I am VERY cross about the misrepresentation of my views here. I wonder how many actually bothered to read what I said. I feel I've been slandered, and effectively accused publically of excusing murder! Extraordinary.
Let's read what has been said about me:
" but I do think jumping on the 'Families need Fathers' bandwagon here is a bit lame "
"Just because their relationship has broken down does not give ANYONE, whatever their gender, the right to take another persons life" (WHO SAID ANYTHING LIKE THAT????!)
"And I will never agree with Tom or even with the suggestion that this could be a contributing factor " (WHY is it that it happens SO often at the point when an abused woman leaves home/breaks up the relationship?????)
"Nicksie, the issue is Tom was wrong. These cases have been widely studied and the men are NOT loving caring men with no previous history of violence who are driven insane by being separated from their children" - WHERE THE HELL DID I SAY THEY WERE LOVING CARING MEN ETC????????
Let's have a look at what I DID say:
"I think that men who are seriously unhinged, violent, abusive etc etc, and perhaps have ideas about men controlling women, can be tipped into this kind of behaviour by feelings of loss of control - the only control left them is over life/death. "
So, let's all read together... I'm saying that these things are being done by men who are "SERIOUSLY UNHINGED", "VIOLENT", "ABUSIVE", "CONTROLLING" etc, and that LOSS OF CONTROL can be a 'tipping' factor that can tip these psychos over the edge.
What I am hypothesising is that men of this kind - i.e. (let me repeat for the dull among you) VIOLENT, ABUSIVE, CONTROLLING, MENTALLY UNHINGED MEN, can pose a risk to their families at the point of separation - it is a potential tipping point, as there is a loss of what they depend on in their abuse - i.e. control/power.
WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH THAT ANALYSIS???? It would lead me to suggest that services need to be trained to pick up on these potential killers - we need an analysis of risk factors etc - and ensure that there is adequate safety for their families, through provision of safe refuges etc (AS I BLOODY SAID). IE - IF my hypothesis is right, that famiy breakdown can be a tipping point, then the services that engage with families around the point of separation need to be resourced and trained to spot this kind of risk. It has happened too many times.
It also implies that the current divorce process is not adequately dealing with cases where there are accusations of domestic violence and child abuse. Some of these cases can take over a year to come before courts with proper assessments because court time is being taken up by divorcing couples who should be sorting out their post separation issues outside of the courts time (within mediation).
Did I "excuse" killing? What a horrendous thing to say about me - shame on you. No - I said, specifically, that I was trying to look for "reasons", not writing "excuses" - if we UNDERSTAND the phenomenon, we can start to do something about it other than shake our heads and tut - therefore let me make it clear AGAIN - there is NO justification for this under any circumstances, and frankly, I'm shocked that people are actually thinking that I could excuse this kind of thing - jeez.
Why can't some people distinguish between "reasons" and "excuses" - they are two different phenomenon - one is to do with cause/effect relationships, the other is to do with moral/ethical validity. I could say that the condittions and ideologies in Palestine are a REASON for suicide bombing, but that in NO WAY EXCUSES it. It is completely unacceptable, but also a phenomenon that is possible to understand in the context of the lives of palestinians and the ideologies being spread in the region - we can get at reasons, but we can never excuse. Surely it is possible to develop understanding of most things, even the most inhumane, evil acts - we could develop an understanding of the historical reasons for the rise of the the Nazis and the Third Reich - that wouldn't 'excuse' Hitler and his cronies, but it might help us avoid a repeat - and that's the point of rational understanding - to learn to do things differently.
Two other minor points -
Firstly - yes, I work on domestic violence issues - in fact, at the national conference I'm in charge of in April, we are addressing some of these issues in partnership with the Home Office's domestic violence unit and some of the Domestic Violence agencies, and we're also tackling men and child abuse at the conference. We have also consulted for HMG on male victims of domestic violence (19% of cases, according to Women's Aid). (If anyone is actually interested in what I work for and stand for, you can find out by looking at the brochure for this conference, which is here ).
Secondly, I am NOT part of Fathers-4-Justice or Families Need Fathers, nor do I necessarily agree with their approaches. I have some sympathy with the issue, because I come across plenty of decent men who cannot see their children and it hurts me to see how it's tearing them (and their children) apart (Nb - I know men who have committed suicide over it, but not murder - someone I met two months ago committed suicide a couple of weeks ago because he couldn't cope with the separation anymore - he was unhinged, but self-destructive, not 'other'-descrtuctive). I'm sure we all know dads who are horrible and nasty, but believe me, there are perfectly decent men out there who have had their children taken away from them, and they are desperately hurt. It is a problem that needs a solution. The divorced fathers issue is a fraction of the issues we focus on - we focus far more on health/education/social welfare/prison services issues (if you're genuinely interested please click the link above - the conference brochure - for a rounded picture of what we're about and who we work with). We do not, as F-4-J do, agree with a 50-50 presumption of contact, as this would priviledge parental rights over children's rights, which we think is wrong - this is also the government position But we do think the legal system needs changing - it's just that we think it can be changed without changes in the law. What we ARE doing in this field, and we're advising the DCA on this, is look to develop pilots for a new way of processing divorces within the courts that channel most couples into mediation to develop a post-separation parenting plan at an early stage, thus reducing court time and costs, and allowing the courts to fast track and resource cases involving accusations of violence or abuse in order to protect both victims and the wrongly accused. If any of you are actually doing anything more constructive on this issue, I'd be most interested to find out.
I despair sometimes. I'm worried about writing this, as I feel very angry, and I'm aware that has the potential to inflame, rather than reconcile, but I don't mean to offend anyone, merely to defend myself. Please don't take this as a sword, but as a sheild.