Focus on children’s rights – not those of the parents
Reflection — By Cristina Weds on August 19, 2010 7:00 am
Trial by fire: mothers have huge problems is getting courts to sympathise with their plight
A FATHER’S distraught description of being excluded from his child’s life by the courts often proves compelling. It persuades people that the reason many father’s rights groups – those which campaign for ‘equal parenting’ and ‘non-discrimination’ against fathers – were set up was to fight against injustice.
One father describes the family courts as a “vicious, misandrist system.” For many people this depiction has proved persuasive. Politicians are looking at enforcing shared parenting – although this ended in tragedy in Australia when a child, Darcey Freeman, was thrown from a bridge by an abusive father, concentrating attention again on such laws.
In truth, most divorce cases don’t reach court. A majority of parents manage to work out living arrangements for their children in ways that suit them. The law is unlikely to do better for these people than the amicable arrangements they have already arrived at, so it would be a mistake to make laws for the entire parenting population based on cases which go to court. The largest percentage of cases which come to court involve domestic violence or abuse of some form. The parental relationship has deteriorated to such a degree that parenting by mother and father together is impossible. By definition, these cases are unsuited to shared parenting.
Contrary to the stereotype, a domestic abuser is not necessarily defined by obvious anti-social behaviour or criminality. Quite a number of domestic abusers are highly successful in their fields. Some of them have problems such as sociopathic personality disorder. This doesn’t make them Hannibal Lecter, but it is estimated that 3% of the population has this psychopathic disorder. Sociopaths are charming, plausible and often highly educated, who friends and neighbours think of as a ‘good bloke’. They keep the side which wields terrifying power in the home behind closed doors. As a result, they are often able to convince courts that they are truly loving fathers and hard done-by husbands. So introducing proper psychological testing where litigation is high conflict and long-running would go a long way to resolving many of these disputes.
The lack of empathy and insight shown by SPD types makes them immune to pleas from ex-spouses and children to stop litigating. The stresses of long-running court cases and continual conflict impact severely on the mental health and general well-being of the victim of the domestic abuse and the children, but the court’s current unwillingness or lack of resources to properly assess whether such a disorder might be present leaves litigants in endless cycles of litigation.
Those who most vocally advocate a child’s rights to see their non-resident parent often say little about whether the children should have the right to refuse contact with a violent or abusive parent. A person who abuses in the home will continue the abuse afterwards, using the courts as a weapon. Children may develop a deep dislike of such a controlling parent and want nothing to do with them. The most strident fathers’ rights activists often duck this issue by claiming that very few abuse allegations are true and that children are being brainwashed into believing them.
Their solution, to ‘undo the brainwashing’ – or ‘parental alienation’, as they call it – by forcing the child into contact neatly gets around the question of giving the child any rights. Since the child is ‘brainwashed’ you can’t give rights to a brainwashed child. This is the fancy footwork that gets some fathers around the question of whether a child’s wishes over contact should be respected or not.
In fact, reputable academic research shows the rates of false allegations of abuse to be extremely low, no more than 2%. There is also a myth put about by some litigating fathers that allegations of domestic abuse are made to gain an advantage in residence/contact applications. In reality, very few applications for contact are turned down on the basis of domestic violence. If a father is excluded on those grounds, we can be sure that it was for excellent reasons and the court will have considered the evidence for them most carefully.
Contrary to popular belief it is not easy for a woman to raise allegations of abuse. Such claims are treated with great rigour. One fathers’ group is providing McKenzie friends to accompany other fathers to court helping them with advice about the system and how to closely cross-examine women on the witness stand to beat their allegations down. At least one, a twice convicted domestic abuser called Matthew Mudge, is acting as a McKenzie friend in the Cardiff courts. The group which supports Mudge is taking public money to fund its activities, so claims of publicly-funded child abuse in Wales actually applies to this group rather than the mothers who oppose its activities.
In this atmosphere, abused mothers find these sorts of hurdles – having to face their abuser in court and general scepticism about their allegations – very hard to cope with. It leads to under-reporting of incidents of abuse simply because it is so hard to cope with a system which doesn’t easily recognise violence or abuse. Often the woman will not present well on the witness stand. If she has been abused very likely she will be emotional and anxious, – not something that lends itself to a judge finding in her favour. By contrast, an abusive husband, with a complete lack of insight into his behaviour, will come across well, as the charming plausible man that most people believe him to be.
One complaint that certain fathers’ rights groups make is about the ‘unfairness’ of a system that does not allow them 50/50 parenting time. If you examine this closely, going beyond the rhetoric, the suggestion of splitting children like property or assets isn’t fair to the very children they claim to be concerned about. Experiences in Australia of shared parenting have shown that children are shuttled about from house to house so that neither is a home. It is a disrupting experience and has led to ludicrous situations where a child lives one week in one place and the following week miles away in the other parent’s home. It makes it hard for the child to maintain friendships in one place; there is lack of continuity, often school books are forgotten in the move and the experience of not being consulted and the lack of flexibility in such arrangements as children reach teen years and want to spend more time with friends and less with parents has proved very unsatisfactory for many children. Shared parenting only works where there is huge flexibility and a good relationship between the parents. By definition this cannot be present if a case is at court.
Such children inevitably have to live with one parent. Research shows that despite progress towards greater equality, mothers are still the ones putting in most of physical care of children during marriage. Men and women do not have symmetrical responsibilities in the home. That women do the bulk of the child care and housework is reflected after separation is not surprising. Many of the fathers who claimed to be sidelined are actually receiving the amount of time which the courts perceived they gave to child care before the marriage split. In fact, it would be better for children’s emotional stability if the arrangements which pertained before the split carried on afterwards. Changing this to give fathers who were less involved before the split equal time after is not fairness to the child. It actually switches the emphasis to the parent’s right to parent, and away from the best interests of the child – which is what we should be concerned with here. Where contact works well and hasn’t been through the court system, child care mirrors the arrangement for child care before the break-up with the mother, in most cases, having the majority of the care.
Many women’s groups feel that the courts place too much emphasis on the amount of time a non-resident parent spends with the child and not on the quality of a relationship, and that not enough attention is paid to what kind of a spouse that parent was. There is a big overlap between domestic abuse and child abuse, for example. A spousal abuser is more likely to abuse the children, either directly or indirectly, than other men.
It was claimed on this site that there is publicly-funded child abuse in Wales. But one group which is receiving a considerable amount of public money in these hard times when child benefit will be frozen for three years is Families Need Fathers. It received a considerable grant that has allowed it to fund new offices and a sizeable staff, along with a support network for fathers. This is at a time when refuges for women and children are often housed in decrepit old buildings without proper heating and facilities. One young woman told us that she and her young child were forced to wear clothes at night and buy extra blankets they could ill afford because the refuge was unheated for much of the time. Neither does it seem right that this same fathers’ group has no official policy for ejecting domestic abusers from its ranks or for barring convicted criminals from McKenzie roles in the courts.
The fact is that abused mothers have a lot harder time in the family courts than fathers do. There isn’t time or funding to risk assess each case that needs it and domestic violence cases are routinely slipping through the net. The Children Act Sub-Committee Guidelines (CASC) and the principles established in the year 2000 about how domestic violence cases were to be handled by the courts are being regularly departed from. These guidelines stress the need for a perpetrator to recognise and make reparation for his abuse, otherwise the balance is supposed to tip against contact. In practice, perpetrators are not being asked to undergo programmes or make reparations. Owing to lack of time and resources, perpetrators are managing both to obtain residence and substantial amounts of contact.
Judicial training on domestic violence is extremely limited. A brief, four-day induction on becoming a judge doesn’t leave enough time to cover these issues properly. Thereafter, any training on domestic abuse is optional, so it is perfectly possible for family court judges to sit for years in family cases without updating their knowledge and skills at all. Yet the field of research into domestic violence has increased immeasurably in recent years and is now very sophisticated, leaving the judiciary way behind. Domestic violence specialists are not employed in training judges; the training is done in-house with senior judges passing down their experiences on the bench to incoming judiciary. In practice this leads to the perpetration of myths and stereotypes about domestic abuse.
It would benefit children and do more to safeguard their welfare if judges were scrutinised and asked to keep a record of what training they had undergone and what research into domestic violence they had read. This is not about being pro-mother. Clearly everyone should be against domestic violence because the effects of it on children are very damaging and those who have witnessed it are much more likely to grow up to develop anti-social behaviour or have mental health problems. This is about being focused on the welfare of children.
Tags: children, Family law, social services
Tweet This
Share on Facebook
Digg This
Bookmark
Stumble
35 Comments
This is a very interesting piece. My only request would be for some reference to sources to be made available. The statistics that interest me are the 3% who have sociopathic tendencies, false allegations are only 2% and a link to the Australian research on shared parenting.
I am very sympathetic to your arguments and understand that a blog is not the easiest place to put references but it would make it easier to weight the arguments.
Thanks for the comment Tom. I used a wide variety of sources to write this piece. There are more references than I can list here – but here are some specifics which informed my article:
Sociopaths comprise 3-4% of the male population (Strauss & Lahey 1984, Davison and Neale 1994, Robins, Tipp & Przybeck 1991).
Dr Robert Hare is an authority on this subject. You might like to reference his work.
There is an excellent compendium of the latest research on domestic violence and the family courts edited by Barry Goldstein and Dr Mo Hannah: Domestic Violence, Abuse and Child Custody. Canadian researchers Claire Crooks, Peter Jaffe and Nicholas Bala wrote a chapter about the effects of DV on children. In each age category children have certain developmental progress they are expected to make. Children who witness domestic violence often fail to meet their developmental goals which in turn interferes with later developmental progress.
Over 40 US states and many court districts have had court sponsored gender bias committees. They have found widespread gender bias against women. Lynn Hecht Schafran is the Director of the National Judicial Education Program. She is the U.S. authority on these studies. Another authority is Mollie Dragiewicz, Canadian academic, who has also written on this subject.
Oxford academics Joan Hunt and Alison Macleod in their paper “Outcomes of applications to court for contact orders after parental separation or divorce” concluded that “resident parents were much less likely than non-resident parents to be successful in achieving their initial objectives,” that “serious welfare issues were raised in the majority of cases,”. In “54% of cases the resident parent raised concerns over serious welfare issues” – domestic violence (34%), child abuse or neglect (23%); parenting capacity affected by drug abuse (20%); alcohol abuse (21%). They concluded that “data indicated cases in which non-resident parents might have reason to feel aggrieved. However this is not because the courts are biased against them. It was clear from file, transcript and interview data that courts, lawyers and Cafcass start from the principle that there should normally be contact and they make considerable efforts to bring this about. The fact that they are not always successful should not tempt us into accusing the system of favouring resident parents. Indeed it would be easier to make the opposite argument.”
Research shows that most allegations of DV made in the context of family law proceedings are made in good faith and have evidence for their claims. Two studies have examined rates of substantiated allegations of domestic violence in the context of family law proceedings. They show that allegations are substantiated in 63 to 74 percent of cases (Shaffer and Bala, 2003; Johnston et al., 2005). The remainder are unsubstantiated – where either there is insufficient information to support substantiation or where there is a determination that the allegation is false. A Canadian study of family law cases in which written decisions were produced over a three-year period identified 42 recorded cases of spousal abuse alleged against men. 74% percent of these were substantiated. Only two cases of spousal abuse alleged against women were identified, one of which was substantiated (Shaffer and Bala, 2003). However the authors noted that in the cases where the courts found the allegations to be exaggerated or unfounded, in some instances the courts gave no reasons for this conclusion, and in at least some cases, judges failed to recognise the existence or seriousness of actual abuse (Shaffer and Bala, 2003).
The evidence is that rates of intentionally false and/or malicious accusations of rape are very low. A British study showed that only 3% per cent of rapes reported to the police were either ‘possible’ or ‘probable’ false allegations (Kelly et al. 2005). Australian studies are similar. In an analysis of 850 rapes reported to Victoria Police over three years, only 2.1 per cent of reports were identified by police as false (Statewide Steering Committee to Reduce Sexual Assault 2006: 5). Three earlier studies in Australia, based on police data from 1986 to 1990, find rates of false reports of sexual assault of 1.4 per cent, 4.8 per cent, and 7 per cent (VLRC 2004: 112).
Although false allegations of rape and domestic violence are sometimes made there is nothing to suggest that these are common or that women make them more often than men (Davis, 2004). In addition, false allegations of violence and abuse are far less common than false denials of their perpetration (Jaffe et al., 2008).
Re Shared parenting in Australia: A report published in January 2010 by retired family court judge Richard Chisholm, says that children are often hurt by 50-50 shared custody. He also says that the law is a “tangle” that makes it more difficult for women to raise allegations of domestic abuse.
The Australian Institute for Family Studies released a report on the same day as the Chisholm report and they say that the shared parenting law favours fathers over mothers and parents over children. They also say that in the Freeman case where a little girl was thrown to her death over a bridge by her father the law meant that the 4 year old’s mother was too frightened to raise allegations of violence in court in case she was considered to be an uncooperative parent trying to undermine the father of her children.
Thank you Cristina Weds for your very clear and substantiated comments and references. I would confirm your statement that, “However this is not because the courts are biased against them. It was clear from file, transcript and interview data that courts, lawyers and Cafcass start from the principle that there should normally be contact and they make considerable efforts to bring this about.”
Certainly this is true in Australia where the rights of fathers are treated as paramount and sacrosanct in Family Court proceedings, even to the point where Judges have awarded contact and even residency with fathers with convictions for paedophilia and child sexual abuse. To paraphrase a Judge in one case stated regarding a convicted paedophile father being awarded residency of his two small daughters, “Well they can lock their bedroom door on a night!”. In another case of a father convicted of child sexual abuse the Judge stated, “Well his offences were against small girls, so his son will be safe in his care, and although he has has shown no prior interest in his children, he’s promised to be a `Good Dad’ in the future”. These are the prevailing attitudes among the judiciary and legal profession in Australian Family Courts and why so many children have suffered abuse and even death, as a consequence of Family Law Court decisions. If the same evidence as is often presented to Family Courts were presented to children’s Courts, the same children have been placed in State Care, so there are double standards being operated by the two Courts dealing with the same children’s matters. The convictions of many of the fathers of domestic violence and the inherent child abuse, would prevent them working is situations involving children, yet they are awarded contact and resiency of their own children.
Most recently a Victorian father drove his car into a dam on Father’s Day drowning his three young sons while he escaped. Witness testimony confirmed that he had done so as a vengeful act towards his ex-partner.
The Shared Parenting (Equal Shared Care) laws in Australia have been a complete disaster for many hundreds of children who have subsequently and consequently suffered abuse and death because parental rights have superceded all other considerations. In other cases, small babies have been given over to fathers for weekend stays and the mothers ordered to ‘express’ sufficient milk for the father to use to feed the baby. Other children, in some cases by parental agreement, are used as Ping-Pongs shuttling backwards and forwards between homes on a weekly basis and not being able to establish and maintain social relationships in either place, while other children have been required to make 18 hour journeys across States so fathers could have two hours of supervised contact time. Other children have been ordered to live near a father’s workplace and home, many thousands of miles from their familiar neighbourhood, friends, and supportive extended families in order that fathers could have a few hours contact. In one such case the child and mother were ordered to live in an outback shanty town because the father had decided to go and live there for work purposes. In another case a a three year old child has to travel alone by air from Dubai to Sydney every month for afford the father equal shared care. These are the consequences of shared parenting legislation and the horrendous consequences there have been for children.
It is not fathers who are suffering disadvantage or inequalities under the Family Laws, it is the children who are being sent into Court-Ordered abuse and death.!
An acquaintance alerted me to this article. I am thankful she did, as the author has presented a most excellent and balanced overview of the soul – destroying practices of chopping up children’s developing spirits as if they were pieces of celery to be equally divided. Insane practices seem to proliferate when politicians and others simplistically apply assumptions and belief systems, rather than facts, evidence and that most rare of commodities ; common sense. Bravo Madame Weds and kudos to the publishers of this piece (the same insanity of practices in custody/divorce cases happens here in Canada). Best interests of the child/ren means – whatever someone else IMPOSES on the hapless victim(s) and their wellbeing be damned.
Family Violence, Family Court, Shared Parenting Laws & The Department of Child Protection
By safe-at-last
Family Court vs The Best Interests of The Child
An Insight into an Abused Mother’s Reality – My Story
It’s not about “justice”, or “the principle of it”, so I will not react. To do so would not serve my purpose. I’ve done what I had to and I’ll do what I must, because they asked me to keep them safe and I promised I would. It is not about getting revenge against you.It was never for revenge against you.It’s not all about you; it never was and it never will be. Nor is it about me. It’s about them and it always will be, because love should not hurt!
If you look online, you will find overwhelming amounts of documented evidence and a great many blogs discussing the unforeseen effects that Shared Parenting Laws have had on abused children in Australia and in numerous other countries around the world, including Canada and the US, and you will get an idea of just how many parents are facing similar dilemmas.
In May 2010, I was emailed a link to an article that read as follows:
“The three major Family Law reviews were handed down in January 2010. It was recognized that the current Shared Parenting Laws are not working in situations where domestic violence is a factor and need to be changed to ensure that children’s rights, well being and safety is of paramount importance.
While this is good news for children, the extreme father’s rights groups have been protesting about the recommended changes, threatening to not vote for the current government if they dare implement them. They say they have 16,000 members that they can mobilize.
The Attorney General has flagged that he won’t make any legislative changes because of their threats before the election. Afterwards, we will have little if no hope because the reviews will be long gone and media interest faded.”
It was after reading the above article that I decided to share my story. I am writing of my own journey here, to hopefully give people an insight into the reality that so many Australian mothers (and some fathers) have faced and are facing, in their struggle to keep their children safe from an abusive, controlling parent, since Australia’s Shared Parenting Laws came into effect in 2006.
I feel we all have a duty of care to these children, and I plead with you all to make their cases heard. Tell your friends and family, write about it on your blogs, sign petitions, attend protest rallies and write to your politicians. Our children cannot speak for themselves!
Here is my story:
I have come to believe that the father of my children is a complete sociopath or even a psychopath and I am terrified for their safety. They have not seen him for months and do not want to. After much counseling, group therapy, completion of the Protective Behaviors Program, doing lots of fishing, gardening and other fun things, and receiving lots of unconditional love, they now say that they are happier than they have ever been, although I believe we all still have a long way to go.
They asked me to promise to keep them safe, and promise I did, but I am losing hope in being able to keep that promise as although I have violence restraining orders for myself and the kids, I will soon be facing their father in Family Court.
While I had always believed that my kids needed to be able to continue their relationship with their Dad if we separated, it is only in the months since our separation that I have come to be aware of what he is really capable of.
After he first left, I realized my kids were displaying most of the symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, which have thankfully diminished with time. Over the months the children have slowly been revealing what he put them through, and with counseling and by reading my journals I have been able to recall all the things he has put me through.
I also discovered information in hidden user accounts on my computer that opened my eyes to the extent of his lies, addictions to sex and violence, and his ability to hide his dark and sadistic nature and come across instead as a warm, genuine and caring human being.
All of his friends and family think he is wonderful, charming man, and that his only faults are that he is impulsive, irresponsible and homophobic.
But I now know that he is in fact, secretly bisexual, into beastiality, extremely abusive, controlling, violent, skilled at subtle cruelty, sadistic, criminally versatile and completely lacking in empathy, remorse and guilt.
I also fear he has some even darker secrets and certain things I discovered have lead me to believe he may also be into into some other extreme fetishes, and I fear he may have committed some horrendous crimes in the very distant past.
One of the things that concerns me most about him however, is his ability to lie so convincingly. He has lied about so many things, to so may people and for such a long time that he has become quite skilled at it. He is talented in his ability to concoct outrageous reasons to justify his abusive behavior, so that most people who hear his lies end up feeling sorry for him and think he has done quite well to have stopped himself from doing more serious harm to “those who have betrayed him”
I often used to wonder if he had told these lies to other people so many times that he had somehow managed to convince even himself that they are true. I even began to wonder what would happen if he was put on a lie detector machine, because I figured that if a person has forgotten that something is a lie, then they wouldn’t actually feel like they were lying whenever they retell that lie, would they?
I’m not sure if I believe it anymore though, because as soon as I started to think he was, although abusive, also a victim of society’s prejudices, and someone who genuinely wanted to stop hurting those he loved, he would somehow blow me away with some off hand remark or explosive outburst that made my mind boggle.
For instance, he would admit to some sadistic reason for his lies, or say something so vicious and cruel that I would be left thinking I did not really know him at all. At one stage I even thought I was crazy and that it must all be my fault or something.
My concerns and doubts got worse and worse with time. Towards the end of our relationship he would often admit to some past wrong doing of his which he had always previously vehemently denied, but such confessions would be anything but an expression of guilt, and more and more often his comments would reveal an alarming level of premeditation or contain some other element that was more than deeply disturbing on many levels.
One such confession occurred a week or so before we separated, when he was talking to me after having exploded in yet another violent rage. He broke down crying (I say crying, but there were no actual tears, just sniffing and crying “noises”), and then said he was violent and needed help.
Then he started confessing all these things to me including years of torturing animals when he was in his 20′s: having once planned to rape, torture and murder his “friend”; an incident where he drugged and raped another male “friend” of his with the hope that it would cause the guy to later commit suicide, and finally he started confessing to an incident in the 1970′s where he and some of his friends picked up a woman hitch hiker, bu I never heard the rest of that particular confession, as I ran out crying.
Afterward, as he had always done before, he denied having said any of the things he had said.
On a different night, he admitted for the first time to the times that he has raped me (he had previously always denied that he had). He then went on to say that the only way he could make up for it was to tell my son that he was conceived during one of those rapes. I was horrified!
There were many other behaviors that I witnessed that, in hindsight, I should have really seen as very clear warning signs, but I guess each behavior on it’s own was never really bad enough to make me question his overall integrity.
Then again, maybe I was in denial. I still don’t want to believe that the man I loved for so long could really be capable of what I can only call evil, but I have had to face the reality that there are just too many things he has done, combined with to many extreme behaviors and over too long a period of time that I no longer have the luxury of hoping it is just all a misunderstanding or that he will ever change. To give him any more chances would be more than irresponsible, it would be insanely stupid.
How can I trust a man who has very contradictory beliefs and values about pedophilia and incest? To explain: on one hand he believes that all pedophiles should be shot, but on the other hand, he believes his ex-girlfriend’s father only molested her as a way of trying to show her how much he loved her.
My own experiences of sexual abuse as a young child were minimized and even outright disbelieved by him. A sexual assault I experienced a young adolescent that was perpetrated by a much older man whom I had loved and trusted and whose wife and family I cared deeply for, was also minimized, and at various times he would even say that I must have “asked for it”. When I told him that he sounded just like the man who had abused me, I then had to run for cover as he erupted in a rage that saw my possessions smashed beyond repair and my framed photo’s attacked with hammers until they were nothing but shards of glass, splintered wood and scrap card in the rubbish bin.
In stark contradiction to his outrage at my “attack on his character”, one of his favorite pornographic videos was an X-rated homosexual video staring multiple young men of a questionable age, one of whom bore an alarming resemblance to his almost adult son from his first marriage.
He also made many off hand comments that revealed disturbing thoughts and feelings about his son, his son’s friends, and younger nieces and nephews that I am simply not able to relate to, and are far too close to blatantly admitting being sexually attracted to them for me to be comfortable with.
For instance, he told me that he found it hard not to fantasize about things that may have been going on when this son had friends over to stay the night, that he fears that his relationship with his son may one day turn incestuous. He also goes on about how proud he is that the boy is bisexual like him.
He also told me he had been unable to stop himself from looking at his niece’s breasts after she reached puberty, and trying to imagine what they looked like underneath her clothes. I always found all of these kinds of statements to be very alarming.
Almost everything about him seems to indicate that the man is a walking contradiction. For instance, he was always rather obsessed with news stories about family violence, child abuse, violent rape, incest, familicide and murder. He would go on about any one story constantly for days or even weeks, and would condemn the perpetrators with such ferocity that the kids and I eventually became fearful to be in the same room as him whenever he was discussing such things.
(Of course I would have been a fool to bring up the obvious hypocrisy of his statements in light of his own past acts of violence and abuse, not to mention his “confessions”. I did actually mention it once without thinking, but his reaction was frightful enough to ensure I never made the same mistake again…)
Yet despite his constant claims of being disgusted by any form of violence, he would watch movies that would leave most people in a state of utter shock but would simply reduce him to hysterical laughter. I hated watching such movies but he would bully me into watching them and when I did, they sometimes made me vomit and often I would have nightmares for weeks afterward.
I do not think myself oversensitive, I can handle violence in epic movies that “moves you” and stuff like that, but real life snuff videos and real videos of kids dying as shovels are embedded into their heads?
His baffling behavior and contradictory views were further shown whenever he spoke of some woman who had supposedly cheated on her partner, whether it was the wife/girlfriend of someone he knew or a stranger, and even if it was just speculation or rumor.
He would spend ridiculous amounts of time suggesting suitable revenge or punishment for such women, most of which would be incomprehensible to myself or anyone else, but if anything was said about the irrationality of his thoughts, the unsuspecting person would be relentlessly insulted and humiliated for their supposed lack of humor and faith in his true nature.
Of course I would always then be terrified whenever he harped on about how obvious it was that I was being unfaithful, which happened quite often even though I never once was unfaithful.
In fact, I only ever once came even remotely close to cheating on him, and all that was, was a period of a couple of weeks when I realized I was thinking about a friend more than perhaps I should, and that I felt happy whenever I thought of him. Though the thoughts and feelings were not in any way sexual, I guess I felt they were more than I should be feeling for a friend and that scared me to the point of telling the friend that I could not see him for a while, and I told my guy that I was confused about some feelings I had been having for the friend and that I had ended the friendship because I did not want to cause any more problems in our relationship, and that perhaps we needed to try and work on our own relationship.
Unfortunately I probably should not have said anything, because I was treated like I had confessed to a long term affair of filthy sex and emotional infidelity.He harassed me about it for years.
What hurt even more though was that he would say these things to the kids, friends, family and professional people, claiming he had proof, which of course he didn’t. In fact all of his attempts to “catch me out” ended up proving my innocence instead, but all this did however was make him angry instead of more trusting. He even tried to set me up by planting fake evidence in our bedroom, but i caught him doing it. He never apologized.
I was once told he had been telling everyone of my “latest” affair with one of my “so-called friends” and the person telling me was lecturing me on my lack of morality. I asked the person who the friend in question was, and when they told me, I calmly pointed out that that friend had in fact been overseas for the previous 9 months and offered to give them the phone number of the friend’s employer who had sent him overseas for the job, at which point the person’s cheeks turned a deep shade of crimson…
Even his sense of humor raises concerns. I consider my own sense of humor to be rather quirky at times, but at least it is a “clean sense of humor. To me humor is at its best when it is in the form of ironic, intelligent insight. I do not find humor in things that have no intelligent play on words or images and are apparently funny just because they are gross.
Freddy got Fingered? I just can’t see anything clever or remotely funny about such humor. It completely lacks whit and to me it is simply outrageously disgusting. I also think it was cruel of him to force me to watch it when I was pregnant with his child, and expect me to endure his gut busting laughter at the scene where Tom Green “helps” deliver a baby.
After he left, I realized my children were displaying learnt sexual behaviors. They also expressed ideas and opinions well beyond their years, and displayed other signs that indicate possible sexual abuse, which lead me to speak to their child psychologist. In a subsequent investigation by Child Protection Officers, the children did not disclose any sexual abuse. While this was the most important thing for me, and a great relief, I do still fear that he may have been grooming them for future sexual abuse.
The only abuse I know of for certain though, is the soul destroying emotional abuse that I often witnessed and experienced, the physical abuse that I experienced myself and instances of physical abuse experienced by my children, the first few of which I witnessed and the last few of which I did not see, but soon found out about, at which point I told him that if he ever hit them or manhandled them again I would have him charged.
We also had to endure feelings of hurt, anger and betrayal as he would constantly lie to them about me, and to us all about himself. He would often pack his stuff and leave for a few days, but tell them that I kicked him out or that I had cheated on him or that he could not abide my laziness/ craziness/ lies/ messiness anymore, or he would blame them for leaving saying that they were bad kids who were deliberately naughty to make him angry so that he would then get into trouble with me.
This would always lead to them being overwhelmed with feelings of guilt, confusion, fear, anger and more, because although they knew they had misbehaved, it was certainly not on purpose or because of what he said it was.
Further more, the messiness he always went on about was often his more than ours, and although it did get sometimes get messy, it was only clutter, not filth, and only ever after he had been at his most abusive. It would always be tidied up, even when it was him who had made the mess.
All of these things build a disturbing picture now that I have been able to piece them all together and have led me to re-examine my already limited trust in him regarding our kids. Combine it all with his long criminal record of multiple convictions for possession of drugs, cultivation of drugs, possession of unlicensed firearms, unlicensed ammunition and restraining orders and other things such as his prior possession of a shot firer’s permit, extensive knowledge of, experience with and known associations with people easily able to obtain explosives, self confessed possession of unlicensed firearms, past association with many high profile criminals, intimate knowledge of the details of their crimes that he has revealed to me in the past (some of which has subsequently been substantiated and then revealed to the public by the media), crimes that I witnessed many, many years ago that he was never caught for (and which I was too naive and in love to report at the time), and the many cruel direct and indirect threats he has made to me in private over the years, is it any wonder that I hold such grave fears for the safety of both my children and myself?
I did initially have strong support from both the Department for Child Protection and The Police Family Protection Unit, and they were full of praise about the steps I had taken of my own initiative to deep myself and the kids safe, and help us all to heal and move on.
Unfortunately, since my ex contacted them to inform them of “his side of the story”, they have now decided that all my allegations are based on hearsay and cannot be substantiated, and therefore they will not support me in court (institutional grooming?!).
They further went on to accuse me of parental alienation, paranoia, negativity and of perpetuating fear in my children.
These departments have only met my children on one occasion, and myself perhaps half a dozen times, and if you were to contact my counselors, my children’s counselors, their psychologist or our victim support worker, they would all tell you they believe I have gone from strength to strength since separating from their father, and have been extremely and consistently proactive, clear minded and positive in all areas of my life, including the task of helping my children heal from the harmful experiences of their own abuse and the witnessing of my abuse, and that rather than perpetuating fear in the kids, I have been successful in helping them to overcome their fears while still helping them to feel safe and teaching them how to stay safe.
Even so, the reports of counselors are opinions based on hearsay, and will not count for much in Family Court, so I fear it’s going to be my word against his in family court.
I have reported all this to the police as well, including the things he confessed to me, but they will not do anything and tell me he’s just bluffing. Further more, it is just hearsay, as I did not witness any of the really serious things he has confessed to or any that I fear he has committed, and the ones that I did witness happened too long ago for any charges made being likely to lead to conviction. They also question why I only report them now and say how do they know I’m not just out for revenge.
I face the same thing in family court and worse. Any allegations I make of his abuse of my children that I have witnessed and my own abuse experienced will be discounted as hearsay as I have no other witnesses. I may even then be found to have “Parental Alienation Syndrome”, an unprovable and questionable psychological disorder that is laughed at by 95% of psychiatrists world wide, and which was actually invented by a psychologist who was later found to be pro-pedophilia and incest, and who then committed suicide. If a judge decides that I have this “syndrome”, then it is most likely that the kids’ Dad will be awarded sole residency, and I may even be restricted to supervised contact.
I have a lawyer who is going to do his best, but he fears for me and my children and doubts he will be able to do much to help us due to the current laws.
Our journey continues….
Perpetrators Perfecting the Fine Art of Institutional Grooming
(Family Court , Shared Parenting, Child Abuse, Child Protection)
By safe-at-last
An Art Being Perfected Under Shared Parenting Laws
A lot of people will have heard of the term “grooming”, but most will think of the term only as it is used in the context of child sexual abuse. What many people do not consider, is that grooming is an art that is practiced by most perpetrators of any kind of abuse, and, I believe, particularly by perpetrators of family violence.
Institutional Grooming Defined and Explained
It is not only a perpetrator’s victims that are groomed (which would be considered emotional abuse), but the victims’ family and friends, the perpetrator’s own family and friends, and even public servants and medical professionals (in which case it is purposeful manipulation).
The grooming of doctors, nurses, mental health carers, family support workers and other public servants is called “Institutional Grooming” and the perpetrator does it for the purpose of self-preservation.
The targets of Institutional Groomers may include their victim’s General Practitioner, psychiatrist, psychologist, child health nurse, pediatrician, carers at a Family Day Care Facility, school teachers, counselors or therapists. The public servants targeted may be social workers, case workers, investigative officers or police officers employed by government departments such as the Department For Child Protection, the Police’s Family Protection Unit and the Department for Community Development. When done with enough finesse to be successful, institutional grooming ensures that any complaints alleged about the perpetrator are either disregarded outright, doubted and therefore not investigated thoroughly, or if acted upon, subsequently dismissed in a court of law.
Why would a perpetrator go to such lengths to manipulate people other than their victims? Because when their victims, the victims’ family and friends, and the public service networks intended to support their victims are groomed successfully, the investment of all that hard work does not go to waste – the victims are then still available to continue to abuse.
Some Thought Provoking Insights into a Victim’s Reality
The scary thing about successful institutional grooming is that it substantially increases the harm done to the victims, not only because the abuse they face continues for longer, but because they lose their trust and faith in the world around them, in their family and friends, in the professional people who are meant to protect them, and most tragically, in themselves.
The things that are said and done to hurt and manipulate a victim only occur behind closed doors, and it can be very hard to remember exactly what was said or done, where, in which order and at what time, when your world feels like it is caving in. An abuser will jump on this uncertainty to highlight a victim’s supposed insanity or make them seem dishonest, and to shift the focus away from his/her own appalling behavior.
Once a victim’s memories of the abuse, the words said, things done and feelings felt during that abuse, have been twisted and distorted to deny, justify or excuse that abuse, one can understand why the victim begins to feel unsure about what really happened. Combine this with the common symptoms of complete and partial memory blocking and/or memory substitution in victims suffering from even mild cases of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and one can see how it can all combine to compound a victim’s confusion and distress, and deter them from objecting or trying to report it the next time it happens. One can also see how these factors can pervert the course of Justice.
Grooming by Perpetrators of Family Violence
In the context of family violence, institutional grooming is done to discredit the non- perpetrating parent (who is often also a victim), and the effects of successful institutional grooming in these circumstances are almost always tragic.
In best case scenarios, it can ensure debilitating emotional trauma and devastating long term consequences as the perpetrator is free to continue their abuse of both the child(ren) and the abused parent. In worst case scenarios, the results can be overwhelming, and may include horrific physical abuse, soul destroying sexual abuse or even premature death of the victim(s). The death of such victim(s) may be due to suicide, manslaughter, murder-suicide or violent murder. The most prevalent and obvious consequence however, is once again perversion of the course of Justice, and the undeniable failure of the Legal System’s purpose.
Damned If They Do & Damned If They Don’t
For clarification, consider this generalized example: If a mother seeks help with protecting her children in a situation where emotional and physical abuse of both herself and her children has already occurred, and/or where there has been inappropriate sexual talk and behavior in front of her children (that may or may not be sexual grooming), and the children have displayed signs that indicate possible sexual abuse (that may or may not have happened, and may or may not happen in the future), but where the perpetrator is skilled at the art of institutional grooming, that mother will often then be subjected to accusations of parental alienation and of perpetuating feelings of fear in her children. Instead of being taken seriously, she finds herself having to defend her actions and her parenting skills, and sometimes may even find herself being the one accused of abusing her children.
If she seeks legal advice, she is advised not to make an application to the Family Court because it is likely that any application will result in 50/50 shared care of the kids. Further more, she is informed that under current Family Law, if she makes any allegations of abuse that cannot be proven, she risks being found guilty of parental alienation and quite possibly faces losing her children to the perpetrator in the likely event that interim orders would award him full residency, and allow her only a couple of hours of supervised contact per fortnight, while her children are sent to live with their alleged abuser. She may also be required to pay the legal costs for both parties.
On the other hand, if she does not do anything about seeking help from the authorities, either because she has circumstantial evidence but no substantiated proof, and no other witnesses to testify on her behalf (her own testimony would be considered hearsay, and therefore discounted), or perhaps because she has been doubted and/or counter-accused before, then at some point in the future she may find herself being found guilty of neglecting her duty of care to her children, and face the prospect of losing her kids to foster care.
What Justice?
While I have no doubt that there are indeed parents out there who do not put the best interests of their children first, and who are in fact guilty of alienating their children against the other parent and perhaps even of fabricating false allegations of abuse, whether for revenge or some other reason, surely they must be the minority? Wouldn’t the majority of parents want to put their kids first?
Further more, I ask this question: What about the mother who, in spite of her own abuse, subjugation and degradation, somehow finds the strength to trust her own intuition, and manages to intervene before her children become the victims of more serious physical abuse or devastating sexual abuse? Instead of being supported and respected for the strength she has shown in the face of her adversity, she is instead victimized, subdued and humiliated to an even greater extent. Where is the justice for mothers such as she? Instead she becomes a victim of the system, and so do her children. What happened to breaking the Cycle of Abuse?
A Society-Sized Cycle?
Has anybody even stopped to think that perhaps the term “cycle of abuse” now describes a far greater cycle of perpetual dysfunction than simply the personal relationships between perpetrators and their victims, a cycle that in fact occurs and continues on a much larger scale – one that encompasses modern society as a whole? I mean, who is more likely to be a liar? A victim or their perpetrator?
Obviously there are exceptions to every rule, but in most cases, what would a victim get out of being a liar? Any parent who has suffered as a victim of family violence, then chosen to speak out against their family’s abuser, and then been consistent in their commitment to the ongoing and endless process of attending appointments with social workers, lawyers, medical professionals, psychologists, counselors, art therapy and group therapy sessions (for both themselves and their children), would agree that the financial costs, physical energy requirements, mental strain and emotional drain of post traumatic abuse times could simply not be worth it.
Proactive parents who choose to engage in such an involved process, due to their genuine desire to heal their family’s wounds, to protect their children from further harm, and to ensure a positive, healthy change in their life circumstances, will have often maintained such efforts for months before the matter is brought before the court, and they will have to maintain their efforts for many months or even years after the court makes final orders, even if orders are reasonably suitable.
In stark contrast, perpetrators who engage in such therapy will almost always only do so after being questioned about allegations of abuse, or in the weeks and days leading up to a court hearing. They only do so to preserve their false reputations, and their energetic last minute efforts will seldom last more than a few weeks past the need to be seen as the “poor victim” of a “vengeful” or “jealous” partner, rather than be exposed as the selfish, unrepentant perpetrators of abuse that they are.
Morality & Proactive Logic vs Passive Ignorance
I think that the Family Law Courts and some government departments are missing the whole point of what is in the best interests of the child. I am not saying that a perpetrator should be guilty until proven innocent, or punished without sufficient proof, but what is wrong with protecting our kids BEFORE they become victims? Why should the only evidence taken seriously enough to warrant supervised contact be substantiated proof of past abuse? Surely prevention is better than a cure?
They cannot say that the cost of supervised contact would be too great if they compare it to the long term costs of abuse to our society, considering how many victims of child abuse go on to have life long psychological problems, alcohol and other substance abuse issues, often grow up to become abusers themselves, or in some cases resort to suicide.
Considerations of a Responsible Government
The purpose of Family Law should be the protection of our children, who are not yet capable of making their own choices, rather than any irrationally perceived justice for those adults who have chosen not to take responsibility for the destructive effects of their abusive behavior, or the unjust persecution of those adults who are trying to shoulder responsibility for both their own and the abusive parents actions, by trying to fight a losing battle that must be fought if they are to honor the duty of care they have to their children.
It is essential that any reforms implemented as a result of the review of the 2006 Family Law Amendments (and any future changes) ensure there are no violations of the first and foremost Rights of our Children – their right to be protected from harm, and to live with out fear, in the warm, safe embrace of unconditional love.
Surely the Government can see the necessity of making well informed decisions regarding the specifics of any changes. Hopefully those responsible for making these decisions will question the effectiveness of a Justice System that only takes into account substantiated proof (scientific fact?) when making judgments that are guided by Laws which have been based on inductively reasoned generalizations drawn from the observation of limited numbers of specific instances (philosophical opinion?). Even the existence of the many heated debates over Australian Shared Parenting Laws highlights the fact that those generalizations were a misrepresentation of the prevailing truth.
The Laws that govern the Australian Family Court System need to be decided by using deductive reasoning to draw valid, logical conclusions from the overwhelmingly substantial amount of relevant empirical evidence available, and most people would agree that those facts can be easily found in the historically prevalent and devastating long term effects observed in children who have witnessed and/or experienced any kind of abuse.
The proven reliability of empirical knowledge obtained by making specific, logical and valid deductions based on vast numbers of instances that demonstrate very clear and consistent long term trends is surely what is required to ensure that the changes made to Family Laws are effective. It is essential that once amended, Family Laws consistently achieve their purpose of effectively guiding judgments in those cases where in there is a need to protect children from a risk of probable future abuse but where most often there is no proof other than circumstantial evidence, victim testimony and professional opinion based on hearsay. It is the only viable path to follow if we are to build a Family Law System in which Justice will actually serve in the best interests of the child.
Shared Parenting decisions in Australia (introduced by legislation in 2006) have been strongly criticised for giving precedence to the rights of parents to a relationship with their children regardless of the quality of that relationship or the effects on the children. Courts have been criticised for failing to protect children from violence and sexual abuse. In recent years state politicians have referred an average of one mother a week to me after their child reported being sexually abused by the father and the court gave residence or shared care to the accused parent. In most cases, the mothers have been given occasional, supervised contact or none at all. Occasionally there are fathers whose children have been abused by their mother’s boyfriend and even their mothers, often while under the influence of drugs. Protective parents, both male and female, have been accused of concocting these allegatons and they are accused of ‘Parent Alienation’. Some mothers with newborn babies have been ordered to hand the infants over to their fathers on a weekly or even 2 day roster despite being breast-fed. In other words, no consideration has been given to the well-documented (by Bruce Perry et al) effects of trauma on young children.
State politicians send clients to me because they are unable to assist given that Family Law is a federal matter. I can only listen. The pattern is well described by Dr Wendy Foote in her PhD thesis and statistics shown on the Family Court of Australia’s website. When mothers find that children are being abused by their fathers and there is no prosecution because the children are too young to be cross examined in our adverarial criminal court, they are in a quandery. If they do nothing, state child protection services can step in, remove the child and seek a care and protection Order; on the other hand if they turn to the Family Court for an order providing supervised or no contact, solicitors now advise them to settle at mediation and not tell the Family Court because of the risk that they will lose residence of their children. When mothers turn to the Court they are much more likely than fathers to be accused of imagining the abuse because they are mentally ill or vindictive. Family Court stats confirm that mothers are more likely than fathers to be deprived of their children because of mental illness. This often despite assessments by respeted psychiatrists that they are normal.
Parents can be punished for making false allegations of abuse but we have yet to hear of fathers being punished for false denials. And as Charles Pragnell says, Australian judges have knowingly given shared parenting and overnight care to convicted child sex offenders leaving young children to protect themselves. These men would not be allowed to work with other people’s children given their inability to get police clearance.
The Attorney General has commissioned and so far ignored four reports and recommendations showing that the Family Court is not protecting children from violence. One was published by the Australian Institute of Family Studies, another by retired Family Court judge Professor Richard Chisholm and the most recent by Professors Dale Bagshaw (UniSA) and Thea Brown (Monash University). Historically, (state funded) statutory child protection services have avoided investigating allegations of child abuse when they are involved in the Family Court or subject to a Court order. At the same time, the Family Court lacks the resources to investigate allegations.
An issue of concern is that Family Court judges are not educated in child development and child abuse and they obviously should be given that they are making potentially life-changing decisions about children so they can judge whether the advice they receive from children’s legal representatives (often qualified only in law) and professional witnesses is theoretically sound and sensible. Despite research by Professor Brown showing the contrary, some judges persist in saying that mothers concoct allegations of abuse to be vindictive.
Yes, fathers are still being deprived of contact with their children because, paying child support and rent, they have insufficient funds to take their case to the court. Child Support is an issue in shared parenting. Mothers are preventing fathers from having overnight access to children because it would reduce their allowance. Fathers who have had no relationship with their children are appearing out of the blue to claim shared parenting, not necessarily because they want a relationship but because they want to stop paying Child Support. These issues have to be resolved for shared parenting to be effective.
Children are also dissatisfied with the system.They would like a voice and complain that a) their views and wishes are either not heard or not accurately represented and (b) they are being forced by strangers to live in circumstances against their wishes. Adolescents are especially angry that they cant participate in school sport when they are not available every weekend and have to stay with a parent who lives far away. On the other hand, if they are to talk to judges, those judges should surely have an educational background that goes beyond family law.
When he retired, the Chief Justice Alistair Nicholson was on record as saying that cases with allegations of child abuse should not be in the Family Court at all; it wasnt created for dealing with them. He pointed to the fact that there were many courts dealing with children’s issues and even the youth court would be a better option. On the other hand, the Family Court would have far fewer cases if there was real reform in the criminal court as recommended by some judges and reports; it is widely thought that the British adversarial system inherited by commonwealth countries is inappropriate for cases dependent on child witnesses because few children have the sophisticated communication skills needed to withstand rigorous cross examination by barristers. As long ago as 1996 NAPCAN recommended that an investigatory system is needed, ie where all the evidence can be investigated and the needs of the child and treatment of offenders is considered.
Congratulations Christina!
This article is well written, well researched and the arguments are lucid. I will post it on to my web site and pass it to all our Freedom Programme friends. We have a Facebook group with the snappy title of ‘Stop women being forced to give abusive fathers access to children’. When I last looked there were about 1500 members all telling horror stories about the family courts.
Thank you from us all.
I hardly call this piece balanced.
However, it does illustrate the need for open courts as referencesa are made to family court proceedings where at the moment the public only get see limited parts if at all except when there has been a murder and we then have it out in the open.
Judicial training is certainly needed on DV and child abuse as fathers are seen as the perpetrators when it is just as often the woman perpetrating or simply making such allegations for advantage.
If one properly researches these matters one finds that over a 10 year period 800 children were murdered by Mother [resident parent] and/or boyfriend ie not the father.
Confusing FNF’s work with what women’s aid do is hardly representative of the situation and anyway as I recall Neil McEvoys article said £250k spent on DV for male victims and £11 million for female victims. Not exactly equality of services. We then have South Wales Police helping statistically by not recording violence and abuse by women as crimes to be given an incident number. No wonder they’ve shot up the leagues for reducing crime!
By concentrating only on murders by fathers – and conveniently ignoring Baby P, Khyra Ishaq, Chloe Murray and Aaron Gilbert [Swansea Wales] where the father had been shut out and/or concerns were concealed from the father as is often the case by child protection services – doesn’t address the real problems coming from the family courts. Non resident fathers are seen as non existent by these services.
Don’t forget FNF report seeing a number of women/mothers/grandmothers etc turning up to their meetings because they are now the similar ‘victims’ of the family courts as fathers – does Christina see these women as violent and controlling women or are these women simply not allowed to have shared custody of the children as they used to have before they unwittingly went to the family courts where they naively thought they would get a fair hearing.
I would bet that the reason they lost is because they had more money for the lawyers to grab than the father. Or perhaps the father was as manipulative and controlling as many of the Mothers who currently get custody in the family courts. These women/mothers are apparently as welcome to the assistance of FNF as any father yet I never hear of such reciprocity by Women’s Aid!
UK – guard against shared parenting. It’s a nice title that gives an appearance of balance but it’s not – here in Australia, thousands of horrified domestic violence mothers who have told their story to the court have watched their children given to their husbands and labelled liars as they can’t prove it – fined for daring to bring it up. Kids alone with violent fathers, the ones that go to court, now with no protection from their mother. There is a court culture now. Solicitors tell mothers to hide any violence or risk losing their child. Hide marks, don’t go to doctors or it will be worse for you. Settle for the child to live in violence half the time rather than lose them 100%. It’s an unbearable situation.
In abuse homes, children have no say where they go, as the courts apply shared parenting as fathers rights. To check this, just google fathers rights in Australia. They are labelled into groups such as “the Shared Parenting Council” and Family Law Web Guide. Great terms, aren’t they? Don’t be fooled – homicide after homicide, study after study due to child deaths, and still the government won’t touch it, it’s so strong and fathers rights are so loud compared to children who are gagged by the Family Court.
Child support in this country also lessens greatly with overnight stays with the father. Fathers that have never shown any interest in their kids are now lining up for custody.
Approve Shared Parenting at your peril, UK. Don’t become a fathers rights victim like Australia.
Well done Christina. Thank you for this very clear and well-referenced piece. Take a bow!
Well done,Cristina! Women HAVE to learn of what is secretly happening beneath their feet,or they’ll continue to incubate children for abusers like dozens of thousands of us in the UK have,and millions of us around Europe ( Western and Eastern),USA,Canada,Australia,New Zeland,thanks to new “any father is God” motto of these secret, unaccountable courts. Fathers’ rights groups,some led by DV perpetraitors and extreme misogynistis,the likes of whom stone women to death in some countries and make laws that allow women to be tortured and murdered with no punishment for the murderer,sponsored by wealthy powerful misogynists with huge egos,have been building a bomb underneath women’s feet for the last 10 or so years.They have been campaigning vigorously,fiercely,with polititians,academics,the media,yet so little is publicly known about it.
I have lost custody of my little girl when she was 2 a few years ago,in the UK.The father abused me so severely that my baby nearly died at birth,she was so weak yet full term.He had a harem of mistresses throughout my pregnancy and went out every night when not working abroad. Though I lived in his isolation knowing he was with mistresses when I gave birth and later,and was abused by him when he was at home,I shielded my baby from my enormous pain and fear and was a very good,devoted mother.I am a teetotal,family-woman who is happiest cooking and baking,and ,when my abuser threatened with taking my baby away if I wanted a divorce,I was 100% sure that I could never-ever lose custody of such a young child who was thriving in my care,especially to such an abusive,negligent, bad Narcissist.My friends and family just laughed off his threats saying “women and children are truly protected in Britain” and fathers like him are probably not even allowed to drag their families through courts for long.When,finally,after 3 years of abuse,his serial womanising and disinterest in family life I filed for a divorce,he filed for custody of our baby and WON hands down despite several doctors writing letters for the court praising me as a mother and exposing him as a bad erant father! He was also allowed to move my destraught baby,who had been with me 24/7,with no family around other then dad when in town and with very sporadic brief interest in her, 300 miles away from me,dump her on a distant relative and travel with work,go out,womanise…Our toddler was so depressed that words cannot describe,it was horrific to watch.She started having nightmares,rapidly dropped in weight,cried not to be sent back when visiting me,yet when I begged CAFCASS and the judges involved to do something,I was threatened with having contact with my daughter rapidly reduced,or even banned! She was with the father and will get used to it,was their plan for her!!! It was torture of both of us,while her dad laughed his head off, especially when I also had NO divorce settlement and he took all the matrimonial money.I was a dead woman walking with pain for years.Words cannot express what this court fashion does to an average woman,you cannot walk,work,sleep,function with grief,it is so intense and non-stop.
Realisation that there are thousands of women in similar situations in the UK now dawned on me too late.I wish I had known about that secret world earlier.Then I also learnt that ,in the past,in Britain,women were legally considered to be just incubators and nannies for their husbands and read about Caroline Norton who two centruries ago lost custody of her children to her wife-batterer barrister husband who also managed to cut all her ties with her children as well.And now,Britain,alongside other countries,seems to be heading back towards the same.But,at least,women were aware of what was in store for them in case of a divorce,now they are totally oblivious to it.
When I see pregnant women all around me now,my stomach churns and I wonder if they know that many of them (with divorce rate so high) are just bearing children that will be taken away from them and the mothers will go through the same,all-consuming pain I went through for many years and still am,to an extent. The fact that women like myself are court gagged,and that some of us who have tried to speak out have had all contact with our children denied as a punishment,and some have even been imprisoned, adds to frustration and pain,as does the pretence of Britain’s “democracy” and “respect for human rights” and British sending preachers on women’s and children’s rights to developing countries to preach those rights that are so badly breached in secret family courts in their own back garden.Women have to have the right to know the truth and Cristina has brought that truth closer to home for,at least,a handful of the women who will come across this article.
No wonder there is so much propaganda blasting from all sides about the importance of fathers,researches that sound dubious and unrealistic (do FR groups sponsor them?),distorted facts on differences between men and women (men are fictitiously presented as women),researches on fatherhood,all positive,constantly mushrooming in papers. Men rule the world and put themselves before the children they do not carry for nine months and give birth to! As simple as that.I feel sickened. I have heard that many mothers are losing custody to their philandering husbands as they have “no male role model at home”,yet the father and his mistress are a two-parent family already. And Dai Pugh,the blogger here,in the cases of child abuse you’ve cited,the abuse and murders of those poor children happened once a male role model,stepfather, got on the scene,before that,with their mothers only,the children were happy,well looked after and safe. The thousands of cases of “good” fathers murdering their children in the event of separation,internationally,daily,compared to extremely rare cases of mothers doing the same (I have no sympathy for them either),cannot be underestimated. While I do not doubt that there are spiteful,vicious,evil mothers who put good fathers into trouble for their own sadistic satisfaction,and such fathers have been victimised further in courts until recently,most of the fathers who apply for full custody are controlling,manipulative,selfish,sometimes violent women’ haters who just want to hurt the more and have the children as weapons of control,and also to avoid maintenance – primary reason for most of them.
I think that only only are the judiciary badly educated on DV and psychotic abuse of women,but I feel they do not care and want abusers to win,I wish I was mistaken,I hope I am,but something just does not smell rights to me.
Also,the fact that children have no voice in courts but can be forced to live with a parent they do not want to live with,now increasingly the father,is a disgrace for a country that preaches human rights to the world.
It used to be all about the mother’s rights and I became a victim of that and wasn’t allowed to see my father who is a very good father and now it is totally for Father’s rights and my children became victims of that and the court tried to force them to see there father,who had already been convicted of child neglect,crack.,battery against his father, just to start and the court also knew he had been terrorizing us and had tried to run over my son. She refused most of my evidence including cps reports of neglect and refused to speak to our children 14 and 8. My children wrote several letters to the judge begging her for help which she refused to read and said that the children have no say in it and I was accused of brainwashing them. Finally after thousands of letters to every public official and group I could find. I was he lost his visitation rights for now. I let my house of 14yrs go into foreclosure and moved out of the county just to escape. I will do anything to keep my children safe and the court system has no rights to keep me from protecting them and enabling someone to hurt or kill them. I have no rights as a parent I have duties and responsibilities…parenting is not a right. Children are the ones that should have rights. They are being discriminated against and have no rights even in America supposedly the land of the free. Where the one’s that should matter the most are treated as property not humans.
A well written article and more. Responses by Mel Stewart, Professor Briggs and Charles Pragnell among others hit the nail on the head!
It never ceases to amaze me that the father’s groups never respond or comment on the abuse and death suffered by vulnerable children at the hands of sociopath fathers or because of the actions of these men,its like it never happened! They dive their heads right into the sand.
All I can say to these groups and the previous, current and whichever incumbent Australian Govt we have is that they have the blood of innocents on their hands and hope that they sleep well at night.
Well said Bridget its amazing that prior to enforced child support fathers were usually quite happy to be absent coincidental..I think not.
And Mr Pugh women whose children are actually listened to and succeed in living solely with mum are NOT manipulative, violent or controlling,perhaps their argument and that of their children’s is too compelling, convincing, too laden with proof for any court to ignore, perhaps those children were so traumatized by the “poor father” who probably alienated his own children through his behavior toward them!
Most of these men crying PAS have actually attempted to alienate the children against their mothers and succeeded in actually alienating the children from themselves..self alienation I recall Charles Pragnell calling them and he is so right!
The current laws are disgusting..they treat children like pieces of furniture and subject them to not only abusive parents leaving them unprotected ,but also severe psychological abuse and a dysfunctional lifestyle which will affect them as adults, children need routine,stability and to know where they are at
everyday.. living in 2 different homes does not do this..Most kids I personally know who live like this HATE it even those who come from balanced “divorced” parents who work in unison..which is rare anyway..perhaps these parents or fathers should I say that advocate for their children to live in this manner should live in 2 different homes,in 2 different suburbs or even states ,with 2 very different sets of families week on and week off for about a year and see how they like it.
SHARED PARENTING = CHILD SUPPORT AVOIDANCE …nothing more!
I also want to add that I see it from an alternative perspective too. My husband loves his 3 kids, he realized that shared parenting and living in 2 different homes was dysfunctional and that his children hated the idea of it. Because he actually loves them and puts their best interests before his, he unselfishly agreed that they live with mum..All 3 are balanced, community minded affectionate teenagers and young men who have a fantastic relationship with their dad. My husband pays substantial maintenance and helps me with my 3 children (whose father avoids anything more than the minimum child support at all costs) and our baby too. That is what good parenting is all about..putting the needs,comfort,best interests of your children before your own.
what a fantastic article, and so true! my childrens are being emotionally abused, have been for over 5 yrs, but, in my experience, the system is more interested in the fathers rights or wants than the children. i was a DV victim, i never had to report it as he was caught in the act by the family support worker. Despite this, i still allowed contact as i felt it was aimed at me and not the kids but he got a new partner and it started again. The kids see it, the kids are scared and the kids are screamed at constantly. i tried to protect them but not enough evidence was available and previous history doesn’t count. the biggest worry is he was adopted himself due to the fact that his dad murdered his 3 yr old step daughter so i have the additional worry of history repeating itself, he so like him personality-wise and DV was problem in that case too. People are listening but no-one has any power to stop it. Judges AND solicitors, i feel, should have to undertake compulsive training in DV and child abuse before being allowed to participate in Family courts. A tour aroung womans refuges and seeing the fear in these kids eyes should make them see exactly what effect DV has. Also, i do have to say, a great big thank you to all the bitter ones who, for no other reason than revenge, severed relationships between father and child. Because of you, victims of DV are being abused all over again and because of you, fathers rights groups are being listened too and rewarded whilst the DV groups and refuges are tossed aside. So thank you, i hope your little victory was worth it and i hope you can sleep easy with a clear conscience whilst children all over the world are abused, tortured and killed during forced contact.
Christina Weds clearly outlines the atrocious situation the Australian Family Law Courts are in. Charles Pragnell and Professor Freda Briggs also once again give their well informed views. Thank you.
The Australian Family Law Court refuse to put the rights of children above any rights of the parents. Most cases that end up in the Family Law Court are because of abuse conditions. The court refuse to acknowledge this and when the protective mother tries her best to protect her children from this abuse, she is then labeled, disbelieved and humilated. Her children are then taken from her and placed with the person the mother tried to protect her children from. The chidren are not given even the basic respect of independent thought or instinct. If the children refuse to visit the mother is blamed as blackmailing them, or trying to alienate them from the father. This is not the case.
Whilst in the court process, the children are forgotten. They are viewed by the abuser as a property or control piece that must be gained to continue his abuse. This process can go on for many years, it seems in the Australian Family Law Court that one set of rules are for the Father and one for the Mother. There does not seem to be any seeking of truth or any real interest in the rights and best interests of our children.
Sociopaths are genius at disguise, manipulation and lying. They have no empathy nor do they have insight. Trying to share parent with them is impossible as it is their way or no way without any remorse for those around them they trample on. Other human beings are just tools to give them the power and control they need. Shared Parental Responsibility is a joke in this arena. It should not be a consideration. It promotes domestic violence and gives power to an already sick mind. The children of course, have been completely forgotten in this process.
my xs has anti social behavior he has been dragging me through the courts now for nine years and uses the court to control my life, our child is severely traumatized by his antics and whenever he talks about our child he refers to him as little c-nt when no one is present, but makes out to the court he loves him so much he wont’s shared care he has tried to drown his son on a unsupervised visit and now after not seeing him for a number of years wont’s contact again, this year alone i have been to court four times which is costing the tax payers heaps of money as mty xs recons he is on the dole but yet works for himself owns his own home, im a full-time carer of two children with a disability one of whom was injured by my xs who kicked him in the face and threw him in his room on his head now this has affected his vision he will never be the same again this happened when he was two years old a few weeks after this he tried to kill us there has been numerous avos which he has breached and been charged for. in court he lies and gets away with it even though i can prove that he is lying . the court says this is in the best interest of the child all the Australia government and the current family laws are doing is raising children to grow up with no respect for our government and the law they have low self esteem and will follow in the abusers footsteps if this court appointed abuse is allowed to continue i have also suffered because of my xs he has raped me bashed me and injured my spine in front of my children and after all this im still asking the court for him to be mentally accessed so now what im going to do is start a class action suit against john Howard for all the pain and suffering he has caused us for changing the family laws to be in the best interest of a abuser.
Well done Cristina! Congratulations to the well researched and presented article. Pleasure for us to read such serious essay about what hurts us in our everyday life. Shared parenting failed in Australia and will fail everywhere. It’s simply reason is that there are a lot of person -especially men – who are not able to SHARE. They don’t want to share the problems, the school stuffs, the troubles and health issues. They want the happy days with their children and no more. Shared parenting would mean to take the responsibility. But those, who have no doubt in their mind that they are doing everything well…I think it simply doesn’t work.
I don’t want to point fingers to the fathers but it seems that they are pointing to protective mothers who only want a childhood for their kids.
Women have to respect themselves and fight for their rights despite of the numerous fathers rights’ groups which are mostly want only a revenge. DV cases are not well handled not only in the UK but across Europe, Canada or Australia. There are a lot of mothers who are on run only because they wanted to protect their children. This is the result of shared parenting, DV ignorance.
There’s no actual punishment for DV perpetrators even if it’s proven by court. They have rights toward their children despite the fact that they abused the mother. How can a judge give shared parenting right to this kind of father? Mothers are tortured by courts and by fathers which is allowed by courts.
The family court system but for first the law needs a huge change. And we are also responsible for that to do anything we can for this.
“Because he actually loves them and puts their best interests before his, he unselfishly agreed that they live with mum..”
This is it right here. This IS most men/fathers in the world.
A fair system would be to award fathers the same amount of time with their child as they were spending pre separation. If the father was the primary carer then sure award the father the majority of the time but if the father was absent and never attended school functions, sporting events and barely spent time with his kids then that shouldn’t change. Shared parenting is a cool concept but how about these fathers advocate for shared parenting before separation or divorce. Maybe there wouldn’t be so many divorces and effed up children if fathers put the best interests of their children first. Of course it will never happen because the shared parenting issue is purely about child support.
Freda Briggs brought up that mothers were denying fathers contact with the children because they would lose a proportion of the child support. I say too bad, the Fathers Rights campaigners fought hard for the legislation to allow for that and if mothers are denying contact because they need the funds to support the children, suck eggs fathers rights!
Brilliant Article.
The issue of abusers receiving automatic contact and even full custody is worldwide.
In Ireland, a child who refused to go into the same room as his abusive father had social services apply for an order to give Electric Shock Therapy to the child, to burn out the memory cells, so the child could then be placed full time with the psychopath father.
The judge spoke to the child, who agreed that the father knew nothing about the child and that the child was terrified of him, then apologised to the mother saying he had to obey the social workers as they were the experts.
This father did not want custody or contact to begin with. It was his lawyer coaching him to ask for it, in order to make him LOOK GOOD in front of the judge re domestic violence.
As an independent advocate now I see the same pattern worldwide with battered women being told by lawyers not to dare mention domestic abuse or child abuse, as they will lose custody.
Apparently, the judges are sick to death of hearing about domestic violence and sexual abuse and the lawyers are placing these learned men and women of the bench.
I regularly hear children in the custody of abusers scream and cry for someone to come and get them out as they call themselves “hostages”.
These children are unable to understand why courts could possibly order them to live with known abusers.
They are also confused and ask why are the judges etc are rewarding abusers and punishing the protective parents and them.?
As adults we owe the children a proper explanation as to why we still treat them like in Victorian times.
Might I also mention certain “expert” witnesses giving conferences to judges in UK and recommending children be placed with domestic abusers for the reason ” that abusers are more authoritarian and keep children in their place”
I guess bottom line if I read the main article and most the following comments (most of which are too long and in the fair according to Charles Pragnell’s belief “just stories” from the last post), Men are unfit mainly to be sole parents and in “Clementine” view.
“Because he actually loves them and puts their best interests before his, he unselfishly agreed that they live with mum..”
Unless of course she buggers off and leaves them. Whilst I understand the cons of shared custody, I get the feeling that men make lousy single parents, and are most liable to be abusive. However what I have not heard in this debate, is the issue of step[ parent abuse. For example Sally leaves Joe, and gets involved with Fred. Fred has a hard time with the Sally’s kids, knocks them about a bit. Joe who may not have been a model parent who went to all the school functions etc, and may regret that, sues for full custody, then Sally does not want to lose her kidsm unfortunately she loves Fred, who is not a bad guy just has a bit of a bad temper and she will not leave him.
What I think we should do is to be preventative and educate about relationships and comittment. couples should have at least a year’s marriage pre before they get married. Is that bad idea. Or perhaps it would put the experts out of a job?
I still struggle to believe what has happened to my children and myself after my experience in those secret courts in the UK. It was so gruesome, so sadistic, so one-sided, so unjust, and they knew it, I am sure. They sided with my abuser to abuse my children and myself further. The article is good but too lenient. It is not, I think, that they do not know, have no experience – they do not care! They consciously abuse and side with abusers. They ignore letters from doctors, nurseries, health visitors, teachers, everyone who knows the family and believe the mother is a good mother, and still force the children to regularly stay with or live with the father who took little or no interest in the children before he was supposed to pay maintenance. Good fathers do not behave like that and treat young children as objects,sociopaths do and they thrive in those courts.
I feel so let down by Women’s rights MPs of all parties, children’s ministers, children’s commissioners of the last decade, PMs, not to mention judges and CAFCASS officers who laugh at these atrocities and at the pain of mothers and children. Us moms who have been wronged by those courts went through years of abuse already and we needed protection and not state abuse. How can so many people in authority turn a blind eye to what is going on worldwide guided by the hundreds of FR groups brimming with members who instinctively hate women and concentrate on that hatred and not paying for the children, place themselves before their innocent children. I know they know we are gagged and all that is underground so that women are not aware, but don’t they have conscience?
As a single woman, I am a dating agency member and I’ve felt shocked by the number of men having full custody of their children upon divorces and blaming the mothers for this or that to justify what they’ve done.But their number is simply staggering, as if the women of Britain don’t have a clue how to look after their children. Some men have full custody of very young children,even babies. The number of those men is noticably high and was perplexing for me before I learnt about the true reason why that is happening.FR groups and new (selfish) fathers’ rights,not ordinary men’s rights.
Young children belong with their mothers and deserve good contact with their good fathers apart from in exceptional circumstances for both, and what FR groups have done is utterly selfish! What is happening can seriously backfire at the social structure of our society, destroy family, produce depressed teenagers and frustrated violent young people. If children want to live with the father and he is a decent father, why not? But how can the court be allowed to force them to or to part a good mother from her children under the pretence that just any father is so important? No, he is no – not at all! Families don’t need bad fathers and if the Government truly supports their “charities”, they should be ashamed of themselves.
I don’t think I’ve read such man hating rubbish dressed as pseudo theories.
To answer the points made with reference to my piece. The deaths that I mentioned occur too regularly and were whilst the children were in the custody of the mother. It is happening too often and we see again and again the child protection services “supporting” the mother and not the child. Aisling Murray murdered Chloe Murray, not a boyfriend. Women are not natural protectors as they put their interests first. They put their new boyfriend before the children and then covered up the abuse. After all if anonymous reports had been made about the father Gareth Gilbert alleging harm to little Aaron the social services and South Wales Police would have been over him like a rash and removed Aaron to safety. However, because the child was with mummy no urgency and in any event the social worker if she had reacted properly and visited would have probably showered the mother with support.
Follow the money I say – watch out for the lawyer with legal aid as she [it often is a she] will milk the public purse like an alcoholic drains a bottle. Mothers [and father] often do not realise how their emotional turmoil is being fuelled by such lawyers for their own ends.
Look at the industries that have flowered as a result of the family courts – domestic violence, child support, experts such as Meadows, Zeitlin and Bentonvim with their untested theories. Now they realise the well is running dry so they are supportive of father custody – legal aid won’t pay, fathers usually have more money so will pay for the family court hangers on.
A child with both parents works as it has done for millenia. Get over it. Maybe if you stopped using children to get back at your former husband/partner and letting the lawyers fleece you you might find yourself feeling better about yourself which I suspect is where the real problem lies. Dragging it out for years earns your lawyer money but gets your children and you nothing. You are not necessarily a victim of your partner but of those who say they are helping you. Don’t expect the family courts to look after your children – finance has priority. Baby P is a case in point. Mummy P had legal aid, Daddy P did not so Daddy P got stuffed with a contact order instead of shared residence and so was regarded as a non entity by the child protection services who kept him wholly in the dark.
How many times has an intractable court case suddenly settled when the lawyers can’t get any money?
Thank you, Cristina, it is s refreshing to hear about the child’s point of view, rather than fathers’ rights. And it is so important that the implications of shared care – which, initially, can appear to be fair – are understood within the gendered nature of domestic abuse, and parenting.
Maypole Women is a new UK charity supporting women and their children through separation and divorce. For a detailed account of how family law fails to meet the needs of women and children please see our recent report Valuing Motherhood
http://maypole.org.uk/research.html.
This page also lists various recent research papers from the UK and Australia on shared care and domestic violence.
If you only have 5 minutes our Executive Summary can be found on our home page
http://maypole.org.uk/.
The pros and cons of shared parenting are so much more complex than has been discussed in the media and elsewhere. One solution cannot fit all.
Dai Pugh,
“women are not protectors”
Ha,ha, and fathers who go out every night like my ex did, womanise serially and obsessively throughout their wives’ pregnancies, like my ex did, force them to wear stilettos and summer clothes in winter when pregnant, like my ex did, batter their wives and take no interest in their children in their free time, are the protectors of their families? And such fathers file for custody and now obtain it! When I needed help with my baby daughter, I had no one there for me as dad was either in a nightclub, in bed with one of his many mistresses or in sports venues, nowhere to be seen for us and when I’d call him to beg for help (broken down heating, water pipe burst, baby had high T, I had migrane), he turned off his mobile – no interest at all, yet now HE has full custody of her and I see her about once a month!
Yes, it is true that there are many women who allow men to wipe floor with them, but not only new boyfriends, but also some allow the fathers of their children to abuse the whole family on and on, my own mother did that and I despise her. While there is no doubt that there are bad mothers around, spiteful, selfish, worship any new monstrous boyfriend after a divorce just not to be alone, it is beyond dispute that it is far more common that children get seriously hurt, murdered, abused by the father/stepfather than their own mothers, especially if the mothers remain single. Don’t give me FR groups’ fiction that women are as aggressive,violent and negligent as men! Nature made us that way. Male animals are aggressive, promiscuous, domineering,and females bear the offspring, nurture them, go and get food, teach them hunting skills, while males fight, draw blood on each other and jump from female to female siring offspring, like many men do. We are part of Nature and no FR fabrications can change the reality.
Is it not a bizarre and horrendous paradox, that while child protection social workers, the police, medical and nursing personnel are working tirelessly to protect children from abuse, that Family Courts (Judges, lawyers, CAFCASS workers) are colluding in Ordering children to be abused and even killed?
How can such a situation have come about when laws relating to children and those charged with implementing such laws, are acting so obviously against each other?
If FNF and other Father’s Rights groups are as concerned about the abuse of children as they would try to have us believe, why are they not fighting for children’s needs, wishes, and rights to be given paramountcy in the Family Courts, rather than solely pressing for their own rights?
The paramount right of children is to be protected from abuse and exploitation – why are Family Court judges, lawyers, and CAFCASS workers not upholding these rights but are continually violating those rights of children?
The lawmakers have certainly created a tragic mess as a consequence of the laws they have passed regarding child custody and visitation under Family Laws and many thousands of children are suffering the consequences.
The law doesn’t favour mothers. It merely favours the best interests of the children. And those interests usually coincide with the children staying with the mother since, in the majority of cases, she has been the primary care-giver. But I don’t think it would be wrong for us to favour mothers, barring abusive ones. As a society do we want to turn mothers into fathers and fathers into mothers? Who looks after the children is a debate we should all get involved in – and not jump down people’s throats for their opinions. I noticed pictures of David Cameron in the news. Clearly he’s a caring, involved father. But if he did 50/50 parenting time he’d never manage the job of Prime Minister. Let’s face it, most men don’t want to be the primary care-givers. Most women are happy in that role. They take substantial periods out of work to raise children – that is reflected in the pay gap between men and women. But it’s a sacrifice many women are prepared to make. This has worked well for a long time. Has anyone noticed that the explosion of custody cases only happened after we started to question the role of the mother as primary care-giver? Maybe it’s time to revert to that.
In response to Dai Pugh: I feel sorry for grandparents and mothers excluded from children’s lives but there is a possible explanation that doesn’t involve demonising the mothers. If the grandparents are parents of the father who is alleged to be a DV perpetrator or who is abusive in some other way, the mother would be understandably reluctant about contact. I have seen cases where allowing access to other relatives just lets an abuser back in because the other family members find it difficult, for a variety of reasons, to exclude him. Perpetrators are hallmarked by their obsessive need to maintain control after their victim has escaped. If they get custody they tighten their control over the children by systematically excluding the mother and undermining her relationship with the kids. There is a difference, I think, between a mother who has fears about abuse excluding the dad; and a perpetrator who excludes the mother because he’s got to have control. This is what we are seeing in the courts at the moment. It’s not an easy fact to face that we have a lot of deadbeat dads applying for custody. One of their political tactics may be to convince politicians to introduce shared parenting. Politicians shouldn’t listen. Parents who want shared parenting can arrange this without the help of the courts and in fact they are doing this in the majority of cases. We shouldn’t introduce laws which will help abusive dads in the courts to gain shared parenting.
Brilliant, piece. This is exactly what has been happening in my case.
Fathers For Justice have been campaining for Fathers Rights In recent years, and while I agree with some of what they stand for. Having witnessed first hand that some women will play God with their children my Husband a good Father who payed for his Daughter had seen her most of her young life, was suddenly frozen out and she was given a new name, so yes I agree some women do do this. BUT.
Having been through the court process myself for the last 3yrs. My Ex Husband has abused the legal aid system to bully and intimidate me and my children and make a complete mockery of the British family court system. For the last 18mnths of these years I have repensented myself in a court sytem where my voice and my childrens voice was not heard. My abusive Ex Husband would present himself as the doting Father and then not even turn up for contact, he couldn’t even manage to sent them a birthday present nevermind sticking to the order which allowed him to call twice a week. I was forced and threatned with arrest if I did not comply and had sent them 6hrs away to a man who wanted to punish me and the only way he could was through my children. He was ordered to take drugs tests4 infact and even though he had failed them all, was allowed to have them for up to 2wks at a time without supervision.
Eventully even though I begged, pleaded no one seemed to care. Then my worst fears were confirmed he had hit them, I did call the police but was made to feel I was wasting their time. I complained and had a new cafcass officer assigned as the a last report was a joke!! It was screaming safeguarding and domestic abuse, when he was questioned he said I never told him, so he hadn’t bothered to do a risk assesment.
As the court now promised to do a fact finding, I was assigned a new judge a Circuit Judge in fact to look at the case last Friday in fact.
He could not believe that the court had ordered that he had staying contact even though he failed 4 tests and that all the evidence pointed to an aggressive abusive man copled with the fact that he clearly abused drugs too, he said it was a definite safeguarding issue and it had been overlooked and it was totally unexeptable.
If it was not for this Judge I don’t know what would have happened, I had had the same District Judge for 3 years and he had allowed this to happen.
Now I feel at ease that my children are safe, seeing their Dad in a safe enviroment. Its not about me I am an adult, I can cope with this, they can’t they are children.
Now I am trying to re-build my life, my children have been deeply scared. I am trying to pick up the pieces.
I’m a victim of the Australian Family Court system. I paid almost $2,000 for a court-ordered Family Assessment that stated “the father displays a high level of understanding his child’s needs”, amongst other glowing statements about him. But nobody believed me that he emotionally and psychologically hurts her so that he can get a buzz out of it. I watched this dynamic play out recently. Our child turned 7 yesterday. About 3 months ago me and her planned and have arranged her party. Invitations are out, and all have RSVP’d. Her father also asked her what she wanted for her birthday party and she told him that she wanted all her friends to be invited to a pool party at the local indoor swimming centre. For 3 months he led her to believe this is what he would do. 10 days before the day, when she asked about the invitations he said he was “still doing them”. Three days before her birthday she learns he has done nothing and there will be no party but she will accompany him “out to dinner” instead. I’m even asked to supply the party dress for her to attend. As a mother I have had to deal with the heart-wrenching disappointment of a small child, cuddle her in her tears, try and soothe the immense amount of psychological hurt he has caused her. This is just one incident, but they are ongoing. Each contact weekend creates yet another avenue for the father to get his “jollies” out of making his child upset. Each time she comes home with something he has said that has pierced into her soul. “Daddy says that I’m stupid and that I will probably be stupid for the rest of my life. Is this true, Mummy?”
But nobody believed me when I told them what he was like. All those who are supposed to protect the children from harm did not do their job. On a personal level they were all hoodwinked and fooled. On an institutional level their systems failed, at every step. They concluded he displayed as a “kind, considerate, loving father, in touch with his child’s needs”. Nothing could be further from the truth.
One poster asked the questions” A Society-Sized Cycle?
Has anybody even stopped to think that perhaps the term “cycle of abuse” now describes a far greater cycle of perpetual dysfunction than simply the personal relationships between perpetrators and their victims, a cycle that in fact occurs and continues on a much larger scale – one that encompasses modern society as a whole?”
yes, I have stopped to think about this a lot. One perpetual cycle of dysfunction running throughout society.
This article is so true its scary…I’m currently being taken to court by my ex. The relationship he had with our children has totally broken down and I am totally in a vicious circle. Contact stopped due to their request but he is using this against me blaming me for brainwashing them. I’m lucky that his abuse was mental but internal scars cant be seen and now im left feeling like i just cant trust anyone ever again. I’m so scared that hes going to be totally believed and Im made to look stupid just like he wants.
I love my children, and this seperation etc has put a huge strain on myself and them and it is soooo hard to keep our lives normal and happy. I want him th have a relationship with them, I grew up without a dad and I really dont want that for my children and, the break is nice a clean house for a few hours is a godsend (boring but nice).
My domestic life hasn’t changed at all Im still doing everything I was before whilst dealing with the pain and fallout. I just wish men who do these sorts of things to women actually got help to admit and realise what they’ve done and how although they’ve moved on to their next victim, the pain suffering and lack of respect they have for mothers and children who have had to suffer years in the relationship andthe after-effects.