Ivy, Sim & Jess get hurt by Family Law ... rockoz.com - Rights of Custody Kids, Australia

CHILDREN'S VIEWS MUST BE HEARD — CUSTODY HURTS KIDS — AUSTRALIAN KIDS HAVE RIGHTS

rockoz
benevolent activism

rockoz.com@gmail.com

rights of custody kids

australia

Kids Lawyer Guidelines

Parliaments recognise apprehended/domestic violence orders fail

On 6 September 2006 in the NSW Paliament, CHRIS HARTCHER, member for Gosford said:

“I do not expect the Attorney General will dispute that unfortunately a number of people use apprehended violence orders as a tactic in unresolved family law proceedings and I do not know how we can combat that.

“I do not have figures but anecdotally I hear that many people involved in protracted or acrimonious family law proceedings take out an apprehended violence order which they then present to the Family Court as evidence to support their own claims or as a bargaining tactic to force the other side to negotiate with them and concede points that they wish to win. That abuse of the system is difficult to correct and I am sure it was taken into account by the Law Reform Commission.

“I have received a number of concerns from males about the apprehended violence order system, which I do not necessarily endorse, but they should be placed before a responsible Parliament to be considered in a second reading debate.

“Many men are concerned that the apprehended violence order system is being abused and that, as a result, many children of separated parents end up in sole parental custody when they would be far better and more fairly served under the custody of both parents.

“As a consequence, the 1993-94 sole-parent pensions amounted to $5.4 billion when the unemployment benefit was only $5 billion. The Federal Government has a very real interest because it is paying out more in sole-parent pensions than in unemployment benefits.

“The inquiry received submissions from father groups about the apparent ease with which an apprehended violence order can be obtained through the system, and that subsequently, if an apprehended violence order is in place prior to making an application to the Family Court, it is required to be included in the application, a point to which I referred earlier.

“There is a serious gap in the ability of the Family Court to deal with child abuse and domestic violence with two systems running parallel. Even though it is always expected that courts co-operate with one another, and I am sure every attempt is made to do so, the fact that two systems are in place in relation to family law causes an enormous amount of complication and expense in some cases. It has been put to me:

This lack of substantive fairness erodes the community confidence in the system as it is seen not as the tool it is intended to be but rather as a mechanism of conflict resulting in a DVO system lacking the respect and community support to deliver its intended results.

Reference: Hansard: http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/
PARLMENT/HansTrans.nsf/ V3ByKey/LA20060920

Ivy, Sim & Jess suffer as lawyers help parents fight

By Murray Robertson
For legal reasons this family ’s identity must be concealed. Family Law believes this protects children; rockoz.com believes it also prevents the Australian public from knowing just how flagrantly kids’ rights are ignored.

Part 1 [Part 2]

Ivy, Sim ’n Jess lived with Mark, their dad, and their mum in a house in Melbourne when it all went wrong. There was certainly tension in the marriage, but the kids never knew about that

They were happy. Jess just started school liked to have fun with her dad, teasing him and being cheeky. Ivy, nearly a teen, liked having a dad but didnt want to be uncool and show it too much. Sim, being a boy, liked to do boy things with his dad, playing cricket and football, going to games and tallking about his teams.

The kids’ mum was was drinking heavily, probably brought about by financial pressure, but the three kids still had a good home with two parents who loved them.

Then in September 2004 , Ivy, Sim’n’Jess’s dad got a lawyer’s letter out of the blue. It arrived while ISnJ were down at the beach with their mum.

The lawyer’s letter told their dad to leave the house because it wasn't his and actually belonged to their mum only (and her sister).

Ivy never knew that their dad made a joke: he emailed their mum’s lawyer asking if he could come and live with him. But none of the kids ever knew that.

As I talk to Mark I can sense a bitter humour breaking through the terrible pain that being separated from his kids causes him.

Soon ISnJ’s granny and granpa who are quite old arrived to visit. Sim never knew that their mum persuaded Gran’n’Gramp to travel interstate to come and “reason with their dad ”. But Gran’n’Gramp persuaded Sim's dad to leave them and go and live somewhere else.

It is a common tactic for wives to get a husband or partners’ parents ont to her side so that they will persuade the man “to be sensible”.

Of course, the last think Mark should have done was to leave Jess, Sim and Ivy, but he did. He went and lived in a buddy’s empty house for a while until he got a flat for himself.

At first it didn’t affect Mark’s work, but soon Australia’s Child Support Agency (CSA) was on the kids’ dad’s tail trying to get money out of him.

Many parents tell this story. I have heard it a hundred times. The parent who keeps the kids (based on lies encouraged by lawyers and evidence never tested in a court) then gets the CSA to get money from the earning parent. A double-whammy. One parent loses home and a chunk of income to a system shared between states and Commonwealth. It seems legal but is not just. It claims to protect children but is unethical and hidden from the public

The three kids were excited when their mum told them they'd soon see their dad. It was two weeks since he'd left home and it didn't really make any sense that suddenly they could never see him. And now mum had to take them to a park to see their dad. It didn't make any sense.

Jess ran up and gave her dad a big hug. Sim behaved well, but Mark could tell his son was confused. Ivy who was particularly close to her mother was torn betwen her two loves. How could she appear too effusive and happy to see her dad without upsetting her mum? She played it cool.

When the legal system sets up a situatioin where one parent has the kids and the other needs permission to see them kids pick up the underlying dynamic very quickly. They learn that one parent has power over the other and they they are the currency of that power. This is what activists want stopped.

[continued - Part 2]