If Fathers for Justice invade again

Do you get to be a member for that £20, Narky?

Ah, you don't get the advice until you hand over your £20.

It seems you've not personally considered a lot about your chosen organisation Spydiii.

Your FB page is not 'guidance' it is a load of anti-mother rhetoric from both men and women (I'm ashamed to say). THe only advice I've seen on there is how to bung up Gingerbread's helplines and troll their (and our) messageboards. Very helpful to single parents I must say!

Perhaps you should re-consider your association with a group who uses bully-boy tactics, threats of police(!), intimidation and handcuffs to females to make it's point?

It does, thank you. I would say that I do consider my XP to have committed an emotional abuse on my oldest in particular (my younger two were thankfully young enough to be mostly unaffected thus far), having been a part of his life until he was 7 he was distraught when his Dad moved away and still is 10 months later. I am quite offended by a certain member of your organisation who insinuated that the fact that my XP committed this abuse was more than likely my fault. I would do anything to take my son's pain and confusion away.

From their site:

For over a decade, Fathers 4 Justice has fought to ensure fathers play a fundamental role in the parenting of their children after parents separate.

How do you ensure that those fathers that don't turn up for contact with their children play a fundamental role?

Do you believe that the majority of children growing up with no contact with their fathers are doing so because of actions of people other than their father?

As a country we can?t keep telling fathers to have equal responsibility and not give them equal rights.

Do you think that the rights of fathers trump the rights of children?

What laws do you wish to see in place of those that currently exist?

runningforthebusinheels; honestly I cannot know everything. I'm pretty busy outside of the campaigning stuff. Hope you understand. But will look into that as would like to know the origin. And, can tell you that if false I would be one to oppose it's use. To date, all I have looked into has been correct.

ThisIsExtremelyVeryNotGood, re fathers who can't be bothered being abusers. I personally have not thought that much on that specific point, but now you've asked... I guess it depends on the quality of the father. If he's a good dad (in which case he would not be absent anyway) then it would be detrimental, but by definition he wouldn't do it. So, maybe kids with dads who can't be bothered are better off without them given they are not a good role-model. It is in my view abusive to deny a child a good parent where they exists and are willing (wanting) to be part of the child's life. It doesn't matter much which way round that is, I've certainly voiced my opinion about dads who do same thing in reverse. So, to mix the issue of intentionally withhold with can't be bothered is not an appropriate comparison. Saying a dad who withholds a child from a mother without reason is an abuser, is. Hope that helps explain my view on it?

Spydiii - But it's a significant part of your campaign? And I can tell you now it is an utterly misleading statistic. If you come on MN asking for 'reasoned debate', isn't it appropriate you know the provenance of a statistic that forms such a major part of your campaign?

No runningforthebusinheels, I >>>personally

Presumably because the F4J trolls would like you to STFU, SaF?

This is my own conclusion (C&P from the other thread) from the 3.8 million children fatherless/1 in 3 fatherless stats. Perhaps Spydiii can confrim?

"3.8 million children (which is about a third of all children in the UK) live in a single mother family, which is their 3.8 million fatherless stat.

In a different statistic, 1 in 3 children whose parents have separated lose contact with their father. I think this comes from research from the Centre for Social Justice, reported here: www.telegraph.co.uk/relationships/divorce/6575997/Third-of-family-break-up-children-lose-contact-with-fathers-in-failing-court-system-poll.html
which is a survey of 4000 people whose parents have split over the last 20 years, not really a picture of what is happening right now.

So the two statistics are not the same."

Stat-stealers. How many of those 1 in 3 are as a result of the Family Court? How many are as a result of men simply walking away?

Screening of members: We don't have members, we have supporters just like you do in the FB page. People can purchase the guidebook (small amount) and ask advice but it's all done on a voluntary basis. We vet people in the middle, everyone else is an external supporter. That said, anyone known to be violent, a problem etc... is weeded out, naturally. That's reasonable I think.

no doubt it's the mum's fault thisis.

Something else I would like to see answered.

F4J say that to have father is a human right that all children deserve. They also say that to deny a child its father is abuse. They say that mothers who do this to their children are child abusers.
By the same logic, are fathers who by their own choice are inconsistent with contact or have minimal or no contact also child abusers?

You've not checked out the 1 in 3 figure?

i'd love to know what i got deleted for BC

spydii it is not legitimate. that's not an opinion - that is a fact.

if the children in this country who are 'fatherless' accounted for 1 in 3 children there wouldn't be very many children at all.

i'm surprised you haven't 'checked' the details of a campaign you are throwing yourself behind. you're presenting yourself as officially involved in the organisation but don't know the basics of your campaign?

...for £20 a year.

Ok, let me get this straight. A MNer starts a thread on MN saying that she is not happy with F4J being on the MN FB page and posting their porny/BDSM campaign photo.

A whole bunch of MNers come on the thread and give their opinion of F4J.

Members of F4J say 'shut the fuck up MNers or we'll have the law on you/get on to your advertisers'.

Is that about right?

And these trolls harassing us are being tolerated why exactly?

and you do realise that some of those single parent households will be headed by men? some will have 50:50 division of contact time? some will be households where the father is actually dead? some will be children conceived by donor sperm? many will be children whose fathers refuse all contact? etc.

given all of that would you agree that your advertising is misleading to say the least?