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

Family Court Proceedings Bill Submission Kitset

Filed under: Child Support,Domestic Violence,Gender Politics,General,Law & Courts,Sex Abuse / CYF — MurrayBacon @ 1:12 pm Wed 19th December 2012

Write Your own Submissions on Family Court Proceedings Reform Bill.

Submissions close on 13th February 2013

Post to:
Committee Secretariat
Justice and Electoral Committee,
Allow more than sufficient time for postal delivery.
Submissions on paper must be supplied as 2 identical signed paper copies.
Submission of a signed submission by post probably helps the credibility of your submission, compared to electronic submission. It also takes more effort for the clerk to redact, than an electronic submission.

You may also submit your submission, on the Parliamentary website: Look down to bottom of page.

Phone: +64 4 817 9508 ??? maybe not best telephone number, but taken from Parliamentary website.
Fax: +64 4 499 0486


This kitset does not follow the recommendations given in the booklet – Making a Submission to a Parliamentary Select Committee. The reason is that most readers of this kitset have personal experience or a friend with experience with Family Court which should be communicated to Parliament. They may not want to spend the time to go through the details of the Family Court Matters Bill 2012.

As a result, they are not in a position to comment on the technical details of the Bill, but may have strong feelings about Family Court practice. It is important to protect our democracy and our children, so citizens should do the best that they are able.

Please speak to your friends and family and try to persuade them to make their own submissions. Politicians will only be influenced, if there is a large number of submissions and a much larger number of signatures and addresses on them.


Making a Submission to a Parliamentary Select Committee – Procedural Advice
Procedural Advice.pdf

Natural justice before select committees – if you accuse someone and name them, then natural justice is important:
The clerk of the Committee may refuse to accept any submission, in which you accuse any named person, party, lawyer, or judge of illegal or improper conduct. For this reason, if you wish to make a submission which truthfully shows improper conduct, I suggest that you take it to your local MP and sign each page and have the MP witness your submission. In this way, you may be able to avoid your submission being trashed. Such submissions should be submitted early, to allow time for negotiating these issues.


Your submission has more persuasive power, if it sounds balanced. For this reason, you must say some positive things about the Family Court:

The judge clearly explained the hearing procedure that was to follow.
The Family Court judge was well dressed and almost on time to the hearing.
The court appointed counsel for child helped smooth negotiations between myself and my ex-wife, so that we were able to make an agreement, before proceeding to a hearing.
The Registrar was helpful in telling me where to go, to get help.
The weather was nice on the day of the hearing, with a clear blue sky over the Family Court.
The Family Court process helped my son to resolve denied access issues and together with counselling, helped improve the after divorce relationship. The time delays did allow plenty of time for cooling off, from the frustration at the time delays.
The judge listened carefully to everything I said and did everything that my ex-wife asked for. Extended tea and lunch breaks allowed plenty of time for parties to regain their composure and pay parking meters all across town.
The Family Court easily allowed me to cutoff all access between my children and their father, which was just what I wanted. My children are badly damaged as a result of my husband’s cutoff access and he should be punished for the damage that he has done.
The Family court moved swiftly to resolve allegations of domestic violence against me. The process only took 5 times the maximum allowable time set down in legislation (42 days). The impact on my relationship with my children was only devastating. I would willingly use their services again.
There was ample parking outside the Family Court, in Kingston Street, Auckland, in the area marked Police!
After only 3 years and 8 months from my son’s application, I was able to see my grandson when he turned 16 years old.
After several years of denied access to their father, my eldest daughter committed suicide. This wasn’t a problem, as I had planned ahead and had two other daughters, to allow for shrinkage.
The Family Court is efficient at managing money and they should be put in charge of MP’s superannuation funds.

Submission Starters:

The following starters are based on commonplace situations. You may take one, delete bits, change it around, perhaps add bits from any others that are relevant, to make your own submission. If you can persuade your friends and/or family to sign and put down their address too, then this will greatly increase your persuasive power.

The main thing is submit it well before the cutoff date 13/2/2013.

You may make several submissions. This is worthwhile, if some issues covered will not all be supported by some of your signers. Separate the issues, to suit the people signing your submissions.

You could assist your friends, by thinking through their situation and extracting the relevant materials from below, to EMAIL them a template, to start them off. Many people need quite a bit of assistance, to overcome the pain that has been suffered along the way.
Ideally, this pain should not result in them losing their democratic rights.
1. Child Support Appeals to Family Court

Child Support payments are unfair for the following reasons:

The cost of appealing to Family Court is far too high, so that very few fathers or mothers can afford to make such an appeal. This denies a workable right of appeal to almost all child support payers.

Child support is calculated as a percentage of gross income, so that men earning more than the average wage end up paying far more than the costs of raising children, as illustrated by the extra benefit given to beneficiaries for an additional child, proportionally reduced to adjust for the time the child is actually in the care of the child report beneficiary..

The child support payment above the cost of raising a child is essentially spousal support, but it continues on after the mother has established a new relationship. This is an unjustified financial transfer from the father to the mother of the child.

The excessive transfer of child support results in many women refusing to allow access between the child and it’s father. The child is effectively made fatherless, with all of the risks that entails, just so the mother can take the highest possible cash payment. The child support becomes a perverse incentive, encouraging the mother to behave in a manner which is quite against the interest of the child to have a healthy upbringing and access to both parents. The Family Court fails to protect children from this child abusive behaviour.

My own or my friend’s experience with these problems was…….

2. Relationship Property Act

The Family Court does not act consistently on this act. This results in many more cases going to court, that if the court’s interpretations were consistent, parties could settle by amicable negotiation. This deliberately erratic behaviour enriches lawyers and judges alike. The Government is failing to manage the conflicts of interest, resulting in the legal profession taking much unearned income from Government and citizens.

To force large transfers, after just 2 or 3 years, creates a dangerous perverse incentive for asset poor people to breakup relationships. This is against the interests of children and against the interests of hard working, taxpaying citizens. In any case, much of this wrongful transfer payment is fritted away and wasted within a short time.

My own or my friend’s experience with these problems was…….

3. Family Court hearings are spun out to take far longer than the issues at hand would justify. This enables lawyers and judges to take more money from Government and parents, than would occur in an honest situation. This thievery impoverishes families and greatly adds to the suffering of parents and children alike. The added stress put onto families to force them to open up their wallets, damages unnecessarily the family relationships, again seriously to the disadvantage of the children.

My own or my friend’s experience with these problems was…….
4. Legal Aid results in a non-level playing ground, encouraging aided litigants to make many meritless cases to court. The legally aided party is protected from an award of costs against them, even when their application has no merit. Although there is a procedure that should protect the tax paying litigant from this abuse, if is often not operated by judges, so that the process is seriously abusive of the tax paying litigant. This is double abuse of taxpayers, through the Government legal aid costs and the direct legal costs to the individual taxpayer. The benefit is taken by lawyers, as unjust enrichment.

The individual cases are abusive, but there is also damage to society due to legal aided litigants gaining iniquitous precedents as a result. This causes further damage to the productive, honest sectors of society and retards NZ’s development.

My own or my friend’s experience with these problems was…….

5. The Family Court tends to leave each party to pay their own legal costs, even where these have resulted from abuse of process by one party. This actively creates perverse incentives for meritless cases to proceed to court. This is a conflict of interest, in that lawyers and judges take large personal benefit, from the legal bills that result from meritless and abusive cases proceeding to court. The Government has a duty to protect taxpayers from this large destructive waste of society’s wealth, but they fail to act as most MPs are lawyers. This is another destructive unmanaged conflict of interest. The United States operates constructive allocations of wasted costs and NZ should follow this good example.

My own or my friend’s experience with these problems was…….

6. When Family Court orders are breached, fathers find that additional costs are required, to gain enforcement. This extra procedures delay enforcement, particularly if the breach occurred during a weekend, diminishing any value that proper enforcement would have had. Even when these extra, unjustified costs have been paid, they find that the Family Court usually refuses to enforce it’s own orders. As a result, there is very little point in fathers attempting to deal with Family Court in good faith, as the deceptions destroy any value that the Family Court actions might otherwise have had.

My own or my friend’s experience with these problems was…….

7. Domestic Violence Act may ALLOW a judge to proceed without any evidence, but it does not REQUIRE them to proceed in the absence of evidence. When they restrict and damage access between children and fathers, they are damaging the quality of the children’s relationships and protection. These actions increase the hazards that children are exposed to, so that the children are usually at more danger than they were originally in. Although this is REQUIRED by law to be resolved inside 42 days, it almost always runs on for many months. Thus the actions of the judge are not protective, but extremely damaging to the children and the father. The judge and the lawyers have taken financial gain, at significant cost to the children’s safety and wellbeing. This conflict of interest is managed by lawyers and judges for their own benefit, at the cost of the families. The Government should manage this conflict of interest, to protect the public.

In my own or my friend’s situation, this resulted in……… The effects on the children were……

8. Family Court tolerates and encourages perjury.

When perjury is not punished, then this creates a perverse incentive to play games and bring meritless cases to Family Court.

The judge and the lawyers have taken financial gain, at significant cost to the children’s safety and wellbeing. This conflict of interest is managed by lawyers and judges for their own benefit, at the cost of the families. The Government should manage this conflict of interest, to protect the public.

In my own or my friend’s situation, this resulted in………
9. Failure to protect children from abusive parents.

The classic publicised example was Jayden Headley and Kay Skelton. It took 5 years for the Family Court to act sensibly and protect Jayden Headley from his mother. During this time, they sided with the mother, through multiple abductions and one international abduction. This extended tolerance of the mother’s abusive behaviour seriously risked Jayden’s welfare, just so the Family Court could maximise their charges to Jayden’s parents. By refusing to competently listen to Jayden’s father, they were able to take the maximum money from this ex-family.

This behaviour is not protecting the child, it is protecting their own paramount financial interests. The judge and the lawyers have taken financial gain, at significant cost to the children’s safety and wellbeing. This conflict of interest is managed by lawyers and judges for their own benefit, at the cost of the families. The Government should manage this conflict of interest, to protect the public.

These problems have been going on for over 30 years. This has caused far too much damage to family relationships, just so that lawyers and judges could take improper advantage of these situations.

In my own or my friend’s situation, this resulted in……… The effects on the children were……

11. Hague Convention for Civil Aspects of Abduction of Children.

By NZ being signatory of the Hague Convention, most parents are misled about the degree of protection that children have, when outside of NZ. Judges and lawyers tell parents about the Convention and imply that it offers a degree of protection from abduction when children are outside of NZ.

If the children are abducted, as happens to about 200 children each year, then the left behind parent slowly starts to discover the truth about the Hague Convention. NZ is as bad as any other country, as it frequently refuses to return children to other countries, especially if the abductor was a NZ mother. NZ fathers discover that many other countries are as non-compliant as NZ about returning children to NZ after abductions.

The main beneficiary of the Hague Convention are NZ lawyers and judges. Costs to the Government would be reduced by about $50 million per year if NZ withdrew from that treaty. NZ children would be safer, as parents would not be misled into allowing their children to be taken overseas. This is especially a problem, as about 85% of abductors are mothers and most of the abducted children never see their left behind fathers again.

In my own or my friend’s situation, this resulted in……… The effects on the children were……

12. Appeal Process Dishonoured

Appeals may be heard in Family Court or in High Court. Generally allowing the judge appealed against to hear the appeal seems like a nonsense and an abrogation of the right given in legislation, to make an appeal.

Even when an appeal is heard in High Court, it is often a sham hearing. To accept an application fee, but not address the issues raised, is just an abusive process. This is financially abusive thievery and socially abusive too. The damage wrought may seriously affect the upbringing of the children and the quality of the parent’s lives.

To nugate the proper process of hearings invites parties to neglect Family Court and take violent actions outside of the court process, as they know that they can have no faith in the competence or the integrity of the court process. Sham hearings are a perversion of the course of justice.

In my own or my friend’s situation, this resulted in……… The effects on the children were……

13. Family Court fails to protect children from emotional neglect by mothers.

The Family Court encourages sensational reporting of child violent deaths, about 10 or 20 per year. Mostly, these are done by men.

The Family Court assists women who have killed children by suffocation, to keep these incidents out of media. The 40% done by women are excused and not publicly reported.

I am concerned about all children killed by parents, whether violently, by suffocation, drowning in bath or run over by cars, or denied medical treatment.

I am much more concerned about babies and children emotionally neglected by their carers, mostly women. If caregivers are depressed or unmotivated, then the babies are usually seriously damaged by emotional neglect. This is not easily visible, but the damage is harder to recover from than broken bones or stab wounds. Recovery may take decades or never be completed. This damage affects 10% of our children.

Most of these children never make satisfactory progress through school. No matter what extra assistance is given at school, progress is poor or disastrous. We cannot blame teachers for what was done to a baby in its first year of life. As adults, these people are inept at making sensible decisions and understanding the consequences of their actions. They are crippled at reading body language and executive decisionmaking.

Our Family Court is completely silent about protecting these hundreds of thousands of children! These children ultimately consume huge amounts of Government resources and are not able to contribute properly to society. Why is the Family Court so inactive about protecting these children, almost all fatherless as a result of Family Court actions. This disaster is costing NZ more than Leaky Buildings and Think Big put together.

NZ does not prepare good quality statistics on child neglect. The USA does, so the USA data probably gives the best indication of child neglect occurring in NZ. . The Fourth National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect (NIS-4) Report to Congress is complete and is available at

The NIS is a congressionally mandated, periodic research effort to assess the incidence of child abuse and neglect in the United States. The NIS gathers information from multiple sources to estimate the number of children who are abused or neglected children, providing information about the nature and severity of the maltreatment, the characteristics of the children, perpetrators, and families, and the extent of changes in the incidence or distribution of child maltreatment since the time of the last national incidence study.

We need to effectively protect baby’s and children’s interests and healthy development

14. Parents do not have good information about Family Court

When parents start dealing with the Family Court they often find that it proceeds in a completely different way from what they had expected.

This takes them hugely by surprise and increases the stresses that they are subjected to, in a manner which is not helpful to the ongoing care of their children. These stresses often allow them to be billed unreasonably and in the long run impoverishes the care that they are able to give their children. Some parents even commit suicide, about 20 women and 150 men per year. Some parents leave NZ to escape from these pressures. These factors result in the poor children being left in a relatively unsupported situation and I estimate that in the long term about 20 of their children suicide too.

Thus, provision of not-misleading information is essential to protect children and parent’s proper interests in life.

In my own or my friend’s situation, this resulted in……… The effects on the children were……


  1. thanks for that. I’m still reading through it. It is MOST helpful.

    Comment by Divorced Man — Wed 19th December 2012 @ 1:39 pm

  2. Dear Divorced Man, the above material is general. If you have any need for more detailed information, please feel free to contact me (09) 638 7275. It is Christmas time and presently I am less dangerous.

    Perhaps the Family Cort Isn’t Working – Steve Taylor in Daily News
    Steve Taylor’s Press Release [about Judge Boshier and the latest Family Court Reforms]
    New Zealand Family Court Stories Convenor Steve Taylor
    New book: Have You Seen My Child – abduction
    Murial Newman’s Shared Parenting Bill by Stuart Birks – with actual Bill as appendix

    Separated with Children by Adam Cowie – Book Review
    Alec Baldwin published his Family Court experiences and it has an excellent analysis of lawyer’s games
    A promise to ourselves : a journey through fatherhood and divorce / Alec Baldwin ACC Library Onehunga non-fiction Biography 920 BAL AVAILABLE
    The kidnapping of Jayden Headley by Kay Skelton his mother
    Another protest against PAS and the ‘family’ ‘courts’
    Protection Orders – The Quantitative Figures

    Administrative Review in IRD New Zealand – Thoughts from a divorced man
    Corrupt IRD New Zealand Administrative Review Commissioner “Harrison”
    Child Support Review – NZCPR Guest Forum – Opinion piece by Bruce Tichbon
    The framing and econometrics of child support
    Child Support – unfair doubling up of support payments where provision has already been made via voluntary agreement
    Child Support Admin Review Officer Mark W Miller Caught Out

    NZ police-nearly-50-per-cent-of-children-who-die-as-a-result-of-family-violence-are-killed-by-their-mothers
    Child Neglect – minutes or months?
    Protecting Children Through Separation

    Accountability that was never really intended to work !

    Not waving but drowning: preventing male suicide
    Costs from False Allegations
    Legislative Process in Perspective
    Protecting your children from familycaught$

    Earlier submission about protecting customers from predatory pricing – ignored by Judith Collins
    Sir Peter Bashier retrd.

    Interview with Jonathan Lynn, writer of Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister:
    My views on politicians haven’t changed at all. I think that, when young, they mostly start out as well-meaning do-gooders, however misguided, but with an unfortunate and highly exaggerated sense of their own abilities. Then they have to swallow so many compromises as they climb the greasy pole that by the time they get to the pinnacle they are no longer the same people. They have been corrupted, one way or another. My view is that we should regard all politicians, and all others who wish to have power over us, with the utmost suspicion.

    Wikipedia/Yes Minister
    In a 2004 documentary, Armando Iannucci compared Yes Minister to George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four in how it has influenced the public’s view of the state. Although Lynn comments that the word “spin” has “probably entered the political vocabulary since the series,”[6] Iannucci suggests that the show “taught us how to unpick the verbal tricks that politicians think they can get away with in front of the cameras.”[7] The series depicted the media-consciousness of politicians, reflecting the public relations training they undergo to help them deal with interviews and reading from autocue effectively. This is particularly evident in the episode “The Ministerial Broadcast”, in which Hacker is advised on the effects of his clothes and surroundings.

    The episode “A Conflict of Interest” humorously lampoons the various political stances of Britain’s newspapers through their readers (although this material was not original[8]):
    Hacker: Don’t tell me about the press. I know exactly who reads the papers: the Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country; The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country; The Times is read by people who actually do run the country; the Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country; the Financial Times is read by people who own the country; The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country; and The Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.
    Sir Humphrey: Prime Minister, what about the people who read The Sun?
    Bernard: Sun readers don’t care who runs the country, as long as she’s got big tits.

    Adam Curtis, in his three-part TV documentary The Trap, criticised the series as “ideological propaganda for a political movement”,[9] and claimed that Yes Minister is indicative of a larger movement of criticism of government and bureaucracy, centred upon public choice economics. This view has been supported by Jay himself:
    The fallacy that public choice economics took on was the fallacy that government is working entirely for the benefit of the citizen; and this was reflected by showing that in any [episode] in the programme, in Yes Minister, we showed that almost everything that the government has to decide is a conflict between two lots of private interest – that of the politicians and that of the civil servants trying to advance their own careers and improve their own lives. And that’s why public choice economics, which explains why all this was going on, was at the root of almost every episode of Yes Minister and Yes, Prime Minister.
    Although Yes Minister showed the infighting between civil servants and Government, you can imagine that the same goes on between judges and Government…….
    Secretary of Education Lesley Longstone resigns NZ Herald


    Comment by MurrayBacon — Wed 19th December 2012 @ 3:26 pm

  3. Thanks for all the work that has gone into this Murray. I like the sarcasm in the ‘positive things’ section…

    Comment by Hans Laven — Wed 19th December 2012 @ 8:36 pm

  4. @Murray – New Zealand does have talent…

    Comment by Down Under — Wed 19th December 2012 @ 9:04 pm

  5. #3 and #4 My apologies, I am laying off the clonazepam a little bit and taking a bit more fluexotine and benzodiazepam, to rebalance. Anger management might also help me, I am sure it is good for everyone, all the time! Marry the axe murderer.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Wed 19th December 2012 @ 9:36 pm

  6. Watch the weight gain with those medications Murray, you might end up needing Reductil to see if the Viagra works.

    Comment by Hans Laven — Thu 20th December 2012 @ 8:06 am

  7. #6 Cruel! I think I need to see a psychologist, I will print out a photograph of one! Cheers, Murray.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Thu 20th December 2012 @ 10:36 am

  8. preferred photo


    This could be a good link to help there Murray.

    Comment by Down Under — Thu 20th December 2012 @ 12:02 pm

  9. #8 Jeepers, all problems quickly solved, or buried deep. I do appreciate help quickly given. I like Karen Horney’s belief in self help and self management. Happy Christmas Down Under. Murray.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Thu 20th December 2012 @ 12:10 pm

  10. It is now the third week of this year and I haven’t seen one sad story about access or access denied over Christmas. I may have missed something? To be fair the number of new contributors appears to be less frequent – could this indicate an ebbing in the flow of failed Family Court cases? It will also be interesting to see how our suicide statistics represent 2012.

    Comment by Down Under — Mon 14th January 2013 @ 10:00 am

  11. Hi,

    Couldn’t find the place to post this but I thought it could be good resourse material for anyone dealing with false allegations or atleast a good read for those that have suffered.


    Comment by Too Tired — Sat 19th January 2013 @ 12:08 am

  12. And if had been found guilty of rape he would have got more than two years jail and he would have lost his job and income and possibly even his relationship and family.

    Comment by Down Under — Sat 19th January 2013 @ 6:37 am

  13. Violence and deception in the family court
    Monday, 14 January 2013, 1:19 pm
    Press Release: University of Waikato

    14 January 2012

    Violence and deception in the family court

    University of Waikato PhD student Jalesi Nakarawa has received a $25,000 Auckland Medical Aid Trust Scholarship to complete his research into violence and deception in the family court.

    Jalesi’s PhD looks at the role of violence and deception that is the reality of family court proceedings.

    He argues that aggression and deception are two fundamental traits of human nature, but current family court legal frameworks treat aggression, lying and deception as sickness or immoral behaviour.

    ‘Family court reforms should proceed from the premise that these traits are part of human nature. The family court is merely an extension of the arena where these traits are played out and in which legal fiction affords some degree of legitimacy to deception.’

    He argues that deception is not easily discernible and defendants, victims, lawyers, judges and court psychologists all inadvertently lend to the deception in family court proceedings.

    ‘When I started looking at family court cases I noticed that some judges don’t apply the law ensuring the best interest of the child and the protection of victims when dealing with domestic violence. Instead they rule on what they reason the law infers supported by theories like ‘parental alienation’ and ‘typologies of violence’ which on the whole plays against the interests of women and children.

    ‘There is a discrepancy in what the law dictates the outcome should be with some judgements being handed down in the family court,’ says Jalesi.

    ‘These judges are fathers, mothers, brothers or sisters with personal perceptions of family relationship that at times sway their deliberation. Likewise court assessments by psychologists are often designed for courtroom expediency employing language and diagnostic labelling that is not only misdirected and often damaging, but also clinically suspect.’

    To complete his research Jalesi will look at a number of New Zealand family court proceedings and use a theoretical framework to examine how domestic violence and deception play a decisive role in the outcomes. The results will then be compared to similar cases in Australia and the United Kingdom.

    The Auckland Medical Aid Trust Scholarship provides funds for individuals to undertake research towards a doctoral degree at a New Zealand university.

    Comment by Gwahir — Tue 22nd January 2013 @ 2:47 am

  14. With an unreasonable reason and without reason, he reasoned, that he was reliably reasonable and for only $25,000, very reasonable.

    Comment by Down Under — Tue 22nd January 2013 @ 6:23 am

  15. my 2 t’uppence worth: S A reminder to make your own submission, or accept your own submission forever?
    Murray – the lost.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Tue 12th February 2013 @ 3:50 pm

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