A monstrous regimen

Paul

My brother is in a similar situation to the one described. He does have access to his children still but only because he is prepared to pay good lawyers and fight a never ending battle countering every accusation. If he didn't have the money contact would have ceased long ago.

Raptus regaliter

Anyone taking bets on whether our New Labour government is about to redress this most appalling aspect of our gynocentric legal system any time soon?

Dave_G

I Haven't seen my youngest son for 12 years now.All the court procured for me was a ten minute phone call once a month, great way to maintain a relationship.I didn't have the money to pay for barristers either. It's a national disgrace.

ThomasR

>the court was compelled to act solely in the best interests of the child

Here's the problem. We ought to listen to the _wishes_ of a child instead of trying to determine his or her interests for him.

We're not in a position to confidently determine another's interests, anyway. Nevertheless, we can try and persuade a child what we think his interests are, and give him opportunities to change his mind later.

However, it reminds his life and his choice who he lives with.

Verity

Socialists hate the family. It is too strong and resistent. Socialist women are the most vicious.

Laura

The gender politics lunacy will never stop.

Men cannot speak up in public because they will be decried as being sexist and so it is left to fair minded people like Melanie to fight their corner.

Feminism has not just degraded men, it has degraded women too, who routinely exploit their gender to get what they want in situations like these.

And, in situations where the relationship between fathers and children is healthy, it degrades the children who are deprived of a healthy influence.

But nanny New Labour couldn't give a flying toss, because with dad out the way, it's all the more easy for the state to exert even more infuence over the family and fill chilren's heads full of mind controlling rubbish.

Sisters - ruining it for themselves.

Leslie

We need to put our children's welfare first.If we love them,why would we want to hurt them by depriving them of their father?

misandrope

Somehow the court has all kinds of leeway when making oddball rulings in favor of the mothers, but when a man's relationship with his children is damaged or suspended by the usual misandrous operations of the court, they find themselves hamstrung by various pretexts, such as the purported 'well-being of the child'. Hasn't this judge seen the statistics on what happens to children raised in fatherless homes? Isn't raising a child in an environment consisting of lies and deceit considered abuse? What is even more disgusting is how 'abnormal' it is for a judge even to speak out, albeit while sitting on his hands.

Ian G

Surely the interests of the child are best served by the truth? It cannot be good for any one to be brought up with lies. One day they might learn the truth - and then what?

davo

Verity
there is much truth about your brief statement.
marriage and family are a challenge to the total control that so many of the hard left wish to exercise over the proletariat. Religion, moral values, patriotism, marriage, family etc are a cocoon that prevents individuals from being manipulated or coerced.
That is why they are incessantly under attack by the left wing loonies.

Dipper

So Verity should the State always keep out of families? what about forced marriage? Female genital mutiliation? Drug addict parents who are too stoned to care for their children?

Clearly on some occasions the state has acted wrongly, and this one would be a good candidate, but glib sweeping statements don't help move the debate forward.

phillip

Currently in Australia, there is a well coordinated effort being made by womens groups to discredit the idea of Parental alienation syndrome in the context of family law.

A psychologist recently was disciplined by his association for the use of PSA in the family court.