Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Why do we allow it?
#1
I'm sat here thinking there are clearly sexist elements to the system, for example, a mother is automatically given PR whereas the father must be named on the birth certificate to have PR. She can even register the child without him if they are unmarried. He cannot do the same however.

Why do we allow in a breakup or divorce just to assume the kids live with their mother and we'll fight them in court for access? Why not a 50/50 split down the middle until it is worked out at mediation and a custodial sentence if neither party adhere to it in the mean time? Why are mothers not being punished for breaking contact orders? It is their duty to promote contact in a sole PR scenario yet they go out their way to do anything but...because they know they can.

I've had a look around on various sites this morning such as change.org and petitions uk and whilst there are a few that try to address the above points, the lack of signatures says it all in that nobody sees the current system as a problem when it quite clearly is. The government won't even look at them until 10000 people have signed it and they are nowhere near it.

You know what does have a high number of signatures? A mother wanting her ex's PR revoked. In that case he has walked away so I can see where she is coming from. My point is though we really need to be signing petitions and get our rights or lack thereof them debated in parliament. Too many similar stories you read time and time again and it is all because the current system allows it.
Reply
#2
(06-17-2018, 10:50 AM)Ric134 Wrote: I'm sat here thinking there are clearly sexist elements to the system, for example, a mother is automatically given PR whereas the father must be named on the birth certificate to have PR. She can even register the child without him if they are unmarried. He cannot do the same however.

Why do we allow in a breakup or divorce just to assume the kids live with their mother and we'll fight them in court for access? Why not a 50/50 split down the middle until it is worked out at mediation and a custodial sentence if neither party adhere to it in the mean time? Why are mothers not being punished for breaking contact orders? It is their duty to promote contact in a sole PR scenario yet they go out their way to do anything but...because they know they can.

I've had a look around on various sites this morning such as change.org and petitions uk and whilst there are a few that try to address the above points, the lack of signatures says it all in that nobody sees the current system as a problem when it quite clearly is. The government won't even look at them until 10000 people have signed it and they are nowhere near it.

You know what does have a high number of signatures? A mother wanting her ex's PR revoked. In that case he has walked away so I can see where she is coming from. My point is though we really need to be signing petitions and get our rights or lack thereof them debated in parliament. Too many similar stories you read time and time again and it is all because the current system allows it.

it does seem to me that especially in the current climate ie #metoo etc that any issue that proposes in any way that women might just be in the wrong is going to struggle.

I guess that there have been many cases where Dad's did not do the right thing and the courts responded and built a sledgehammer of a system.

It also seems to me that this is open to abuse by manipulative women.

I also think that women have better support networks than the many lone wolf blokes who appear on here.

What can we do differently to bring more Dads together and unify the many cases illustrated on this and other websites into a call for action to change the courts/cafcass/cms systems?

I am keen but have little idea where to start.
Reply
#3
(06-17-2018, 10:50 AM)Ric134 Wrote: I'm sat here thinking there are clearly sexist elements to the system, for example, a mother is automatically given PR whereas the father must be named on the birth certificate to have PR. She can even register the child without him if they are unmarried. He cannot do the same however.

Why do we allow in a breakup or divorce just to assume the kids live with their mother and we'll fight them in court for access? Why not a 50/50 split down the middle until it is worked out at mediation and a custodial sentence if neither party adhere to it in the mean time? Why are mothers not being punished for breaking contact orders? It is their duty to promote contact in a sole PR scenario yet they go out their way to do anything but...because they know they can.

I've had a look around on various sites this morning such as change.org and petitions uk and whilst there are a few that try to address the above points, the lack of signatures says it all in that nobody sees the current system as a problem when it quite clearly is. The government won't even look at them until 10000 people have signed it and they are nowhere near it.

You know what does have a high number of signatures? A mother wanting her ex's PR revoked. In that case he has walked away so I can see where she is coming from. My point is though we really need to be signing petitions and get our rights or lack thereof them debated in parliament. Too many similar stories you read time and time again and it is all because the current system allows it.

It is very disheartening that so many innocent men are at the receiving end of this one sided law system that exists. I have always said it that all cases should be handled on a case-by-case basis and not using the same tar brush on everyone.

Nowadays a lot of women want to get divorced either cos they think the grass is greener on the other side, or because their main self purpose for getting married has been achieved (kids, house, etc). And these women will use the law to their advantage to get what they want. How about the law asks both parties "who is it that wants the divorce and why"? and then take it from there. If a woman wants a divorce that doesnt entitle her to have full custody of the kids especially if the man didn't want a divorce. These are things that need to be looked into for a change, and for us men to stand a chance of not losing other things that are precious to us in a divorce. I am willing to sign any petition that is fair to us men.

That is my 2 cent.  Smile
Reply
#4
I'm in the middle of divorce and have discussed this at length recently with various social services, solicitors, barristers. It does appear to be the culture is slowly changing for the better.

There is an obvious realisation behind the scenes that family law and favouring women by default has created a monster. Publicly the authorities will never admit such a thing but there does seem to be a culture change going on.
The government making noise on replicating time limited spousal maintenance like Scotland for England, the demise of long term spousal maintenance, the realisation that mesher orders have just stored up problems for women in later life are all indicators the culture is changing but it is snails pace.

You need to look at it like a swinging pendulum. The system and culture has swung so far in favour of women that just through sheer resistance alone the pendulum is beginning to swing back.

The bottom line is it's got to the point that women have overplayed their hand in a divorce system and it's got to the point it's not workable. Probably judges and magistrates are tired of seeing bogus domestic abuse claims to real ones. Most likely the feedback from social services are that they spend the majority of their time perusing dead ends than actually protecting people with legitimate domestic abuse claims.

There is also a clear push going on to tackle male depression as it's got to the point the suicide rate of men is too big too ignore any longer.

Also the gender fluidity culture change going on is going to further muddy the waters. Women know this is and it's no coincidence the biggest groups against this have been feminist groups. I have no doubt it's partly to protect the current family law system. It's going to be harder for family law to by default favour women when at the sametime the government is changing law to recognise gender fluidity when the main premise is gender is a social construct and we're all equal.
Reply
#5
Sadly, for fathers and us men the change is not happening quick enough.
There is currently a review and consultation of Scottish divorce law (and English... I believe)
which is being driven by the whole 'Gender Recognition' movement and debate.
(It is now the norm to have two men as parents, or two women who are the parents).

One of the main points being focused on is the 50/50 childcare arrangements.
This is coupled with the 'voice of the child', or enabling the opinion of the child/children.

I spent nearly 2 years reading "in the best interest's of the child" in every solicitor's letter.
Solicitor's, Mediators and all involved in the process all over used this one phrase.

I can go some way to understanding how difficult it might be to facilitate this properly.
How exactly do you go about measuring the response and views of a small child?
My understanding for now is that a child's opinion can only be sought at 10 years old.

We do need change. The system is outmoded and favours the mother.
For now, we need to get smart, be sharp, outwit and be clever in our approach.
Choose your solicitor wisely. Read up and be prepared. Play the game as it is now.
Reply
#6
Agreed but the indicators are that it's at least a step in the right direction and I personally think change is coming faster than you might think. To me the gender recognition debate really has the potential to bring major change to the family court system and quite soon.
The family courts were never built for this.
There is no way LGBT groups will put up with the same non-resident parental rights men have traditionally had to put up with. As same sex relationships grow no doubt so will the voice for change.

I think thats why the government are trying to get ahead of the curve now.

There's a few teachers in my family and I was shocked to hear how common and open same sex relationships are in schools thesedays. It certainly isn't like it was when I went to school, the new generations coming are lot more liberal.
The fact Government are debating this now is a significant indicator.

Personally I think governments have had their hands tied over daring to reform family courts but gender recognition gives them a legitimate reason to overcome the feminist lobby groups.

If they start giving preferential rights to just gender fluid people (and they are slacking the laws n this too) which is starting to happen already you'll end up with a farce of men transitioning to women as an attempt to gain more rights. It's a can of worms alright.
Reply
#7
That’s actually a very good point Beehive and I really do agree Smile let’s hope so!
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)