Advanced search

This is why men who commit DV against their partners shouldn't be allowed access to their children

(294 Posts)
StewieGriffinsMom Sun 03-Mar-13 07:47:31

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BertieBotts Mon 04-Mar-13 00:11:37

True. But I thought we were discussing child contact?

Pan Mon 04-Mar-13 00:19:20

yes, in context of previous DV instances. Most IDAPers have children. And the young dads' programme I referred to above, at my work place,..somewhere above..2/3rds have a DV history. 8 out of 12 participants.

fuzzywuzzy Mon 04-Mar-13 00:30:48

The DVIP programme consists of an initial assessment, if the person fails this they're not allowed on the programme.

The programme is continually assessed with a report produced half way thro & then one at the end.

Ex failed it pretty spectacularly recently. Not surprising given he failed the initial assessment three times before passing it.

StewieGriffinsMom Mon 04-Mar-13 11:05:34

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Spero Mon 04-Mar-13 11:36:33

What UK studies? I would be grateful for link. The fact that you talk of 'sole custody' makes me wonder - this hasn't been the term used in UK legal system for over 20 years now.

Spero Mon 04-Mar-13 11:45:02

For those interested in the debate, the link below is Lord Justice Walls 2006 response to the Womens Aid study which BertieB has linked and cited.

It is well worth a read and gives a valuable perspective on the way the courts approach these matters.

PieChips Mon 04-Mar-13 11:47:27

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

StewieGriffinsMom Mon 04-Mar-13 11:50:53

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Spero Mon 04-Mar-13 11:55:06

I hope people can understand why, based on my own experience and reading what Wall LJ says - at the time he was the President of the Family Division so his word counts for an awful lot - I just don't accept that the family law system in the UK fails to take violence seriously.

What is interesting to note is that out of the 29 cases of children killed by their father in a ten year period, only five were involved in court proceedings and 3 of those five involved consent orders - when both parents turn up and agree the terms of an order. Wall LJ recommends a more rigourous investigation of consent orders to make sure both parties are giving free and full consent. But I don't see how it is the court's 'fault' if parties turn up with an order they say they are happy with. The courts are legally obliged to support families to make agreements under the 'no order principle' of the Children Act.

If there are UK statistics showing that violent men often succeed in getting residence orders then I would really like to see them as I would find that shocking.

offensivenickname0403 Mon 04-Mar-13 11:57:45

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

Spero Mon 04-Mar-13 12:00:55

As our little friend so aptly demonstrates the world is full of all kinds of dickheads and sadly, some of them breed.

I think in all the circs the courts do a good job in trying to balance what the children need - identity and safety.

jellybeans Mon 04-Mar-13 12:01:53

I agree. men who have committed DV should not have unsupervised contact.

StewieGriffinsMom Mon 04-Mar-13 15:49:50

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CaptainSensible1 Mon 04-Mar-13 16:01:54

I can't agree with that statement at all. As spiro said, the courts try their hardest to do a good job with the childrens welfare the major concern.

Dadthelion Mon 04-Mar-13 16:15:42

What I notice is, and I can only think it's the influence of the Patriarchy when the genders are split it's men one side, women and children the other side.

It's as if children are more the woman's than man's.

I'd also like to see the evidence that courts are weighted towards men's rights rather than women and children's.

In the UK it seems to me the courts try and keep to the status quo and try to be fair.

Schooldidi Mon 04-Mar-13 16:30:21

I have only dealt with children who have suffered dv as a teacher. One of the pupils in my form when I first started teaching was ordered to have contact with her father even though he had severely beaten her mother in front of her and had beaten her older brother on numerous occassions.

It was not supervised contact that he was granted (I think it started as supervised but was moved to unsupervised even though she was clearly terrified of him), she was basically forced to spend every other weekend at his house, where she was too scared to speak in case he hit her like she had watched him hit her mother and brother. She was an emotional wreck, she cried over the most trivial things at school because she was scared of upsetting anybody or being in trouble, she made up ilnesses every time she was due to have contact with him. Those effects were massively in evidence without him ever having hit her, or even threatening to hit her. Her mother continued to fight through the courts to deny him access, but it wasn't til she was old enough for the court to take her views into consideration that she was allowed to cease contact, and she was given couselling. Overnight she was a different girl. It was like a massive weight had been lifted off her shoulders, she suddenly made more friends, her schoolwork improved. From her standpoint she wishes her father had had no more contact once her mother left him, she wishes her father had had no more contact from the first time he hit her mother.

That was only one girl's story but there are a number of other pupils I have taught who have been in similar situations.

Hullygully Mon 04-Mar-13 16:49:47

How lovely to see Pan back! Shall I report myself now Pan and save you the trouble?

BertieBotts Mon 04-Mar-13 17:04:50

I think we're basically saying the same thing, in that I think the courts try to be balanced. But balanced is not always fair or right. If it gets to the point of court proceedings, then there's clearly some kind of conflict there. One or both parents aren't playing ball. I think the likelihood that DA has been present is probably far more likely than in the general population of relationships with children which split up.

KateSMumsnet (MNHQ) Mon 04-Mar-13 17:11:03


AbigailAdams Mon 04-Mar-13 17:26:09

Are those eyebrows for Pan, Kate?

StewieGriffinsMom Mon 04-Mar-13 17:59:50

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MmeLindor Mon 04-Mar-13 18:14:36

What is your problem with SGM? I have chatted with you over the years, on a variety of topics and have never had such a response as you have posted towards SGM on this thread. It surprises me.

It is belittling to dismiss her OP as absurd, and to accuse her of being over-emotional and it is absolutely not on to say that she is using the murder of a child to further her own agenda.

OliviaAllOverTheSpamMumsnet (MNHQ) Mon 04-Mar-13 18:16:40


TunipTheVegedude Mon 04-Mar-13 18:18:15

Kate, there are some personal attacks still standing on this thread that really need to go. I reported one earlier but haven't had a response.

Hullygully Mon 04-Mar-13 18:20:24

Wow, do you all need tweezers at MNHQ? Getting a little overgrown over there.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now