I have met and heard the tragic stories of many parents. PA is a function, by and large, of a custodial ex-partner, although some alienation can start while the couple is still together.

This blog is a story of experiences and observations of dysfunctional Family Law (FLAW), an arena pitting parent against parent, with children as the prize. Due to the gender bias in Family Law, that I have observed, this Blog has evolved from a focus solely on PA to one of the broader Family/Children's Rights area and the impact of Feminist mythology on Canadian Jurisprudence and the Divorce Industry.

Thursday, July 23, 2009

In OZ ~ Shared parent laws for rethink

This looks and sounds ominous. If they equate Shared Parenting to the act of murder quoted someone hasn't got a clear perspective. They most assuredly have to look at the most recent OZ information on the abuse of children on an ongoing basis by single mothers, the very people wanting to end shared parenting. The abuse and killing of children by single mums is well documented in the USA far above the same stats for dads yet law makers just can't equate the negative social outcomes for children. Socialists often don't respond well to dad related issues so it currently doesn't look good. Overington must be tickled pinkiliciously. MJM Caroline Overington | July 24, 2009

Article from: The Australian

FEDERAL Attorney-General Robert McClelland has pledged to make changes to the Howard government's contentious shared parenting laws - and to the entire family law system - to ensure the safety of children after divorce.

In a speech due to be delivered today, Mr McClelland will cite the case of Darcey Freeman, the little girl thrown from Melbourne's West Gate Bridge, allegedly by her father during a custody dispute, as a reason for the review.

Darcey's father, Arthur Freeman, faces a murder charge for allegedly dropping his daughter over the bridge in January, a day after coming to an agreement with his ex-wife about custody of their three children.

Members of Darcey's family have previously said they tried to warn authorities about their fears for the safety of the Freeman children, saying the judicial system failed them.

Mr McClelland has appointed former Family Court judge Richard Chisholm to conduct the review of the family law system, particularly in the context of family violence.

His decision to intervene comes after an avalanche of complaints about the way the family law system is working, particularly in relation to the custody of children.

The Australian understands several prominent women from Kevin Rudd's front bench, including Minister for the Status of Women Tanya Plibersek and Health Minister Nicola Roxon, are concerned about the way family law is operating.

There are concerns children are being forced into damaging shared parenting arrangements because of shared parenting laws introduced by the Howard government in 2006. The laws require the Family Court to presume the best interests of a child are served by a meaningful relationship with both parents after divorce.

Men's groups say the laws are working as they should but women's groups say the laws force mothers into ongoing relationships with violent ex-partners.

An advance copy of Mr McClelland's speech, provided to The Australian, says: "There will always be differing perspectives about how our family law system should function. That's especially true for those individuals and groups directly affected by the laws and processes."

But he says the Rudd government's priority is the safety and wellbeing of children, which may not always mean equal, or a lot of, time with both parents.

Mr McClelland's review is in addition to a review of the shared parenting laws that was built into the legislation when it was passed in 2006. That review, by the Australian Institute of Family Studies, is due to report in December. Mr McClelland says he will "await the findings of the AIFS report before proposing legislative change to the shared parenting law".

But, he said, "if it becomes clear that current laws and practices may jeopardise the safety of families and children, we must work together to address these shortcomings".

"It is paramount that our family law system is capable of identifying and responding to violence."



CAconservative said...


Mike, I was following this thread and posted this a.m.

The Marin Center for Judicial Excellence is just another attempt by mad moms who lost their children because of false claims of child abuse to change the court systems to allow lying to continue to be accepted in a court of law.

Their "Family Court Crisis" documentary is just another attempt to fool the public into believing that mentally ill moms should have their children back and they should be taken off supervised visitation. Parental Alienation is real, and so is the "Syndrome."

Meera Fox, and all their ilk should face up to the fact they have been exposed many times both in Sacramento and by other "family" friendly groups as liars.



Children's Rights says:

The CJE documentary "Family Court Crisis" had a "prequel" that was exposed. "Breaking the Silence" was a sham.

Who knows what their Assemblyman or California State Senator they will dupe with their anti-male bias?

"Both Meera Fox and Dominique Lasseur are apparently aware they are fabricating yet another false documentary, and that collecting supportive anecdotal footage might not be an easy task. The MRRC website contains an apparent confession [emphasis added]:“Dominique is passionately interested in continuing his work in this area, as he can see how raising the public's consciousness about this problem and indeed, creating a public outcry about it, will be key to achieving the reforms we seek in Family Court …. I know you will all agree that this is a project that would be worth its weight in gold if he [Lasseur] can pull it off. He envisions marketing a series on Family Court failure to Court TV, Frontline, America Undercover, or all three, if we can get him enough information, footage and support. The reason he met with me about this project is because I know all of you and he was hoping I could rally you troops to help him with his project.”

The phrase "worth its weight in gold" likely reveals Meera Fox’s end-goal as a feminist attorney in steering courts to liquidate fatherhood, seize family assets, and children. Is there any other pecuniary benefit she could possibly be chasing? We think not. "Pulling it off" is a term commonly used in planning bank robberies, political subterfuge, and other illegitimate activities. The statement that Lasseur is actively pursing the same target, and driving the execution of it all, suggests that he is on the same page.

We have archived this web page for future reference, since it will probably be deleted by the time you read this article."

I suspect BKLaw is really Barbara Kaufman. I attended your November 2007 Family Court Crisis. What a lot of crap! I made sure the Marin Judiciary had a copy of David Usher's article exposing the "Breaking the Silence" nonsense and the follow-up "Family Court Crisis." The Rogers woman might have gotten away with Parental Kidnapping by taking her kid to South Carolina, but just like O.J., the family court judge saw better and she will probably be on supervised visitation forever. Too bad.


Michael J. Murphy said...

A most excellent summary of some of the history of the issues. The lawyer is indeed Barbara Kaufman and should know better than to start an argument on a news paper website. Lawyers never seem to be able to win and my experience shows they just dig themselves in deeper. Kaufman is typical of the victim feminist lawyer who wants it both ways. She brags about representing men but with her stance its hard to fathom any man getting proper representation.

What never ceases to amaze me is many of these things have been debunked but they still grasp at peddling it and there are still gullible schmucks like rep. Jim Beall out there quite prepared to "buy" the product hook, line and sinker.

Jim Bailey - JimBWarrior - HandsOnEqualParent said...

Thanks Mike - Up on Equal Parenting @ Ration Shed with your wise assessement - Onward - Jim

Michael J. Murphy said...

Hi Jim. Those of us working hard on getting Shared/Equal Parenting in our respective countries or political jurisdictions within countries have a stake in the OZ outcome. Overington and some of her sister victim feminist columnists have shown their colours and it is PINK. That colour can be construed both symbolically and politically just add an "O" on the end.