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

Tue 28th June 2011

Pro-female IRD

Filed under: Child Support,General — Mikey @ 1:23 am

Mum tells IRD that children are in her care to avoid Child support payments. Father is on DPB after loosing business during recession. Children are actually in shared care.

IRD takes word of mum and deducts child support from dad’s DPB. Mum tells IRD that dad is a fraud and works under the table. IRD takes word of mum and accesses dad at last years income. IRD keeps the accessed income in its formular.

Dad sits on the computer for three months noting every minute children are with him to prove shared care.

Dad disputes that children were in mum’s care. IRD places order on dad’s bank account and robbs the money from his account.

Dad cannot pay the rent and applies to WINZ for a food voucher. Dad has WINZ investigator knocking at his door to investigate “work under the table”.

It’s time the IRD wake up to such fraud.

Fri 24th June 2011

Institutionalised Sexism

Filed under: General — triassic @ 11:37 pm

Employers association Chief Alasdair Thompson is obviously not very savvy in media matters, however I have been amused how the media have sensationalised the matter yet seldom comment on the continual matter of institutionalised sexism within the family court and its interpretation of family law.

Few media ever report, or have probably never sat in the family court, where a father is attempting to gain equal access to his children or to stop his child’s mother from relocating to another town with the child.

Two displays of sexism at work in society scream out for publication on the front page of print and the lead story in electronic media:

1. Fathers required to prove they are capable (defined by a judge) of looking after children before being given equal shared care.

2. Fathers having their children relocated to another town because a judge decides it’s in the best interests of the child, i.e. Dad does not have the same status as mum so kids wont really miss him after a short time.

These examples are based on sexism and therfore supply the children involved a comprehensive message as to which parent they should respect and model themselves upon.

Telling females that their monthly bodily functions may be affecting their ability to be equal in work output, and thereby diminishing their total pay scale, seems insignificant in comparison. However, it is an easy story to beat up and takes bugger all effort to do any research on!!

Wed 22nd June 2011

A day in the NZ courts.

Filed under: General — Vman @ 3:41 pm

Bar worker Jodi McGregor, 24, was furious when her boyfriend – to whom she was pregnant – confessed he’d had sex with her friend. McGregor, of New Plymouth, invited the friend to her home for a party on February 12, got another woman to pin her down by holding her hair, and laid into her with her fists.


An 8-year-old girl was unflappable under cross-examination in the Invercargill District Court yesterday as she gave evidence of cruelty at the hands of her grandmother.

Rebecca Scandi Hughes, 17, was sentenced last year to 12 months’ jail with special release conditions, which include psychological counselling, for assaulting the same child on March 1, and assaulting her with a weapon, namely a coal shovel, between March 5 and 12.


A woman has driven into a shop window in Petone, near Wellington, crushing an employee on the way, police said.


Mon 20th June 2011

Does John Key think like David Cameron?

Filed under: General — Scrap_The_CSA @ 10:55 pm

PM must act, not rant, over single parents by Martin Fricker, Daily Mirror 20/06/2011

DAVID Cameron hit out at fathers who run out on their children yesterday and said absent dads deserve to be shamed in the same way as drink drivers.…………

Mr Cameron said: “It’s high time runaway dads were stigmatised and the full force of shame heaped upon them. They should be looked at like drink drivers, people who are beyond the pale.

“They need the message rammed home, from every part of our culture, that what they’re doing is wrong.

“Leaving single mothers – who do a heroic job against all odds – to fend for themselves isn’t acceptable.”

This is what the Tories in the UK think. I wonder if the Tories here think the same?

What positive change has John Key and the National Party made to improve the child support (AKA child tax) system? Nothing!

I wonder how much John Key thinks like David Cameron?

Thu 16th June 2011

Child Support – Help

Filed under: General — Vanessa @ 9:35 am

Hi can someone help? My husbands ex wife has successfully applied for an admin review which we filed a cross application. The son attends private school and about a year ago she unilaterally put him into boarding saying she would meet the costs. She lives less than 9km from the school. The review officer ignored the fact no agreement was reached and said it only needed the expectation of one parent (ie her). We now pay the maximum formula asessment plus private school fees + boarding fees. A total of $2600 per month or $29,000 per year – the review officer has said we have to restructure our earnings, sell our house etc because my husband has first obligation to maintain his son in the style (she and he has become accustomed to). She has little outgoings, is the recipient of a family trust, has over 200k in the bank. I live with my husband with my daughter from a previous relationship, she objected to my husband receiving the discount for a dependants, so that was taken off us as well, my child has special needs and as such is enrolled in a non state school. My husbands income and her income are basically the same, the difference she has more cash, and no outgoings and a big Family trust. The maximum child support (1400 per month) is actually paying for her rent etc. She also gets the son to write letters to the IRD in support of her applications. We have a review hearing tommorrow for the cross application under Ground 1: The capacity of either parent to provide financial support for the child is significantly reduced because of a duty to maintain another child or person Ground 2: The capacity of either parent to provide financial support for the child is significantly reduced because it costs extra to cover the special needs of another child or person they have a duty to maintain. Ground 8: The child support assessment does not take into account the income, earning capacity, property or financial resources of either parent or the child. The issue here is she forced boarding, make us pay for it and just wants more and more

I dont hold my breath on this one but any assistance or ideas or pointing in the right direction ie relevant cases would be appreciated

Tue 14th June 2011

UK Child Support Changes

Filed under: General — Scrap_The_CSA @ 10:00 pm

Now life for non-resident parents is, potentially, about to get worse. In recent years, the level of a non-resident parent’s income being payable for maintenance was calculated on the following basis: 15 per cent for one child, 20 for two children and 25 for three or more children. Now, under a phased introduction, the proportions will change to 12, 16 and 19 per cent for someone earning less than £800 a week and 9, 12 and 16 per cent if the salary or wage is above that. These will be calculated on gross and not net income so, every wage- or salary-earning non-resident parent will have to pay more.

Guilty untill proven innocent

Filed under: General — Scrap_The_CSA @ 9:49 pm

WASHINGTON, June 13, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — “”¦ This is to our President. President Obama remarks often “¦ It’s “¦ been two Father’s Day years in a row where he admonished fathers, especially African American fathers, to step up to the plate. Well, I’m an ex-baseball player; almost went pro years ago”¦ so my analogy is: When the fathers step up to the plate, we get a fast ball right between the eyes. “¦I’m not a teenage Dad, I’m not a Dad who doesn’t work, I don’t have a criminal past or an anger management problem, yet my little boy is growing up without his father.”

The above quote comes from the trailer for filmmaker Janks Morton’s powerful new film, Guilty Until Proven Innocent (GUPI

Sat 11th June 2011

Parental Conflict – Alienating a Child

Filed under: General — Scrap_The_CSA @ 1:53 pm

Auckland Family Court judge Margaret Rogers said more than 1000 pages of evidence had been filed with the court.

“At this point in [the child’s] life, [its] future should lie ahead of [it] full of promise and potential. But I fear for [the child] and for [its] future,” she said in a decision issued last year.

“I fear for [the child] for one simple reason. [Its] parents … have one of the worst parental relationships I have seen in 22 years of experience in the field of family law.”

The father may not be perfect but the headline “Kiwi mum battles to keep child” substanially discounts the mothers contribution to the alienation of this child from the father. To me the headline shows a clear bais – man is evil, woman is victim menatlity of the reporter.

The court was told that the child maintained a consistently negative view of the father and continually told a lawyer and a court-appointed doctor that it did not want to visit the father.

“A common theme for [the child] is to describe [its] father as evil, and emphatically state that [it] hates [the father].”

Judge Rogers said she found that the child was “alienated”. The court-appointed child psychologist defined this as “a child who expresses, freely and persistently, unreasonable negative feelings and beliefs towards a parent that are significantly disproportionate to the child’s actual experience with that parent”.

The mother has denied she ever engaged in intentional or unintentional “alienating behaviour”.

Interesting denial by the mother, given the child has been in her care and is so young.

As to Mark Henaghan’s comments about money dragging out Family Court proceedings – surely the same logic must apply to one party (Mum) being granted endless legal aid compared to the father having to pay for his lawyer or self represent.

Letters to the Dompost please.



The Propaganda Never Ends

Filed under: General — Ministry of Men's Affairs @ 11:35 am

Here’s some insight into what is being taught to young women in schools etc about domestic violence, and below is my reply to the newspaper and to Ms Kearns.

This article, while containing some potentially useful content, is mainly feminist propaganda that will harm relationships, wreck families and children’s lives and increase the risk of partner conflict and violence. Gender terms for abuser and victim, as if only men ever commit domestic violence, are propaganda. It was unbalanced to refer only to unexplained statistics claiming violence toward females without mentioning that violence toward male partners is just as frequent. Further, it’s ridiculous to suggest that a man is likely to be violent if he asks for any of his preferences to be met, wants her to reply to his communications and/or to pick him up on time as arranged, and such advice will only encourage unrealistic expectations that safe males should passively accept any treatment from women without complaint. Also, it was misleading to confuse relationship conflict and domestic violence generally with the unusual Weatherston case that involved serious personality disorder. Violent reactions come from both genders and usually arise from bilateral relationship conflict, and until we understand this we will continue to fail in reducing domestic violence.

Fri 10th June 2011

The feminist Trojan horse in Family Law

Filed under: Domestic Violence,Law & Courts — JohnPotter @ 10:18 am

Queensland MP George Christensen recently spoke to the Australian Federal House in opposition to plans intended to undo Family Law reforms put in place by the Howard government in 2006.

I have never heard a politician so clearly expose the feminist, anti-father agenda. Why don’t we have anyone like this in NZ?

But justice and maintenance of rights for fathers is an affront to this feminist ideology from this government. What a clever way to rob men and rob fathers of their rights! Surely no-one would vote against amendments aimed at protecting children and preventing family violence. But that is not what these amendments are really about. There is already protection in the current Act. The fact is that these amendments actually trivialise what is a very serious matter – that being family violence.

The broadened definition of ‘family violence’ waters down the meaning of violence and will, in effect, make family violence more acceptable – precisely the opposite of the purported aim of these amendments. These amendments should be seen for what they are. They are a Trojan horse, full of malicious code designed to deprive fathers of their rights.

Full transcript here, or watch the video:

Thu 9th June 2011

Evidence Based Practice – Gluckman

Filed under: General — MurrayBacon @ 12:21 pm

Professor Sir Peter Gluckman, John Key’s chief science advisor has called for better development of teenagers.
Prime Ministers Science Advisory Committee

He also made another release, which in the longer run is far more important.
Evidence and policy formation

He also called for looking for evidence, before instituting new social policies and also when evaluating new social policies which have been newly instituted.

Whilst internationally this idea is several decades old and has been used actively in more careful development of legislation in european countries for over 2 decades, it is still quite novel inside NZ, alas.

Many of NZs economic disasters would have been avoided, if we had been more careful before introducing “innovative” legislation. Examples range from Building Act (leaky buildings), to DPB with the huge increase in solo parenting and the follow on effects of deprived parenting and dangerously behaved children. Another examples is the DV Act and the negligible improvement in women’s and children’s deaths by homicide – actually women’s perpetration of homicide has increased. There have also been increases in men’s suicide that that have resulted from caught abuse, through that Act. MENZ Quantitavive Figures My own analysis of the effectiveness of that Act is here.

If Sir Peter’s ideas gain traction in NZ Government, then we can hope to markedly reduce men’s suicides.

A very good example of a Government carrying out good quality relevant social research is Australia Institute for Family Studies. The coverage includes social, criminal, child development and protection, with a view to producing useful information, aimed at improving social quality for all Australians. Although the title says “family” they take a constructive interest in single people’s lives too. (Sort of like a Families Commission, but with a research budget and a strong sense of direction.)

National have indicated that they have an axe ready for Mental health Foundation and Families Commission and even the Press Council, that they don’t fund! Real murderers territory, kill everything that moves. If you want to support social development in NZ, not just by copying other countries, then put pressure to support relevant and good quality social research within NZ.

It is election year – lets push careful family oriented social policies as a leading issue.
Best regards, MurrayBacon – axe murderer.

Powered by WordPress

Skip to toolbar