Pussy Pass Denied: Australian Family Court

[Oz-BlokeParticipant 3233]

Glorious to read about today an Australian father getting some semblance of justice in the Australian Family Court System (at last!). A mother who bad-mouthed the father and deliberately tried to f~~~ with his weekends with the kids has lost primary custody of the kids and will now be the one getting the occasional weekend of custody. Serves yourself right for trying to poison the minds of the children against their father! No Pussy Pass for YOU!

Child custody: one mother’s bitter lesson in sharing the kids with dad

Note the way the mother tried to use the fact that the father is a physically large man against him (Pussy Pass 101), despite their being no suggestion of him ever physically harming the children. Sorry dear. ‘he’s big, so he’s bad’ does not cut it snowflake.

To quote the article –

“This case shows exactly how far we’ve come in 10 years,” says family law expert Stephen Page. “We’ve moved from dad getting one weekend a fortnight and half the school holidays, if he was lucky, to a situation where you ­really have to tell the mum — and I’m not saying this is a problem only for mums — look, if you don’t support them seeing their dad, no matter how much you hate him or how bitter you feel, they will be taken off you because this is not about you. This is about the kids.”

Les Stubbs, director of family law specialist firm Harris Freidman, agrees, saying: “It’s hard to believe but we do still see parents who say, ‘They’re my kids.’ Not ‘our kids’ but ‘my kids’, and when that happens the court will have no hesitation in moving them. It’s not about punishing the mother. It’s about the rights of the child to know both of their parents.”

The Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Act 2006 was introduced by the Howard government in controversial circumstances. Critics complained that prime minister John Howard was in thrall to men’s rights groups, which had complained for years about the Family Court’s perceived bias against fathers. Supporters said it would tip the balance towards dads who had been paying hefty maintenance — or not — for children who had been turned against them.

The court heard that while the couple’s daughter, who is eight, had always been pretty happy to see her father, the boy had become “strongly resistant to spending time” with him and, across time, the girl also started wavering. Part of the problem was the way Mrs Ralton reacted when her ex-husband called the house, making it plain to the children that she didn’t like him; and also her habit of accepting invitations to school birthday parties on “dad’s weekends” and then asking them to choose what they’d rather do.

The judge considered all the evidence, and the magnitude of the decision clearly weighed on him: if he moved the children, they would be “devastated” since their only real relationship was with their mother, yet they were also entitled to know and love their ­father.

“This is an outstanding example of a child who is in distress,” he said. “A nine-year-old who will not even come into the court building.”

If he moved the children, there would be “considerable grieving in the short term for the loss of the mother” because “the father has not been the primary carer. He does not have a particularly strong relationship with them” but “living with the mother was a very ­unhealthy relationship for the children to be developing in”.

So he made orders that to the mother seemed inconceivable: the children were, from that date forward, to live with the ­father, who would be permitted to enrol the children in a new school closer to his own home, ­effective immediately.”
.
Finally some justice for the children, they have the right to a meaningful relationship with their father.

#ManOut

[UntamedParticipant]

They didn’t do it for the well-being of the father, fathers have NO rights. They only started to look into the situation because the boy had become a serious problem. Had the boy not shown to be distressed the father would still be unable to see his kids and the Court wouldn’t have given a f~~~ about it.
It’s only a victory for certain children.
Fathers didn’t win anything with that decision.

Don't let them Blame, Shame or Tame you!
Give 'em NOTHING, not even an answer!
#GenderSegragationNow!

[Anonymous 42]

Oz-Bloke wrote:

Sorry dear. ‘he’s big, so he’s bad’ does not cut it snowflake.

Correct me if I’m wrong? Most enormous men I ever met are gentle giants without mean streaks or nasty personalities, It’s the little ones you have to look out for!

Too bad the ship is full of water and the bilge pumps vandalized with the bow dipping under the water line before they decided to start turning it around!

Thanks for the GOOD NEWS, Oz-Bloke, no matter how rare it is! It’s good to lift the stigma feminism has blanketed us with since their formation to tare us down!

Now if only the education system can get the same overhaul and stop treating boys like square pegs hammering them into gynocentric round holes!

[bladeParticipant]

DONT BELEAVE IT BRO.

Example

VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV

This is the same bulls~~~ dads in distress constantly fall for .

They always are saying they have spoke to a judge and the judge was shocked what men went threw .

How many judges over the years

DIDS give me a f~~~in break .

Judges are bigger masters of bulls~~~ than lawyers .

C~~~s are throwing bones .

There is a push that for an in quiry into the family court cases that have resulted in physical harm and or death . It was rejected the first time a few months ago .

Hetti got on mals arse and it looks like it is back on . Nothing will happen . Maybe in many many years to come because i beleave oneday people will look back in disgust .

ONE THING I FIND INTRESTING

Alot of labour and liberal members of parliment will tell you there is no bias in the family court .

What really p~~~ed me off is the idiots heading the inquirey beleave the same .

Keeping a child from dad . Abuse isnt it . How many kids see or know dad . No dad high risk kid and so on .

Can check child support stats . More proof of everyone benefits .

JUDGES ARE CORRUPT LYING FILTHY C~~~S

The whole family court industry needs to watch there backs because theres lots of people waking up to this racket

THE PLANTATION HAS NOW TURNED INTO THE KILLING FIELDS . WOMAN ARE NOW ROLLING CAMBODIAN STYLE .

[Oz-BlokeParticipant 3233]

Untamed wrote:

Fathers didn’t win anything with that decision.

I’d like to think it helps set precedence, which is a tool lawyers use when their case has similar circumstances. So next time an Australian mother is bad-mouthing the kids’ biological dad, constantly asking the kids who they want to spend the dad’s weekend with and trying to throw spanners in the works of a father trying to form a meaningful realationship with his children – lawyers can refer to this case as evidence the kids do NOT automatically stay with mum because VAGINA!. I’ll take any successes fathers can get in the overtly gynocentic, vagina-worshipping Family Court system. It’s a start, but there is still a long way to go in the battle for fathers’ rights.

#ManOut

[Oz-BlokeParticipant 3233]

Also note the gynocentric bias of the journalist Caroline Overington writing the article. She starts with –

“This was not one of those cases where the children had been ­abused and neglected, and therefore had to be removed from their mum’s care for their physical ­safety. She loved them very much and she made sure they were well fed and attending good schools, yet they now live, by court order, with their dad and can see her only once a fortnight, supervised, in a child contact centre.”

It starts off all about the MOTHER, how SHE loves the kids and was not hurting them. It’s like the author is instantly in defence of her HIVE sisters and a change to the custody arrangements is ‘inconceiveable’. Dad only gets mentioned at the end of the second sentence. It sets the mother up as the ‘victim’ from the get-go, misandrous from the beginning.

No mention of the child support payments the father has been making, no mention that dad might LOVE the kids too, no mention of who got the house in the divorce (usually the mother), how the case made it to the courtroom and before a judge because the mother may have refused to concede any custody in the pre-court mediations that exist in Australia. Skip all those details as it may undermine the mother’s ‘victim’ status.

Fortunately the article has enough facts to avoid becoming full-blown feminist propaganda, but still the female writer struggles to hide her allegiance to the sisterhood. Estrogen is a strong hormone to overcome I guess, even when it comes to court reporting.

#ManOut

[TrailbossParticipant 1844]

One thing I have learned, in my 50+ years on this Earth: The Pendulum *always* swings back the other way. The Pendulum has been swinging upward and upward, in favor of women (Specifically in the courts) for a long, long time. At some point: It has to start swinging the other way. I’m not saying it actually *has* started swinging the other way…yet. But as time goes forward, and maybe with a *lot* more men going MGTOW…maybe…just maybe…we *might* see it start to swing back the other way in our lifetime. I like to believe that maybe….

An educated, armed populace cannot be enslaved.

[Can’t Stump TrumpParticipant]

Why do I feel like this isn’t the whole story? All divorced mothers talk s~~~ about their exes to their kids. All children of single mothers grow up believing their dads are pieces of s~~~. I don’t see anything different or unique about this case.

Women are better at multitasking? Fucking up several things at once is not multitasking.

[bladeParticipant]

Just TOSSING A BONE

F~~~ THE FAMILY COURT

THE PLANTATION HAS NOW TURNED INTO THE KILLING FIELDS . WOMAN ARE NOW ROLLING CAMBODIAN STYLE .

[MaddladParticipant 765]

This is what women do, have kids with someone who at the time is the best bloke ever and then after they have the kids apparently he’s an unfit parent..

[bstoffParticipant 4878]

It’s going to be difficult for the kids and the father in this new situation because they’ve already been turned against him and their lives are being uprooted, in their minds, because they think their dad is being selfish.

I hope things work out for them.
No f~~~s given about the selfish, vindictive ex-wife.

[AttonParticipant]

Far too few in number, I am ashamed to call myself Australian when my country has a court like this.

A MGTOW is a man who is not a woman's bitch!

[Author]

Posts