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

Demonstrations at lawyers’ homes

Filed under: General — Julie @ 6:59 am Sat 6th May 2006

Media release from the Family Law Section:

Simon Maude is the Chair of the Family Law Section of the New Zealand Law Society. He expresses concern about the recent picketing of family lawyers’ homes by members of a men’s group in the Auckland area, as follows.

Recently, the website of a group of men issued an invitation to its members to further demonstrations outside lawyers’ homes with these words: “It is expected that a reporter from the Herald, one from the Central Leader and possibly TV3 will attend so a good turn out would be good for our cause but never mind that it’s great fun and empowering to stick it to those cockroaches anyway.”

While this may appear to be harmless fun to some, the reality for the lawyers on the receiving end is that they have been subjected to insulting and abusive attacks, much of which has been amplified through a loudspeaker system to the annoyance of anyone in the immediate neighbourhood. These actions have not only upset the lawyers involved but also their children, who, in some cases, have been frightened and quite disturbed by the experience.

If the intention of these groups has been to embarrass and offend the lawyers, then to a certain extent they have been successful. If their intention has been to frighten the lawyers’ children, then they have probably also succeeded, but why and at what cost?

While the Family Law Section would not challenge the group’s right to demonstrate to seek changes in family law, the Section believes they have misdirected their energies by engaging in personal attacks on lawyers and their families.

It may be that there is a misunderstanding of the role of lawyers in the Family Court and in particular the role of lawyers appointed to represent children. The men demonstrating may have assumed that lawyers for the children have much greater power and influence than is in fact the case. The role of the lawyer acting for the child is largely to represent the child’s views to the Court.

The reality is that most lawyers representing children also act, at other times, for adult parties in proceedings involving children. As advocates they are required to do their best to represent the interests of all their clients, whether they are adults or children. Children’s lawyers do not make the decisions about the children, the Court does.

To take action against family lawyers at their homes will not effect changes to the system but will cause distress to their children and the children of the neighbourhood who, not surprisingly, find demonstrations outside their homes intimidating and frightening.

Simon Maude


  1. Right-On,

    Proves we have hit the mark

    Top Marks to Andrew Wotton for the inspiration

    Now its up to the rest of us to increase the monmentun. We must include the irresponcible MP’s who have formed the Law and Social Policy and all of those that have used it to allowed this wholesale destruction of our Familys

    Onward – JimBWarrior

    Comment by JimBWarrior - HandsOnEqualParent — Sat 6th May 2006 @ 8:06 am

  2. Jim,
    You certainly have a good attitude.

    Yesterday, I spoke with a woman who said. “The Aussies wouldn’t put up with this. New Zealand justs sits and takes it. Except the farmers.”

    Comment by julie — Sat 6th May 2006 @ 10:11 am

  3. Whilst you pat yourselves on the back for a job well done, are you not remotely concerned at Simon Maudes ascertion that the actions of protesters are frightening children? I thought MENZ was a child friendly site? Or is this a case of 2 wrongs making it right for you guys?

    Comment by Adrian — Sat 6th May 2006 @ 11:40 am

  4. Adrian,
    Do you think the men’s movement should wash cars, drive the elderly around, or help kindergardens, schools etc to have their vioces heard? What you say is real and I don’t doubt that. But can you suggest a better way and guarantee that after every-one works all week, pays bills in their very limited spare-time and keep up with their professions (reading up to date law, accounting issues, computer software updates and the like) and visits with children, court cases and more; that they will get somewhere. (Not just a few moments to vocally express themselves but real life changes)

    Comment by julie — Sat 6th May 2006 @ 4:20 pm

  5. Two wrongs don’t make a right – yeah right!!!… we just got to accept the corruption by the filth that proclaim to act in the child’s best interests.I will not accept -end of story !!! My mother died, Christmas 2005, heartbroken because of low life scum lawyers & psychologists – now my four sad children have lost their ‘gran ‘ . I am going to make these Canterbury so called professionls pay for their malicious behaviour . Don’t you dare say these bastards don’t deserve what is coming !!! They know nothing of children’s feelings as they all worship a money God and couldn’t give a toss about our kids suffering because they enjoy creating the insidious PAS!!!!! . Maybe their children would be interested in what these sinister dogs do to innocent parents while at ‘work ‘ !!!! Time has come to let everybody know what damage they have done to so many families!!!!! I will be busy as I have had 27 of the pathetic parasitic leaches and they are all going to get a visit. To hell with the consequences as I got nothing more to lose !!!

    Comment by Peter Burns — Sat 6th May 2006 @ 4:47 pm

  6. maude is a faggot, thats all i have to say after reading his piece.

    Comment by cwb — Mon 8th May 2006 @ 12:06 am

  7. Name calling and vitriole are childish and churlish. I’m an absolute supporter of gender equality and shared parenting as a fundamental principle guiding all family decisions.
    However, too many of the viewpoints stated on here are abusive and angry. If you want to be taken seriously you have to be seen to be being ‘reasonable’. If all you can conjour up is bitterness and abuse you will only be seen to be an unhinged minority. That’s not going to bring about change, but will galvanise people’s opinions that you are not good for your children.

    Comment by Adrian — Mon 8th May 2006 @ 10:40 am

  8. and getting access and proving to the courts that what being said about you is crap.

    Comment by alfred c. — Mon 8th May 2006 @ 6:37 pm

  9. Adrian,

    Hear, hear!

    CWB, your comment is an ENORMOUS INSULT to some very nice sticks I know and stooping to the same level as these other imbeciles lowers your standing to theirs.

    Having said that, Simon is obviously being deliberately obtuse, because the abuse perpetrated by these FC judges and lawyers every day against innocent children makes even Dr. Harold Shipman seem a saint.

    Comment by Ethos — Mon 8th May 2006 @ 8:54 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

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.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar