Published at
04/20/11 A recent submission to the Australian Family Law Legislation Amendment Bill 2011

A child's perspective of shared parenting:
"I will NEVER forgive"

"I am the result of shared parenting. It was enforced because my parents were told it was the normal arrangement when they divorced when I was 12.

I spent every second weekend (far from the disgusting 50/50 arrangements some poor children are forced into) travelling for three hours around trip to spend time with my Dad.

"I am left with an anxiety disorder and I will NEVER forgive my father for pushing his desire to see me over my need for consistency and a normal life.

"I was never able to make "best" friends because I was never around! With one week on and one weekend off I could never be counted on by my friends. Sleepovers were impossible. I travelled for hours to see my father, away from my extra curricular activities while his life barely changed at all. I missed hours and hours of ballet lessons, outings with friends, church and so on.

"All this was done after a violence free relationship and fairly amicable split by my parents. The fathers in Australia can look forward to their children HATING them for what they've done.

"Good on you Mens' groups. By the way, do they think their daughters are going to be proud of the fact their fathers ignored basic evolutionary science (that children need their mother and that mothers are chemically wired to be the most empathetic and self sacrificing parent) to get his own way?


"My father recently expressed sadness that we were forced into such a contact arrangement. I appreciate that he loves me and did what he thought was best but we both agree that it was the wrong way to handle the situation. You know what I would have loved? Visits! My dad coming to me! I would have loved him visiting me, picking me up and taking me shopping, or to the park, or out for lunch, or to the museum and me not having to miss what all my friends were having (a consistent childhood) in order to spend time with him.

"It was awful, just awful, being without my Mum and so far away from her. Even with a loving father, I felt like a huge piece of me was missing with out my Mother. I think all children feel the same way about their mothers (despite what the men's groups are trying to say).

"PLEASE! Listen to the children! Please!"



Excerpted from:

Fathers lose bid for equal custody rights after review of family law

David Norgrove's Family Justice Review has rejected calls to give fathers equal rights to share custody of their children

By Tim Shipman
Wednesday, Nov 02 2011

[United Kingdom] Fathers hopes of securing equal rights over their children will be dashed tomorrow when a review of family law is published.

Plans to give parents equal rights to share custody of their children in the event of a split have been rejected by the Family Justice Review, led by former civil servant and businessman David Norgrove.

In a further blow to fathers rights campaigners, the Norgrove Report will also reject calls to enshrine in law the principle that children should have a meaningful relationship with both their mother and father.

Instead, it will simply say the courts should keep the idea of a meaningful relationship with an absentee father in mind when they make decisions about a childs future.

The report was rejected as a slap in the face for fathers last night and will undermine David Camerons claims that he would speak up for a strong family life.

Sources familiar with the report said Mr Norgrove had rejected statutory protection for men because it was likely to lead to lengthy legal battles to define a meaningful relationship.

In his interim report earlier this year, Mr Norgrove concluded the state of the family courts was shocking and that disputes take far too long to resolve.

He also rejected plans for parents to share custody 50-50 after seeing evidence that the system does not work in countries where it has operated such as Australia.

A senior government source said: The panel found that shared custody on an equal footing led to lengthy delays in the courts which are not in the interests of the child.

They have also rejected the halfway house of statutory recognition for the need to maintain a meaningful relationship on the basis that the courts would spend ages deciding how to define a meaningful relationship.

Nadine OConnor, campaign co-ordinator for Fathers 4 Justice, said: This whole exercise has been designed to appease womens groups, not fathers.

The Tories promised a fundamental review of family law and said that  Norgrove was not good enough. But they've made a complete U-turn.

Except as otherwise noted, all contents in this collection are
copyright 2007-2011 the liz library. All rights reserved.

This site is hosted and maintained by
Send queries to: