Custody case father calls for Family Court transparency
Stephen Jelicich, speaking publicly for the first time since coming out of hiding with baby Caitlin, said the role of the Family Court in determining parental custody was too important to be shrouded in secrecy.
“I have absolutely no doubt the Family Court needs transparency because they do seem to be a law unto themselves. They disregard laws, they rush things, they don’t actually take into account the child’s welfare.
“I have documented proof as to what was done wrong (in my case).”
Speaking with Caitlin in his arms, Mr Jelicich said that despite losing confidence in the Family Court, he was confident of keeping his six-month-old daughter in New Zealand.
The couple now have a month to prepare their cases for the Hague Convention proceedings. Mr Jelicich said he had not spoken to his estranged wife since before Christmas, when they had an argument that resulted in Mrs Jelicich being charged with assault.
Police withdrew the charge after she left New Zealand for Wales but Mr Jelicich said he did not consent and was seeking to have the charge laid again.
Well Spoken Stephen, it seems an incongruous thing to me that in a society that harps on about the importance of protecting our children yet allows inappropriate lawyers and judges to operate in this domain. By inappropriate I refer to individuals who put their own personal agendas at the forefront of any case. It is imperative for the protection of children that this court has a yearly mandatory psychological assessment of all lawyers and judges who wish to work in this area of law. How in gods name can you rely on a professional to act in the interest of a child if their hidden agenda in the case comes from misogyny or misandry? Equally, how in an adversarial environment can their interests be paramount?
If there is to be a law change it will probably be achieved through lawyers and politicians (mostly lawyers) having a bit of a yarn and a few drinks. Neither of these parties will ever adequately put children first because they don’t vote and they don’t pay bills. The rights of adults should be trampled on in custody cases. Any other consideration will inevitable be based on gender politics
Comment by Bryan — Tue 15th February 2005 @ 2:42 pm
Well done Bryan (15th Feb 2005).My partner is currently trying to get access to her son who is almost 14. We speck to him on the phone once a week and he has been constantly asking us when he will get to see us.His counsel for child has been and spoken to the father but won’t see the child (almost a young person)Counsel has commented that ‘it does not matter what the boy wants’. We, along with everyone else, can’t comprehend it. We agree that the rights of all adults should be trampled on in custody cases and the children’s rights respected under UN law.
Comment by Rob Bailey — Sun 1st May 2005 @ 10:13 am