Do we have a few casualties?
This post is for those working in community groups in New Zealand. Please be aware that there are a number of young men that out of fear that the Family Court is anti-men are fighting young women with lawyers and through the FC proceedure of counselling and then mediation.
I think it is wonderful these young males feel comfortable enough to stand up and demand access to their children and want to continue being a major part as a father but be-aware that some of them have not had their names on the birth certificates and are now becoming liable for many years of child support.
Nothing to alarm them about but please just walk them through back pay of average $25,000 for 4-5 years (plus penalties) and $80 a week for the next so many years.
It might be a good idea to invite the other partner to a discussion outside the law. Remember, the fear of feminism may not be prevalent in their relationship.
I appreciate what you are saying here Julie, but in this subculture there is also a fair bit of blackmail going on. (You want to see the kid — compliance.) I have met young men who have handed over one weeks dole money just to hold their baby — Don’t forget to walk them through that one too.
Comment by Bevan Berg — Thu 12th October 2006 @ 8:42 pm
I’ve met guys who’ve sat through 20 weeks of anger management counselling (which they paid for personally) just because they were accused (NOT PROVED) of being violent.
Don’t forget to walk them through that one either.
Comment by Stephen — Fri 13th October 2006 @ 1:08 am
Stephen.
Let’s not confuse two groups of people here. The group you are talking about has been processed by the state system. The group Julie is talking about, many of whom are under 20 years, are struggling with human relationships, and parenting. Their experience of their first child is not as a couple living in the same house, collectively raising a child. They may have effectively avoided the system, but in doing so have created an unhealthy subculture. Re-introducing the father as a paying parent individually pays the DPB, but most fathers in this case will always be in debt to the state. That’s the start of a whole new system.
Comment by Bevan Berg — Fri 13th October 2006 @ 8:20 am
Bevan,
On the contrary, any woman from nz, even (perhaps especially) in such a subculture can and often will it seems use DV allegations to shaft a father. Ex parte orders are as easy to get as take out pizza on such spurious grounds as ‘I’m afraid’ to boot.
So I still encouarge Julie to walk these guys through that number too.
Comment by Stephen — Fri 13th October 2006 @ 12:33 pm
Thanx for reading it how I meant the post to be read. I’m impressed you understand.
There is alot of changes in our society since the father’s coalition brought the corruption of the FC to the public’s attention and there are going to be people affected in different ways.
You are right that DV accusations and sexual allegations can be used against these men but at the moment they are not (in cases I know) because of the pressure the father’s groups have made and from the relationship counsellors strong beliefs in 2 people in the relationship and 2 parents to the children.
The problems I see are exactly the same as Bevan describes. And it is even in 20 and 30 year olds. These people will never get a chance to get ahead.
As for the DV, well that is a whole other area to be challenged IMO. But neccessary.
Comment by julie — Sat 14th October 2006 @ 9:35 am
Overwhelmingly, my experience of the FC these last 5 years is that while it overwhelmingly favours the parent ‘in possession’ there seemed little or no bias against males.
At this stage I feel the problem is not the FC, but the services which advise it – specifically, CYFS and psychologists.
In several instances I had evidence with-held and even perjury committed by several of these experts.
One of these is the subject of an ongoing complaint/investigation to/ on the part of CYFS and the Commissioner for Children.
However, whilst a friend of mine is an experienced criminal and family lawyer – previously prosecutor for the Ministry of Health – bias and inconsistency on the FC’s part is VERY well acknowledged by every EXCEPT the FC itself, and those self-same advisory services.
Comment by Kai — Mon 20th November 2006 @ 4:43 pm
Kai,
It is so good to have you on board to comment because it shows you do care for the people. I would like to encourage you to question things for that’s what got me involved.
What I have found is something way beyond what I thought NZ or even my own country Australia was about. I thought we were for people. I thought we were for equality. But then I learn’t that we had male power for many thousands of years and that women were supposed to be less than men because religion said women were inferior to men. But then I learn’t that really we always had power. In fact, as a female I have always had power.
So I questioned since being on this site what is the problem, why are the men complaining?
So then I learn’t about femenism. I thought femenism was about allowing women to vote and to go to work and to stop hating us females if we were single parents. At that time women were considered ‘less of a person’ if they stepped out of marriage’ and I am all for the women’s movement. But it has gone too far in the fact that now us women are in control. We are calling the shots. But while we are calling the shots, we are destroying our men. Not only are we saying that men are horrible human beings but we are telling them they should be something they were not born to be.
We are telling them that we as women are not just important and that our feelings are not just important but we are teaching our young children that that if they are males then theirs are not important. And we are doing this by the power we are controlling and by the funding we are receiving.
Basically, we are out of control. We have taken so much power that we have forgotton that maybe men need some power. And not just that but our wonderful leaders of femenism believe you men are bad, that all you do is lie. Sure you lie. That’s what we love about you. I ask you, “Do I look as good as I did when I was 20?” And you say, “You look better than you did at 20.’ Do you want an argument. NO. But I know you are lying because I can’t possibly look as good as I did when I was 20. You guys can’t win. Us women are out to get you whether you like it or not. I ask you. If you had of said I look worse than I did at 20, would we have even gone out that night?
Comment by julie — Mon 20th November 2006 @ 5:58 pm
Please do not mistake my beliefs – as I have been subject to significant sexism and bias – I am also aware of many women who are likewise disgusted with such behaviour.
Comment by Kai — Mon 20th November 2006 @ 10:59 pm
Also… I would have said you look different 🙂 as i do
Comment by Kai — Mon 20th November 2006 @ 11:15 pm
Author: Kai
Comment:
Overwhelmingly, my experience of the FC these last 5 years is that while it overwhelmingly favours the parent ‘in possession’ there seemed little or no bias against males.
And who do you suppose has possesion of the kids vastly most often?
Oh! Golly! Surprise, surprise.
It’s Women.
And you want to me to believe the Family Court isn’t anti-male.
Yeah right bro’.
Comment by Stephen — Tue 21st November 2006 @ 2:04 am