Despite the many changes ushered in, and promised, from the top of the family justice system, the reality for most on the ground is that little has changed. The lack of legal aid hasn’t helped, reducing the odds of vulnerable families getting the right support from good lawyers. The system too, still has a lot to learn about domestic violence perpetrators and how they function, and in a Court which relies heavily on character analysis, having to as it does because evidence of abuse or wrongdoing is often too expensive to procure or hidden from plain sight, the lack of knowledge and understanding nationally about these issues is still unacceptable.
And so we still have parents, like this mother, losing their children to a violent partner given the responsibility of caring for them, in spite of their pleas to be returned to their mother. The voice of the child, too, is still too often ignored, the consequences too dire to mention.
Maypole Women, a widely respected domestic violence charity, features a mother’s thoughts on how the family justice system has failed her and her children in their newsletter this month. It will be a familiar narrative to those of us who assist families when things go horribly wrong, but it doesn’t make it any easier to read, because as you will discover, this mother and her children’s lives, are still in danger. And the Family Courts have facilitated that risk of harm.
This is the mother’s letter to the family justice system:
To the Family Court
‘I am mute from the pain and fear and the enforced silence. My mind is no longer mine, it takes over and blocks the agony, helping me live and breath. I exist, I do not live.
He said he would hunt me down and kill me. He has succeeded. I am as dead, but worse, I am still living with unbearable pain, the pain returns throughout the day, always as intense. At night, I am tormented, sleeping little, afraid to sleep, haunted.
My children stolen and given to the man I have tried to protect them from, the courts help him continue his abuse…the silencing, the denigration, bullying, twisting words and actions, gas lighting, telling me I’m mad or lying , not believing my crying children begging to come home to me, abusing them and cutting down my maternal instincts to protect and love my children.
What type of people are you who cannot see you are puppets in the hands of an abuser or at very least colluding with him in abuse of the vulnerable … mothers who ran from the terrible abuse of a man and tried to protect her children, struggling alone.
And we will be left changed, damaged, some may not survive, children will live with this inner pain for the rest of their lives, mothers living in darkness, crying, howling in despair, their children torn from their hearts, part of them missing, worrying, worrying about what their child is going through.
Shocked that this country allows this, why, why. How did it happen? We have been labelled, thrown into a strange alternate universe where we are judged, told we are someone we are not, abusers of our own children, made up stories.
We cannot believe the madness of your beliefs, the excuses you will make to tear children from their mother..why are you like this, what do you gain? A wage at the end of the month? Power, twisted vengence … did you have an abusive childhood, are you sick yourself?
You are killing women and children, emotionally, mentally, physically…we will not live as long as we were meant to and our lives will not be the best they could have been because you have burdened our souls with excruciating, deep, and terrible pain.
My children were sweet, gentle and harmless. They have changed, they are troubled…. but no-one notices because they have learned to be silent, to hide their feelings and get on with life as best they can. They think I abandoned them.
You are responsible for this, inflicting pain, neglect, utter lack of compassion or understanding, made up models and tactics, used to trap mothers and children into silence. Nothing changed, men and powerful women rule, mothers and children considered the lowest and weakest, there to be bullied and squashed.
Society does not want to help women who are trapped in abuse, they don’t understand why, how it happens, the clever baiting and trapping, the threats, the pummelling of all self-worth, the fear, confusion, mind and spirit barely existing.
And now, instead of support, you act as fellow abusers, you fail to protect children and you break mothers, barristers relishing the win with no thought, or even perception of the suffering they cause.
You believe you can get away with this horrific abuse of some of the most vulnerable in society.
You are right, you can.’
Researching Reform 
I have questioned many times as to why the lie detection equipment is not used more widely within Family and Criminal Court proceedings in the UK given its alleged high level of accuracy according to the Jeremy Kyle show.
Surely determining the truthfulness of parents and professionals within Family Court proceedings would avert many a travesty of justice where entirely honest and blameless parents are ruthlessly and often permanently alienated from their children thanks to the current justice system which upholds the interests and rights of malicious liars including CAFCASS officers and social workers and colludes in the alienation of non-resident parents who often represent a protective factor in the children’s lives and fails to ever punish those found guilty of repeated acts of malicious lying and perjury.
The same of course applies within the criminal courts where many an innocent person has been fitted up and framed for crimes they did not commit reliant upon both professional and public witnesses being prepared to LIE and bear false testimony.
To do lie detector tests could or may save millions of pounds a year with many court experts and others In a childs best interest losing their jobs then perhaps children will have some form of saftey.
Maggie Tuttle
http://www.childrenscreamingtobeheard.com The silent witnesses here lies the truth
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Maggie, thank you for your comment. I think there are lots of conflicts here, including poor training, professionals treating the process as a popularity contest, a very significant lack of evidence gathering and awareness of DV and how it works and worst of all, a pervasive numbness which can stem from too much exposure to emotional situations, which in turn leave professionals jaded and without focus. That’s just a few of the issues, I think.
LikeLike
Domestic terrorism is a crime and has no place in civil family law.
Why ask social workers etc to investigate when they cannot prosecute.
A DV policeman/woman is the person we need to do their job.
DV cases should should not be passed to social workers, psychologists etc.
Criminal psychologists would be beneficial too.
Too many perpetrators grooming professionals and diverting the limelight away from themselves.
http://safe-at-last.hubpages.com/hub/The-Fine-Art-of-Grooming
“The grooming of doctors, nurses, mental health carers, family support workers and other public servants is called “Institutional Grooming” and the perpetrator does it for the purpose of self-preservation.
Institutional grooming refers to the manipulation of professionals who have contact with the victim, so that any allegations of abuse made by the victim are doubted or outright disbelieved.
The targets of Institutional Groomers may include their victim’s General Practitioner, psychiatrist, psychologist, child health nurse, pediatrician, carers at a Family Day Care Facility, school teachers, counselors or therapists. The public servants targeted may be social workers, case workers, investigative officers or police officers employed by government departments such as the Department For Child Protection, the Police’s Family Protection Unit and the Department for Community Development. When done with enough finesse to be successful, institutional grooming ensures that any complaints alleged about the perpetrator are either disregarded outright, doubted and therefore not investigated thoroughly, or if acted upon, subsequently dismissed in a court of law.”
LikeLike
Thanks LP. There is a problem when children are involved and that is that post trial for the DV element, someone needs to offer the child/children and abused parent some kind of support, both during and after the court process for the DV. The family justice system is stuck in strange limbo, with some overlap with the criminal courts and this really needs to be sorted out to create a more streamlined process, with minimal court involvement wherever possible.
LikeLike
I’m a loving heartsick nurturing protective young mother from Cincinnati Ohio who is going through the unthinkable and living every parents worse nightmare as I’m being completely and purposely blocked from getting the long overdue justice my kids and I so rightfully deserve and praying for as my innocent young daughters were preyed upon by sick evil persons who are abusing their power and involvment as they own their own government contracted business and have the local juvenile justice system in their pocket and are getting away with basically doing corrupt back door deals within the juvenile justice system who they paid off to cover up the state and federal laws they’ve committed to get away with fraudently making look real the conspired plot and illegal forged kidnapping of our kids. My husband and I were never accused of child abuse or neglect they knowingly committed fraud and made a knowingly false report to cps saying my husband and I were having marital problems (which is definitely not grounds for cps to randomly visit my in laws house while our kids were there visiting for the day and the one and only time my husband and I let our guard down and let his mom and her husband babysit for a few hrs on June 28th 2015 and ever since that day we let our girls was the last time we ever saw our little girls, our kids have been gone, kidnapped, held captive, abused and severely isolated ( the worse type of inhumane isolation upon a child) from absolutely everything they know and love for almost 4 years and NO HELP FROM OUR LOCAL OR COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT OR COURT SYSTEM due to my in laws connection and dealings within the county gov agencies and the bribes they paid out to continue to get away with kidnapping our girls and block the return of girls back home to us and block us from justice. The bogus fraudulent illegal case my in laws paid cps to dummy up false marital issue bogus claims they lied and made up against us which they used to illegally remove our kids was UNSUBSTANTIATED JULY 23RD 2015 but why our are kids still gone and not seen for 4 years??? Something needs to be done to look into our kids kidnapping.
LikeLike
Has the ring of truth about it ;so no more comment needed on this mother’s letter
LikeLike
You can feel her exasperation, and her desperation.
LikeLike
The secret ‘Family’ Courts stink to high heaven.
Social workers in all their guises urgently need to be forced out of the Courts and back into education, so they can learn how to act fairly – and according to the child’s needs, and the harms actually done, or most likely to be done, to that child.
They need to stop their rampant sexism against caring male (or female) parents. That sexism is seemingly taught to these people as they undergo their social work ‘education’. It is not adequate. It is unfair to all parties, particularly to the children.
They need to be forced into making accurate, ‘child-serving’ records.. and where they don’t, they should be jailed, and in future kept away from any social work or other representation of people, for ever.
Judges, currently sitting in the Family Courts,urgently need to be forced to pursue such rotten examples of social work, until justice is achieved for the child.. and such social workers are denied, for ever, the right to appear in the Family Court. If they can be shown not to do that, then they should also be removed for ever. A good social worker, who is honest and caring, and who makes very accurate and complete records, and stands by them, to the benefit of the child, is worth her/his weight in gold. For that, we need people for great common sense, to be trained adequately. About how many social workers can we state that?
Legal representatives, particularly barristers, who have no intention of adequately doing the job, or who (as we found) act in a totally incompetent way, should be removed from the Family Court for ever. They are a menace to already distressed families..
Because of the lawless secrecy of the Family Court, there is no other sanction which would work. Currently, without such sanctions, incompetents ‘work’ within the Family Court for a ‘working’ lifetime, ruining lives in a very expensive manner. This must cease.
Court Officers who act against justice, changing records, allowing solicitors to change final Court Orders, against the Judge’s decision, should be sacked and black-marked against ever gaining future employment within the publicly funded Court system.
It is also high time that human beings were not treated as scum, by being forced into premises which are designed (newly designed in the case of Manchester Family Court) to intimidate and discomfit people who are already in the throes of such utter misery as family break-up and violence, especially where children are involved.
Does any Family Court Judge, refusing wider (helpful) members of the child’s family any access to his/her Court, realise how miserable is a day sitting on icy cold metal seats, which are pinned to the floor, so we can’t steal or throw them. The insult of such Court furniture, is hardly designed to aid the public – which does, after all, pay for it.
Does any Family Court Judge realise what support he/she is removing from the distressed child, by this lack of access of wider family to the proceedings?
Just as Lords, Ladies, MPs and Judges, we are all trying to live our lives as well as we can.
In respect of ‘Family Court justice’, there is currently no such thing. Treat the public as ‘scum’ and ‘scum’ is the only thing you will see.
How dare anyone call the currently noxious, Family Court situation, ‘justice’?
LikeLike
Hi OA, I do think a lot of this is to do with competence and understanding. I’d like to see a much higher standard set for all sectors inside the family justice system.
LikeLike
Hi Natasha,
This letter really affected me. It could have been written by me, except instead of promising to track me down and kill me he coolly told me he was looking for my replacement. Psychopathy can be identified conclusively in a simple brain scan – N.B. not all psychopaths are violent, but all psychopaths CAN lie their heads off.
Please can you contact me, Natasha, if you are able to help when things go terribly, terribly wrong. My final hearing is in a month.
LikeLike
Thank you for your comment, I’m sorry to hear about your case. Please email me at sobk13 at gmail dot com and I’ll do my best to help.
LikeLike
Natasha, You cannot assume the mother is telling the truth. As the next commentator states, ‘Surely determining the truthfulness of parents and professionals within Family Court proceedings would avert many a travesty of justice where entirely honest and blameless parents are ruthlessly and often permanently alienated from their children thanks to the current justice system which upholds the interests and rights of malicious liars including CAFCASS officers and social workers and colludes in the alienation of non-resident parents who often represent a protective factor in the children’s lives and fails to ever punish those found guilty of repeated acts of malicious lying and perjury’. Fathers have long campaigned against this type of treatment as we have seen in the recent case of Jonathan Coupland. Perhaps the introduction of a lie detector test for mothers as well as fathers and professionals might be one answer. kip
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2609838/Custody-battle-fathers-86-000-payout-social-worker-falsely-accused-abusing-daughter.html
LikeLike
Hi Kip, I come across enough ‘cases gone bad’ in this context to find this letter an accurate representation of how wronged and badly treated parents feel the system affects them and their children. This letter seems genuine enough to me, and as far as I’m concerned, when a judge can err with all the so-called evidence in front of him and professionals in charge of ascertaining the truth fail despite being given access to parties and resources, an assumption based on a letter doesn’t seem that odious. We must also remember though, that just as we cannot always say for sure whether a mother is telling the truth, the same must also stand for fathers who ask the public to accept their wrongs as genuine reflections of the truth.
LikeLike
Kip, please do not fall for the old Eve ill Eve liar story because it is a divide and rule mechanism used in patriarchal law courts and it usually works.
There is enough research to prove that female DV victims are not liars on a grand scale.
There is enough research too to prove children of Eve are not liars on any grand scale- less than 1% lie ….yet we know children are rarely believed in these cases and that protective parents can be blamed for alienating the children- a theory created by a pro pedophile “expert” who committed suicide when the net closed in on him.
http://www.domesticviolenceabuseandchildcustody.com/
“Contrary to what many might assume, the people who staff our nation’s custody courts have no real expertise about topics related to children’s best interests—children’s developmental needs, the mother-child attachment bond, the benefits of long-term nursing, the harms of maternal-child separation, and so forth. Judges usually aren’t required to have any education whatsoever on the major issues affecting the litigants who appear in front of their bench.”
“For more than two decades, protective mothers from every state in the country (as well as overseas) have been ordered to turn their children over into the care, and even the custody, of the children’s abusive fathers. This occurs even when there is adequate evidence of child abuse, domestic violence, and other harmful behaviors on the part of the father. Courts claim to be doing this to ensure that both parents remain involved in their children’s lives after divorce or separation, but in fact, in most of these cases, precisely the opposite happens: mothers are denied any meaningful relationship, or even contact, with their children. In the meantime, male supremacist groups claim unfair treatment in the family courts, seeking shared or total custody in order to avoid paying child support and to maintain men’s traditional control over their partner and their children.”
LikeLike
Hi Kip, hope you are well.
I was just wondering if Natasha would as keen to publish my story, as a father, who has basically faced the same scenario as that told here of the mother she writes about? Then again I also wonder if she would be as quick to believe the things I would have to say [edited]. With statements like: “This letter seems genuine enough to me” (made by Natasha) the operative emphasis on the doubtful word “Seems” well really, this says it all! Perhaps on receiving my story Natasha may use the same word, “seems” in regard to my stories veracity and the truthfulness of it. Well if I got a “Seems” too, I’d be happy with that I suppose. I Read the story here, as written by the mother in question, in regard to it Kip you make the statement: “Natasha, you cannot assume the mother is telling the truth”, but I get the distinct idea that Natasha indeed has, and it makes me wonder why? Surely mothers do not lie do they?
Also in Natasha’s introduction she states: “And so we still have parents, like this mother, losing their children to a violent partner given the responsibility of caring for them, in spite of their pleas to be returned to their mother” er what! God forbid the idea that fathers should be given the responsibility of caring for their children, we all know that this lays with the mothers don’t we? Forgive my sarcasm Natasha, but I am afraid, (and I say this with utter respect to you) you seem to reek of bias towards mothers. I may be wrong, but if I am then show your willingness to publish my story too, just to redress the balance. Then again, how will you know if I am telling you the truth? Thing is you don’t and you can’t, how could you? I put you to the test Natasha.
Hope you are well and happy new year to you and to Kip. Paul Manning.
LikeLike
Hi Paul, it would help if you addressed the questions you have for me, to me, rather than Kip. It’s just a question of courtesy.
I don’t think much of what I’m about to say will make any difference to your view point, angry people are often, I find, the least able to hear, but let’s try. Firstly, I often defend men who have been placed in terrible positions by mothers. I do much of that work in private as an adviser to fathers going through the courts. I’m not going to go into the details of the cases I’ve worked on as that would breach confidentiality, but I often assist fathers where mothers have, for example, unjustly blocked contact. If you have actually read my blog at all, you would know I also work with fathers groups. But I’m very selective about who I work with. I won’t work with any group, regardless of gender focus, if they are aggressive, dictatorial, or rights-focused, for example. To date, there are not that many fathers groups who shun those characteristics, perhaps a glaring difference between the sexes, after all.
As for the rest of my blog, whenever a domestic violence group shows up that actually wants to highlight men who are being abused by women, I post about them. I seem to know more about these groups than so-called male activists in the sector, and that I find telling, too. But I also note that there just aren’t that many groups out there doing good work for men, so again, I can’t be blamed for a lack of focus in the sector when it comes to issues which affect men.
As for this mother’s story, it’s anonymous which is why it’s been posted; so I won’t be posting up your story, as it will not be anonymous at this point by virtue of you offering up your story publicly. Perhaps if you had thought about it a little more, you could have emailed me, but this isn’t really about thought, is it, it’s more about emotion.
As for putting me to the test, your comment doesn’t really offer a challenge, I’m afraid. It’s just one more angry man, whose made himself deaf to the world by virtue of shouting at it, for a very long time.
LikeLike
Yes I thought as much Natasha, I mean that I would be accused of being angry, when indeed I am certainly not, in fact I am a dyed in the wool pacifist and mediate often on peaceable matters which helps any anger dissipate. I do not find your judgemental sentence very useful or helpful when you state: “It’s just one more angry man, whose made himself deaf to the world by virtue of shouting at it, for a very long time”… you know me do you? I think not my dear. Peace to you.
I knew you would not run my story anyway, your stated reasons for not doing so do not hold water at all, in that you could easily post it some time later and not use my name at all. Further, in that story no names would be mentioned nor any specifics. But I doubt you will change your mind. May I kindly say that a person in your position should not be making judgements about one if you have never met them.
Of course many fathers are indeed angry, but anger is not always a bad thing, have you ever heard of righteous indignation? Anger made Nelson Mandela act, it made him care and eventually that anger led to love, which I feel was always deep in his heart anyway. Love is deep in my heart too, but my dear how could you know that?
If you change your mind about my story I am sure you will let me know. I still put you to the test on this if you really want to be fair and show no gender bias. One more thing Natasha I am quite well aware of all the work you do for fathers and for families. I get around more than you will know. I congratulate you for that work and ask that you keep it up, I think its great what you are doing. You see I am not angry at all, but if you think I am, I will have to work on it. Again much peace to you. Mizpah.
LikeLike
Paul
Reading your written words by your own hand leads me to believe you are a manipulative controlling man, you’ve been given your answer but that’s not good enough for you as you yearn to keep control of pushing your opinion and biased thoughts on others. As much as you try with your apparent words of sincerity towards Natasha’s good work and how you are a gentle peaceful man the only thing that is truly apparent is your strong emotional anger towards women. Natasha be careful, this man is dangerous, the sad thing is that he can’t see how twisted he is!
LikeLike
Why make it a battle of the sexes? Surely no one sensible wants a manipulative person to have a decent parent cut out of their children’s lives. Let’s not fall for the old divide and rule trick – the enemy here is not men or women, but ignorant, proud and gullible professionals who are taken in by a cunning parent and become hell-bent on proving they are right, knowing that, currently, they are unaccountable.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..
LikeLike
I think all that’s left for me to say is that I trust Maypole Women to print a genuine letter. Their work is usually of a very high standard and having engaged with their founder in the past, I have every reason to believe that the charity are satisfied the mother is telling the truth, and therefore so am I.
LikeLike
Doubt whether my views or experience will pass censor either. This is just typical feminist propaganda that does a great deal of damage to in propagating an untruth about the prevalence of domestic violence against women. In my experience in the family courts since 2002 most allegations are false and used by selfish and malicious women without a care for their child’s needs to cut a father out of the lives of his children. That is widely recognised by those who take a more gender neutral objective view but unfortunately the courts are obliged to investigate and fathers are forced to see their children in contact centres for at least months for some minimal period a fortnight whilst they do so. The reality is that domestic violence is not the gender based issue feminists seek to portray it as and even Home Office statistics show that 45% of victims are male – and that is just those that report it (it is well known that many men will not report it and even if they do they will not be taken seriously). This type of propaganda serves to perpetuate the injustice of men having to justify contact with their children and prove they are ‘safe’ and ignores the reality that men and women are victims of domestic violence in near equal numbers and children are at greater risk statistically from their mothers than their fathers. Treating fathers like this is wholly contrary to the best interests of children in being allowed to benefit from a meaningful relationship with them.
LikeLike
What a breath of fresh air your comments are John! Yes it is true that children are at far greater risk from their mothers than they are from their fathers, statistically I mean, (more stories on that score in the world wide press of late I notice. And it is true that when I went to contact centres my relationship with my son suffered greatly. I didn’t meet many mothers there, mostly fathers with that sad look on their faces, just saying this and without any gender bias too. For me its just a fact that I have seen for myself.
LikeLike
This is not ‘just feminist propaganda’. Both men and women use domestic violence, both men and women suffer from it.
Having been a member of the ‘father’s movement’ for years, I know how angry we can be. We can be blinded by this anger. When Matt O’Connor started F4J in 2002 he boasted that we would change family law within three years. We haven’t, and we won’t unless we unite AS FAMILIES. We have to recognise that it is not just fathers who suffer. Non-resident parents suffer more than resident parents, and it is usually the father who becomes the non resident parent, hence the popular view that the Courts are anti-father. In reality, the Courts are anti-family; they seem to be in a feeding frenzy, gorging on the dismembered carcasses of severed families. We all suffer, including of course the children.
Only by presenting a united front will we ever win. We have to put aside any gender bias we have, whatever has happened to us personally, and work together, men, women and children. That would be a force to be reckoned with! Let the ‘Family’ Court try and get past that! The likelihood of this happening is minimal, but I don’t think anything else is going to change things much.
LikeLike
Many thanks for your thoughts, Roger.
LikeLike
Good comment Roger and I agree with it entirely.
When I first became a campaigner for fathers rights, some 7 years ago, my views were mainly based upon my own personal experiences in the family courts and the shocking way I was treated there as a father. I decided there and then that the judges were biased in favour of mothers. To some degree I still hold that view because of the hundreds of good fathers I have met that got the same treatment in the courts, they had done nothing wrong to lose those they loved and I believed them too. In time my views changed and softened and I began to realise that many mothers too were getting a raw deal, many of them I am in contact with and in spite of me being a father I have sympathised and tried to help them in going to their court cases to assist. It was then that my views changed even more, after witnessing some of the most heartless and appalling decisions by judges, so perfunctory and cold, I was shocked. This made me think deeply about the whole issue of the way the family courts were being run and how the decisions were being made there, the legality of them, the honesty of them and the experts used somehow in a under handed way. For reasons that I cannot explain here I broke away from Matt O’Connor and F4J, and decided to stream line and unite with other groups, mums and dads together. This has been one of the best decisions I have ever made and it it works better I have found, rather than the gender issue that is often promulgated, I have to admit that I still find myself doing that to some degree, especially when I perceive bias towards mothers, then I try to re address the balance. (See my other posting here on that issue) The main problem is not necessarily with mothers or fathers, although it can be, more so the problem lies with the courts themselves, with Cafcass, Uk Social services, the experts and of course the gravy train that goes along with them all. I am not on the side of fathers any-more, I can say that I have become wiser now and am with ALL parents who are suffering at the hands of the uncaring family courts. Something needs to change, but I wonder if they ever will.
LikeLike
Thanks Paul. I too left Matt O’Connor and F4J, or did they leave me? Things have to change. ‘If we tolerate this, then our children will be next’. I do hope that all groups will, despite all the differences, come to realise we need to present a united front. I think that is the only way forward now.
LikeLike
Why make it a battle of the sexes? Surely no one sensible wants a manipulative person to have a decent parent cut out of their children’s lives. Let’s not fall for the old divide and rule trick – the enemy here is not men or women, but ignorant, proud and gullible professionals who are taken in by a cunning parent and become hell-bent on proving they are right, knowing that, currently, they are unaccountable.
LikeLike
Thank you, Paul. You are right – the victim is the parent who the CAFCASS guardian decides should be the victim, male or female… and of course the children, who are then placed in the sole care of a psychopath – now protected desperately by all those who have gone along with the programme.
LikeLike
I have not had the time to read all of the comments in detail but there seems to be some widely differing views between people who have clearly suffered – which is natural. As someone who has been supporting women victims of DV for over 10 years all I can say is that it has always felt to me that the Family Courts tend to work best for the violent/’unreasonable’ parent rather than the one who has been victimised. This seems to be true regardless of whether the violent/’unreasonable’ parent is male or female. Some of the rulings seem to be bizarre at the very least and the parent trying to protect the children is often blamed when the children do not want to see the abusive father or mother – even though the children are quite clear on this. When a judge can say that it is ok for a self-confessed marihuana addict to have his son as long as he has the sense not to take it in front of the child it is madness. I realise that everyone working in the Family Court system is trying to do their very best but I do not believe that the system is fit for purpose. I feel that there is not enough understanding of the issues involved in many of these cases and that, above all, it is not always safeguarding children well enough when it comes to deciding on contact and residency issues between parents.
For me it is one of the most frustrating and distressing parts of the work that I do. I believe that violent/abusive parents (of either sex) should be better assessed and made to go through extensive programmes before they are allowed to look after something as totally precious as a child. Violent/abusive parents are not good parents – if they were they would not hurt their partners.
LikeLike
Many thanks for your comment, Judy.
LikeLike
The tone of injustice rings load from the Family Courts yet it is unheard by so many.
LikeLike
I have to say I’m with Kip and Paul here. Which is not always the case….
The courts are far from patriarchal. Whilst there are obviously cases where the DV is harming kids and they have to be protected it is also the case that women’s allegations are believed and dads are stopped from seeing their kids for months on end every day in the the family courts ( as a MF I’m there frequently) whilst something calling itself investigation goes on.
Given the length of time it takes cafcass to get to grips with a case ( I’m also an ex guardian ) and the fact that when they do they are coming from a gendered (‘ women have problems. men ARE problems’ / deficit model of fatherhood stance ) this effectively does untold damage to the father child bond and gives alienation a fertile ground in which to flourish.
Radical reform is what is needed. Not only structurally but also in how DV is perceived. When 47 % of victims are men we can’t continue believing it to be a gender issue. It’s a cyclical family issue.
Why otherwise would the creator of the first women’s refuge, Erin Pizzey, be campaigning with whiteribbon.org to make this point ?
LikeLike
Hi Alison,
Many thanks for your comment. To our mind you can’t label the courts patriarchal or matriarchal as a whole. There is no uniformity in the process and any sustained patterns we see are usually a result of error or poor training. We certainly don’t feel that the system is beneficial to women as a whole, our experience helping other women makes that very obvious. As the courts stretch over an entire country, and are run by many different people with no clear single approach (even though the system requires it, there is still room for adaptation through varying policy and other things), the variations in quality and competence are huge, so that mistakes are still being made.
Translated to the family unit, this just means that sometimes the court gets it right with DV and sometimes it doesn’t.
The mother’s experience above isn’t a ploy to denigrate men or to make them all out to be liars. That’s why commentary suggesting such things is irrational here. It is merely the experience of one woman, and in the many years we’ve been assisting families, we have come across a lot of cases where the perpetrator of DV has managed to fool the court.
As for DV itself and the gender debate, it wouldn’t matter whether it was just 1% of men affected by it (setting aside for a moment the contestable 47% stat you mention which we’ve heard before), anyone affected by DV is important, not just a number.
LikeLike
Judy, Alison and Natasha – all your comments make total sense to me, and of course the Courts vary throughout the country as indeed do the Judges.
In the Sunday Express yesterday, Matt O’Connor wrote an article in response to the revelation that non-resident parents – who are mostly dads – are three times more likely to die early after separation than resident parents. The total since 2003 is 8,515 non-resident parents compared to 3,090 resident parents. The death rate is an astonishing nineteen times the number of British forces killed in Afghanistan. I think that the majority of deaths for non-resident parents would be suicide, but I have no figures to back this as none are given by the Department for Work and Pensions (despite a request). Nevertheless, the figures are illuminating.
Matt’s response to this is to call for a Minister for Men. Whilst I see where he’s coming from, I think this is a mistake. I think having a Minister for Women is a mistake too. Two wrongs, therefore, do not make a right. We need, perhaps, a Minister for Men and Women, or maybe Parents and Children. To emphasise a gender divide is just that – divisive. May I call again for unity between all parents of good faith – we all want the same thing, equality and fairness for ourselves and our children. Not a big ask, really, is it? But seemingly unobtainable if we go on bickering between ourselves, whilst lawyers and others feed off us all.
LikeLike
Roger, my mother, a great one for sayings, often used to say “United we stand, divided we fall!” I hear a lot of individuals and pressure groups all saying the same thing but they stand alone and divisions are created by their distance to each other. Their impact for change is lessened too.
The outrageous atrocity in France has shown what happens when people stand as one and that is something those fighting the family system should learn.
All the splinter groups need to join up and act as one. We would then be a formidable body that would change the system as our voices would be heard, not as an irritating whisper but as a strong voice that can bellow if and when it has to!
LikeLike
Dana and Paul,
Thank you for your support. I’m so glad I’m not just a voice crying in the wilderness! Maybe after the recent appalling events in France which brought everyone together in defiance will send a message to the leaders of all the splinter-groups fighting family law. I would think a united front would only be needed for a short time. So many of us have been affected by the Family Courts and there’s hardly anyone in the country now who doesn’t know someone who’s been through the mill. I advise everyone to try and avoid them if they can possibly do so. Our families are as shattered by these Courts as any family shattered by death. I do hope we can all unite for as long as it is needed to change this cancer in our midst.
LikeLike
Natasha, I have got to say this thread illustrates the need for a system of formal justice which does not favour one group over another. The sad fact is that if you put a woman’s story against a man’s in court, it is more likely that it is the female who will be believed. This may not be because of any inbuilt prejudice in the system but in the same way thrillers that exploit the vulnerability of women are better box office and that they usually sell more motor parts. I have found from experience that if I told the same story as that described above I would be laughed out of court simply because I am a man. Hope you are keeping well! kip
LikeLike
If this mother were to present this to the court, not only would she be laughed at, she would have all contact with her children ceased and all control given to the father. No explanation would be given to the children about why they were living with their father and why they never saw their mother again.
She would be judged as ‘mad’, ‘hysterical’, ’emotional’, ‘not complying’ and in general, would be terrorised by powerful ‘professionals’.
Nothing is clear in family court, Infact its a horrifying mess, ruining peoples lives. most importantly the childrens.
LikeLike
From my experience in trying to help a lady near me whose child has been sent to live with the abuser, I would say your comment is spot-on, Lucy.
LikeLike
Natasha – In the experience of other child advocates and myself, over a great many years, this mother’s experiences in the Family Courts is quite common and many hundreds of other mothers have suffered similar experiences and indeed there is a clearly discernible pattern to events: i.e.
1. Mother alleges domestic violence and child abuse;
2. Father (and his lawyers) counter-claims that the mother is deluded, is also abusive, has `coached’ the children in the abuse claims in order to `alienate’ the children from him. (Often despite clear and convincing evidence that he has `alienated’ the children from himself by his violence and abuse towards them);
3. In order to resolve the dispute the Court appoints a CAFCASS Worker and a psychologist, although Family Courts do not have the statutory powers, expertise, nor resources to investigate child abuse and domestic violence. (Australia’s Child Justice Diane Bryant – 2009). The CAFCASS worker and the psychologist do not have training nor experience in child abuse investigations and usually rely only on a one hour interview with the child and a similar interview with the father (who of course denies the violence and abuse), before pronouncing that the abuse did not happen because the child did not disclose to the CAFCASS worker and the psychologist performs a few personality tests on the parents. Personality tests do not investigate child abuse, only an examination of the child by a forensic paediatrician and forensic clinical psychologist can determine that.
4. The psychologist/psychiatrist will then usually pronounce that the mother is mentally ill e.g. a non-specific Borderline Personality Disorder or Delusional, and again only on the basis of a one hour office interview);
5. Even in the small percentage of cases where the police and statutory child protection workers may have investigated the abuse and domestic violence allegations (and they do so in less than 25% of cases), and find the allegations to be substantiated, this is often ignored and disregarded by the Courts. Both the police and child protection workers are highly reluctant to become involved in Family Court disputes over custody/contact and so their investigations are often cursory and rushed;
6. When evidence of domestic violence and child abuse can be readily disregarded and dismissed by Family Court judges, who are not bound by the requirements of the Evidence Acts, then it becomes virtually impossible to establish a history of the father’s violent and abusive behaviours;
This article discusses many of the issues involved and which variously relate to Family Court proceedings, not only in the USA, but the UK, Australia Canada and several other countries.etc
http://www.sfweekly.com/2011-03-02/news/family-court-parental-alienation-syndrome-richard-gardner-pedophilia-domestic-violence-child-abuse-judges-divorce/
LikeLike
Many thanks, Richard.
LikeLike
Dear Mr Grenville
Thank you for providing this link to yet another very old pet article.
When I clicked onto the link the first popup on my computer screen was of a picture showing the “green” fruits of a seemingly very competent “closet” gardener’s labours. I clicked on this picture which in turn took me to an advertisement for a new magazine, dedicated to the Bay’s “burgeoning Marijuana growing industry”. A quick scan through the menu and the various blogs yielded a surprisingly large number of articles aimed at the dope cultivation industry. Their circulation figures point to some considerable success.
In this context, the reference to “high emotions” in the article takes on a rather different meaning to the one that I think you would prefer in support of your inspired piece.
A factual and reliable article in this setting seems about as likely as a pro European Community article in the Daily Mail or even a balanced view on gender issues from the Gruniad.
Thank you for brightening up an otherwise dull friday night.
Perhaps you would care to share some links or references to some primary information sources with us if you get the opportunity to actually do some proper research?
LikeLike
Natasha & Richard, How do you account for the fact that domestic violence is almost never cited as a reason for divorce? A popular reason is infidelity and later on down the line comes the allegations of domestic violence and the ‘discernible pattern’ described in this account. I am afraid until individuals such as as Richard Grenville stop perceiving themselves as ‘white knights in shining armour’ there will be no justice in the family court for separated fathers such as myself and as a consequence children will continue to suffer. kip
LikeLike
Hi Kip, forgive the brevity of this reply as it’s a bit manic at RR today, but there are all sorts of reasons as to why DV is not cited as much as it should be, that is to say in line with the reality of DV on the ground, and this applies as much to male victims as it does to female ones. Much of it is cultural and to do with the victims themselves and also how society treats them, so it’s not as simple a situation as you perceive it, if I may say so.
LikeLike
Natasha, The reasons for not reporting domestic violence are well documented. But this does not apply to the vast majority of parents in the family court. The link Richard Grenville is making between fathers access to their children and domestic violence is pernicious. Researching reform is about applying evidence not our feelings to policy. Both Richard and yourself are hiding behind a popular myth regarding the benefits of ‘shared parenting’. Reforms in Australia as well as elsewhere in the world have demonstrated that the myth is used by feminist groups to prevent both parents sharing in the upbringing of their children. It was Dame Butler-Sloss who flew in the face of reason by blocking reform on ‘shared parenting’ without proper consultation and at the eleventh hour in the House of Lords in the UK. Not all fathers are evil and not all mothers are angels. The type of account given by Richard Grenville, based on anecdotal evidence, only serves to poison the debate. kip
LikeLike
Hi Kip any debate which seems to lean unreasonably toward one gender or another is poisonous and I find it interesting that you call out Richard on perceved bias when you exhibit the same.
That said, it is important to remember that not all things are equal. However, that does not mean one man’s suffering is any less serious than a woman’s. And vice versa.
LikeLike
Natasha, Thank you for your words. I am uncomfortable with your comparison to Richard Grenville who is presumably paid to advocate his ideas in the family court. As you are aware Lord Justice Thorpe said that I have a “history of responsible campaigning and writing on issues relating to family relationships”. False allegations of domestic violence are also a feature of desperation in family proceedings. He is muddying the waters between domestic violence and the principle in law that both parents should be entitled to equal access to their children post separation. I have also appeared on a number of occasions before Lady Justice Hale who is now Deputy President of the Supreme Court and neatly described mine and her own position in the following way;
“The father has a point of view which he wishes to advocate. His Honour Judge Milligan described it as a political point of view, but it is not political in a party-political sense. There are many people who might call it political in the gender political-sense for there are many ways in which that word can be used. He has the view that the courts and the law have been too respectful of the relationship between mothers and their children to the detriment of the importance of the relationship between fathers and their children. He argues that one of the purposes of the Children Act 1989 was to redress the balance: to promote a more equal sharing of responsibility for children between mothers and fathers and to promote the maintenance a good relationship as possible between children and each of their parents should, unhappily, their parents not be living together. The father is correct that that was one of the principles behind the Children Act 1989, in which I take a certain amount of pride” – (4 February 2003).
I am sorry to say Dame Butler-Sloss was instrumental in setting back family justice in the UK when she put herself at the head of a consortium of female dominated charities and opposed ‘shared parenting’ legislation in the House of Lords.
kip
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
LikeLike
Hi Kip, not sure why you have ‘your comment is awaiting moderation’ on your post. Just to be clear, if I ever moderate a comment I explicitly state so on the post. In any event, this is a standard message WordPress sends on sites that do not automatically allow comments to be published before the site owner reads them. I’m sure you can appreciate that there are legal and ethical reasons for why I must check all content on this blog from commenters before it goes out.
LikeLike
Natasha, I hope this will make you smile! It is all part of my grand design. NOT! The first attempt missed out a bit in the last paragraph about Dame Butler-Sloss which I altered in the second attempt, as you can see. When I reposted the thaing again the moderation thing came up again also automatically. I hope you can see the funny side! kip
LikeLike
Ha! Thank you for explaining, Kip… I just didn’t want to be accused of doctoring comments in secret, you know how strongly I feel about transparency and free speech 🙂
LikeLike
If you can’t hear the pain in this, from the mother and the children, you are missing the message. Someone lying could not express these feelings. Mothers and children are experiencing cruelty and abuse at the hands of the courts, and being silenced. It may not be your experience but it is theirs. They are not smiling and may never smile again.
LikeLike
Thank you Kate, I think that’s a good observation.
LikeLike
Natasha & All, I find the trend to base the law on the feelings and sensitivities of individuals rather than the actions of the criminal disturbing. Nobody should think they can look into the hearts of people and the law should still be based on the evidence. kip
LikeLike
I don’t think anyone here was suggesting that tone and content of a letter is full and final proof of harm. What posters are saying is that it can and does, often, show a path to the truth.
LikeLike
Natasha, As you say this is a forum for debate. I feel the path to the ‘truth’ should be based on the evidence not feelings. The alternative case I am making on this thread is that when we believe that we can identify this path via our feelings then we allow ourselves to be influenced by prejudice rather than pride and let sensitivity not sense persuade us. It is because I believe in these features of the judicial system that Lord Justice Thorpe said that I have a “history of responsible campaigning and writing on issues relating to family relationships”. kip
LikeLike
Hi Kip, It’s a shame family court cases are not based on tangible evidence. The general public believe justice is based on innocent until proved guilty. They are misinformed. The family courts operate on the balance of probalities, basically another’s viewpoint. Isn’t it strange that in criminal court cases of neglect, as opposed to family court cases of neglect , there is evidence of photos depicting the scene that are then splased across the media, rather than the word of the social worker making a case. There is a clear need for more evidence and less speculation and invention! It should be a requirement to take photos of homes that are described as being cess pits for the benefit of the family court. The same goes for taping interviews, just like the police have to do.
LikeLike
Dana & Natasha, It seems as though we are talking about a different kind of justice! kip
LikeLike
Maybe the inherent issue with this is that we are talking about justice in thr first place. I have come to the conclusion that family matters should be framed not in justice parlance but rather in child welfare terms. There is no denying that crimes are sometimes committed but are we really looking for justice or are we hoping for a smooth and supportive transition from one type of family unit to another? I often think about that.
LikeLike
Natasha, That is because you come from a legal background. I do not. In the extract from my own proceedings Lady Justice Hale said, ‘The father is correct that that was one of the principles behind the Children Act 1989, in which I take a certain amount of pride. The father points out that he has a certain amount of pride, so I make that comment in response’. Her ladyship then goes on to say ‘He also argues that his views are not politically motivated, but they arise because of his qualifications and experience as a teacher with a professional interest in child development, child psychology and the welfare of children’. In the hurly-burly of the Court of Appeal I found that the Deputy President of the Supreme Court showed a knack of summing up complicated issues as well as a sense of what is right and wrong. kip
http://tenderyearsdoctrine.blogspot.co.uk/p/blog-page_92.html
LikeLike
Actually, I was making the point that in family matters, justice seems like an awkward proposition. What is justice? Is it a remedy? Is it revenge? Is it vindication? And should we be using terms like justice in this context after all? Should family matters really be placed inside a ‘justice’ system or should we be disrupting the entire process and focusing on the emotional drivers which cause the majority of divorce related problems in the first place? those are things that go through my mind often, as I try to understand what the best way forward for families might be.
LikeLike
I find that this thread encapsulates everything that is wrong with the Family Law Court system. It is an adversarial legal contest for possession of an inanimate object, a child, whereas it should be a system for determining the future care and welfare of the child, and with recognition that each child has emotions, feelings, preferences and prejudices, and physical, emotional, psychological, intellectual and social needs.
Of course children and young people are not allowed to advocate for themselves in such proceedings but are the victims of the system, waiting silently for their fate to be decided.
What is needed is a system which is Child-Centred and places the Needs, Wishes, and Rights of the child as foremost.
As far as children are concerned, the Family Law legislation and the legal system have not advanced in two centuries from when they were considered to be merely the “Goods and Chattels” of the parents. They are still just divided up along with the house, furniture, cars, and finances.
If that is `Justice’ for the child, then the Family Court system would be best abandoned and a system based on Solomon’s decisions would be preferred as the outcome would be far less painful for the child.
LikeLike
Hi Natasha, Kip and Richard, I’ve recently been reading up a little about adoption and the pain that is caused to both mother and child and eventually to the adoptive parents. (Natasha, thank you for kindly putting up the research on your twitter flicker.) In Adoption, you have a man made situation which is doomed to failure simply because of the mechanics of it. It’s not the natural course of life.
It came about originally because women who had their child out of wedlock were deemed to be fallen women and intellually inferior and they would create inferior children, so it would be in the child’s best interests to remove the child and hide the “shame” of the mother at the same time by adoption and so the child went to childless but usually affluent couples.
This generated an adoption industry and adoptive parents were happy to pay for a child they could call their own. The climate prevailed that women should not have children out of wedlock and they would bring shame not just to themselves but the entire family! Then the social climate changed and mothers began to keep their children and the source for children to be given “voluntary” dried up.
There were always the kids in care, housed in care homes, poor unfortunates left orphaned by circumstance. We know all about how many thousands of kids were shipped off to the colonies for a free life in the sunshine but it was to be decades later that the truth came out about how this was a myth, the children were abused. Not so aultruriistic now!
Children in care are still being given away to adoption today. One might be forgiven for thinking that it’s the better option, than leaving a child in foster care. A forever family! That too is a myth! Research has proved adoption is detrimental to both mother and child and fails the expectations of the adoptive mother. That is, those that don’t disrupt at the outset! Whilst no one is bothered about the mother they are supposed to care for the childs well being.
Yet we have a government hell bent on adopting as many children from the care system whose numbers have swelled to more that double the figures since that often quoted Baby P case. In actual fact numbers rose whenTony Blair PM offered social workers financial incentives to adopt “hard to adopt” children who had been in care for a long time. Of course social workers found blond, blue eyed babies were the most desired by adopters and social workers took the easy route of supply and demand and were rewarded. Pressure groups became aware of the financial incentives and they were stopped or were they?
Children in their droves, mainly white children, under the age of 5 from the care system are government driven to be adopted. This has spawned a whole new industry of adoption agencies attracted by the exceptional profits made. I see parellels between cars being stolen to order and the rise of white children taken for adoption. Supply and demand! “What about the research?” I hear you cry. Well, it’s ignored, brushed under the carpet! Why? This industry generates money. Simple!
This family system fails the families but it generates £billions for the millions involved under the guise of the best interests of the child! The adoption model is flawed but while it makes money it will continue. The same is true of every arm of the family system. If each arm is broken down to the component parts you will see it’s all about the self perpetuating industry that makes money! Everything else is a distraction! It’s not altruistic! It’s not about the child! The child is merely the catalyst!
LikeLike
Pleasure, D.
LikeLike
To the mother who wrote this. I can relate in many levels. I lost my kids to an alcholic. A mental abuser. I feel deep deep pain. Miss my kids every second of the day. I too feel like a walking lost soul. Dead and feeling excruciating pain. Court systems suck in broward county. Im devastated. Thank u for sticking up for all mothers like this out there. I was a stay at home mom. My ex stripped everything away from me. Forced me to move out of the home. He geta majority of time.. doesnt obay parenting plan and threatens my time with the girls. Hurts
LikeLike
Thank you for your comment, and I’m so sorry you and your children have been through all that you have. Apologies, for legal reasons I’ve had to remove your name.
LikeLike
With no disrespects to all mums and dads, what is not amazing is that the kids are in many cases used as weapons, some years ago I wrote to governments telling them that before many people marry there is a PRE-NUPTIAL agreement drawn up so why cant their be a PRE-NUPTIAL agreement for the kids, NO REPLY. I have the evidence from a SO CALLED court lawyer who is recommended by the courts for the children who clearly states in a letter THAT all evidence is irrelevant we are in family courts not criminal court, so for the parents courts and all “In a child’s best interest” learn to listen to the children screaming to be heard or get it right from day one and forget the money and do a PRE-NUPTIAL AGREEMENT for the children Amazing that the laws were changed yet again recently re finances on a divorce WHERE WERE THE KIDS INCLUDED OH SORRY THERE FOR THE WAR DOWN THE ROAD
LikeLike
Yes, that’s exactly how I feel. “I feel mute” our court system is the worst. Nothing I say makes a difference, if it’s verbal abuse; it’s OK because it’s not visible. I’m mentally and physically exhausted but I can’t give up. The love for my daughter gives me the strength I need to fight.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m so sorry Leslie. Keep fighting, your daughter will never forget xxxx
LikeLike
Can you please email me at [edited]. You have spoken the truth and you took the words right out of my mouth!!! We need to put our heads together and do whatever it takes to stop this abuse! They say they want the best interest for the child. Not true, I had proof to show how abuses he is to my daughter that is 16 but the so called honorable judge did not want to hear anything. My daughter has refused to go with him , she said she can’t take it anymore, he has anger issues. The judge actually said if she refuses push her out the door and lock it. I’m thinking so you actually said to abuse my daughter? What kind of court system is this? I don’t think that’s in the best interest of the child! Please contact me and we can talk on the phone cuz there is so much more to tell!!!! I won’t to expose what is going on and how they are the real abusers to our children! We need to get as many women together and fight together and not let them get by with with destroying our children!!!
LikeLike
Thank you for your comment, and I’m sorry you’ve experienced all that you have. I’ve had to edit your post to comply with reporting restrictions, but you’re welcome to email me at sobk13(at)gmail(dot)com.
LikeLike
😮 omg can’t believe this is happening to you. Big hugs.
LikeLike