Showing posts with label mother. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mother. Show all posts

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.  

The Family Court Frees mother from Jail over running with her son

Family Court frees South Coast woman jailed for disappearing with son
BY NOEL TOWELL LEGAL AFFAIRS REPORTER
12/05/2009 2:09:00 PM
A South Coast mother who was jailed last year for fleeing the state with her child in defiance of a court order has been freed on appeal.
In a landmark decision last September, a Federal Magistrate ordered the woman, who was captured after a 13-month nationwide hunt by Australian Federal Police, to be locked up for six months, saying it was a warning to the nation's warring parents.

The woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, took her 11-year-old son and went on the run in late June 2007 after the court ordered her to allow the boy to spend weekends with his father. She initially took the child from her NSW home to Queensland and from there to Western Australia, where she settled with a new partner and enrolled the boy at school under a new name.

The pair remained hidden in the west, where they were tracked down by the Australian Federal Police after a 13-month investigation.

First Full Face Transplant: A domestic violence survivor and mother

For anyone that still believes that survivors are lying, clearly they have been misinformed.  One of the reasons why most domestic violence cases don't connect to Family Court is because of the secrecy laws that prevent victims from speaking out.  Until Darcey Freeman was thrown off the bridge, everyone assumed that people who accessed the Family Court and raised concerns about domestic violence were making false allegations.  False Allegations have been found in recent studies to be 5% or even less.  Some victims are too afraid to raise it because of the legal risks of losing children or being charged with costs if they cannot provide enough evidence.  Unlike the criminal court, the Family court demands victims to provide the evidence and routinely makes orders that exposes children and domestic violence victims to risks that they attempted to be safe from.  

Since the early 1980s, Family Courts all over the world have supported the batterers side unless there was an obvious case of domestic violence and even then the stakes for protection are high.  The psychological trauma that a victim faces is twisted into, "She is crazy" in order to undermine her credibility to report the violence and capacity to look after the children. 
The amount of legal abuse that goes on is profound and to put it frankly its pure evil.  Its sad to hear children and mothers living in fear not just because of his violence, but because of a court that backs it.  An injustice that tears apart any good natured person.  Both men and women have watched sisters, daughters and wives reduced to tears over the magnitude of this problem.  
There is only one thing that needs to be done: Protect victims and their children.
Simple as that, there is no negotiations when a life is at risk.     

Has the Family Court Ignored

After the Family Court Battle, has the Father missed visitation for

Banners

Anonymums Blog Button

Get this button and link us to your blog, website or myspace page:

Step One
Copy(Ctrl +C) the following code :
Step Two
Paste(Ctrl+V) it onto your blog, website or myspace page.

I Support Anonymums Banner

Show your support on your blog, website or myspace page:

Step One
Copy(Ctrl +C) the following code :
Step Two
Paste(Ctrl+V) it onto your blog, website or myspace page.

Anonymums Family Violence Fact Sheet

Anonymums Family Violence Fact Sheet
Free Fact Sheet on Family Violence and Family Court

Should the Family Court have a Protective Parent BIll?

Breaking the Silence

Battered Mothers Custody Conference interviews

Bookmark and Share