should mum be allowed to deny dad contact ?

Here follows an e-mail I sent recently. You can work out for yourselves what
is going on.
Post replies please, what do you think ? You can also e-mail her (she has
not yet replied)
her e-mail address is

Note: I don't agree with cross posting. This was originally posted on
alt.dads-rights.unmoderated, but has been posted here entirely seperately.
Cheers,
Chris


Dear Keely,

Thank you for your honest reply.

Details of your case were voiced on a Fathers-4-Justice international
forum. My mail was not directed at you, but at the social worker it was
sent to. It was alleged that she seeks to prevent children (including
yours) from having contact with their dads.

You will note that content of my e-mail was not "hate mail". I was merely
asking why she does this. Even though the given subject of my e-mail was
"bitches from hell", at no stage was that epithet applied to anyone in
particular. IMHO it is applicable to persons who vindictively seek to
alienate the other parent from their child(ren) as often happens after
divorce.

You state that your daughter's father is violent and has mental health
issues. These allegations are all to easily made and, to be on the safe
side, often too readily accepted by the authorities. For instance, I know
of a case where years later, a mother admits to having "fought dirty" to
preclude her ex from contact out of pure spite. To cut a long story short
he hung himself... which was explained to the children as proof that he
was mentally ill. Can you *honestly* say that you believe your daughter's
father would deliberately harm her if he was allowed to be with her on his
own ? Has he been found guilty of previous violence against his daughter
and has the diagnosis of mentall illness been made by a qualified person?

Personally, I find it hard to believe that a man would come all the way
from Japan (we are talking about the same case are we not?) to inflict
injury on his child. It is my understanding that Fathers-4-Justice is
campaigning against abuse of the system and it's indifference to the
injustice this causes for the children and the other parent.

While you may not respect your former partner, being a mother and hence
getting custody does not make you right and him wrong. Neither does it
mean you are the appropriate person to decide if, when and under what
conditions he may see his child. Should this depend on you being
reasonable ? Is it even fair to expect you to be so ? Your ex should not
have to fight in court to gain permision for daughter and dad to be
together. They have that right unless the courts have been given adequate
reasons to take it away. Were they ?

Regarding the men's groups you mention, they are probably little different
from women's groups. Many involved are just seeking reasurance and advice
from others who have been there and done that. No doubt there will be some
who seek to subvert the bonafide cause for less laudible reasons... who
can tell, but there can be no doubt that divorced dads generally get a
pretty rough deal and a bit of solidarity won't go amiss. Alas I had to
sign out of the F4J international forum, as it receives more e-mail than I
can deal with and IMHO is too much concerned with maintenance payments and
not enough about keeping contact going which is really what Spiderman,
Batman and Robin stunts aimed to draw attention to!

The thing for you to do is to decide whether you want an acrimonious
battle that will harm all concerned, or whether you are going to
acknowledge that your ex has come all that way because he loves his
daughter even if the love between you and him died long ago.

So do you still want an apology ?
Does the one "spreading vicious rumours" wish to own up?
Perhaps the truth is somewhere in between, but the real issue is: Have
your daughter and her dad been able to have quality time together ?

ps: What's a crc group ?

----- Original Message -----

Subject: Your hate mail


Dear Christopher,

You have been misinformed by a member of the crc group I was
corresponding with.

I do not obstruct access, I do insist access is supervised by a
social worker due to her father's violence and mental health
issues. He gets sent photos, could live nearer if he wished,
unlimited phone time, and reports 3 times a week.

I only have one child. You sent the mail to a lady who was
defending me, it is aimed at me.

I dont know who told you to send this to me, but he is giving
men's groups a bad name.

I think you owe me an apology for harrassing me and calling me a
bitch.

I hope you have to guts to reply and take task with the man who is
spreading vicious lies.

Keely

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 17:31:43 +1300, "ChrisScaife"
wrote:

While you may not respect your former partner, being a mother and hence
getting custody does not make you right and him wrong. Neither does it
mean you are the appropriate person to decide if, when and under what
conditions he may see his child. Should this depend on you being
reasonable ? Is it even fair to expect you to be so ? Your ex should not
have to fight in court to gain permision for daughter and dad to be
together. They have that right unless the courts have been given adequate
reasons to take it away. Were they ?

This is a very sensible paragraph, and is well directed at both moms and
dads who have taken it on themselves to determine appropriate access,
rather than following the orders of the court.

"ChrisScaife" wrote in message
...
Dear Keely,

Thank you for your honest reply.

Details of your case were voiced on a Fathers-4-Justice international
forum. My mail was not directed at you, but at the social worker it was
sent to. It was alleged that she seeks to prevent children (including
yours) from having contact with their dads.

You will note that content of my e-mail was not "hate mail". I was merely
asking why she does this. Even though the given subject of my e-mail was
"bitches from hell", at no stage was that epithet applied to anyone in
particular. IMHO it is applicable to persons who vindictively seek to
alienate the other parent from their child(ren) as often happens after
divorce.

So was there some confusion as to whom the epithet implicated? That's not
exactly hidden between the lines.

You state that your daughter's father is violent and has mental health
issues. These allegations are all to easily made and, to be on the safe
side, often too readily accepted by the authorities. For instance, I know
of a case where years later, a mother admits to having "fought dirty" to
preclude her ex from contact out of pure spite. To cut a long story short
he hung himself... which was explained to the children as proof that he
was mentally ill. Can you *honestly* say that you believe your daughter's
father would deliberately harm her if he was allowed to be with her on his
own ? Has he been found guilty of previous violence against his daughter
and has the diagnosis of mentall illness been made by a qualified person?

All other things aside, what I find intriguing about the above paragraph is
the admission of spite as a motivation. This indicates that there was blame
for the original conflict on both sides. There can be no spite otherwise.


--
"There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
those who understand binary numbers and those who don't."
-----------------------------
Byron "Barn" Canfield

"Byron Canfield" wrote in message
news:AH6ub.225525$Fm2.226447@attbi_s04...
"ChrisScaife" wrote in message
...
Dear Keely,

Thank you for your honest reply.

Details of your case were voiced on a Fathers-4-Justice international
forum. My mail was not directed at you, but at the social worker it was
sent to. It was alleged that she seeks to prevent children (including
yours) from having contact with their dads.

You will note that content of my e-mail was not "hate mail". I was
merely
asking why she does this. Even though the given subject of my e-mail was
"bitches from hell", at no stage was that epithet applied to anyone in
particular. IMHO it is applicable to persons who vindictively seek to
alienate the other parent from their child(ren) as often happens after
divorce.

So was there some confusion as to whom the epithet implicated? That's not
exactly hidden between the lines.

You state that your daughter's father is violent and has mental health
issues. These allegations are all to easily made and, to be on the safe
side, often too readily accepted by the authorities. For instance, I
know
of a case where years later, a mother admits to having "fought dirty" to
preclude her ex from contact out of pure spite. To cut a long story
short
he hung himself... which was explained to the children as proof that he
was mentally ill. Can you *honestly* say that you believe your
daughter's
father would deliberately harm her if he was allowed to be with her on
his
own ? Has he been found guilty of previous violence against his daughter
and has the diagnosis of mentall illness been made by a qualified
person?

All other things aside, what I find intriguing about the above paragraph
is
the admission of spite as a motivation. This indicates that there was
blame
for the original conflict on both sides. There can be no spite otherwise.

I believe there was and as you pointed out elsewhere there often is.
The tragedy is that the authorities allowed themselves to be manipulated by
one party to visit revenge upon the other.
It is quite possible that that is what this lady is doing right now. I
cannot judge that, but she can.
I wanted to try and make her aware of it.

--
"There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
those who understand binary numbers and those who don't."
-----------------------------
Byron "Barn" Canfield
http://www.headsprout.com
Flash examples: http://www.canfieldstudios.com/flash5
[I do not respond to private emails regarding issues for which the
appropriate venue is this newsgroup, nor do I reply to posts by email.]


"ChrisScaife" wrote in message
...

"Byron Canfield" wrote in message
news:AH6ub.225525$Fm2.226447@attbi_s04...
"ChrisScaife" wrote in message
...
Dear Keely,

Thank you for your honest reply.

Details of your case were voiced on a Fathers-4-Justice international
forum. My mail was not directed at you, but at the social worker it
was
sent to. It was alleged that she seeks to prevent children (including
yours) from having contact with their dads.

You will note that content of my e-mail was not "hate mail". I was
merely
asking why she does this. Even though the given subject of my e-mail
was
"bitches from hell", at no stage was that epithet applied to anyone in
particular. IMHO it is applicable to persons who vindictively seek to
alienate the other parent from their child(ren) as often happens after
divorce.

So was there some confusion as to whom the epithet implicated? That's
not
exactly hidden between the lines.

You state that your daughter's father is violent and has mental health
issues. These allegations are all to easily made and, to be on the
safe
side, often too readily accepted by the authorities. For instance, I
know
of a case where years later, a mother admits to having "fought dirty"
to
preclude her ex from contact out of pure spite. To cut a long story
short
he hung himself... which was explained to the children as proof that
he
was mentally ill. Can you *honestly* say that you believe your
daughter's
father would deliberately harm her if he was allowed to be with her on
his
own ? Has he been found guilty of previous violence against his
daughter
and has the diagnosis of mentall illness been made by a qualified
person?

All other things aside, what I find intriguing about the above paragraph
is
the admission of spite as a motivation. This indicates that there was
blame
for the original conflict on both sides. There can be no spite
otherwise.

I believe there was and as you pointed out elsewhere there often is.
The tragedy is that the authorities allowed themselves to be manipulated
by
one party to visit revenge upon the other.
It is quite possible that that is what this lady is doing right now. I
cannot judge that, but she can.
I wanted to try and make her aware of it.


And just what motivation might a person have for being spiteful?


--
"There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
those who understand binary numbers and those who don't."
-----------------------------
Byron "Barn" Canfield

And just what motivation might a person have for being spiteful?

Is that relevant ?
Whether it is justified or not, nobody should be using their children to get
at each other.
What would king Solomon have said ?

In my experience a lot of the resentment is built up when women get together
to bitch about their husbands/ex's and exchange tips on how to get their own
way.
The accused doesn't even know what he is blamed of let alone get the chance
to defend himself.

An accusation of domestic violence can often be made simply to have the man
thrown out of his house.
Accusing the woman of violence also results in the man being thrown out,
because the mother needs to be there to look after the child and the police
don't care who is to blame they just want to separate the trouble makers.

You really have no idea of what goes on have you ?!

In article , CJS says...

And just what motivation might a person have for being spiteful?

Is that relevant ?
Whether it is justified or not, nobody should be using their children to get
at each other.
What would king Solomon have said ?

In my experience a lot of the resentment is built up when women get together
to bitch about their husbands/ex's and exchange tips on how to get their own
way.
The accused doesn't even know what he is blamed of let alone get the chance
to defend himself.

And the men's rights USENET group is......?

Banty

"CJS" wrote in message
...
And just what motivation might a person have for being spiteful?

Is that relevant ?

You were the one that claimed spite could exist in total absence of any
action by the other party. Answer the question. Just what motivation might
a person have for being spiteful?

Whether it is justified or not, nobody should be using their children to
get
at each other.
What would king Solomon have said ?

In my experience a lot of the resentment is built up when women get
together
to bitch about their husbands/ex's and exchange tips on how to get their
own
way.

And you are doing what? Looks to me like all your posts are doing exactly
the same thing, but to people on a world-wide basis, instead of in a small
room with a select group.

The accused doesn't even know what he is blamed of let alone get the
chance
to defend himself.

An accusation of domestic violence can often be made simply to have the
man
thrown out of his house.
Accusing the woman of violence also results in the man being thrown out,
because the mother needs to be there to look after the child and the
police
don't care who is to blame they just want to separate the trouble makers.

You really have no idea of what goes on have you ?!

I know that almost any woman who accuses her husband of violence when there
has been none has some other reason for wanting that person out of the
house. What could that be?


--
"There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
those who understand binary numbers and those who don't."
-----------------------------
Byron "Barn" Canfield

"Byron Canfield" wrote in message
news:XIrub.181477$ao4.609161@attbi_s51...
"CJS" wrote in message
...
And just what motivation might a person have for being spiteful?

Is that relevant ?

You were the one that claimed spite could exist in total absence of any
action by the other party. Answer the question. Just what motivation
might
a person have for being spiteful?

Did I claim that ? I think you are getting two things confused.
I claimed that marital breakdown can come about thru no fault of either
party.
I also claimed that children are being used to hurt the oter party out of
spite.

The reasons for spite can be genuine, vastly exagerated or totally imagined.

A new mum suffering from severe post natal depression can have a very
distorted view of reality, especially if she joins up with other women who
are having marital difficulties and they all sit round bitching about their
husbands, jumping to conclusions and making devious plans to do things their
own way without involving their husbands in the decisions. Such cliques are
poison to society. If your wife joins one, go get yourself a good lawyer
because there is only one outcome. IMHO if the founders of the women's
movement could see what it has degenerated into today I think they would be
ashamed of what they started.


Whether it is justified or not, nobody should be using their children to
get
at each other.
What would king Solomon have said ?

In my experience a lot of the resentment is built up when women get
together
to bitch about their husbands/ex's and exchange tips on how to get their
own
way.

And you are doing what? Looks to me like all your posts are doing exactly
the same thing, but to people on a world-wide basis, instead of in a small
room with a select group.

I am trying to stick to hypothetical and annonymous cases but there are some
who keep trying to make it a personal issue.
Clearly I am not the one who hung himself now am I ? And for the record,
neither was there any infidelit involved in my marital breakdown.

Either way, do you think a secret gathering of unidentified conspiritors
with a hidden agenda to take you personally to the cleaners is more laudible
than an open campaign to tell people that what is happening is wrong ?

An accusation of domestic violence can often be made simply to have the
man
thrown out of his house.
Accusing the woman of violence also results in the man being thrown out,
because the mother needs to be there to look after the child and the
police
don't care who is to blame they just want to separate the trouble
makers.

You really have no idea of what goes on have you ?!

I know that almost any woman who accuses her husband of violence when
there
has been none has some other reason for wanting that person out of the
house. What could that be?

Perhaps she wants the house for herself. !?
Why have an inconvenient husband around when you can chuck him out and, as
someone suggested "get on with your own life".
Raise your children the way you want without having to care what 'he'
thinks.
No need to do his washing or cook for him (assuming one has such a stayed
domestic pattern).
No need to relocate for his work.
Have whatever friends and lovers you like come round.

Can you imagine trying to raise children together with someone like Banty?
If there was any issue, any tiny issue at all, that you didn't fully agree
with her on, do you think she would know the word 'compromise' or would she
go on and on until she had the final word ? Check who is at the end of each
branch in each thread here...in some cases it is blatantly obvious why there
is a single parent situation!

"ChrisScaife" wrote in message
...

"Byron Canfield" wrote in message
news:XIrub.181477$ao4.609161@attbi_s51...
"CJS" wrote in message
...
And just what motivation might a person have for being spiteful?

Is that relevant ?

You were the one that claimed spite could exist in total absence of any
action by the other party. Answer the question. Just what motivation
might
a person have for being spiteful?

Did I claim that ? I think you are getting two things confused.
I claimed that marital breakdown can come about thru no fault of either
party.
I also claimed that children are being used to hurt the oter party out of
spite.

The reasons for spite can be genuine, vastly exagerated or totally
imagined.

You still have not answered the question and I'm will keep asking it until
you do -- what's the motiviation for acting out of spite?

A new mum suffering from severe post natal depression can have a very
distorted view of reality, especially if she joins up with other women who
are having marital difficulties and they all sit round bitching about
their
husbands, jumping to conclusions and making devious plans to do things
their
own way without involving their husbands in the decisions. Such cliques
are
poison to society. If your wife joins one, go get yourself a good lawyer
because there is only one outcome. IMHO if the founders of the women's
movement could see what it has degenerated into today I think they would
be
ashamed of what they started.

You say this happens, but it's only your say so. Sounds like you have some
general issues with women.


Whether it is justified or not, nobody should be using their children
to
get
at each other.
What would king Solomon have said ?

In my experience a lot of the resentment is built up when women get
together
to bitch about their husbands/ex's and exchange tips on how to get
their
own
way.

And you are doing what? Looks to me like all your posts are doing
exactly
the same thing, but to people on a world-wide basis, instead of in a
small
room with a select group.

I am trying to stick to hypothetical and annonymous cases but there are
some
who keep trying to make it a personal issue.
Clearly I am not the one who hung himself now am I ?

I think you have. You've turned this into a "hate women" thread.

And for the record,
neither was there any infidelit involved in my marital breakdown.

Either way, do you think a secret gathering of unidentified conspiritors
with a hidden agenda to take you personally to the cleaners is more
laudible
than an open campaign to tell people that what is happening is wrong ?

So far, you have not established your premise that "what is happening is
wrong". So far, nothing is happening except to you.

An accusation of domestic violence can often be made simply to have
the
man
thrown out of his house.
Accusing the woman of violence also results in the man being thrown
out,
because the mother needs to be there to look after the child and the
police
don't care who is to blame they just want to separate the trouble
makers.

You really have no idea of what goes on have you ?!

I know that almost any woman who accuses her husband of violence when
there
has been none has some other reason for wanting that person out of the
house. What could that be?

Perhaps she wants the house for herself. !?

And why would that be? You do have a penchant for settling on the symptom
and calling it the cause.

Why have an inconvenient husband around when you can chuck him out and, as
someone suggested "get on with your own life".

Which would indicate that the partner was too self-absorbed to be a part of
that life.

Raise your children the way you want without having to care what 'he'
thinks.

Which indicates that the partner was too self-absorbed to communicate about
issues such as child-rearing.

No need to do his washing or cook for him (assuming one has such a stayed
domestic pattern).

Again indicates a presumption by the partner that the other would do the
entirety of the domestic chores, and failed in the communication arena
again.

No need to relocate for his work.

Again, points to self-absorbtion on his part, assuming that she would be
willing to move, instead of discussing it and arriving at an agreeable
solution.

Have whatever friends and lovers you like come round.

The former is an issue requiring communication; the latter is a symptom of
lack of intimacy and communication.

All these things you point out are merely symptoms of an underlying problem,
usually communication. It is also notably diifficult, if not impossible, for
those who have those very communication problems to realize the underlying
problem and often results in just such a situaton as yours where you attempt
to absolve yourself of any responsibility, putting all the blame on your
partner.


--
"There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
those who understand binary numbers and those who don't."
-----------------------------
Byron "Barn" Canfield