- promoting a clearer understanding of men's experience -


MENZ.org.nz Logo First visit to MENZ.org.nz? Here's our introduction page.
MENZ ISSUES

MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Wed 7th June 2006

Shared Care Challenge

Filed under: Law & Courts — Ministry of Men's Affairs @ 10:08 am

Dear Dr Robertson

You were quoted in the Waikato Times on 3 June 2006 as saying
(i) that for parents effectively to take shared responsibility for children “you need a high degree of co-operation and goodwill between the parents” and
(ii) that “it is probably in the best interests of a child not to have their current arrangements upset”, then making clear that you are referring to arrangements in which the mother has sole custody.

Can you refer me to the research on which you base your claims in (i) and (ii)? My understanding of the research is that shared care arrangements work at least as well for all parties as do other child-care arrangements across various qualities of the separated parent relationship, this holding for all but the most highly-conflicted parents. This means that your claim that shared care requires a “high degree of co-operation and goodwill” is simply incorrect and unsupported by the research. My understanding of the research is that on various measures children have been shown to do better under shared care arrangements than under other arrangements including being mostly cared for by either parent. On the other had there appears to be no finding that children do more poorly under shared care than under alternative arrangements, except one study of questionable merit that suggested babies under 18 months old suffered ill effects from shared care. Given this research picture, it appears that your claim in (ii) above is not accurate nor is it supported by the research.

In the same article you refer to a statistical analysis of 2004 Family Court figures that showed “Seventy-four per cent of women who applied for custody in 2004 got custody and 68 per cent of men who applied got custody”. Can you refer me to that analysis and/or the data used. You go on to say that the claimed 6% differential is “hardly surprising given what we know”. To what knowledge were you referring? You go on to say that the claimed 6% differential is “hardly symptomatic of a bias”, but if there were no bias then surely there would be no differential.

I look forward to the research on which your public statements are based. I remind you that under the NZ Psychological Society Code of Ethics you are required to ensure that your public statements honestly reflect the research, and alternatively that you refrain from activities outside your areas of expertise.

7 Responses to “Shared Care Challenge”

  1. Peter Burns says:

    Dear Neville
    I don’t show any bitterness when I am in the company of my alienated daughters, which is 4 hours every 3 months . I show them love and gentleness, as it is not their fault the people of the system disregard truthful and healthy bonds of love . My children never see a bitter dad however they understand my regular visits to a cardiac ward have something to do with dad being upset. The end result of injustice and on the shovel end of people who do not fight fair = there is always a real genuine victim and I suppose I am in that unfortunate category. Shortly my stress & bitterness will go to the grave with me and possibly my case when it goes public will stop my sons from ever having to go through such a unfair major depressive episode .
    Let the children play with a happy dad – dam the lies – why and what for – let the children love a happy dad as he is a great role model to love .
    I am never bitter around my beautiful children whom I treasure with all my heart as they are worth more to me than anything else in this cruel world.
    Regards
    Peter B

    Neville Robertson wrote:
    I didn’t ask if you were entitled to feel bitter. I asked, how does your bitterness help your children?

    ——————————————————————————————–
    Neville Robertson, Department of Psychology, University of Waikato

    ——————————————————————————–

    From: Peter Burns [mailto:dad4justice@yahoo.com.au]
    Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2006 10:05 AM
    To: Neville Robertson
    Subject: Get a life gripper

    If you can not understand why a man is bitter after he has lost his scared primal priority ( his children ) after false allegations and judicial maliciousness then I will not waste my time talking with such a imbecile .
    My four children are the victims of prejudice and corruption and are badly affected so am I expected to be happy about the situation ???
    I don’t think we come from the same planet however please understand fact Mr Robertson , all the litigiousness was not of my making . i.e . it was not my fire but I dragged into the embers only be frizzled alive .
    The family court is committed to ignoring wrongful behaviour , which clearly shows the children it is alright for a custodial parent to lie and this not good for children . When family court judges talk piously of the ” caring court ” , I wish they could hear the roar of pain that their piety has caused .
    For a court paid psychologist to say ” the truth is not relevant in the family court ” defies comprehension – however so is the enormous cost associated with my carefully premeditated down fall. It is well over a million dollars and I have not doubts that you will argue it was money well spent . My 4 children are bitter and angry at people like you who condone the wilful unlawful gender discrimination practised by the femninazi politically influenced judiciary.
    As a obvious alien you seem to be the only person in New Zealand that struggles to come to grips that the family court is nothing more than a sinister brothel that is mass producing sad children .I look forward to protesting on your front lawn as I have much to say to you !!!!!!
    Get a life gripper
    4 the kids -dad4justice

    Neville Robertson wrote:
    And the level of bitterness and litigiousness you describe here — how does that help your children?

    ——————————————————————————————–
    Neville Robertson, Department of Psychology, University of Waikato

    ——————————————————————————–

    From: Peter Burns [mailto:dad4justice@yahoo.com.au]
    Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 8:47 PM
    To: Neville Robertson
    Subject: 4 Childrens’ self esteem – Good idea eh ?

    Neville

    I was first convicted on a breach of protection after I was compelled to express guilt by members of the West Coast judiciary November 2001. I have a large volume of irrefutable evidence that proves I have been dealt some rough justice at the hands of the unscrupulous law professionals that was first orchestrated in the Family Court July 2001. I was accused of sexual child abuse and domestic violence without any truthful foundation and I can honestly show you evidence the first breach of the protection order was the result of corruption and deceit. This caused a great deal of upset and trauma for my four children as we all enjoyed very strong and healthy parent — child relationships.
    Regarding my firearms just remember well – this time 5 years ago I lived on the West Coast as a good dad and stable partner to what was a extremely happy family unit with no problems. I was also in my element as an outdoors person and my twin sons from my first marriage used to come over Christchurch at every opportunity to go hunting with their dad. My daughters enjoyed eating wild roast venison & pork (shot by myself in the wild and with a DOC permit) – not to mention the added bonus of fresh whietbait, snapper and all my four children were happy with life. I was trained in army how to handle firearms when I was a soldier and I used throughout my life I liked to enjoy competition trap and range shooting as a hobby. Now I am denied the right to teach my all my children, including to my girls the art of safe game hunting. I had never had any trouble with police and held a firearms license for thirty years until the protection orders were smashed into my face. The big lie started from there and no one is accountable. This is not good for the self-esteem and overall credibility of the children when they have to endure and witness a falsely criminalised dad discriminated against by a hateful and unfair system.They are all badly affected by parental alienation syndrome !!!!! My kids tell me that some of the talk about me is so unfair they are deeply hurt by it , but what would you care, as you have no consideration for the innocent fathers and children feelings.

    4 the kids -dad4justice

    Neville Robertson wrote:
    And breaching the protection order and wanting his guns back helps his kids how exactly?

    ——————————————————————————————–
    Neville Robertson, Department of Psychology, University of Waikato

    ——————————————————————————–

    From: Peter Burns [mailto:dad4justice@yahoo.com.au]
    Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 2:18 PM
    To: Neville Robertson
    Subject: How would you feel learned git ????

    The Kangaroo Family Court is just an unscrupulous gravy train that runs on the rails of deceit and dishonesty completely devoid of truth and integrity.
    Once apon a time a happy family lived in a small rural community on the West Coast and two young girls flourished within the healthy environment of a loving close family unit. The girls 8 & 6 years old loved their daddy to bits as he nurtured them with love, gentleness and complete devotion. Then Mum and children decided to go on holiday ‘over the hill ‘ to visit both sets of grand parents, 3 July 2001, while dad stayed home to look after the family pets and house. A week later dad receives a text from the girl’s mum saying the children hate him and they never want to see him again. Dad travels to Ashburton to see what’s going on regarding his family however he is confronted by a large contingent of over zealous police who tell him to go back to the Coast and forget his family. He returns home, seriously concerned for his daughter’s welfare, so he rings local police who come around and take his firearms, arrest him and serve him with 6 sets of protection orders. He is now a bewildered client of the Family Court and since becoming a respondent he has been subjected to over 150 Court appearances in High, Family & Criminal jurisdictions. Permanent protection orders that remain around his neck are slowly strangulating the life from him, as they are responsible for 14 criminal convictions. He is unemployable due to depression. He has been locked up in Greymouth, Christchurch, Ashburton, Leeston & Rangiora police stations, Paparua Prison x 2 and Hillmorton Hospital Maximum Security Ward, encountered 28 different Judges, 30 lawyers, 5 psychologists, 10 psychiatrists, 4 police armed offenders call outs and far too many dysfunctional bias CYFS social workers. His case has appeared in Westport Star Times, Ashburton Guardian and Christchurch Press. He is still subject to Court probation conditions and he is absolutely gutted he is only allowed to see his sad daughters for 4 hours every three months. His mother died a heartbroken paternal grand mother last Christmas, and his present partner has a permanent limp because of a cruel police assault in her home that was witnessed by her terrified teenage daughters. His 21-year-old twin sons cannot understand why they can’t apply for a gun license and my friends are at a loss to why they had police seize their firearms. My daughters told me they both cry everytime they have to drive past my place when they are forced to undertake the 2 hour trip to visit a lawyer whom they do not like.
    Out of the blue on 16 March 2006 a member of the ex’s family who is Court protected writes to this sad dad ” You have the system loaded against you and have been manipulated by it. You are the victim of corruption and prejudice. “In the Christchurch High Court 12 April 2006 a judge writes dismissing the Appeal Hearing regarding the 14 criminal convictions;” I have every sympathy for the predicament in which the appellant finds himself, the essential thrust of the appeal is his contention that the original protection orders were invalidly made.”In the Christchurch Family Court 11 May 2006 a judge writes after the dad tried to get the protection orders discharged at a two hour hearing;” The way forward requires Mr B recognising that there is a basis for the continuing presence of the protection orders.” This dad has decided that he cannot live with such evil and corruption as it is greatly affecting his health, so he is making arrangements to abandon all Family Court access proceedings. In reflection he wished he did not help create four New Zealand born children as his credibility as a Father has been obliterated by false allegations.

    8 year old daughter to dad letter — 3rd July —2001 (Left under my pillow and photo copied in her own hand writing )
    ” We are going to Grans today. We are leaving on Friday to go the Granma and Grandads and we are going to stay for five sleeps then we are going home to see dad and the dogs. The end “.
    The reality was they stayed with Gran (my beautiful mother — RIP) and my ex told mum that our family was really close and Peter was a fantastic / loving Father, however she went to Ashburton and made malicious false allegations to CYFS, Family Court and police. The rest is sad history eh !!!
    4 the kids = in solidarity – dad4justice

  2. Intrepid says:

    Here are some numbers from the US to go by verse the ones unsupportedly given by Mr. Roberson(Here’s to you Mr. Roberson, Jesus loves you more than you will know). They are found in a well respected magazine that has covered issues in a bi-partasan way. And can be checked via links atWorldNetDaily.com and Whitleblower Magazine.

    “Fathers get custody of children in uncontested cases only 10 percent of the time and 15 percent of the time in contested cases. Meanwhile, mothers get sole custody 66 percent of the time in uncontested cases and 75 percent of the time in contested cases.” -Whistleblower Magazine

    Unfortuately unless we have a source that has a good reputution, we need to follow Bengamin Disraeli’s quote of, “There are lies, lies and statistics.”

  3. Jadie says:

    Mr. Roberson,
    How DOES what YOU do HELP the children? How many children could come back and sue YOU for what you have done to damage their lives with your LIES?

  4. starr says:

    Mr Robertson needs to compare the population as a whole and than come up with figures that make 100% showing what part of the 100% custody was granted to males and what part pf the percentage to females. only then will the true picture show up and we all know what that will look like.

  5. Wayne says:

    Tell me Mr Robertson,
    Is it normal for a psychologist to use the word “said” when quoting comments made by the mother and “claimed” when quoting the father?
    Tell Mr Roberts, doesn’t that appear to suggest BIAS?
    My Psychologist is in Hamilton, perhaps she was one of your students eh!

  6. PaulM says:

    Peter:
    Interesting correspondence with Neville ‘I’ve got unresolved father issues’ Robertson. To shirk responsibility and draw attention away from his own behaviour, Robertson says nothing about himself but only answers you with questions.
    Perhaps you could ask him some questions. Like

    How does he manage to remain so comfortable and unmoved by the misery and suffering of dads deprived of kids, and kids deprived of dads? Is it because he hides in the halls of academia and avoids as far as possible contact with real people?

    How will he account for his misuse of power, privilege and education, to the generation of children who will want to know why they had to grow up without dads?

    Did he himself grow up without his father close by? What was it like?

  7. cwb says:

    if you guy’s don’t stop complaining about mr robertson, you are going to put him out of a job, oh – the adver$erial $y$tem, how lucrative it is for some, look’s like the kid’s are helping you mr robert$on.

Leave a Reply

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

Since May 2016 this site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

« »

Powered by WordPress

Skip to toolbar