AFCC: The Man behind the Curtain

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


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


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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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



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

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

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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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

Stop The Responsible Fatherhood Bill

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

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

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

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

Some of these punishments include:

"Isolating The Child From The Protective Parent"

"Orders inhibiting the Child From access to Counseling"

"Removal of The Mothers Passport'

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(C) twice as likely to commit crime;

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

(E) more likely to commit suicide;

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

(G) more likely to become pregnant as teenagers.

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

  

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

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

 

Article 26

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

Victims of sexual assault are:⁷

3 times more likely to suffer from depression.

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

13 times more likely to abuse alcohol.

26 times more likely to abuse drugs.

4 times more likely to contemplate suicide.

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

Mother's surprise confession exploded cot death theory

In the last of his series on criminal cases being considered for appeal, Duncan Campbell examines the evidence that could free a woman with a mental age of 10 from a life sentence and the circumstances in which a man was jailed for stabbing two racist attackers

• Duncan Campbell
• The Guardian, Saturday 4 January 1992 00.01 GMT
• Article history

Early this year, the Court of Appeal will have a chance to hear for the first time the case of Jacqueline Fletcher, who was jailed for life at Birmingham crown court in 1988 for drowning her six-week-old son, Glen.

Ms Fletcher, now 23, was born in Bangor, north Wales, and grew up in Atherstone, Warwickshire. When she left school she started going out with a young petty criminal, Glen Miles, and became pregnant by him.

Her first baby was born prematurely after what Warwickshire social services described as 'physical abuse and kicking by the father-to-be' and weighed just over two pounds. She was not capable of looking after the child properly - doctors now say she has an IQ of 70 and a mental age of 10. The child was taken into care and eventually adopted.

Her second child, Glen Richard Miles, was born in September 1984, again prematurely. The child's father was back in prison shortly after the birth. Social services worked closely with Jacqueline to make sure that the child was properly cared for. She was visited daily by at least one person connected with the social services.

On October 19, 1984, a postman, Gary Penny, arrived to deliver mail and found Ms Fletcher crying 'my baby, my baby.' The child was dead on the sofa and Mr Penny called the ambulance and police. An ambulanceman attempted mouth-to-mouth resuscitation. A pathologist's examination suggested that the child was a cot death victim. No inquest was held, as is the normal practice, so that parents are not caused further distress.

More than three years later, in December 1987, and a mother again for the third time, she was complaining about the fractious nature of the new child. With her landlady in the room, she said: 'I'll do to you what I done to the other.'

The police were informed and she was taken to Nuneaton police station and questioned for six hours. At the start of the interview she told the police that she had woken and found her baby dead. But later, after she had asked her solicitor, Ian Richardson, to leave the room she is recorded as having admitted to the killing, giving 'post-natal depression' as her reason. Her solicitor said he was shocked to find she had changed her mind when he returned and witnessed her full confession. She was charged with murder.
Even at this stage it did not appear that Ms Fletcher would be jailed for life. Infanticide, in which a mother suffering from post-natal depression takes her child's life, is normally seen as necessitating treatment and care rather than jail.

The main evidence against her in court was her confession, in which she described how the baby struggled under water. A Home Office pathologist, Dr Peter Andrews, also gave evidence based on an analysis of microscopic slides of body tissues, which had been kept for routine research purposes. From these, Dr Andrew concluded that the pathology was consistent with drowning. After the jury had convicted her on a majority verdict of 10 to two she was given a mandatory life sentence.

But there were many puzzling factors which a probation officer working with her became concerned about. Justice, the British section of the International Commission of Jurists, was contacted. It in turn alerted the BBC programme, Rough Justice, and an investigation was launched.

New aspects emerged: her mental age suggested that the confession might be unreliable there were inconsistencies in the method by which she said she had drowned the baby. The second factor concerned the testimony of Dr Andrews. Rough Justice contacted a number of experts in paediatric pathology and their findings were that the pathology was equally consistent with cot death.

It was discovered that there had been testimony given by Dr Andrews in which he had referred to the child's lungs as being 'waterlogged' this, it transpired, had only been an attempt at putting complex pathology into layman's language. In fact, far from having any extraneous body fluid in the lungs, the fluid to which Dr Andrews was referring was a naturally produced body fluid. (The pathologist who carried out the original post-mortem had not been called to give evidence in the trial. He stands by his view that the child died a cot death.)

Bryan Tully, a clinical psychiatrist, and an expert in police interview techniques, said that it was highly unlikely that someone of Ms Fletcher's level of intelligence would use a phrase like 'post natal depression.' It could have been the case, he suggested, that she had got the idea that, if she just pleaded guilty to infanticide, she believed she would not serve any sentence.
With this new evidence, leave for appeal was sought and granted. Just before Christmas, Lord Justice Russell gave permission for the defence to seek further evidence to be taken from another pathologist, Dr Iain West. Next week there will be fresh consultation between the experts at which stage the Crown will decide whether or not to contest the appeal.

Warwickshire police have criticised Rough Justice's programme, accusing it of 'inaccuracies and half-truths.' They have stated that the jury made their decision on the evidence in front of them and on the basis of a confession made by a woman who said she had killed her child. They say they will co-operate with any appeal.

Jacqueline Fletcher's father, Leslie, says he believes the appeal case is 'as strong as any case can be' and says he never believed his daughter had killed her child.

Net knows best for modern mums

Net knows best for modern mums 
28 April 2009

Modern motherhood is as much characterised by social networks and online communities as traditional coffee mornings and conversations across the washing line, according to research out today from Post Office Broadband.

The new research, ‘Keeping Mums Connected’ shows that every year, the average online mum chats to 24 online friends who they have never met in person, and that 83 per cent of mums use the internet - 17 per cent more than women in general.

Social networking sites and forums are giving mothers the chance to converse openly about sensitive matters - a new trend which has coined these online parents ‘Anonymums’.

Faye Mingo from parenting club Bounty, commented: “Online social networks and forums offer mums an anonymity that allows them to be candid and frank about the challenges of motherhood without fear of condemnation or embarrassment.

“Motherhood can be a daunting prospect and women have always been dependent on friends and family to provide a support network.

“Now we’re seeing these circles of influence grow as women share their problems and experiences with people in the same situation – from choosing baby names to coping with post-natal depression, women are finding additional support and advice thanks to the internet.”

Internet usage among mums is highest in East Anglia, with 91 per cent of logging on in the last year, compared to the lowest areas of uptake in the North East of England (75 per cent) and Yorkshire and the Humber (74 per cent). The national average is 83 per cent.

The report also showed that mums are using the net for other activities to keep themselves connected to friends and family: 25 per cent of mums use the internet to share photographs (compared to 18 per cent of all UK women), 29 per cent bank online (22 per cent of all UK women), and 19 per cent use online auction sites (11 per cent of all UK women).

Hugh Stacey, head of broadband at the Post Office, added: “The internet offers a wide range of information, advice and interaction opportunities for parents. This research shows that mums are getting more out of the net than the average female web user – be it emailing friends and family, buying and selling baby goods, or sharing photos.

“The internet is providing mums with a critical link to information and advice in the outside world as well as providing a quick and easy way to complete every day tasks. For many mums, it’s hard to imagine what life would be like without it!”

Post Office Broadband is a reassuringly easy-to-use service with national coverage and one price - wherever you live. It offers up to 8mb per second connection speed and you can pay for the service in cash at any Post Office branch nationwide, an option not offered by any other internet provider.

In addition, 3.8 million mothers a week visit a Post Office, a useful one-stop-shop on the high street for mums, with services including mobile phone top ups, bill payments, savings and Child Trust Fund information

Mothers and Children

Children have become known through the superficial equalistic views, that children need both parents.  Yet all of the natural factors are presenting itself as to why this mechanical society cannot replace motherhood.  The maternal deprivation experiment conducted by Bowlby demonstrated even back then that it was cruel and inhumane to remove newborns from their mothers.  The recent media hype on drug affected babies, fails to reveal the drugs inflicted on mothers to treat a natural biological process of hormones known as "post natal depression".  Many of the drugs that mothers are forced to take are very harmful for babies, some have been proven to induce psychosis( just google "effexor").  A known factor developed upon empirical research is the bonds developed between mother and child is vital for their growth and well being.  

Unfortunately because of the growing number of deadbeat dads who see their children as financial burdens than human beings have gone to great lengths to avoid that support.  This is why most shared parenting websites will:

1. Provide child support information.
2. Focus on father involvement.
3. Provide information on Parent Alienation Syndrome that is a major factor for custody reversals from mother to father.
4. Will Deny Violence Against Women Exists.
5. Claim that a majority of Child Abuse allegations are false.
6. Label Victims advocates as "Father Bashers".
7. Label anyone who challenges them a "feminazi"(despite the fact that the Nazis comprised of mostly men).
8. Claimed that dads were committing Suicide as a result of "fatherlessness", when the statistics is based upon indigenous males.
9. Help anyone that claims they were "falsely accused of child abuse or domestic violence" - even with a criminal record.
10. Exploit women to further their goals and then toss them aside later.

These groups have been fairly successful because of the gentle approaches that women's rights movements have taken.  In fact many advocates of domestic violence deeply considered the notion that men were victims of violence, but discovered that a cast majority were actually perpetrators camouflaging under the guise of victimhood.  

Many would like to state that this is a "gender war" between two equal opponents, but it is a war on mothers and the propaganda is no different than the material spread about the jewish families.  

What is very dangerous is the impact that it has had on the children and mothers who have suffered from the harassment and even violence perpetrated towards them in the process to gain custody.  Some will stop at nothing to see her separated and his "property" retrieved.  Its become obvious with the splurge of youtube videos about fatherhood with names such as, "eventoddlers"  utilizing junk science and baseless research to claim that babies need fathers too.  

Not to mention the amount of hands that have taken large sums of money to take a hand in ripping a child away from the mother as if it is a sport.  

Fatherless has become a cover to commit not only atrocious abuse, but to commit one of the largest hate crimes against mothers in our times.

If there was a true sense of equality between mothers and fathers: Fathers would have been giving birth by now.  There is a lot of technology on human tissue, that if male scientists bothered to spent more time researching and finding ways to physically equalize mothers and fathers, instead of biological warfare's, penis enlargements and Pharmaceuticals: The Fathers would have a good argument.  However they don't and the children are suffering deeply because of it.  Its all very well to degrade and humiliate mothers to win the prize, but without motherhood he knows taht he would not be here today and thus some feel the need to control that, to prevent the masses from appreciating her for whom she truely is:LIFE

Maternalism

Maternalism

What is Maternalism?

Are the voices of mothers who identify with the liberation of mothers and the rights of their children.  There was a past emergence of Maternalism in feminist history in the nineteenth century, however it is not consistent to today’s issues that continue to undermine her rights and values. 

We believe that the act of giving birth has been extremely undervalued in today’s society much as a result of patriarchy but also due to the lack of representation of mothers voices in women’s rights organizations.  We note that the eight hour day was inclusive of workers rights, but failed to acknowledge the labor of mothers towards raising future generations.  In the last twenty years, our rights have declined further with this acknowledgement as our children have grown to become the property of the state and men.  We have the right to work from home, have flexible hours so that our care and work is balanced to eight hour days.   We demand that employers provide the technology and opportunities to do so.   We have the exclusive right to be prioritized to be the exclusive candidates that have existing or possible opportunities to do so.

We believe that joint parenting and shared parenting that is forced under the state of law upon dissolution of marriage undermines our rights to:

Consent to the renamed marriage contract.

Continue our natural primary care giving relationship with our children.

Make decisions for the welfare of our children

Obtain protection of family

Freedom of movement

Love our children without scrutiny of the deep bond we place with our children

Raise our children

Be appreciated for the lives we bore onto this earth.

Whilst the status of women has improved, the status of mothers has declined that our representation in the media of mothers is poor and discriminatory.

We believe that both forced and persuasive adoption is a degradation of women equivalent to prostitution and laws against this abdominal crime need to be enforced.

We believe that threats to take our children for objecting to medical practices that are harmful is an exploitation of mothers and undermines her ability to intuitively know what is best to raise her children as she has done hundreds of years prior to the introduction of medical treatment.