Matt O’Connor, founder of the British pressure group Fathers 4 Justice has summed up the situation of family courts in language we all can understand:
“follow the money”
“A wicked deceit”
“Like banksters and gangsters”
“family law is so rotten to the core”
“our family courts which are blighting the lives of an entire generation”
”they are rapaciously gobbling up taxpayers money”
“an orgy of greed at the expense of desperate dads and broken children”
“Nobody on these committees is above being pulled into a sordid pit of moral squalor, greed and amorality”
“selling dads down the river again and again and again”
“lay the blame at the feet of collaborators”
“they profit directly from a production line of misery”
“They know the price of everything. And the value of nothing”
This is exactly the kind of language we need to be serving the “collaborators” at their every turn, through any means available.
It’s only when we get the message across about the real issues of family law, the “wicked deceit”, the “moral squalor, greed”, that we will see the tide turn on those collaborators. But no amount of tinkering with the law will ever put an end to the racketeering of the collaborators. As Matt says they have been “selling dads down the river again and again and again”. And, to use Matt’s figure, that’s 30 years of victims of these perpetrators. These victims cannot be forgotten. They must see justice done, which means restitution. Only when we see restitution for separated fathers and children (and any other victims of the collaborators) will the agony be put to an end. It’s a simple case of ‘follow the money’. Once the money goes to the victims there will be no more incentive for the collaborators. When fathers get their dignity, families and finances back the collaborators will live in shame.
For Ex-fathers the motto must be simply ‘show me the money’.
Orgy of greed
In her article on the Smart Stepmom When Kids Believe a Lie, Laura Petherbridge says,
“However, many stepmoms believe once dad gets remarried and takes on a second family, that the other children should have compassion and understanding about his financial strain and receive less.”
“This is incorrect. He brought those children into the world, and he is still fully responsible to provide for them. And he signed a divorce agreement making a vow that he would deliver. It is his duty and obligation.”
In a short article like this, Laura Petherbridge cannot be expected to go into the kind of detail needed to do justice to the subjects of child and spousal support payments. However I think a little more “truth” is in order. So, truth be told, we have to understand right up front than everyone needs a little more “compassion” when a new family comes along. This is true in intact families — if new children come along there is less to go around for the other children and for the parents; there is no reason it should be different in separated families, be they blended families or any other type. This is also true if a new family member such as a elderly parent or an unemployed family member comes into the family. Furthermore, it is totally contrary to fundamental equality that children should be subject to different standards just because they were first or were not first or because of a divorce or of separation agreement or because of laws for so-called child-support. We need also to remember that all current alimony/spousal-support and child-support agreements are made under duress. Any father facing family court in America or the rest of the Western World knows he is dead meat before he even starts, and that the children he considered to be his children are no longer his, but are nothing more than tokens for misandric peonage that clearly work contrary to any concept of the child’s best interests or any kind of realization of parental rights, justice or equality. The level of fatherlessness in America is clear proof that family law and the family courts in particular are working against children at every turn. The long path to fundamental justice that we thought had been established or soon would be established in the beginnings of the civil rights and gender equality movements have detoured around family law which has now submerged itself into a morass of deceit and avarice that deserves universal contempt. And that contempt should continue until fathers receive the restitution of family, finances and dignity they deserve for the systematic and systemic injustices they have been forced to endure.
It’s good to see that removing children from their families is still punishable 30 years after the events (at least in Argentina). Fortunately, there is no time limit in international law for charges of human rights abuses. That means ex-fathers and their children everywhere still have hope of restitution and justice. The hateful, systemic separation of fathers and children is the worst human rights abuse of our time. As Juan García says in the referenced article “We’ll continue this fight for justice”
Former Argentine dictators found guilty of baby thefts
It’s a shame that we have to go to so much trouble just to state the obvious. This is what happens when an outlandish ideology takes hold of the ruling class. In this case it’s feminism that after decades of screaming and badgering has managed to infest the legal, political, and media spheres. Consequently stupidity has ruled in family law for many decades, particularly from the early part of the 20th century. Of course there was that glorious period in the ‘sixties’ when the hope of equality was showing its face as the laws were, at least superficially, turned into gender neutral territory. That equality quickly vanished when the feminists saw women’s historical special status starting to disappear They claimed victim status contrary to any kind of logic, reason, or fact. The current state of misandry throughout our family law system is the result of the bullies and their toadies who currently decide the fate of families, with the resulting indentured servitude of fathers and the collateral damage in many families, and to our society.
Dr. Kruk, in the referenced document, gives the scientific data on the outcomes for separated families when there is “family conflict”. Equal parenting is shown to be far better than the feminist solution that has been the norm for so many unfortunate separated fathers and children for decades. Those improvements in family outcome with equal parenting are not only undeniable from the data but were always to be expected because they are so reasonable to anyone other than a rabid feminist or family-law lawyer. Of course, requiring scientific support for equal parenting should not be necessary in any society that claims equality of rights regardless of gender, but then our present ruling class has never really believed in such a thing, has it? What is it about equality that is so hard to understand?
Co-Parenting and High Conflict
Families are becoming aware of the loss of their rights to raise their children. Some examples:
– Swedish homeschooling father and public advocate for homeschooling, Jonas Himmelstrand, has been forced into exile in Finland by Swedish authorities.
– Montreal mother chose to remove her son from high school, enrolling him in an online learning course, the principal threatened to call social services.
– In contradiction of freedom of religion, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Quebec parents do not have the right to remove their children from the controversial new Ethics and Religious Culture Program.
Still the cry of ex-fathers is not being heard. This canary-in-the-coal-mine has been ignored at the peril of all families in the western world on now in the third world as well. Fathers have been summarily excluded from their children’s lives without the slightest occurrence of any wrong doing, only to find themselves further victimized by being legally robbed by the very persons who abducted their children. It is only a matter of time until this mugging by the State spreads to all aspects of family and individual rights.