Australia - Custody wars: put kids first

"JayR" wrote in message
...
SpiderHam77 wrote:
I don't understand thisd whole vindictivness against all CP's as a
whole. The vast majority of of CP's I'm sure want the NCP to involved
in the childs life if for nothing else then to give them a break.


Not in my experience. So far she's stopped at nothing, using the courts
to prevent me from being with our child, and then driving over to the
day care center to drop her off while I stay at work or at home alone
writing out checks to her.

In his book "Divorced Dads: Shattering the Myths" Dr. Sanford Braver writes
about a survey where 33% of NCP men complained about visitation issues and
interruptions. More importantly, the same survey found 25% of CP mothers
admitted to disrupting visitations. This bad behavior, using the children
to get back at a former husband, is an easy way for many vindictive ex-wives
to torment their former spouses.


I do agree that CS laws need to be changed. As it does appear the
NCP's are getting taken through the ringer. However I do think this is
still a small minority of people this is happening to.


Spare me your "I agree....however..." mock sympathetic crap. Whether
it's a minority it's happening to or not doesn't matter -- it's wrong.
The family court system does not sanction vindictive CPs who use C$,
PAS, and visitation interference as tools to grind their axe, with no
consideration of what it does to their children. In fact the courts
often reward this behavior.

But that said I have to agree changing some of these laws to almost
in fact favour the NCP makes no sense either because then you are just
creating the same problems in reverse, and as the saying goes. You get
an inch, you'll want a mile.

I agree with the this Attorney Genral in her stating that if measures
to control things like the child living arrangments would impede on the
life of the CP, and there would be in turn no such actions that were
mentioned for the NCP.

I understand NCP's don't want their children living with other
parents. But your going to have face reality. If you don't want your
child to have another person around them, then by all accounts your
going to have avoid relationships as well.

Now if your child is only 2 upon seperation... well then you have
another 16 lonley years ahead of you. Laws have gotta work both ways.

I support the idea of Joint Custody more. That way have the time you
have your child with you, and can control the environment. And most
places. When the child reaches a certain age. Usually 12-14, they can
decide if they want to live with one parent more.


And if one parent is, from a very early age, brainwashing the child into
believing what they want is the same as what the CP wants? What then?
It's happening to my kid, I can see it plain as day. I refuse to hurt
our kid that way and won't try to combat CP by playing mind games with
our kid. So you know what will happen when she turns 12? CP will waltz
her into court, the performance practiced for 10 years will be performed
to perfection beyond any possibility of disbelief by judges or
counselors, and I'll most likely lose custody -- all for being the
"good" parent. My only hope is that it will backfire on her and our
kid, at age 12, will be mature enough to recognize who was thinking of
her and who was thinking of grinding an axe.

If you get to this point, ask for a psychological evaluation by a licensed
psychologist who is not affiliated with the court. Let the psychologist
know about your concerns. A professional child psychologist is trained to
patiently sort through the child's brainwashing statements, and when they do
discover what has been programmed into the child's thoughts, it will work
against the child's mother.

Okay obvisouly I didn't explain myself properly. For that I
apologize, as I do agree with alot of what you are all saying. There
do need to be changes made to system. What those changes are, well
thats up for debate.

I think one of the key things that is forgotten in all the arguing
about CS payments, child custody arguments, is the mental health of the
child. And I know that there are evil CP's who go out of their way to
abuse the system, and deny access of the child to the NCP.

And I know there are NCP's on the same token who don't pull their
share and even attempt to support their children. So if you wanna look
at statistics I think at the end of the day the numbers are pretty much
even, and it seems to be what ever group you talk to will give you
different numbers that support their group in a better light.

I do think that the change that needs to be made to the system is the
fundamental thought process. All NCP's should automatically be
considered a responsible parent, in the eyes of the court, unless a 3rd
independent party can prove otherwise.

Now this could be done through providing convictions, not charges, to
the court of crimes that are recent, within the past 2 years. Or
through a independent psycologist interviewing all people involved.
Mother, Father, and all children. And then allow them to provide their
findings to the court. These are just ideas, and are up to be changed
if better ones can be suggested.

Once the concept of both parents are equal, then the courts, in my
mind should have no choice to be to award arrangements like Joint
Custody right from the start. And then the option of not wanting that
can be decided on by the parents.

Example say a father has a job that takes him out of town alot. Well
as a responsible parent he would be able to reconize this, and realize
that having his children half the time in any given month would not be
in the best intrest of his children.

And then once the determination of custody is decided upon, support
should simply be charted. If you have the child X number of days per
month, and make X number of dollars then this is how much you pay in
CS.

I am in total support of NCP's wanting to interact with their
children, and wanting to be an active person their lives. All children
need the love and support of both parents.

SpiderHam77

"SpiderHam77" wrote in
oups.com:

I don't understand thisd whole vindictivness against all CP's as a
whole. The vast majority of of CP's I'm sure want the NCP to involved
in the childs life if for nothing else then to give them a break.


The problem is, parents that agree do not need courts. Most people I
know share the children 50-50 and little or no money changes hands...
and they have never seen a court, and have only visited a lawyer once or
twice and are now long done.

When you have a vindictvie ex, you WILL* see a court. And the laws
support this vindictiveness, which is salt in the wounds. My ex wants
nothing more than to ruin me financially and keep the child. And the
courts are right there supporting her along the way. That is what needs
to be fixed.

* Some parents (i.e.the Father) sadly give up - basically accepting some
sort of schedule and some sort of custody. I have also seen a lot of
this. People can only take so much financially and emotionally. I do not
look down upon anyone who has gone through the ringers numerous times to
finally give up. Oddly, in these cases, this will be another statistic
against fairness in the courts, why? it will be seen as a) oh, most
people settle their differences out of court and thus no changes are
needed to the family law system and b) most people settle for joint
custody (which is really token joint custody with minimal contact).


I do agree that CS laws need to be changed. As it does appear the
NCP's are getting taken through the ringer. However I do think this
is
still a small minority of people this is happening to.


umm.. see my response above. It happens to everyone. But, most
eventually just give up fighting. In Canada child support laws are way
out of whack with reality. Most people get tired of fighting, of
launching lawsuits against the goverment, of taking on Revenue Canada
and fighting the government for legislative change. Everyone goes
through the ringer in a vindictive case.

What you fail to grasp... and I will repeat myself... is that if people
settle in fairness and both parties are satisified with 90% of the
split, you will not see the inside of a courthouse. But, when there is
vindictiveness, you are headed to court. And the courts are biased.
Which encourages this vindicvtiveness. Child support and spousal support
laws are screwed up beyond beleif.

To add to your headaches, you can expect a good dose of PAS and years of
manupilation and emotional abuse to your child by this vindictive ex. I
have seen it. I find most fathers do not get sucked into this style of
revenge (and it is very easy to do so). So, I will be the good guy and
in 20 years maybe my child will realise this. But that's 20 years of
lost time, emotional abuse, financial hardship and more. Can the law
prevent that... probably not.. but it would at least not give fuel to
the fire.


But that said I have to agree changing some of these laws to almost
in fact favour the NCP makes no sense either because then you are just
creating the same problems in reverse, and as the saying goes. You get
an inch, you'll want a mile.

Huh? I think they wanted some equality? No?

H.

JayR wrote in :

SpiderHam77 wrote:
I don't understand thisd whole vindictivness against all CP's as a
whole. The vast majority of of CP's I'm sure want the NCP to involved
in the childs life if for nothing else then to give them a break.


Not in my experience. So far she's stopped at nothing, using the courts
to prevent me from being with our child, and then driving over to the
day care center to drop her off while I stay at work or at home alone
writing out checks to her.

I hear yah. My ex forced her schedule and agenda through the courts. Now
with her nice little schedule, she will take the child from me, drop off at
daycare (and usually without me knowing) and then I get a bill in the mail
- that nice Section 7 extra expenses. So I pay to keep my child from me?
All during time when I am at home or could easily be at home. So I can't
have the child 50-50, but taking them to another person is okay with
everyone.

Yeah, great system.

H.

I agree with much of what is said below. However, one important fact
needs to be kept constantly in mind. All the research indicates that
children do far, far better if they grow up in two-parent families. That is
also the arrangement that creates the fewest problems for society at large.
To me, it is entirely clear that nearly all the social problems that
confront U.S., and no doubt Australian, society (such as violent crime and
falling educational standards) are largely attributable to the growth in the
proportion of children who grow up in single-parent (that is, fatherless)
families.

In such a situation, the primary problem is not finding ways of
accommodating to the prevalence of single parent families. The primary
problem is finding ways of DETERRING the creation of such families. The
best way of deterring the creation of such families is to stop providing
incentives for mothers (who in the U.S. today initiate 70-80 percent of
divorces) to expel fathers from their families. Ending the guarantee of
maternal custody, and with it generous tax-free "child support," is a very
good way of establishing a deterrent to divorce. That's the best way of
putting kids first.

If you're standing by a river and you see children, or the bodies of
children, floating by, you shouldn't concentrate just on trying to rescue
the surviving children. You should go upstream, and find out -- and stop --
the people who are throwing the children into the river. Then you should
find ways of stopping them from doing so.


"SpiderHam77" wrote in message
oups.com...
Okay obvisouly I didn't explain myself properly. For that I
apologize, as I do agree with alot of what you are all saying. There
do need to be changes made to system. What those changes are, well
thats up for debate.

I think one of the key things that is forgotten in all the arguing
about CS payments, child custody arguments, is the mental health of the
child. And I know that there are evil CP's who go out of their way to
abuse the system, and deny access of the child to the NCP.

And I know there are NCP's on the same token who don't pull their
share and even attempt to support their children. So if you wanna look
at statistics I think at the end of the day the numbers are pretty much
even, and it seems to be what ever group you talk to will give you
different numbers that support their group in a better light.

I do think that the change that needs to be made to the system is the
fundamental thought process. All NCP's should automatically be
considered a responsible parent, in the eyes of the court, unless a 3rd
independent party can prove otherwise.

Now this could be done through providing convictions, not charges, to
the court of crimes that are recent, within the past 2 years. Or
through a independent psycologist interviewing all people involved.
Mother, Father, and all children. And then allow them to provide their
findings to the court. These are just ideas, and are up to be changed
if better ones can be suggested.

Once the concept of both parents are equal, then the courts, in my
mind should have no choice to be to award arrangements like Joint
Custody right from the start. And then the option of not wanting that
can be decided on by the parents.

Example say a father has a job that takes him out of town alot. Well
as a responsible parent he would be able to reconize this, and realize
that having his children half the time in any given month would not be
in the best intrest of his children.

And then once the determination of custody is decided upon, support
should simply be charted. If you have the child X number of days per
month, and make X number of dollars then this is how much you pay in
CS.

I am in total support of NCP's wanting to interact with their
children, and wanting to be an active person their lives. All children
need the love and support of both parents.

SpiderHam77