MENZ ISSUES

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

Who’s up for a little civil disobediance?

Filed under: General — Vman @ 2:10 pm Fri 10th August 2007

Who’s up for a little civil disobediance?

Two motorists stopped traffic on 2 lanes of the Harbour Bridge for 3 minutes in protest at the lack of action on child abuse.

Perhaps we should do the same thing but as a protest at the lack of reporting and acknowledgement:
(a) that biological father absence is the key indicator of child abuse risk
and
(b) the Family Court’s role in covering up the fact it excluded biological fathers from children’s lives who were subsequently tortured to death.

Dr Viv Roberts
“has reason to believe” that “in both cases that are in the media; Nia Glassie in Rotorua and [Tyla-Maree] Flynn who was burnt in Tokoroa, went through the family court very recently. Clearly the Family Court failed those children very badly.”

He goes on to explain that the law prevents him stating what he knows about the Family Court cases or even admitting that he knows anything, so he has to say that he “has reason to believe”.

4 Responses to “Who’s up for a little civil disobediance?”

  1. Bevan Berg says:

    So is there anyone out there who knows, “what Viv has reason to believe” is true.
    Now, we are not asking you to tell us what you do know, only if you “know”, that what Viv has reason to believe, is true; if you know what I mean.

  2. Dave says:

    If there is please contact me. I am trying to find the answer to Bevan’s excellent question. I have an idea how to do something powerful with this information.

  3. Dave says:

    OK I have found out that there is reason to believe this is true in at least one case. A letter has been sent to Boshier on the issue.
    As Murray pointed out the ideal situation would be to get our hands on the file [with the names and addresses removed]. I wont believe any spin Boshier will put on it [if he even admits to it].

  4. Benjamin Easton says:

    Returning from Auckland I have pretty significant news, if, (1) it is as presented and as it comes directly from the source, it should be highly credible and (2) if it is considered as relevant to improving the situations for children post separation by this group.

    I appreciate that this may seem out of the way fromt he thread so far, but i contest this consideration if in fact our focus collectively is to reform and acting system that is abusive of the relationships between son’s and daughters and their fathers and mothers. It is child focused.

    The practice under steam is to provide counselling for children affected (or disaffected to which ever you subscribe) by a separation. The children are given support for how they may feel. This, because I know it’s author is not your ordinary “touchy feely” session where the interviewer or counsellor is a patronising wally (or wallyess) but more focused on giving the child a voice and working with that voice to empower its protection – implying gender nuetrality. This is likely to mature into a national condition.

    Relavent to this thread came the question of compulsion. Should such a programme (and I do not intend to elaborate on the detail or answer questions because I don’t yet know) if it picks up children who are subject to court proceedings, be used as a protective measure to empower every child so adversly disaffected?

    We are not talking CYFS.

Leave a Reply

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