Monday, May 22, 2006

Double standards

I took a friend to the Social Services Select Committee a couple of years back. They were taking submissions on the Care of Children Bill. He wasn't very articulate and blew all the arrangements we'd made beforehand about how we would present. He might even have come across as slightly wild-eyed. But that didn't change his story. He had fought for the custody of his three children for eight years. He feared for their safety. The court-appointed counsel for children constituted a huge barrier. Eventually he gave up. Soon after his ex appeared with the children and left them. She never returned. He still has them and they seem to be doing well.

When we look at the guys currently protesting it pays to consider what they have endured. In the seventies feminists decided it was cruel to remove children from their natural mothers. Society all but dispensed with adoption. As with mothers, in most cases, it is equally cruel to remove children from their fathers.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

This was on campbell live tonight, and I think that they missed the point.

They were asking the question "is the family court biased" - whereas the guy protesting the issue that they interviewed had a different question - he wanted to know why fathers (or the initial non-custodial parent) have to prove that they are suitable parents before they can get shared custody.

IMHO, the starting point should be shared-care, and the burden of proof of one parent being unfit should fall on the other parent (or sicail services). Innocent until proven guilty and all that. But the system rarely wants to change what they see as the status-quo.

Brian Smaller said...

Yes well, Muriel Newman tried to bring in a bill to legislate shared parenting but the left voted it down.

Unknown said...

It is always sad to see that this area is one in which Womens Rights has gone to an extreme and alienated thousands of children from their fathers.

It is paradoxical in that the arguments supporting the stance of "mothers rights" are exactly opposite to those that they support for 50% matrimonial splits and equal pay in the workforce. But the hypocritical are rarely repentant while they are winning.

Anonymous said...

A yes. First they want half, and then they want half of your half. It's only fair.

My heart aches at the thought of some social agenda driven people ripping my son from me.

I truly feel for these people.