Have you noticed that whenever a new movement starts-up to try and address the well-known prejudice in the UK Family Courts against shared-parenting, an insidious counter force swings into action? As paranoid as this sounds, it is also true.
Tens of millions of pounds of public-money is today being poured into organisations that ostensibly arrange special accommodation for women in distress (ignoring the thousands of men who quite literally freeze-to-death sleeping on our streets). Sadly, a good deal of these funds, (and I have nothing against women in distress being given special accommodation) are diverted into the hands of political extremists who promote messages that say men in general are demons, women-abusers and child-killers. Completely nuts as such messages are, they are nevertheless broadcasted in spades through a network of connections in the BBC, in particular.
As an example, when an erstwhile author and an acquaintance recently spoke at a Central London meeting of the need for compensation for children who have now grown-up with Family Court orders that ruined their lives, he referred to children denied contact with their fathers. Within two-weeks of his speech a one-off BBC News Article topped the Breakfast TV bill, about adult twins and how their lives had been transformed for the better by a Family Court Order that forbade contact with their useless-dad.
Similarly, one-month after the launch of this website, asking for donations for a class-action, (or group litigation as it is more properly called) for those who, without a criminal trial, have received a no /indirect-contact order against seeing their children, a similar counter TV-article headlined the News, (meaning, again, the BBC). In this Women’s Aid amongst others dragged into the spotlight a wretched victim of an annihilator ex-partner, who tragically killed himself and her two children. On the basis of this person’s life experience, it was argued that no/indirect-contact orders are a widespread necessity.
Acts of self-annihilation are deeply tragic and beyond most normal people’s comprehension, as are most extreme mental-illnesses. Yet, it occurs in equal numbers at the hands of women and men, and thankfully it is extremely rare. What is even more relevant is that it occurs far more frequently at the hands of women after a Family Court case than by men (the exact opposite of claims made in the media by Women’s Rights Campaigners).
What any of this has to do with a rational investigation of the Family Courts is a mystery, except that ‘rational’ is not what extremists do. What matters to them, it seems, is to ensure the Family Courts remain a battleground for the War of the Sexes; in which society is obligated to benefit one parent and to discriminate against the other, based on their gender. In this instance because of an anecdotal one-sided account of a man being sent totally mad by either his ex, or the Family Court System, or for some other reason – we will never know for sure.
Debating Family Court policy on a gender-conflict basis is always a mistake and unhelpful. It creates fuel for the fire extremists need to push for discrimination in favour of those that believe, mistakenly, that all a child needs is its mother. The Doubtfire Fund remains unaffected for the Doubtfire Fund is not a campaigning, lobbying or support organisation – and it does not seek to get you to believe anything. It is a gift-fund, set-up to finance an international group-redress-action for compensation for those who have received the severe ‘punishment order’ (the most severe type of order possible) of not being allowed to raise or even see their own children, but made without a proper trial, and without any laws – (for contrary to what most understand there is no law in the UK that stipulates how much time a parent should be allocated in a child arrangements order following divorce or separation).
Protection of a citizen’s private and family-life are central to a civilized society. Punishments that remove these essentials of life, and forever, require a duty of care by a Nation State to ensure the recipient of such retribution has had a fully-robust trial. The UK Family Courts do not do this, and all the Women’s Aid scaremongering and use of connections in the media will not make this go away. UK family Courts, when they issue indirect/no contact orders without a fair trial, are all in breach of the European Convention of Human Rights (Articles 6-8).