulted on whether the identity of a child should be protected after the end of proceedings, unless there is an order to the contrary on welfare grounds. The Government's response to this consultation will be published in due course.

Saturday, October 20, 2007

False DV Accusations Can Lead to PAS

Don't I know it, as false allegations of DV and Child Abuse have destroyed my life !

Why and how this can happen is beyond belief and falls at the feet of a dysfunctional and prejudice Family Court?

Seven years of pure hell , however all the parasitic lawyers and psychologists have done very nicely from the meandering litigation process . The gravy train pays well eh Adrienne Edwards !!

My case has cost the country big dollars, but my children are a mess ? And, the pious judges call it a caring civil court ! How dare they claim that the Family Court acts in the child's best interests .

The Families Commissioner - Rajen Prasad said my case was a travesty of justice !

Thank you Judge Peter Boshier for putting your dumb head in the sand regarding my tragic case !!

False Domestic Violence Accusations Can Lead To Parental Alienation Syndrome

Source: American Chronicle: David Heleniak - October 18, 2007


David Heleniak:

David Heleniak is a civil litigation attorney in New Jersey and Senior Legal Analyst for the True Equality Network.

False domestic violence (DV) restraining orders can lead to Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), a pattern of thoughts and behavior that can develop in a child of separated parents where the custodial parent causes the child to unjustifiably fear and/or hate the other parent.

Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) is a pattern of thoughts and behavior that can develop in a child of separated parents where the custodial parent causes the child, through manipulation and access blocking, to unjustifiably fear and/or hate the other parent. PAS is more than brainwashing, in that the child comes to actively participate in the degradation of the target parent, coming up with original (often ludicrous) reasons to fear/hate him or her.

Domestic violence (DV) restraining orders are a perfect weapon for an alienating parent. Typically, in addition to removing an accused abuser from the marital home, a DV restraining order also "temporarily" bars the accused abuser from seeing his or her children, and "temporarily" gives the accusing parent exclusive physical custody. And temporary, in the Family Court, has a funny way of becoming permanent.

Obtaining a restraining order based on a false allegation of domestic violence gets the target parent out of the house and out of the picture. A father who can't see his kids, for example, is unable to rebut the lie "Daddy doesn't love you anymore. That's why he left you." Nor can he rebut the alternate lie, "Daddy is dangerous. The wise judge said so. That's why he can't see you."

Often, if an accused abuser is allowed to see his or her children, it is in a supervised visitation center. As Stan Rains observed in "Supervised Visitation Center Dracula," "The demeaning of the 'visiting' parent is readily visible from the minute that a person enters the 'secured facility' with armed guards, officious case workers with their clipboards and arrogant, domineering managers.... The child's impression is that all of these authority figures see Daddy as a serious and dangerous threat. The only time a child sees this type of security is on TV showing prisons filled with bad people." Not only does visitation in a visitation center send the clear message to the child that the "visiting" parent is a bad person, if children decline to see their parents under such a setting, they are generally not forced to do so. More perversely, if a child is encouraged by the custodial parent to refuse to see the target parent, there will be no significant repercussion to the targeting parent, and, generally, the child will not be forced to see the target parent.

The more time a child spends away from the alienated parent, the worse the alienation will become. As psychologist Glenn F. Cartwright remarked in his article "Expanding the Parameters of Parental Alienation Syndrome," "the old adage that time heals all wounds, such is not the case with PAS, where the passage of time worsens rather than heals the affliction. This is not to say that time is unimportant: on the contrary, time remains a vital variable for all the players. To heal the relationship, the child requires quality time with the lost parent to continue and repair the meaningful association that may have existed since birth. This continued communication also serves as a reality check for the child to counter the effects of ongoing alienation at home. Likewise, the lost parent needs time with the child to ensure that contact is not completely lost and to prevent the alienation from completely destroying what may be left of a normal, loving relationship.... The alienating parent, on the other hand, requires time to complete the brainwashing of the child without interference. The manipulation of time becomes the prime weapon in the hands of the alienator who uses it to structure, occupy, and usurp the child's time to prevent 'contaminating' contact with the lost parent, depriving both of their right to spend time together and furthering the goal of total alienation. Unlike cases of child abuse where time away from the abuser sometimes helps in repairing a damaged relationship, in PAS time away from the lost parent furthers the goal of alienation. The usual healing properties of time are lost when it is used as the primary weapon to inflict injury on the lost parent by alienating the child." Along these lines, Dr. Richard A. Gardner, who coined the term "Parental Alienation Syndrome" in 1985, maintained: "If there is to be any hope of their reestablishing a relationship with the targeted parent, PAS children must spend significant time with him (her). They must have living experiences that will demonstrate that the PAS parent is not noxious and/or dangerous."

A parent willing to falsely accuse the other parent of domestic violence would probably be willing to poison a child against him or her. Add to this the problem that a judge willing to "err on the side of caution" by entering a DV restraining order based on a dubious false allegation would probably not be willing to do what was necessary to prevent the development of PAS.

PAS is heart-wrenching and, tragically, common. If the DV restraining order system could be reformed so that only real victims obtained restraining orders and only real abusers were thrown out their houses, I predict that the number of PAS cases would be greatly reduced. Let's try to get there.

Thursday, October 18, 2007

NZEEF Submission on Family Matters Bill

Dear Mr. Hill,

This is the submission of the New Zealand Equality Education Foundation on the Family Courts Matters Bill. I assume that this submission can be made by email, as I have done this often in the past. I do not wish to appear before the Committee in person.

The sole issue that the NZEEF wishes to address in this submission is the issue of the openness or otherwise of the Family Court.
You are aware that section 25 of the Bill of Rights Act 1990 (BORA) guarantees the right to a public hearing in criminal matters, and that section 27 guarantees the right to natural justice in all matters before a court. The Family Court does not deal with criminal law, of course, but the spirit of section 25, taken together with section 27, should be interpreted, in my view, as importing a right to openness in the Family Court, because:

1) the detriments suffered by parents and children as a result of decisions made by the Family Court are not less serious than most of the detriments that a person can suffer at the hands of a criminal court; and

2) the only guarantee of natural justice is the opennesss of a court to
public scrutiny.

The changes in relation to openness that are at present in the Bill are insufficient, as are the provisions that are already in the Care of Children Act 2004. This is because the media are not -- any more than the judiciary, the legal profession, or the Law Commission -- representative of the full range of views within New Zealand society, and thus are capable of applying anti-male bias. The following is evidence of anti-male and left-wing bias in the media in Western countries:

- In his Canadian thesis at http://equality.netfirms.com/boycecnt.html, Jim Boyce states "I examined coverage of gender and violence in 1242 headlines published in seven major Canadian dailies from 1989 to 1992.... Considering that statistics on violence typically show that men are at least as victimized as women, the contrast in the amount of coverage given to each was striking: Of the 540 headlines which directly referred to the gender of victims, 525 (97.2%) focused on women and 15 (2.8%) focused on men, a ratio of 35 to 1."

- An objective study at
by Tim Groseclose of the right-wing and left-wing sources quoted by United States media outlets, published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, found that "Of the 20 major media outlets studied, 18 scored left of center, with CBS' "Evening News," The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times ranking second, third and fourth most liberal behind the news pages of The Wall Street Journal."

- Former television insider Ian Wishart reveals in his book Eve's Bite (
http://www.evesbite.com/ ) that ""There were times when one would cover a stage-managed protest on some worthy liberal issue, with barely anyone there, but the point of the story was to give favourable publicity to the worthy liberal issue" (p. 32)...."TV news is heavily manipulated -- not overtly but by the social views of the journalists themselves -- and presents liberal views as orthodox, and conservatve views as quaint or outdated" (p. 33).

- I remember being refused entry to a journalism course at ATI in the 1970s -- apparently because I wore a suit and said I did not want to change the World -- whereas a Leftist female friend of mine (with less impressive academic qualifications) got in.

- I also refer the Committee to the chapter of my book on bias in the media and education system at the page http://equality.netfirms.com/13indoct.html

Therefore, I submit, the presence of "accredited media" is no substitute for full openness of the Family Court.

In relation to the countervailing issue of privacy, which must be balanced against the need for openness, I submit:

1) Privacy can be dealt with as it is in the criminal court, where issues of privacy are just as important -- i.e. by suppression orders, or by clearing the court, where such measures are necessary;

2) The increased emphasis on mediation means that it is possible for most couples to avoid Family Court hearings altogether.

The legal and judicial professions contain organisations and features in their professional education and professional associations which imply a commitment to the belief that women are disadvantaged, relative to men. This belief has never been tested in an objective fashion. Men, in the Family Court (and elsewhere in society), often believe that they are disadvantaged relative to women -- yet the profession that has all this power over them appears to assume the opposite. Likewise, the media is dominated by people,who have grown up with the same belief that women are disadvantaged,relative to men.
The Law Commission also seems to be dominated by people with this belief.

It is possible for both men and women to be disadvantaged in different ways, but denying men open justice in the Family Court seems to be a sure-fire way of ensuring the continuation of oppression by ideological prejudice.

Yours sincerely,

Peter Zohrab
Acting President
New Zealand Equality Education Foundation

Tuesday, October 16, 2007

The dreadful Glenelg scandal !!

Dear Theresa,
I wanted to send you this message which outlines the seriousness of the issue we are involved in investigating. Deborah met with us here at my home several times and helped us put together our second documentary with TVNZ on the issue. We have the support of leading experts in the various fields in the World. Psychology , Forensic Psychiatry , Forensic Pathology. This is a small piece of a gigantic conspiracy to destroy our Families. I feel that you could become a valuable member of our Team if you wanted to help in some way. Our struggle for truth and justice has defined us as individuals but has come at a huge personal cost .

Hope it doesn't frighten you away. I wanted you to know so that you can decide. With your gentle , compassionate heart I know that you could be of comfort to many people.

Hope you had a lovely day

Love and light

Wednesday, 12 May 2004


What I am about to say will shock this House.Every member should be ashamed of what happened. This Government and the last Government have ignored a dreadful scandal. In 1987 three little girls went to the Glenelg Health Camp in Christchurch. They were put in the care of the State. Their parents trusted their children to the care of the
State. A State employee sexually abused these little girls, and no Government has ever done anything except sweep this scandal under the carpet.

The Ministry of Health employed a medical officer of health, Dr Diane Espie, to work at the health camp. Without the parents' permission, and with no other adult present, Dr Espie repeatedly examined these little girls in a way that can only be described as sexual abuse. She inserted swabs into their vaginas. She measured their vaginas with tape measures, not once, not twice, but over and over again. She kept saying to these little girls: "This is what your fathers do to you, isn't it?". One little girl says that Dr Espie rubbed her breasts, and when the little girl cried Dr Espie slapped her and said she was having a bad day.

That was child abuse, but, worse, this doctor convinced the Department of Social Welfare that these girls were being sexually abused by their fathers. The girls were not allowed home to their families until their mothers agreed to separate from their husbands. The police investigated these men and found there was not a shred of evidence that they had sexually abused their daughters. These families have been destroyed. One of the girls, whom I am in contact with now, is a very, very damaged young lady. She was put into foster care. She was abused in foster care. She lived on the streets from the age of 11. Eventually, she found her way back to her father. These people have fought for 17 years for justice, for someone to just stand up and say "I'm sorry.", and for Dr Espie to be accountable. Nothing has ever been done by any Government, despite letters written by Helen Clark and Phil Goff, letters to Katherine O'Regan and Peter Gresham.

In 1987 the Cartwright inquiry was appalled that vaginal swabs were taken from stillborn female fetuses without parental consent. This situation is worse because no Government has been appalled by it. Why did not any one care about these families? I believe that if Dr Espie was a male doctor, she would have been brought to justice and she might well be in jail now. She might well be innocent, but she needs to be brought to an inquiry, which I have asked this House to instigate. I ask members of this House to imagine for one moment that their children had gone off to a health camp with minor health problems and never come home to their families again, and that they had been sexually examined without parental consent. How would fathers feel being accused of sexually abusing their daughters? How would mothers feel being forced to break up their families so that they can keep their children? The State has enormous power. It has huge powers. It has abused its power in this case, and the State can try to do something to put it right. The State has been so wrong, and I implore the Minister of Justice to act on my letter and my petition to do something for these families.

The book - Taken Into Custody


Glitches at Amazon and some other online sellers have been corrected. You can now buy the book easily at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, WorldNetDaily, Borders, and other booksellers. In fact, the Amazon sales ranking has been very high. (Amazon is now featuring 6 reviews, all of which give the book 5 stars.) WorldNetDaily reports they are already sold out and have ordered more. Last week, the publishers told me they have ordered a second print run.

Now is the time to contact radio stations and get interviews. Again, if you are connected with a local group, you should try to come on with me for a joint interview. Below is a sample letter you can send to talk radio producers, either before or after you phone them. Attached is a press release, and several pages of highlights from the book.

Please forward this message to your friends and urge them to buy this book and seek radio interviews. Thanks.


PS: Thanks to Jeremy Swanson for arranging an interview with several Canadian radio stations. Thanks too to all those who wrote to WorldNetDaily in response to my recent piece. Here is Chuck DeHart's letter, currently posted at :


What feminism has wrought

Thank you for publishing Stephen Baskerville's "Some are more equal than others." It's time for the Western world to recognize the gender inequality that has sprung from radical feminism and political correctness to destroy fathers and their children, especially male children. Just look at the bastion of feminism, the educational system, to see how males, from the Ritalin drugged first-grader to the men not accepted into college, are cut out of societal opportunities.

Chuck DeHart

(Sample Letter)

Dear [Producer's Name],

Stephen Baskerville's new book, Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family, exposes the shocking truth behind today's divorce epidemic. The divorce industry today is not only destoying families, ruining children's lives, and destabilizing society; it now threatens our freedom and constitutional government.

Below see endorsements from Phyllis Schlafly, Paul Weyrich, Mike McManus, Grover Norquist, and other luminaries, testifying that this is the most destructive and dangerous abuse of power in America today. You will see that Dr. Baskerville has already appeared on major media, including O'Reilly, Hardball, and CNN.

Below is a description of the book, and attached are some highlights.

Dr. Baskerville's contact information is below.

[Then add your own message.]

“This book is a tremendous and much-needed report on how family courts and government policies are harming children."
Phyllis Schlafly, President, Eagle Forum

The War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family
By Stephen Baskerville

Why is the American family in crisis? Dr. Stephen Baskerville argues that the most direct cause is the divorce industry: a government-run system that tears apart families, separates children from fit and loving parents, confiscates the wealth of families, and turns law-abiding citizens into criminals in ways they are powerless to avoid. In more than half of divorces, one person forces it upon the other.

In all of human history, this kind of crisis has never happened before. Indeed, today's divorce machine resembles the totalitarian regimes of the last century. Like them, the government officials who exercise virtually absolute control over the private lives of Americans have never been held accountable to anyone. Taken into Custody explores it all:

* Why the "deadbeat dad" is not only a myth but a hoax, the creation of government officials and lawyers plundering parents whose children they have taken away.
* How hysterical propaganda about domestic violence is destroying families, endangering children, and making criminals of innocent parents.
* The real causes of child abuse and how the abuse industry willfully ignores them.
* What drives the rash of "parental kidnappings."
* How family courts operate as if there is no Bill of Rights, denying parents their constitutional legal protections.

Taken into Custody exposes the greatest and most destructive civil rights abuse in America today. Family courts and Soviet-style bureaucracies trample basic civil liberties, entering homes uninvited and taking away people's children at will, then throwing the parents into jail without any form of due process, much less a trial. No parent, no child, no family in America is safe.

The legal industry does not want you to hear this story. Radical feminists, bar associations, and social work bureaucracies have colluded to suppress this information. Even civil libertarians look the other way. Yet it is a reality for tens of millions of Americans.

STEPHEN BASKERVILLE, Ph.D., is assistant professor of government at Patrick Henry College and president of the American Coalition for Fathers of Children. He holds a PhD from the London School of Economics and is a Fellow at the Howard Center for Family, Religion, and Society. The author of more than eighty articles on fatherhood and family issues, he has appeared widely on national radio and television programs.

ISBN-10: 1-58182-594-3
ISBN-13: 978-1-58182-594-7
$24.95, Hardcover
Publication Date: July 2007


A selection of the Conservative Book Club.

Conservative Book Service

Praise for Taken Into Custody

See syndicated columns on Taken Into Custody by Phyllis Schlafly and Mike McManus.

"Since unilateral divorce was adopted in the 1970s, millions of innocent parents have lost their fundamental right to raise their own children to an array of government officials and "experts," such as judges, lawyers, psychotherapists, social workers, child protective services, child support enforcement agents, mediators, counselors, and feminist groups. Dr. Baskerville documents injustices to children and fathers that might otherwise seem beyond belief. He exposes the distortions and fabrications propagated by the divorce industry to rationalize confiscating children from their parents. This is must reading for everyone who loves children, family, or justice."

-- Phyllis Schlafly, President, Eagle Forum

"At long last, Stephen Baskerville in Taken Into Custody: The War Against Fathers, Marriage and the Family, has made the case for the critical importance of fathers in bringing up children. His view, that fathers are the victim of discrimination in the court system in this country, is absolutely correct. Hopefully this book will begin a counter revolution so that fathers will be seen as essential to raising a family. The only successful families, by and large, are those with BOTH parents and children. This book has long been needed, and Dr. Baskerville is absolutely the right person to have written it."

-- Paul M. Weyrich, Hon. PhD, Chairman and CEO, Free Congress Research and Education Foundation

"Taken Into Custody exposes the corruption of the divorce industry – lawyers paid to destroy marriages, courts who do their bidding, and bought state legislators. It is must reading by millions who lost access to their children, but also by church leaders whose support is essential if Stephen Baskerville’s reforms are to have a chance. The danger of gay marriage is trivial compared to the carnage of divorce explored here."

-- Michael J. McManus, President and Co-Founder, Marriage Savers

"Baskerville has exposed a major abuse of power that is not only responsible for destroying families and for the social disorder that ensues from that. It also rationalizes massive government spending and violations of our constitutional freedoms by courts, bureaucracies, and other arms of the state. Today's social crisis is not the product of impersonal social forces to which we must resign ourselves. It is the logical culmination of the modern state's perpetual drive to create problems for itself to solve. This book powerfully reveals the interconnected threats to the family, accountable government, and freedom."

-- Grover Norquist, President, Americans for Tax Reform

"No-fault divorce, in practice, means unilateral divorce. When one parent is divorced against his will, that means the state must enforce the separation of that parent from his (or sometimes her) children and home. That means the state will intrude in the most personal areas of the family’s life, in effect, obliterating the distinction between public and private. These are the key insights of Stephen Baskerville’s important new book, Taken into Custody. Everyone concerned about the condition of marriage and children should read this book."

-- Jennifer Roback-Morse, PhD, economist and author, Smart Sex: Finding Life-long Love in a Hook-up World

"Stephen Baskerville's Taken into Custody powerfully depicts the myriad cruelties and injustices currently being visited upon American fathers."

-- Glenn Sacks, columnist and talk radio host


Dr. Baskerville has already appeared on these shows, among others:
The O’Reilly Factor
Tucker Carlson (planned)
Court TV with Fred Graham and Katherine Crier
Think Tank with Ben Wattenberg
Extension 720 with Milt Rosenberg
Janet Parshall’s America
Bott Radio Network

His writings have appeared in these leading publications:
Washington Post
Washington Times
American Conservative
Human Events
Catholic World Report
World Net Daily
American Spectator
The Spectator
American Enterprise
National Review
Independent Review
Salisbury Review
Political Science and Politics
Women's Quarterly
Family Policy Review

Contact the Author:
Stephen Baskerville, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Government
Patrick Henry College
1 Patrick Henry Circle
Purcellville, Virginia 20132
703 560 5138 * 540 338 8737 * 202 330 3248 (mobile)

Available at Amazon's special price of $16.47 (regular price $24.95).

Saturday, October 13, 2007

Petition to the UN - In the interests of CHILDREN

Dear Friends, on behalf of the “In The Interests' Of Children” tm Campaign Team, we bring you this short news bulletin:-

1. See no evil, hear no evil, do no evil ….

The voice of the UK administrations response to facted case wrongdoings carried against our children... Read the website for more, including live raw communication between our parent sponsor and head of the UK Family Justice Division, Sir Mark Potter (aka Lord Justice Potter)… We would sincerely like to hear from you if yohaveexperienced similar wrongdoings/denials in your Country against children.

2. Our campaign birthday….

On the 5th-November-2007 we will be 1-year old. This is also Guy Fawkes Night [1] in the United Kingdom. Please help us celebrate with a BIG BANG by asking as many people to sign the petition as possible on our birthday. To date we have well over 1000 international signatories, but we still have a long way to go before we can go to the United Nations.

3. Call for translators ….

Although we have the petition translated into a few languages - English, Finnish (c/o Pertti Ruha), French & Portuguese (both c/o Marc Smulders), we still need voluntary translations in Spanish, German, Italian, Hindi and other languages. We will obviously acknowledge your donated works for the benefit of children.

Please continue to ask friends, family, work colleagues, neighbours, grandparents, brothers, sisters… to sign the petition, for the sake of our children and future generations to come, every UNIQUE signature counts, and REMEMBER this is YOUR battle as much as it is ours. Don’t forget that paper versions of the petition can also be downloaded from the campaign website.

Please feel free to pass this email to others…

With the kindest of regards on behalf of,

In The Interests' Of Children ™

UN 1503 Campaign Team


Email: info@un1503petition.com

[1] Guy Fawkes (13 April 1570 – 31 January 1606), also known as 'Guido', was a member of a group of English Roman Catholics who attempted to carry out the Gunpowder Plot, an attempt to blow up the Houses of Parliament and kill King James I of England, to protest Protestant rule, on 5 November 1605.

Friday, October 12, 2007

Mums from Hell

Sad stuff and children deserve better. Why are the systems failing these children ? Why is child abuse numbers appalling in New Zealand ? Why don't the nanny state social engineer brigade get together in a meeting of the minds so this problem can be obliterated from the emotional landscape of many young victims ?

read more | digg story

Thursday, October 11, 2007

UK -Women's Aid report 29% rise in Child Abuse reports

I do wonder what the total damage to our vulnerable children through insidious child abuse is New Zealand ? The breakdown of the family and the destruction of bonds of genuine and loving child/biological parent relationships caused through fatherlessness has placed the children of the Western World in a tragic situation .
The total eradication of the child abuse problems within society should be a priority for a clear headed and caring government . Why is government and society letting our children down ?


Thursday, October 11, 2007
Women's Aid has reported a 29% increase in the number of child abuse incidents reported to its national helpline last year.

The organisation says cases reported to the helpline included an abuser urinating on a child, a child being kicked in the stomach, children being beaten and being exposed to rape.

Five per cent of the reported incidents happened during access visits and 20% of abusers were ex-husbands or ex-partners of the child's mother.

Men swallowing female hormones ! ?

Dear dad4justice,

I'm in LA, where I appeared yesterday on ESPN Radio
and this morning on the KTLA Morning Show. Never will
I be able to fully fathom the wimpiness of men. When
the clips are available, I will post them and notify
you. Then, you can see/hear for yourself.

Later today, at 4PM ET (my hit time is 4:40PM ET), I'll
debate Lis Wiehl on FNC's 'Your World with Neil Cavuto.'
There is a lawsuit at a $10B hedgefund about men being
required to "swallow female hormones to trade better."
The theory is that women are more mellow and more civil
than men, and, if men can emulate women, they will become
tamer and, hence, better salesmen. Really? Has anyone ever
witnessed a catfight? Has anyone ever met a tame divorcee
in a courtroom? Check out the article at:

I have been swallowing female hormones for years, if you
know what I mean. Female hormones are delicious, but they
never made me throw dishes at the wall or hiss like a cat,
and they never made feel mellow, either.

Should be great TV. I hope you can tune in at 4PM ET.


MHR Enterprises
PO Box 33086
Los Gatos, CA 95031-3086
eMail: Marc@TheNoNonsenseMan.com
Website: http://www.TheNoNonsenseMan.com
BLOG: http://TheNoNonsenseMan.MensNewsDaily.com

Tuesday, October 9, 2007

Some are more equal than others

Dear Peter Burns

The piece below is published today in WorldNetDaily, which has a huge and very influential circulation. It addresses child custody within the context of new feminist attempts to change the Constitution.

To help get more such pieces published, please respond with letters to the editor. Please use letters@worldnetdaily.com.

Regards - Stephen

In fact, if any group faces systematic discrimination today, it is males. And it is not trivial. Men routinely lose their children, along with everything else they possess (including their freedom), in divorce courts, because child custody is virtually automatic to mothers, even when the mother is the one breaking up the family. Feminists not only

read more | digg story

Saturday, October 6, 2007

Frustrated Fathers

Leader of Opposition
House of Representatives

23 March 2004

Mr Peter Burns
27 Elizabeth Street

Dear Mr Burns

Thank you for letter 2 March, concerning matters between yourself and the Family Court.

I note your comments and have forwarded your letter to National’s Family spokesperson Judith Collins, for her information. Regrettably, as you have written to the Governor – General, the Attorney General, the Prime Minister and the Commissioner of Children (who are the appropriate people to investigate and progress such matters) I am unable to assist you further.

With best wishes

Yours sincerely
Don Brash
Leader of the Opposition

cc Judith Collins.

Percy Shelly wrote 200 years ago after the Lord Chancellor denied him access/custody of his children:

I curse thee (Lord Chancellor) by a parents’ outraged love,
by hopes long cherished and lately lost,
by gentle feelings thou couldst never prove,
by griefs which they seem nature never crossed……………..By all the happy in children’s growth,
that undeveloped flower of budding years,
sweetness and sadness interwoven both,
source of the sweetest hopes and saddest fears,
O wretched ye if ever any were,
sadder than orphans ,
yet not fatherless.

Friday, October 5, 2007

I just want a chance to see my son's girls

I had a tear in my eye after I read this . RIP mum killed by a hateful Family Court and a sinister New Zealand Police Force !!! Well done psychologist Dr John Watson and barrister Adrienne Edwards ( I hope you are happy mum is dead as you murdered her ). I first alerted the Prime Minister of New Zealand Helen Clark of my terrible family circustances early in 2002. She fobbed me off , and I am thankful for the support of various National Party MP's including Don Brash , John Key , Nick Smith and Judith Collins . I would also like to thank the sincere lady Muriel Newman who was most compassionate at a Select Committee Hearing relating to the Care of Children Bill.
Thank you Muriel and I hope you are well. I will never forget the Chairman of Select Committee Tim Barnett laughing at my sad situation . I will get even , legally .

Anyway here is the touching article from Scotland .

I just want chance to see my son's girls

SANDRA DICK ( sdick@edinburghnews.com)

HEARTBROKEN and grieving, there was just one thing that kept Ann Ramsay going after the suicide of her only son - an overwhelming love for his two beautiful children.

One was just six years old and the spitting image of Ann's own daughter; the other was two years younger, delicate and dainty with a shock of blonde curls. They are Ann's last mortal link with the son she had to bury, aged just 24.

If only she had her way, she'd spend as much time as possible with the children. There would be trips to the park, fun sleepovers and granny's home cooking.

But instead, a bitter rift has blown Ann's world apart - the little girls she dotes on as only a granny can are no longer permitted to visit her home. The few times she has seen them recently have been by accident when she's spotted them in the street in the Midlothian village where they all live.

"It's been terrible, really horrible," says Ann, reflecting on how a tragic sequence of events and a painful period of grief culminated in a rift with the girls' mother, heralding a shattering severing of family ties.

"So much has happened," says Ann. "My son hanged himself just three weeks after my father died; his partner started a relationship with one of his close friends; I struggled to cope with it all.

"I'm the first one to admit my head was all over the place, but not to have the chance to see the girls . . . it's just tearing me apart."

It's a tragic tale of a family ripped asunder by highly charged emotions, petty squabbles and stubborn attitudes, with two innocent little girls caught in the crossfire. Sad as it is, Ann's heartbreak at being denied the chance to cuddle and care for her grandchildren is not unusual.

On Tuesday, campaigners Grandparents Apart Self-Help Group took their 277-signature petition to the Scottish Parliament's justice committee to ask for the greater legal rights for grandparents struggling to gain access to grandchildren. Led by Jimmy Deuchars, they pleaded for an advisory Charter for Grandchildren - drawn up to secure grandparents' access to children in the face of family breakdowns and disputes - to become legally binding.

It would mean, argues the group, that grandparents could not simply be frozen out of their grandchildren's lives on a parental whim; and that grandparents such as Ann - sidelined as her son's partner moves on with her life and cut from her two grandchildren's lives - might have at least some legal rights.

Ann's voice catches as she counts, on one hand, the number of times she has seen her son's pretty little daughters in the past two years - just twice last year and just once this year for only ten minutes.

A sympathetic family friend sneaked the girls to her home and hid them behind the wheelie bins in the garden so that they wouldn't be spotted.

"I just want the chance to spend time with them," Ann explains, "because they are all I have left of my laddie."

Her son Robert's lifeless body was found hanging from a tree in July 2004, just a few weeks after a split from his partner - the mother of his two little girls.

Says Ann: "He had been trying to get in touch with his ex-partner. He'd had a difficult time with cocaine - but he'd been trying to sort himself out and hadn't touched drugs for nearly a year.

"The break-up came out of the blue and he took it very badly because he really loved his children. Three weeks before his suicide my dad died - and there'd been family problems there too.

"It was the anniversary of Robert's dad's death from a heart attack. He was really finding it hard to cope.

"He went back on the drugs, went out on the Friday night and never came back. He hanged himself." Tormented by her grief, Ann admits that she made mistakes in the months that followed her son's death.

She buried her feelings in a bottle, raged against her highly charged emotions and sobbed herself to sleep at night. With her only other child, her daughter, living in Wales and with no other grandchildren to focus on, Ann poured her emotions into the wellbeing of Robert's little girls.

Today she can understand why his partner lashed out at her, angrily warning her that she'd never see her grandchildren again after social workers arrived at her home to check on their welfare.

"I really believe she is a good mother and that the girls are well cared for," says Ann.

"I like their mother - I've got a lot of time for her and I know she has had a lot of emotional upset too. I know I've not been an angel in all of this.

"I've sent her a letter and I've tried to make contact to sort it out, but I can't get near her.

"All I want now is to have the chance to spend a bit of time with the girls - they're all I have of Robert and not being with them has been horrendous."

But petty squabbles can rapidly evolve into major family rows capable of tearing apart relationships - as Sandra Docherty from West Lothian knows only too well.

She describes the row she had with her daughter as a "minor tiff" - so irrelevant that she can't even remember what it was about - but still severe enough to have led to her being frozen from her grandchildren's lives for seven years.

"I used to look after my granddaughters all the time so my daughter and her husband could go out to work," explains Sandra, 67. "What started as a tiff spiralled out of control, I tried to patch things up, but then we both ended up digging our heels in.

"I asked to see the children, she said no and after a year I decided to go to court."

It was then that Sandra discovered that grandparents have no legal access rights to their grandchildren.

She lost not only the case, but the impact of going to court created a new division. Today, neither her son nor her daughter speaks to her and she hasn't seen her two granddaughters - nor been allowed to send them a birthday card or Christmas present - in seven years.

"I can only hope that one day the girls might turn up on my doorstep. At least then I can show them all the court papers and tell them that I only wanted to be given a chance to spend time with them, that I really love them," says Sandra.

"I know I could never have put my parents through what my daughter has put me through.

"I didn't get a card from her for my 60th birthday. Instead I got a solicitor's letter from her saying I wasn't going to get to see the girls again.

"She's 37 now, and I don't think she's going to change her mind. But if she turned up at my door tomorrow, I'd let her in and I'd forgive her.

"Whatever has happened, she's still my daughter."

HELP group Grandparents Apart was formed six years ago by a group of grandparents fighting for the right of access to their grandchildren.

The aim was to provide support and advice, but more recently the group has lobbied the Scottish Parliament, calling for a change in family law to give greater rights to grandparents.

Organised by Jimmy Deuchars, from Mosspark in Glasgow, the petition calls for MSPs to change the advisory Charter for Grandchildren to make it legally binding to ensure "the rights of children are recognised by all public agencies and families, and enforced by law".

He argues that the advisory charter has been ineffective in providing grandparents with greater access to their grandchildren in the wake of family disputes.

He has personal experience of how few rights grandparents have after becoming embroiled in his own battle to see his granddaughters following their mother's death from breast cancer and their father's decision to move to Liverpool.

"It started to become harder and harder to actually see the girls," he explained.

"There were always excuses why they couldn't get to Carlisle - where we had agreed to meet. We ended up going to court in Liverpool to try to sort it out and it was shocking at first to find out that as grandparents you really don't have any rights at all."

Mr Deuchars and his wife Margaret argued their case for access with a court reporter, and eventually an amicable agreement was reached between their former son-in-law and his new wife.

Now he is determined to help other grandparents in their fight for access.

"Grandparents have a lot to offer a family yet they don't have any rights whatsoever," he said. "That's wrong. It's painful for children to lose contact as much as it hurts grandparents.

"It's all about getting families together and trying to make sure the children in the middle don't lose out."

This article: http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/features.cfm?id=1585782007

Shooting cop named .

Without prejudice .

I brought my first copy of the Truth for many, many years today to find out the identity of the cop that shot Stephen Jon Bellingham and I was horrified to find out it was sergeant Anton ten Hove (51).

One must be so careful these days about commenting about police behaviour, however I do admire the New Zealand Truth Newspaper for highlighting his name where MSM has not dared to go near the grey subject. Typical gutless controlled media and the Truth can count me in as a regular reader.

Now I know Anton ten Hove and his legendary black gloves, however I am not going to adjudicate on the Bellingham incident as to the circumstances have been fully and fairly examined by the appropriate authorities. Fat chance of that happening as "police lie to save each other’s butts" Senior Sergeant Arnold Kelly - Ashburton Police .

The eyewitness to the event that I spoke too alleged they heard 4 gun shots and Steve had his hands beside his arms. I would believe this, as Anton ten Hove with a gun pointing at you is not a good idea and would frighten anybody into dropping what he or she carried. He is a mean machine and I can tell you he is one worked up fitness, martial arts machine and I wouldn’t even for the slightest moment ever think of messing with this aggro dude, especially when he is packing a piece.

What really hacks me off about this whole sordid affair is that the victim here was on legal party pills . What did the government think when they brought this shit into society . It is pure madness and I blame the likes of that twisted Utopian - tree hugger - green ropehead called Nandor . The idiot that is always bleating on about social justice and doing nothing about it .
Yeah right, he contributed to this death . He has blood on his hands as well as sergeant scrap king !! It is well past time that the duped New Zealand public realize the greens are just Helen Clark feminist cult nutbars /puppets . I hope they are destroyed at the next election and replaced by clear headed and sensible people who are passionate to environmental issues . These socialist nanny state control freaks are just nanny state social engineers . They are gormless and spineless creatures, who just flap in the changeable wind. A type of parasitic species with no social responsibility ,conscience or morals . Basically they are hot air blunders , wasted spaces , yet these devious creeps campaign on some deluded and trivial issue until they find a high ground to grandstand .They are protected by the twisted and mental Prime Minister, which allows them to build a platform of self righteousness and think their communist manifesto is not showing .

Oh well , stuff the consequences, as I am way past caring , two days before Christmas a couple of seasons back a 17 stone Ashburton cop called Constable Mark Walter Dryland assaulted my female partner in front of her two terrified teenage daughters .
Three Ashburton cops traveled out of their jurisdiction into the Christchurch Police Area , bashed their way in on a unsigned search warrant looking for items relating to my family court case, to give me a right doing over as a Christmas prezzy . Who said the cops are not the biggest gang in New Zealand ? If I not here tomorrow , you know what happened ???

Justice Goddard from the PCA said to my lovely , kind and law abiding partner that is to be expected living with me and Senior Sergeant Arnold Kelly from Ashburton is responsible for my injustice and the terrible destruction of my family .

You and me Kelly ? What you say ? Lets make it a fair fight - get it on - eh jellyfish !!?? You dirty corrupt bastard . And ,the PCA is a toothless corrupt tiger.

No wonder people hate cops and the stoned up Greens . Sue Bradford is just a hairy arm pitted bush pig that couldn't even accord myself the decency of answering my polite question at a Select Committee hearing the submissions on the smacking bill saga ! I made all that effort for that fat pig to turn her back on me . I was left speechless . Who the hell does she think she is !!
That says a lot for the gutless communist scumbags ! Helen Clark is a disgrace to all New Zealanders !!

Thursday, October 4, 2007

Denmark adopts equal parenting

The Copenhagen Post

27 September 2007
Parenting shake-up expected

http://www.cphpost. dk/get/103636. html

The legal system is preparing for a rush of fathers seeking joint custody of their children when revised parenting laws come into effect next week.

The new parental law, which becomes valid on 1 October, is designed to give additional rights - and responsibilities - to both fathers and mothers.

While current, decade-old legislation requires parents to reach an agreement before joint custody is granted, the new law establishes co-parenting as the norm - even after a divorce. Under the new rules, joint custody can only be repealed if serious concerns for a child's safety such as abuse come to light.

The law requires divorced parents to share a range of responsibilities ranging from taking the children to school to ensuring each other has information about school activities. Children themselves will also have more say under the legislation, as child welfare authorities will interview them about parental custody matters.

Experts are concerned, however, that the revisions could result in a flood of new law suits. Anja Cordes, chairman of the national organisation of lawyers dealing with custody cases, was a member of the committee that drew up the law's proposals. She stated that although the political will was in place to establish co-parenting after a failed marriage, feuding parents might lack the ability to put their differences behind them for the good of the child. 'It will take time before parents learn to separate parenting with partnership and to stop seeking revenge through their child,' she told Berlingske Tidende newspaper.

She also predicted longer processing times for child welfare authorities in future cases, as parents who had lost custody cases in the past seek the chance to have their case retried.

Anette Hummelshøj, the head of Department of Family Affairs, admitted the new law could place an additional strain on the legal system.

'But our expectation is that when the courts have established a clear line for the legal area, a higher number of parents will be able to settle either inside or outside the courts.'

"The child's good memories of the alienated parent are systematically destroyed and the child misses out on the day to day interaction, learning, support and love, which, in an intact family, usually flows between the child and both parents as well as grandparents and other relatives on both sides."

Glenn Cartwright PhD.

Quotes I like ;

" Hatred is not an emotion that comes naturally to a child. It has to be taught. A parent who would teach a child to hate the other parent, represents a grave and persistent danger to the mental and emotional health of that child".

Justice John Gomery

Do not wait for leaders; do it alone, person to person. -- Mother Teresa (1910-1997) Albanian Missionary

When we accept tough jobs as a challenge to our ability and wade into them with joy and enthusiasm, miracles can happen. -- Arland Gilbert

Wednesday, October 3, 2007

Britney Spears will lose custody of children .

LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- A court has ordered pop singer Britney Spears to give up custody of her children effective Wednesday at noon.
Spears' former husband, Kevin Federline, is to retain custody of their two sons "until further order of the court," according to a ruling by Superior Court Judge Scott Gordon.

It was not clear what led to Monday's decision awarding Federline full custody. A transcript of the court proceedings was ordered sealed.

Last month, a judge ordered Spears, 25, to submit to random drug tests after finding she engaged in "habitual, frequent, and continuous use of controlled substances and alcohol."

That order, also by Gordon, provided no details and did not name any drugs.

The former couple has been embroiled in a bitter custody fight over their sons, Sean Preston and Jayden.

The parents had split custody 50-50, but Federline then asked for the arrangements to be shifted to 70-30 in his favor. Video Watch how Spears became user of -- and prisoner to -- fame »

In addition to ordering the twice-weekly drug tests, Gordon ordered Spears to spend eight hours per week working with a "parenting coach," who was to observe her interactions with her children.

Gordon also told both parents to avoid alcohol or "other non-prescription controlled substances" 12 hours before taking custody of the children.

He also barred the exes from making "derogatory remarks about the other party and the other party's family or significant other" during the case.

And he ordered the parents to go through "joint co-parenting counseling" and barred them from using corporal punishment on the boys.

Spears and Federline were married for two years before their divorce became final in July.

Monday's order comes amid a career freefall for Spears, whose new album is due to be released November 13.

After her September 9 "comeback" performance on the MTV Video Music Awards, critics derided her singing and dancing as lackluster and said she appeared overweight in her sequined two-piece costume.

Her former divorce lawyer, Laura Wasser, resigned last month as her legal representative after telling reporters the singer "just wants to be a mom."

Spears' management company, the Firm, recently quit after representing the singer for little over a month.

Sound Off: Your opinions and comments
updated October 2, 2007

dad4justice comments;

Great to see dad was the life boat for the children as mum slowly sinks in a confused world of addictions and haywire stinking thinking .

Many women lose the plot and I am thankful that dad stepped up to the nurturing platform rather than the children being seized by callous authorities .

*This article can also be accessed if you copy and paste the entire address below into your web browser.

Tuesday, October 2, 2007

Don't want to know Boshier and two evil psycho liars !!

Without prejudice .
RIP Mum.
Due to various comments made about this post on kiwiblog by some anonymous coward blogger's like roger nome and peak oil conspiracy etc... I must advise that all mentioned parties in this blog have been sent a link to this post.

I do want the chance to get this before a Court . I am prepared for any of the serious consequences that I will face. Personal power will continue as I post my entire case on the net . It will shock many, however, it's the only way I can get the truth out so it cannot happen to your kids or grand children ?

Principal Family Court Judge
Peter Boshier
Level 8, Solnet House.
70 The Terrace

Clinical Psychologist.
John Watson.
58 Avonside Drive.
Christchurch 1. Office Tel: 0 –3 –981-3157.
Fax: 0 –3 –981-3179.
Home Phone: 981 –3850.
Mobile: 025 2266374.

Clinical Psychologist
Michael Davidson
P O Box 3221
Tel: 3654073
Fax: 365 5762

Dear Peter , John and Michael .

Congratulations to cyfswatch web site for helping to expose this widespread unacceptable behaviour .The systematic corruption must stop as you snakes have destroyed my family and killed my mother .
I have emailed all those so called de -family court professionals a copy of this blog post and challenged them all with the statement " please take me to Court if offended ."
Whats another bad mark against my name, as the corrupt gravy train of blood sucking parasites have already tainted me with 14 false convictions and destroyed my life .

As our twisting acid tongued Prime Minister would swank from her insidious gob ;

I have thought long and hard about my previous posting about John Watson, who helped create the insidious cyfs monster that has become a dysfunctional / bureaucratic inertia. I foolishly thought I could take civil proceedings against his malicious behaviour. However it is with much regret to inform all, that the court will not even listen to my genuine grievance. It was always going to be a bit like David and Goliath, however there are no stones in the river. Who said you could seek natural justice in New Zealand is a deluded fool. Stuff the consequences of this email as I think I owe it , to my family and my deceased mother the dignity of the truth, which is only fair.
I welcome any legal implications from my posting, maybe it will help me achieve some balanced/fair justice. Yeah right. This John Watson should be struck off for professional misconduct. It was reported by cyfs social workers in 2001 that my two daughters loved me heaps and felt safe with me. I was the happy dad for years, whom tucked my beautiful daughters into bed most nights, before I read them a bedtime story. They enjoyed their dad who was so proud that he could help nurture them on a daily basis.

I first started writing my concerns about my case to the Principal Family Court Judge’s Chambers 20th February 2002. I have 13 meaningless replies from the ineffective Chambers.
Now because of an judicial old boy’s network protecting and pervading the New Zealand's justice system I am deemed a threat to all children, and not worthy of forming healthy bonds with my own flesh and blood. The cruel litigation has meandered on for years, the vile parental alienation syndrome tactics employed by all are causing adversity for all the parties concerned.

Here is proof that Judge Boshier and the many unscrupulous greedy gravy train professional’s that have attached themselves to the disgraceful litany of lies.

In 2004 Boshier and myself exchanged letters via New Zealand Post.
My letters were a complaint regarding the two bias and totally unfair psychological reports presented to the court by specialist Family Court report writer, clinical psychologist Dr. Michael Davidson. A judge first directed Davidson to in the 2002 to write a specialist assessment to be obtained under S29A of the Guardianship Act 1968. The trauma this bias /unfair report affected me that much I am completely lost the plot. In his opinion he unfairly obliterated my emotional landscape and said that I should see my girls in a few years time with a security guard present. I was so upset. Police arrested me at Armed Offenders roadblock. I was incarcerated in a round cell at Paparua prison then got a early Christmas present and sent off to the Hillmorton Hospital, as a court directed compulsory mental health patient. I was forced to take the terrible psychotropic medications. Also I mentioned to Boshier the disgraceful conduct of the first court appointed counsel for child, Chris Robertson from Ashburton who told my mother that she could not deliver her grand daughters birthday and presents to his Ashburton Office. Mum was upset she had a heart attack and admitted to Christchurch Hospital Christmas 2001.Boshier terminated all correspondence with this letter from the Principal Family Court Judge’s Chambers.

14 October 2004

Dear Mr Burns

Thank you for your letter of 12 October 2004. I will not be responding any further on this issue.

Yours sincerely
Peter Boshier
Principal family Court Judge.

The court appoints John Watson in July 2005. He is brought into proceedings to write a specialist/report/assessment under section 133 of the Care of Children Act 2004.

Boshier cannot explain his latest reply, which was the first correspondence I have heard from him since the October 2004 letter.

The Principal Family Court Peter Boshier is undoubtedly involved in what I regard as a “ arrogant subversion of the justice system.”

Reply from Boshier
23rd January 2007

Dear Mr Burns
Thank you for your letter to me of 15 January concerning a registered psychologist, John Watson. I know that you and I have had correspondence before and in particular concerning, Mr Watson.
My previous view to you has been that in relation to a psychologist, I have no jurisdiction to take action. It is a matter to be considered by either the Court hearing the case or the Psychologists Registration Board. It would be quite wrong of me to give you any other impression.
Yours sincerely
Peter Boshier
Principal Family Court Judge.

My first Letter to Boshier regarding former cyfs worker manager, parole board and family court reports writer John Watson.

Principle Family Court Judge of New Zealand
Judge P F Boshier
P O Box 10 –167

15 January 2007

Dear Sir,
I seek your learned opinion about the lewd behaviour of a Family Court psychologist called John Watson.
I have brought this matter to your attention as I have lost all faith and confidence in the Family Court system that allows this type of conduct.
Surely it is not acceptable behaviour and certainly not in the publics best interests. As the Judge responsible for the Family Court you must consider this complaint about Watson and act accordingly.
John Watson must be held accountable to protect the judicial system’s impartiality, integrity and independence.

The Complaint is as follows;

January. My mother finally gets to enjoy two unsupervised hours with all four of her grand children at her Rakaia huts property. This is the first time for five years as a persecuted paternal grandmother she enjoys the luxury of being in the loving company of all four of my children.

February. I am admitted to Christchurch Accident and Emergency Department with a heart attack after I discovered my Family Court lawyer Tony Greig had not been sending letters onto my daughters.

June.A Family Court Judge Strettell asks for affidavits to be prepared and submitted by my mother and twin sons. They all speak of how greatly the injustice has affected them.

July .The Family Court requests psychologist John Watson to update a report pursuant to section 133 Care of Children Act 2004. He is instructed to contact the following parties to access proceedings, namely - both sets of grandparents, parent’s partners, children’s schoolteacher and Hillmorton Hospital. I ring him and tell him to please leave my mum out of proceedings due to her rapidly deteriorating health. He acknowledges my concern and tells me he will not contact my mother .My partner is witness to him saying that as she was listening on the other phone.
The Family Court Judge Strettell and acting lawyers Geoff Kean and child counsel - Adrienne Edwards are told that my mother would like to inform the Court that she can longer handle being part of the proceedings due to her failing heart condition. The Court is told that mum’s affidavit, was sworn in at the Christchurch Family Court by a registrar 1st July 2005. It made it plainly clear to the Family Court that my mother cannot take the proceedings any longer, as she has found the treatment of the paternal family to be totally unfair and a traumatic experience. My mother’s affidavit clearly shows the hurt, stress and heartbreak the Family Court had forced my poor mum to endure. All parties to the proceedings including the Judge at the hearing said they could understand my mother’s situation and agreed that it would be better if mum was left out of further proceedings.

November.Inexplicably the Family Court appointed Psychologist John Watson telephone’s my mother. She becomes so upset by his phone call my lovely female partner, who witnessed her reaction came home in a tearful state and told me that she had to put my mother in bed after the despicable phone call. My mother died heartbroken four days after Watson’s phone call. I am so upset about the unfairness of the Family Court. I thought I had an assurance from a Family Court judge that mum’s request to be excluded from future proceedings was official, and was recognized by the Court some months earlier. The disgusting situation deteriorates even further when you consider the vile fact that the Court appointed psychologist report writer failed in his bias wisdom to contact the maternal grandparents. Watson is recorded as describing the maternal family as one of the most vengeful and vindictive he has ever known. He was most concerned about my ex partner withholding a letter from cyfs that I obtained through the Privacy Commissioner’ Office. This letter clearly showed that the cyfs investigation initiated after the anonymous informant was of no valid foundation.Cyfs social workers say “ After a home visit and talk with the girls, we are satisfied that the children are kept safe from abuse “ Watson did not mention this is in his report and did not show any balance. Shamefully as again instructed to do so, he failed to contact Hillmorton Hospital – Dr Mark Earthroll. Watson is a proven liar.He recommends I see my alienated daughters on one or two years with a security guard present .
Watson’s conduct is beyond belief. If this is acceptable behaviour from a so-called Family Court professional, then God help all the paternal families he has involvement with.

I know of an another parental grandmother here in Christchurch that spoke to Watson in phone conservation for two hours in 2001. She got her hopes up that he would write a positive report, as she made it very clear that she was extremely concerned about the welfare of her primary school grand son . She did not like his alienation from the paternal family, and that her grandson needed her for his best interests and needs. He promised her that he would make a court report. She was horrified that Watson did not make a report for the court .She contacted him two years later via phone and she said do you remember me and the phone conversation we had for two hours in 2001? He blatantly lied to this heartbroken grandmother by stating he could not remember the call. The young lads lawyer Michelle Cook said the father was a jail bird , which was a lie , so the system could justify the callous parental alienation tactics endorsed by corrupt crown law employee ! The father has given up and the gran mother is talking suicide . Well done cyfs, family court and Ruth Dyson !!!

He must be held accountable, and our families want Watson on receiving end of natural justice. This is a truthful affidavit is an official complaint about his malicious behaviour. We are all struggling to know why he would have done this to us . I feel like bashing him big time but I will not because another stint in jail would kill me !! The victims of his sordid lies ,these elderly grandmothers’ did not deserve this, as they were all were such honest and kind ladies. They did not understand this evil miscarriage of justice firmly entrenched and disguised in a secret sinister court system. We are thankful for our mum’s who taught us all the importance of love, virtues, morals and a healthy respect for family and others.
Why did the family court persecute my mother ? Why did they break her spirit ?
Why ?

December 2005 .For the second time that sad year I get to spend four unsupervised hours with my daughters. My daughters are sad their gran had died, however my alienated children are extremely happy to in the company of their unfairly treated loving and caring dad, who did not need the services of a tax payer funded security guard!

I have withdrawn from all Family Court proceedings after several years of excruciating heartbreak. I had to distance myself the judicial corruption and unlawful gender bias that has inexplicably occurred. The malign Family Court wanted a fourth psychological specialist’s report to be conducted.
I want John Watson struck off as a registered psychologist, as his conduct is clearly malfeasance. I intend on bringing a substantial lawsuit against this man for his unbalanced, bias and criminal behaviour.

Yours faithfully

Peter Burns
27 Elizabeth Street

It is better to be nobly defeated on principle than win on lies – dad4justice