Kid napping syndrome

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/mar/24/social-worker-abuse-online


Maybe they're just hooked on the power, like most in the Child Protection and divorcee industries.

Looks like blogging through a US server is the way to get around the evil secrecy laws of the Family Court.

• 
  
• • Rachel Williams
  • The Guardian, Wednesday 24 March 2010
  • Article history

Renée Zellweger as a social worker rescuing a child in the film Case 39. Photograph: c.Paramount/Everett / Rex Features

The hounding of social workers by the press for being "baby-snatchers" if they take children into care is a predictable story. But now such persecution has taken a new twist with online campaigns by families protesting about child protection intervention.

A proliferation of blogs and pages on social networking sites have sprung up. In one example, a Suffolk family claim they were forced to give up their child for adoption, with no evidence of abuse. They went to Spain before the birth of their second child, who is now in the care of Spanish foster carers acting on information from Suffolk social workers.

In some cases, the blogs make for uncomfortable reading. Social workers and managers are named and vilified, accusations are hurled at councils, and court injunctions banning the identification of the families and children are flouted.

According to Hilton Dawson, chief executive of the British Association of Social Workers, websites devoted to attacking social workers are a growing problem. "They illustrate the difficulties of the social workers who are damned when they do and damned when they don't," he says. "We get many complaints from people who feel very threatened by the publication of sometimes vitriolic criticism of them, and really very unpleasant personal abuse."

Managers are almost powerless to stop what Simon White, director of children's services in Suffolk, describes as "floods of information about the council that is completely false and misleading".

Some of the blogs are hosted in the US, where the constitution's first amendment, guaranteeing the right to free speech, makes them all but untouchable.

White's concerns about the content range from the impact on the targeted social workers and the reputation of the council to the effect the content of the sites may have on the cases and the families involved. "There's quite a lot of abusive and personal stuff aimed at named individuals," he says. "Some is clearly defamatory, and obviously we have duties to those staff. And when you get into the wilder edges of it, you are sometimes worried about their personal safety."

White also fears that an online campaign might be contagious. "If it started to become commonplace that whenever we did a pre-birth conference, families would consider leaving the country, it would force a change in practice," he says. "We'd have to be much less open with families."

One Suffolk employee who has been named on a blog says the experience is not just personally upsetting but has a knock-on effect on other cases. "Other families are aware of what's being said and they will bring it up, and that's difficult, especially when people may be making sensitive decisions," the employee says.

The problem of online hate campaigns is not limited to Suffolk. White knows of at least three other councils that have been similarly targeted, and a quick trawl of the internet reveals links to families around the country keen to tell their stories. Myths about social services – that they get financial rewards for every adopted child, or that they are involved in conspiracies to remove families' children – are perpetuated.

"The vast majority of what we do is actually allowing families to stay with their kids, even when we've got very serious concerns," White says. "There were 38 adoptions in Suffolk last year. Of children who entered the care system, 45% went back to their parents in the same period."

White does not think there is much that can be done about the way information spreads, but he would like action beyond the individual local authority when allegations about conspiracies or financial inducements are made. "The profession, or the government, needs to respond," he says. "They need to defend the arrangements and processes, and put right mistakes and misapprehensions."

The BASW works constantly to address the myths about social work, Dawson says. He has recently written to every local authority in the country offering to help them communicate to communities and the local media what social workers do.

At a time when councils are struggling to recruit social workers, another reminder of the pressures of the job is the last thing they need. "This work is immensely demanding, personally and professionally, and it's difficult to retain staff at the front end," the Suffolk employee says. "Staff are concerned that the same sort of thing could happen to them."

Violence laws face challenge

At last the racket is exposed and a class action launched.

http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2010/03/14/133845_scalesofjustice.html

https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=50025422e2&view=att&th=1275ab216a8fefca&attid=0.1&disp=attd

ttps://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=gmail&attid=0.1&thid=1275a78225ff9114&mt=application%2Fpdf&url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2F%3Fui%3D2%26ik%3D50025422e2%26view%3Datt%26th%3D1275a78225ff9114%26attid%3D0.1%26disp%3Dattd%26zw&sig=AHIEtbTCXnl9jZIcZz53R9OhCxTox-gHTg

file:///D:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Administrator/Local%20Settings/Temp/Mail0003.PDF

"Stunned, devastated, horrified etc.

"Stunned, devastated, horrified etc."

http://blog.fathers4equality-australia.org/equalparenting/FiDBlog.nsf/dx/law-needed-to-curb-false-abuse-allegations?opendocument&comments

...as is every father when this reality is revealed.

And now we hear our Family Court authorities claiming that fathers have been given false expectations that the can remain equally is the lives of their children when their wife repudiates their marriage and leaves.

This constantly repeated claim that the child's best interests are best served by creating torment and conflict by empowering a mother to exclude a father is contrary to what any normal person would think . It would be rejected without hesitation.

Wouldn't it improve matters if the fathers were forewarned? I'd say

Michael the same thing happened to me and I'm now banned from seeing my daughter at all.

If child contact was enforced from the outset, conflict would be avoided and the child's best interests would be protected. Children are happier and more successful when they have shared parenting. Its the solution that avoids the conflict, litigation, it reaps money for the industry and money for the mother.

The idea that a father might be a danger to their own child is as preposterous as assuming that a mother would be a danger to their child. Its an idea that is promoted with a mult million dollar PR campaign that targets men as perpetrators of violence against women - Family Violence:

This game all about extortion and kidnap - the 2nd oldest industry in the world. Parents will spend everything and more to maintain contact with their children. Its a gold mine.

"Follow the money"

Women emerge as aggressors in Alberta survey

My God there's a multi million dollar industry based on portraying men as perpetrators of "Family Violence". ...and the Canadian Government spent $10M based on fraudulent information! Shouldn't Kennedy-Dutton be charged with fraud? If nothing else. What about all the children that lost their fathers because of this fraud. Should they get compensation? Could the same thing be going on here in Australia? Women emerge as aggressors in Alberta survey

National Post (Toronto, Ontario) - Saturday, 10th July 1999

By Brad Evenson and Carol Milstone

http://www.franks.org/fr01060.htm 67% of women questioned say they started severe conflicts This article appeared in the National Post (Toronto, Ontario) on 10 July 1999. This item may be cited as Brad Evenson and Carol Milstone, Women emerge as aggressors in Alberta survey, National Post (online edition), July 10, 1999. OTTAWA - Women are just as violent to their spouses as men, and women are almost three times more likely to initiate violence in a relationship, according to a new Canadian study that deals a blow to the image of the male as the traditional domestic aggressor. Perhaps the most surprising aspect of the study, however, is the source of the data -- a 1987 survey of 705 Alberta men and women that reported how often males hit their spouses. Although the original researchers asked women the same questions as men, their answers were never published until now. When the original Alberta study was published in the Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science in 1989, it was taken up by feminist groups as evidence of the epidemic of violence against women. The researchers, Leslie Kennedy and Donald Dutton, say they were primarily interested in male-to-female violence at the time. In any case, the one-sided Kennedy-Dutton study was cited extensively in a 1990 House of Commons committee report The War Against Women, which ultimately led Brian Mulroney, the former prime minister, to call a two-year, $10-million national inquiry into violence against women. The inquiry's 460-page report made 494 recommendations aimed at changing attitudes in governments, police departments, courts, hospitals and churches. It also led to a torrent of lurid news features about battered women. The current study, which will appear this week -- again, in the Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science -- says that while the need to stop violence against women is obvious, violence against men is being ignored. "Our society seems to harbour an implicit acceptance of women's violence as relatively harmless," writes Marilyn Kwong, the Simon Fraser University researcher who led this study. "Furthermore, the failure to acknowledge the possibility of women's violence . . . jeopardizes the credibility of all theory and research directed toward ending violence against women." The study shows roughly that 10.8% of men in the survey pushed, grabbed or threw objects at their spouses in the previous year, while 2.5% committed more severe acts, such as choking, kicking or using a weapon. By contrast, 12.4% of women committed acts of minor violence and 4.7% committed severe violence. The violence is seldom one-sided. Of those surveyed, 52% of women and 62% of men reported that both partners were violent. When questioned about who initiated the most severe conflicts, 67% of women believed they had started it; only 26% believed it was their male spouse. Regardless of who started it, women appear to end up the losers in the struggle. A major U.S. study on the topic shows 3% of women suffer injuries in spousal violence, while only 0.4% of males were hurt badly enough to seek medical care. Publication of the "other side" of the violence study provides a sharp illustration of how social science is manipulated to fit a particular agenda. "It happens all the time. People only tell one half of the story," says Eugen Lupri, a University of Calgary sociologist whose research shows similar patterns of violence against men. "Feminists themselves use our studies, but they only publish what they like. "As some feminists say, it's counter-intuitive. We would not expect that to be true; and if things are not expected to be true, for some people they are not true." Even the federal government appears to turn a blind eye. In 1993, Statistics Canada began to keep track of assaults by men on women in its Violence Against Women survey. But it does not measure the female-to-male violence. "At the time, it was decided that since violence against women was more prevalent, we would only keep track of that," explains spokesperson Shelley Crego. Ms.Crego said this decision was based on police reports, noting women complain more frequently of assault by men than vice versa. In her article, Dr. Kwong implies this creates an incorrect picture. "It is important to keep in mind that, within the criminal justice system, any of the physical acts endorsed by these respondents would constitute assault," she writes. Nor does it appear that violence is confined to married or common-law relationships. In a separate study to be published this week, researchers from the University of Regina and Wilfrid Laurier University report that 39% of males surveyed said they suffered violence while on a date, compared with 26% of females. "This sex difference has been found in other studies of physical and psychological dating violence," report researchers Donald Sharpe and Janelle Taylor.

Your hosts Reg and Sue Price would like to hear your news and views on the topics:
	Email: support@mensrights.com.au Mail: P.O. Box 28 Waterford Queensland 4133 Australia Fax: (07) 3200 8769 Tel: (07) 3805 5611

Women emerge as aggressors in Alberta survey

There's a multi million dollar industry based on portraying men as perpetrators of "Family Violence"...and th Canadian Government spent $10M based on fraudulent information! What about all the children that lost their fathers because of this fraud?. Should they get compensation? Could the same thing be going on here in Australia? Women emerge as aggressors in Alberta survey

National Post (Toronto, Ontario) - Saturday, 10th July 1999

By Brad Evenson and Carol Milstone

http://www.franks.org/fr01060.htm 67% of women questioned say they started severe conflicts This article appeared in the National Post (Toronto, Ontario) on 10 July 1999. This item may be cited as Brad Evenson and Carol Milstone, Women emerge as aggressors in Alberta survey, National Post (online edition), July 10, 1999. OTTAWA - Women are just as violent to their spouses as men, and women are almost three times more likely to initiate violence in a relationship, according to a new Canadian study that deals a blow to the image of the male as the traditional domestic aggressor. Perhaps the most surprising aspect of the study, however, is the source of the data -- a 1987 survey of 705 Alberta men and women that reported how often males hit their spouses. Although the original researchers asked women the same questions as men, their answers were never published until now. When the original Alberta study was published in the Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science in 1989, it was taken up by feminist groups as evidence of the epidemic of violence against women. The researchers, Leslie Kennedy and Donald Dutton, say they were primarily interested in male-to-female violence at the time. In any case, the one-sided Kennedy-Dutton study was cited extensively in a 1990 House of Commons committee report The War Against Women, which ultimately led Brian Mulroney, the former prime minister, to call a two-year, $10-million national inquiry into violence against women. The inquiry's 460-page report made 494 recommendations aimed at changing attitudes in governments, police departments, courts, hospitals and churches. It also led to a torrent of lurid news features about battered women. The current study, which will appear this week -- again, in the Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science -- says that while the need to stop violence against women is obvious, violence against men is being ignored. "Our society seems to harbour an implicit acceptance of women's violence as relatively harmless," writes Marilyn Kwong, the Simon Fraser University researcher who led this study. "Furthermore, the failure to acknowledge the possibility of women's violence . . . jeopardizes the credibility of all theory and research directed toward ending violence against women." The study shows roughly that 10.8% of men in the survey pushed, grabbed or threw objects at their spouses in the previous year, while 2.5% committed more severe acts, such as choking, kicking or using a weapon. By contrast, 12.4% of women committed acts of minor violence and 4.7% committed severe violence. The violence is seldom one-sided. Of those surveyed, 52% of women and 62% of men reported that both partners were violent. When questioned about who initiated the most severe conflicts, 67% of women believed they had started it; only 26% believed it was their male spouse. Regardless of who started it, women appear to end up the losers in the struggle. A major U.S. study on the topic shows 3% of women suffer injuries in spousal violence, while only 0.4% of males were hurt badly enough to seek medical care. Publication of the "other side" of the violence study provides a sharp illustration of how social science is manipulated to fit a particular agenda. "It happens all the time. People only tell one half of the story," says Eugen Lupri, a University of Calgary sociologist whose research shows similar patterns of violence against men. "Feminists themselves use our studies, but they only publish what they like. "As some feminists say, it's counter-intuitive. We would not expect that to be true; and if things are not expected to be true, for some people they are not true." Even the federal government appears to turn a blind eye. In 1993, Statistics Canada began to keep track of assaults by men on women in its Violence Against Women survey. But it does not measure the female-to-male violence. "At the time, it was decided that since violence against women was more prevalent, we would only keep track of that," explains spokesperson Shelley Crego. Ms.Crego said this decision was based on police reports, noting women complain more frequently of assault by men than vice versa. In her article, Dr. Kwong implies this creates an incorrect picture. "It is important to keep in mind that, within the criminal justice system, any of the physical acts endorsed by these respondents would constitute assault," she writes. Nor does it appear that violence is confined to married or common-law relationships. In a separate study to be published this week, researchers from the University of Regina and Wilfrid Laurier University report that 39% of males surveyed said they suffered violence while on a date, compared with 26% of females. "This sex difference has been found in other studies of physical and psychological dating violence," report researchers Donald Sharpe and Janelle Taylor.

Your hosts Reg and Sue Price would like to hear your news and views on the topics:
	Email: support@mensrights.com.au Mail: P.O. Box 28 Waterford Queensland 4133 Australia Fax: (07) 3200 8769 Tel: (07) 3805 5611

I guess many people don't know that the divorce industry has a very wide definition of violence to ensure it can completely strip litigants of their assets and their children.

Mothers for example can usually be persuaded to allege violence when facing the prospect of loosing custody of the children. This way even those reluctant to subject their children to having a loving parent subjected to such allegations won't escape the net.

Regards,
Simon Hunt
Family Law Action Group (FLAG)

http://www.theage.com.au/national/court-does-not-screen-for-violence-20100305-pox8.html

Court 'does not screen' for violence

CAROL NADER

March 6, 2010

THE Federal Magistrates Court hears more than 80 per cent of parenting disputes that end up in court but does not routinely screen for family violence, say the authors of an evaluation of changes to family law.

The Australian Institute of Family Studies evaluation says there were 10,987 applications for orders involving children in the Federal Magistrates Court in 2008-09, compared with 2086 in the Family Court.

It said while the Family Court conducted assessment interviews with parents that included screening for family violence, this did not happen in the Federal Magistrates Court, which had insufficient resources and heavy workloads.

But Chief Federal Magistrate John Pascoe says the court's processes were designed to identify family violence and child abuse as early as possible.

The Howard government commissioned the report to assess changes to family law introduced in 2006. The federal government released the 379-page report in January and found that the changes emphasising greater shared parental responsibility were overall working well. But this critical issue went under the radar.

''Issues relating to family violence and child abuse are brought to the attention of the [Federal Magistrates] court by the parties, or the family consultant or independent children's lawyer where these professionals are involved,'' the report says. ''No routine screening takes place by FMC personnel, although parties have the opportunity to bring safety concerns to the attention of registry staff.''

But the report notes that at the end of last year the court was allocated more resources.

Co-author of the evaluation, Dr Matthew Gray, said one reason the Federal Magistrates Court did not routinely screen for family violence was lack of resources.

''Cases with family violence are being missed throughout the family law system, including in the court, and the better and more sophisticated the screening for violence, the more likely it is that the cases will be identified and dealt with appropriately,'' he said.

A spokeswoman for Chief Federal Magistrate Pascoe said the Family Court and Federal Magistrates Court had difference processes that took into account the different case mix and volumes.

''The Federal Magistrates Court is a high-volume court with a spectrum of matters, including complex ones,'' she said. ''The Family Court's work is now confined to the most difficult and troublesome matters.''

She said every party to an application in the Federal Magistrates Court had to file a supporting affidavit setting out family violence, substance abuse, mental illness and child abuse. In the year to June 2009, 713 Notice of Abuse forms filed were also filed in the court.

''Federal magistrates are aware that for a variety of reasons allegations may not be raised and routinely explore the presence of risk issues at the first court date,'' she said. Extra resources were being used to explore family violence early.