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

Family Court Changes, Unhappy lawyers

Filed under: General — allan harvey @ 5:57 pm Thu 2nd August 2012

Warring parents will be encouraged to sort out custody disputes and other matters without lawyers, under a shake-up of the Family Court.

Justice minister Judith Collins announced a series of reforms today which include introducing a Family Disputes Resolution (FDR) service.

Families must go through this system to sort out private parenting matters, such as school holiday care on contact arrangements, before applying to the court.

The FDR service will cost $780 (excluding GST) – which Collins says is cheaper than hiring lawyers. If this unsuccessful, parents can make an application to court.

Automatic access to pre-court free counselling will be axed – but could be granted by a judge. Private providers, approved by the justice ministry, will staff the FDR.

Collins said the proposals will minimise the harmful impact conflict has on children. It will reduce court applications by 4000 and see 2000 fewer children going to court each year. She estimates it will save $70m over four years. Parents who are eligible will still be entitled to legal aid.

The government also proposes simplifying court processes. Three new ”tracks” will be introduced. A ”fast track” will deal with urgent applications such as allegations of domestic violence and protection of children.

A ”simple track” will deal with single issues like contact arrangements for children. Parties will represent themselves without the need for a lawyer.

Under the ”standard track” the court will deal with more serious issues such as an application for day to day care or permission to take children to live overseas. Parties will represent themselves for most of this process. However, if the dispute is not resolved the case moves to a formal hearing with lawyers present.

Affidavits will also now take a standardised questionnaire form.

The reforms also aim to crack down on repeat applications. In 2010-11 there were 26, 281 Care of Children Act applications – involving just 8678 families. Under the proposals, parties must get the permission of a judge to commence new proceedings where an order has been made in the last two years.

Collins said the overhaul is the first significant changes since the Family Court was established in 1981. The Family Court Reform Bill will be introduced to Parliament later this year. It will also include:

* increasing the penalty for breaching a protection order from two years to three years imprisonment;

* improving domestic violence programmes;

* extending the definition of domestic violence in law to include economic abuse. This includes restricting access to money, extorting or spending the victim’s money or preventing someone from working outside the home;
* makes parenting information courses mandatory.


  1. The lawyers will do just fine; don’t loose any sleep, guys.

    If restricting access to money AND/OR spending the victim’s money is now domestic violence, pretty much everyone is vulnerable. Unless you qualify for the pussy pass, of course!

    Typical radical feminist “heads I win, tails you loose” family policy if you ask me.

    Comment by JohnPotter — Thu 2nd August 2012 @ 6:24 pm

  2. Guys … comments like the ‘pussy-pass’ do not do you any justice – the case Judith Collins referred to today where one party has been utterly destroyed in the Family Court by another is a kiwi mother who has been economically abused to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars over a period of over 3 years by the wealthy father of her child who is not even a kiwi … this one cuts both ways and while there may be judges who are biased against men, there are then also those biased against women – but it is not about men VS women – it is about the welfare of the children – I would hope that strikes a chord.

    Comment by Anon — Thu 2nd August 2012 @ 6:42 pm

  3. Anon,
    Good grief! Where have you been for the past 40 years?
    Pussy pass is our Non feminist PC term.
    You say using it doesn’t do us any justice.
    What a terrible hoot! We use it to highlight anti-male injustice.
    You can’t shut us up with your attempt to shame us for using our language.
    Why bother?
    I think you need to get out and speak to a lot of men.
    Then you’ll find there’s ample good reason to use the term pussy pass.

    Re: The mom who you say was “utterly destroyed” –
    Oh please! Spare us the uncorroborated emotive BS.
    We weren’t born yesterday.
    The woman (if any such even exists) hasn’t been destroyed at all – she’s alive, or else where is your link to her obituary? Duh.

    So it isn’t about men Vs women, but it’s about the welfare of the children huh?
    I reckon you’re condescending to think we didn’t get that point a


    time ago.
    Please go make the point loud and clear to NZ feminists and all they’ve tainted with their warped ideology these past decades though. Let us know the results too.

    Comment by Skeptic — Thu 2nd August 2012 @ 8:18 pm

  4. So if I understand this, if I take any control over *her* money, this is economic abuse.
    And if I withhold any of *my* money, that too is economic abuse.
    Sounds like (from *her* persective) ‘what’s mine is mine, and what’s your’s is mine’.
    Bring it on. My next partner is inheriting half of my $300,000 debt.

    Comment by I'm Broke — Thu 2nd August 2012 @ 8:47 pm

  5. #2..a woman economically abused over a 3 year period? thats a fucken novelty..women dont mind shafting their X’s out of 1000’s of $$ but men are suppose to care when it happens to a female..couldnt have happened to a nicer person..cry me a river

    Comment by Ford — Thu 2nd August 2012 @ 9:44 pm

  6. Hi all

    Tune in to News Talk ZB.

    One of the topic is family court reform If you are interested

    Comment by Shinhee Yi — Thu 2nd August 2012 @ 10:01 pm

  7. Real law reform will happen when people go to jail for perjury and false accusations. Real law reform will happen when the definition of domestic violence admits that women can and do hit men, and that they should be put in jail for it.

    Anon’s comment was amusing. It’s all about the welfare of the children, but her complaint is about the woman being “destroyed” (really?) due to kiwi woman (racist or just sexist?) not being funded over three years by her non kiwi partner. And if I look in the sky I will see the clouds have formed the word “gullible”.

    The family court will treat women unfairly. That’s because they are incompetent ideologs. However men treated badly through the family court system will outnumber the women 100:1 or more.

    And mistreating the father is, ultimately, bad for the children too.

    Comment by blueface — Fri 3rd August 2012 @ 1:33 am

  8. #2 I’ll concede that my use of the term “pussy pass” is intellectually lazy, and unnecessarily offensive.

    But it certainly doesn’t “cut both ways” as you suggest; I’ve never seen any evidence of a Family Court Judge who is biased against women.

    In any case, the Judges are only part of the problem – gender discrimination pervades the entire family law system. The outcomes speak for themselves.

    Mark my words: the new crime of economic abuse will turn out to be “overwhelmingly perpetrated by men”, just as all the other varieties of domestic violence supposedly are.

    Comment by JohnPotter — Fri 3rd August 2012 @ 10:13 am

  9. Intresting moves by the government on the family court, but the obvious exclusions to any changes are just so loud in their exclusion! it’s madness
    1 consequence for false aqusations (on both the applicant and also on the lawyers who are clearly advising their clients to make these)
    2 equity in custody as a right. Or as I thought the justice system was ment to dictate, “innocent until proved guilty”

    Below is the email I have sent to my member of parilment who has sent this on to Judith Collins

    I believe the biggest issue is that of the ability for one party (in this case my ex wife) to be able to make any accusations they wish with out any consequence. 

    This ability to make accusations such as violence towards the spouse and child (regardless of their validity) puts the receiving parent on the back foot and in this case I found myself fighting crazy allegations with money I don’t have.

    This creates an imbalance in proceedings and also gives the parent making the allegations all the power and also sadly all the control over the child, which in my case has lead to no contact for a period of time and now after a year and a half of battling only limited contact with my son.

    My recommendations are as follows

    1. A psychologist report from the very start. (this report will expose any deception from the start and give the court some grounds to behave fairly to both parents)

    2. Introduce consequence for false statements and false accusations (in my case I have defended myself from accusations of violence and now child abuse, both have been accepted as not true by the court, however I sill have lost well over a year of time with my son and have gone through a living hell as a result)

    3. Restrict the ability of the judge from making orders that are financially difficult for parents to follow.

    4. Give the mediation process some teeth (in my case my ex wife just delays every meeting she can and when we reach any consensus she changes her mind at the next session, this process is well understood by many people I know, as being a legitimate tactic for the parent holding all the power) and in my case I have no negotiating power and my ex wife has it all. If this mediator had some teeth to be able to demand meetings are in reasonable time and outcomes at each mediation withheld then the family courts would see a lot less court time.

    Comment by Jamie — Fri 3rd August 2012 @ 11:16 am

  10. Actually, the number of allegations in family court will likely increase, not just, John, because of this new definition of economic abuse, but because of the incentive to allege abuse.
    Economic abuse will be deemed domestic violence (and you’re right that men will no doubt be found perpetual abusers), but – and this is the critical factor – it can justify an urgent application, an application for a protection order, which will see poor old men assigned to no / reduced / supervised contact only, whist the rest of the process can then be dragged out for the usual years; and women of course get a fee-free application into family court.
    That’s going to be the real heartache for men – women will have a financial incentive to play the domestic violence card, and economic abuse is of course a ‘bruise free’ abuse, which won’t require a doctor to assess physical damage, nor a pschologist to determine evidential psychological damage.
    And all that will provide extra fodder for women’s refuges to pursue even more relentlessly their stated mission to ‘stamp out’male violance. With a legal definition behind them, they can seek funding to stamp out this new evil.

    On a complete aside, I for one will now expect my partner to contribute fully and equally financially to our relationship, in precisely the same way feminism demands men contribute equally to housework.

    Comment by You're Figgin'Kiddin! — Fri 3rd August 2012 @ 5:59 pm

  11. How the hell can I defend ‘economic abuse’?
    I earn the pay packet (about $36,000 a year). My wife is on a sickness benefit.
    Do I hand the whole damn lot over to her? Do I go halves?
    Do I sit and try to budget with here? Agree all spending? Who decides if we can’t agree? If I exercise the casting vote, is that ‘çontrol’. Must I let her decide?
    What if she wants to spend $100 on lotto, and I disagree?
    She buys woman’s day, puzzle mags, and smokes. I do none of these. Is that equitable? What if I say no to her spending the money I earn on these.
    Forget about domestic violence. Think of those bloody lawyers who’ll sit and argue this all the way through family court.

    Comment by Peter — Fri 3rd August 2012 @ 6:09 pm

  12. Hey Peter,
    Just a heads up from those of us involved.
    You earn a salary, Your wife is on a sickness benefit.
    Oh Dear my colleagues at WINZ have a fraud team who may come looking for you both.
    That isn’t economic abuse, that’s more like pay up or we charge you both with fraud and see what the judge decides. If you can pay the benefit fraudulenty collected (even if you had no knowledge of it, but you do so you are almost certainly to be found guilty) then WINZ may not take the matter to Court and you avoid a fraud conviction which is never good for getting loans or mortgages. If not then my WINZ colleagues are lacking in understanding of “circumstances”, Paula Bennet has very clear instructions to them these days.
    We at IRD share information with WINZ and I think you could expect a call rather soon.
    Yours civilly.

    Comment by Ms IRD Officer — Fri 3rd August 2012 @ 6:17 pm

  13. On further reflection of the new structure I belive the mediated format will only delay the inedible which will eventually be court, so this new structure will just extend men’s agony
    Rearranging the deck chairs

    Comment by Jamie — Fri 3rd August 2012 @ 6:21 pm

  14. Sorry Ms IRD. I meant ‘was’

    Comment by Peter — Fri 3rd August 2012 @ 6:46 pm

  15. Your first mistake is in thinking those in government think like you. They do not.

    My rates went up again this year, as they have every year. They have increased 5-fold in 10 years. So have all my neighbors. Everyone is angry about it. If I really wanted to stop this, I could run for council on a policy of no more spending/no more rates rises. So emotive is this topic that I think I could easily win a position on council.

    But think about this.

    I could go to all the trouble of getting on council, work close to full-time for 3 years for a dubious result, and if successful, save myself a few hundred dollars a year. And if I succeeded, all those who sat on their arses doing nothing benefit just as much as I do who took all the risk and did all the work. So why would I bother? It is far more economic to pay up and forget about it.

    So this leaves a peculiar kind of individual who does run for office. You can be sure his interests are not aligned with yours – the mere fact he is running for office makes him different. Clearly he does not care about wasting your/public money. If he is not bothered about squandering your resources, you can be sure he doesn’t care about your family either.

    As much as I support mens issues and rights, government will never deliver them. They are the very ones who have taken them away. Like the employee who keeps harping on about why he deserves a rise, we are all left wondering why he just doesn’t go elsewhere if he is that deserving. We men will get nothing begging from government, but we have a better chance if we simply vacate the premises. That is what MGTOW is all about. Earn as little as you can to live well. Pay the least amount in taxes as you can. Learn to do more for yourselves. Do not marry, cohabit or have children. Go abroad.

    I recall certain people of conscience saying they would never visit countries where apartheid was being practised, in order that their tourist dollar did not end up supporting a system of government abhorrent to them. I do not know how effective this was, but I share the same sentiment now – only I no longer have to travel to put it into practise.

    Comment by rc — Fri 3rd August 2012 @ 6:59 pm

  16. It is obvious that “economic” abuse targets mainly males. Extending protection order to three years? Bingo… males on receiving end, condidering that most protection orders are granted against males and sometimes because former partner threaten to “put his sticky fingers on the new curtains” The real issue is that 50% custody should be altomatically available of right to any parent provided there is no evidence they have been a bad parent. This would solve the majority of disputes and take the wind from womens’ sails who too ofter claim children as their own “property”. Why on earth there isn’t coherant men’s group who can articulate genuine grevience’s and get a decent audience is an absolute tradegy. Maybe New Zealand needs a functioning Families Need Father’s branch here to support men and provide some pressure group muscle which seems to be non existant at present.
    These “reforms” looks like guys being sold down the river again

    Comment by John — Sat 4th August 2012 @ 2:00 pm

  17. John, time to catch up.
    Protection Orders are “to death us do depart”. they have a lifetime duration.
    The extension to 3 years is the time you spend in jail for a breach of an order.
    At a cost of about $80,000 a year timres 3 years thats a quarter of a million that all the rest of us need to pay for board and lodgings. Oh and during that time that bloke won’t be able to pay any Child Support so the rest of us carry his ex and kids for the 3 years on a DPB with no benefit recovery from that miscreant and add another few thousand or 10,00 or so or maybe 100,000 if he chooses a jury trial and it all rounds out at about $350,000 to $400,000 of taxpayer support for this feminist revenge. And guess what we all pay it, and the kids suffer from no daddy and the only party to benefit is mum.
    What nonsense you talk about the UK as well John. FNF or Fathers 4 Justice or lots of other smaller groups. They are a disunited as we are here. Unfortunately men and fathers groups have shown ourselves unable to organise a decent piss-up in a brewery all over the world.

    Comment by Rogered — Sat 4th August 2012 @ 4:07 pm



    Comment by dad4justice — Sat 4th August 2012 @ 6:03 pm

  19. In principal, I consider it a positive move that parents are required to attend parenting after separation courses before they can take their case to family disputes resolution.

    However, these services will only be as good as the people who run them. If the man haters are put in charge, this will make things worse, not better.

    Overall, the reforms are extremely disappointing.

    Comment by Pete — Sun 5th August 2012 @ 8:17 am

  20. The changes terrify me. I fear there will be more incentive for my ex to torture me again because her costs will be finite.
    Matters such as holidays and week ends with the kids are deemed to warrant a change to the system.
    I copped an admin review last wek. Back assessment ($12k) plus have to pay and extra $400 per month (on top of exsiting assessment). Hearing was 20 mins.
    Economically i have already been brought to my knees.
    To appeal the decision i must file in family court, and to have any serious chance of winning, hire a lawyer (probable cost is about 8-10k). If i lose, still have IRD debt and risk having costs awarded against me.
    Some system. No wonder men top themselves.

    Comment by Shafted — Mon 6th August 2012 @ 2:00 pm

  21. Reply to Shafted #

    Or they flee from N.Z to another Men/Father friendly country…And begin a new Life again…

    Comment by johndutchie — Mon 6th August 2012 @ 3:52 pm

  22. Hi John,
    have read your posts.
    The whole system makes you want to scream.
    She obtained a preotection order against me some years ago (fictitious assault charge) and threatens me with the police every time i dare to merely disagree with her.
    Have the contact with the children for 5/14 days per fortnight but overnight for only 2. Therefore i do not meet any thresholds for shared care.
    If i want a variation in parenting order=$$$$$.
    If i want to challenge admin review=$$$$$$
    Meantime, mummy gets to holiday with kids and remind them that they cant have tennis lessons because daddy is a tight arse.
    Weekends at daddys are pretty boring due to a lack of funds.
    Go figure

    Comment by Shafted — Mon 6th August 2012 @ 4:06 pm

  23. Hi everyone I am still waiting a day in court regarding custody of my child I have defended myself against violence to my x and child abuse (all as I’m sure will understand untrue) and have won. However still only a very small amount of time with my child, the next step is court led mediation, anyone got experance with these can you suggest tactics?

    Comment by Jamie — Mon 6th August 2012 @ 4:15 pm

  24. Jamie ( 9 ) above – welcome to the club mate – this is the scam being run by family court lawyers – destroy your credibility, and your reputation and get violence and protection orders in place at every opportunity – subject you to enormous provocation, and lies without consequence giving the female total control over your life and your money. I have spent ten years and hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to fight this corrupt system and I have not had one success – nothing – men are doomed, so dont waste a cent trying.

    Walk away from your kids, leave the country and start up a new life somewhere else – because trust me the NZ system – regardless of any changes being made will destroy you.

    Yes the focus is all on persecuting and punishing the father – again. As you rightly state and it was my first reaction when I read the news about changes being made to the family court system – where are the penalties for making false statements, swearing false affidavits and giving false evidence – like you, I have defended every single allegation – at huge cost to me and yet there has been NO consequence or punishment of the female or lawyers for making and submitting false evidence.

    Fortunately I have successfully prevented every attempt to have violence and protection orders against me – but its been traumatic and costly.

    Response to Shafted – as I have stated above, the system is oppressive and completely unworkable for a man, father – especially after you have ben raped of any money you once had in divorce settlements – no father, man will ever have the resources to defend, or take action against this corrupt system – I have spent the money on every single avenue – supported by my new wife or ten years and we have had NOT ONE WIN out of any of it.

    And still the shit keeps coming, we still have to receive a child for visits who has been brainwashed and destroyed by a bitter and twisted gold digging bitch – and nothing ever happens to her. Nothing. Two psychological reports on her behaviour and how it has destroyed the child – and this system puts the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff – knowing the child has been and continues to be damaged forever. The latest changes will DO NOTHING to address or stop the primary concerns. NOTHING.

    All they are focused on is persecuting the father more – increasing penalties, opening the door to more opportunities to persecute you and control you.

    The latest insult to my family , was IRD walking onto our property – while we were away from the property, having a holiday with the effected child, and stole not only my vehicle but that of my wifes, legalised extortion – because I have been protesting the maximum child support payments demanded of me – they take no notice of filed income statements which show I no longer have the high salary, but prefer to take the word of a bitch I have not lived with for ten years. They allow her to use the child to spy on our home and use that evidence to suggest I can pay more. The system is so corrupt its enough to drive you insane.

    I was in the police in this country for 11 years, ran successful businesses here and abroad and I have never been involved in a system so corrupt, so oppressive, so discriminating in its processes.

    I have spoken to the Human rights commission – hoping ( silly me ) that they would investigate this corrupt system – the response is, they get lots of complaints about the IRD child support system, but they chose NOT TO INVESTIGATE – so you have the government and its offices committing some of the worst breaches of your human rights, discriminating against you with impunity and you have NO chance to hold them to account. And the very organisation set up to investigate these concerns refuses to do so.!!!!!!!

    If I had my time over again, sadly I would have walked away from my kids and moved overseas – the system has done nothing to promote quality time with my child, and is singularly focused on taking every last cent you have – including stealing your assets and selling them to pay maximums in child support………to the mother.

    I have a new wife and child of ten years and that means nothing to them – my ex gets more per week from me than my own new family – work that one out.

    And stealing my wifes car, the family vehicle, and taking my truck which the kids have grown up with, has done nothing but cause more stress on my kids and family.

    My wifes vehicle was returned – when I raised hell about it. Was there any apology – NOTHING.

    Good luck – dont waste a cent in family court. Its a complete sham as is the IRD review system – they will NEVER turn over a previous decision, and no decision will ever go in your favor.


    Comment by hornet — Mon 6th August 2012 @ 4:38 pm

  25. Yep,
    The court led mediation is obviously in the family court and presided over by a judge.
    They tend to advise you of the legal position (if one of you is being stubborn), i.e. what the various options are. Yu can both have lawyers there and the judge may (if not already done) order that a lawyer for child is appointed. I did not have a lawyer because the fact is, you do not have to agree. You are in control.
    It is relatively informal. Nothing said in mediation can be used against either party in later court hearings (if there are any).
    if you reach agreement and are happy with it, ask the judge to issue orders by consent. That means that the agreement becomes binding on either party and enforceable by the court.
    Just decide in your mind what you want beforehand. You know your ex better than anyone and will therefore know what is the best way to get the outcome you want.
    In mediation, i asked for a lot more than i was prepared to settle on so that she would negotiate me down to the position i wanted.
    Be careful not to consent to any financial arrangements as these will come back and bite you later if she applies for administrative review of child support in later years.
    Do not volunteer any information unless it helps you. For example-don’t say “the kids will be sleeping on the couch until i can afford a bed” as she will be able to ask you in court (should you go to hearing) what sleeping arrangements you have for the kids, even though she knows the answer.
    It is a relatively hamless process. Good luck sir. Tough times-most of us have been through it!

    Comment by Shafted — Mon 6th August 2012 @ 4:42 pm

  26. Jeepers Hornet. Sounds like my situation.
    Kids come to the house. Text and email mum every second of the day.She can lie and twist absolutely everything i say, and lie about her own finances and there is absolutely no consequence
    Children are brainwashed that i am a loser who does not care for them and who runied mums life.
    I have (in the past) been arrested, sent to anger management, denied access to the kids, had supervised access to the kids etc etc and all at $$$$$$$$ to me.
    In family court i proved that she had punched me in the face on occasion and the judge described that as offending ” at the lower end of the scale” I wonder what would have happened if i had king hit her in the face?

    Comment by Shafted — Mon 6th August 2012 @ 5:07 pm

  27. Thanks for the advice “shafted” just one question re one of your statements ‘Be careful not to consent to any financial arrangements as these will come back and bite you later if she applies for administrative review of child support in later years.’
    Could you give me an example of how this could bit me later as I am also facing an IRD review right now

    Comment by Jamie — Mon 6th August 2012 @ 5:23 pm

  28. shafted and hornet..the lengths some(most)females will go to,to have the final controlling say

    Comment by Ford — Mon 6th August 2012 @ 8:27 pm

  29. Ird review is a process whereby you are invited to provide financial information to the review officer.
    She can seek extra $ based on any of eight grounds. See child support act.
    The process, in my opinion is a kangaroo court.They have made up their minds that you are poked before you walk in the rrom. In the event that you do not like their findings your only recourse is appeal to the family court ($$$$$$). Which IRD office will you be in?
    I suggest that you take a support person (not a lawyer) along. At least then, when you appeal it you will have file notes made by somebody independent of you.
    I am in the process of appealing now. Not pleasant and probably a waste of money.
    Example of financial stuff (at mediation)is agreeing that the kids go to a certain school and then finding out she wants you to pay the whole lot. If you do agree on any such thing you must specifically state in your written agreement with the mother what you will and will not pay for.
    Good luck

    Comment by Shafted — Tue 7th August 2012 @ 8:49 am

  30. Discrimination, bias, oppressive, breaches several human rights – that is my personal experience, and my view will never change. It is run by women, for women, and is directly aimed at making men suffer. I have no other description for it.

    1. I have not been invited to any of the review meetings – my ex got sit down meetings, a coffee or three and every personal favor imaginable – I got a phone call. I would have got more response and acknowledgement from the grass on my lawn had I bothered to talk to it.

    2. They take the word of a bitch I left ten years ago, over actual financial accounts and income. They allow her to use a child to spy on my new life with a wife and child of ten years, distressing the kid even more, but this is acceptable because its the mother using the child to her own gain.

    3. I have been told by IRD staff that the reviews NEVER get overturned, so the first one, which is always biased towards the father will remain in place, until you can find the money and time to fight it. So what is the point in offering a review process if decisions will never be overturned – the system is a complete sham.

    4. After the first review period determination ended, I received a letter detailing my payments based on my INCOME for that year ended. I make payments of the amounts they requested, I had no problem with this, because the amount was based on my income and this was fair at the time, six months later the ex complains, they invite her into there office, review the decision based on my assets, not on income, and demand maximums out of me, and penalise me for the six months of arrears – based soley on her word – even after paying what they told me to, I still get back payments demanded of me with huge penalties thrown in – figure that one out.

    5. Direct discrimination against fathers – They refuse to acknowledge that I am currently a full time dad to my child while my wife is working. They refuse point blank to acknowledge this in any way, demanding I get a job so that I pay her maximums in child support. If a woman was treated like this, there would be hell to pay. But as father and as a male we apparently are not allowed to be full time parents to out kids.

    6. The ex demands that the child attends a private school at high cost – even when the psychological reports on the mothers damaging behaviour state such a schooling environment is detrimental to the child. Again we have direct discrimination against fathers – so normal married families are allowed to remove children from these high cost schools when times are tough = but not separated parents – more discrimination – as a divorced father I have to pay these costs even when I have lost my high salary and income.

    7. I am sick to the core of this disfunctional system – it is not fair or reasonable – I thought child support payments were based on income – not on assets you may have left after divorce – assets she has already been paid out half of. So again we have more direct discrimination – and a hahaha if you dont like it take us to court at your costs to prove otherwise – and thats where this system is oppressive – men dont have the time of the money after spending most of what they have after divorce defending there reputations, fighting off false allegations of violence, and all the usual tricks the lawyers use to keep the conflict alive and well. So you waste your life in court just trying to see you kids, huge costs to you after divorce and then you are expected to take a government department to court because you are guilty until you prove otherwise. based on the word of a lying bitch you have proven to be a liar time and time again. And while this is all going on she is still making it hard for you to have peaceful quality time with your own child – And they wonder why men go off the deep end. this system is corrupt to the core, it is disgusting . And all I see in the latest round of changes is to increase the penalties against men, and open up more areas when you can be labelled and tagged for domestic violence.

    They have not addressed the cause of most mens anguish, the core of the problem is stopping parents who make false allegations and who make it hard for fathers to have quality time with there kids – this is the issue and what have they done to address this provocation, NOTHING – the legal profession dont want to see these conflicts end, because its worth too much money to them.

    And sadly the child support industry is also a great earner for the govt so all they want to do it look at every way they can take more from you, even seizing assets if you fail to meet there unrealistic demands.

    NZ is a poor country now, we used to have great industry here and good employment, most of which has left or established itself overseas, so now we are being raped by politicians who have no clever ideas how to pay off debt, or grow industry again, so all they can come up with is to look at new ways of taxing us all more and more…… every aspect of our lives……..

    Comment by hornet — Tue 7th August 2012 @ 1:40 pm

  31. It is perversely ‘nice’ to know that i am not the only one to have been through this shit.
    It is never ending.
    She destroyed my reputation socially (went to women’s refuge after a none assault)
    She would not even give me my clothes after i left the family home.
    Review officer advisd me that my income is relevant to admin review but hers is not.
    She lied in admin review and this is an offenc under the act. IRD informs me that this is not their concern and i should engage a lawyer to look into it. Have these cretins got any comprehension of the fact that we have been made destitiute?
    I am genuinely frightened of what she will do next. Every time i think there is no other pain that can be inflicted she gets creative and WHAM.
    Why is it that on breakup, we are supposed to adjust our (previously) comfortable lifestyles to that of the impoverished, yet she is actually now better off than before.
    Why does she get to choose to continue to live in her mansion and i have to adjust my coat according to my cloth.
    Complained that kids saw me naked. I don’t normally shower in a suit! I am like Hornet. At thre end of my tether. Choices suck-fold and pay what you can’t afford or fight it and pay a lawyer.
    In the meantime she is rubbing her hands together waiting for 010413 for the next admin review.
    No wonder people take off and abandon their kids. There is no joy in this. Just trying to retain some sort of relationship with children that are constantly told that you are an uncaring prick.
    Relate to Hornet and the kids spying on him. Mine are constantly looking around my place and monitoring every facet of my behaviour etc etc.
    Ready to scream!!!!!!!!

    Comment by Shafted — Tue 7th August 2012 @ 1:57 pm

  32. Jame and hornet. Regarding judge led mediation…
    Yes, it’s run by a judge. Remember a judge is NOT a professional mediator and they have been known to act inappropiately. Take someone with you, a lay person or a Mackenzie friend as you may need an independent witness to highlight what the judge says. In my case, judge de Jong acted extremely unprofessionally and would not even listen to why I wanted the kids more in my care. Without asking my ex he said, ‘now that clearly isn’t going to happen’. Sorry, I thought he was the mediator! And be careful with slimy lawyers who try to suggest in a hearing that the mediation failure was your fault.

    My personal advise to anyone who wants mediation… Go to a professional mediator. They will usually not want lawyers present as they do not want an adverbial atmosphere. It’s worth the money.

    Comment by JS — Tue 7th August 2012 @ 3:32 pm

  33. Thanks again for your advice, the scary thing is (as hornet mentions) I am getting a phone call for my IRD review, so suppose my x is getting that cup of tea…

    the only thing that is keeping me sane is the fact if i didn’t do this and I mean keep fighting in the family court, My boy would grow up without his father.

    there seams to be a few sites and groups fighting for the same obvious stuff, and it is very clear in my mind that a justice system without the presumption of Innocence until proven guilty or “Shared care as a right” and “consequence for false statements made to the court”.

    so my question is why when this is so simple how has this not changed?

    can the groups unite to fight this?

    I have met with my local MP and now intend to met with more, the mister of justice received my recommendations in my fist blog “above”, and I would encourage as many of you as possible to also me with your MP and request an audience with The Minister of Justice.

    I also have read that great piece by Rodney Hide, do we know were he is now as he could be a great advocate.

    Comment by Jamie — Tue 7th August 2012 @ 3:49 pm

  34. Reply to all

    As anyone at ‘Menz issues’ such as Hans Laven/John Potter ever thought to approach ‘Rodney Hide’ and being him on board as a spokesmen for Fathers rights in N.Z…..

    John Dutchie… Free at long last from the cesspit called feminist N.Z

    Comment by johndutchie — Tue 7th August 2012 @ 4:02 pm

  35. #32 JS. I think the Family Court has done away with Judge led mediation. I believe it is now a Lawyer led mediation. No doubt with the recent changes, someone will have to pay for it.

    Comment by golfa — Tue 7th August 2012 @ 4:46 pm

  36. In addition to those groups there is Pauls-News and NZFVL. Both “Hidden”!

    From my experience ANY MP will do or say nothing that may affect their chances of being elected, or fail to toe the party line. I have heard of Fathers for justice but seen no achievement. The other I have not heard of. There are many redoubtable men giving their all You name but two.

    Comment by Gwahir — Tue 7th August 2012 @ 5:11 pm

  37. Pauls news is at You have to join!

    Comment by Gwahir — Tue 7th August 2012 @ 5:14 pm

  38. jamie, you are right on the money asking why when we have all these groups has nothing been hammered home at a political level. Sadly my view is many of these groups are also benefitting financially from THIS BUSINESS – conflict is great business for all those who want you to subscribe, contribute, expend all your savings on lawyers etc…….and until there is a cost back the other way to those who keep defending this corrupt system nothing will change……

    By cost back I mean there needs to be a collective, who take the system to court – and seek damages for the pain and anguish they have suffered – and I mean a huge damages claim from multiple parties. You see you have a system which point black refuses to address the causes and put in place prevention – having had ten years of this I know every facet of the system and none of it is helpful to stopping or helping prevent the causes of most conflict.

    Damages claim for discrimination – this would be huge because the system is discriminatory on so many levels. ( and waste time with the human rights commission – they are there to protect government breaches of your rights, you might even have to name them in your case as parties to the offence because they will NOT take any action when you complain to them. )

    A case before the consumer affairs office could also be tried, because you have a legal system, and the justice system selling a service, which in my personal experience is selling a service they have not remedy for – 99% of my lawyers fees were seeking help to prevent the bad behaviour of a mother towards my child and towards me as the father – 99% of the fees were me seeking help in preventing this ongoing conflict so I could have quality time with my child – and after ten years, they have no solution, there is nothing they will do to help stop what most of us suffer on a daily basis -and so in my mind that is a fraud on the part of the legal system – they offer a service to help you, take lots of money from you, but they will not and cannot help stop the main concerns you go to them for help for. No other service industry would get away with this, but the legal system presently does.

    Nothing will change unless there is a cost, and a huge exposure of this corrupt system. All we see presently are higher penalties and charges, aimed at further disempowering fathers , and nothing to address the causes.

    I can see why most men who end up with protection orders end up in that situation – the provocation, the lies and bullshit you are expected to put up with, would drive most normal rational people to react.

    ten years of this, every offering the family court has, we tried, my fantastic new wife ( a great woman and mother ) and I went down every path the offered, believing that someone would help us = nothing has benefitted us at all, nothing has helped stop put an end to the horrible behaviour of the mother, in fact two psychological reports on the harm the mothers behaviour has cause the child have been swept under the carpet. I have a completely clean slate, not one incident, not one allegation as ever stuck, but it cost me a fortune and my sanity defending these things.

    the ONLY solution we have found to protect our family is to stop seeing the child – that sounds harsh, but after ten years of visits where the child comes to us distraught, brainwashed, stressed out, every visit is made unpleasant by the actions of this nasty individual, you have no choice but to walk away. Unless you want to live an unhappy life, and worst case scenario lose the new family you have and are trying to protect. ( thats another entire subject – the system does nothing to allow you to move on, in peace with a new wife and child – there is no recognition of this fact – its like they completely ignore the fact you have moved on )

    When and if someone wants to launch a crusade against this entire system im in, but to do things half arsed you will not get anywhere – as is pointed out politicians WILL NOT stand up for what is right for the people, they will only stand up for what is right for them – money and power are there usual vices, not helping families in distress.

    All the best


    Comment by hornet — Fri 10th August 2012 @ 1:24 pm

  39. I’m sorry Hornet, Better men than you have destroyed themselves trying. Probably the most notable being the Jim’s (Bailey and Bagnal) The latter being immortalised photographically as he demonstrated outside a family court somewhere. Its on the Home page of Pauls-News! Another has got under officialdom’t skin to such a degree he was arreste on trumped up charges and has had his computer confiscated. Funny how friends rallied to replace that equipment????? He fights on!

    Sorry hornet at this point you only sit in the shadow of these warriors.

    Comment by Gwahir — Fri 10th August 2012 @ 1:46 pm

  40. Hornet,
    I have an ex that has spent 7 ears harrassing me and brainwashing my children.
    I have thought on occasion that i would lose my mind from the powerlessness i feel and from the injustice of it all. Mine has manufactured situation after situation that makes me look the bad guy in the kid’s minds. Please agree to xxxx as this is isn the interests of the children. if i say no, the kids are advised that they can’t do xxxxx because dad does not care etc etc.
    Spied on in my own house. Every facet of my behaviour reported to mother.
    My name rubbished by her all over town to anyone and everyone who will listen.
    Nowhere can i get help.
    Yippeeee! Not

    Comment by Shafted — Fri 10th August 2012 @ 1:48 pm

  41. The measurement seems to be that less children will have their parents go to court.
    Shouldn’t the objective be that more children have a meaningful relationship with both parents?

    The objectives are fundamentally wrong.

    Comment by Vman — Mon 13th August 2012 @ 6:53 pm

  42. That’s because more men will give up ….
    Specially as more women will cry ‘violence- he economically deprived me’; and get their fees waived, and insn’t protection order against him.

    Comment by I Give up — Mon 13th August 2012 @ 8:57 pm

  43. Guys #38 – 42.
    I hear your frustration loud and clear.
    Just reading your comments it’s clear that the NZ family court and allied services has a huge disconnect between themselves and Joe Average.
    I think to safeguard oneself against uncorroborated false accusations and all the resultant horrors of state violence done to men by avoiding close intimate domestic relationships and forgoing having kids with women in NZ is the only sane responses to an insane situation.

    Comment by Skeptic — Tue 14th August 2012 @ 2:27 am

  44. Skeptic,
    I know you are tongue in cheek, but you are correct. The situation is absurd.
    When men find themselves spied upon by their own children, and held up to a standard of behaviour that is unattainable, we have a problem

    Comment by Shafted — Tue 14th August 2012 @ 10:19 am

  45. Shafted,
    I’m not being tongue in cheek at all. That’s an assumption.
    I’m actually serious when I say the sane response to an insane situation is to avoid the situation altogether.
    There are other parts of the world which despite their flaws don’t have misandry enshrined in law like NZ.
    Talk to John Dutchie who describes himself as “free at last from NZ”.

    Comment by Skeptic — Tue 14th August 2012 @ 11:33 am

  46. Apologies for my assumption.
    Needless to say, i get the point.

    Comment by Shafted — Tue 14th August 2012 @ 11:53 am

  47. Guys quick question; do any of you know if it is written in the law (care of children act) or anywhere that you have the right to know were your child is? at anytime, as my x is taking my son away for the weekend etc and refuses to tell me were.
    the only thing I can find is in the Guardianship Act were its say * where and with whom the child lives “care of children act s16

    Comment by Jamie — Tue 14th August 2012 @ 12:16 pm

  48. Reply to #45 #46

    Yes,you are very correct ‘Skeptic’…And I don’t mince my words….Free at long last from this feminist cesspit hell hole called N.Z…

    ‘Shafted’ go to this website and read and that goes for you to Allen Harvey…………….happierabroad

    Comment by johndutchie — Tue 14th August 2012 @ 12:17 pm

  49. lol-food for thought thanks John

    Comment by Shafted — Tue 14th August 2012 @ 12:26 pm

  50. Hi Jamie and post #47,
    If you thought your child was spending weekends in Australia or at the local Mafia headquaters the Court might be interested.
    However they will assume you know he or she is in their mother’s company and that you should trust mum that whatever places he/she goes are appropriate. I also suspect she enjoys winding you up about this and you have risen to her bait. What age is your child? How come you can’t talk to them and ask them about exciting things they have been doing with mum?

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Tue 14th August 2012 @ 1:19 pm

  51. Hi John and Skeptic,
    I choose to stay here, significantly because my children live here with me and they also deserve to have contact with their mother who normally lives here. I look forward to having grandchildren one day and I hope they enjoy NZ well.

    It dates about 10 years years ago now but in a rather long winded affidavit to the Court I one stated.

    I have no confidence in this court to decide about my parenting. If this court or Ms XX wishes to continue to marginalise me as a parent so be it. I shall no longer agree to be the enforcer of my own oppression as Judge MacCormick counselled me twelve months ago.

    20. I do choose to be a citizen of this country of my birth. I shall not willingly be forced into exile from my own land or from our children by choice. While evil exists in this land good people must oppose it otherwise the cancer of this court’s prejudice shall grow and injustice shall prevail.

    On three occasions Judge O’Neil stated, I have read your affidavit Mr Harvey and we will not be discussing it here! We didn’t, but I got all I asked for. I like to think my work with UoF since has done a little to stop the spread of cancer. The leave NZ message just seems to me to be a version of victim mentality and I’m not going there myself. Good luck to those who find it to their taste, it is not to mine.

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Tue 14th August 2012 @ 1:34 pm

  52. Reply to Allan Harvey

    Your comment Allen ‘Good luck to those who find it to their taste, it is not to mine.’…Its nothing to do with good luck Allen…Its to do with blatant ‘demonetisation’ of Manhood and Fatherhood…

    Secondly my daughter and son have left the ‘nest’ and also left Feminist N.Z…So there is no need for me to stay here in this feminist cesspit hell hole called N.Z….

    But I will still continue to fight till my last breath, on what Feminism as turn into…A vile and evil gender supremacy movement…

    Kind regards to you…

    John Dutchie…….. Free at long last from feminist N.Z

    Comment by johndutchie — Tue 14th August 2012 @ 2:19 pm

  53. Reply to Allen #51

    ‘The leave NZ message just seems to me to be a version of victim mentality’…Is that so…???…Sorry Allen and please excuse my selfish reason for leaving N.Z for I don’t want to the next ‘Peter Ellis’…

    ‘victim mentality’ that one I will truly leave for the feminists…

    John Dutchie…… Free at long last….

    Comment by johndutchie — Tue 14th August 2012 @ 3:29 pm

  54. Allan #50.
    I think your advice to #47 is weak BS.
    The non custodial parent SHOULD know where the children are in case of any emergency – whether they be in Australia or Eketahuna.
    I accept that may not be the law in feminist NZ, but it’s what is morally correct for sustaining strong family.
    Why be such a pander to women and the law type when you can be a strong advocate for men’s rights instead?
    What’s the pay-off?

    Comment by Skeptic — Tue 14th August 2012 @ 3:38 pm

  55. I guess the counter argument is the following. My ex is intrusive and wants to know every single thing about me and what i do with the children to the exclusion of my enjoyment of the children.I do nto like her omnipresence and therefore do not insist on knowing the childrens whereabouts whilst in her care. I do ask thatshe inform me if they leave the country but otherwise leave her alone as i expect the same

    Comment by Shafted — Tue 14th August 2012 @ 3:43 pm

  56. Shafted I understand the need to have your time with your kids but in an ideal world I was hoping I could atleast know we’re my son was. Not restrict this movement at all quite the country I hope he travels the world with or without me. I just have this feeling that I need to know we’re in the world so I can feel at peace.
    Anyway has any one got an answer based on law

    Comment by Jamie — Tue 14th August 2012 @ 3:57 pm

  57. #56 Jamie,
    The law does not say anything on this matter.
    The general principal is when with mum she decides what and where, when with dad vice versa.
    If it is communicated to the other parent that is good, if not there is no law to insist on it.
    Shafted in post #55 gives the rationale for this and thast is what is expected in most situations.
    If you take this to an extreme nit would be unreasonable to know when your child is inside a building or out in the sun. Let’s assume Mum is a rabid skin cancer fetish person and she is concerned. Father might be a sun person and believe Vitamin D is the solution to all health problems. Poor kids, both parents should but out of what happens in the other home.

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Tue 14th August 2012 @ 6:30 pm

  58. #57. Alan,
    “Poor kids, both parents should but out of what happens in the other home”…..
    Very sad to see you write this. It shows the level of empathy that the family court gives to the best interests and well being of children; ie zero.
    While, day to day issues are not the concern of the other parent, guardianship issues are. Say, Jamie’s ex was going to going to take to children to becomea muslim, christian, jew, hindu. Should he be itoled? Absolutely. If the child is hospitaized and requires medical attention. Should he be told? Absolutely.
    If his ex is moving to another part of the country to live, should he be told before hand? Absolutely.
    If his ex is moving overseas, should he be informed….. absolutely.

    Perhaps Jamie, you could ask your ex in a different way. If she is taking your child away for a holiday in the country you may have to accept that you don’t know where BUT you can request confirmation that it is just a holiday and not a permanent move.
    If its to go overseas then you DO have the option of preventing the children from leaving the country.

    So, try to ask her in a way where you can explain that you are concerned and just want to be assured that this is just a holiday inside New Zealand, and if you don’t get that, I would suggest you see a lawyer.

    BTW. Alan, if you knew that your ex was leaving your 6 yr old home alone, would you think..oh, I should butt out? Or if you get a call from your child wanting to talk to you becaue they are very frightened, would you tell them you cant butt in?
    I’ve had BOTH these happen to me…….and yes I did butt in and for both the family court chastised me. However, I would do it again, since anyone with any sense knows that there needs to be a risk assessment made on the child and if the risk is considered too high then you need to intervene.
    I look forward to the day when the family court is no more.

    Comment by JS — Tue 14th August 2012 @ 7:59 pm

  59. Hi JS,
    I can see you are experienced in guardianship matters.
    Yes both parents (and any other guardians) should be consulted about religion, medical matters, residence (location) and schooling. What determines a “guardianship matter” is debatable and may in the end needed to be decided by a Judge.
    The Court is not going to touch “risk assessments” other than perhaps considering a report someone commissioned privately. The days of Courts being quick to request and pay for reports are now long gone.
    My learning from having been involved with the Family Court for over 10 years is that working in the realm of the possible helps. Family Courts exist and will continue to do so even with Judith’s Collins charges and attempt to slim lawyers down in their dress sizes. The work I do is about helping individual families move forward and in seeking political and legislative change. These are 2 sides of the issue and I have learnt that they are best not mixed.

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Tue 14th August 2012 @ 9:14 pm

  60. Actually Alan, judge burns was very specific when he asked me what risk a 6 year old would be in when he was left alone. Even the fact the it was illegal didn’t phase the old git. He took the fact that I tried to rescue my son as interference even thoug my ex has since admitted fault and expressed her regret for her error. I’m just pleased that I took his decision to the high court and won. Shouldn’t need to in a “just” world though should I…….

    Comment by JS — Wed 15th August 2012 @ 6:03 am

  61. In that, I mean his decision to suspend my guardianship rights….

    Comment by JS — Wed 15th August 2012 @ 6:07 am

  62. It is extremely rare for a parents guardianship rights to be formally suspended by the Court. I have read about it happening but never seen that penalty imposed in any case I have been working with. Even cases where all contact has been barred by the Court, guardianship has been continued. I am not surprised that such a radical action by a Judge would be overturned on appeal.
    However I am not willing to discuss specific cases here on MENZ. On multiple occasions I have seen MENZ postings appear in FC (normally being used against the poster). Public forums, like MENZ, are not appropriate for discussing specific cases.

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Wed 15th August 2012 @ 1:04 pm

  63. I have seen one case Allan, a few years ago. The child is now over 16 but I will anonymise the details. The child had been taken by CYF, but kept running from their foster parent. Many allegations were made by both parents and CYF. (None proven.) The child was hidden by their parents for almost 3 months. An arrest warrant was issued against the child’s mother. The police showed little interest in the matter. The mother was stripped of her guardian ship when the arrest warrant was issued. Eventually CYF returned the child, and that was a saga 🙂

    CYF commonly remove guardianships when a child is moved to a Home for life program, the Guardianship being passed to the foster parent.

    Comment by Gwahir — Wed 15th August 2012 @ 3:20 pm

  64. That may be true. I try to avoid Care and Protection cases as I have limited experience in that area. I was talking matters under Care of Children Act. Yes CYFS permanency concept is difficult stuff.

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Wed 15th August 2012 @ 4:52 pm

  65. I use my case as an example that, while the system was not designed to be sexiest, some individuals within it have corrupted it to the point where miscarriages of justices are made. I was fortunately to have funds available to fight it, but others are not and in their cases the children miss out. That is child abuse in my opinion.
    I have seen things that you only ever would imagine would occur in movies. One day, these injustices will be acknowledged and the child abuse caused by this state system can then be addressed. But at present those injustices are ignored so many people will suffer.

    It’s time for me to end my posts on here as its pissing off some of those involved. If I’m getting under their skin then I’ve succeeded in making them squirm. I hope others do the same. Don’t identify yourself as that would be a contempt of court. But please see if you can find your judgement online. It will be there as the legal profession don’t seem to care much about the privacy of these documents.
    Thanks ms Irving for representing my children, though perhaps it would have been more professional to represent them after speaking with them. It speaks volumes of your professionalism when they are so happy with their dad, that both parents have made great effort out of court to resolve their differences and are succeeding and yet you advocate otherwise.
    In my opinion, Your understanding of the situation is so inaccurate and warped that, you must have an issue with fathers in general.
    But hey, it’s my view, and you have yours. It’s just that a fathers views are so worthless in the arena you call a court……

    Comment by JS — Wed 15th August 2012 @ 8:22 pm

  66. must be all those vindictive females who want to dish out their own sense of justice..females can cause so much shit for men its not funny

    Comment by Ford — Wed 15th August 2012 @ 8:45 pm

  67. Dear JS,

    This would not be the same Jennifer Irving, formerly of Irving & Randsfield who had protestations outside both offices and homes by the Fathers Coalition?
    If squirming is being currently exercised, perhaps a final thrust rather than withdraw could be the balance for what you seek.

    Kindest Regards

    Paul & Opal
    South Auckland Refuge for Men with Families
    09 269 4411
    021 221 9192

    Comment by Paul Catton — Wed 15th August 2012 @ 10:30 pm

  68. #65 JS, please stay. We need guys who have experienced what you have on here. Generally if people are squirming because of what you’ve written about them, it’s true. Nothing is more righteous than the Truth. Let them squirm, they deserve it.

    Comment by golfa — Thu 16th August 2012 @ 9:44 am

  69. Dear JS, thank you for your comments. If you are ruffling a few feathers, then keep up the good work! We all need to be challenged, to develop the best and most workable ideas.

    I challenge you, in your comment that by pouring in money, you got a better outcome for your children. From listening to many men and women’s experiences, I would guess that at the smell of money, your applications were held back more than if you had been more discrete. Then, when some of your tax paid, worked for money had been turned into their ill-gotten gains, you were able to catch up to where you should have been all the time. I suggest that anyone is safer wandering down Queen Street or K Rd at 3 in the morning drunk, than in familycaught$ during plunder hours.

    Best regards, MurrayBacon – axe murderer.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Thu 16th August 2012 @ 6:45 pm

  70. JS, and also Jamie ( enquiring about the Right to be told where you child is ) and Guardianship act etc.

    JS – Somehow, someway any funds or resources you have ( and everyone else on this board ) would be better spent on a national campaign to demonstrate just exactly what corruption is occurring in this family court shambles. How dare any person support a situation where a six year old is safe when left alone – that is not right in anyones book. And JS you should not have had to spend a cent getting the RIGHT decision. So are these fleas sitting on the bench in the family court so out of touch with reality, and expected parenting values, that they need to be exposed and removed? Why is there not some Justice deptarment template of expectations ( which always protect CHILDREN ) that they must consult and are binding before they make these obscene rulings? ( I wont detail here but I have had a similar experience where my daughter was texting her mother late at night asking her when she was coming home from a party because the child was distressed – but thats an acceptable situation for the family court and is good parenting if your the mother.)

    Having been through every bad behaviour of the mother that exists ( 10 years of it now ) – I am sure she will find new undiscovered methods as the years roll on to harm the child and upset my new family – there is not ONE CONSEQUENCE to any of this. And yet the Justice department booklets on separation list all these things a parent should NOT DO, to a child in separation, but there is NOTHING in law, no defined punishment or consequence protecting the children and sadly in most case the many fathers effected from this bad behaviour. And the reason is simple – if there were laws and consequences, the entire family court business would come to an end – because women would be prosecuted, and it would put a stop to most conflict overnight, and lawyers would have nothing to do, because the majority of the conflict would cease – or at least be significantly reduced.

    Isnt that the point here – this family court sees the same things over and over again, and in any normal service based business, they would look at ways to improve it, and reduce the conflict and harm to there most valuable clients – the children. But we do not see this at all, we see more and more penalties, more ways for lawyers to create costs, and delays, and processes which can be manipulated to cause MAXIMUM harm to children and families, and to fathers who mostly just want to see there children in peace.

    Jamie asks above – is there a law which states he can at least know where his child is?…… I have proven at huge cost – the guardianship act is the most useless piece of fluffy legislation – while it may list all your rights that you should have in your childs life – try getting any of this enforced – even if you win the odd hearing – a breach by the ex will cost you more and more $$$$ – way too much than it is worth trying to get it enforced – and dont mention the delays and time wasted in court trying to get every breach heard and actioned – the system is unworkable – because mothers can breach court orders with impunity and without consequence – but as a man and a father – if you breach one – your arrested mate – immediately. Gone, persecuted and destroyed. Forever. Dont waste time in family court – dont waste a cent trying – it is a complete fraud, and is corrupt to the core.

    I say this from experience – and here is a simple story over last christmas – a true story to demonstrate exactly how the system and these lawyers treat men.

    After ten years – I have a court order – specifying that I see my daughter in large blocks of holiday times during school holidays, with pickup and drop off at a third party location – Large blocks of time for those reading is best – because you can have time with your child to transition – and you get quality uninterrupted time without any of the usual crap packed up sent with the visit by the mother.

    We are also lucky to get a designated phone call once a week – but this does not happen as it should – in fact if the child has a great time with us, we usually dont get the phone calls again for at least two months after she has returned to her mother. They need this time to brainwash and deprogram you see for contact is refreshed.

    So last christmas, mother arrives at out home unannounced and outside of the agreed court ordered times and location, and while we were away – some two hours from the our home -and tries to drop the child off early.

    Obviously we were unable to receive the child.

    So our four week holiday time arrives the next day ( the childs birthday ) and we find the child has been taken away on holiday with the mother. And WILL NOT BE DROPPED off to us as per the court ordered times and dates and location.

    I call CYFS – they cannot and or will not help me uplift the child – as per the court order.
    I call the police – they want to help – but the family court has put in place road blocks – the police can not enforce a court order any more if its family related = HOW ABSURD. If it was you or me – a father – breaching a court order – violence or protection order – we would be arrested IMMEDIATELY.
    I am instructed to fill out an application for a warrant so the police can uplift my child.

    Keep in mind the police can enforce any other court order – just not a family court order. This is obscene – and should be changed.

    MY wife and I, and our other daughter then embark on a huge time wasting exercise – remember this is our holiday time, we were supposed to be having with our family – its christmas holidays – all plans we had are now GONE.

    We fill out the justice department notes and affidavits sent to us by the justice department – I personally hand deliver these to the court registrar. After driving almost two hours across town to there court I had to attend – these are Sworn and accepted into the court.

    Really simple stuff – heres a copy of YOUR court order – detailing the dates and times the child is supposed to be in my care – and she is not – can you help me get her back so my wife and I can enjoy whats left of our holiday with her.

    The judge – the despicable human being – throws the application out because its NOT in the correct format!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    So there is NO acknowledgement of the concern, and the very specific issue – no consideration of the fact the child is missing quality time with my family – no acceptance of the very court order issued by that court – what a crock what a disgrace, what a corrupt unworklable system- what a complete waste of my time.

    There were NO reasons that child could not have been uplifted and delivered to us so we could enjoy our designated holiday – NOTHING, the police were waiting for the warrant to action it, and this family court disgrace did nothing to help me or my family have our time. So my point is simple – even when you have an order – which cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to get after years in family court – they will not support you and help you when you need it most.

    We lost two weeks and the birthday with that child and we will never get that back – the family court directly contributed to that distress, and to preventing us having time with our child, It directly discriminated against my family by refusing to enforce its own court order.

    So where do fathers go when they have these issues and when they are trying to do the right thing by the law – my experience is they have NO WHERE to go. NOT one social service will help you when you most need it. Not CYFS, not the police, and certainly not the family court.

    I give you this example (just one example of many ) of how you are treated as a father – you are discriminated against, you have no rights, and even if you have money, and time and a court order in your favor – you will get NO WHERE.

    Dont waste a cent with lawyers in the family court system. It is corrupt, it is discriminatory and until it is truely exposed – it will not change.


    Comment by hornet — Fri 17th August 2012 @ 10:16 am

  71. perhaps its name and shame time….. who was the judge who threw out the application and what format was that application not in?

    Comment by namethem — Fri 17th August 2012 @ 12:23 pm

  72. Hornet,
    I get what you say.
    My ex asked me to take annual leave from work to look after the kids. I did so only to be told by her (with glee) that she was in Australia on holiday with them and “tough shit” from my point of view.
    I filed in family court for an order for none removal (she was threatening to take them to live there against a parenting order), application for increased custody and application for protection order (intrusiveness, threatening and troublesome behaviour). The first and last of these filings were applied for “ex parte”. Took me 3 attempts to file them “in the correct format” and was bounced three times by some man hating omnipotent little cretin at the family court. The courts were so concerned about my rights that approximately a year later we got to mediation. The system is an absolute joke.
    The orders should be enforceable by the police-simple as that. Stock responses of the courts and the IRD is that i need to see a lawyer. Like i have a lazy $30k in the bank just waiting around for such an eventuality.
    I have spent every cent i have in child support, backdated administrative reviews and defending myself against spurious allegations of violence and abuse.
    No wonder people go troppo or turn their back on the fight.
    Hornet, on a personal note, i feel and share your pain. You have to change the way that you deal with the issue personally as it will destroy you as it nearly destroyed me

    Comment by Shafted — Fri 17th August 2012 @ 2:25 pm

  73. Alan #59 , You say – “The work I do is about helping individual families move forward and in seeking political and legislative change. These are 2 sides of the issue and I have learnt that they are best not mixed”.

    That statement strike me as odd.
    I don’t see how you can separate the two. When you work with individuals and families and the femily caught as you say you have for the past ten years, you become part of the divorce industry system, period. You’re then mired in femily lore, and answering to caught staff including Femily Caught Grudges.

    As for legislative change, what a hoot – do you mean that for ten years you’ve been pushing for equal rights for fathers? (and as many posts from Dads on this thread show we still have such a long way to go to achieve that)
    Gosh, so much progress to date eh?

    For some reason I keep thinking of that old counseling maxim – “If what you’re doing doesn’t work, you need to change what you’re doing”

    Comment by Skeptic — Fri 17th August 2012 @ 3:55 pm

  74. Hi Skeptic,
    I do try to separate the two sideas of our work. I do become part of the system and seek to assist individual families stuck in the mire of the Family Court. I answer civilly to lawyers, Judges and Court staff. Being polite costs me nothing and may gain my clients some gains.
    On the legislative change front no one pretends matters are easy or that we have the changes we desire. Small gains are however still small gains and we have also fought back some negatives that were threatened. If you dig around you will find some of my handywork in submissions etc. I like to think that the Domestic Violence (Enhancing Safety) bill we had a pretty good result and the figures since have been very pleasing. We have to date had some success with the current Child Support Reform process as well.
    The maxim I understood to be If it works, do more (hence support chaps in the FC), If it doesn’t work – stop doing it (looks like very few groups are still tackling the legislative change area). We are more than happy that men go their own way. What I don’t understand is why they look over their shoulder and snip at others.

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Fri 17th August 2012 @ 4:13 pm

  75. Alan, keep doing more. I’m sure at this rate with your small gains men in NZ will have equal rights a parents by, oh, about 2170. Possibly.
    I’m glad to hear you say you’re more than happy that men go their own way (deliriously happy or perhaps ecstatic?)
    It’s a road to freedom which you have to take to fully appreciate.
    I look over my shoulder and snip at those who support the current white knight misandry which rips off all NZ taxpayers because I’m loyal to NZers.
    I’m critical of those like yourself who buy into and naively support the divorce industry system with politeness and acquiescence where I think protest and outrage is appropriate. I think your energy would be much better spent in warning men not to get into relationships and have kids in NZ, rather than being an ambulance at the bottom the divorce industry cliff, you’d then be a safety net at the top of the cliff.
    Every guy in NZ who joins the marriage strike shrinks the divorce industry just a little bit more and saves the taxpayer money.
    It’s a no brainer.
    Do the math.

    Comment by Skeptic — Fri 17th August 2012 @ 6:35 pm

  76. While people remain at the bottom of the hill I’m happy to be doing some first aid. It is always a deliema about campaigning alone or ambulance work. UoF has decided that we need to have our activists doing ambulance work which backgrounds the campaigning work we also do.
    If it takes to 2170 someone still needs to be raising the issues and flags at this time.

    The only kinds of fights worth fighting are those you’re going to lose,
    because somebody has to fight them and lose and lose and lose
    until someday, somebody who believes as you do wins.
    — I.F. Stone

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Sat 18th August 2012 @ 11:57 am

  77. Allan,
    I think your quote sounds weird. Like you’re expecting to lose again and again. Not attractive.
    Meanwhile I’m feeling like a winner – as is Dutchie and others of us who’ve stepped out of harness.
    Good luck scraping the mess off the bottom of the cliff and feeding the beast by paying all those taxes for the privilege.

    Do you use a triage system to deal with the volume of casualties?
    UOF are making great progress aren’t they? Do they have a timeline for success? Perhaps this time next century?

    Comment by Skeptic — Sat 18th August 2012 @ 12:28 pm

  78. Shafted, thanks for the personal advice – You are right, it can destroy you. Especially when you know the difference between what is right and what is so horribly wrong, and there is nothing you can do about it.

    I have a great life currently, married ten years to a fantastic new wife, a great mother and another child – What a contrast that is to the gold digging, horrible, bad behaving maggot I had the misfortune of meeting, and who the system supports and encourages to behave that way without consequence.

    The ONLY stress and concerns we ever have, are issues concerning the child in question, and sadly after so many years of it, and after taking hit after hit, trying to do the right thing, but getting nothing but problems for it, we have found – not seeing the child is best solution for us, our relationship, and the stress on the child. Isnt that a sad indictment on the system – that is the only workable solution, unless you want keep putting your head out there for more of the same.

    What I will do where and when ever possible, is let people know the horrors of this current system, educate them to walk away and not spend valuable time and money on a system which is NOT GOING TO HELP YOU ONE BIT.

    The ambulance at the foot of the cliff scenario is exactly right, in terms of what this system is doing – it actively separates parents from children ( men and fathers more so ) it allows behaviour which is detrimental to the child to flourish, and the expectation of the system when the child rebels ( usually as they hit there teens ) is for dad to wait for this to happen, and then deal with the aftermath. The court appointed psychologist actually stated that to my wife and I – after detailing the bad behavior of the mother the harm it is causing the child. severe Psychological stress.

    And remember these investigations by psychologists are invasive – the come to your home, they interview both you and the wife, and your children. This is the courts appointed independent remember = reporting for the court – do they take any note of her findings . Which identify the mother causing ALL the problems and concerns towards the child – NO they DO NOT. NOT ONE thing has been done about these findings. That is offensive, and totally irresponsible and negligent. Allowing the harm to the child to continue.

    NO we are told after all that, that We have to wait for the child to rebel against the mother – what a joy that will be, so we have to wait for that to happen ( which it will ) and then we have more problems to deal with. A child so messed up and rebellious – I cant wait.

    The only reason this system is getting away with how it operates, is because most fathers do not have the funds, the time or the ability to take the fight to them in court – and prove the discrimination, lawyers charging a fortune for services they can not provide ( they have no legal or punitive means available to help stop the bad behaviour and the lies of mothers until there is a law change with penalties), and an automatic right of access to your child as a father, the oppressive way in which this system currently flourishes will continue.

    Until enough fathers band together with there collective stories and take the system to court, nothing will change. While I agree with naming and shaming these lawyers and judges making these decisions – it will NOT change things.

    Only a court case seeking damages for harm caused will actually make them wake up and see – and I am talking harm they are a party to causing to kids, as well as fathers, you have a system which is oppressive, there are multiple breaches of mens and fathers human rights, and you have direct discrimination by several govt bodies on many levels.

    This is a known fact, and yet why are fathers not taking this fight to the system? You ( we ) would win, because the concerns are real. But individually it will not have an impact. Individually we get picked off, classified as nutters, and segregated. That is currently why the system wins, because it disposes of individuals with ease.

    The entire system looks to destroy your reputation and label you from the very start – youve all been through this so you will all be so very familiar with the tactics used – , provoke you, call you violent and angry at every opportunity – mud sticks eventually, stop you seeing your kids, hold them up as leverage for property settlements ( yes this is a tactic lawyers engage in with impunity ) allow lies about you to be told on every level and in every affidavit filed – and then when you do react – which sadly you are provoked into doing – bingo – told you so, see he is violent, angry aggressive, nasty, horrible, not suitable to see his children. Wow, and that all happens as soon as the lawyers get involved – regardless of what a great father and dad, you may have been beforehand.

    And that is a massive concern to most dads, and fathers, having there reputation totally destroyed, with no consequence to those who are allowed to lie in court, swear affidavits with total lies. All so that power and control of the children is handed to the one who lies the best, and behaves the worst towards the children.


    Comment by hornet — Sat 18th August 2012 @ 7:56 pm

  79. #78 hornet. You are a very smart and astute man. I salute you.

    Comment by golfa — Sat 18th August 2012 @ 8:11 pm

  80. Hornet I have to say that my 521 days so far sceams trivial to 10 years but I do understand your pain.
    The sad thing is your story is my story up until the leaving the child alone part, I haven’t and don’t think I could ever concider that.
    I have met with local MP for National and now have been in contact with juteth Collins, no real luck so I have now got an appoipment with John Banks

    I don’t know what else to do

    Comment by Jamie — Sat 18th August 2012 @ 8:18 pm

  81. And are you experiencing problems? :-

    The Law Society has attacked a “shambolic” new system for processing Family Court cases in Auckland, saying it is only a matter of time before someone dies.

    The society has been meeting with the ministry to sort out the new centralised system, which it says has caused backlogs and huge delays in cases involving at-risk children and domestic violence.

    It believes the ministry wants to roll it out nationwide.

    “It is only a matter of time before someone is injured, or worse, as a consequence of court proceedings not being dealt with, or orders not being issued,” society family law section chairman Garry Collin said.

    Principal Family Court Judge Peter Boshier has written to the ministry with his “continuing concern” about the system, and asked for a meeting with Justice Minister Judith Collins.

    A nationwide rollout would be a disaster, Collin says. “The model is fundamentally flawed.”

    Courts Minister Chester Borrows, said he had told the ministry to work with staff, lawyers and judges to address the problems urgently, and was expecting a briefing early this week. “After many years working in the sector I’m aware of the risks posed by delays. The situation is simply not good enough.”

    Since February’s changes, Family Court files have been handled by processing centres in Auckland and Manukau. That means cases dealt with in outlying courts, like Papakura and the North Shore, are now processed in central “hubs”.

    The model was supposed to make the system more efficient, but lawyers say it is chaotic, with affidavits going missing, judges not being given complete files, delays of up to several months for hearing dates, sealed orders not being sent, and emails and voice messages going unanswered.

    It is understood at one point there were 3500 unopened mail items, and that case officers have been dealing with up to 300 files.

    The ministry responded by spending $232,356 on 19 temporary staff to help clear backlogs, and rostering five staff from other parts of the country to help. Overtime and accommodation bills have pushed the blowout cost close to $1 million.

    The ministry has admitted mistakes in implementing the system, but courts deputy secretary Robert Pigou said claims lives were being put at risk were “alarmist”. While the ministry was “not happy”, the problems were about implementation and it had a “robust” system for dealing with urgent applications so that they were dealt with within 24 hours.

    Ad Feedback

    But the society has provided the Star-Times with dozens of examples of delays and problems, including:

    No paperwork issued for a woman granted a protection order. The subject of the order videoed her at her apartment but police were unable to arrest him.

    Service documents for an interim parenting order were issued from the wrong court with the wrong names. It took more than two months to correct it.

    A terminally ill woman had to wait several months for orders to be made in a straightforward property case, after files were lost.

    A mother was denied access to her children for several weeks because her case “ground to a halt” in the Manukau court.

    In a Papakura child custody case, the court refused to accept documents because the father was not named as a respondent. He was dead.

    An application for appointment of a welfare guardian for a mentally incompetent person took five months, by which time the person was dead.

    Collin said it did not augur well for other major Family Court changes later this year.

    Comment by Gwahir — Sun 19th August 2012 @ 9:42 am

  82. Nice to see that the only cases provided by the Law Society where men were mentioned, they were DEAD.

    Comment by golfa — Sun 19th August 2012 @ 10:00 am

  83. Dear Hornet, you are right. In my opinion, the conclusion is that men should work constructively together, rather than being taken down individually, again and again. This isn’t an issue for talking about, it is an issue for doing.

    More to the point, men need to work together, supportively, before their lives are seriously damaged. I cannot see any point in trying to be a solitary hero and being completely destroyed?

    Some people here criticise, sometimes in sarcasm. I have too. However, I have rarely seen this bring people together, or help them to build a better life.

    The parents who have been “shafted” are the people funding the legal workers, to continue their plunder and relationship vandalism. These are the people who pay for nice suits, fancy cars, to help boost the public credibility of the yet to be illegised mafia. This enables ongoing and increased protection rackets, standover tactics and thievery, under cover of exaggerated secrecy.

    The legislation doesn’t create so much secrecy, the gullible just back down under largely baseless threats, made by liars and cheats. The people hiding behind pseudonyms are cowards, as much as the mafioso that they fear.

    I don’t like supporting mothers or fathers, in an environment of incompetence about protecting children from abuse. This just leaves a dishonest game. Most parents are worthy of being protected from familycaught$ thievery.

    How could people with legal training and training in ethic-less greed, ever serve or protect children, or defenseless men or defenseless women, from their own selfishness? Why is there no competence in child protection in the familycaught$, when ostensibly this is why we pay them to be there?

    Allan mentions working on preparing submissions to parliament. This is time consuming and tedious. I don’t see the snipers among us contributing to this effort? Success is measured over years, if you don’t take part and contribute, then situations usually slide away from you. Should Allan or I be criticised, or the people too lazy to put in their own time and effort?

    Listen widely, you might find other allies where you least expect?

    So the selfish snipers in the end, lose the things that they claim to hold most dear? I simply don’t believe them, I judge values by actions.

    If judge boshier can take a child from the mother and put custody with the father, after 6 successive sex abuse allegations, he is putting the child’s welfare ahead of ongoing thievery by familycaught$ and legal workers. Sure, it took him too long to spring into action. He didn’t in any way sort out the financial wrongs that had occurred. This shows clearly his values. The rest of the familycaught$ thieves are far worse than him……

    Similarly for Kay Skelton and the familycaught$ judges that milked her bad behaviour, without taking any constructive actions to protect her boy.

    May I suggest – keep your eye on the ball. If you want to criticise without helping or contributing, then it looks to me as though you are consenting and supporting the relationship vandalism that is going on.

    Men that want help when they are in need, but are not willing to contribute to help others, are so selfish that most of all, they cheat themselves. The bleating comes later.

    It is in action that gains might be made, otherwise you just paint yourself into a decreasing area of passivity and enhanced insanity.

    Where is my axe? MurrayBacon.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Sun 19th August 2012 @ 11:44 am

  84. Gwaihir, #81 I touched on these issues in my submission, page 5:


    This submission focuses on what changes are necessary, for the Family Court to reliably deliver satisfactory value for money. Decisions about utilising the services of Family Court need to be made in the same way that any household needs to prioritise its spending decisions. Accountability within a household facilitates challenge about quality of spending and measuring the value actually delivered, against that expected when the spending was agreed.

    The creation of the Family Court was an experiment, which is overdue for critical evaluation (30 years – 2 generations of dysfunctional families).

    Generally the public underestimate the time required to investigate family planning issues and even more so when investigating options for two somewhat independent households. For this practical reason, the Family Court tends to select from a reduced set of options. In doing so, it fails to meet reasonable expectations of users.

    Due to its built in high cost structure, it could never provide a service with the quality expected and a reasonable cost. Due to these pressures, it often fails to correctly find facts. To satisfactorily sort out issues of fact, requires more than just affidavit and affidavit in reply. As a result, the resulting judgements are often not useful and lasting. In practice, if parties refuse to work together on affidavits, then it is unlikely that anything on earth could make a proper finding of facts and sensible plan for the future, when paying such high hourly rates, far higher than even USA pays.

    As a result, it may be preferable to halt Family Court, before its replacement has been completed.

    If the familycaught$ cannot cost effectively meet social objectives, then it’s only remaining value would be if it was funny. It can’t even do that.

    Cheers, MurrayBacon – axe murderer.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Sun 19th August 2012 @ 11:53 am

  85. MGTOW is taking action.
    It’s being responsible on a personal level with far reaching social and political ramifications.
    As a MGHOW you don’t consent to nor support relationship vandalism. Hell, you remove yourself from that arena entirely and by simply being that way model a new kind of leadership.
    For there comes a point after countless attempts over decades to petition the femily caught$, domestic violence $ervice$, indeed the whole divorce industry when a sane person realizes they’re beating their heads against a brick wall. You aren’t going to suddenly change the nature of people who have a vested interest in the status quo.
    Go figure.
    A proud sniper.

    Comment by Skeptic — Sun 19th August 2012 @ 2:30 pm


    It seems to me being a Man Going His Own Way (MGTOW) is something some folks don’t understand and lash out at in misguided fear.
    Having like millions of other men made the shift to being MGHOW here are a few clarifying facts which should negate some of the platitudes and urban myths that have grown up around this movement.
    MGTOW isn’t being lazy. Far from it.
    It takes effort in the face of much dumbness which would label you being faggy or some kind of loser. It takes effort and courage daily in the face of many cultural messages to ‘man up’ and ‘find a nice woman’.
    It’s no longer spending pointless decades petitioning stonewalling stone-hearted powers that be who like the status quo just as it is thank you very much.
    It’s doing the emotional work of grieving as you realize some folks will never learn and will always hate you for no longer playing the game of life by their rules, and some will distrust you because they think your copping out of team man, when really your in boots and all in your own way much deeper than they.

    It’s a kind of liberation you have to have a lot of courage to take for yourself.
    Some will respect you for your stand whilst others will naively attack you. That’s life.
    Folks often fear and attack what they don’t understand.
    You won’t be alone however. Many brave men have already made the transition to a form of freedom apparently many NZ men don’t even know about.
    In Japan 60% of Men under the age of 40 describe themselves as MGTOW.

    Comment by Skeptic — Mon 20th August 2012 @ 8:44 am

  87. Skeptic,
    I am happy that you go your own way. I don’t care where in the world you exist or that you remain anonymous.
    However your post above shows that you have a deep seated insecurity that drives some sort of proselytising zeal for your beliefs.
    No one lashes out at you, where has there been posts against your MGTOW philosophy? Maybe it is your own flagellation, or internal dissonance, you are getting lashed from?
    You state you are pleased with where you are at. Wonderful, be happy. So why do you need to snipe at others who have a different view?

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Mon 20th August 2012 @ 10:02 am

  88. Hornet. I too have considered walking away from the children for their own well being, but happen to believe that i provide some sort of grounded balance in their lives that they may be able to dra on one day in need. Don’t know if i’m right but i hold onto that.
    I guess the main issue is the grey area-the area that harms the children the most but that you can’t protect them from.
    I can’t protect them from the repetitive head fucking they get from their mother about me, and subliminally therefore, about men in general, thereby continuing the cycle.
    I can’t protect them from the absoulte neediness and dependency the maggot has created in them that will ultimately make them fragile human beings, unable to cope with life on life’s terms.
    I cant stop their mother’s interrogations about every facet of my behaviour. This if itself makes them “tell tales” and forces them to look down on their own father for no good reason.
    I can’t go to any authority and say “her tone of voice towards me is so disparaging it amounts to aggression” as i would be disbleieved andosund pathetic. Only i and the children get to witness this hostility.
    Like Hornet says, the system operates only from the view point of mending what is broken as opposed to preventing the breakage.
    Happy days

    Comment by Shafted — Mon 20th August 2012 @ 10:21 am

  89. Jamie, 80 . I have not walked away from my child yet, but believe me, my wife and I see no other alternative if we want to have peace in our lives. And I guess as a father and as the man of the house, you have to decide what is more important and worth protecting – a big factor is my new family, a great wife and mother and new child – these are important to me, and god forbid if this crap every destroyed that. So I guess you have to make sacrifices and harsh decisions in order to keep what is currently important. The system refuses to allow a father to protect his child from harm.

    As for politicians – they will give you lip service but will do NOTHING. Banks – what good is he going to do here?? It was he who merged the police with traffic enforcement – destroyed a great police department turning it into a revenue collection service for government. Dont get me started on that subject. As soon as they CORPORATIZED the police – started calling Inspectors – MANAGERS, and demanding that every investigation must be BUDGETED before the police do there work – the end result is we all now have to PAY for any service which was previously FREE. Investments are only made in Traffic enforcement – Revenue collection – not criminal investigation which costs money. And this spins off into every facet of our lives, where the service we SHOULD expect from the POLICE is NOT going to be provided – sound familiar. I did 11 Years in that job – when it was a great job, when police were held in very high regard and when we attended everything in Auckland in a given shift – and im talking everything – including alarms, thefts from cars, burglaries – everything – now whats the waiting time for police attendance if they come at all?????????

    No the only way to actually get traction on Fathers concerns – is to take collectively take a case to the high court – as I details previously – and win, and seek damages for all the harm the system is allowing to be caused to children, and the discrimination it is currently getting away with to good fathers, good men, who are being deliberately deprived of access to there kids – peaceful, quality time with there kids – that is all I have ever wanted. And I have never had it.


    Comment by hornet — Mon 20th August 2012 @ 12:20 pm

  90. Hornet.what a horrible choice to have to make. It seems that all of us have dreadful choices to make throughout this horrendous journey. Fight the system (IRD in my case) via family court and spend money only to lose, or put up with their spurious irrational decisons against you (and pay$$$$$$).
    Give up on the children or fight to be with them, only to have them not that keen on you due to the head fuck mum has done on them about you.
    Watch beautiful human beings (the kids) become needy, whiney and highly strung as a result of mum’s parenting or endeavour to exert some authority and discipline on them in the limited time you have with them. As a result of the latter there is the usual Monday morning ‘incoming ass hole seeking missile” (also known as abusive email)
    Refute comments in email and be reminded of your “controlling abusive and intimidating ways” (also known as disagreeing).
    The list goes on.
    Attended sports with the kids in the week end. Half the mothers there were overtly ignoring me. I can only assume that the maggot has been pointing out my failings to them in the preceeding week. You gotta laugh. Otherwise you would do nothing but cry.

    Comment by Shafted — Mon 20th August 2012 @ 1:25 pm

  91. Shafted – I fully hear you mate – your sports day is similar to my attending a FATHERS DAY LUNCH at my daughters school, and as soon as I arrived and sat down with my daughter – the FEMALE teacher approached and told my child to go to the gym for netball – during lunch – I had to intervene, and explain that NO i just drove two hours to be there on the schools invitation for a FATHERS DAY LUNCH with my Daughter – and that my child was having LUNCH with ME!!!!!!!!!

    This is another tactic used to alienate fathers from the kids – present other things – sports, a birthday party, anything which is promoted as being more important than seeing dad. What the system fails to recognise is that in a separated parent situation seeing DAD is the most important thing for a child to over anything else. – I had no idea the school through a female teacher would also get in on the act.

    You are exactly right – this entire system is about $$$$ and has nothing to do with actually caring for and looking after children. Fathers are forced into a pay per view contract with there own kids, worse still, having to endure a constant stream of ultimatums or trade off concessions as to when you can having any time with them. Ie, yes you can see your kid, but you must agree to this list of my demands before I hand her over. I do not like to see my kids used as a negotiating tool, but it appears the govt thinks this is ok.

    All the best in your battle. When and if you get sick of bashing your head against a brick wall ( the current system ) its time a good human rights lawyer was engaged by as many fathers as can be mustered.

    Comment by hornet — Mon 20th August 2012 @ 4:02 pm

  92. LOL. You are a tonic. I am not amused by your plight-just totally recognise it.
    We have very clear rules in our parenting order as to which week of the holidays we each have the children. She would not cross the road to assist me, yet constantly requests i swap week. I have now started to dig my heals in on this and i am presented to the children as the ass hole who is inflexible and the sole reason for their not being able to see family members.
    Constantly get “well you could have done this for the week end but it is your week end with dad” etc etc.
    They are also told that dad is buying them such and such a (utterly expensive) present for their birthday. When i don’t , i am the bad guy who has let them down.

    Comment by Shafted — Mon 20th August 2012 @ 4:20 pm

  93. Sceptic (#86) states: “In Japan 60% of Men under the age of 40 describe themselves as MGTOW”” In stating this, Skeptic is merely quoting a somewhat dubious claim on a non-descript website.

    In Japan, In 2010, a total of 700,000 couples married and the marriage rate became 5.5 as a result, down for the second consecutive year (source:

    In NZ, The general marriage rate was 12.5 marriages per 1,000 not-married population aged 16 years and over. (source:

    Therefore, Japan has around 45% of the marriages NZ has, per 1,000 population.

    According to Wikipedia, “According to a 1998 survey by the Ministry of Health and Welfare, about 60% of single men … between the ages of 20 and 34 live with their parents”

    It would seem that the same – or extremely similar – statistic has been turned into a gross generalisation that the same 60% of men are therefore subscribing by way of concious commitment to a dubious cause of ‘going their own way’.
    I know this is an assumption, but if 60% of japanese men aged 20 through 34 are living at home, and if 60% of japanese men under 40 are deciding to abandon long-term permanent child rearing relationships, according to the MGTOW website, then there MUST be a very significant intersection between the two groups, because otherwise there simply aren’t enough men to make up both claims – they can’t POSSIBLY be mutually exclusive.

    But hangon – the same wikipedia reference includes the words “… and 80% of single women … ” in the same quote.
    Are these 80% of japanese women therefore going their own way (WGTOW) Wouldn’t this therefore blow the MGTOW claim completely out of the water??

    Skeptic – your claim is – at best – simply outlandish twaddle.

    Comment by IWMOW — Mon 20th August 2012 @ 5:24 pm

  94. p.s. – that wikipedia quote is per …

    Comment by IWMOW — Mon 20th August 2012 @ 5:27 pm


    Allan @ #87,
    I was making a general statement and offering another perspective regarding the femily caught$.
    An alternative to putting one’s head in the noose and hoping sweetie pie doesn’t turn one day and yank on the rope aiding and abetted by divorce industry henchmen

    Also please stop with the patronizing.
    If you had the decency to ask me I could tell you of numerous incidents both in NZ and elsewhere after going MGTOW where I’ve had folks snidely remarking that I must be some kind of loser or gay for not chasing tail and pandering to women in general.
    Thanks for the free psych evaluation (deep seated insecurity) – what a hoot! LMAO.
    I’ll pass on it as ironically I feel more secure than ever.
    I’m not a phone call away from divorce devastation. I’m not paying taxes to support a system which reams my brothers in the femily caughts, and I’m not playing ambulance at the bottom of the cliff whilst wasting forests of paper submitting yet another submission to folks who don’t care to change the status quo which suits them fine for yet another decade.
    Been there, done that and got the beating head against a brick wall scars on my forehead as a reminder.

    If you’d bothered to read accurately my previous postings on this thread you’d see I’ve already answered your question about why I challenge/encourage other NZ men to think more carefully about entering the marriage~divorce system in NZ. It is fraught with danger for men. As is readily observable from many other posts on this thread and on the MENZ website in general marriage for men in NZ is a terribly risky gamble to take which all too often has horrendous outcomes for them.
    I see MGTOW as a viable alternative to caving in for pussy and putting oneself in harms way.
    I love my NZ brothers enough to want to share that. Call it sniping, or whatever term you wish I’m going to continue doing it – If that rubs you up the wrong way so be it.

    Hornet @#91,
    Yep, a good human rights lawyer might be a way to go.
    As folks at A Voice for Men (the fastest growing Men’s Rights Website in the world) are fond of saying these days – Men’s rights are Human Rights.

    Comment by Skeptic — Mon 20th August 2012 @ 5:56 pm

  96. IWMOW @ #93,

    We can all cherry pick sources.

    Here’s some more ‘outlandish twaddle’ …….

    Quote – Megumi Ushikubo AUTHOR AND SOCIAL RESEARCHER says SURVEYS suggest that two thirds of Japanese men in their 20s are grass-eaters.

    Quote – MEGUMI USHIKUBO, : These men are mainly in their 20s. They have no aspirations for love or material wealth or professional promotion.

    Many of you have likely heard of the oushoku danshi–self-described herbivores or, literally, “grass-eating boys” of Japan.

    Grass-eating boys’ commitment phobia is not the only thing that’s worrying Japanese women. Unlike earlier generations of Japanese men, they prefer not to make the first move, they like to split the bill, and they’re not particularly motivated by sex. “I spent the night at one guy’s house, and nothing happened-we just went to sleep!” moaned one incredulous woman on a TV program devoted to herbivores. “It’s like something’s missing with them,” said Yoko Yatsu, a 34-year-old housewife, in an interview. “If they were more normal, they’d be more interested in women. They’d at least want to talk to women.”

    Yoto Hosho, a 22-year-old college dropout who considers himself and most of his friends herbivores, believes the term describes a diverse group of men who have no desire to live up to traditional social expectations in their relationships with women, their jobs, or anything else. “We don’t care at all what people think about how we live,” he says.

    Japan panics about the rise of “herbivores”;young men who shun sex, don’t spend money, and like taking walks. – Slate Magazine

    Sound familiar?

    But here’s the thing.. this is not a fringe movement in Japan. According to the linked article (from 2009)

    Media Shakers, a consulting company that is a subsidiary of Dentsu, the country’s largest advertising agency, estimates that 60 percent of men in their early 20s and at least 42 percent of men aged 23 to 34 consider themselves grass-eating men. Partner Agent, a Japanese dating agency, found in a survey that 61 percent of unmarried men in their 30s identified themselves as herbivores. Of the 1,000 single men in their 20s and 30s polled by Lifenet, a Japanese life-insurance company, 75 percent described themselves as grass-eating men.

    Comment by Skeptic — Mon 20th August 2012 @ 6:39 pm

  97. I think you missed the point. Skeptic.
    Whether it’s 60%, or whether its 66% doesn’t really matter.
    If 80% of young Jap women are similarly not entering relationships, it’s a long call to imply its basically because men aren’t taking them on.
    I don’t disagree some men are avoiding relationships. But I really do not belive the vast majority – 2/3rds, by your quotes, are *because* of the reasons you cite.

    Stats suggest men are living at home (with their parents) longer; you appear to conclude its because its the men choosing not to enter long term realtionships, purportedly because of the various reasons on some unidentifiable MGTOW website.
    Stats suggest MORE women live at home longer; you appear to conclude its because men are choosing not to enter long term realtionships with them.
    Stats show marriage is in decline. You appear to conclude its because men are choosing not to enter long term relationships with women.
    Sociologists suggest a major reason young people live at home longer is economic; You appear to conclude its because men are choosing not to enter long term relationships with women.

    Feminists claim they they’re not taking on men who earn less, are less educated, and so on. You appear to conclude its because men are choosing not to enter long term relationships with them.
    Feminists claim they they’re not staying in realtionships because of alleged violence, and they are now free to be independent, and so on. You appear to conclude its because men are choosing not to enter long term relationships with them.

    Lets make it relevent to NZ.
    Where is there one single establiched substantiable statistic showing men aged 21 to 40 are avoiding relationships en masses, because they are ‘going their own way’?
    Last I heard, is that “About 23 per cent of adults were living alone in 2006 compared with 19 per cent in 1986. ” (source I guess you’ll conclude that’s clear proof that its because men are choosing not to enter long term relationships with women.

    I could go on. Even if 1/2 NZ men lived alone (i.e. not in or intending to be in a longterm relatinship with a woman), there simply is no emperical evidence that it’s because of the feminist crap going on around us.

    I Went My Own Way. I’m far happier, and king of my castle.
    I’ll take on a woman again. When my child is grown up. And with my propoerty and assets tied up as securely as I can. And only to an equally assetted / incomed woman.

    Far as i can see, is that me, and others who you seem to attack and bully thru this site any opportunity, have acheived the same; have taken on the system and acheived an acceptable result, in terms of seeing their children.
    Can you say that?

    Comment by IWMOW — Mon 20th August 2012 @ 7:06 pm

  98. I think you missed the point I am making IWMOW.
    I think you’ve also tried to ascribe to me several assumptions which I’ll get to.
    In Japan, which I’ve visited several times you’ll meet a lot of younger guys who are not interested in following in their fathers’ footsteps. They aren’t interested in becoming overworking corporate drones who die earlier than their wives as peripheral family wallets.
    In brief you can say they’ve stepped out of harness.
    Mighty smart guys I reckon.
    You say sociologists suggest the reason they don’t enter into long term relationships with Japanese women are only economic. Which sociologist, you don’t say. That’s glib in my view.
    It’s patronizing too in my view to simple mischaracterize them as economic losers who can’t get a woman. Be warned guys who are thinking of making the transition to MGTOW, that’s a classic mischaracterization many MGTOW get labelled with. Read a few MGTOW boards and you’ll see that time and time again with many being slurred as basement dwellers.

    I think you need to get your head around the fact that many Japanese men don’t give a shit for the traditional provider-protector husband role period. I think you’ve read right past the quotes from sociology researcher so I’ll repost them here –

    Megumi Ushikubo AUTHOR AND SOCIAL RESEARCHER says SURVEYS suggest that two thirds of Japanese men in their 20s are grass-eaters.

    Quote – MEGUMI USHIKUBO, : These men are mainly in their 20s. They have no aspirations for love or material wealth or professional promotion.

    I agree with you that for some living at home with their parents is an economic necessity. But hears the rub. For many living at home with there parents is the preferred path because they have no desire to form live in relationships with women so there’s no need to ‘fly the nest’. I know. Like I’ve said I’ve visited Japan several times and spoken to young Japanese guys.
    Go figure.
    Now to NZ. I don’t claim there’s evidence that the MGTOW phenomenon has taken hold in great numbers in NZ. The jury is still out on that one and I don’t think Universities crammed with feminist ideologues are going to rush to join the queue to study such in any case. We’re talking about studying men after all. Far simpler, and profitable to keep pounding out the bad man meme instead of taking an in depth look at any MGTOW phenomenon that might arise in NZ.
    However, it’s interesting to note the periodic reporting of a man drought in NZ; and I get at least some feedback from a few NZ guys who identify with their Japanese counterparts as stepping out of harness. Interesting too that the StuffNZ article you link to identifies decreasing rates of marriage as a predominant trend in NZ. Other trends the report noted are an increase in NZers living alone, and nearly half of all live births in 2010 were to unmarried women, compared with just under 10 per cent in 1964.

    Now to your future aspirations- you say you’ll take on a woman again. That’s an interesting turn of phrase you use there. Freudian slip?
    Good luck with keeping your assets in Fort Knox – “with my property and assets tied up as securely as I can”. Very telling that you even have to consider such a move. Several guys have reported on this site that Judges frequently over rule men’s pre-nuptial agreements in favor of women, so you might want to investigate that further if that’s the road you intend to go down.
    With the full power of the state and a lace curtain media behind them I think you’ll be very lucky to find a woman who is as equally assetted as you – more than you yes, most definitely.
    It’s ripe with irony that I strongly challenge ideas which I think don’t serve men well and someone like you comes along and stoops to trying to brand me a bully and a loser.
    But to entertain your smug final statement with a response I’ll say this.
    ALL NZers don’t get an acceptable result – massive fatherlessness.
    Can you deny that?


    Comment by Skeptic — Tue 21st August 2012 @ 12:54 am

  99. you just keep right on believing you’re right, Skeptic. Whatever.

    Comment by IWMOW — Wed 22nd August 2012 @ 7:55 pm

  100. IWMOW,
    I’ll keep on taking the advice and feedback of many Men’s Rights Activists from around the world and spreading MRA ideas as they speak clearly of a shared lived experience I have with them, and ultimately Men’s Rights are Human Rights.

    Good luck with the hetero-relationship stacked poker game you seem intent on entering given the current feminist zeitgeist in NZ. Some great NZ men I know have been wrecked on that reef.
    Be VERY careful brother.

    Comment by Skeptic — Wed 22nd August 2012 @ 11:12 pm

  101. Wow Skeptic. You mean you take advice from both of them!

    Comment by Gwahir — Wed 22nd August 2012 @ 11:17 pm

  102. Gwahir,
    If you stop patronizing for a moment and asked me instead I could link you to many thoughtful individuals who have helped me shape my views.

    Comment by Skeptic — Wed 22nd August 2012 @ 11:23 pm

  103. It would seem to me that we are all against the anti male inbalance that has arisen over recent years.
    Destructive and semantic attacks serve little pupose in my view.

    Comment by Shafted — Thu 23rd August 2012 @ 9:59 am

  104. Hi guys, Sorry to hear of the battles you have all had to face. I suggest you send emails to all MP,s,Funders, Churches and friends(male and Female) etc asking them to suggest to others for Fathers Day to buy the new book that Ian Grant has out about “fathers being very important to a childs life. A baby recognises Fathers voice as soon as they are born according to Ian Grant. Ask everyone to go into the MENZ site and just see what Fathers are up against as they might be the next one or their extended Families might also be affected. Trouble is Politicians are there for votes and of course if they start supporting men the ones that are making money out of all this get in the headlines. There has to be some accountability of taxpayers money(of which most of us are)and it can not keep going on..just tip toeing through the tulips in the hope of getting someone on side. Either that or Men are going to go the the Police and lay complaints if they are shouted at, sent swearing texts etc..Yeh right..Can just see that..There are it seems so many out there in the same situation and it is very sad for all those beautiful children as no matter what they still Love their Mum and Dad..Look at all the programmes on TV that bring a tear to the eye when children go searching for them before it is too late. I am sad to hear that funding is so low when I see what these other groups get..Maybe Fathers could ask that Families make donations or vouchers to your group instead of gifts..Of course unless they are given a copy of Ian Grants new book..hang in there and stand Proud and Strong..Oh and Happy Fathers Day..No matter what you are still a DAD and should be Proud..

    Comment by Kathy Davie — Tue 28th August 2012 @ 9:22 pm

  105. Does anyone know where we buy these black ribbons that are being made available on Friday please? Thanks

    Comment by Kathryn Mary Davie — Wed 29th August 2012 @ 12:44 pm

  106. I have 5nights/14 days of shared care of my two children aged 8 & 5. Do I qualify for relief in child support??

    Comment by kumar — Tue 15th January 2013 @ 2:59 pm

  107. Hi Kumar,
    Not under current legislation.
    You need an average of 6 nights a fortnight (40%).
    Section 13(ii) may be able to provide if you have “significant other contact/costs”.
    New legislation before parliament will provide relief but we have yet to see it through all stages but that is hoped for this year.

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Tue 15th January 2013 @ 3:27 pm

  108. @Allan It is almost to the point where we need a separate website to help the screwed male understand child support legislation.

    Comment by Down Under — Tue 15th January 2013 @ 4:00 pm

  109. I would agree however the openness necessary could well encourage misuse of posts!

    Comment by Gwahir — Tue 15th January 2013 @ 4:17 pm

  110. Thanks Heaps Allan…in 2012 i got 5/14 nights shared custody of “protected children”. How long should I wait for before applying to the court again for a 50/50 care? What should I take to the court to convince them for a 50/50 care?

    Comment by kumar — Tue 15th January 2013 @ 5:01 pm

  111. Hi Kumar,
    Flick me a direct e-mail to [email protected]
    Here is not the place for discussions about Court matters.
    My general rule of thumb is you can ask for review of parenting order every 6 months. Takes about another 6 months to come to a hearing anyway.
    Courts are not liking frequent changes but if what they have given does not take expectations into account then what else can they expect?

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Tue 15th January 2013 @ 5:20 pm

  112. @Allan – that’s a good point. Society would expect every couple to consider each other’s expectations before entering a long term relationship.

    Comment by Down Under — Tue 15th January 2013 @ 7:35 pm

  113. Do the courts award this 5/14 on purpose so there is no qualification for support for the father?

    Comment by Kathryn Mary Davie — Tue 15th January 2013 @ 11:35 pm

  114. I have even seen Judges grant an adjournment in proceedings so Lawyer for Child to calculate the number of days explicitly so that the Child Support furmula is not “breached”.
    Moving from 145 nights to 146 is like crossing a mountain pass.

    Comment by allan harvey — Wed 16th January 2013 @ 7:32 am

  115. That awkward moment, when you come to the realisation that the Family Court is actually about political outcomes and not about your children. Then you look around and realise the general-public is still oblivious to your new-found knowledge and the political aspirations of a civil state.

    Comment by Down Under — Wed 16th January 2013 @ 8:04 am

  116. Women have been put in jail n had DV orders placed on them have you all been living under a rock for 40yrs? Yep looks like it. N once again women are shoved in the same basket we are not all alike every solitary case is different n when ur kid tells you abuse that is going on what would you do?

    Comment by Anon2 — Wed 16th January 2013 @ 7:33 pm

  117. O look! A troll!

    Comment by Happy Larry — Wed 16th January 2013 @ 8:31 pm

  118. Anon2 I think I hear what you are trying to say. I suggest the conversation could be more gainfully be pursued in a hidden group. Please visit expert non judgemental help is available. It was a mens group, but you are unfortunately far from alone.

    Comment by Gwahir — Thu 17th January 2013 @ 1:43 am

  119. It would be interesting to see the stats on these results and who issues them as a matter of course rather than letting justice prevail. All these books and propaganda about putting the children first seems to be a wrought..Just the money for lawyers to fight the cause is insane..Maybe with the mental health and other issues this all leads to should also be added up. I do agree that somehow things neeed to be talked about before going straight to lawyers and getting legal aid.If it is thrown out of court do they have to pay legal aid back?

    Comment by Kathryn Mary Davie — Thu 17th January 2013 @ 1:46 am

  120. Never mind Domestic abuse..Phsycological abuse is all the go now..Guess they will all try and get in before the law changes..

    Comment by Kathryn Mary Davie — Thu 17th January 2013 @ 1:49 am

  121. Kathryn my Post #118 also could apply to you. Its in private. You will be listened to.

    Comment by Gwahir — Thu 17th January 2013 @ 2:02 am

  122. Hi Allen

    have emailed you for post #110/111

    Comment by kumar — Fri 18th January 2013 @ 12:20 pm

  123. Anon comment 116.. can uyou quote a case in NZ where this has happened??.. “Women have been put in jail n had DV orders placed “..

    Comment by kirannjiharr — Fri 18th January 2013 @ 7:25 pm

  124. I can say without the quote of a case that women have been jailed for DV and have those orders against them etc: I used to work with them and still work withthe men in the same situation, my eyes were opened to how much women get away with while working with them but some do get caught etc.

    Comment by Too Tired — Fri 18th January 2013 @ 9:28 pm

  125. Kay Skelton was jailed for what could be loosely termed DV – abducting her son and organising his concealment (hiding) against court orders …
    Doens’t quite fit the topic, but close enough ….

    Comment by Happy Larry — Sat 19th January 2013 @ 8:22 am

  126. 125 Happy Larry. Not too sure Kay Skelton was ever jailed for abduction. She plead guilty to it but was jailed for Perjury.

    Comment by golfa — Sat 19th January 2013 @ 9:26 am

  127. But she did for this…


    Comment by Down Under — Sat 19th January 2013 @ 9:45 am

  128. Pretty sure she was jailed for weeks until her father fronted up out of hiding with her son.

    Comment by Happy Larry — Sat 19th January 2013 @ 10:42 am

  129. She was jailed for contempt of court for refusing to divulge the wearabouts of her father and child but got home detention for the abduction charge.

    Comment by Down Under — Sat 19th January 2013 @ 12:07 pm

  130. Down under is correct contempt of court is an infinite sentence until the defendent “Purges” themselves of the contempt. I saw it used in 2005 when a child (10 yo) kept running from alleged CYF mistreatment. The child was hidden and the mother dragged before the family court with no representationShe withstood an interrogatby 3 lawyers, abd the judge with no support (I may add the mother was not from NZ and although her English was reasonable, support was actively discouraged.

    At noon the court ajourned for lunch. The mother was told to return at 2pm.

    In the intervening 2 hours she dissapeared. 🙂

    A hue and cry erupted in the local newspapers, dire threats were issued against the mother and those protecting her!

    After almost 4 months the mother was betrayed by one of her so called protectors.

    She was arrested, and held in police cells over night. CYF moved the young person to a secure home!

    When the mother appeared in court, it was decided that as the child location was now known, the mother was not in contempt!

    As a sequel the young person became uncontrolable. In a very short space of time, CYF were planning her return.

    Here we see another use of Contempt of court Warrent!

    Comment by Gwahir — Sat 19th January 2013 @ 1:54 pm

  131. Happy Larry Dick Headley was in hiding with the boy for a little over 6 months. They were flushed by the childs uncle and helpers setting out to visit EVERY farm in the area.

    It is a facinating case! More twists and turns than the Waikato River. The final Judgements are in public.

    Comment by Gwahir — Sat 19th January 2013 @ 2:01 pm

  132. Yes a fascinating case but don’t believe everything is in public. What has been released is selected bits by Boshier and the Fc propoganda machine. Very little of the seven years or so of delay, manipulation, conievance by the Family Court and FC lawyers (I understood she used 17 different lawyers)for Ms Skelton is in the public domain. Boshier and others hav not allowed a complete look at this case and what happened for seven year is still largely held within the secrecy of the Court.
    After seven years and over $100,000 most parents would have given up which was of course Ms Skelton’s bigger picture. As Gwahir says she was detained for contempt and not for the abduction.
    Over 40 of our finest detectives were supposedly on this case full time and they got lead a merry dance by Skelton and Headly for nearly 6 months. Again the work of Father and others outside the Police led to the eventual return of the child.

    Comment by allan harvey — Sat 19th January 2013 @ 4:54 pm

  133. In a further attempt to evade jail she got herself pregnant. It didn’t work (I suspect because of the media scrutiny.) She served LESS THAN HALF her sentence and was released.

    Comment by golfa — Sat 19th January 2013 @ 7:51 pm

  134. Dear Allan #132, someone with better knowledge of caught$ suggested to me, that his guess was over $500,000. At first I was astonished, but he said the same as you, the whole story has yet to be told. Bashier may have admitted what the public already knew, but doubtless has hid as much as he could get away with.

    The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?????

    I am quite curious on this point. Its not just that I hate to see children deprived, by legal workers manipulating money off parents, but the fact that one [or both] of the parents had big money, was the very reason that all of these terrible things happened to poor little rich Jaydon Headley.

    The boy would have been better protected if he had been born into a poor family! It was the large pot of gold, that led to the legal workers playing off these two parents for so long and in such a child damaging manner.

    If we have autopsies about unexplained medical deaths, then this case cries out for a Commission of Enquiry into how the legal workers could self-deceive and string out a simple set of issues for so long and in such a child sacrificing manner. Is there such a thing as legal ethics? I doubt it.

    It should also be a warning to other parents, not to go into familycaught$ waving around dumb cash. Dumb cash is paying bills without requiring accountability from your legal worker. Wise cash is letting your legal worker see that money is available, but it is only paid out on delivery of sensible and competent work and outcomes. The customer must judge performance, every single step of the way and make sure they have alternatives.

    The principle of public policy is to establish incentives for citizens to treat each other respectfully, constructively and honestly.

    The familycaught$ did do this for Jaydon Headley, after it came out in public. There is a billion$ lesson for NZ there…..

    Cheers, MurrayBacon – free axe murderer.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Sun 20th January 2013 @ 11:05 am

  135. I have a problem that my ex has been filing false affs to get a protection order which is no no longer there, accessed me of anger problem and had do anger management 3 times every time they question why i am there because i don’t, she as accessed me of sleeping with my kids, emotionial abusing them and harrasment, the kids layer got alot calls and letter from the ex and I have not even be called by him has has base his judgement on me by what the ex says and is refusing to show any of the letters, he has also writen the reports and not sent them to us before court yet he seens them to the ex, i have 2 folders full of false affs and now have not seen my kids in 5 1/2 months because i won right to have kids for xmas (which i not had last 2 years before ) so ex said to kids i did it to her her so therefore hurting the kids, the parenting order is we meant to have sharecare but she did when lawyers going on xmas holiday,my lawyer has done nothing and now says she no long wants to do my case (i found out she is talking with ex lawyers behind the seen).
    I don’t know what to do life has been hell for last 4 years. by the way it all started when she found out been in a relationship after separated accessed of anger to save face in the church as you shouldn’t leave a marriage, she has always been on dpb and is also working doing porse care giving, which 1/2 she earns is case expences which she has none so earns including dpb around a $1000 a week, when i was on benfit i was classed a single person even with sharecare of to girls, got $220 a week and $73 ird, weeks girls not there i couldnt afford food, so only got food when they were home (cooked good meal) i went for a food grant but got told no can not get because not on dpb or had fullcare of my girls

    Comment by bellboynz — Sat 11th May 2013 @ 7:56 pm

  136. NZ Family use NZ Family Court Justice system to prevent son from seeing and being with dying father.
    by Steve Taylor

    It was a simple personal request for respect by Grant Elmsly for himself, his wife, Fang and their 3 sons in 1998. It was opened for personal resolution by Grant in 1998 to no avail. No one else needed to know.

    There was immediate escalated verbal and physical abuse against Grant and his wife..

    No one could have foreseen and Grant Elmsly and his wife were not prepared for the heinous consequences that have increased in their severity and ferocity against them to this day.

    They were requesting respect from their parents and siblings. It was a horrible and unusual thing that was done against them by Grants parents and siblings. It was cruel and premeditated on many levels and was continued from NZ into Australia, ignoring Grants being beaten up, ignoring Fang being raped, ignoring Grants illegal Rotorua dismissal in 2000 and the consequences of many other acts against Grant Elmsly and his family members, so Grants parents and siblings could hide their heinous act against him and his family

    Today as a result Grant Elmsly, his wife and sons are banned and legally stopped from attending their Dads terminal illness and funeral in Rotorua.

    Grant Elmsly, his wife and sons have among other things been imprisoned, beaten, disinherited, ostracised and sadly have a fear, from how they have been treated so far, a fear of their parents and siblings and what they will do next. Grants parents and siblings are masters of power and manipulation.

    Grants parents and siblings have gone to extraordinary lengths since 1998, using extreme ferocity, venom and hate filled haste to protect themselves. Grants parents and siblings protect themselves with well paid lawyers, a NZ Family Court system that is blind to justice, a ton of money and a well documented past history of interpersonal and inter family abuse that apparently is to be perpetuated now into the next generation. Indeed winner takes all and possession being nine tenths of the law is Grants parents and siblings conscious mantra.

    Even though Grants Dad is dying of bone and prostate cancer, the calculated travesty against Grant and his family was recently justified by the statement, even by Grants Dad that business is business. Grants parents and siblings recent stated aim was to use the legal system in NZ to prevent any discussion and indeed any next generation discussion of their affinity fraud. They have more or less succeeded.

    Grants parents and siblings are satisfied now. The threats and legal manoeuvrings against Grant and his family have stopped now that Grant and his family have been prevented from going to NZ, getting legal help in NZ and getting a peaceful resolution or any justice by the way Grants parents and siblings have manipulated the NZ Family Court, NZ people and the situation. Grants parents and siblings were even gloating about the extreme punishments they were going to hand out against Grant as the head of his family if he came to NZ. Grants parents and siblings were happy to speak against Grant when he was not there to defend himself. Grants parents and siblings have sown it all up. Well done to them.

    NZ Family Court is a sop to rich people who want a business like decision to be made that ignores any repercussions against humanity. Grants parents and siblings are avid consumers of the NZ Family Court.

    signed by Grant and Fang

    Comment by Grant and fang Elmsly — Thu 31st July 2014 @ 11:54 am

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