Care and Protection a Joke
The FC have finally done their worst. They need to have their closed doors opened to show the criminal injustices they continue to do to children.
Just come from an ordered Care and Protection meeting ordered by Judge Druce with the non trustable C4C Christina Cook.
Two choices were given, the abused child be made Ward of the State or the abused child be placed in a CYF home. There was one other option, the father walk away from his day to day care application and the mother keep abusing the child as she has done for 6 years.
The day to day application has been in place for 6 years for the sole purpose of trying to protect the abused child from the abuser, the mother.
The oldest child has written an affirmation along with letters to the FC and Judge Druce confirming the abuse she received by the mother.
The FC still don’t believe her. So they in turn don’t believe the child.
The mother has always pleaded alienation. Original.
There needs some sort of open structure put in place that is going to ask the FC to be accountable for their lies, misconducts and criminal injustices to these children.
How is this poor little child going to feel when he is taken away from the people who love him.
How is he going to feel all alone with strangers, people he doesn’t know.
How is he going to feel.
Well guess what, the C4C, Care & Protection Coordinator and the CYF Social worker, yes they had one of those there too, didn’t give two sniffs of how the child might feel.
All they kept saying was that the child cannot be placed with the father because… and then changed their topic.
They would not give an answer.
The C4C stumbled trying to cover her tracks, blatantly making excuses for not being straight forward.
Bloody Typical Family Court….
Never seem to be able to side with the Father, even when that should be the case, if it was reversed with the father abusing the child, before you know it the mother will have full custody, and the father if he is lucky would have Supervised Visits if that.
Definatly time for the Family Court to Stand up and not be so damned bias.
Comment by nzleagle — Tue 13th October 2009 @ 8:51 pm
Please have more sympathy for the familycaught “judges”. Remember that they are trained as lawyers, to write commercial contracts, to buy, to sell, to trade or exchange, to ignore the human differences between people, to calculate tax or [spousal and] child support.
This is training, that negatively prepares them for a job trying to find out what is going on in dysfunctional families, let alone what should be done to make things better. They are skilled at separating clients from hard earned money and to have no conscience about what it takes to do this. Their human understanding goes little beyond manipulation.
If we employ the least equipped in our society to do this work, then we just get what we deserve. Like all incompetents, they blithely move forward, without looking to see whether they are successful or have done damage. Success or failure just isn’t their problem.
Just think for a moment, what they are doing to their souls.
They are heroes, rushing in and empowering the custodial parent (in this case mother), whether that is a problem or not. They cannot diagnose, because they don’t understand what is happening in the real world, let alone what could make the child’s life better. They see only what they want to see, blinded by their own unaccountability and arrogance – prescience they think! Scared to make decisions or take action. Paralysis by analysis. Cowards. Best efforts, but not to be seen when accountability is demanded.
Sure, it tears parents apart, when they know that they are being restrained from protecting their own child. The promises of our society aren’t being honoured. Been there. Still, it pays to check on our own perspectives, by listening widely to the people around us.
My only suggestion is basicly what you have already done well, to shine a bright and clear light on what is going on. Best regards, MurrayBacon.
Comment by MurrayBacon — Tue 13th October 2009 @ 9:25 pm
Several institutions need to be taken to task here. There seems little question these children have been abused and yet numerous folk and organisations have deliberately been turning a blind eye.
They are as responsible for this abuse as the individual actually perpetrating it.
Child abusers one and all.
If no mechanism exists to hold them responsible the laws of your land are extremely deficient. The only possible moral or ethic is that they are criminal.
Comment by gwallan — Tue 13th October 2009 @ 10:01 pm
This is what CYFS and C4C are trained to do. If a father stands up in the FC against a mother, these people are trained to say, “He wants power over the mother”.
Then if the child goes to CYFS the father and mother will have to do parenting courses but they have to be different because these people are trained that a father can’t be allowed to be trusted by the child because fathers are BAD, BAD, BAD.
Comment by julie — Tue 13th October 2009 @ 10:06 pm
I agree with nzeagle.
Where the hell do these biased “people” come from anyway? What are their backgrounds? Do they have credentials? How are they appointed? Have they been screened? Do they in fact care about the fate of children or are they more interested in the money they make?
Recent news tells us our elected trusted politicians are corrupt,and in it for the money rather than the good of the country.
So based on that, how can we trust the FC? Or any Govt appointed agency for that matter?
Fact is, we cant. We have gay people in Govt, pedophiles in senior positions, and Police who are too damn busy to do their jobs properly and restricted anyway by corruption at high levels.
If you approach a lawyer with a view to helping your child thru a crisis, do u really think that lawyer really cares about your situation? Or do you think that lawyer cares more about preparing the huge bill, knowing that even if he loses the case, the fee is the same?
Think about it. I think most average NZers would stick together on the subject of fair play and what is honest and decent and reasonable and justifiable.
The people who let this Country down are the the money makers…the Politicians and the lawyers..the people who really just pretend to be interested in social matters, but who are in fact more interested in attaining wealth at all costs.
Ask yourself..why would anyone want a Law degree if not to make money?
Ask yourself..why would anyone enter Politics if not to make money?
Why would anyone want to become a hard working doctor….to save lives? Why would anyone want to be a vet?
Our Politicians are crap, but we’ve got to elect someone who puts their hands up to grab the money and the perks. Limited choice really. The big problem in NZ in my view is that we do not have truly honest people willing to put their hands up for election.
I know this detracts from the subject matter, but is nevertheless related.
A good caring Govt would deal swiftly with the subject of child abuse, rather than pin the blame automatically on poor Dad. We can do better.
Comment by Morris — Tue 13th October 2009 @ 10:11 pm
I feel for you Sonny, but they make the rules so we have to work smarter within them. Did you ask what it meant if the child was made Ward of the Court? It does not automatically follow the child will be placed with CYFS, the court will still decide residence, the parents simply lose guardianship. Sometimes parents or close family retain custody. Is there a trusted family member you can put forward?
You can object to the appointment of C4C and have the FC direct a Counsel to Assist on Welfare & Best Interests be appointed so C4C can no longer argue these lines as she is just confined to simply relaying the child’s view. File a memo and ask for a conference to hear your complaint. In my opionion C4C wield too much power and their role should be divided between two lawyers. You stand a better chance when C4C can’t argue welfare and best interests.
Also the child’s views have to be taken into consideration by the Judge. Were these reflected?
In the end though, my dear friend Murray is right. The FC is an exclusive club for rich lawyers who get richer on the misery of others. Just take a look at the cars they drive to the FC every hearing day. I regret you are a man and a father who has been thrown into the FC grinder and your only role is to feed the child support machine with money that will of course never be spent on your children but to pay the army of 6000 people IRD employs.
I fear justice never will be delivered in this case as it is in mine or thousands of others. You and me mate are just two more fathers missing in action. Kia kaha!
Comment by Gerry — Tue 13th October 2009 @ 10:31 pm
Against all the odds I won. Despite all the lies and the worst deceit in the history of this country I won! I researched, talked to my sons teachers and his councillor and employed a Private Invesigator to help me prove that my ex stole money while we were married, had multiple affairs, and her partner was abusing my boy.
The strength of my argument and research was so strong we nver ended up in Court because my ex could nver go there. The lawyers made a fortune, but the Police knew they had been conned.
My ex was never prosecuted for the lies and the deceit, the stolen money, and her partner was never prosecuted for the abuse of my son. I might have succeded somewhat in rescuing my son from harms way but these bad people are still out there, seem to have immunity.
It seems that my son’s mother has immunity. If the charges were reversed, I would be in prison. The FC seems to think that because I am now a solo Dad, my son would be better off in the company of his mother, a thief, and her partner who has been confirmed as a child abuser.
Its so strange. I take my boy away away on holiday 3 times a year fishing. I buy him clothes and stuff and we love each other to bits. My ex has never taken my 12 yold on holiday in years.
Bias? Yes, it s there, and the IRD dont help in the subject of Child Support. I fund my son to very extent, his holidays, schooling, trips and I care for him most of the time.
Ex lives in a house, but does not care for our only son. Dismal really.
Comment by Morris — Tue 13th October 2009 @ 10:51 pm
I may have won my individual case albeit at great cost, but I have succeded in that my son might now be able to grow up to be successful…(not a lawyer).
My son now prefers to stay with me and I save for his UNI education.
I would just like to encourage others to stand up and fight against the corrupt system.
I might have won my case, but that doesn’t mean I will turn my back on other men in the same situation. I think we have to unite to present our views and the injustices to us us men. I aim to help. I know I can succeed.
Comment by Morris — Tue 13th October 2009 @ 11:15 pm
That is just wonderful.
Comment by julie — Tue 13th October 2009 @ 11:29 pm
Thanks for the comments.
Liked the way you worded your post Murray. Amazing how the FC can determine what’s best when they are so far off base with the truth and have no idea of the reality of each individual situation.
Yes Gerry we know all the ins and out, the father has been in this mess with the FC for 8 years. I’m the step mum and been in it for nearly as long.
In regards to the child, the choice was taken away for up to 6 years or placed in a CYF home where there can still be minimal contact. Those were the only two choices.
What I find so horrific is that the criminal acts are being committed by the FC and the so-called lawyers and psych writers.
What part of the ‘Child’s welfare is paramount’ is focused on when the child’s own words are ignored time and time again, until the kid is so sick of telling people that he starts to give up.
It’s not in the ‘child’s best interest’ to see him slowly become depressed, frustrated and totally at a loss as to what he can do to protect himself. Then he finds ways to survive in the abusive environment, by saying what the abuser wants to hear, just so he doesn’t get hit so often.
But as the oldest child said, it’s the emotional and mental abuse which is far worse, lasts longer and doesn’t leave marks.
How does one prove that?
Glad you won your case Morris, how long did you battle for?
Comment by sonnyking — Wed 14th October 2009 @ 12:36 am
Morris,
Hi,
The answers to all your questions are: Women’s Refuge.
Do not look any further. FC, Police etc work for them.
Failing to understand that is like looking for a black cat in a black room
when it is not even there.
— Women’s Refuge commissions a University ‘research’ on Police DVA intervention.
— The ‘research’ finds that the police are not doing their job.
— A newspapers publishes the key finding of the ‘research’ which is: the police are not doing their job
— Next day you read in the paper that the police admits that they have not done enough but they are in the process of setting special intervention teams. Inspector Greg has got his chance to be promoted.
— Interventions ensue. Protection orders are made. Women’s refuge gets more funding for the number of protection orders they engineered and more political power.
Win win situation for every one. Politicians are seen to be doing something to stump out ‘domestic violence’ They call it Family violence now (Annette King), judges, lawyers keep their salaries etc.
The truth is this.
Womens Refuge, FC, Cyfs are the triangle of violence in NZ.
DVA is a recipe for more violence even when honestly implemented.
and it is not. It is badly and poorly implemented.
I can tell you that in FC they now that they are creating more violence, they are the cause of many murders but no one has got the guts
to admit the failures from the inside. Earn the trust of a lawyer and he may tell you the bare truth.
Comment by tren Christchurch — Wed 14th October 2009 @ 11:11 am
What part of the country is this in?
I have some very special influence within CYFs for a certain part of the country. I can get a father friendly person to look into this case. If it is in the right region my contact can change the outcome. They will have to be convinced the child will be safe with the father. That is often not as simple as it sounds. However this person really is father friendly so you will definitely get the best out of a rotten system from this person. They can’t tell the FC what to do but they can work the system.
Tell me what region and if you are sure you can demonstrate the children will be safe in Dad’s day to day care then contact me directly.
Comment by Dave — Wed 14th October 2009 @ 3:13 pm
From the names of the lawyer and Judge I suspect Northland.
Comment by [email protected] — Wed 14th October 2009 @ 4:09 pm
Yes Allan you are correct.
Dave it is Northland, Dargaville to be exact, however the Care and Protection coordinator works from Whangarei and I think the CYF social worker works between both Dargaville and Whangarei offices.
This is all supposed to be happening within the next couple of weeks, but my partner has not signed anything as yet.
The child would definitely be safer with the father as for starters the child would be loved and looked after. There would be no emotional and physical abuse, which is what he is continually receiving from his mother.
The daughter is nearly 17 years of age and has lived with the father since she was 9 1/2 because of the abuse she received on a regular basis.
She has clearly stated over and over again what happened to her in her mother’s care.
The CYF file is vast and has people including Te Roopu Kimiora asking for an investigation. Calls and letters to CYF were not followed through or thoroughly.
If something can be done then yes, we will be pleased to make direct contact with you.
At present I do not trust anyone. I am so disgusted and literally sick to death of the continual blatancy of legal rubbish that is spilled from the mouths of those that sit there with their nice, sweet little smiles telling you what is going to happen to the child when they, the C&P coordinator and the CYF social worker hadn’t even met the child.
We even got told by the CFY social worker that the whole matter was the worst she’d seen.
I don’t know what she was referring to except that the child has become the product of his mother’s making like a little puppet and I truly believe the mother must be seriously mentally unwell to do what she has done to her own children.
The C4C would not state whether she believed her client, the child, or not and the child’s feelings and well being were forgotten, because they don’t believe the child and this even after the nearly 17 year old walked out in tears distraught that her brother was being taken away and stating very clearly that her mother abused her.
Comment by sonnyking — Wed 14th October 2009 @ 10:15 pm
OK that is another region but I know this person used to have contacts in Northland as well. Let me check they have the ability to even review the case first. If they can then I’ll organise a way for you to send me some further information privately.
I can relate to your unwillingness to trust anyone. Been there, done that and still don’t trust many people myself. I can give you the names of various people who have been around a long time and can vouch for me if you need that.
In regards to your case. The information about the 17 year old is crucial. I wish you had said that in the beginning. This makes things much easier from your point of view. (At least it would if the FC had a shred of decency).
Key questions:
What is age of younger child?
Is mother caring for any other children?
— To regular contributors: who do we have that could help in Northland?
We need to move quickly if possible —
Comment by Dave — Wed 14th October 2009 @ 10:47 pm
P.S. had another thought:
BEFORE he signs ANYTHING:
He should request a judical conference at court.
Under C of C act guidelines state that child should have relationship with both parents. Request conference for judge to explain to Dad how the options being presented to Dad are consistant with this guideline. Prior to the conference, ask that everything said in the conference be recorded and a transcript be provided. Be polite about it.
Tell them Dad will need to read over what was said and process it before signing off on options placed before him. Be humble but insistant that this is necessary.
Also do anything else that gives written proof of what options were placed in front of Dad.
This will work best if father is representing himself.
Get help from your local fathers group. You may need to talk to people in Auckland for best help available.
Comment by Dave — Wed 14th October 2009 @ 11:00 pm
Thanks for replying Dave.
The younger child is now 11 and no, his mother has no other children in her care.
The father and I have in our care, his daughter the nearly 17 year old, my youngest son 14 and we did have my oldest son in our care but he’s now an adult and fending for himself, and doing great.
The father’s son comes to us for access 3 weekends per month and we do have half the holidays.
If the mother wasn’t abusing the child, and had not taken him to all sorts of various institutes stating that there was something wrong with him, the father wouldn’t be applying for custody as the child would be fine and happy and would be in school.
BUT, the exact opposite has happened. The mother is abusing the child and I’m sure she is using him as a tool to fuel her hunger for attention, power over him or what ever other possible reason.
The father has already attended a judicial conference recently which is when he was informed that there may be a section 19 acted upon because of, what the FC deemed as ‘continually conflict’.
When the father asked what conflict he was told that it was because the mother and father can’t agree on what to do with the child, and that was basically the gist of what he got for why the child hadn’t been placed into his care.
That proves the FC do not believe the children, period.
Yes the father is self represented, I’m secretary, oh joy.
Seriously though, the amount of misconducts that happen behind closed doors that go against the ACTS are criminal.
If there can be some advance with this case, we are willing to try anything.
What I don’t understand is that the daughter has been saying the same thing for years, we have, and the son, but to no avail.
Comment by sonnyking — Thu 15th October 2009 @ 11:53 am
What does 11 yo say he wants?
This all sounds very typical. In the FC “best interests of the child” is defined as having a good relationship with the mother. Everything else is a ‘nice to have’ as far as the FC is concerned. Hence in this case, if the 11 yo lives with Dad then the primary concern of the FC is what is the consequences for the child’s relationship with mother. Probably mother will be seen for what she is and this will be bad for the relationship between 11 yo and mother.
Perhaps present it this way:
(a)
If 11 yo does not live with Dad at this age then child will most likely form negative view of his mother. If 11 yo lives with Dad while still young enough to be molded then Dad has fighting chance of getting 11 yo to maintain positive view of mother. I.e. it is really in mother’s long term interests that 11 yo live with Dad for the next few years.
(b)
Conflict argument is circular and self defeating. The only cause of conflict is mother’s obstruction to father being involved in child’s life. If father providing day to day care then mother is not in a position to exclude father. If mother tries to be obstructive it is of little consequence since most time father is doing the caring. Father not interested in excluding mother. Father wants to promote mother to child.
( c ) If child comes to serious harm after reports of abuse from mother and also documented history of abuse towards elder daughter. Yet FC kept 11yo with mother or placed in foster care rather than in proven safe home with father then FC will be seen to have failed in it’s duty of care. FC needs to place 11 yo with father to ensure physical safety and continued relationships with sister and family first. Other considerations are secondary.
Comment by Dave — Thu 15th October 2009 @ 6:53 pm
I suspect there is more to all this “conflict” than you have explained. The problem with this one is that it is used by the FC to justify any decision it wants to justify. That always means excluding or minimizing father.
Call me a pessimist but I am assuming social workers comment meant that this is worse case of parental conflict seen. That is very bad news for you. Worth checking that assumption out. Are mother and father fighting like cats and dogs?
Get some help from your local father’s group about that one. They will have to go into some of the detail with you.
I haven’t heard back from my contact yet but I don’t want to get your hopes up because it is not within their region. Plus it is not clear to me how much involvement CYFS has in your case.
Comment by Dave — Thu 15th October 2009 @ 7:01 pm
Thanks for the info Dave.
The 11 yo has been stating that he wants to live with the father since he was 5. But unfortunately he has also learnt survival tactics and will often say what his mother wants to hear to prevent being bashed or she has filled him with Ritalin to the extent of him being so off his face that he does everything in slow motion and cannot comprehend what is happening.
At our home he is just a regular little boy that laughs, plays, yells, cries, argues the point, annoys his sister and brothers and is a happy kid that doesn’t fear things.
The father doesn’t have any contact with the mother, that is why we are at a loss in regards to the ‘conflict’ excuse the FC put forward.
I questioned the C4C at the Care & Protection meeting as to why the father hadn’t been given day to day care of the child and she answered it was because of the last big Court hearing.
That remark was just a cop out remark as the hearing she was referring to was several years ago and it was because the mother had put in an application to take the daughter back, this was after she had kicked her out.
The FC ruled for the father and it was finished.
At the time the father spoke to the C4C about what the son had been saying and she told the father very clearly that she was not lawyer for the son only the daughter and the son was another matter.
Comment by sonnyking — Fri 16th October 2009 @ 10:09 am
Just a note, the father doesn’t have contact with the mother for the reason that the mother refused any contact with the father in the fore mentioned hearing, stating that the father should be dead and that would solve her problem as he was taking her kids away from her.
This was the answer to the question asked by the father ‘Will you work together with me for the benefit of the kids?’
Of course this comment was obviously not bad enough for the FC to take into consideration.
Comment by sonnyking — Fri 16th October 2009 @ 10:19 am
I talked to my contact but he can’t review this case. He sent me a list of all the usual official channels one is supposed to be able to go to if one has an issue with the process. (Waste of time IMHO).
Comment by Dave — Thu 22nd October 2009 @ 4:25 pm
That’s okay Dave.
Thank-you for trying anyway.
I’ve come to the sad conclusion that children are not paramount in the eyes of the FC.
And as far as those females that cause most of the problems, they need their heads read or have worse done to them than they do to the children.
I am still, after all the years of witnessing what my partner’s kids have and are still going through, baffled at how a mother could do what my partner’s ex has done.
Comment by sonnyking — Thu 22nd October 2009 @ 7:05 pm
Welcome to the club.
My personal view is that:
(a) People do nasty things to other people. They always have and they always will.
(b) We the public, recognise this and so we put in place laws and institutions to protect the most volnerable. I.e. Children.
(c) In the vast majority of cases the mother is using the children as a way to be nasty towards her ex. This is by definition, a form of child abuse and ultimately the child suffers in some way.
(d) We turn to the laws and institutions we created for such purposes.
(e) Rather than serve the long term interests of the child, these laws and institutions tacitly encourge this abusive behaviour by female parents. They make the consequences for the child worse.
So I don’t really blame mothers who behave this way. Yes they cause misery. They are human beings. They have failed in one of life’s most important aspects. Some humans fail. It’s not new.
In my view the real failure is the institutions we put in place to protect children from the failings of humans that go too far. In my view these NZ institutions are an abject failure.
I am a student of history. Historically, institutions with the behaviour and record of the institutions I describe above are either peacefully reformed or else they are violently abolished.
What it takes is for people to loose tolerance for the failings of those institutions. In my view that comes from exposing the outcomes for the children.
Comment by Dave — Thu 22nd October 2009 @ 8:17 pm
Agreed and that is why I’m am for the FC becoming open to the public and the so-called closed doors accessible for viewing.
The FC would then have to comply with the Acts which they conveniently undermine everyday by going over, under, around, but never through correctly. If they did the 1000’s of children wouldn’t be the victims they are, and if they did the fathers would be seen as parents, not just an abusive fixture from which to pin every possible fault on.
My ex of 18 years and I are best friends, will always be and our children have always come first. My partner thinks of my ex as a brother, my ex has supported my partner and our plight in the FC, yet the FC still think that my partner is the one causing problems.
We never had the need to step into a FC, our children knew and still know, at 14 and 20, that they are the most important thing in our lives.
The problem with my partner’s ex is that she doesn’t feel or do, for whatever reason, the easiest thing in the world for her kids, and that is to just love them, what could be easier.
How do you abuse something so violently that you love unconditionally?
Comment by sonnyking — Tue 27th October 2009 @ 9:03 am
Hi guys i stumbled across this website after trying to find some information to help my cousin who is currently in the process of fighting cyfs to regain custody of two of his children who were wrongfully taken from him and i wanted to let you know that i am thoroughly impressed with the strength of conviction for your desires to protect your children. Please keep fighting i just wish that our government agencies werent so corrupt that we even had the issue of it being assumed that the mother is the best care giver, even i know that sometimes the father is actually the best carer in some cases.
Please keep fighting
Comment by amy — Wed 11th November 2009 @ 10:44 pm
They say that cause it is actually them who want power over the men… or for that power to continue.
Comment by Scott B — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 8:46 pm
Omg were do thes cyfs get of. through crim court Not guilty .fgc after 3 years of ther hell. now thay make false documents for the judge . we hav witnesses to this (purposly left of )were are having another baby and i cant even help my wife with our children. I have had enough !!! court sistim is mor of a joke than a stand up comedian .help please . cant liv another day in this bs country!!
Comment by simon — Sat 26th November 2011 @ 11:33 am