To ask what do you think of father's for justice

[AuntiePickleBottom]

www.fathers-4-justice.org/hunger4justice.php

having supported DH in his fight to see his DD, i can understand why some father's want to take action.

at the same time i can understand why some mother's refuse access

FFS there is not an automatic assumption that mums will get residence In the hypothetical but extremely unlikely scenario that both parents have shared childcare exactly between them, both work the same hours and are both equally fit, the court would probably (and often does) commission a report from a children's officer which may or may not involve talking to the children about their preferences, depending on age. The courts don't just rubberstamp the word "MUM" across every form they receive.

OTOH there does seem to be an assumption that the dads who belong to F4J have been refused access by the courts. Plenty of times they haven't, but mums don't really have to abide by court orders in practice either, sadly. The only real recourse the courts have if an order is broken is to fine or imprison the mother, both of which are obviously going to impact negatively on the DC, so the court's metaphorical hands are tied really if a mum just refuses to comply with contact. I fully sympathise with any dad with an ex like this, and there are plenty around. I can see why you might want to start dressing as Spiderman and climbing onto Parliament at that stage but realistically it just isn't going to make a difference.

Disclaimer: my legal knowledge is a decade or so out of date!

i feel really really sorry for any parent who isnt allowed access to their child, without a genuine reason

i feel even more sorry for the children who are used as pawns, as possessions and are prevented from seeing both parents equally

I don't much care for the association itself, but I do think the system is unfair to many fathers at the moment, and there is a case for addressing that.

Violet a threat to snatch a child would not automatically mean a parent didn't get contact but it would almost certainly be supervised and they'd take into account things like nationality, passports, possibility of getting a second passport etc.

To address the original OP, I lean more towards "Families need Fathers" than "Fathers for Justice" when it comes to getting decent rights for Dads to see their children.

When families split, you thankfully have a large number of families where both parents put their own feelings aside and make sure that both sides have access to their children and both provide support.

You then have the two ends of the spectrum - the Dads who don't want to support their children or are refused access because of abuse or one sort or another and also the Mums who don't want to have their ex involved because of their personal feelings and/or have a new relationship.

This is why groups are needed to support the Mums who have to deal with feckless fathers and the Dads who can't get access even when they want it.

What isn't productive is to say "Well my ex was a useless waste of space ergo all men are a useless waste of space and anyone who is trying to get access to their child has probably had it refused as they are an abuser" as it just doesn't work like that and it weakens the argument.

To be honest, the assumption that a man who has had access refused, must have been abusive or feckless is the reason why such groups need to exist in the first place. Some are, some aren't. Women aren't always pure as the driven snow in these cases.

OH got residency of my two SS's even though he worked and the ex didn't. She made him take the kids to work with him so she didn't have to look after them and could shag other men . The youngest was 4 months when they split, and he still got residency, its bullshit all mothers have more of a bond then fathers. In fact the next two children she had live with their dad, and they split when the youngest was 3 months. Her oldest DD lives with her dad since she was 12 months, and is now pregnant with baby number 6. See a pattern?

I know a few mothers who deny access to the fathers for no real reason. It does happen.

I had previously had some sympathy with them because I can't imagine how painful it must be to only see your DCs every other weekend (or even less). However, I saw an interview with Matt O'Connor a couple of weeks ago when he was bleating on about how Cameron was vilifying fathers and hadn't ever had a single bad word to say about single mothers with DC by different dads, living on benefits and I decided he must be delusional (or deaf!).

Just want to repeat what sunshine posted upthread:

"F4J founder Matt O'Connor started F4J when his XW prevented him from having access to their DC.

The reason? He was an angry drunk - by his own admission. He thought this in no way impeded his ability to look after his child.

When he sobered up and stopped being an arse, his XW allowed him to have access again.

I'd say his XW was a woman protecting her child, not an "out and out bitch".

Several of the core founders have been arrested for abusive behaviour. Kind of lends credibility to the idea that their XPs were telling the truth about them being abusive etc."

On that basis I do not think F4J are a good, genuine organisation.

Cameron made a rod for his own back with that terrible speech about absent fathers being held to account.

I'm quite looking forward to see how he is going to deal with this as F4J on the face of it seems to be exactly the sort of people he was wanting to step up to the plate.

I agree with you op, children have a right to a father in their life, if they are not violent, abusive, or addicts not recieving help.

I am looking forward to being hauled into court by ex.He's just going to make a huge fool of himself.Has he ever paid maintenence?No.Has he ever made efforts to see DC?No.Has he ever given DC a birthday/xmas card/present?No.

Ah but he has got in touch with a Fathers Rights group who have decided that I'm the bitch who did not educate DC about ''Dad'' and paint him as sunshine and roses.Its my fault DC has a low opinion of him.Not his fault for being a shit father,nope,its my fault.

It's also a mistake to think that a court granting access leads to access. A close friend has legal access, for just one Saturday a month, yet the access he is actually allowed by his XW is minimal. He turns up (on time, if he's five minutes late, she goes out) to find yet another excuse - one of the children is unwell, has a birthday party, doesn't want to spend time with his father - and my friend is put in the unwinnable position of forcing a child to do something he or she doesn't want to do and then face criticism in court, or miss seeing his children for another month.
His XW has no issues with him taking her back to court to force her to do what she is required to do by law, because she gets Legal Aid. He works, pays for her house, pays maintenance as was agreed at the beginning, and then pays legal fees because she breaks the agreement and it has to go back to court.
Each case needs to be studied individually which is why some of the man-hating sweeping statements on here just smack of bitterness and the need for revenge.

Why is he only allowed one saturday a month? That's very unusual.

He is now remarried and lives in another part of the country, so that's all he requested.

While I admit that there are few (any?) cases where a RP has been imprisoned for failing to facilitate contact, it exists as a punishment. Currently, however, there are no punishments for a NRP who consistently fails to turn up for contact. There are lots of examples just here on MN where NRPs have taken RPs to court for contact but then repeatedly fail to turn up or cancel at the last moment, or turn up late or on a completely different day with no notice. That needs to be dealt with too.

BTW, it's only a gender issue in that 92% of single parent families are headed by women. When a man is the RP it is common for him to have the same issues as a female RP when it comes to residency and access (though male RPs have a greater likelihood of being widowed rather than separated).

It doesn't exist as a punishment in his eyes because he's a reasonable man who would not advocate the imprisoning of his children's mother.
Of course it happens the other way around, I accept that. I just think there might be two sides to some arguments.

Molivan your friend chose to live far from the children and chose one saturday a month.Thats only 12 days out of 365 he chose to see his child/ren.
If he is late then that is his own doing.

"It doesn't exist as a punishment in his eyes because he's a reasonable man who would not advocate the imprisoning of his children's mother."

Where did that come from? i haven't seen any references to prison on this thread?

oh sorry yes I see.

He is never late, BumWiper, he's just been told quite clearly by her what she will do if he ever is.
He has made a new life after the marriage broke up but wants contact with his children. He has made no unreasonable requests and behaves in a way that is nothing but honourable.
How anyone can see this scenario and believe that he is in the wrong is beyond me.

My brother is the primary carer for his DC's and has been for years and years after his wife had an affair and left them all. She then reappeared shortly after and threatened to take the kids abroad where he'd never see them again if he didn't agree to sign over half his pension.

It's all sorted out now and she see's them regularly but the point I'm trying to make is that being a manipulative so-and-so isn't totally linked to the XY chromasome and men can and do make perfectly fine lone parents inspite of not having wombs.

PS. F4J are a bunch of nut-jobs, though ...

God bumwiper that's awful, can't stand men like that.

piglet we will see what happens,I'm going to hazard a guess at the old court route and he won't bother showing up.

Molivan I still don't understand why your friend chose only 12 days a year.Its not as if he moved a plane journey away.She has no physically back up from the other parent for 29/30 days every month.What was wrong with him staying in the area?Surely his children should be top priority when deciding to move.I wouldn't blame her for going out if he is late.

I am all for fathers rights. I am not for this organisation.

DH was friends with the 'main man' for our area and he is, to put it lightly, a cunt. He has six children with three different mothers and another that may or may not be his. Two he has with different mothers who were only 16 and 17 (he's 32). The four he has with his long-term ex he does not have access to as he was very violent towards her and stalked her when she ended it. He stole her keys and had a new key cut to access the back door when she was out. He'd follow her in his car up to 100 miles away and 'accidentally' bump into her in different towns despite a restraining order. He has been to court and held for 6 months in custody but got off on a technicality for fraud, keeping guns, identity theft, drugs, dealing drugs and a plot to use gunpowder during a F4J rally. Another man was coerced into admitting the lot and the evidence didn't say otherwise. This man got away scot free. He pays no maintenance but to everyone he is "a non-guilty, law abiding daddy who just wants to love his babies but the police are corrupt and everything is fucked".

Holy shit, that man. DH no longer associates with him but used to live with him and submitted anonymous evidence to the police against him so has witnessed this first hand.

Twat.

Bum Wiper, you know nothing about this situation and you're judging him and refusing to judge her despite her utter disregard for the word of the court or the fact that everything in this case is stacked utterly in her favour.
We all make life choices for our own good reasons. It's pointless him asking for more access, she doesn't allow him the small amount he has asked for.
I'm sorry if your life choices have left you bitter, but you have to remain open to the fact that not all men deserve everything they get.