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

Dear MENZ

Is there any support out there for women, like myself, who have no success in encouraging the father of a child to stay in touch with the child?

The father of my daughter has literally manifested this lie that I refuse to let him see her. He ignores his own daughters messages to call her and to stay in touch.

He believes that if she wants to visit him then she will call, yet he is the adult! He usually contacts her for her birthday and Christmas, which I know is more than some children receive, but there’s the part missing in the middle that he takes no responsibility for.

I wholeheartedly support those fathers who struggle with access to their children and feel that the system fails them immensely. I feel that our situation is, to a degree, equally frustrating.

Kind regards
F

Hello F. You ask:

Is there any support out there for women, like myself, who have no success in encouraging the father of a child to stay in touch

As far as I know, there is no support for the situation you describe. In New Zealand, the majority of interventions into families are aimed at removing fathers, not encouraging them!
(more…)

As if his feetdragging BS with Families Commission wasn’t bad enough………………..
FemmieDunne now wants to turn nz into a prison colony for those who fall behind with their child tax.
Yes Dads, if you need to go overseas for that lucrative job to get the dollars together to pay off the IRD leeches TOUGH SHIT, Peter Pan is going to lock you in Police State nz. Then their going to turn the screws by letting you sink further and further into debt.

Anyone heard of anti-peonage laws around here?

United Future Party January 26 2007 Leader’s Letter (Excerpt)

by Peter Dunne

The actions of the Family Court in the Jayden Headley case raise some interesting issues. It is not that long ago that there was a strong media campaign to “open up” the Family Court to more public scrutiny. Stop the secrecy, and let the public see for themselves what was going on, the argument went.

� Now that the Court has done that in this case, it strikes me as ironic that the argument suddenly seems to have shifted from the public’s right to know, to protecting a person’s right to a fair trial, even though in this instance the information released publicly is all information known to the Court anyway.

What is needed here is a more considered discussion about how open Family Court proceedings should be than the polarised debate of recent years.

�

This is the best United Future have to offer?

More discussion!

I’m reminded of a poster on my wall : Consultants, if your not part of the solution there is a lot of money to be made prolonging the problem.

This is from the same MP advocating detaining parents at the border for alleged child support debt.

Politicians like Peter Dunne need to be aware that parents have had enough� of the failed matrix of family law.

Tinkering will not remove the cause/s.� A problem cannot be eliminated until the root cause/s are removed.

Discussion on opening the family court is going to remove the cause of the problem. Yeah right!� Another Tui Ad solution from Peter Dunne.

Media Release - National Child Support Conference - 29 January 2007

For immediate Release

Conference Calls for “Jayden’s Law”

Child Support Reformers from throughout the country met in Wellington last weekend.

The conference was focused on forming a nationwide network for reform as part of a strategy to build up a growing campaign for shared parenting and fair and reasonable child support culminating in a month of national awareness coinciding with the 2008 general election.

The conference endorsed with applause the proposal to work together to promote “Jayden’s Law” as the basis of this campaign.

“ Jayden Hedley is representative of kiwi kids who are totally failed by the current matrix of family law . Officials and Politicians have continued to allow this mess, a mess created by the legislation they put into law to. Parents have had enough. The only way to fix the problems with family law is to change the legislation and we are determined to do so.” Replied Mark Shipman, Conference spokesperson, when asked: Why is a law change needed?

“The solution is simple; let’s look at what might happen in a better world. It’s a New Zealand with the presumption of equal shared parenting, both parents Best Alternative to Negotiated Agreement (BATNA) is the same, 50/50 equal shared parenting supported by a fair and reasonable child support system. That’s the essence of Jayden’s Law and that is what the escalating campaign is all about, producing the best outcomes for Kiwi Kids by bringing about legislative change. “Commented Mark when asked to sum up Jayden’s Law.

“Parents from throughout the country have spent a weekend working out a clear strategy for achieving implementation of Jayden’s Law. Presumptive Shared parenting and fair and reasonable Child Support is the 21st century solution for parenting post separation. “Concluded Mark

Key Points that make up Jayden’s Law

• Mediated (Free)
• Negotiated Agreement between parents.
• Presumption of equal shared parenting.
• Both parents BATNA (Best Alternative to Negotiated Agreement) is the same 50/50 equal shared parenting supported by a fair and reasonable child support system.
• If a parent deliberately obstructed the child’s right to be parented by the other parent they will suffer the proscribed penalty.
• Proscribed penalty : A period of limited supervised contact with the children building back up over time subject to no further obstruction. Compulsory attendance at a Kids need Mum and Dad course run by parents.
• Counselling would be provided free of charge.
• Free access to services that may be needed for example drug and alcohol rehabilitation.

Ends

For Further Comment Contact

Mark Shipman (021) 982222

Jim Nicolle (021) 800-586

Media Release Parents for Children.

28 January 2007 For Immediate Release

Dunne Urged To Stop Tinkering and Address the Root Cause of the Child Support Debt Trap.

“Having just pushed through a major amendment to the Child Support Act 1991, United Future Leader, Peter Dunne is back to tinkering with this fundamentally flawed legislation. His latest brilliant proposal: pass more information between Government departments on parents who, it is alleged, owe child support and penalty payments. This is a precursor to a law preventing these parents leaving the country. Still tinkering and not addressing the cause of the problem, while knowing that such a measure is unlikely to decrease the level of alleged debt.” Observed Mark Shipman, of Parents for Children, when asked to comment on the changes promoted by Peter Dunne.

“The alleged debt is mostly made up of late payment penalties, and money “owed” to the government for benefit recovery, money that will never be seen by kiwi kids. With TVNZ reporting that about 75% of paying parents are experiencing debt problems there need to be some serious questions asked. One would think that this out of control debt spiral is a pretty good indicator of some serious problems with the Act and Inland Revenues administration of it. It’s pretty obvious that once a parent is assessed by Inland Revenue with an alleged child support debt they are caught is a debt trap that never stops growing. This is one of the fundamental flaws of the legislation, it creates the debt” Commented Mark when asked to comment on the cause of the alleged 1.1 Billion Dollar debt.

“It’s a Tui Ad solution. Peter Dunne’s latest tinkering will fix the problem? Yeah Right” Concluded Mark.

Ends For Further Comment Contact

Mark Shipman (021) 982222

Jim Nicolle (021) 800-586

Dateline: Ontario, Canada
By: Sharpened Pen
From: The Honor Network

Priority News Exchange Program News Item (PNEP)

A few weeks ago, on December the 13th, the Durham Regional police force ran an ad in the Oshawa this Week News paper. (more…)

Dateline: US Midwest
By: Zachary Horton
From: The Honor Network

Priority News Exchange Program News Item (PNEP)

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4677265

This is an interesting story about a guy who donated sperm so that a friend of his could have a baby.

(more…)

Dateline: Ireland
By: MUMSF
From: The Dads House Forum
Via: The Honor Network

Priority News Exchange Program News Item (PNEP)

John Marques, the father who was jailed for 3 months last July after a maintenance order beyond his means was imposed on him by the Family Law Courts, has been jailed again yesterday, by Judge Mary Martin at Carlow District Court, and is being held in Cloverhill Prison in Dublin.

(more…)

Dateline: New York, New England
By: Jeff Zeth
From: The Honor Network

Priority News Exchange Program News Item (PNEP)

The title of Hillary Clinton’s book “It Takes a Village” is taken from an African folk saying, the point of which is that raising a child is the responsibility of the whole community. While I agree with the sentiment in its widest sense, in New York State, where Senator Clinton now makes her home, the phrase has taken on a new, sinister meaning.

(more…)

I am happy for Jayden now � that he has returned to his dad and a loving paternal extended family. I am sad for Jayden� now seperated� from a mum and extended maternal family. I have no doubt that Kay , despite her actions, loves Jayden.

� I am angry that Jayden represents tens of thousand of New Zealand children failed by a system that encourages years of litigation and is impotent at protecting Jayden’s right to be parented by both mum and dad. This is the reality of the Family Court, not the spin doctoring of Chief Family Court Judge Peter Boshier.

This mess has dragged on for the whole of a little boy’s life and the Family Court has allowed that to continue. This is the reality of what an adversarial system of family law produces it’s a norm not an exception. Boshier’s own statistics show that his court is happy to accept and encourage absent or part time dads.

Let’s look at what might happen in a better world. It’s a New Zealand with the presumption of equal shared parenting , both sides BATNA (Best Alternative to Negotiated Agreement) is the same, 50/50 equal shared supporting this is a child support system that fixes the cost of children and� apportions cost � by the percentage of time spent with each parent.

Chris and Kay would make an appointment with a mediator. The mediator’s task would be to work Chris and Kay to a negotiated agreement between parents from a position where both parties are equal and the child’s right to be parented by both parents is protected. Assuming Chris and Kay can’t agree the 50/50 shared care kicks in.

�

Kay wants to fight it out in a court and is obstructive with the clear aim of alienating a child from his father. To be ultra sure she throws in domestic violence and abuse allegations What happens now?

If a parent deliberately obstructed the child’s right to be parented by the other parent, resulting in drawn out proceedings, or violence and abuse claims not substantiated by a criminal standard of proof, they would be punished and suffer the prescribed penalty. Yes it will have an effect on the child but a punishment must take place as parental alienation greatly increases the damage to a child compared with a reduced amount of time with mum.

The punishment needs to be twofold, a period of limited supervised contact with the children and compulsory attendance at a Kids need Mum and Dad course run by parents. Counselling would be provided free of charge and free access to services that may be needed for example drug and alcohol rehabilitation. Knowing that the best outcome for Kiwi Kids is when both mum and dad share parental rights and responsibilities society would condemn parental alienation and workplaces would adjust to enable shared parenting.

That� New Zealand � is only a short distance away, the sleeping giant is awakening and the system is shuddering.

�

Regards

Scrap