Really? we think that "that organisation" are representative of fathers in general? really?

[NormaStanleyFletcher]

"They are already telling us that F4J (and by association every dad in the land) are bullying and intimidating them in this latest campaign, a stance that completely ignores the decades of intimidation that has been suffered by fathers at the hands of women?s organistions and which attempts to control the space around the campaign..."

Do they think we are as mad and misguided as them?

Intimidation by women's organisations?

From http://karenwoodall.wordpress.com/2012/03/18/on-the-tyranny-of-the-weak-a-mothers-day-musing/

Who is this handmaden person?

Sorry about what you're going through, seaofyou.

When my ExH decided he 'owned' the space outside my front door, I just started ringing the police. I had had enough. They agreed with me, that I shouldn't feel scared about stepping out of my own front door, and were really, really helpful.

I've read some of seaofyou's posts before, this has been going on for ages, police have been involved, I think there's an injunction too.

Could you move house in secret, seaofyou, somewhere far away from where you are now? Or are your son's needs too complex to start again somewhere else?

I think in cases of alleged DV we should start with the presumption of truth, since unless anyone believse that women are inherently more likely to lie than men, then the fact is that most of them will be telling the truth. False allegations of any crime tend to hover between 5 and 10% and DV is no exception. And if we believe that men and women lie with equal frequency, then the number of women lying about DV is no higher than the number of men denying allegations that are true, which would largely cancel each other out.

In order to therefore prove or disprove either way, if there is no corroborating evidence (and I think we should allow family and friends to testify, since very few people are willing to perjure themselves even for a very good friend or family member) one of the first things I'd recommend is a psychological evaluation of both parties by a psychologist who has been fully trained in abuse dynamics. That will not only pick out the abusers but will also pick out the small number of women who do lie. There is nothing to lose except perhaps the fact that quite a few people will be held accountable for their abuse in a way that is unprecedented.

Regarding the proposals mentioned in the DV link, as LineRunner says, this is just tinkering with the system. The power is already there. The first woman to be imprisoned for witholding court ordered contact happened in 1997 (A v N (Refusal of Contact).

I'm liking the idea of using psychologists, abusers often seem charming on the surface but will have behaviours clear to the experienced eye.

And thank you for the information re the court case.

i think we also need to stop the mythology of the courts favouring women over men by men (and their female relatives) when most of them haven't even been to court.

a court will extremely rarely deny contact - the numbers of fathers who have been refused contact is miniscule - like tiny!

so a hell of a lot of these dads, no offense, are going to be like the example given on this thread - saying poor me, the system has failed me and i can't see my kids when in reality they haven't even bothered to use the system and legal avenues available to them because they want it all their own way or nothing and aren't prepared to compromise.

this must be true because the figures show us the percentage of men refused contact by the court is less than 0.1%.

sAf, I have never at any point portrayed my ds as saying "poor me". He is using the system and taking legal advice, as I have said several times. Do, please, go back and read it. Your snide comments are beginning to irritate.

not being snide - expressing my opinion. a parent a year down the line who has not even tried to go to court has not used the system or made best use of the legal paths available to him.

oLKN when I had the CCTV fitted Izzy suggested I put inside so ex would not know which was a fab idea and maybe he'd have that injunction by now. But CCTV installer said about glare off window and the leaded beading would cause visual problems so I had no choice but to have it outside. ex spotted it and did a U turn (damn) solicitor was hoping he'd attack again (evidence for injunction).

I do have footage of him driving past few times I just need a CCTV forensic specialist to make it clear how much more is it going to cost

I kept all the cyber abuse but police didn't take much notice of that either? One PC said to me when I called them as ex parked up around the corner (now bear in mind ex now lives abroad) PC said ex can stand in my garden and look in my window if he wants WTF!!?

Victim Support were amazing and the only organisation that listened/understood/helped me. I was lucky and had regional manager on our case and she was appalled police did nothing! She said this type of 'behaviours' is extremely dangerous and she got funding for cctv for us as was worried for our lives. arson team were lovely too.

I have a new front door now without a letterbox so feel safer. However may be summoned to court for years of maintenance owed in next few weeks and I expect the wrath of ex's venomous actions...so I will become hyper alart again kwhen this happens.

But their is nothing I can do until their is evidence.....how many other women went repeatedly to police and they are not here now. I don't want ds and me to be next weeks chip paper iykwim:(

I need to stay re ds school but it is so easy to get lost in city and next house will not be end of street near open fields where easy escape routes for ex.

www.hmcourt-service.org.uk

if you go there ^ you can download an application for contact order form (C100), fill it in and post it off.

that would take me ten minutes. not a year.

you cannot convince people you are devastated and heart broken and desperate and raving and suicidal about seeing your kids if you haven't even bothered to download and send off a form in a year i'm afraid.

that's the thing - i will never believe a man who claims his ex is refusing to let him see his children and it's all down to her not him and he's desperate to see them if he hasn't even bothered to download, fill out, send off a form and get a contact order process underway.

it just doesn't add up because we all KNOW don't we? that we'd have filled that form in the very first day our ex's had refused to let us see our children. there is NO way we'd have let it go on.

Swallow did you mean me? Sorry if it wasn't directed at me? But I did go to CPU when SS failed to take action. Then CPU refused to take it further. I have a solicitor who said I need evidence, ex spotted CCTV 2 days later.

Ds has disclosed (old stuff from last year). sS manager said to contact her ASAP and SW and polic will interview ds. But CPU Said CPS this would not go to court re ds age/disability/time lapse and no evidence...I did phone SS manager over week ago and well no call back but I am worried I will be judged again as making it up to get at ex!
So I don't know if I am doing the right thing not bothering telling SS manager now but I feel they will point finger again:(

What's C100? Why did solicitor not inform me of this? I ain't suicidal though! But I know what I'd like to do to ex grrrr!

no seaofyou - i'm talking generally about men who go around claiming to friends and family that they're desperate to see their children and their ex is stopping them and garner sympathy and stuff when in reality they've done nothing to remedy the situation and sometimes it's of their own choosing anyway.

i totally believe you did all you could to sort it and the law failed you.

Swallow are you talking to someone else...I live with my ds

oops sorry

C100 is the form for application for the court to make an order about contact - sorry - misunderstandings

However we all know that even if the court orders contact there has been something like one woman ever jailed for denying it so that if a woman keeps breaking a court order there is very little recourse against her (or afather for that matter). There is that very sad story of a Japanese moterh who took the sons to Japan just been written about ni a book and it's not that unusual. The father has not been able to see them for abotu 9 years and the p hone calls stopped as soon as the woman got her hands on the proceeds of the matrimonial home.

No sea, sAf was being bitchy about my son. And as we're in Scotland, her downloads are usesless.

But next time he sees his son, I'll just tell him to hang on to the boy and not return him. He has PR and there is no court order in place, so he's perfectly entitled to do this, and perhaps it will speed up the process.

Except, of course, that having the ex and her entire extended family screaming, swearing and waving pitchforks in the yard of our farmhouse might be the tiniest bit scarey for a wee boy. Maybe not in his best interests, huh?

i find 'bitchy' quite an offensive word. and this leap to keeping a child (as if i'm advocating it) rather than just going to court seems a little extreme to me.

pitch fork waving also sounds a little extreme - you really don't like this girl or her family clearly.

is your son living at home then?

There are a few more than just one mother who have been jailed, until 2009 there were around 50 committals a year for non compliance with a contact order. New enforcement laws were introduced in December 2008 and in 2010 there were 50 orders for unpaid work (community service) but I don't know if that reduced the number of mothers sent to prison or not.

Families tend to interact in a circular fashion so both parents and even children may be implicated in contact problems. Although separated parents struggle with making arrangements for children most resolve matters between themselves and do not involve the courts. Parents with the majority of care often underestimate the importance courts and those professionals working with children attach to contact. However, when the courts are involved most do adhere to court orders. If not the first line of enforcement in England & Wales is stern talking and contact activity directions to attend parenting classes, DV perpetrator programmes, anger management etc.

There are a few families that make regular appearances in the family courts because one or both parents have a personality disposition that lacks empathy and understanding so they are rigidly fixed and unable to make the necessary compromises. A presumption of 50:50 shared residence won't change personality dispositions in intractable cases. Anyway residence or shared residence only determines where a child lives, it is Parental Responsibility that gives equal responsibility to both parents and rights to carry out those responsibilities. In intractable cases the courts may make orders (contact, shared residence, residence or even a transfer of residence) with conditions attached to regulate Parental Responsibility and equalize the power between parents. Some parents (either gender) with the minority of care for children give up.

As far as DV is concerned there is a difference between believing someone has been abused and having the evidence required in court to know they were abused. Even when it is found that abuse has occurred it isn't necessarily a reason for a court not to order contact. Any significant harm children suffer is weighed against the strengths, including measures that might be put in place, of an attachment with both parents. That means in cases of low level abuse some form of contact is likely to be deemed in a child's best interests and only in exceptional cases when there are high levels of violence is no contact ordered.

OLKB, Please, this isn't AIBU, it is a discussion on the FWR board about whether 'that' organisation represent all fathers in general. Many of us of course use cases close to us to make points, and many of try to help each other with debate and practical advice, and yes, sometimes by being frank and sometimes by providing food for thought.

May I ask you to withdraw the 'bitchy' remark.

I apologise for my use of the word bitchy, it is obviously inappropriate on a board like this and I shouldn't have done it.

Appreciated, OLKN.

Line runner I am delighted (sorry that sounds bad doesn't it) that I am not alone in this front issue....victim support said it was the main opening to my house and cause he couldn't kick my head in physically, doing it symbolically to front door was kicking my head in psychologically!?

Anyway OLKN glad you remember me:) I don't know if you remember my first post ? Everyone thought I was a troll....I wanted to know where could I buy a gun for protection...I was hysterical with fear back then as he was attacking every 3-4 weeks.

I was reading a blog of a father on that site and they were on about how to escape CSA payments....one father said rent a flat in Dublin for a few months! Anyway either ex wrote that himself or followed the advice ha as that is what happened!!

so you'd agree STIDW that even in extreme cases, eg. where abuse is proven, it is still very rare for a father to be denied any contact?