Are we guilty of ignoring fathers' rights?
Posted at: 00:03
Lifeclass Extra: read Lesley Garner's exclusive online column
Desperate letters about fathers who have been denied access to their children continue to pour in to our columnist Lesley Garner after she highlighted the plight of a single father last month.
We have heard about a father whose only contact with his daughter is to watch her from behind the school gates, and from another who spent £60,000 to secure parental responsibility and a court order, only to find it constantly being disobeyed by the mother.
Are the courts automatically biased towards mothers, even if they may not be the more suitable parent? What steps can be taken to force mothers to provide fathers with the necessary contact with their children?
Is there too much of a focus on a father's responsibility to make alimony payments, and not enough on his right to visit his child?
How do you think Britain compares to other countries in the way that it handles the rights of separated parents?
Has the adversarial approach to divorce law turned children into the spoils of marriage?
To post a comment click here
If you would like the chance to see your view appear on the Letters to the Editor page of The Daily Telegraph, email
[email protected] By contributing to Your View, you acknowledge that any content created by you and published on telegraph.co.uk may be copied, edited, removed, reused, modified, published, transmitted, and displayed by Telegraph Group Ltd. Although we will not change the essence or meaning of your contribution, you also waive any moral rights you may have in having the material altered or changed in a manner not agreeable to you.
Comments (114)
A more important question:
Are we guilty of ignoring children's rights to have equal access to both parents?
Posted by Don, the 14%er on November 30, 2006 2:28 PM
Report this comment
The Families Courts desperately require the coming of another intellect like that of Lord Denning to save innocent people, mothers, fathers and children from a tragic anomaly that must impinge on the fabric of our society with incalculable pain and consequential damage
Posted by Ben on November 30, 2006 1:31 PM
Report this comment
I am a mother of two children who has been severly alienated from them.
I have fought in the family court for two years. To this date I have been dismissed as a person who should take a step back from fighting for her children.
I applied for residency in 2004 after the breakdown of my marriage, my ex husband then began his alienation process, I have had four contact orders, all of which have been breached, I have had three CAFCASS reports all of which have clear inconsistencies in them, all of which have been overlooked by the court.
My ex husband has never applied for residency, never had a lawyer, has broken a prohibited steps order.
He is unable to care for the children and leaves them with his parents most of the time. I am completely cut out of their lives, luckily the schools have been very supportive and do keep me informed. I was the victim of domestic violence, of which the Domestic agency was involved, this was overlooked by the courts and CAFCASS, the agency was involved at the recommendation of the police with who I had reported the incidents to.
So two years later I a still without my children, I have put in an official complaint to CAFCASS, am taking my case to High Court. I have almost given up, but I refuse to let a system continue to erode a warm loving relationship with my children. My ex husband is doing this for his own financial gain - and the system allows him to do this. I do not doubt he loves his children, but he certainly does nothing to encourage them to call or see me. Their little hearts have been stolen from me.
Cruel world given that I was their main carer up until two and a half years ago and throughout their formative years.
Disgusted - yes I am, I aim to bring this to the attention of the media and for something to be done about our shocking family courts. It is damaging children and that is a sad fact, so many children are being denied warm loving relationships with families, because the courts have limited resources and the lack of training, thus the more difficult cases slip through the net.
Wrong? It is criminal that these children are being denied the love of their families.
Posted by Tracey on November 30, 2006 1:28 PM
Report this comment
I spent over 6 years in the family court system trying to maintain contact with my son - whilst his mother fought against it and repeatedly broke court orders for contact.
Last year our case reached the high court and the judge roundly condemned the mother and her family for influencing my son against me and said that I was a good father who had done everything he could for his son. The judge then banned me from seeing him and banned me from his school.
I was then given the usual sop of indirect contact. This means that I am allowed to write to my 7 year old son 6 times a year, when it obvious to all concerned that his mother will not let him see anything I send.
I am also required to compile a memory book supplied by the court reporter. The guidance with the memory book said that it was particularly useful for Aids sufferers and others with terminal illnesses - who won't be around for the child in future.
As far as I know the only terminal disease I have is that of being a father in the UK.
Posted by Paul on November 30, 2006 12:23 PM
Report this comment
Yes fathers rights are ignored. I was refused access to my kids over 10 years ago. Now they are adults they do not want to know me and have changed their names to the new husband's name... What about my feelings as a father. Does anybody care? NO!
Posted by xris on November 30, 2006 12:01 PM
Report this comment
Hands up those who voted labour. Then you get what you deserve.
Posted by James Colton on November 30, 2006 11:41 AM
Report this comment
Quite simply 'yes'.
Post divorce men are regarded as walking wallets who have to prove that it is to their kids' benefit that they should know him. He can face baseless allegations (lies) from mother to which the court gives a lot of weight. It takes forever and only benefits the parasites of the legal system: ie pays the wages for the solicitors, barristers & judges - it is in their interests to keep the acrimony running - at least while the family has any money left.
The result is: depressed dads who find working and new relationships hard; depressed kids who want to see their dad but get into trouble from mum if they say so.
Court is the wrong arena: it takes too long and is all about conflict. We need something that is quick and continues to oversee matters so that if either parent breaks the agreement they are brought into line -- currently mum can do what she wants and dad is brought up short if he steps out of line.
Posted by alain on November 30, 2006 10:53 AM
Report this comment
First, grateful thanks to Lesley Garner for continuing to highlight this issue.
The family courts in the UK are corrupt. The political agenda corrupts justice.
Lawyers can manufacture well paid work for themselves by increasing the acrimony. Fixed fee divorces are long overdue.
Cafcass applies belief to unproven assertions by the mother. Cafcass applies disbelief to any assertions by the father. Cafcass can actively interfere on the side of the mother. The Judge is more than willing to believe Cafcass in order to excuse his or her responsibility in the institutionalised abuse of children. These children are subsequently deprived of dad contact.
The children then suffer for a problem between the parents and this is illogical, cruel, immoral and evil.
Men are routinely mocked in court by Judges who seem to have issues themselves. Women are frequently treated as heroic figures. Especially with the paper hankie brushing away the tears.
Amateur accountancy is used by the 'Judge' in financial hearings without fairness to both sides. The result is great benefit for the mother who frequently has had little input to domestic finances.
The father is frequently ousted on the unproven say so of the mother leaving the children with the mother, for significant time, because of the delays in the court system. The Judge will then argue that this contrived status quo should continue "in the best interests of the children".
Proof of assertions should be required from both parties. Family courts however are the archetypal example of the "mud sticks" principle where men are concerned.
In years to come, the mad divorce system in the UK will be compared in emotional harm to the slave trade of the past. Men die now due to heartbreak and impossible frustration with injustice.
Posted by Jeff on November 30, 2006 10:50 AM
Report this comment
When we think about this issue we must look at the whole picture and not just the British situation. In every western country on the planet, the SAME bias against dads in family courts and the SAME anti male hatred on TV, in the press, in programming, advertising and so on, is rife. This means that an agenda is happening. It cannot be an accident. All of these courtiers did not get into this situation at the same time, "by accident." So, the question is: Who is driving this agenda? The one common denominator is radical feminism. This is not the feminism of equality and rights for women. Radical feminism is the feminism of hatred of men. It is rife within our institutions and left wing politics. It is now infiltrating the UN and it thrives on promoting the fear and hatred of men. It was radical feminism that drove the legislators forty years ago to create the system in the family courts we have today. Whenever a left wing government have come to power the radical feminists have moved swiftly to promote their own agenda and laws which favour them and disempower men. This in turn means that within the western world there is a political body that is NOT elected but is being secretly financed by left wing governments with tax payers money, to spread hatred and the fear of men. Hugely inflated statistics and "estimated" statistics, biased non scientific "studies" and advocacy research are used to scare the public.
Until the British people (and press) wake up, the same way as people all over the world are starting to and start asking some very hard questions. The madness that has infected our relationships, legal system, press, TV and social services etc, will continue. BUT, don't take my word for it. Research it yourself.
Posted by George Rolph on November 30, 2006 10:04 AM
Report this comment
A shame that this important debate is taken up with the usual misinformation and anti-women rants.A better question would be 'Are we damaging children by placing the parents rights above those of the children?'
And what about parents' responsibilities? Why is it that so many fathers choose not to exercise contact with their children - 50-60% according to one recent research review? How can these fathers be supported and encouraged to remain in their children's lives?
Posted by anchor on November 30, 2006 9:43 AM
Report this comment
UK is simply said a feminist country. Marriage does not make any sense for a man there - and as father you are on the risk to pay and never see your children, because your wife does not like you, cheats on you and finally kicks you out of YOUR house.
Posted by Yohan on November 30, 2006 9:24 AM
Report this comment
What about fathers who have access but choose not to bother, mothers who are left with full responsibility bacause the absent father wants to try and make their life hell. It works both ways, fathers should have automatic rights to see their children but absent fathers should be made to take responsibilty for the care of their children and not just when it suits them.
Posted by Sars on November 30, 2006 9:10 AM
Report this comment
This is a western world utterly rife with feminist led anti-male propaganda, and men face essentially complete discrimination on so many levels. This is an issue that continues to gain momentum, just as emancipation began a radical change for women. And this is an issue that led to the creation of increasingly powerful masculinist organisations. Female tv bosses, politicians and your general extremist feminist clearly want to stifle democratic debate and acknowledge this anti-male discrimination, but they above all should realise it's here to stay, and male discontent will grow. I can imagine blanket boycots, demonstrations, direct action, etc, happening, because women in power wish to snuff out this issue, and continue to trample men's rights. Above all this demonstrates for men what feminism is truly about, namely all about Eve, and to hell with Adam. Equality is a fantasy.
Posted by Andrew on November 30, 2006 8:36 AM
Report this comment
It is clear that the whole issue of family law needs to be put under the microscope. It is manifestly a nonsense and is viewed by many as an instrument to undermine men's status as equal parents and should be abolished.
Traditional marriage is under attack as a result of the enactment of divorce laws that in many cases act as an incentive to dissolve unions where in the past couples may have tried to salvage their relationship, in addition to which the acceptance of alternative family arrangements further destroys respect for the institution of marriage.
What is required is to abolish the whole clumsy edifice of family law and treat marriage as a contract willingly entered into by two adults which should be treated like any other legally binding contract so that unless both parties agree to terminate the contract in accordance with its terms no marriage can be dissolved and any party wishing to break the contract should suffer the legally mandated consequences set forth in the marriage contract.
This would act as a deterrent to unsuitable individuals entering into marriage contracts and to those wishing to terminate them for fear of the consequences.
All lawyers know that this makes sense but a great deal of money is made under the current arrangements
and there is little prospect that things will change, in the meantime marriages will continue to break down and children will remain pawns in the divorce lottery.
Posted by Tony Langley on November 30, 2006 8:13 AM
Report this comment
As the first poster on this matter has noted, far too many interests beyond women alone profit from the alienation of fathers from children. The biggest challenge for the men's movement is to identify those non-women interests profitting from the bastardisation of innocent children.
Posted by Jk olban on November 30, 2006 8:04 AM
Report this comment
The discarded programme of family law reform.
Find out here about the family reforms sabotaged by DfES civil servants.
This programme of seminal social reform was devised and agreed by the judiciary, legal professionals, parenting groups and child development specialists was accepted and funded by the Government in 2003 was announced by the Government as its flagship in 2004
but was discarded by DFES civil servants - who hoodwinked Ministers - by pretending these reforms were still in progress
The first two documents, set out the formal specifications:
PP - Conf is the 2003 reform submitted to Government - as approved by Ministers but discarded by Whitehall
Project 157 is the 2004 re-submission of that same reform to Government
This 2004 resubmission was made after it transpired that the DfES had thrown away the original 2003 submission (which the DfES was still pretending to work on)
The resubmission, Project 157, was again accepted by Government Ministers, and passed again to the same civil servant, who was again told to get on with it. On 15 July 2004 he again pretended to agree ('Yes Minister') and got rid of the project again - by pretending - again - that this time he was really going to do the job properly ('That was then, this is now'). Then he continued the same pretence. He replaced the agreed reform with something different and, indeed, useless. Meanwhile, as part of this package of deceit, the intended reforms were announced as the basis for the Government's 2005 package - which, of course, had already been killed by his clique within the DfES before it was publicly launched by the rest of the DfES.
Other documents listed under 'History' provide a minute proportion of other official documents recording this tragic farce.
link
Posted by David Mortimer on November 30, 2006 7:58 AM
Report this comment
It is not only fathers who are deprived of their human rights alongside their children. I am a sixty six year old grandfather who has been banned from seeing his granddaughter for the last five years.
I can teach children but a judge decided that my son and I were upsetting the mother as for over three years we tried to get him to enforce the orders on contact and penal notices for disobeying orders.
I say end the secrecy of the family courts so that the world will realise that one million children will not be spending Christmas with both of their biological parents.
Posted by Chris on November 30, 2006 7:26 AM
Report this comment
A father's first "right" is the DUTY to look after his family.
That is what the word "husband" means.
Fathers need to think on that a great deal more than they do.
Posted by TESS NASH on November 30, 2006 7:15 AM
Report this comment
Seems like Cafcass can only speak in controlled environment where fathers are gagged.
Posted by bharati on November 30, 2006 7:04 AM
Report this comment
I am just one of the countless fathers who find themselves at the blunt end of UK Family Law and it's ageing and out-of-touch courts. My crime? None. Just a normal scenario of husband and wife falling out of love very undramatically and the wife finding a new partner. One in three marriages end in divorce. The problems come though because society assumes that the child of a marriage is somehow the 'sole property' of the mother when the parents divorce. UK Law put's the mother in absolute control of the destiny of the child and the destiny of the father's relationship with that child. It is barbaric to everyone involved - it's emotionally cruel to children, it asserts that women should naturally be 'home makers', and that men's role is best to be kept at a distance from their children in order to provide financially for the mother staying at home.
I have total respect for all the mothers, fathers, children and grandparents who find themselves torn apart in secret courtrooms up and down Britain, at the mercy of Judges whose main experience of parenting probably came from boarding school. These old fashioned and outdated Courts have to be made open and non-secret immediately.
Posted by Paul on November 30, 2006 7:03 AM
Report this comment
I'm a white middle aged man and a father. I'm on the bottom of every pile.
Posted by david on November 30, 2006 5:59 AM
Report this comment
Both my ex-partner and I are in receipt of benefits. Whilst she receives over £155 a week, I receive £55.
At the weekends when they visit, Friday evening to Sunday evening, I am expected to feed and entertain them out of my SINGLE person's benefit whilst she saves money from not having any extra expenses.
This is grossly unfair, I believe whilst I am unemployed I should receive a proportion of child benefit and child tax credit to cover the time for which I am solely responsible for them.
As you can imagine, feeding two children, entertaining them, and paying for travelling expenses to return them home over a weekend is impossible. If I take them on holiday during the summer, my ex-partner recieves £155 per week whilst having no children in her care, I still receive £55. Fathers get no consideration whatsoever in the benefits system.
Posted by Will on November 30, 2006 5:44 AM
Report this comment
As somebody has already stated on this subject - children do not remain children forever. Surely when a child has become an adult, he/she is free to contact his/her estranged father - or even mother for that matter. Although many years may have passed - and those years can never be "claimed back" - at least contact can be made and kept if both parties want it.
And the bitter ex-partner can do nothing about it.
Posted by Martin Heyes on November 30, 2006 4:12 AM
Report this comment
Family Law rewards dysfunction and punishes responsible behaviour. Family Law is not concerned with the social consequences or the devasting emotional and financial damage to the parties involved. Family Law pursues its own interests; the child's interests are the last thing on the agenda. Inequality and the bias in Family Law exists to transfer the maximum amount of wealth from families to the profiteers in the system. Equality would render the entire system virtually useless.
Family Law is junk law and should be trashed.
Posted by Armando Milani on November 30, 2006 2:52 AM
Report this comment
As an unmarried father and single man, I obtained full custody of my daughter aged six years about 20 years ago in the USA as the Mother exhibited what has become known as PAS- not recognised by the Family Court here. This was in Open Court and recorded in the Broadsheets as it was a precedent and not without its aspects. It is important to note that this did not have the support of the Court's own Social Workers who in my opinion were unable to grasp the salient features of the Case.
It can be done so Fathers should get a good lawyer or McKenzie Friend and involve privately a child psychologist- not a Social Worker as soon as possible after the separation. I held full custody until mid-teens when after allowing joint custody we had problems. These were manageable. I have a good relationship with my daughter and a workable relationship with the Mother.
It may be with the now President of the Family Court, Sir Mark Potter whom I appeared in front of as a Mckenzie friend recently re- use of MCA 1973, that Fathers in the UK may have a better deal as some of his decisions might point in the direction of a 'level playing field'.
I would point out that the leading London law firms involved in the MCA 1973 Case had failed to grasp the essentials behind my litigant friend's position and I had to point out to them their argument was fatally flawed and they would lose on another count anyway.
My point is that it is essential (unfortunately) to do your own legal homework and thoroughly understand the legislation and how to use it.
Posted by Name withheld on November 30, 2006 2:02 AM
Report this comment
Statistically speaking, considerably more children are killed by their fathers than murdered by a stranger.
Which is leaving aside the huge number of women abused and murdered by husbands and partners or ex's. The whole murder statistics are severly scewed by "domestics".
The God given right of certain men to abuse has erroded the rights of decent men. It is notable that instead of blaming the abusive men for this state of affairs, as ever, it's the women who get the blame.
Men want what they want, but without responsibility or concern for the effects on others, especially women and children. As ever.
Blame the women without the men taking any responsibility at all. Same old, same old.
Posted by Thalia on November 30, 2006 1:52 AM
Report this comment
Statistically speaking, considerably more children are killed by their fathers than murdered by a stranger.
Which is leaving aside the huge number of women abused and murdered by husbands and partners or ex's. The whole murder statistics are severly scewed by "domestics".
The God given right of certain men to abuse has erroded the rights of decent men. It is notable that instead of blaming the abusive men for this state of affairs, as ever, it's the women who get the blame.
Men want what they want, but without responsibility or concern for the effects on others, especially women and children. As ever.
Blame the women without the men taking any responsibility at all. Same old, same old.
Posted by Thalia on November 30, 2006 1:51 AM
Report this comment
I give my full support to the men's movement and MRAs.
Stop the criminalization of men!
If men are not happy, no one will be.
The sooner society grasps this vey simple concept, the better for us all.
Posted by Carlos. on November 30, 2006 1:31 AM
Report this comment
The Australian government pays female children $4000 to have babies and dupe some unfortunate male into an 18 year 18% CSA nightmare.
Posted by tim costello on November 30, 2006 1:27 AM
Report this comment
In Australia, men do not have rights, any rights.
Posted by tim mercier on November 30, 2006 1:21 AM
Report this comment
From Australia continued:
Question 4:
Not just as spoils of marriage but,
under Family Law, as weapons that can
be used against the father.
Posted by John Shea on November 30, 2006 12:12 AM
Report this comment
I sold my house and spent all my life savings in a divorce settlement/custody case primarilty to prevent my ex-wife from taking my son out of the country back to her homeland of Korea. I was successful and got to keep him in Sydney with her having weekend visitations rights. After all the money and anguish she never visits him anyway. The court orders are just there to be ignored and there seems to be no way to enforce them. Divorces should NEVER be heard in court in my opinion.
Posted by Colin on November 30, 2006 12:09 AM
Report this comment
This is from Australia:
Question 1.
Part 1. Answer is yes - absolutely
Part 2:
(a) The children should be carefully
taken by the authorities and
placed with the father for the
allocated period of access time.
(b) Persistently recalcitrant
mothers to be fined or sent to
prison.
(c) Reverse the custody with the
mother paying maintenance and
paying full compensation for the
amount of property handed to her
in respect of caring for the
children.
Question 2:
Answer is yes - absolutely. This is
regardless of whether or not he is the real father of the child.
Question 3:
In comparision with Australia -
definitely not worse.
Posted by John Shea on November 29, 2006 11:50 PM
Report this comment
I have won custody of my 2 kids with the help from fathers 4 justice a couple of years ago. However I was in a similar situation to Paul. I used to wait at the school fence and meet my young daughter secretly at breaks and dinner times. The head teacher only put a stop to it when someone in the area reported it to the authority.
I am one of the luckiest fathers that have come through this situation, but it has taken it's toll on me both financially and mentally. The 5 years of acrimony felt like half my life has gone. This situation not only effects the children, but all of the extended family.
Posted by Tony on November 29, 2006 10:36 PM
Report this comment
There are some very sad stories here. I lost contact with my father in my childhood following divorce. He later apologised to me, on his deathbed, saying he just could not face the stress and sadness of visiting us. He still loved my mother when he died - he never mended his broken heart.
My husband has two sons from his first marriage. His first wife forbid any contact between his sons and myself and following the birth of our daughter, her also. However, she allowed him to visit his sons on her conditions which, for the most-part were designed to disrupt our family life. It had nothing to do with what the boys wanted. It was a mind game. But, we knew it and didn't let her win.
Our children are all grown up now but they decided, as soon as they were old enough, that they would contact their half-sister and they adore her - as she does them.
We hear so much about feckless, irresponsible fathers but not so much of the brave souls posting on this board. Please keep fighting for your children, they need you more than you know.
Posted by A sympathetic Mum on November 29, 2006 10:35 PM
Report this comment
Save in a few very notable cases where Judges remember why they took the job and try to do some justice (at least until the Court of Appeal knocks them down) the family courts and those who work in them are not primarily concerned with the rights of fathers, mothers or children.
Nobody cares if court orders are flouted, parents' lives are ruined and children suffer; it's all about money. Easy solution: he can go out to work, she can stay at home with the children, and another family is kept off welfare. The absent parent does not need to see the children. Best to keep him out of the way to avoid trouble. The less rights he has the less chance of his feeling aggrieved at being deprived of them.
Any propaganda will be peddled with impunity to preserve this status quo as long as the public purse is protected in the short term.
The paradox is that increasing public awareness - that the courts handle a family's life after divorce in this cold-blooded, materialistic and dehumanising way - is the main cause of the decline in marriage and family life in Western "enlightened" countries.
It can only be hoped that what replaces marriage can stay out of the clutches of the social engineers, legislators and courts long enough to flourish. If we lose family life altogether, social cohesion will quickly follow.
Posted by Mark on November 29, 2006 10:05 PM
Report this comment
My own situation is this...
I had 2 families.. I married young divorced and paid maintenance etc... The mother allowed my children to be abused... which ended up in my son dying later on...
I moved abroad, and have 2 children whom I hoped would be the basis of my life.. but after 3 years of caring and sharing their lives the German mother stopped everything, claimed state support and found a boyfriend... against my wishes I have been cut off and seen my 10 year old son a total OF 30 MINUTES in the last 3 years and I can't get any news about my little girl whose 5th birthday was yesterday! I dont even know where they go to school, the courts don't reply, lawyers are useless and the police arrest me if I try to see the children, (that is if the mother hasn't gone on holiday or away if it's known I am coming)
as the mother claims I am agressive so that I get taken away by police and deported... written authority is "required" from the mother, who of course never gives it..I sent presents to both of them for birthdays etc - but I know that they rarely arrive ... I asked a German policeman if he would EVER enforce a court order AGAINST a mother, he was honest enough to shake his head...
I don't care if you print my name address and the children's too, this scandal has gone on 7 years and my children are denied their father and their culture... and there are thousands upon thousands... too many guys just have a belly-full and walk away... and that doesn't help my case... or those like me, who just want to to give their time, energy, experience and love their children.
Posted by Chris on November 29, 2006 9:33 PM
Report this comment
The situation for fathers in the UK is only slightly better or worse than it is in all other western democracies. There are virtually no jurisdictions in the world where fathers get a fair deal...except for those places where they get an unfair advantage. And neither of these situations is acceptable.
The problem is that all of the stories about judicial bias against fathers are anecdotal. Everyone 'knows' this bias exists...but no one has ever taken the trouble to prove it with serious research. This enables governments to ignore the outcry, and that is just what they do.
However, there is some hope. New statistical research sponsored by World Fathers Union, an international NGO based in Canada, is being undertaken to prove allegations of judicial bias by rigourous statistical analysis of the public record of judges and the courts in which they sit. A recently published report of the research findings on the Quebec Superior Court in Canada has revealed a severe and overriding bias against fathers by the associate chief justice of that court. Recommendation has been made to the Minister of Justice to have this particular judge removed from judging custody cases.
Whilst one study such as this will not solve the global problem, the research programme is ongoing, and it should put family court judges in all jurisdictions on notice they are being watched and could be the next 'subject judge' of a damning analysis of their own judicial records.
For those interested in learning more about this research programme, it is described on the organisation's website at link
Posted by John T. Smith on November 29, 2006 9:26 PM
Report this comment
I am an ex-serviceman who has served
throughout the world for this country in recent
years. I am disillusioned with the way I and
others have been treated by this government
and the previous one. I could write a book about
the way I have been treated by the CSA and the
legal system in this country. My heart goes out
to all those fathers and families who are not
allowed to see each other. The government and
the liberals who run this country should hang
their heads in shame.
Posted by John on November 29, 2006 9:16 PM
Report this comment
In the end love will win. The persistence of a parent denied is a manifestation of love and right thinking. The intransigence of a denying parent is a denial of love for the child. One is a positive polarity,and the other is a negative polarity. I have accepted the requirement to bear witness to these principles over five,ten or fifteen years.(Bear in mind also the paradox that the worse the behaviour of a partner after separation, the more evident the unsustainability of the partnership). The best witness to the sourness of the denier is a willing acceptance of what is required, over the long term, to counter this evil. For evil it is. To rail against the court system is futile. Ask not what you ask of life, but ask what life asks of you (to paraphrase a man who found meaning even in a concentarion camp). When I read many of the comments above, they encourage me, because they show the wells of love in the world, and I am also proud that men have this capacity.
Posted by simon on November 29, 2006 9:12 PM
Report this comment
The response to this article is absolutely overwhelming.
One of these days, a very clever politician will finally get his or her finger on the pulse, run on a platform that promotes equality for men and fathers, and scoop an election.
Posted by Jay Freed on November 29, 2006 9:09 PM
Report this comment
How can we ask the French for help within Nato, cowards are cowards and do not help.
Posted by Jones on November 29, 2006 8:13 PM
Report this comment
At the end of the day if a partner denies a relationship between a child and their family, and the legal system is biased, then it is appropriate for autonomous action to be taken. Children brought up by single parents suffer in all walks of life, education, emotional sucurity and experience mainly to justify a selfish and bitter trait. The world is better off without that scar. On that subject I have no doubt at all.
Posted by Kevin Hall on November 29, 2006 7:14 PM
Report this comment
The question posed in this article is truly being answered here. YES, fathers' rights are being flagrantly abused or ignored, and children's rights along with them. But can we now move on to the next question: why is nothing being done about it? Here is why.
Politicians don't want to know, they are too busy trying to buy women's votes to bother with the damage some of those women are doing. And there are too many feminist politicians who believe women's rights consist of giving them all the powers they want regardless of how they use them. The Family Courts don't want to know, they are dominated by elderly male judges who see themselves as upholding the great tradition of chivalry whereby women are perfect creatures who always need protecting from violent aggressive men. These judges are complete suckers for a few crocodile tears and the well-worn lies that women are encouraged to peddle through the Courts as a fast pass to booting unwanted husbands out of their homes, families and money. The lawyers don't want to know, they are too busy counting the loot they make out of this misery. CAFCASS doesn't want to know, it is just another money-wasting employment bureau for the incompetent and uncaring. The mainstream media don't want to know, they are too lazy to dig out the unpleasant truth when it is far easier to go with the crowd and chant the endless mantra "all women good, all men bad". Big business doesn't want to know, they dare not upset their biggest customers, i.e. women. Too many women don't want to know, allowing themselves to be seduced by the power they have been given to wreck their ex-husbands' lives, and taking every advantage of it, barely registering the fact that they are just as surely destroying the children they are supposed to be sharing with those same men.
So who is going to help fathers (and some dispossessed mothers too) and their children in this predicament? Winning the moral argument by a country mile has not helped. The above people just continue to look the other way, and are apparently not concerned at the contempt their unprincipled and damaging behaviour is generating. Complaints are achieving nothing, protests are achieving nothing. And all the while the blinkers stay on and the moral degradation of our nation and the destruction of family life continues apace. It is heavily ingrained, one might say endemic in our putrid political system that rewards the feckless and freeloaders and penalises the honest and hard-working.
Are we truly damned? Or do we just have to grit our teeth until these angry people get organised on a huge scale, we reach the tipping point, and an explosion of rage engulfs the whole corrupt system and sweeps it away for good?
Posted by Paul Parmenter on November 29, 2006 6:36 PM
Report this comment
This is the new world that we are going to live in the future. It is the breaking-up of the family orchestrated by the United Nations.
It is a Socialistic agenda to destroy the the family in order for this future "world body" to govern the populations of the globe.
Fathers are still the providers of the family, but soon will be unable to afford the cost to do so.
Women are the tools they are using to bring it about.
It began in the 60's with the concept of equal rights in the family
which I compare as to have two captains on a ship, which of cause has been devised to bring about the division in the family. It was followed with another,what I call "phenomena", the a-masculation of the male.
Hereby the rights of the male has been replaced with the rights of the woman.
Sit still and observe!.......
Posted by Johannes on November 29, 2006 6:24 PM
Report this comment
Here in America, it is much the same. My husband hasn't seen his three daughters in three years even though they live only 10 minutes away. He has a court order that compels their mother to at least have them phone him once a week, but that court order is ignored. He has never ever missed one single child support payment, yet he has had not one bit of contact with them in all that time. He could go to court and sue for his visitation rights to be upheld, but the cost is prohibitive.
The girls will be starting college next fall, one right after the other, and it will be very interesting to see if the girls and their mother demand that my husband chip in for their university costs. The issue of higher education costs was deferred, so now that university looms, it's all about to hit the fan. Should a divorced father who has had no contact with his children for years (their doing, not his) be compelled to pay for university (they will be 18, ie, adults)? You watch...some judge is going to make him pay, furthering the idea that men/fathers are no more than walking, breathing ATM machines. You just watch...
Children being used as weapons by ex-wives...it is disgusting and immoral. No one cares about the kids. Taking away a child from her father is beyond evil. Those girls are going to have emotional troubles all of their lives because their mother convinced them that daddy never really loved them (but let's make him pay...).
Posted by Michelle on November 29, 2006 6:05 PM
Report this comment
My wife said I could use the internet...
so I say yes and it's about time we get back to equality...yes dear coming...I've got to go and do the ironing...
Posted by glyn on November 29, 2006 5:58 PM
Report this comment
Family Courts have no interest in solving issues for the children they have the privilege to serve, only in lining pockets of malicious solicitors, barristers and judges. 2 years in family court, 2 court orders and I haven't seen my children for over 2 years and just been informed that if I send them cards or Christmas presents or attempt to contact then I will be arrested for harassment! The grandparents are also victims of this outrageous gravy train. As someone who works in a caring profession and has the highest clearance to work with sick children, if I hadn't experienced it I would never have believed it.
Posted by David on November 29, 2006 5:39 PM
Report this comment
The tragic fact is that all family matters are confidential, so the truth of the matter is like an iceberg only a small part of it shows since the judiciary are so scared of public opinion if vented might get out of hand.
Like the man in Exeter-- how can a stupid Judge deny a man his human right to see his child, I wonder if the tables were turned the judge would be happy with the situation?
Many mothers mentally abuse children to hate their father using the child as a way to get at the absent parent, the only person who suffers is the child since abused turn out to be abusers, and society pays in the long run.
But the feminist movement think this is fair game and have hoodwinked society to make out their such charmers, and the likes of the NCPCC what a waste of time they are full of wind but don't know what is going on, I was told by one employee they don't do anything about mental abuse, you just got to wait until the child grows up and sees things for themselves!!! But the damage is done by then.
If everyone was allowed to say how dissatisfied in the law then perhaps the Government and the sexist CFCASS organisation (please go to Dewars research for his report on them) might change but thanks to the system we are stuck with this terrible situation.
The only people who suffer from all this is the children, Is it not time for society to get wise and start making amends.
Posted by The father of a mentally abused child on November 29, 2006 5:23 PM
Report this comment
Given the mounds of evidence that men are being systemically discriminated against, and not only in family court ( See Paul Nathanson & Katherine Young's excellent pair of studies on this topic, " Spreading Misandry ", and " Legalising Misandry " ), to ask this question is to answer it in a very loud affirmative. Put it another way; were such events being done to women, to mothers, would the question be at all necessary ? Exactly.
Posted by Andre Lieven on November 29, 2006 5:11 PM
Report this comment
The situation here in America isn't much better; fathers aren't considered as anything more human than a walking cash machine.
I have spent what would have been more than the equivalent of the cost of my daughter's college education just to be even somewhat relevant in her life. What a waste of futute resources.
The saddest part is that the county Domestic Relations agencies ENCOURAGE this strife as they get matched, dollar for dollar, for every penny they extort out of fathers. How sick being extorted by my own government.
Posted by Ben on November 29, 2006 4:57 PM
Report this comment
It happens to women too! Some men are the same as the women, want your money but will not allow contact: I am one of those women I haven't seen my son for over a year.
Posted by emily on November 29, 2006 4:29 PM
Report this comment
News headline:
1) Are we guilty of ignoring fathers' rights?
2) newsflash, the earth is not flat !!
Posted by jack D on November 29, 2006 4:26 PM
Report this comment
As a male in this "woman's world" I have to watch or hear some ridiculous stories, where I know, if it was the other way around the fan would be covered brown. I see women hitting men on tv, I hear of the men that kill their children while the women who do so the stories get buried; there have been two reecently after the big stories in Crete. We hear the news on the radio every week about "domestic violence" which strangely although has no reference whatsoever to men on women, does not count if it is women on men violence, despite the fact that I and many other men have been abused in our previous marriages. I have struggled to see my daughter in the last seven years but have finally reached the "milestone" of shared residence, where I should be "happy with what I've got" when the reality is that my daughter needs more than that, as the care from my ex is somewhat lacking, although the judge thought low standards were fine for my daughter, caring more what the mother thought than my daughter's actual wishes through a trained CAFCASS officer who listened to her wishes separately from me, but apparently was biased because she did not agree with the mother. Some years before I had a Cafcass officer who did nothing for my daughter and he was a "skilled and dedicated professional". Gender bias in the courts is rife. They want the business in court, as they must surely know I cannot sleep every night for wandering what I can do next to protect my daughter's health dispite of the authorities. Thank you for caring. But no one in this country does except people involved in this debacle. Everyone else lets it fly by because it does not affect them. They all wish we would shut up and go away at the end of the day. I wish I could.
Posted by Daniel on November 29, 2006 4:17 PM
Report this comment
Isn't there one lawyer, judge, CAFCASS worker or even minister who is prepared to post to this discussion and justify this terrible family justice system and explain why, as some have claimed, we should be proud of it? Is there really any doubt that it is a national disgrace, that it destroys families and lives and that it should be replaced with a fair and equitable system as a matter of urgency? Perhaps one of the brave souls who jeered and heckled Telegraph columnist Cassandra Jardine at the recent Family Justice Conference would like to speak up?
Posted by Nick Langford on November 29, 2006 4:01 PM
Report this comment
Dads are very much viewed as a nuisance by the divorce industry . In the view of the female dominated social services industry, upon divorce a man turns from a loving father to a potential wife beating paedophile. We have virtually no rights except to pay our ex partners money which they then use to deny us contact with our kids. I fear that things will only get worse now with the destruction of the one effective organisation that had the courage to ask for equal rights, F4J.
I am reduced to begging on the doorstep of my ex wife's home to see my 8 year old son who is well aware of his bargaining position. My 9 year old daughter calls me on her mobile every night for a bed time story as her mother blocks most contact and my expensively won court order to see my son is ignored. Until we stop the gender biase against men that is so endemic and entrenched in our society (most men sing along to the feminists chorus)then the situation will only get worse.
Posted by R. on November 29, 2006 3:54 PM
Report this comment
The crux of the matter is failure to have the stomach to jail women for breaches of agreements because they are "non violent". There is no such compunction about men who are presumed to be violent. Children and houses are the fine men must pay for a failed marriage.
Posted by edward bourke on November 29, 2006 3:46 PM
Report this comment
I divorced my first husband when our children were 4 and 1. I wanted shared custody on the basis that if the children could not have both of us all the time, they could have one of us for half the time. I eventually got him to agree and for twelve years we have made it work. THe children spend one week with me and one week with him, changing on a Friday after school. It is hard, because you have to stay civil towards someone you may not even like anymore. But the children flourish because their parents can be civil to each other, can attend parents evenings together and present a united front at all (well most!) occasions. Our daughter achieved 10 A*s and 2 As in her GCSEs this summer - what better proof that joint residence can work?
Posted by Vicky on November 29, 2006 3:44 PM
Report this comment
I read with interest the column and stories of fathers. The problem, it seems, is worldwide, at least in the West. Here in Canada some fathers are driven to the wall financially and emotionally. Some of them commit suicide. It used to be that mothers that were left by their husbands were extremely bad off, however the pendulum of Family Law has swung way over to the other side. I always advocated for the rights of mothers, but now the time has come (is overdue)to fight for the rights of exhusbands and fathers. By the way I am the mother of a son who is almost at the end of his rope, and feels victimized to the point that even his career is being destroyed.
Posted by Ruth on November 29, 2006 3:38 PM
Report this comment
My daughter is 4.5
Every day of my relationship with her mother I am reminded that if I cross her I may lose the thing dearest to me. I have supported the pair of them since birth. The mother has never contributed a penny. Why does society put a good hard-working taxpayer in this position? I even thought to myself "what if I stayed at home and she worked and paid all the bills and gave me spending money"? Then said "that's absurd - unfair on her". But then thought the law says that me doing this for her for the last 5 years is not only fair on me, but entitles her to continuing support. Bizarre.
Posted by steve on November 29, 2006 3:36 PM
Report this comment
I am a grandmother. My son's fiancee took their
2 week old baby back to her mother's and won't
allow him to bring the baby to see us. We think
she is suffering from post-natal depression, but
she won't seek treatment. My son is being
systematically squeezed out of his child's life by
his fiancee's family as his fiancee plans a life of a
single parent on benefits. At 21 he has a good
job, loves the girl and adores the baby. It seems
he was only required for his DNA and the child
support he will now provide. I can't see it ending
anywhere other than the courts where he is likely
to receive little sympathy, I suspect. So cruel and
so sad.
Posted by Kim on November 29, 2006 3:36 PM
Report this comment
I think there is a tragic irony here in that thousands upon thousands of children are being brought up in Britain today - where our birthrate outside wedlock (and any meaningful relationship) has soared beyond the level of most western states - by single mothers in the complete absense of a contribution: financial, emotional or otherwise, by their fathers.
That some men try so hard to gain access to their kids and to provide for them after the relationship with the mother has ended for whatever reason - yet hundreds of thousands of feckless men don't give a toss about the women they casually impregnate as they skive their way through life - is a damning indictment of the Welfare State.
I would venture to say that the complete failure of the CSA is evidence that the government is on the side of the view that it is OK if men take no part in child-rearing beyond begatting the offspring - why else would a raft of easy benefits reward single motherhood? We are only a notch down from all children belonging to the proletariat not their parent(s).
The tragedy for many fathers is that where children remain with the mother she is able to constantly feed them negative feelings about him - and often begins the process of conditioning them to view her new partner in the parenting role to the exclusion of their father, even when he contributes strongly to their upkeep. That is why we have groups like Fathers For Justice.
Posted by simon coulter on November 29, 2006 3:32 PM
Report this comment
The foregoing merely serve to show one thing - that the law is an ass and should be reviewed. The presumption in favour of the woman needs to be stopped and a cold, clear and logical decision taken - oh sorry, that can't happen with the messed-up mentality of our so-called "social services". As long as this kind of abuse of fathers continues, we will continue to see squatters on judges' chimneys, Buckingham Palace Balconies, etc. Wake up everybody.
Posted by Had Enough on November 29, 2006 3:17 PM
Report this comment
Being English with a Spanish ex-wife, I can say that things here in Spain are similar to the UK, with the courts almost exclusively favouring the mother when it comes to awarding custody of the children.
The situation is not helped by the fact that almost every day the press reports a severe beating or murder of women by their (ex)-husbands or (ex)-boyfriends, maintaining the general view that the victims are almost always the wives or girlfriends. While no sane person can condone this violence, more press coverage on the reasons that drove these men to commit such desperate acts would certainly help to raise public awareness of the blinkered discrimination that occurs in the divorce rulings.
Certainly the worst contract that a man can sign here in Spain is the marriage one - not only does he gets penalised if he breaks it but also if the other party breaks it !
That said, apparently things are now changing with the introduction of "shared custody", although when applying for it recently my lawyer told me not to get too optimistic because the judges are still very reluctant to award it even when the child wants it too. We will see !
Posted by Steve on November 29, 2006 3:11 PM
Report this comment
When I discovered my first wife was having
several affairs behind my back in the late 1970s I
finally decided enough was enough and filed for
divorce. The court decided that our two children,
then aged 9 and 6, were to live with their mother
and I accepted that reasonable access would be
an appropriate part of the settlement, along with
a very generous cash payment that bought a
house as well as ongoing child support and
alimony. In order to rebuild my life I emigrated
to the US, knowing that I would be able to visit
my children and at least continue what had been
a very loving and special relationship.
How wrong I was! Many thousands of pounds
later I discovered that "reasonable" is a legal
term that has no meaning except that it provides
fat fees to lawyers to try to work out a definition.
I bought the children airline tickets with
assurances from British Caledonian that they
would be well looked after. At the last minute
the social workers on the case decided that
exposure to the US would be bad for the children
and the tickets were never used.
I hired a private detective and he was able to dig
up the fact that my ex-wife was continuing to
have affairs that often meant the children were
left at home on their own for hours on end.
Many years later an ex-colleague confirmed this
to have been the case as he was one of her
lovers!!!
Did this information make any difference? None
whatsoever. Finally, after 7 years I saw my
children again. The circumstances were far from
pleasant as my son attempted to commit suicide
(a cry for help, he used a blunt knife on his
wrists) and I was told that from then one I would
have to take responsibility.
Even though the children are now fully grown
and I have grandchildren there remain problems
and I occasionally receive condemnatory e-mails.
I would like to think this is a one-off example
but I know for a fact that many fathers are in far
worse off situations. At least I have had a good
job and could afford the legal costs. Not
everyone is so fortunate.
Social service workers and counsellors need to
read this thread and maybe they would begin to
understand just how much harm they cause.
Judges must be held accountable as well for
many of the idiotic rulings that are made.
Posted by Name Witheld on November 29, 2006 2:58 PM
Report this comment
All these posts have a common theme - the absence of family rights - equal parental rights to exercise responsibility towards one's children.
Children of both sexes conditioned to this value set of seeing one or both parents treated with contempt are set the very worst example in life. We have a generation of children being inculcated with values which are totally counter-ethical to the basic tenets of a free and just society.
Furthermore, they are being taught to be selfish, to consider that there is a hierarchy of importance, children first, mothers second, fathers third. Basically, their fathers are not being treated as human beings at all.
And the worse the family situation, the worse they are treated.
The parallels with slavery are obvious. Slavery consisted of treating a whole class of people as second-class or non-human, without rights, and once these values became culturally assimilated, they became exceptionally difficult to eradicate.
These are not fathers' rights issues - they are family rights - separated family issues. The whole family suffers. Once these values are established, they go from generation to generation. Children are not taken out of poverty by being supported only with their mother - if they spend time with a poor father their experience is of poverty and discrimination as well. Such policies make the children of separated families poorer, whilst politicians claim they are richer, or the children lose their father, itself a form of poverty.
Often the argument used to justify this violation of our human rights to be responsible in our own families is that it is in the child's best interests. The question here is "according to who?" Why should a judge decide what is in our children's best interests? The legal threshhold right now is simply if a case goes to court.
In law we still retain what is called parental responsibility. Responsibility without rights of decision? Children telling their parents what to do? Mothers "allowing" or denying fathers access to children?
Small wonder that the common denominator in separated families is often the abandonment of responsibility one cannot exercise.
I speak as a father who has attempted to act responsibly for over ten years now, whilst being denied all contact, not by the mother - she does not have this power, but by the judicial system - which does. Yes, parents bear some responsibility, but our whole system encourages and supports family breakdown now, and we all live within this climate of fear.
I am living the equivalent of an open prison sentence as a socially marginal non-person, having been charged with no crime, recognised as a good father with a child who has clearly expressed a desire to be with both her parents as equals. None of this has mattered. Our separated family had its ups and downs, but we had a very happy and flourishing child - clearly recognised and acknowledged by judges and teachers alike. This in no way prevented the most extreme official measures to deny my child all contact.
So much for any claim that separated families are defective - it is crystal clear in our case that it is human rights abuses by the system which are at fault. So much for any claim that separated fathers act irresponsibly - acting responsibly in such situations is a living hell.
It seems frankly amazing to me that people do not see the implications of this abusive system. We cannot claim to live in a free democracy if our access to our children is determined by judicial discretion - it's a tyranny. Those with the strongest sense of responsibility for their children are most discriminated against - the system favours the oppressor. All of these abuses are being hidden by secrecy in court proceedings - another hallmark of authoritarian states. The socially weakest, divided families, are worst treated. Need I say any more, the results are plain for all to see?
Posted by Julian on November 29, 2006 2:57 PM
Report this comment
As my daughter said, she would be devasted if she did not know me. And yet the court system does not start from the principle that both parents have equal "rights" and should have equal access. If it did, this two tier system of, usually the Mother, having first class status and the Father second class status would be stopped in its tracts. The practical day to day arrangements may well work out that the Father only has access every other weekend, but if there were difficulties one would refer back to the guiding principle of equal access and that might have a salutory effect upon the Mother. She would be aware that the Courts could just as we
Show Posts