Saturday, October 10, 2009

In the UK ~ Fathers 4 Justice protest hijacks city walls

It
couldn't have happened on a finer day - that being my birthday. Good
job lads - we need to wake up these family court social engineers on
both sides of the Ocean.MJM













4:47pm Saturday 10th October 2009


comment Comments (3) Have your say »


CAMPAIGNERS from New Fathers 4 Justice dressed up as superheroes to hijack Southampton's old town walls in noisy protest this afternoon.

The protestors donned Batman, Superman, and Spiderman costumes and unfurled banners from the bridge near the city's historic Bargate demanding equal rights for dads over a megaphone.

Shoppers and motorists passing below waved or honked in support while around half a dozen police gathered close by.

The demonstration, which went off peacefully, was being held in support of Lee Moorman, 30, from Chandlers Ford, who is battling for equal contact with his son.


http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/4675586.Fathers_4_Justice_protest_hijacks_city_walls/












New Fathers 4 Justice protest in Southampton for Chandler's Ford dad Lee Moorman



1:58pm Monday 12th October 2009


comment Comments (0) Have your say »

More stories about: Chandler's Ford



BATMAN, Superman, Captain America, and Spiderman joined forces for a protest in Southampton.

The “superheroes” from New Fathers 4 Justice hijacked the city’s old town walls near the Bargate in support of Chandler’s Ford dad Lee Moorman, 30, who is fighting for access to his child.


Motorists passing below honked their support while around half a dozen police gathered close by. The protesters unfurled banners from the bridge over Castle Way and demanded equal rights for fathers over a megaphone.

Mr Moorman said he was having “sleepless nights” after last seeing his
three-year old son in July. He said he wanted joint custody not a
couple of hours access in a contact centre.

“I’ve got to go to the family courts which I’m told will be a lengthy process and cost a lot of money.”

Mr Moorman said he was planning a monthly support group in Southampton.
He was joined by protester Mark Harris, 50, who said he needed 133
court hearings to win the right to see his children.

The former Shirley
resident set fire to a wheelbarrow of the court papers he accumulated
over his ten-year battle as a show of disgust for the “biased” family
courts.

Mr Harris was one of the protesters who last year scaled the roof of deputy Labour leader Harriet Harman’s home while she and her husband were inside.

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/4677244.___Superheroes____fight_for_justice_for_Chandler_s_Ford_dad/

You can use Google Maps to get a street level view which you can rotate 360 degrees. Look for BarGate.

http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=yth&q=map+Southampton,+UK&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=Southampton,+Hampshire,+UK&gl=ca&ei=mkrTSprnJJCINJyOoJQD&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=image&resnum=1&ved=0CA8Q8gEwAA

Mike Murphy, Sault Ste. Marie, ON, Canada says...

5:34pm Sat 10 Oct 09


It
couldn't have happened on a finer day - that being my birthday. Good
job lads - we need to wake up these family court social engineers on
both sides of the Ocean.















UTS, says...

5:34pm Sat 10 Oct 09


fair play to them.


























Condor Man, Southampton says...

6:43pm Sat 10 Oct 09


about
time fathers had more rights over their kids. Shame on judges and the
court system in general for forcing blokes into this organisation.

















Helenlou, Southampton says...

9:52pm Sat 10 Oct 09


It
is such a shame that he has to resort to this to try to see his son.
Some women just use kids as weapons for money and self satisfaction. He
would have such a better life with his Dad. Whatever happens at least
he will see that his Dad has fought tooth and nail for him.

















flower49, Holbury says...

9:54pm Sat 10 Oct 09


I
bet you could have filled that bridge 10,000 times over with all the
women who were owed child support from the CSA. How many dads do not
pay any money to their ex wives to help with the bringing up of their
offspring? Not saying that these men do not pay towards their children
but, I do not suppose there would be many women dressing up as Superman
or Batman to make a point. We just carry on working and carry on
bringing up the kids.

















Helenlou, Southampton says...

10:04pm Sat 10 Oct 09


flower49
- you have completely missed the point. These Dads pay maintenance and
are fighting to see their children who they love very much. Mums get
the automatic right to access to their children no matter who pays for
it. Its not a question of money its a question of access.

















soton1980, Southampton/Fareham says...

11:47pm Sat 10 Oct 09


Fair
play to these guys! I find it unbelieveable that in the 21st century
when men and woman are supposed to have equal rights that father's
rights are less than the mother's!

















smithy31, plymouth says...

8:13am Sun 11 Oct 09



Mike Murphy wrote:

It should say "It couldn't have..."


well
done to the lads we need to show them that us as fathers are no
differant from there mother ive got 3 kids which ive not seen since may
09 due to family law fathers are for life not just on saturdays i
support this group all the way such a shame i never made it nigel from
plymouth

















rabbitlady, Totton says...

11:29am Sun 11 Oct 09


What
about the dads who are violent to their partners in front of their
kids, carry on affairs with other women, dont pay maintenance and still
want to see their kids? my child at 5 yrs old told the court 'I dont
want to see my dad'

















Condor Man, Southampton says...

12:09pm Sun 11 Oct 09



rabbitlady wrote:

What
about the dads who are violent to their partners in front of their
kids, carry on affairs with other women, dont pay maintenance and still
want to see their kids? my child at 5 yrs old told the court 'I dont
want to see my dad'


what about the dad who doesn't earn
enough money to keep his wife so she goes off with a bloke who earns
more yet still screws the father for child support in addition to
getting all the benefits? we've been dominated by women on this issue
for too long.

















TheJoiners, harefield says...

12:29pm Sun 11 Oct 09



Condor Man wrote:


rabbitlady
wrote: What about the dads who are violent to their partners in front
of their kids, carry on affairs with other women, dont pay maintenance
and still want to see their kids? my child at 5 yrs old told the court
'I dont want to see my dad'


what about the dad who doesn't
earn enough money to keep his wife so she goes off with a bloke who
earns more yet still screws the father for child support in addition to
getting all the benefits? we've been dominated by women on this issue
for too long.


Its not about screwing the dads. You have
kids you pay for them, simple as. If you dont earn enough to support
them, dont have them

















smithy31, plymouth says...

12:58pm Sun 11 Oct 09


as
for the comment with the 5 year old the courts will not listen to a
child of that age they need to be 11 before even a thought of what the
child wants so i dont no what **** that came out of i have 3 kids
10,8,3 and the courts dont listen to them a father is got as much right
as there mother no matter what has happened in the past its all the
future that counts nigel plymouth plymouth family butchers is the law
courts

















Saintly Sinner, Southampton says...

1:05pm Sun 11 Oct 09


My ex owes me money through the CSA.


I now my pay child maintenance to my ex through the CSA, whilst still being owed money from my ex.


Guess what flower49


I am a man, who bought up his child alone until my child choose to live with his mother.


Yes, mothers can be just as bad, if not worse

















Condor Man, Southampton says...

1:58pm Sun 11 Oct 09



Saintly Sinner wrote:

My
ex owes me money through the CSA. I now my pay child maintenance to my
ex through the CSA, whilst still being owed money from my ex. Guess
what flower49 I am a man, who bought up his child alone until my child
choose to live with his mother. Yes, mothers can be just as bad, if not
worse


just try telling Harriet Hatemen that.

















nononsense2009, southampton says...

2:16pm Sun 11 Oct 09


I
am of the belief that fathers should see their children, however its
all so easy to blame the mother for cutting access. I am a mum who has
been here done this and believe me its not easy. We have to think about
our children and when dad comes when he feels like it, puts other
things first on access days, is in and out of your childs life and you
have a distraught child who crys when dad doesnt show and then 6 months
later has several organisations asking the child to draw how they feel
because dad has decided he wants contact again and taken it back to
court and then child crying because they dont want to see dad anymore
what are we meant to do. You have to do what is right for your child.
So yes there are some fathers who dont get to see their children
because mum has decided it to be this way but not all mums do it to be
vindictive, we are just protecting our babies from future let down and
sitting at the front door bag in hand coat on for their father to not
show again for the third weekend in a row......only to find ourselves
back in court being blamed for cutting access several weeks later.

















nononsense2009, southampton says...

2:32pm Sun 11 Oct 09



smithy31 wrote:

as
for the comment with the 5 year old the courts will not listen to a
child of that age they need to be 11 before even a thought of what the
child wants so i dont no what **** that came out of i have 3 kids
10,8,3 and the courts dont listen to them a father is got as much right
as there mother no matter what has happened in the past its all the
future that counts nigel plymouth plymouth family butchers is the law
courts


i am a mum and i have been dragged thru the courts
so many times. I understand what you are saying about a five year old
not being able to have a say at court. However there are organisations
trained specifiacally to help your child. One inparticular is NYAS they
are a bit like a CAFCASS officer (im sure you all have one assigned to
your case) however the NYAS officer is there to solely represent your
child, in essence they are your childs voice!! The courts value these
officers evaluations and the work they do with the children. They are
trained to work with all ages and get to the bottom of things. However
if you choose to ask for their help you may not always like the
outcome, if your children tell the officer that they dont want to see
you this is the case they will put to the courts. However if you are
sure that your children do want you to be part of thier life then they
may just be able to help you and it may be worth asking about them!!! I
suppose you really have nothing to loose :) The only thing i will
always say is great fight for your children but never ever blame the
mother, children are very very protective especailly as they get older.
The fact that they now live with mum will usually mean that it is her
they will protect and sometimes this means that they will see you
putting her thru unpleasant things and alot of stress and they may
decide that you are the bad person in it all and choose not to see
you!!!! Remember no matter how you feel about your babies mothers they
ARE raising your children and most of them are doing a blooming good
job!!

















Saintly Sinner, Southampton says...

3:19pm Sun 11 Oct 09



Condor Man wrote:


Saintly Sinner wrote:

My
ex owes me money through the CSA. I now my pay child maintenance to my
ex through the CSA, whilst still being owed money from my ex. Guess
what flower49 I am a man, who bought up his child alone until my child
choose to live with his mother. Yes, mothers can be just as bad, if not
worse


just try telling Harriet Hatemen that.


I
think I would be *issing into the wind, the same as I'm doing with the
CSA, when I asked them to reduce my payments until the debt I'm owed by
my ex was cleared

















Saintly Sinner, Southampton says...

3:24pm Sun 11 Oct 09



nononsense2009 wrote:

I
am of the belief that fathers should see their children, however its
all so easy to blame the mother for cutting access. I am a mum who has
been here done this and believe me its not easy. We have to think about
our children and when dad comes when he feels like it, puts other
things first on access days, is in and out of your childs life and you
have a distraught child who crys when dad doesnt show and then 6 months
later has several organisations asking the child to draw how they feel
because dad has decided he wants contact again and taken it back to
court and then child crying because they dont want to see dad anymore
what are we meant to do. You have to do what is right for your child.
So yes there are some fathers who dont get to see their children
because mum has decided it to be this way but not all mums do it to be
vindictive, we are just protecting our babies from future let down and
sitting at the front door bag in hand coat on for their father to not
show again for the third weekend in a row......only to find ourselves
back in court being blamed for cutting access several weeks later.


And I suppose mother's don't do that when father's have custody, because the mother walked away from the child?


Useless parents are useless parents whether male or female, it's not all men..

















Mike Murphy, Sault Ste. Marie, ON, Canada says...

3:56pm today Sun 11 Oct 09


As
often happens in these discussions the focus for equality disappears
from view and we get caught up in the minutiae of personal tragedies.


The
issue is mums get custody in most cases and dads are marginalized as
visitors and then often not at all if mum says so. All the power and
control is in the hands of a single gender. Mum and dad were presumable
equal during the partnership - now they are not. If we have a
presumption of equality then each case can proceed on the basis of its
own merits and available time. If both parents are fit what is the
problem? If one parent can't do 50-50 then they work out whats best for
them but at least the judges have to go on the basis of equality not in
the one sided winner take all approach. All that is doing is increasing
conflict - not decreasing it. The children, unless they have been
alienated or abused want both parents in their lives. Its about them!

















rabbitlady, Totton says...

11:56pm Sun 11 Oct 09


smith31
i can assure you that my child at 5 years old made the decision for no
further contact with dad. A CAFCASS Officer came to my property on two
separate occasions to speak to my child (with me out of the room). He
then wrote a report for the Court recommending no direct contact. My
child was actually frightened of dad because of his violent temper. So
please be informed that Court will take the opinions of a 5 year old
into consideration!

















lee-nf4j, eastleigh says...

7:41am Mon 12 Oct 09


This was all for my son vinnie moorman . I miss and love him so much xmas soon hope i will see him

i will keep FIGHTING there are lot of good dad out there !!!


What we want

1 - Equal Contact

an
automatic presumption of equal contact with the children when the
parents split as a starting point. This will give both parents equal
parity of rights to see the children.

2 - Open Courts

To be brought into line with the crown and magistrates courts. This will prevent corruption, biasness.

www.newfathers4justi

ce.info

















rabbitlady, Totton says...

8:01am Mon 12 Oct 09


Lee,
I don't know the circumstances of your split but the child's wishes
have to be taken into account when contact decisions are made. It is
not in the child's best interests to be force to have contact if it is
not what they want. My ex partner played no part in her young life
whatsoever, he never put her to bed, instead preferring to stay out all
night with various women, he never took her to school, went to
assemblies etc. Whilst only being young, children do take in what they
see and therefore the Court have an obligation to take their feelings
into account. I wish you good luck with your campaign but we must
realise that every case has to be judged on its merits and at the end
of the day the children have to come first. Good Luck.

















newfathers4justice ( sussex ), sussex says...

9:02am Mon 12 Oct 09


i sense some feminist twats ...


im not here to argue the toss


*so dont bother to reply to this


ill point it out simply .....


the courts DO NOT act in the childs best interest, nor do they enforce the law,

as mike said most residency is with the mother,

cafcass
lie and twist things that are said, which is why most from a recent
ofsted report across the uk deemed practically every single branch
INADEQUATE !,


the simple point here is that if there is no
"real" reason for stopping contact then decent loving child/father
contact should be 50/50

( i exclude false allegations, which does happen and is sick! of another party to do this to stop contact )


all of us in this organisation pay for our children

this is not about money, and the people that bleat on about csa money make me sick to the core !

kids
and cash are a seperate issue, mothers get paid by the government for
kids to look after them regardless of the csa you need to realise this !

now
stop being heartless feeble money grabbing leeches, and using a child
of a way of gaining money, and let the decent loving father that has
done no wrong ! see his children !



there are hundreds of
loving dads out there that want to see there kids and have been stopped
for absoloutely no reason ! be it mothers, cafcass corruption, or
failing courts


we want 50/50 contact now !


some commentators on here should really not comment on something they clearly know nothing about.


The men that died during the war fought for there families only to have there rights taken away from them in the present!


THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN SUFFER AS A RESULT OF ONE PARENT, (USUALLY THE FATHER) BEING CUT OUT OF THEIR LIVES WITHOUT LAWFUL REASON.

THE REMOVAL OF A CHILD FROM A FIT AND LOVING PARENT IS NOTHING LESS THAN CHILD ABUSE.



"Destroy the family, and you destroy society"


until next time .....


















newfathers4justice ( sussex ), sussex says...

9:25am Mon 12 Oct 09


Any dads caught up in this plight, contact us and we can help you fight the system.


WE WANT:


1.AN AUTOMATIC PRESUMPTION OF 50/50 CONTACT AS A STARTING POINT WHEN THE PARENTS SPLIT.


2. OPEN COURTS


NEW F4J

www.newfathers4justi

ce.info

















gillyman, southampton says...

9:39am Mon 12 Oct 09


women on here are missing the point banging on about csa payments

the
fathers for justice are usually men who pay maintenance and have no
access to there kids because there is no support for dads from the
british courts

















steven gately, portsmouth says...

11:31am Mon 12 Oct 09


spiteful- evil- child abusing- phyco- bich mothers that use children as weapons an to gain cash

should be locked up permanantly

and let the father look after thier kid coz there obviously not fit too


my ex is a phyco and they let nut jobs like that look after my kid ?


gordon brown

get a grip you scotts muppet fraggle numopty !!!


mc, ste rip

















soton-mike80, Southampton says...

11:38am Mon 12 Oct 09



gillyman wrote:

women
on here are missing the point banging on about csa payments the fathers
for justice are usually men who pay maintenance and have no access to
there kids because there is no support for dads from the british courts


Spot-on...
I have friends in this situation, they are upstanding members of the
community, they want to contribute to the lives of their children,
they've never missed a single birthday, christmas or any holiday, but
the British Courts do not recognise that fathers can have a more
positive influence on their children.


Those parents that use
children as pawns and weapons are not fit for purpose (it happens in
both genders). This is not a man VS woman thing, it is quite simply a
matter of equality.


My heart goes out to all those women that do
have no-good partners, as with the men, but please do not tarnish all
men with the same brush. Some of us are more decent than you would ever
know! And ladies, if you keep preaching that all men are bad - you'll
start to believe it and be alone for the rest of your lives!


Good luck F4J! I love your style!

















newfathers4justice ( sussex ), sussex says...

11:50am Mon 12 Oct 09


please watch our video


copy & paste this link:


http://www.youtube.c

om/watch?v=ExiGRl5x5

6w


our site:

http://www.newfather

s4justice.info/

















freemantlegirl2, Southampton says...

11:52am Mon 12 Oct 09



steven gately wrote:

spiteful- evil- child abusing- phyco- bich mothers that use children as weapons an to gain cash

should be locked up permanantly

and let the father look after thier kid coz there obviously not fit too


my ex is a phyco and they let nut jobs like that look after my kid ?


gordon brown

get a grip you scotts muppet fraggle numopty !!!


mc, ste rip


mmm and that post is really sane and balanced isn't it! lol

















freemantlegirl2, Southampton says...

11:58am Mon 12 Oct 09



newfathers4justice ( sussex ) wrote:

i sense some feminist twats ...


im not here to argue the toss


*so dont bother to reply to this


ill point it out simply .....


the courts DO NOT act in the childs best interest, nor do they enforce the law,

as mike said most residency is with the mother,

cafcass
lie and twist things that are said, which is why most from a recent
ofsted report across the uk deemed practically every single branch
INADEQUATE !,


the simple point here is that if there is no
"real" reason for stopping contact then decent loving child/father
contact should be 50/50

( i exclude false allegations, which does happen and is sick! of another party to do this to stop contact )


all of us in this organisation pay for our children

this is not about money, and the people that bleat on about csa money make me sick to the core !

kids
and cash are a seperate issue, mothers get paid by the government for
kids to look after them regardless of the csa you need to realise this !

now
stop being heartless feeble money grabbing leeches, and using a child
of a way of gaining money, and let the decent loving father that has
done no wrong ! see his children !



there are hundreds of
loving dads out there that want to see there kids and have been stopped
for absoloutely no reason ! be it mothers, cafcass corruption, or
failing courts


we want 50/50 contact now !


some commentators on here should really not comment on something they clearly know nothing about.


The men that died during the war fought for there families only to have there rights taken away from them in the present!


THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN SUFFER AS A RESULT OF ONE PARENT, (USUALLY THE FATHER) BEING CUT OUT OF THEIR LIVES WITHOUT LAWFUL REASON.

THE REMOVAL OF A CHILD FROM A FIT AND LOVING PARENT IS NOTHING LESS THAN CHILD ABUSE.



"Destroy the family, and you destroy society"


until next time .....



mmm and that post is really sane and balanced isn't it! lol

















freemantlegirl2, Southampton says...

12:15pm Mon 12 Oct 09



freemantlegirl2 wrote:


newfathers4justice ( sussex ) wrote:

i sense some feminist twats ...


im not here to argue the toss


*so dont bother to reply to this


ill point it out simply .....


the courts DO NOT act in the childs best interest, nor do they enforce the law,

as mike said most residency is with the mother,

cafcass
lie and twist things that are said, which is why most from a recent
ofsted report across the uk deemed practically every single branch
INADEQUATE !,


the simple point here is that if there is no
"real" reason for stopping contact then decent loving child/father
contact should be 50/50

( i exclude false allegations, which does happen and is sick! of another party to do this to stop contact )


all of us in this organisation pay for our children

this is not about money, and the people that bleat on about csa money make me sick to the core !

kids
and cash are a seperate issue, mothers get paid by the government for
kids to look after them regardless of the csa you need to realise this !

now
stop being heartless feeble money grabbing leeches, and using a child
of a way of gaining money, and let the decent loving father that has
done no wrong ! see his children !



there are hundreds of
loving dads out there that want to see there kids and have been stopped
for absoloutely no reason ! be it mothers, cafcass corruption, or
failing courts


we want 50/50 contact now !


some commentators on here should really not comment on something they clearly know nothing about.


The men that died during the war fought for there families only to have there rights taken away from them in the present!


THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN SUFFER AS A RESULT OF ONE PARENT, (USUALLY THE FATHER) BEING CUT OUT OF THEIR LIVES WITHOUT LAWFUL REASON.

THE REMOVAL OF A CHILD FROM A FIT AND LOVING PARENT IS NOTHING LESS THAN CHILD ABUSE.



"Destroy the family, and you destroy society"


until next time .....



mmm and that post is really sane and balanced isn't it! lol


People
are not going to listen to your argument if you accuse them of being
feminist twats, and then demand that they don't reply! That's not equal
either. It comes over as very aggressive. I am totally sympathetic to
your plight but don't ruin it!


I agree, CSA payments/child maintenance is a separate issue.


The Children Act means that the child has priority but is, as you say, often misinterpreted.


No
child should be forced to see a father (or mother or other relatives if
they really don't want to). The lady that said her 5 year old didn't
want to see dad. My daughter also said that, but I did feel that it was
because she was 'angry' with him at that time, it wasn't permanent. I
sat down with dad and explained that and to be fair we both agreed that
the door should be left open, and lo and behold a few months' later she
changed her mind. They are now really close, and I am thankful because
she is happy.


Shared access is hardly ever granted with very
young children, as it's confusing for them to be flitting about from
house-to-house. Children need both parents, but they also need
stability. Due to schooling for example, it often isn't possible to
have totally equal shared access. Shared access isn't always in the
best interests of the child, EVERY parent male or female should put
their child's welfare and happiness first. I'm on the side of my
children, not me or my ex - that is irrelevant. It's about how we
proceed as parents. Sadly, couples cannot often come to agreement and
that's where the Courts have to step in and then it gets nasty because
one person never agrees, and therein lies the crux of the matter. When
a family breaks up it is near-on impossible to keep this totally equal
because of the logistics of the situation - some manage it with a lot
of compromise. It is often difficult to negotiate the way through child
contact because the emotions and fall out from a bad break up is bound
to affect things, however you may try not to let it.


I would
like to comment on your comment about men fighting in the war, that
many women were left one-parent families during the war and contributed
hugely to the war effort. The dynamics of society have changed for the
better, even though perhaps the father still has to obtain more
consideration in the Court. My sister is a family solicitor and she
acts for a lot of fathers and even she says this but she says that both
sets of parents usually lose sight of the most important thing because
they're arguing and that is the child.

















freemantlegirl2, Southampton says...

12:17pm Mon 12 Oct 09



freemantlegirl2 wrote:


newfathers4justice ( sussex ) wrote:

i sense some feminist twats ...


im not here to argue the toss


*so dont bother to reply to this


ill point it out simply .....


the courts DO NOT act in the childs best interest, nor do they enforce the law,

as mike said most residency is with the mother,

cafcass
lie and twist things that are said, which is why most from a recent
ofsted report across the uk deemed practically every single branch
INADEQUATE !,


the simple point here is that if there is no
"real" reason for stopping contact then decent loving child/father
contact should be 50/50

( i exclude false allegations, which does happen and is sick! of another party to do this to stop contact )


all of us in this organisation pay for our children

this is not about money, and the people that bleat on about csa money make me sick to the core !

kids
and cash are a seperate issue, mothers get paid by the government for
kids to look after them regardless of the csa you need to realise this !

now
stop being heartless feeble money grabbing leeches, and using a child
of a way of gaining money, and let the decent loving father that has
done no wrong ! see his children !



there are hundreds of
loving dads out there that want to see there kids and have been stopped
for absoloutely no reason ! be it mothers, cafcass corruption, or
failing courts


we want 50/50 contact now !


some commentators on here should really not comment on something they clearly know nothing about.


The men that died during the war fought for there families only to have there rights taken away from them in the present!


THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN SUFFER AS A RESULT OF ONE PARENT, (USUALLY THE FATHER) BEING CUT OUT OF THEIR LIVES WITHOUT LAWFUL REASON.

THE REMOVAL OF A CHILD FROM A FIT AND LOVING PARENT IS NOTHING LESS THAN CHILD ABUSE.



"Destroy the family, and you destroy society"


until next time .....



mmm and that post is really sane and balanced isn't it! lol


Sorry that comment got 'carried over' from a last post. Wasn't meant for you.















Mike Murphy, Sault Ste. Marie, ON, Canada says...

3:56pm today Mon 12 Oct 09


@freemantlegirl2, Southampton says...

12:17pm
Mon 12 Oct 09 You seem to be a more reasoned mom and are able to see
some of the bigger picture. I would suggest to anyone that a 5 year old
is incapable of making a reasoned decision to lock out 50% of their
genetic heritage. They will have been alienated in some manner or
temporarily angered. Think about it - would you let your 5 year old go
to the store by themselves, ride a bicycle through town by themselves,
go around the block by themselves, smoke, drink alcohol, decide not to
go to the doctor or school et al. Why would you think then this child
can make a decision to reject a parent. It lacks logic and is a red
herring. If a child rejects a parent there can't be many reasons. First
look for a deliberate attempt to alienate - social workers are not
qualified to determine if this has happened then look for abuse by the
rejected parent. Even abused children seek the love of the abuser and
do not out rightly reject the parent. Any one who states a 5 year old
can make such a decision is very likely deliberately alienating the
child and is the abuser.

No comments:

The work of Fathers 4 Justice and the Pain of Fathers ~ Activism in the UK

Equal and Shared Parenting ~ The Movie