Experience of divorce?

[Bagpuss]

And that attitude is why men are now reluctant to help children in distress. There was the case of the girl knocked down that got national attention but it's happening locally all the time with lost children and so forth. To those who say child safety overrides all other considerations I say who is most likely to abuse a child? Their own parents of course. Therefore all who say such nonsense must surely support the raising of all children in state orphanages. Oh, but of course, they are "different" and would never harm a child.

Makes me sick.

Most child abuse happens within the (natural) family unit. The public perception of stalking bogeymen is largely a myth, Morover more children were abused/abducted in the 1970s than now.

[Spartacus]

Most child abuse happens within the (natural) family unit. The public perception of stalking bogeymen is largely a myth, Morover more children were abused/abducted in the 1970s than now.

Exactly Bagpuss. It's mob fear whipped up by the tabloids. The biggest danger to children is their own natural parents.

[BrilloPad]

Exactly Bagpuss. It's mob fear whipped up by the tabloids. The biggest danger to children is their own natural parents.

And that is confirmed by home office. I seem to think in 200n(where n is 2 or 3 or 4?) that 18 killed by dad. 19 by mum. and 38 by Mum's new partner. none by strangers.

The NSPCC also had stats to prove that biggest danger to kids is Mum. And that far less abuse if kids had contact with Dad. but it was pulled when NPCCC joined up with women's aid. Now they support that children should only have contact if mum says so! And gave evidence to MP select committee to that effect. Its why I hate NSPCC.

I'm not saying that men should have the power. Just a say. They do 30% of child raising (on average) so why not 30% of say. If women want equality in work(which I support) then there needs to be equality in the home.

Sorry for the rant. I must stop posting. I must stop posting.

[jeremytaxman]

Andrew, PMed you if you get some time. TIA.

[Swamp Thing]

I'm not saying that men should have the power. Just a say. They do 30% of child raising (on average) so why not 30% of say. If women want equality in work(which I support) then there needs to be equality in the home.

Spot on. I’m afraid the bias against men is institutionalised, at the courts, CAFCASS and the CSA. In my case I settled at 65% in a short marriage with one kid, no spousal maintenance. With hindsight I think I got off lightly, financially speaking. But in terms of contact, the ex applied to leave the UK with my daughter, and won in the court. On this aspect, the machinery of the legal system swung into gear against the man. The notion of 50/50 contact being good for the child was swiftly set aside in favour of the argument “Well, if the mother is not happy being in the UK, it can’t be good for the child, so they can leave”. Father’s views and daughter’s feelings were cast aside.
IRO CAFCASS, I was in the minority in that the officer supported my case for keeping my daughter in the UK. But when it came to following this through in court, the officer bottled it and came out with a watered-down assessment.
IRO of the CSA, did anyone know that, if a man (it usually is) challenges an income assessment, even if he is correct, that man will be marked up on the CSA system as a troublemaker. Future caseworkers will then be notified and immediately take the appropriate position with the man, which is to be hostile, non-receptive to logical arguments, and pursue mercilessly for more cash.

So yes, if as a man you’re married, try to stay that way. If you’re not, don’t. Or if you really have to, get a pre-nup. Not romantic, but that’s the reality forced upon us today by an antiquated family law system.

Swampy (getting ready for the first of 10 planned contact visits abroad in 2007 )

[jeremytaxman]

65% ... With hindsight I think I got off lightly

why do you say that ?

[BrilloPad]

IRO of the CSA, did anyone know that, if a man (it usually is) challenges an income assessment, even if he is correct, that man will be marked up on the CSA system as a troublemaker. Future caseworkers will then be notified and immediately take the appropriate position with the man, which is to be hostile, non-receptive to logical arguments, and pursue mercilessly for more cash.

Swampy (getting ready for the first of 10 planned contact visits abroad in 2007 )

I really really hope the contact session goes well - good luck to you and your daughter. I know 2 chaps whose children went abroad - in 1 case the daughter reached 13 and came back to the UK to live with dad! Like the girl who went to Pakistan from Scotland, once children reach a certain age its hard to argue with them . So please keep contact and let your daughter know that dad is always there.

Certain f4j friends of mine request their details under the data protection act every 42 days. They also pay one pound more than the CSA ask for - the CSA system goes into spasms!

[Joe Black]

The NSPCC also had stats to prove that biggest danger to kids is Mum. And that far less abuse if kids had contact with Dad.

Over the years I used think that women/mothers generally put their children first, certainly because the idea of a mothers bond, her love for her children, her 'role' etc has been drummed into us over many a year. I don't quite believe that any longer, having seen the consequences of various break-ups up close and personal.

In some cases certainly, I am left wondering whether it was actually the 'family' and 'children' which came first, or whether it was simply the case that all that mattered was the dream of the nice house, white picket fence, children to show off to their friends, and if it doesn't work out what does it matter if they have to drag their kids through high and hell water, from one place, or from one man to another until they get what they want.

Swampy (getting ready for the first of 10 planned contact visits abroad in 2007 )

What can I say?

From what I've been told, here in Belgium at least, certainly if you have a co-parenting agreement (perhaps that's the key), neither ex-partner is allowed to move more than a certain distance from the other (50 miles?) without some sort of court approval...then again that's what you're saying she got in any case.

Where's she going to if you don't mind me asking? e.g. US, Australia, Falkland Islands?

[Swamp Thing]

To Jeremytaxman: I felt that 65% to the ex was fair going, because this was achieved with minimal court involvement, such that most of my financial affairs did not put under the spotlight. I found that any information was dangerous in the ex's hands, so the more matters stayed out of the court, the better I think I was. Oh, and initially, her demand was for 92% of joint assets

To Joe Black: There is nothing to say. I have a travel routine now so I just get on with that and don't think about the bad stuff. Yup, I believe the 50/50 contact rule exists in Belgium, France & Sweden - shame it's not all over the EU.

[BrilloPad]

To Jeremytaxman: I felt that 65% to the ex was fair going, because this was achieved with minimal court involvement, such that most of my financial affairs did not put under the spotlight. I found that any information was dangerous in the ex's hands, so the more matters stayed out of the court, the better I think I was. Oh, and initially, her demand was for 92% of joint assets

To Joe Black: There is nothing to say. I have a travel routine now so I just get on with that and don't think about the bad stuff. Yup, I believe the 50/50 contact rule exists in Belgium, France & Sweden - shame it's not all over the EU.

I was initially asked for 100% of joint assets!

SwampThing - Can I ask where the kids are now? Is it in the EU or outside?

The idea of a Europe wide law is a very interesting one. Good point.

There was a test case on family court secrecy in Europe - Europe agreed with family court. Although the secrecy thing is alot lighter in Scotland. Interesting that in the UK there are seperate legal systems.