MENZ ISSUES

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

New Family Court (Supporting Children in Court) Legislation Bill – Now only one reading away from becoming law.

Filed under: General,Law & Courts — Lukenz @ 6:27 am Tue 22nd June 2021

In a lot of cases children who want to see dad, they will have their say. That being said, lets get down to the real world. The worlds most cunning animal is the human. To head the above scenario off, a woman need only alienate the child before lawyer for child gets to interview the child.

In my view, if a child has been alienated by one parent, the child need only repeat what they hear from that parent and the other parent won’t be seeing that child anytime soon. No prize for guessing which gender does the alienation.

Where is the legislation to outlaw and call alienation violence?

Family Court (Supporting Children in Court) Legislation Bill

The bill seeks to:

• Reinforce the expectation that a child should have reasonable opportunities to participate in decisions affecting their care and welfare.
• ensure that lawyers appointed to represent children in proceedings are suitably qualified to represent the child or young person and that they explain proceedings to their clients.
• Require lawyers to facilitate the efficient resolution of disputes in order to minimise harm to children, families, and whānau.
• Reinforce the need for the court to recognise and respond appropriately to family violence, particularly the impact it has on children.

New Zealand National Party differing view.

The National Party does not support this bill because, while improvements to children’s participation are to be welcomed, this law would see more disputes in court and a more legalistic approach involving more lawyers. As many submitters noted, this would make things worse not better for children.

In relation to child participation, we would note we heard from multiple submitters that it is not in every instance in a child’s welfare and best interests to actively participate. For example, where it involves confronting trauma or significant family acrimony it can be harmful. Additionally, over-exposure to multiple professionals and to the court case can lead to a sense of responsibility for the decisions made.

We also agree with the related concern that this bill is proceeding without the benefit of research from which to develop an evidence-based model for children’s participation and guidelines about the circumstances where children should be involved.

This leads to concerns we have about lawyers for the child, given that this bill will lead to an even more central role for them. Many submitters raised concerns about the role and lack of training and lack of skills of lawyer for child when it comes to such important matters as child development and psychology or sexual violence. We agree with this concern. Other professionals with skills and training relevant to children could do a better job out of court.

More court process and lawyers are not the answer. Finally, in support of our view we point to the international practices we were made aware of during the select committee process. With this law, New Zealand will see more cases in court with more primacy provided to lawyers than in any of the several comparable jurisdictions we looked at. Almost invariably these jurisdictions use other professionals such as psychologists or social workers more than they do lawyers with variable training and knowledge of dealing with children.

22 Responses to “New Family Court (Supporting Children in Court) Legislation Bill – Now only one reading away from becoming law.”

  1. ErasingDad says:

    I’m in favour of the bill. A focal point is to try and remove the adversarial nature and litigation aspects. LFC’s already have all the power. But they muzzle children and filter what they want through biased court reporting. Lawyers should be encouraged to seek agreements and cooperation outside of the court process. As most of us know, women use the court process to punish and seek revenge.

  2. Evan Myers says:

    In a normal intact family there is a mother and a father encouraging the mind of the child.

    How many different people do we now have in competition for the mind of the child?

    In the end the same position will be arrived at once again.

    The father is the only competent guardian of the child.

    That’s how the fight ended last time too.

  3. golfa says:

    So let me get this right ….. L4C are now supposed to explain to their “clients” (read children) the proceedings in the Court. Yet when parents do this, they are punished for discussing “adult issues” and are told to lie to their children … ie. “I know you want to see me more but Mummy and Daddy are trying to sort it out”

  4. Lukenz says:

    I prefer to keep matters away from the courtroom, negotiate and have them red stamped by a Judge after the agreement. Without that red stamp, your agreement may as well be printed on toilet paper.

    In my view, courtrooms are for people who can’t agree.

    It is the questioning of the child who is in the current custody of its mother and her influence that concerns me.

    LC4’s are like a box of chocolates. You can get an amazing one, an OK one and one that is a hard line man hater. What a nightmare that would be.

  5. DJ Ward says:

    Dad has his say.
    Mum has her say.
    Lawyer for dad speaks.
    Lawyer for mum speaks.
    Police speak.
    Psychologists speak.
    Lawyers speak.
    Witnesses speak.
    Service providers speak.
    The judge speaks.

    And now, the child.
    Must speak.

    Cowardly adults.
    All speaking, making no decisions.
    Placing such a burden, of hurting others.
    On the most innocent.

    Just more, and more to fight for.
    More chance of corruption.
    Perfect, for racketeering.
    Crooks.

  6. Dadvocate says:

    I have today seen the dirtiest alienation tactic yet to be played in my case.

    Got a surprise call from one of my children via their device, call was usurped by other parent within moments to seek clarification. Had a gut feeling something was wrong, and should not have answered. other parent regularly witholds contact using this method, so a call outside of ordered dates/times should have rung a bigger alarm bell.

    Clearly seeking to foster distrust of child in me.

    Call to establish why not there to receive child, child had a balloon.

    In reality other parent misinterpreted order (9th time in as many weeks)odd for a person in administration for almost 20 years, to have such a failing grasp on the english language.
    Child due to spend birthday weekend here in around 3 weeks, feel other parent wanted birthday weekend to self.

    Naturally upset child ended call without saying goodbye, obvious to author parent that child was setup with view to fail from party less concerned with his psychological well being.

    Other parent recently had urgent application shat on by judge, earlier in the week. And will understandably feel the pending shift in power and the loss of that power imbalance other parent has been high on for some time.

    Perhaps counsel for applicant should have been urged to clarify clients misunderstanding prior to the weekend instead of filing vexatious litigation. Talk about seeking conflict. And demonstrating in front of child.

    Why such a rogue tactic? Presumably as (clever) judge recently invoked fcr 416ua while giving sole leave to c4c to raise safety concerns and that other parent likely now feels powerless that wont be heard in the interim.

    I will be another week before I can console my child, hopefully I can smooth this over. Child not 5 yet.

    Other parent has opposed contact voraciously for 12 months and only very recently got things running in that respect, after being forced by the courts.

  7. Lukenz says:

    @6 There are a few reason why your X withholds contact. In no order.

    1. Power and control.
    2. It punishes you.
    3. It hurts you to know your child is hurt.
    4. To make your child estranged from you.
    5. It allows her to stay in the family home.
    6. It allows her to hold on to all the items in the family home.

    There are many tricks, not answering the device, her in the background just waiting to record one word out of place. Not being on time.

    Keep diary. Keep an account.

    In the end, your child will come back to you. It is however the lost childhood that will never been regained.

    The court must keep contact going. They know this is important. You should let the court know what is going on. It can build up over time and result in more forced contact.

  8. Dadvocate says:

    @7 Thanks for responding. “Solace from a stranger”

    Power struggle – check
    Punishment – Check
    There is no doubt in my mind hurting child to hurt me is a tool other parent might use.
    Device only makes calls, briefly, never is to receive. Other parent always lurking in shadows.
    Other parent definitely wants child to have less contact, last 8 weeks spent using childish lawyer trying to force “changes” on interim order.

    “Sand and seashells” content of recent urgent application for judicial conference. Yes read that right.

    Child is clever and often ends calls the moment other parent begins to interfere. Witnessing power struggle developing between parent and child as child seems to resist being controlled, child very much like Dadvocate. Very strong bond with child and Dadvocate that other parent is unsuccessfully trying to undermine, hence brutal attack with balloon as chosen weapon. Symbolic interference. Other parent has very fragile sense of self, and sees child as extension of her or even personal property.

    Diary – Check.

    Am under impression the court wishes not to humiliate other parent as have been very accepting of weak reasoning for “mistakes” yet I see the “between the lines” references from His Honour to his observation of other underhanded tactics not referenced here.

    I remain adamant the behaviour should come under open scrutiny, but her mental health might not hold out.

    I’m a self litigant and have impending RTM to be convened, is there someone I can talk to in private about what happens next ?

  9. golfa says:

    #8 If you are in Auckland …. I suggest you attend the Auckland Parent’s Support Group. Meetings are held every Thursday at 6.45pm in the Melville Cricket Pavilion, Melville Park, 18-20 St Andrews Road, Epsom. There is plenty of parking at the north end of St Andrews Road. And a Lawyer is present. Bring a pen and paper because you’ll be given the best advice from seasoned Family Court victims !

  10. Dadvocate says:

    #9 Thanks for the heads up, I am further down the South Island.

  11. Brenda says:

    Greetings,

    I’m not the best speller but I see the word “Psuedo” is spelled incorrectly on your website. In the past I’ve used a service like SpellAlerts.com or SiteChecker.com to help keep mistakes off of my websites.

    -Brenda

  12. Very Nice post!
    It was exceptionally helpful! I heartily impressed by your blog and learn more from your article, thank you so much for sharing with us. Parental Alienation Canada keep doing awesome, You will get well-informed data about it here.

  13. Kstar says:

    The lawyer for child (LFC) system concerns me. I’ve just lost all contact with my daughter as a result of our LFC. Going back to Court to revise a parenting order we had a new LFC. The LFC is very active with the local womens refuge (on board etc) and certainly a stereotypical man hater type. My daughter advised her she is fine with both parents but as she is suffering mental health issues LFC pushed that mum is the ‘safer’ person to talk to. The night before Court I was advised (quite late) that LFC was now changing her submission and wanted all contact between me and daughter cut (quote “until her mental health stabilised” – have a great relationship with my daughter’s counsellors who have never raised any issues of danger from either parent and in fact been very encouraging and supportive). At court she promised Judge further evidence would be obtained. All contact was cut – I haven’t seen my daughter for 2 months now. Ive been pushing for this “evidence” but it has never happened – i even spoke to the people the LFC was supposed to get the evidence from (counsellor and school etc) and they haven’t been contacted. At a recent directions conference my ex – (daughter’s mother) agreed to me resuming contact with my daughter (publicly anyway). My daughters counsellor also is strongly supportive of this and even offered to assist with this. However LFC again strongly opposed this. I have my son week-about and we have a great relationship. LFC has advised Court she is ‘concerned’ about him. I feel like throwing in the towel but know I have to stay strong to stop her trying to do the same thing with my son.

  14. Evan Myers says:

    In the alienation process daughters are the weak link.

    Once the mother has successfully alienated a daughter that sets up a dynamic where the daughter doesn’t want to be alone and will begin to isolate the son.

    The perpetual hate machine doesn’t stop.

  15. golfa says:

    #13 Kstar. I suggest you put in an Application to remove the L4C and ask for a replacement. If you are in Auckland, I suggest you attend this meeting on Thursday night. “Meetings are held every Thursday at 6.45pm in the Melville Cricket Pavilion, Melville Park, 18-20 St Andrews Road, Epsom. There is plenty of parking at the north end of St Andrews Road.”

    Bring pen and paper because you’ll be given a lot of information and you won’t remember it all as your head will be spinning !

  16. DJ Ward says:

    #13 Kstar.

    Sometimes you just have to shake your head, and go WTF.

    A lawyer for child, who is openly tainted.
    IE represents female perspectives.
    Represents women, in a paid capacity.
    Then given rights, in a court of law.
    To be the Judge, that the Judge surrenders to.
    And recommends banning a parent, from a child’s life.

    Even the Taliban, would think that unjust.
    And there a bit crazy on the Justice stuff.
    Sounds like theft of your rights, corruptly.
    There is a striking difference of course.
    The Taliban, prosecute for known lawbreaking.
    It doesn’t matter, if the laws a little bit crazy.
    Or that the punishment is cruel, and inhuman.
    Like banning a person from being a parent.
    Without any standard, of justice.
    Far worse than the Taliban.
    The justice is cruel, but honest.
    Here, justice is cruel, but dishonest.

  17. DJ Ward says:

    And I remember.
    From a wise mans, sacrifice.

    In Iran they stone mothers.
    In New Zealand they stone fathers.

  18. Lukenz says:

    Kstar.

    What part of NZ do you live in?

    That LFC is nothing more than a thug. A criminal by humanity standards. Getting her qualification for the sole purpose to cause families, loving dads a mess in their lives.

    Kstar, you are a good man, you are a good father. Don’t give up fighting for your daughter. She needs you to fight for her. Never surrender her rights to a dad who loves her. She is relying on you to stand up.

    The LFC has zero concern for the future wellbeing of your children and should be replaced. Contact

    Golfa as soon as you can.

  19. ErasingDad says:

    #13 – I have been through a similar experience. I was prevented from seeing my children for over 9 months. The LFC (Lisa Halford) has done nothing but create barriers. While you can try to get the LFC changed, the other way is to turn the tables. It takes a lot of patience. I actually filed a discontinuance because of the LFC’s biased behaviour. I have an LCF (Long Cause Fixture) judge now as the case file is immense. I think having an LCF judge is key. They can see patterns of behaviour from the other parent and counsel over time. I was getting no where with the continual coin toss of judges for each conference/hearing. Some judges will hide behind the LFC. I’m thankful now that I will always have the same judge who actively engages the LFC in support of my relationship with my children. Hang in there, push for an LCF judge if you can. Your counsel will advise the pros/cons of changing the LFC. It doesn’t always work.

  20. Downunder says:

    We used to call them, judge managed cases.

    In retrospect having been through the whole 9 yards for the best outcome I wouldn’t do it again.

    Sick bitches don’t get better through the process, they only get sicker and more destructive.

    If mothers behave this way there really is only one resolution. If they’re not sick enough to lock away them fathers should get full custody.

    End of.

  21. ErasingDad says:

    #20 – You are right. The other parent will get away with a hell of a lot of provocative and hostile behaviour. Don’t even dare to try and get justice or retribution. The system simply doesn’t allow that as an outcome for men. It’s a hard choice whether or not a man stays within the family court mincer. I have slowly begun turning the corner and that’s only because I have a judge who won’t tolerate nonsense, not even from the LFC. The judge understood my reasons for wanting to discontinue, (hostility from the mother, no support from the LFC, a broken system, financial drain etc) but the LFC tried to weaponize it as if it were evidence I didn’t care for the children. The Judge didn’t want a bar of it and knocked the LFC back. 8 judges have been across my case so far and this was the first to have reigned in the LFC. The judge also told the mother that she would be holding her to account for making sure I was given every opportunity to rebuild my relationship with the children after being separated for so long.

    I was blown away.

  22. DJ Ward says:

    I admire you guys for your perseverance.
    I only had 2 events with the courts.
    First attempt to stop me seeing my son.
    Was sorted out with an interview with a lady.
    I got one visit a month out of that, process.
    Ignored from the beginning.
    Then a second time with a day in court.
    Defending against a protection order.
    And permanently stoping me seeing my son.
    Represented myself.
    And stoped the attempt.
    Winning the holiday weekends, and 3 weeks over Christmas.
    If that’s winning.
    And payed my child support.

    So my battles were small.
    Only having to restrain a conversation, in court.
    Just to get my win.
    Forced to be the beggar.

    I have lost my need, for restraint.

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