There is a very frightening reality these days for moms considering divorce. It’s a reality that numerous women assembled at the Monmouth County Superior Courthouse in New Jersey today are determined to raise awareness about, in hopes, of inciting change while calling the competency of judges such as Judge Paul Escandon in question.
Like Judge Paul Escandon, a number of judges are on the hot seat for being allegedly biased against mothers and ruling in the favor of fathers in divorce and custody proceedings. And whereas, in some cases, such rulings are warranted, in others, they are not.
The peaceful protest rallying together in Monmouth County Monday was doing so to protect “Abused Children Of Divorce and Separation.” These moms are seeking to have courts dig deeper into cases and become more educated in determining divorce and custody rulings that meet the optimum needs of the children involved. The claim is that the manner in which Family Court handles these cases is not only archaic but in certain “high conflict” situations, the manner is barbaric. High conflict cases comprise many meanings, folks, including granting custody to documented abusers and pedophiles.
The price for a mothers own safety and freedom in 1996 was an imposed, unnatural and unwanted separation from my eight children, including my nursing infant. The injustice committed against her is not just the physical separation from her children, but the willful desecration of the mother-child relationship and bond, a sacred spiritual and emotional entity.
Many mothers who seek safety from abuse are routinely prohibited from having even the most basic contact with their own children, not because they were unfit parents, but because they were outspent, out represented, and out-maneuvered in a court atmosphere that seems to favor those who inflict domestic violence.
We are sick and tired of the family courts making statements without evidence, or proof. Sadly most people by now have forgotten about Hayley Gascgoine, the young mother who died five minutes before the judge gave the verdict. Many professionals said her death was not caused by stress, it was other factors, or something else, - or even down to using drugs because she went to the toilet, previous to her collapse.
The toxicology report proved that she was clear. Our professionals cannot be trusted, not in any aspect, not one word. No one who has not witnessed, or been a part of the family court process has a clue about just how abusive these environments are.
Pauline Hanson's One Nation party went to last year's federal election with a policy of abolishing the Family Court and replacing it with a tribunal of "mainstream Australians".
The Turnbull government is expected to shortly commence the biggest review of the Family Law Act since it was introduced in 1976, amid pressure from Pauline Hanson to address the rights of fathers under the Act.
Questioned by Senator Hanson at a Senate committee hearing on Friday, Attorney-General George Brandis indicated the terms of reference for a review by the Australian Law Reform Commission would be released shortly, saying that the government wanted to hold the widest possible review of the workings of the Act.
These orders were made by a Newcastle Judge against an innocent man who just wants to spend time with his children and who made it quite clear that he has no faith in our court systems ... Gee, I wonder why. Loughnan gave everybody reason to be scared of injustice in our family courts after seeing this :
You see, for the lovely little chump to do this, he can then prevent the father from bringing any more matters into the court without a Legal Appointed Guardian, who is at no obligation to do what he asks. This man MAY pay for his own lawyer but Loughnan has prevented him using anything but government paid crooks which will not help him.
But wait ... and to add insult to injury, there's more :
Study: About 32,000 pregnancies result from rape each year
The Rape Survivor Custody Act would encourage states to strip parental rights from rapists
When an Ohio judge denied a request for Cleveland kidnapping suspect Ariel Castro to visit the 6-year-old girl he fathered with one of the women he kidnapped and raped, the reason seemed pretty clear cut.
CHILD protection campaigners say women who accuse their former partners of sexually abusing their children are being unfairly labelled as mentally ill in the Family Court.
Child sex abuse researcher Freda Briggs and child protection advocate Charles Pragnell say recent cases show the emphasis on shared parenting responsibilities is putting Professor Briggs and Mr Pragnell are part of the Safer Family Law campaign and argue that amendments to the Family Law Act in 2006 were geared towards the rights of parents rather than those of children.