MENZ ISSUES

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

NO KIDDING!!

Filed under: General — mama @ 8:43 am Fri 2nd November 2018

Some things are so obvious they apparantly do not need saying…but it is okay, we have free speech and we can Babble if we want to…Mansplaining encouraged…

11 Responses to “NO KIDDING!!”

  1. mama says:

    First 2 headlines accross the screen of a morning show….

    IMMIGRATION LAWYER SAYS APPLICATIONS WITH FALSE INFORMATION A BIG PROBLEM…tell me about it.

    PSYCHOLOGIST SAYS MORE PARENTAL EMOTIONAL HELP NEEDED AFTER SEPARATION..all the rage.

  2. Downunder says:

    It’s not just immigration and Family Court applications, Mama, the lie has become a currency.

  3. mama says:

    I know ,,, just imagine if a FC lawyer came out exclaiming the same…what a fantasy.

  4. Evan Myers says:

    I think his name was Terry Carson, a Family Court lawyer from way back when who published an article about how bad the Family Court was – remind of the title if I’m wrong but was it called “Fiction in the Family Court”?

  5. Evan Myers says:

    Blimey!

    Google even found an old MENZ article about it …

    https://menz.org.nz/Information/dvact1995.htm

  6. mama says:

    I did not hear about the submission process when it was available to the public,, apparently they have had all of 300!! submissions on the relationship act review, I wonder how many they had for this one…the Evidence Act…

    Under section 202 of the Act, the Commission must consider whether the Act’s provisions should be retained or repealed; and if they should be retained, whether amendments are “necessary or desirable”. The review is not intended to revisit the Act’s fundamental policy settings. However, the Commission is required, on this occasion, to extend its review to consider some policy matters arising in relation to evidence in sexual and family violence cases.

    Surely,,, surely, they can spend a little money on advertising the submission process for these life changing Acts,, this is a democracy right??

  7. DJ Ward says:

    They are going to introduce Alimony to compensate stay at home parents.
    They are going to make the family home goes to the parents with the kids until settlement.
    Plus 50% rulings to compensate stay at home parents.
    Easily opened trusts.
    The best interests of the child will become Matrimonial Property standard.

    I wonder who the law Commision support.
    Lawyers will be loving this change with the added incentive for women to get the kids.

    The only good thing is the shift to 50:50 relationship earnings with beginning assets protected. So the 3 year sexual predator won’t get much but a 25 year relationship is similar to present rules.

  8. mama says:

    The ONE thing I abhore the most is ‘ the use of children’ act, currently on television is the spark advertisement, ‘we’re gunna rule the world’ and the children are looking mean.

    but when government is doing it too, it becomes the ultimate excuse, how can you deny changes that pitch the best interest of the child…but the key, this word beginning with the letter c is being bandied about like ‘ a rubber duckee’, for want of a better faster description.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mh85R-S-dh8

  9. mama says:

    #5,, Evan Above ,,was good to read this,,danka.

    Fiction In The Family Court
    In the May 2001 edition of New Zealand Lawyer magazine, lawyer Terry Carson reveals how the Family Court offers great opportunities for budding fiction writers. He says the main rule for drafting applications for temporary protection orders is to use plenty of adjectives and adverbs. It is much more effective for an applicant client not merely to be hit but to be “heavily punched”. A fall during the course of a scuffle is more impressive if it is described as “the respondent violently threw me to the floor”. If the respondent uses a few swear words during a verbal argument refer to it in the affidavit as being “a torrent of obscene abuse.” It will catch the Judge’s eye better that way.

    When the Domestic Violence Act 1995 came into force, Carson had been practising family law for about 26 years. He immediately noticed that significant numbers of men began coming into his office complaining about the orders served on them. Almost without exception they referred to acts committed by the applicant towards them which on the face of it would have justified them applying for a protection order. Real concern was often expressed about how mum would cope with the children on her own now dad was kept out of the home by the interim protection order.

    Carson says: “You have to ask whether granting a temporary protection order to the partner who first rushes to Court and gives a one-sided view of the problem for the Court in the absence of significant physical violence is the appropriate way to deal with such situations. Sometimes a temporary protection order seems more a prize for speed rather than need.”

    He concludes: “We need to remember that the function of the Court is to serve the public. There is far too much unrest in part of our community for us to believe that all is right with the Court. A close look at the way temporary protection orders are applied for and granted would be a good starting point towards maintaining public confidence in the Family Court.”

Leave a Reply

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar