Shared Parenting: Isn’t it a little dumb?

A hilarious, but provocative article was written about Australian Family Law reform. As they say, “All truth is made in jest”. Its called, “Law Reform By The Frozen Chook“, a title that surrounds Barry Williams of the Lone Fathers Association who claims that his wife hit him with a frozen chook. It is important to note that in the same breadth Mr William supported homicides committed by men. It highlights how the family law reforms have been made to accommodate myths that have no research to support them. In fact there is no link between the family court and absent fathers unless he has tried to kill the mother or the kid and even in those circumstances, they might get no over-nights or supervised access. To this day, these groups still attribute family violence to not having “shared parenting”.

There are no real laws to protect children and parents from family violence in the family law act, but there are punishments for not being able to substantiate the abuse to the judges requirements of course. Considering the “Pub Law” article, it is sobering to learn that the shared parenting bill was established on the foundation of beer absorbed brain cells. It is after all puzzling to contemplate that if the mother does not do everything the ex wants, she is not complying to shared responsibility and must be punished by relinquishment of the time she spends with the children regardless of the quality of the care she may provide.

Now this doesn’t sound like sharing at all. It sounds like the ownership of women and children even after the relinquishment of divorce. If it was truly about shared parenting then, both genders would be held accountable for their “shared responsibility” and if a parent was violent, then they are clearly not being a responsible parent and thus such “rights” do need to be relinquished.

But somehow those beer absorbed brain cells decided that even if they don’t get the 3 when they try and add 1+1, they believe that if they continue to add it, they will eventually get that answer and every time they get 2 on the calculator, its a “sign” that they are close to finding 3.

The Shared Parenting Council is bias

Although news coverage on family law is relatively low, but mostly in the favour of fathers. The Shared Parenting Council of Australia claims to represent fathers and mothers. Pay attention to some details and this organisation represents fathers:

President
Michael Green QC

Vice President (1)
Barry Williams
[Lone Fathers Association Australia]

Vice President(2)
Coral Slattery
[Family Law Reform Association NSW]

Vice President (3)
Greg cairns (Retired)

Vice President (4)
Terry Bowker
[Reliable Parent’s Inc]

Executive Secretary
Wayne Butler
Mobile: 0411 850 677

Federal Director
Edward Dabrowski
Mobile: 0409 917 345

State Director (QLD)
Peter Marsh

State Director (NSW)
Tevor Bock

State Director (VIC)
Lindsay Jackel
[Nuance]

State Director (SA)
Vacant

State Director (WA)
Joan Hopkins
Telephone: 08 9474 9552

State Director (TAS)
Vacant

Territory Director (ACT)
Jim Carter
[Lone Fathers Association Australia]

Territory Director (NT)
TBA

Should the Shared Parenting Law be Changed?

A recent report released by professor Chisholm revealing that a number of children are at risk and consequently recommended changes in the shared parenting law. Mens groups are angered by the recommendation, whilst children’s groups champion the notion.

But should the law revolve around mens rights? Are mens rights violated and if so how are they more violated than children’s rights or say victims of domestic violence which make up a majority of women?

Professor Chisholm proposed in the report to consider the merit of involvement that the parent had before separation but omitted any reference to mothers and fathers. So why are mens groups claiming that they would lose contact? Where a parent would lose contact in Chisolms recommendations is where there are substantiated findings of family violence. So what do mens groups really want?

According to Kathryn Joyce, in America, mens groups have become frighteningly effective where they have managed to block domestic violence laws. The question remains, how effective will they be in Australia?