MENZ ISSUES

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

False child abuse claims SHOULD be penalised in NZ too

Filed under: General — Julie @ 8:15 pm Sat 1st March 2008

West Virginians could soon face criminal charges for falsely reporting child abuse or neglect to influence a custody case.

The House of Delegates voted 85-13 Wednesday to send the Senate a measure that would also slap any parent making a false report with a $1,000 fine or paying the other side’s lawyer fees.

The misdemeanor crime would also carry a punishment of up to 60 hours of community service.

The bill is among the goals of groups that allege West Virginia treats fathers unfairly in awarding custody and child support. Lawmakers have debated the prevalence of false reporting.

Kanawha County Democrat and House Judiciary Chairwoman Carrie Webster said the bill was amended to ensure its provisions do not chill the reporting of actual abuse or neglect.

This could be New Zealand. This needs to be New Zealand.

39 Responses to “False child abuse claims SHOULD be penalised in NZ too”

  1. Richard says:

    yep, I’d be keen to get a few votes for a referendum on that one,,this would be a positve step,,and nows the time,,is there any one really keen on helping men in this situation in parliment, or is it time one was elected,

  2. Karen says:

    I think so too, maybe if we could get a few in the next election, I think the Dunedin South seat is worth going for, and this one issue could make a lot of difference and we would get the votes if we didn’t come on too strong, maybe a women, keep both genders on our side

  3. julie says:

    Hi Richard, hi Karen,

    From my learning while being involved in this, I have realised that you don’t change the law or make a law unless a party puts it forward while in parliament and then you have to do the hard work of lobbying and collecting support through different ways.

    United Future has one waiting to be pulled from the hat for a men’s affairs equal to a women’s affairs. That is going to be a tough one but still possible.

    This seems a bit easier. I think from my understanding that we have 2 ways to go with this.

    One would be to approach all politicians and try to get someone to pick it up and two would be to start gathering research and win the hearts and minds of other groups in the community which would make the bigger parties look to take this on.

    It would be great if it became part of the election issues. I am keen also.

  4. Hans Laven says:

    I’m not sure that this issue needs a new law. Surely perjury laws are sufficient and would allow punishments in the range that this law provides?

    There may be some advantages in highlighting the importance of the issue by a new offence category, and perhaps it would be followed more diligently by judges who may view it as less serious than perjury. However, I would prefer a law that held judges accountable for failing to pursue prosecutions for perjury when there is evidence thereof.

  5. Hans Laven says:

    On second thoughts, I guess this law pertains also or mainly to false reports to child protection agencies etc, not just in Court proceedings. So I support such a law.

  6. Richard says:

    My ex threatened me that she only had to make an assault charge with the police and I would be thrown out of the home. This was in response to my request that she either did housework or got a job instead of spending every day at university while the children were in the creche. During our marriage she achieved two university degrees. In the ten years we were together I never hit her once. Even though I owned the home before marriage she was given the majority in the family court settlement. My contribuion to her study was never considered.

    I don’t want to change the thread here but I am now in a relationship after many years and would appreciate any advice on whether or not the FC recognises prenuptial agreements or does it just do whatever it likes as usual and make the law up as it goes? I understand that women and lawyers are the two most treacherous things on the planet and find it regretable that this kind of thing needs to be considered but experience has made me a bit more skeptical. Any help here would be appreciated, thanks

  7. julie says:

    I won’t take it to heart that you think women and lawyers are the most treacherous things on the planet, lol, because I would have thought alligators were higher.

    Just having fun but I guess it has come to this. I know of men who had money and women do target them and getting pregnant to them has been a goal for some. And the women do say things like, “I am made now”. They don’t want to have a relationship but just want the money.

    But some men have out smarted these women. They had no assets and no money. Nothing was shown to be in their name. They put the money under another person or it is in a trust. My grandparents made a trust like this to protect the great grandchildren in case one of the husband or wives wanted to take any of us to the cleaners.

    I guess the Maori do something similar. Else their land will be divided and sold for ex partners or gold diggers.

    Other than that I have heard that pre nuptials don’t work in 99.9% of cases.

    Maybe there is someone out there with a way to make them work.

  8. Hans Laven says:

    Under current relationship property laws, most people perhaps everyone needs to engage in deceitful structuring of their assets and/or to pay lawyers for agreements to try to sign themselves out of existing laws. Conclusion: current laws are deeply flawed, don’t work for most people, and should be changed. For example, relationship property should refer only to the increase in a couple’s assets from the time the couple moved into a committed relationship, and should exclude all assets owned by each party prior to the commencement of a committed relationship. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that’s much more fair and many more people would then be happy simply to rely on the law as it stands when it comes to separation.

  9. Katy says:

    Hello, my name is Katy. I am a student from University of Canterbury in New Zealand. I am doing a research on child abuse.

    Could you please reply me via email on some of the main causes for child abuse? My email address is sch202@student.canterbury.ac.nz

  10. rosie says:

    Hans you’ve got to be extra careful with second marriages and relationships.I’m in a position where a large chunk of money that is invested in our house is from the sale of my previous home and money left to me from my late daughter and parents.We’ve made that safe now.But the way it was before,if anything had happened to us his ex could have,or should I say would have made a claim on our entire estate.Not for herself of course but for her children.

  11. julie says:

    I wonder if Katy’s address is real. I think I will, actual I will send her details to the school and complain.

    If she is doing proper research on child abuse she wouldn’t be coming at fathers the way she has. Not the biological fathers since they are the least likely to abuse their children. Mothers are the highest, step fathers are the second highest while biological fathers are the least.

    To all students coming on this site for answers.

    Be different. Search for truth. Look for research that is unbiased and check out what questions they asked and use scientific study rather than social science study if you are allowed. Hypotheses are not real research.

    The men’s movement has a lot of information/research you can use but you must be respectful when asking for it.

  12. rosie says:

    God almighty what’s got into you Julie?

  13. julie says:

    Do you think I was too tough Rosie? (being serious)

    Why would she ask such a question on my article? Is it not obvious I am saying tha we need something against false accusations?

    I am trying to figure out why she would ask me or anyone to provide her answers as to why children are abused?

    Do you not wonder why she is asking this here? She must have ample research at her University and if she was doing a real study she would be approaching family groups and women and children services.

  14. julie says:

    On second thought Rosie, hear me out on this.

    The first questions I was asked to ask here were, “Men, why are you violent to women? Men, why are you violent to children?”

    That is all the females working in these areas and studying this stuff know.
    Woman = good. Man = bad.

    They want to know what they can do to stop men being masculine. They don’t know that men are OK. That there is nothing wrong with them. That is how much feminism has damaged their thinking.

    But if this site is to be more mellow this year. I am OK with that also.

  15. rosie says:

    Sit back and say nothing would be your best option cos you have no idea of what you’re talking about

  16. julie says:

    Hi Rosie,

    Sit back and say nothing would be your best option cos you have no idea of what you’re talking about.

    They might just be wise words I need to hear.

  17. julie says:

    OK, Rosie, thanx for the wise words, once again.

    From now on I will back up what I say with facts.

    For students wanting research on child abuse

    Divorced families – myths and facts

  18. Karen says:

    purjery laws are a joke, we have proved many purjeries, false documents and theft from a child’s bank account by the mother, the father had put $50 a month for five years,(all gone) the family court Judge said “these allegations are common in this situation” the police said “these are serious charges, she might go to prison for 7 years” the lawyer for child said “that proves how much she wants the child” the father said “I give up” and the mother said communications by the father over her lies were inappropriate, and fainted and applied and recieved a ex-parte protection order for mental abuse, the laws are useless in family court, and Judges don’t enforce access orders in favour of the father, they say “it’s not in the child’s interest to punish the mother”

  19. Karen says:

    we have made several complaints of abuse of this child to family court Judges who ignore it, claiming that litergating parents make these allegations and don’t take it any further, it seems inconcievable to them that mothers do abuse their children, any alination is not concidered abuse

  20. Katy says:

    Thank you very much Karen (for your useful email).

  21. starr says:

    WHILE ON THE TOPIC…

    man and his young wife were in divorce court, but the custody of their children posed a problem.
    > The mother leaped to her feet and protested to the judge that since she brought the children into this world, she should retain custody of them.
    > The man also wanted custody of his children, so the judge asked for his justification.
    > After a long silence, the man slowly rose from his chair and replied…
    > “Your Honor, when I put a dollar in a vending machine and a Coke comes out, does the Coke belong to me or the machine?”

  22. julie says:

    Katy,

    I apologise if I misunderstood you.

  23. perseus says:

    NZ will be the last country in the world to give fathers proper rights, but it is coming and is moving our way slowly, it will start in US and UK, an upsurge of anger against all the hatred against men and fathers, by using the law to persecute us and to steal our kids from us, but mark my words things are changing very slowly.
    NZ is still in the 70s but thinks it’s laws are advanced (HAHA), thinking because it gave women the vote first (it was one of the last to give ALL men the vote – they never mention that do they), it has to give women priority all the time. THis is all just social engineering, but the anger felt by an increasing number of men here and overseas will be causing more and more hate and bad feeling, they do not understand why there are more and more problems in society, all they are interested in fathers paying up the child support so that they can spend money on judges pensions and the like, one day we will win, NZ will follow as usual

  24. Pat Norton says:

    I started a thread on opinion on trade me asking everyday people if they think people making false allegations of child abuse should be charged, so far they do,,time to make the politicains make a stand on this one,,and if helen can change the laws over night any one can, make this a election issue, put it out there

  25. julie says:

    Pat Norton, you are wonderful for doing what you have done.

    Last year I started putting things on there too. I was told that 95% of the people on there are feminists.

    But the men are starting to speak out. Everything you do is worthwhile. You have walked into the lions den. Let us know if you need help.

    Your results speak volume.

    Keep fighting the good fight.

  26. pomcat says:

    something has to be done which should also include some kind of training for the judges who continually err on the side of “caution” by not condemning these evil women that make these disgusting accusations.
    Our case was a typical example. The judge found that he had absolutely no doubt that nothing had happened between my husband and his son. BUT then went on to say that the psycho ex had been right in her actions “even if they did get a little out of hand”.
    Let me clarify that. She made the report to the Police who got the boy in for an interview. After the interview both the Police and CYFs said there was no case. The psycho would not take this and still took my husband to court. Even her lawyer advised her to drop it, but no…she couldn’t.
    So there’s a judge out there that knows this freak made up a load of BS and yet decided to let her off the hook. She should have been charged, but what can we do in little ole NZ?

  27. karen says:

    I wonder if both these ex’s are related,,same thing happened, cyps said the complaint was unsubstantiated, the police questioned the child and refused to lay charges,,but these mental abuse claims stopped access for two years,,,,two years of the boy being told his dad didn’t want to see him, two years the boy’s lawyer told the father the boy didn’t want to see him,,it wasn’t until the boy was contacted by a third person who told the boy his dad did want to see him that communication opened up again,,to stop the non stop allegations the dad has applied for shared care, 50% each,,this means relocating to the north island,,so what,,,,it is in the interest of the child to either walk away and stop this non stop family court stuff, where she can do what she likes,,or go for shared care,, will keep you posted, it is before the courts now,,the mother is the abser and the police and family court judges,, stand by her,,,and continue to take her complaints

  28. Hans Laven says:

    Karen – typical stuff that we frequently hear about. The law is mainly at fault; when domestic violence claims are made the Court is expected under law to treat the respondent as guilty until proven innocent. Sadly, the children are harmed in having their relationship with the accused parent seriously disrupted. Innocence can never be proven because the Court requires absolutely no evidence apart from a person’s allegations, and anyway all that is required from an accuser is that (s)he claims to be frightened of the respondent. So the default outcome is that the accused parent has to undertake indoctrination programmes and to convince the Court that (s)he no longer presents a risk to the accuser or children before normal contact can resume with children. This usually takes years, by which time the bonding between parent and child has been badly damaged and the child’s development has been deprived of significant input from that parent. Somehow it was reasoned that children’s welfare was so important as to justify abandoning a number of fundamental legal principles and individual adult rights. Such reasoning is similar to that employed by all totalitarian governments in favour of some priority, and seldom leads to an admirable outcome. If children’s interests are so important then surely that is a reason for proceeding as carefully, morally and ethically as possibly in making decisions that affect children.

    A basic flaw in our family legislation is that it does not properly recognize the harm caused to children by disrupting their relationship with one parent. It does not adequately weigh up this harm against the harm possibly caused by alleged violence or other undesirable parenting behaviour.

    Strangely, although the law expects the Court to act in ways contrary to fundamental principles that have long provided essential balance in our justice system, it seems to do so much more reliably when accusations are made by mothers against fathers than the other way around. A mother will make accusations whereupon father’s contact with children will be immediately curtailed and, if the father is lucky, ordered to continue under strict supervision for which the father must pay. However, when a father makes similar accusations against the mother, the child usually remains unsupervised with the mother until the accusations have been legally processed during which time the Court largely sits on its hands while the mother withholds the child from father in contempt of orders. Mother’s accusations are much more likely to be upheld or left in force although unproven. Whereas even those mothers who make accusations proven false are hardly ever subject to censure or legal consequences, fathers who make accusations no matter how well-evidenced are often then seen as being abusive for the fact of making the accusations. Yes, there are cases that contradict this trend but so many cases come to light that the trend cannot be credibly denied despite protestations from the Principal Family Court Judge. The Court will apply its empowering legislation variably depending on the genders of the applicant and respondent.

    How on earth did we allow things to become so wrong? Because of the steamroller influence over recent decades of faulty feminist ideology. Because even the current Principal Family Court Judge has made speeches about domestic violence in which only men are referred to as committing it and only women are referred to as being victims of it. Because New Zealanders have been captured by feminist propaganda and misinformation. Of course, there was always some validity in feminists’ concerns and demands, but we have been led down ridiculous and dangerous paths because too many feminists did not stick to their fundamental moral principles such as honesty, integrity, fairness and interpersonal respect. They still don’t.

  29. pomcat says:

    Karen, sounds like our “exes” are v similar, although we all live in the Sth island. What makes such a mockery of our case is the fact that she had already made a half arsed accusation against my son and we recently found out that she had made an accusation against her own oldest son around the same time as she was accusing my husband. Apparently as she couldn’t prove my husband had done it then it must’ve been her son. It all went to CYFs and yet she is still out there looking after 4 kids.
    The judge made the comment (like you have said Hans) that there is the “perception” that these abuse accusations come up when custody battles are just starting up, but he said that these are false. Hmm, how come the cop said exactly the opposite and said that it was extremely common for accusations to be made when a custody paper has been filed. ours was less than a week.
    We were extremely lucky in the respect that our case was cleared up in a matter of months rather than years. That doesn’t make it any easier to take though, nor does it make it acceptable that there are people out there getting away with purgery.

  30. karen says:

    we took our proof to the police two years ago,,and the child told them how his step father belted him with a horse whip,,they told him to go away, they weren’t interested. (the police say now the charges are too great, she could go to prison for 7 years,) The Judge said this is typical in custody cases,,she (moc)claimed these allegations were mentally abusing for her, she gets a protection order, the child another hiding and no father for over two years,,the family court system is corrupt, is a woman’s court, even after being put on notice by a judge this woman continued to carry on alinating the father, she was threatened with reversal of custody, the child becoming a ward of the state, having to pay back air fares paid for by the father if she doesn’t put the child on the plane,,she said, “the child doesn’t want to” end of story, no judge enforces parenting plans on the mother and no one cares,,,

  31. perseus says:

    Brilliantly eloquent and true Hans

  32. perseus says:

    Brilliantly eloquent and true Hans. I think things are changing slowly, the BBC is beginning to have programs aimed at fathers and men (maybe they feel emberassed how they have treated men), “Outnumbered”, ie social engineering of fathers instead of the usual female emancipation social engineering, but we will all be abused in the mean time. USA and UK fathers will eventually change things

  33. pomcat says:

    The problem is that no-one wants to know about this over here. Everyone is up in arms when child abuse is reported and rightly so. But no-one ever gets to hear about all the cases of false abuse claims. That would go against what everyone wants to believe wouldn’t it? No-one seems to want to know that there are women out there who are quite capable and willing to destroy everything a child needs in life purely to satisfy their vindictive feelings towards the man that was in her life.
    I would be very interested to see just how many men come up with this kind of BS should a study ever be done. I would have to say that I think that there would be less than 2% and that’s being being kind to the vindictive witches out there.
    Any ideas where you could get ahold of any statistics with regards to the proportion of false claims made, particularly in relation to custody claims?

  34. rosie says:

    I worry about my husband’s ex accusing him of child abuse in the future.
    She sent him photos of their daughter the other day which I can only describe as ‘in a seductive pose’.It sickened me cos she is only 12 years old.

  35. Hans Laven says:

    Rosie, your husband might be sensible to destroy those photos, or perhaps to have his lawyer store them safely with their source, date and method of receipt from his ex being carefully recorded. Current censorship laws could see him being treated like a child molester if he is found to have such photos. If there is conflict with his ex, there is a possibility she is setting him up for exactly that.

  36. pomcat says:

    Yeh you have to be very careful. My husband was asked over the phone by his ex if he wanted to persue his custody application. When he said that he was going ahead with it he was told “you just watch what comes out”. At the time we could not think what she could possibly mean, it never entered our minds that she could do something so heinous. Unfortunately it is our word against hers and could not be used as any evidence. One week later the false accusation came out. Nowadays we do everything by e-mail.
    The sad thing is that when you get an accusation you suddenly look at everything you do that would be considered normal in a whole new light. Your photos, changing at the swimming pools, it’s the worst thing ever. A photo like your husband’s ex has sent could be totally misconstrued if she makes any kind of accusation and yes, let your lawyer know. If it has been documented it will be harder for her to prove anything. We keep a diary since the case and note down everything that happens, as it happens. Just in case…
    You really have to cover your butt when dealing with these sorts of women.

  37. rosie says:

    Hi Hans and Pomcat
    I have warned my husband many times to be very careful.A friend of ours who was a prison officer has given him the same advice.
    The warning bells rang a long time ago when he was only allowed his daughter to stay with us,not his son.She would always have some excuse as to why he couldn’t stay.
    I believe that she has set out to destroy his life from before she left him and consequently now that I have come on the scene,my life as well.
    My son says she’s a phycho and she needs to be admitted.
    She spends her whole days scheming and planning revenge for what?God only knows.
    From becoming a nominated person on my husband’s IRD tax files a few month before she left him to now resorting to sleazy tactics to try to break us up.
    An investigating officer at the IRD said to me that she sounds very disturbed.
    But I think she is just extremely evil.
    A father and his daughter’s relationship is destroyed now because of her.

  38. Jay says:

    Just about to go to the family court for the first time in an attempt to stop my ex from continuing to mentally abuse my kids. This woman has tried unsuccessfully to get my kids removed from my care by making false allegation about me to cyfs, the police.
    Even after CYFS have apologized to me for the way they sledgehammered their way into my children’s lifes and that there was nothing wrong with my kids (they waited until AFTER xmas to tell me they had not been abused.. nice xmas I had..not), the reverberations still continue… rumours go round of me being a paedophile, which is probably the most detestable stigma to have, especially as a loving father.
    Got to have some good luck soon… there had better be some family court reps with some common sense out there.. hadn’t there ?

  39. Hadi Akbari says:

    Hi Julie, Youre right, woman do just that, they use men in a big way and that is bad but getting pregnant for money and raising that poor child without the poor Daddy is outright cruel and vey disgusting and we all know its true

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