Discharge Order
Domestic Violence Act 1995
In the Family Court
at Christchurch
Fam 2006 –009 –000709
Applicant
Peter Joseph Burns
of Christchurch
Respondent
R J K
of unknown
Upon application made to it, the Court orders that the Protection Order made in the Family Court at Ashburton on 17 December 2001 be discharged.
Andrew Tulloch
Deputy Registrar
Copies to:
RJK
Adrienne Edwards ( Child Counsel)
Friday, August 29, 2008
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Judicial Book Banning
Judicial Book Banning
Most of us are familiar with the arbitrary and corrupt court decisions of judges in America which we have thus far tolerated. “Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.” Declaration of Independence.
But now comes an interesting court decision from off our soil, and that is orders to destroy all copies of a book. Now why do we find this interesting. It is because if this kind of rulings are being made by the judiciary from off our shores, it certainly will not be long before we shall find our judges doing exactly the same thing here in America.
The below is an email to J.A.I.L. from New Zealand about what happened to her. I have taken the liberty of slightly editing it for understandability and readability while seeking not to change its substance.
VictoryUSA@jail4judges.org
_______________________________________________
From:
To: JAIL4Judges
Although I live in New Zealand, I appreciate receiving your e-mails and knowing that Americans are doing something about the judges who sit in judgment upon those forced to appear before them. It is great to hear that you are starting to have an impact.
As an author, I had once believed it was important to respect the judiciary. I no longer believe that. I have documents that prove that the courts in New Zealand condone secret trials to ban books, and the irony is that one of the books the High Court ordered destroyed was one written by this author.
An ex parte order was imposed upon me that told me that I could not tell even my husband that I was travelling some distance to appear in the High Court to face proceedings for contempt of court.
The hearings were heard in closed Chambers and all documents were to remain confidential. I was forced to disclose my manuscript with handwritten annotations. I was found to be in contempt of court, fined, ordered to pay damages, legal disbursements and court costs. An order was issued for all copies of my book to be destroyed.
I was accused of being reckless for relying on my lawyer who is now the Solicitor-General of New Zealand for legal advice.
Such is the state of justice in the country of New Zealand!
So thanks for being an inspiration to us.
Cheers
Most of us are familiar with the arbitrary and corrupt court decisions of judges in America which we have thus far tolerated. “Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.” Declaration of Independence.
But now comes an interesting court decision from off our soil, and that is orders to destroy all copies of a book. Now why do we find this interesting. It is because if this kind of rulings are being made by the judiciary from off our shores, it certainly will not be long before we shall find our judges doing exactly the same thing here in America.
The below is an email to J.A.I.L. from New Zealand about what happened to her. I have taken the liberty of slightly editing it for understandability and readability while seeking not to change its substance.
VictoryUSA@jail4judges.org
_______________________________________________
From:
To: JAIL4Judges
Although I live in New Zealand, I appreciate receiving your e-mails and knowing that Americans are doing something about the judges who sit in judgment upon those forced to appear before them. It is great to hear that you are starting to have an impact.
As an author, I had once believed it was important to respect the judiciary. I no longer believe that. I have documents that prove that the courts in New Zealand condone secret trials to ban books, and the irony is that one of the books the High Court ordered destroyed was one written by this author.
An ex parte order was imposed upon me that told me that I could not tell even my husband that I was travelling some distance to appear in the High Court to face proceedings for contempt of court.
The hearings were heard in closed Chambers and all documents were to remain confidential. I was forced to disclose my manuscript with handwritten annotations. I was found to be in contempt of court, fined, ordered to pay damages, legal disbursements and court costs. An order was issued for all copies of my book to be destroyed.
I was accused of being reckless for relying on my lawyer who is now the Solicitor-General of New Zealand for legal advice.
Such is the state of justice in the country of New Zealand!
So thanks for being an inspiration to us.
Cheers
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Ex-All Blacks coach: PC world destroying NZ
Rugby legend Sir Brian Lochore says political correctness is destroying New Zealand.Sir Brian, who coached the All Blacks to their 1987 Rugby World Cup victory, urged fathers to let their children take risks - but to lay down rules and impose "consequences" if rules are broken. He was speaking at…
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Tribute to Fathers….Parent Alienation
This is a small collection of videos from fathers who have been cut out of their children’s lives. I look to God for the strength to have faith that in the end, all will be well; that Truth will triumph over falsehood, Goodness will exceed the darkness, and that Justice will have the last word. If not in this life, than in the life to come.
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Friday, August 22, 2008
Kiwi Courts failing DV victims.
What a load of horse shit.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/4664179a11.html
Thursday, 21 August 2008
Family Courts need better security, better information from criminal courts and legal aid for applicants if they are to work effectively, says the court's top judge.
Principal Family Court judge Peter Boshier addressed the Continuum of Family Violence Conference in Napier today on how the justice system treated victims of domestic violence.
Judge Boshier said the ramifications of family violence permeated through New Zealand society and the "horrifying" statistics were only just scraping the surface.
In 2006 police recorded 71,000 family violence related incidents. One in four women and just under one in five men would be the victim of domestic violence at some stage in their lifetime.
Judge Boshier said courts had an important role in responding to violence incidents. "But there is much that must be done both in and beyond the judicial system," he said.
"The security in our courts seems woefully inadequate," he said, when compared with overseas courts, and even airports and Parliament.
The threat of intimidation in courts was high and in one year 4231 items were taken off people entering New Zealand courts.
Judge Boshier cited items collected from the Manukau court house, which included pistols, knives, razors and scissors.
"A real worry is the knowledge that some victims will not come to the Criminal Courts to give evidence because of fear and equally they look askance at the Family Court because of the uneven standard of security. We can and must do better."
He said victims must have access to justice that recognised their state of trauma and disempowerment, and they must have access to better information and safety than just the mere granting of a protection order.
Judge Boshier said he would like to see all applicants properly legally represented and seen by trained Family Court staff to explain to them what they were entitled to.
The state had a responsibility to provide free legal representation if the applicant could not afford it. Duty solicitors were available for offenders in criminal courts.
Victims might not feel empowered and may unwittingly be put at risk without the "wraparound support services" being available, he said.
Family Violence Courts in some centres were a bold step in reforming the criminal justice system, but because of cumbersome nature of the criminal system, struggled to provide effective access to justice.
Judge Boshier said he wanted to see greater use of electronic confirmation of court orders.
There would be better safety for victims if the Family Court was diligent in reporting perpetrators who did not attend prescribed programmes, and if police actioned every referral and prosecuted where needed.
The "clunky" paper-based exchange of information between the Family Court and District Criminal courts could be done better with computers to reduce the errors, he said
Judge Boshier also said the Family Court would be better served if it had access to a defendant's complete criminal history, especially when deciding whether to continue a protection order or not.
- NZPA
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/4664179a11.html
Thursday, 21 August 2008
Family Courts need better security, better information from criminal courts and legal aid for applicants if they are to work effectively, says the court's top judge.
Principal Family Court judge Peter Boshier addressed the Continuum of Family Violence Conference in Napier today on how the justice system treated victims of domestic violence.
Judge Boshier said the ramifications of family violence permeated through New Zealand society and the "horrifying" statistics were only just scraping the surface.
In 2006 police recorded 71,000 family violence related incidents. One in four women and just under one in five men would be the victim of domestic violence at some stage in their lifetime.
Judge Boshier said courts had an important role in responding to violence incidents. "But there is much that must be done both in and beyond the judicial system," he said.
"The security in our courts seems woefully inadequate," he said, when compared with overseas courts, and even airports and Parliament.
The threat of intimidation in courts was high and in one year 4231 items were taken off people entering New Zealand courts.
Judge Boshier cited items collected from the Manukau court house, which included pistols, knives, razors and scissors.
"A real worry is the knowledge that some victims will not come to the Criminal Courts to give evidence because of fear and equally they look askance at the Family Court because of the uneven standard of security. We can and must do better."
He said victims must have access to justice that recognised their state of trauma and disempowerment, and they must have access to better information and safety than just the mere granting of a protection order.
Judge Boshier said he would like to see all applicants properly legally represented and seen by trained Family Court staff to explain to them what they were entitled to.
The state had a responsibility to provide free legal representation if the applicant could not afford it. Duty solicitors were available for offenders in criminal courts.
Victims might not feel empowered and may unwittingly be put at risk without the "wraparound support services" being available, he said.
Family Violence Courts in some centres were a bold step in reforming the criminal justice system, but because of cumbersome nature of the criminal system, struggled to provide effective access to justice.
Judge Boshier said he wanted to see greater use of electronic confirmation of court orders.
There would be better safety for victims if the Family Court was diligent in reporting perpetrators who did not attend prescribed programmes, and if police actioned every referral and prosecuted where needed.
The "clunky" paper-based exchange of information between the Family Court and District Criminal courts could be done better with computers to reduce the errors, he said
Judge Boshier also said the Family Court would be better served if it had access to a defendant's complete criminal history, especially when deciding whether to continue a protection order or not.
- NZPA
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Final attempt at vindication.
IN THE FAMILY COURT
AT CHRISTCHURCH
FP 003/59/01. FAM 2003-009-001936. FAM 2006-009-000709
Applicant;
Peter Joseph Burns
Respondents
Five members of the maternal family
Affidavit of Peter Joseph Burns in support of an application for a discharge of a domestic protection order.
Peter Joseph Burns say on oath;
1.The maternal grand parents made a notification to Child Youth Family Service (CYFS) in November 2000 claiming I was sexually abusing both my daughters.
2.The protection orders were based on false allegations made to police in July 2001 relating to male assaults female and several threatening to kill offences. Police withdrew the serious criminal charges, however they formed the foundation of the existing domestic violence orders. The protection orders were made 28 August 2001 and protected the following persons ????? These unfair protection orders were put in place without due process and honesty.
3 I have custody of my eldest teenage daughter and the insidious protection order makes it difficult to be taken seriously as a credible role model father. I am unable to tolerate any further humiliation, loss of dignity and integrity. The character assassination must stop, to which I, my four children, and other members of family have been subjected over the last seven years. Enough is enough.
4. I cannot tolerate the deceit and manipulation of/by the maternal family, dishonest lawyers, cruel psychologists, and the overzealous police. I am sick and tired of being involved in the lengthy and heartwrenching Family Court litigation process. Only last month the mother of the children made another notification to CYFS concerning my parenting skills. I am trying my best as a genuine falsely accused father and feel every step forward is hindered by the protection orders.
5. My Family and close friends have expressed their serious concerns at the impact these proceedings generally have had, and will continue to have, on my health generally. I have been medically diagnosed with endogenous depression due to the forced domestic violence proceedings.
6. The protection orders make me feel useless, unworthy and unable to contribute to society in any meaningful way. I am sick of being stereotyped as a violent / nasty dad even though I am deemed a fit and proper person for full custody of my 15 –year old daughter?
7.The Family Court must discharge the protection orders immediately. The Court must apologise and compensate for the gross mismanagement and the trauma caused by the implementation of the malicious protection orders. It is most upsetting that I cannot move forward in my life with the burden of injustice constantly placing restrictions and obstacles in my path.
Signature of Applicant
Sworn at Christchurch this 7th day of July 2008
Before Me;
AT CHRISTCHURCH
FP 003/59/01. FAM 2003-009-001936. FAM 2006-009-000709
Applicant;
Peter Joseph Burns
Respondents
Five members of the maternal family
Affidavit of Peter Joseph Burns in support of an application for a discharge of a domestic protection order.
Peter Joseph Burns say on oath;
1.The maternal grand parents made a notification to Child Youth Family Service (CYFS) in November 2000 claiming I was sexually abusing both my daughters.
2.The protection orders were based on false allegations made to police in July 2001 relating to male assaults female and several threatening to kill offences. Police withdrew the serious criminal charges, however they formed the foundation of the existing domestic violence orders. The protection orders were made 28 August 2001 and protected the following persons ????? These unfair protection orders were put in place without due process and honesty.
3 I have custody of my eldest teenage daughter and the insidious protection order makes it difficult to be taken seriously as a credible role model father. I am unable to tolerate any further humiliation, loss of dignity and integrity. The character assassination must stop, to which I, my four children, and other members of family have been subjected over the last seven years. Enough is enough.
4. I cannot tolerate the deceit and manipulation of/by the maternal family, dishonest lawyers, cruel psychologists, and the overzealous police. I am sick and tired of being involved in the lengthy and heartwrenching Family Court litigation process. Only last month the mother of the children made another notification to CYFS concerning my parenting skills. I am trying my best as a genuine falsely accused father and feel every step forward is hindered by the protection orders.
5. My Family and close friends have expressed their serious concerns at the impact these proceedings generally have had, and will continue to have, on my health generally. I have been medically diagnosed with endogenous depression due to the forced domestic violence proceedings.
6. The protection orders make me feel useless, unworthy and unable to contribute to society in any meaningful way. I am sick of being stereotyped as a violent / nasty dad even though I am deemed a fit and proper person for full custody of my 15 –year old daughter?
7.The Family Court must discharge the protection orders immediately. The Court must apologise and compensate for the gross mismanagement and the trauma caused by the implementation of the malicious protection orders. It is most upsetting that I cannot move forward in my life with the burden of injustice constantly placing restrictions and obstacles in my path.
Signature of Applicant
Sworn at Christchurch this 7th day of July 2008
Before Me;
Monday, August 18, 2008
Rape accused student back at school
Principal Youth Court Judge Andrew Becroft said that while he could only speak in general terms, such a situation was very unusual.
The female judge's decision to send an alleged rapist back to the same school as his victim is beyond comprehension and against protections contained in various human rights legislation. The judiciary is out of step with mainstream thinking.The poor family must be livid with a clearly dysfunctional justice system!
http://stuff.co.nz/4661611a11.html
Rape accused student back at school
Decision slammed by principals
Tuesday, 19 August 2008
A judge's decision to allow a Waikato schoolboy accused of raping a fellow student to return to the school lacked common sense, the secondary schools principals' association says.
Association president Peter Gall said the principal involved was angry about the unexpected bail ruling.
The Education Ministry is paying for a teacher aide at a cost of up to $20 an hour.
A ministry spokesman said the teacher-aide was paid from the ministry's $2 million Interim Response Fund.
Mr Gall told Radio New Zealand some common sense should have prevailed when making the decision, as it was unacceptable for an alleged rapist to be allowed back into the school that a victim attends.
The 14-year-old boy appeared in the Hamilton Youth Court this month charged with raping a 16-year-old girl who attended the same high school as him.
He was granted bail by Judge Denise Clark, allowing him to return to school.
The boy, school, accused and alleged victim cannot be named under Youth Court rules.
The alleged rapist turned up at school the day after the ruling.
Two female staff took the girl off site until the principal could manage the situation.
He then suspended the boy and the school board met and agreed to extend the suspension until the court case was resolved.
The Education Ministry has agreed to provide teacher aide funding for the boy and meet his educational costs.
Mr Gall said the boy had a teacher aide, and other help to make sure his education continued.
Principal Youth Court Judge Andrew Becroft said that while he could only speak in general terms, such a situation was very unusual.
He said judges took such bail decisions very seriously, but in the end the court relied on information provided to it, especially from the police.
The boy will reappear in the Youth Court in October for a depositions hearing.
- NZPA with the Waikato Times
The female judge's decision to send an alleged rapist back to the same school as his victim is beyond comprehension and against protections contained in various human rights legislation. The judiciary is out of step with mainstream thinking.The poor family must be livid with a clearly dysfunctional justice system!
http://stuff.co.nz/4661611a11.html
Rape accused student back at school
Decision slammed by principals
Tuesday, 19 August 2008
A judge's decision to allow a Waikato schoolboy accused of raping a fellow student to return to the school lacked common sense, the secondary schools principals' association says.
Association president Peter Gall said the principal involved was angry about the unexpected bail ruling.
The Education Ministry is paying for a teacher aide at a cost of up to $20 an hour.
A ministry spokesman said the teacher-aide was paid from the ministry's $2 million Interim Response Fund.
Mr Gall told Radio New Zealand some common sense should have prevailed when making the decision, as it was unacceptable for an alleged rapist to be allowed back into the school that a victim attends.
The 14-year-old boy appeared in the Hamilton Youth Court this month charged with raping a 16-year-old girl who attended the same high school as him.
He was granted bail by Judge Denise Clark, allowing him to return to school.
The boy, school, accused and alleged victim cannot be named under Youth Court rules.
The alleged rapist turned up at school the day after the ruling.
Two female staff took the girl off site until the principal could manage the situation.
He then suspended the boy and the school board met and agreed to extend the suspension until the court case was resolved.
The Education Ministry has agreed to provide teacher aide funding for the boy and meet his educational costs.
Mr Gall said the boy had a teacher aide, and other help to make sure his education continued.
Principal Youth Court Judge Andrew Becroft said that while he could only speak in general terms, such a situation was very unusual.
He said judges took such bail decisions very seriously, but in the end the court relied on information provided to it, especially from the police.
The boy will reappear in the Youth Court in October for a depositions hearing.
- NZPA with the Waikato Times
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Friday, August 15, 2008
F4J protest on Harriet Harman's house - 2nd time in a month!
All we want is EQUALITY you corrupt lawyers, psychologists and judges !!!
Harriet Harman F4J Second Rooftop Protest
I wonder what Helen Clark's roof will be like? Do watch the sky as Batman will fly.
Abuse from Family Court employee leaves man 'gutted'
My experience with the Family Court has been the most traumatic event in my life. A Family Court psychologist John Watson and a lawyer Adrienne Edwards hounded my poor mother to death. The Court is a despicable place staffed by callous criminals.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/thepress/4653380a6530.html
Abuse from Family Court employee leaves man `gutted'
Phil Hamilton - The Press | Wednesday, 13 August
When a Christchurch man approached the Family Court for advice during his marriage break-up, he did not expect an earful of abuse.
Dale Truman said that after he had explained his problem, a Family Court employee laughed at him and told him: "I'm leaving in two weeks; I don't give a f... about your problems." Truman, of Heathcote, who is on an invalid's benefit, was appalled by the conversation on August 4.
"I'm going through the worst time of my life," he said.
"I ring up a court official to ask for advice and was ridiculed. How can I now have any faith in the Family Court?"
The official refused to identify himself and Truman made a complaint.
He was sent a letter of apology after the official was identified, but Truman believes that is not good enough.
"They said it was totally out of character, but I don't believe it is," he said. "I'm gutted by the whole experience."
A Ministry of Justice spokeswoman confirmed an apology was made to Truman.
"A conversation took place between a Christchurch Family Court staff member and a Family Court customer which became heated," she said.
"The customer subsequently received a letter from the Christchurch Family Court apologising on behalf of the staff member for speaking to the customer in an unacceptable manner."
Truman was told the man would be disciplined.
"The staff member confirms the conversation got out of control and he should not have spoken in the manner he did and he apologises," the spokeswoman said.
"We will deal with it as an internal matter."
http://www.stuff.co.nz/thepress/4653380a6530.html
Abuse from Family Court employee leaves man `gutted'
Phil Hamilton - The Press | Wednesday, 13 August
When a Christchurch man approached the Family Court for advice during his marriage break-up, he did not expect an earful of abuse.
Dale Truman said that after he had explained his problem, a Family Court employee laughed at him and told him: "I'm leaving in two weeks; I don't give a f... about your problems." Truman, of Heathcote, who is on an invalid's benefit, was appalled by the conversation on August 4.
"I'm going through the worst time of my life," he said.
"I ring up a court official to ask for advice and was ridiculed. How can I now have any faith in the Family Court?"
The official refused to identify himself and Truman made a complaint.
He was sent a letter of apology after the official was identified, but Truman believes that is not good enough.
"They said it was totally out of character, but I don't believe it is," he said. "I'm gutted by the whole experience."
A Ministry of Justice spokeswoman confirmed an apology was made to Truman.
"A conversation took place between a Christchurch Family Court staff member and a Family Court customer which became heated," she said.
"The customer subsequently received a letter from the Christchurch Family Court apologising on behalf of the staff member for speaking to the customer in an unacceptable manner."
Truman was told the man would be disciplined.
"The staff member confirms the conversation got out of control and he should not have spoken in the manner he did and he apologises," the spokeswoman said.
"We will deal with it as an internal matter."
Even By Trial Lawyer Standards, Edwards A Real Sleazebag
The good news: DNA testing has confirmed that John Edwards is not the father of Rielle Hunter's baby.The bad news: The father is Bill Clinton.Ha ha -- just kidding! It's almost impossible to get pregnant by having the type of sex Bill Clinton prefers.Also
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Time for Auusie fathers to have their day.
When will kiwi fathers have their day? Yeah right, no chance in a feminist - wimpish regime.
http://www.news. com.au/dailytele graph/story/ 0,22049,24175423 -5006009, 00.html
The Daily Telegraph
14 August 2008
Time for Aussie fathers to have their day
By Angela Saurine
Major decisions about parental leave and breastfeeding are being made without adequate research into the roles fathers play.
Fatherhood expert Richard Fletcher said policy makers were "shooting from the hip" and wasting taxpayers' money because not enough research has been done into how fathers fitted into national priorities.
Dr Fletcher, of the University of Newcastle's Family Action Centre, has
assembled senior researchers and advisors to address the problem.
"They're deciding on paternity leave, but nobody in Australia really knows what effect it may have if dads stay home with their children," he said.
"We need to bring fathers into the discussion, but the research isn't there.
"The chances are that we are using a lot of energy and taxpayers' money throwing money at problems without being able to address them effectively.
"Fathers are very important at deciding things.
"We know that fathers have an effect on literacy and breastfeeding rates, but usually the lactation consultants only talk to the mums."
Dr Fletcher said basic survey questions on parenting by research groups such as the Australian Bureau of Statistics and the National Institute of Family Studies needed to be reviewed because they are based on the mother's role and are assumed to be appropriate for fathers.
"We need to define clearly the notion of fatherhood and understand its relationship to motherhood," he said.
The Australian Research Alliance for Children and Youth has given the network a grant to do the research.
Dr Fletcher said the network aims to define fatherhood and examine the gaps in our knowledge of indigenous fathering and how cultural factors influence father-child relationships.
David Chalke, a social analyst for the cultural change monitor AustraliaSCAN, said research into the role fathers played was long overdue.
"The debate has been largely framed from the mothers' perspective, either from a traditional standpoint - that it's women's work - or from a feminist standpoint - that it's definitely women's work," he said.
"The whole area of male role models, fatherhood, male involvement in childrearing, has never been sufficiently investigated and needs attention."
Family Relationships Services Australia executive director Sam Page said it was important to understand the roles fathers played and to tailor services and support accordingly.
"Gender roles are changing and couples with children are having to navigate and negotiate that," she said.
---
Fathers who want to get involved can call Dr Richard Fletcher at the University of Newcastle on 02 4921 6401 or go to click here:
http://www.newcastl e.edu.au/ centre/fac/ efathers/ includingfathers /
http://www.news. com.au/dailytele graph/story/ 0,22049,24175423 -5006009, 00.html
The Daily Telegraph
14 August 2008
Time for Aussie fathers to have their day
By Angela Saurine
Major decisions about parental leave and breastfeeding are being made without adequate research into the roles fathers play.
Fatherhood expert Richard Fletcher said policy makers were "shooting from the hip" and wasting taxpayers' money because not enough research has been done into how fathers fitted into national priorities.
Dr Fletcher, of the University of Newcastle's Family Action Centre, has
assembled senior researchers and advisors to address the problem.
"They're deciding on paternity leave, but nobody in Australia really knows what effect it may have if dads stay home with their children," he said.
"We need to bring fathers into the discussion, but the research isn't there.
"The chances are that we are using a lot of energy and taxpayers' money throwing money at problems without being able to address them effectively.
"Fathers are very important at deciding things.
"We know that fathers have an effect on literacy and breastfeeding rates, but usually the lactation consultants only talk to the mums."
Dr Fletcher said basic survey questions on parenting by research groups such as the Australian Bureau of Statistics and the National Institute of Family Studies needed to be reviewed because they are based on the mother's role and are assumed to be appropriate for fathers.
"We need to define clearly the notion of fatherhood and understand its relationship to motherhood," he said.
The Australian Research Alliance for Children and Youth has given the network a grant to do the research.
Dr Fletcher said the network aims to define fatherhood and examine the gaps in our knowledge of indigenous fathering and how cultural factors influence father-child relationships.
David Chalke, a social analyst for the cultural change monitor AustraliaSCAN, said research into the role fathers played was long overdue.
"The debate has been largely framed from the mothers' perspective, either from a traditional standpoint - that it's women's work - or from a feminist standpoint - that it's definitely women's work," he said.
"The whole area of male role models, fatherhood, male involvement in childrearing, has never been sufficiently investigated and needs attention."
Family Relationships Services Australia executive director Sam Page said it was important to understand the roles fathers played and to tailor services and support accordingly.
"Gender roles are changing and couples with children are having to navigate and negotiate that," she said.
---
Fathers who want to get involved can call Dr Richard Fletcher at the University of Newcastle on 02 4921 6401 or go to click here:
http://www.newcastl e.edu.au/ centre/fac/ efathers/ includingfathers /
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Law Seminar on Child Abuse by Ian Kennedy
Dear colleagues,
The attachment "Protecting children after Bieganski - how much is enough?" is a 1993 Family Law Council of Australia seminar paper written by the current Chair of the Family Law Section of the Council, Ian Kennedy. It is also available for download from
http://www.dadsontheair.net/show/Family_Law_Seminar_on_Child_Abuse_by_Ian_Kennedy.rtf.
The members of the Law Council are appointed by the Prime Minister and the Cabinet.
Until now the paper has not been available on the internet. In a
letter to me, Kennedy says it was not intended to be read by the general public.
It shows that it has been known at the highest level of government
for years that the Family Court has been systemically abusing families and children.
The paper is of great interest, especially to anyone writing a
history of the Court or interested in bringing a class action against the Government.
Thanks to Gregory Lathome of the fathers4equality internet discussion group who kindly put the paper on file.
Please would you send the paper to anyone whom you think may be interested in reading it.
Thanks,
Michael Midgely
The attachment "Protecting children after Bieganski - how much is enough?" is a 1993 Family Law Council of Australia seminar paper written by the current Chair of the Family Law Section of the Council, Ian Kennedy. It is also available for download from
http://www.dadsontheair.net/show/Family_Law_Seminar_on_Child_Abuse_by_Ian_Kennedy.rtf.
The members of the Law Council are appointed by the Prime Minister and the Cabinet.
Until now the paper has not been available on the internet. In a
letter to me, Kennedy says it was not intended to be read by the general public.
It shows that it has been known at the highest level of government
for years that the Family Court has been systemically abusing families and children.
The paper is of great interest, especially to anyone writing a
history of the Court or interested in bringing a class action against the Government.
Thanks to Gregory Lathome of the fathers4equality internet discussion group who kindly put the paper on file.
Please would you send the paper to anyone whom you think may be interested in reading it.
Thanks,
Michael Midgely
Tuesday, August 12, 2008
'If you see this DVD,I love you'
http://www.theage.com.au/national/if-you-see-this-dvd-i-love-you-20080812-3u61.html
Adele Horin
August 13, 2008
A DYING man has been told by the Family Court that he may leave a "time capsule", consisting of a letter and DVD, for the 11-year-old daughter he has not seen for five years. The main purpose is to exonerate the girl for her father's death.
The girl has consistently expressed a wish that "her father was dead", the court was told. The man, who has terminal liver cancer, has as little as six to 12 months to live.
The court's family consultant has expressed concern for the girl's emotional health in light of the vehement remarks she has made about her father over years.
The girl's lawyer, Duncan Holmes, said: "While wishing your father dead might be a typical childish remark, in this case the little girl's wish is going to come true, quite quickly. In the circumstances, you have to do what you can."
The girl was three when her parents separated in 2000. The trial judge, Justice Le Poer Trench, said the mother was "permeated with hatred for the father" and was unwilling to foster the relationship between father and daughter.
In 2002, the court ordered that the father be allowed regular phone contact, and be able to send letters and gifts. The parents were ordered to attend counselling.
The girl last saw her father in December 2003. He applied in 2006 to see her every second weekend and half the school holidays. But, according to Mr Holmes, the case had "meandered through the court for 2½ years until it clicked into gear after his diagnosis of inoperable liver cancer".
Mr Holmes said the child had expressed hatred of her father from a young age. Yet the court records showed there was no abuse or serious violence.
Mr Holmes said the mother had not believed her ex-husband was dying, and it had been necessary to bring his doctor to court to give his diagnosis.
The court has said the father should provide the letter and DVD to Mr Holmes, who would check it to ensure it was suitable, containing, for example, nothing that disparaged the mother. The time capsule will be lodged with the court and the girl will be told how to access it.
Mr Holmes said the court had also made orders to attempt to set up a last meeting, but he held little hope it would proceed. He said it was rare for a court to go to such lengths to allow a father "to convey his love to his daughter".
Adele Horin
August 13, 2008
A DYING man has been told by the Family Court that he may leave a "time capsule", consisting of a letter and DVD, for the 11-year-old daughter he has not seen for five years. The main purpose is to exonerate the girl for her father's death.
The girl has consistently expressed a wish that "her father was dead", the court was told. The man, who has terminal liver cancer, has as little as six to 12 months to live.
The court's family consultant has expressed concern for the girl's emotional health in light of the vehement remarks she has made about her father over years.
The girl's lawyer, Duncan Holmes, said: "While wishing your father dead might be a typical childish remark, in this case the little girl's wish is going to come true, quite quickly. In the circumstances, you have to do what you can."
The girl was three when her parents separated in 2000. The trial judge, Justice Le Poer Trench, said the mother was "permeated with hatred for the father" and was unwilling to foster the relationship between father and daughter.
In 2002, the court ordered that the father be allowed regular phone contact, and be able to send letters and gifts. The parents were ordered to attend counselling.
The girl last saw her father in December 2003. He applied in 2006 to see her every second weekend and half the school holidays. But, according to Mr Holmes, the case had "meandered through the court for 2½ years until it clicked into gear after his diagnosis of inoperable liver cancer".
Mr Holmes said the child had expressed hatred of her father from a young age. Yet the court records showed there was no abuse or serious violence.
Mr Holmes said the mother had not believed her ex-husband was dying, and it had been necessary to bring his doctor to court to give his diagnosis.
The court has said the father should provide the letter and DVD to Mr Holmes, who would check it to ensure it was suitable, containing, for example, nothing that disparaged the mother. The time capsule will be lodged with the court and the girl will be told how to access it.
Mr Holmes said the court had also made orders to attempt to set up a last meeting, but he held little hope it would proceed. He said it was rare for a court to go to such lengths to allow a father "to convey his love to his daughter".
Monday, August 11, 2008
Parental Alienation and Hostile Aggressive Parenting
Parental Alienation and Hostile Aggressive Parenting are harmful to children's emotional and mental health.
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Dads On The Air
www.dadsontheair./465F50AD.jpg
DADS ON THE AIR
www.dadsontheair.net
Local Sydney Time: 10.30am to 12 midday Tuesday 12th August 2008
USA Eastern time: 8.30pm to 10pm Monday 11th August 2008
USA Pacific time: 5.30pm to 7pm Monday 11th August 2008
UK GMT time: 12.30am to 2am Monday night (Tuesday morning) 11th August 2008
2GLF FM 89.3 in Sydney
and ONLINE via live streaming at http://www.893fm.com.au
or in MP3 format at http://www.dadsontheair.net
SAVE THE MALES
With Special Guests:
* Kathleen Parker
* Peter Burns.
Author Kathleen Parker has created a furore around the world with her new book Save The Males. Don't miss this fascinating interview. So disenfranchised have men become, that only a woman can state the bleeding obvious, that the extreme sexism of gender feminism has done a great deal of harm to men, women, children, and society as a whole. For her pains she has attracted vicious criticism from the feminist pack. We'll also be talking with Peter Burns from New Zealand, who has been to court more than 200 times to right false allegations, proving that the family law system is just as appalling and just as discriminatory in NZ as it is in Australia.
But first up, Kathleen Parker.
She argues that feminism has neutered men and deprived them of their noble, protective role in society.
Writing in The Times of London she said:
"I know. Saving the males is an unlikely vocation for a 21st-century woman. Most men don't know they need saving; most women consider the idea absurd. When I tell my women friends that I want to save the males, they look at me as if noticing for the first time that I am insane. Then they say something like: "Are you out of your mind? This is still a male-dominated world. It's women who need saving. Screw the men!"
"Actually, that's a direct quote. The reality is that men already have been screwed - and not in the way they prefer. For the past 30 years or so, males have been under siege by a culture that too often embraces the notion that men are to blame for all of life's ills. Males as a group - not random men - are bad by virtue of their DNA.
"While women have been cast as victims, martyrs, mystics or saints, men have quietly retreated into their caves, the better to muffle emotions that fluctuate between hilarity (are these bitches crazy or what?) and rage (yes, they are and they've got our kids).
"In the process of fashioning a more female-friendly world, we have created a culture that is hostile towards males, contemptuous of masculinity and cynical about the delightful differences that make men irresistible, especially when something goes bump in the night.
"In popular culture, rare is the man portrayed as wise, strong and noble. In film and music, men are variously portrayed as dolts, bullies, brutes, deadbeats, rapists, sexual predators and wife-beaters. Even otherwise easy-going family men in sitcoms are invariably cast as, at best, bumbling, dim-witted fools. One would assume from most depictions that the smart, decent man who cares about his family and pats the neighbour's dog is the exception rather than the rule."
Columnist Amanda Patell wrote in the UK's Daily Mail:
"Every once in a while, a book not so much lands on your desk as lobs itself like a hand grenade, exploding preconceived wisdoms and shattering the bones of the status quo. Save The Males is such a book. It is the fiercest and most fearless defence of men, fatherhood and ultimately the family I have read in many years.
"American author Kathleen Parker's courageous thesis is that initially, through extreme feminism, then via its craven implementation into society, women have demonised men and trivialised their contribution, especially to family life.
"I say courageous because, in the eyes of many women and of the liberal establishment, suggesting men have had a rough deal is nothing short of heresy. Parker should be burnt at the stake, they cry. But isn't it ironic that only a woman could make such a plea for men?
"She argues: 'As long as men feel marginalised by the women whose favour and approval they seek, as long as they are alienated from their children and treated as criminals by family courts, as long as they are disrespected by a culture that no longer values masculinity tied to honour, as long as boys are bereft of strong fathers and our young men and women wage sexual war, then we risk cultural suicide.'
"It's enough to set a feminist's hair on end. Parker argues that in trying to make the world fairer for women, an adjustment most agree was vital, we have made it unfair for men. In our attempt to honour women, we have dishonoured men.
"By bending over backwards to make single mothers feel good about themselves, by diminishing the role of fathers, by elevating women as the superior parents, we have gone a considerable way to destroying one of the basic tenets of a successful society - family life.
"Apart from the effects of this seismic social shift on society, it is also grossly unfair. Can you imagine a world where men demanded women be more like them - dress like them, act like them, even look like them. Because that is effectively what our post-feminist society has done, but with the genders switched.
"The traditional male values, what Parker almost poetically calls 'masculinity tied to honour', are now seen as nothing more than a direct assault on women."
She goes on to say that feminists ridiculously believe that unless men are like women they insult them and threaten their existence: hence the feminisation of men, or as women so disingenuously describe it, getting in touch with their feminine side.
Too many men have been too utterly gutless or too craven in their desperate attempts to appease or please women to even support other men who have dared to speak these truths. Thus we see so few men supporting separated men, while a separated woman has an instant network of sympathisers often exploited to the hilt.
"Thus Hybrid Man was born," Patell writes. "An acceptable male model now is more likely to be of the David Beckham variety, wearing more make-up than the missus, hairless, perfumed, varnished, emasculated by his bossy wife and perhaps fond of wearing her undies.
"Good dads, loving husbands, supportive male role models, they're few and far between even in the fictional world of TV. But in the real world it wasn't enough that we demanded they be more like us, we superior human beings. We had to traduce men as well, treating them in almost all forms of popular culture as useless, ineffectual, even comic characters, or as violent, cheating and untrustworthy."
Joining the explosion of commentary around the world on this blockbuster book, Derek Lord in The Press and Journal wrote of Save The Males:
"The feminist movement has a new hate figure - someone who has inspired more loathing among its members than Hugh Hefner, Peter Stringfellow and all the other male chauvinist pigs you can think of - and, shock, horror, she's a woman.
"American author Kathleen Parker has written a book entitled Save the Males that challenges the foundations of 21st-century feminism. Bravely she contends that, initially, through extreme feminism and its adoption by western society, women have demonised men and trivialised their contribution, especially to family life.
"Her passionate defence of the male sex and their worth in the world at large has had many women across the pond foaming at the mouth. They regard Parker as a traitor to her gender. She dares to suggest that in trying to make the world fairer for women they have made it grossly unfair to men.
"She argues that by going out of our way to make single mothers feel good about themselves, by diminishing the role of fathers, by elevating women as the superior parents, we have gone a long way towards destroying one of the major building blocks of society - the nuclear family.
She laments the destruction of traditional male values that she describes as being "masculinity tied to honour", claiming that these values were regarded by feminists as a form of assault on the female gender. Thus there was a move towards Metrosexual Man, a softer, gentler creature who was encouraged to "get in touch with his feminine side".
"So Desperate Dan was out and David Beckham was in. Men shouldn't be afraid to dye their hair, wear perfume and use a little moisturiser to keep their complexion looking lovely.
"Parker also writes about the assault on the traditional male character in films and television. She calls this the Sitcom Man syndrome and asks us to try to think of a wholesome, reliable role model among the hundreds of screen dads we have seen over the past generation or two. Although she is obviously referring to the American output, she could just as easily be writing about TV shows and movies on this side of the water.
"Look at the types of men portrayed in any British soap or sitcom. They're either bumbling, feckless eejits like Coronation Street's Steve, the pencil-chewing taxi driver, or serial womanisers like the ginger minger in EastEnders.
"The state reinforces this low opinion of fathers on both sides of the Atlantic. Parker states: "The family courts effectively make fathers a slave to the state; his wages become state property; his time with his children is determined by a family court judge, and he faces jail if, for whatever reason, he fails to pay his child support on time."
Our Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and the Joe Ludwig, the minister responsible for the despised Child Support Agency in Australia, have been busily and utterly irresponsibly reinforcing these stereotypes with their hysterical and essential dishonest claims about separated fathers. While Rudd's swanning round Beijing basking in taxpayers dollars, how tough are many separated dads doing it back home in Australia tonight!!
One person who knows all about the brutality of the modern state is Peter Burns, one of the leading members of the fathers rights movement in NZ, he hosts a very successful website http://dad4justice.blogspot.com/ where he dispenses a wealth of information from around the world, to do with fatherhood issues.
He has been to court more then 200 times in order to fight false abuse allegations, which caused him to be restricted to just 14 supervised visits with his daughters over a 6 year period. That was until 12 months ago when his eldest daughter now 15 decided to come and live with him as she didn't believe all the bad things said about her father.
Sunday, August 10, 2008
Pathetic keystone cops to issue red cards to DV suspects
I do wonder why the police bother with something as pathetic as a red card, because present law demands that a domestic violent offender is immediately incarcerated and faces a life as a respondent client in a prejudged gender bias de Family Court. The politicized and feminized keystone cops would be better off giving them the local undertaker's card. The reality is that men are guilty the instant the female makes the allegations and the truth doesn't matter in the sordid world of a sisterhood influenced Justice system.
I wonder how many falsely accused fathers' funerals I attend this year?
RIP - Joe, Ralph,Wayne........
Police to issue red cards to domestic-violence suspects
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4649011a6530.html?
Domestic offenders are being given the red card by police in Christchurch.
More than 15,000 cards have been printed and are being given to alleged perpetrators in any domestic incident to which police are called.
Christchurch police family violence co-ordinator Pegeen Murphy said the cards were intended to give the person, usually a man, some options to get help.
"We get in early at the first domestic and give the guy a card," she said.
"It tells them there is help available. It's not about being punitive, but telling them it's OK to ask for help."
The cards, a joint effort by police and the Canterbury Abuse Intervention Project, have also been distributed around social agencies in the city.
Murphy said police had been handing out similar cards to victims for the past 10 years, and it was realised that nothing was provided for the alleged offender.
The first print run of 5000 went straight away, after they began handing out the wallet-sized cards last month, and the next run of 10,000 had almost been exhausted.
Murphy said the response had been good.
"No-one is out to get anyone. We just want them to make a change.
"The feedback from frontline officers is the guys are saying `good, something for me', which is good."
The six groups given as contacts for offenders will report back in three months on whether the cards have increased the calls they receive.
Christchurch police get called to a domestic violence incident every hour on average.
I wonder how many falsely accused fathers' funerals I attend this year?
RIP - Joe, Ralph,Wayne........
Police to issue red cards to domestic-violence suspects
http://www.stuff.co.nz/4649011a6530.html?
Domestic offenders are being given the red card by police in Christchurch.
More than 15,000 cards have been printed and are being given to alleged perpetrators in any domestic incident to which police are called.
Christchurch police family violence co-ordinator Pegeen Murphy said the cards were intended to give the person, usually a man, some options to get help.
"We get in early at the first domestic and give the guy a card," she said.
"It tells them there is help available. It's not about being punitive, but telling them it's OK to ask for help."
The cards, a joint effort by police and the Canterbury Abuse Intervention Project, have also been distributed around social agencies in the city.
Murphy said police had been handing out similar cards to victims for the past 10 years, and it was realised that nothing was provided for the alleged offender.
The first print run of 5000 went straight away, after they began handing out the wallet-sized cards last month, and the next run of 10,000 had almost been exhausted.
Murphy said the response had been good.
"No-one is out to get anyone. We just want them to make a change.
"The feedback from frontline officers is the guys are saying `good, something for me', which is good."
The six groups given as contacts for offenders will report back in three months on whether the cards have increased the calls they receive.
Christchurch police get called to a domestic violence incident every hour on average.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Study finds working women detrimental to family life
<<"A study published today by the University of Cambridge suggests that the tide of public opinion is turning against the view that women can "have it all". It finds that in Britain and the United States there is "mounting concern" that women who play a full and equal role in the workforce do so at the expense of family life".>>
Leading article: Excessively hard-working families
Wednesday, 6 August 2008
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/leading-articles/leading-article-excessively-hardworking-families-886113.html
A study published today by the University of Cambridge suggests that the tide of public opinion is turning against the view that women can "have it all". It finds that in Britain and the United States there is "mounting concern" that women who play a full and equal role in the workforce do so at the expense of family life.
In one respect, this finding is profoundly dispiriting. It indicates that, for all the efforts by women to achieve all-round equality, the old gender stereotypes never really went away. There is one rule for men – who are expected to be the breadwinners – and another for women, who are expected to find fulfilment in the home. When the perception is that family life has declined, it is they – not the men – who take the rap and are expected to adjust their ambitions.
In other respects, however, this study reacquaints us with an awkward truth, which has for too long been obscured. The specific proposition it examines is that family life suffers "if a woman works". Rewrite this to say that family life suffers "if both parents, or a single parent, go out to work full time", and you have a thesis that would probably be less contentious.
The British job market is more flexible than many in providing part-time jobs that make it easier for employees to combine work and bringing up children – even if these jobs invariably carry inferior pay and conditions. This Government has also tried, not always successfully, to ensure that work pays more than benefits.
In its desire to get as many people as possible into work, however, it effectively penalises parents – usually, but not always, mothers – who stay at home. Tax breaks are conditional on working, and they attach to the individual not the household. Staying at home has become the preserve of benefit-recipients – single mothers before their children turn 16 – and the better-off. Elsewhere, two incomes have become the norm.
Ministers insist that they want to help "hard-working families". Their version of family-friendly policies, though, is more nurseries – whose inflexible hours and inadequate standards discourage take-up – and so-called "wraparound childcare" in the form of breakfast and after-school clubs. For some children, the choice is now between a school day that can last from 7.30am to 8.30pm and long hours hanging out on the street or in an empty house.
It has long been taboo to ask whether the unhappiness of British children compared with their Continental counterparts, and the relatively high incidence of anti-social behaviour here, might somehow be related to the long hours worked by British parents. But the question should be asked – and answered. If the Cambridge study is correct in finding widespread dissatisfaction with the quality of family life – and we suspect it is – it may not be working women who are to blame, so much as the primacy our ministers have given to paid work.
Leading article: Excessively hard-working families
Wednesday, 6 August 2008
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/leading-articles/leading-article-excessively-hardworking-families-886113.html
A study published today by the University of Cambridge suggests that the tide of public opinion is turning against the view that women can "have it all". It finds that in Britain and the United States there is "mounting concern" that women who play a full and equal role in the workforce do so at the expense of family life.
In one respect, this finding is profoundly dispiriting. It indicates that, for all the efforts by women to achieve all-round equality, the old gender stereotypes never really went away. There is one rule for men – who are expected to be the breadwinners – and another for women, who are expected to find fulfilment in the home. When the perception is that family life has declined, it is they – not the men – who take the rap and are expected to adjust their ambitions.
In other respects, however, this study reacquaints us with an awkward truth, which has for too long been obscured. The specific proposition it examines is that family life suffers "if a woman works". Rewrite this to say that family life suffers "if both parents, or a single parent, go out to work full time", and you have a thesis that would probably be less contentious.
The British job market is more flexible than many in providing part-time jobs that make it easier for employees to combine work and bringing up children – even if these jobs invariably carry inferior pay and conditions. This Government has also tried, not always successfully, to ensure that work pays more than benefits.
In its desire to get as many people as possible into work, however, it effectively penalises parents – usually, but not always, mothers – who stay at home. Tax breaks are conditional on working, and they attach to the individual not the household. Staying at home has become the preserve of benefit-recipients – single mothers before their children turn 16 – and the better-off. Elsewhere, two incomes have become the norm.
Ministers insist that they want to help "hard-working families". Their version of family-friendly policies, though, is more nurseries – whose inflexible hours and inadequate standards discourage take-up – and so-called "wraparound childcare" in the form of breakfast and after-school clubs. For some children, the choice is now between a school day that can last from 7.30am to 8.30pm and long hours hanging out on the street or in an empty house.
It has long been taboo to ask whether the unhappiness of British children compared with their Continental counterparts, and the relatively high incidence of anti-social behaviour here, might somehow be related to the long hours worked by British parents. But the question should be asked – and answered. If the Cambridge study is correct in finding widespread dissatisfaction with the quality of family life – and we suspect it is – it may not be working women who are to blame, so much as the primacy our ministers have given to paid work.
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
One Brave Judge Resists Feminist Agenda
Feminists are in an uproar about Judge Schultz's decision and would like the New Jersey Supreme Court to reverse it. Feminists want courts to uphold a woman's right to kick a man out of his home based on a woman's unverified accusations.
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Monday, August 4, 2008
Depressed, repressed, objectified: are men the new women?
They're less fertile, more weight-obsessed and 'non-essential to parenting'. No wonder men are confused about modern masculinity. Elizabeth Day reports
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Dads Flee to NZ
http://www.news. com.au/heraldsun /
Herald Sun
31 July 2008
Deadbeats fleeing to New Zealand to dodge child maintenance
By Sue Dunlevy
Thousands of deadbeat dads are fleeing to New Zealand to escape paying child maintenance.
More than 20,000 Australian parents have escaped overseas to avoid paying child support, with figures revealing NZ is a favourite haven.
These parents owe around $90 million in unpaid child support, but the Australian Government is about to crack down on them.
More than 7600 people have crossed the Tasman to avoid their financial responsibility to their kids.
After NZ, the next most popular destination is Britain where there are 3276 Australians who owe more than $22 million in child support.
Another 2231 Australians living in the US owe $14 million in child support.
Human Services Minister Senator Joe Ludwig
said parents who avoided financial obligations to their children would be tracked down.
"Separated parents living overseas now owe around $90 million in payments to their kids back in Australia," Senator Ludwig said.
"Wherever separated parents live, it's unacceptable for them to shirk their child support obligations. "
A meeting in Hobart yesterday decided to make greater use of orders that banned parents with a child support debt from leaving the country.
The Child Support Agency <http://www.csa. gov.au/> will extend its computer data matching reach to cover the Department of Immigration as well as the Tax Office
The agency will also conduct data matching with child support organisations overseas, especially in NZ.
Australians do not need a visa to enter the country.
The NZ child support agency already helps track down Australian parents who have unpaid child support obligations.
They catch around 63 per cent of the parents they are notified about.
Senator Ludwig said international debt was the fastest growing portion of the nation's unpaid child support.
Overseas debt rose by 13 per cent in 2006-07 compared the growth in domestic debt of just 1 per cent.
Herald Sun
31 July 2008
Deadbeats fleeing to New Zealand to dodge child maintenance
By Sue Dunlevy
Thousands of deadbeat dads are fleeing to New Zealand to escape paying child maintenance.
More than 20,000 Australian parents have escaped overseas to avoid paying child support, with figures revealing NZ is a favourite haven.
These parents owe around $90 million in unpaid child support, but the Australian Government is about to crack down on them.
More than 7600 people have crossed the Tasman to avoid their financial responsibility to their kids.
After NZ, the next most popular destination is Britain where there are 3276 Australians who owe more than $22 million in child support.
Another 2231 Australians living in the US owe $14 million in child support.
Human Services Minister Senator Joe Ludwig
said parents who avoided financial obligations to their children would be tracked down.
"Separated parents living overseas now owe around $90 million in payments to their kids back in Australia," Senator Ludwig said.
"Wherever separated parents live, it's unacceptable for them to shirk their child support obligations. "
A meeting in Hobart yesterday decided to make greater use of orders that banned parents with a child support debt from leaving the country.
The Child Support Agency <http://www.csa. gov.au/> will extend its computer data matching reach to cover the Department of Immigration as well as the Tax Office
The agency will also conduct data matching with child support organisations overseas, especially in NZ.
Australians do not need a visa to enter the country.
The NZ child support agency already helps track down Australian parents who have unpaid child support obligations.
They catch around 63 per cent of the parents they are notified about.
Senator Ludwig said international debt was the fastest growing portion of the nation's unpaid child support.
Overseas debt rose by 13 per cent in 2006-07 compared the growth in domestic debt of just 1 per cent.
Saturday, August 2, 2008
Unarmed woman Tasered twice in wet bathroom
The use of high-voltage stun guns is again in the spotlight, after an unarmed woman was shot twice with a Taser gun within the space of just a few seconds.The woman broke into a Titirangi home and barricaded herself in a bathroom on Tuesday evening, and although three officers were in attendance…
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Biological or Social Father
Biological fathers not necessarily the best, social dads parent well too from PhysOrg.com
A large number of U.S. children live or will live with a "social father," a man who is married to or cohabiting with the child's mother, but is not the biological father. A new study in the Journal of Marriage and Family examined differences in the parenting practices of four groups of fathers according to whether they were biologically related to a child and whether they were married to the child's mother. Researchers found that married social fathers exhibited equivalent or higher quality parenting behaviors than married and cohabiting biological fathers.
[...]
Inside Catholic book review of Baskerville's lastest book
Book review of "Taken into Custody: The War against Fatherhood, Marriage, and the Family",
Stephen Baskerville, Cumberland House, 352 pages, $24.95
http://insidecatholic.com/Joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4196&Itemid=48
Inside Catholic
31 July 2008
My comment (no.39) on the review;
As a victim of false allegations made in the Family Court in 2001 two months before the twin towers disaster I can assure you it has been a heartwrenching experience that I would not wish on my worse enemy.
Firstly, the authorities take your children and imprison you. A family man one day, then like a lighting strike celled up like a caged animal the next. Then they poison and brain wash the children, tainting their vulnerable tiny wee minds, so they can learn to hate dad during the years of forced alienation. The state lawyers, counsellors and psychologists feed from all the misery like leeches at a blood bank. These unscrupulous professional scum enjoy false allegations in the adversarial Family Court litigation system, which reeks of unlawful gender discrimination. The gender bias system breeds resentment and certainly tests my faith. The blatant injustice orchestrated by callous state agencies that shamefully claim to act in the best interests of the child is a sad indictment on all western societies.
Stephen Baskerville, Cumberland House, 352 pages, $24.95
http://insidecatholic.com/Joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4196&Itemid=48
Inside Catholic
31 July 2008
My comment (no.39) on the review;
As a victim of false allegations made in the Family Court in 2001 two months before the twin towers disaster I can assure you it has been a heartwrenching experience that I would not wish on my worse enemy.
Firstly, the authorities take your children and imprison you. A family man one day, then like a lighting strike celled up like a caged animal the next. Then they poison and brain wash the children, tainting their vulnerable tiny wee minds, so they can learn to hate dad during the years of forced alienation. The state lawyers, counsellors and psychologists feed from all the misery like leeches at a blood bank. These unscrupulous professional scum enjoy false allegations in the adversarial Family Court litigation system, which reeks of unlawful gender discrimination. The gender bias system breeds resentment and certainly tests my faith. The blatant injustice orchestrated by callous state agencies that shamefully claim to act in the best interests of the child is a sad indictment on all western societies.
Violence takes over from shoplifting as the crime women most often commit
Violence takes over from shoplifting as the crime women most often commit
31 July 2008
Richard Ford, Home Correspondent
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article4432458.ece
Violence has for the first time overtaken shoplifting as the most common crime by women, according to annual statistics released yesterday.
During 2006-07 the number of women detained for violent offences reached 87,000 an increase of 11 per cent on the previous year. The number arrested for theft and handling stolen goods was 80,000, down 6,400 on the previous year.
The number of women held for robbery also rose, from 4,100 in 2005-06, to 4,400 in 2006-07, appearing to reflect a growing trend of violence by women.
An increase in young girls and women being arrested for violent attacks occurred in every age group, from 10-17, 18-20 and 21 and over. Overall, the number of women arrested for violent offences has more than doubled in eight years.
The figures, which were released by the Ministry of Justice, show that the largest increase in arrests of both men and women was in the category of violence against the person.
The emergence of a “ladette” culture, linked to excessive alcohol consumption, has been blamed for violence by women. One criminologist said yesterday: “These figures suggest something significant is happening.”
The increase could, however, be a result of changing police practices, in particular the need to meet a government target in 2007-08 of securing convictions for more than 1.2 million offences. This has been achieved. Criminologists and some officers have said that the target has encouraged police to focus on “easy pickings” resulting from disorder on the streets.
There has been a steady rise in the number of women arrested for violence against the person since the turn of the century, when the figure stood at 37,100. This year the Youth Justice Board said that violent attacks by girls aged between 10 and 17 had risen by 50 per cent over the past three years.
The board has ordered a study into offending by girls in this age category. Its initial findings suggest that the rise is linked to an involvement of the police in incidents that in the past would have been dealt with in schools or by other community figures of authority.
31 July 2008
Richard Ford, Home Correspondent
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article4432458.ece
Violence has for the first time overtaken shoplifting as the most common crime by women, according to annual statistics released yesterday.
During 2006-07 the number of women detained for violent offences reached 87,000 an increase of 11 per cent on the previous year. The number arrested for theft and handling stolen goods was 80,000, down 6,400 on the previous year.
The number of women held for robbery also rose, from 4,100 in 2005-06, to 4,400 in 2006-07, appearing to reflect a growing trend of violence by women.
An increase in young girls and women being arrested for violent attacks occurred in every age group, from 10-17, 18-20 and 21 and over. Overall, the number of women arrested for violent offences has more than doubled in eight years.
The figures, which were released by the Ministry of Justice, show that the largest increase in arrests of both men and women was in the category of violence against the person.
The emergence of a “ladette” culture, linked to excessive alcohol consumption, has been blamed for violence by women. One criminologist said yesterday: “These figures suggest something significant is happening.”
The increase could, however, be a result of changing police practices, in particular the need to meet a government target in 2007-08 of securing convictions for more than 1.2 million offences. This has been achieved. Criminologists and some officers have said that the target has encouraged police to focus on “easy pickings” resulting from disorder on the streets.
There has been a steady rise in the number of women arrested for violence against the person since the turn of the century, when the figure stood at 37,100. This year the Youth Justice Board said that violent attacks by girls aged between 10 and 17 had risen by 50 per cent over the past three years.
The board has ordered a study into offending by girls in this age category. Its initial findings suggest that the rise is linked to an involvement of the police in incidents that in the past would have been dealt with in schools or by other community figures of authority.
Kathleen upsets the feminazis' with the cold steel of truth
Quote: American author Kathleen Parker has written a book entitled Save the Males that challenges the foundations of 21st-century feminism. Bravely she contends that, initially, through extreme feminism and its adoption by western society, women have demonised men and trivialised their contribution, especially to family life. Her passionate defence of the male sex and their worth in the world at large has had many women across the pond foaming at the mouth. They regard Parker as a traitor to her gender. She dares to suggest that in trying to make the world fairer for women they have made it grossly unfair to men.
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/766592?UserKey=0
The Press and Journal
1 August 2008
Wake-up call aims to restore men to their rightful role
By Derek Lord
The feminist movement has a new hate figure someone who has inspired more loathing among its members than Hugh Hefner, Peter Stringfellow and all the other male chauvinist pigs you can think of and, shock, horror, she’s a woman.
American author Kathleen Parker has written a book entitled Save the Males that challenges the foundations of 21st-century feminism. Bravely she contends that, initially, through extreme feminism and its adoption by western society, women have demonised men and trivialised their contribution, especially to family life.
Her passionate defence of the male sex and their worth in the world at large has had many women across the pond foaming at the mouth. They regard Parker as a traitor to her gender. She dares to suggest that in trying to make the world fairer for women they have made it grossly unfair to men.
She argues that by going out of our way to make single mothers feel good about themselves, by diminishing the role of fathers, by elevating women as the superior parents, we have gone a long way towards destroying one of the major building blocks of society the nuclear family.
She laments the destruction of traditional male values that she describes as being “masculinity tied to honour”, claiming that these values were regarded by feminists as a form of assault on the female gender. Thus there was a move towards Metrosexual Man, a softer, gentler creature who was encouraged to “get in touch with his feminine side”.
So Desperate Dan was out and David Beckham was in. Men shouldn’t be afraid to dye their hair, wear perfume and use a little moisturiser to keep their complexion looking lovely.
Parker also writes about the assault on the traditional male character in films and television. She calls this the Sitcom Man syndrome and asks us to try to think of a wholesome, reliable role model among the hundreds of screen dads we have seen over the past generation or two. Although she is obviously referring to the American output, she could just as easily be writing about TV shows and movies on this side of the water.
Look at the types of men portrayed in any British soap or sitcom. They’re either bumbling, feckless eejits like Coronation Street’s Steve, the pencil-chewing taxi driver, or serial womanisers like the ginger minger in EastEnders.
The state reinforces this low opinion of fathers on both sides of the Atlantic. Parker states: “The family courts effectively make fathers a slave to the state; his wages become state property; his time with his children is determined by a family court judge, and he faces jail if, for whatever reason, he fails to pay his child support on time.”
I know of one man, a hard-working dentist and devoted father and husband, who suddenly found himself homeless after 20 years of marriage when his wife declared that she was bored with him. The courts awarded her half the value of the family home and a large percentage of her husband’s salary.
How fair is that?
Parker contends that the low opinion of fathers springs from the explosion and normalisation of single motherhood.
“By elevating single motherhood from an unfortunate consequence of poor planning to a sophisticated act of self-fulfilment, we’ve helped to fashion a world in which fathers are not just scarce, but in which men are superfluous,” she says.
Later, she states: “At the same time that men have been ridiculed in the public sphere, the importance of fatherhood has been diminished, along with other traditionally male roles of father, protector and provider, which are incredibly viewed as regressive manifestations of an outmoded patriarchy.”
Far from joining in with the sisterhood’s blanket condemnation of the male of the species, the American author waxes lyrically about the innate qualities of many men. When she looks at her own father and fathers around her, she concludes that being a father is, in fact, the manliest thing a man can do. She says it encourages responsibility, sacrifice and the ability to put others before yourself all essential qualities to a functioning society and to a happy home.
“When we take away a man’s central purpose in life and marginalise him from society’s most important institution (the family), we strip him of his manhood.
“Growing up without a father is the most reliable indicator of poverty and all the familiar social pathologies affecting children, including drug abuse, truancy, delinquency and sexual promiscuity. Yet some feminists and other progressives still insist that men are non-essential.”
Of course, in Scotland’s dependency culture, the state has taken the place of the father when it comes to providing for the single-parent family in many instances. Indeed, there are thousands of single-parent families who would be considerably worse off financially if the parents had married.
They would probably have much more difficulty finding a council house and, if and when they found one, they would not get nearly as much in the way of state handouts as the mother would have received as a single parent.
It would be a tragedy if this sort of financial consideration continued to dominate the attitude of so many young Scots women towards marriage and family life.
As for the country’s young men, unless things change drastically, the whole concept of fatherhood will go the way of the dodo and Parker’s notion of “masculinity tied to honour” will be as outmoded as the chivalry of King Arthur and his knights of the round table. These young men need the example of a father or grandfather to let them know what their role in life should be what they should aspire to but those examples are becoming increasingly thin on the ground.
Kathleen Parker’s courageous book is a wake-up call reminding us of the importance of men in family life. She says that we ignore that call at our peril and society as we know it will perish. She concludes: “In the coming years, we will need men who are not confused about their responsibilities to family and country. We need boys who have acquired the virtues of honour, courage, valour and loyalty. We need women willing to let men be men and boys be boys.”
I couldn’t have put it better myself and I’m glad I didn’t try, or I’d have to go into hiding for the next 20 years for fear of being tracked down and disembowelled by the sisterhood’s enforcers.
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/766592?UserKey=0
The Press and Journal
1 August 2008
Wake-up call aims to restore men to their rightful role
By Derek Lord
The feminist movement has a new hate figure someone who has inspired more loathing among its members than Hugh Hefner, Peter Stringfellow and all the other male chauvinist pigs you can think of and, shock, horror, she’s a woman.
American author Kathleen Parker has written a book entitled Save the Males that challenges the foundations of 21st-century feminism. Bravely she contends that, initially, through extreme feminism and its adoption by western society, women have demonised men and trivialised their contribution, especially to family life.
Her passionate defence of the male sex and their worth in the world at large has had many women across the pond foaming at the mouth. They regard Parker as a traitor to her gender. She dares to suggest that in trying to make the world fairer for women they have made it grossly unfair to men.
She argues that by going out of our way to make single mothers feel good about themselves, by diminishing the role of fathers, by elevating women as the superior parents, we have gone a long way towards destroying one of the major building blocks of society the nuclear family.
She laments the destruction of traditional male values that she describes as being “masculinity tied to honour”, claiming that these values were regarded by feminists as a form of assault on the female gender. Thus there was a move towards Metrosexual Man, a softer, gentler creature who was encouraged to “get in touch with his feminine side”.
So Desperate Dan was out and David Beckham was in. Men shouldn’t be afraid to dye their hair, wear perfume and use a little moisturiser to keep their complexion looking lovely.
Parker also writes about the assault on the traditional male character in films and television. She calls this the Sitcom Man syndrome and asks us to try to think of a wholesome, reliable role model among the hundreds of screen dads we have seen over the past generation or two. Although she is obviously referring to the American output, she could just as easily be writing about TV shows and movies on this side of the water.
Look at the types of men portrayed in any British soap or sitcom. They’re either bumbling, feckless eejits like Coronation Street’s Steve, the pencil-chewing taxi driver, or serial womanisers like the ginger minger in EastEnders.
The state reinforces this low opinion of fathers on both sides of the Atlantic. Parker states: “The family courts effectively make fathers a slave to the state; his wages become state property; his time with his children is determined by a family court judge, and he faces jail if, for whatever reason, he fails to pay his child support on time.”
I know of one man, a hard-working dentist and devoted father and husband, who suddenly found himself homeless after 20 years of marriage when his wife declared that she was bored with him. The courts awarded her half the value of the family home and a large percentage of her husband’s salary.
How fair is that?
Parker contends that the low opinion of fathers springs from the explosion and normalisation of single motherhood.
“By elevating single motherhood from an unfortunate consequence of poor planning to a sophisticated act of self-fulfilment, we’ve helped to fashion a world in which fathers are not just scarce, but in which men are superfluous,” she says.
Later, she states: “At the same time that men have been ridiculed in the public sphere, the importance of fatherhood has been diminished, along with other traditionally male roles of father, protector and provider, which are incredibly viewed as regressive manifestations of an outmoded patriarchy.”
Far from joining in with the sisterhood’s blanket condemnation of the male of the species, the American author waxes lyrically about the innate qualities of many men. When she looks at her own father and fathers around her, she concludes that being a father is, in fact, the manliest thing a man can do. She says it encourages responsibility, sacrifice and the ability to put others before yourself all essential qualities to a functioning society and to a happy home.
“When we take away a man’s central purpose in life and marginalise him from society’s most important institution (the family), we strip him of his manhood.
“Growing up without a father is the most reliable indicator of poverty and all the familiar social pathologies affecting children, including drug abuse, truancy, delinquency and sexual promiscuity. Yet some feminists and other progressives still insist that men are non-essential.”
Of course, in Scotland’s dependency culture, the state has taken the place of the father when it comes to providing for the single-parent family in many instances. Indeed, there are thousands of single-parent families who would be considerably worse off financially if the parents had married.
They would probably have much more difficulty finding a council house and, if and when they found one, they would not get nearly as much in the way of state handouts as the mother would have received as a single parent.
It would be a tragedy if this sort of financial consideration continued to dominate the attitude of so many young Scots women towards marriage and family life.
As for the country’s young men, unless things change drastically, the whole concept of fatherhood will go the way of the dodo and Parker’s notion of “masculinity tied to honour” will be as outmoded as the chivalry of King Arthur and his knights of the round table. These young men need the example of a father or grandfather to let them know what their role in life should be what they should aspire to but those examples are becoming increasingly thin on the ground.
Kathleen Parker’s courageous book is a wake-up call reminding us of the importance of men in family life. She says that we ignore that call at our peril and society as we know it will perish. She concludes: “In the coming years, we will need men who are not confused about their responsibilities to family and country. We need boys who have acquired the virtues of honour, courage, valour and loyalty. We need women willing to let men be men and boys be boys.”
I couldn’t have put it better myself and I’m glad I didn’t try, or I’d have to go into hiding for the next 20 years for fear of being tracked down and disembowelled by the sisterhood’s enforcers.
Friday, August 1, 2008
Men tell why they are Key to National
For years kiwi men have been bombarded and demonized by a Helen Clark gender bias government. She is the trigger and reason for the mass exodus across the ditch of the kiwi male . The personal that are employed by this radical feminist and homosexual Labour government work within the static of unlawful gender discrimination, which their mode of operation encourages. Tragically good men are driven off shore by the legalized child support extortion racket, false allegations of domestic violence as the vindictive and vengeful government agencies (that claim to act in the best interests of the child) overwhelm them with unfair obstacles.The Crime Act doesn't list a female assaults male charge? How odd !! How hard are these fathers to be driven in a country that does not adhere to principles that protect the best interests of the child? Male suicides give the answer. So that's in the best interests of the child?
Miss Clark is a childless leader, who enjoys the spoils of absolute power and the privileged leader position to endorse and implement her political ideologies.This is detrimental to a balanced and fair society. For example, how can balance be achieved when the head researcher at the Families Commission (Rowena Cave) is a radical feminist? Surely this is not in the best interests of acceptable community standards?
Men have genuine grievances resulting from the stranglehold the radical feminists' have inflicted on a hacked off struggling society . I doubt the dream boat National Party have the balls to address the widespread gender imbalance and inequality.Community spirits are hitting rock bottom and healthy male role models are as scarce as a honest politician but who cares?
The present shady behind closed doors H2 velvet underground policy is a shameful political atmosphere where corruption and lies flourish, and where a Ministry of Men's Affairs is a distant delusion !
It is little wonder the system breeds resentment.
New Zealand is a total utter disgrace and the Prime Minister is at fault.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10524883
Miss Clark is a childless leader, who enjoys the spoils of absolute power and the privileged leader position to endorse and implement her political ideologies.This is detrimental to a balanced and fair society. For example, how can balance be achieved when the head researcher at the Families Commission (Rowena Cave) is a radical feminist? Surely this is not in the best interests of acceptable community standards?
Men have genuine grievances resulting from the stranglehold the radical feminists' have inflicted on a hacked off struggling society . I doubt the dream boat National Party have the balls to address the widespread gender imbalance and inequality.Community spirits are hitting rock bottom and healthy male role models are as scarce as a honest politician but who cares?
The present shady behind closed doors H2 velvet underground policy is a shameful political atmosphere where corruption and lies flourish, and where a Ministry of Men's Affairs is a distant delusion !
It is little wonder the system breeds resentment.
New Zealand is a total utter disgrace and the Prime Minister is at fault.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10524883
Men rarely get fair shot in domestic violence cases
The system breeds resentment, however praise the court for protecting male rights.
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)