Mothers being forced to agree to shared parenting or lose their child

Mothers are being blackmailed into shared parenting in the Family Court 'Magellan List'.

My name is Maurice Kriss and I am the President of the National Child Protection Alliance of Australia. (NCPA) The National Child protection Alliance is a registered charity and nonprofit organisation dedicated to the protection of Children and Young people from abuse and neglect.  It was formed by researchers, academics, child welfare/ protection professionals, advocates for children, children's lawyers and parents to promote the Rights of the Children under the UN conventions.

I was first admitted to The New South Wales Bar as a barrister in 1988.  I predominantly practiced in the Criminal field of Law.  Until, in 2007, when I was asked to appear for a mother who was appearing in the Family Court in Canberra.  She alleged that her 3-year-old son had been anally assaulted by the child's father. The mother in this case lives on the South Coast of New South Wales.  This case launched me into a new pathway in law.

From that time onwards, my life took on a new direction.  I joined the NCPA where I was asked to assist a number of mothers who had their children taken from them by the Family Court after reporting that their children had been sexually abused by their husband or partner and handed to the abuser.  I was asked to assist mothers in all States of Australia excluding the Northern Territory.  For the following eight years I appeared in these states mostly pro-bono.  It was during these Court cases that I noticed a distinct pattern of corrupt conduct of the Family Court whereby the mothers were treated with abuse and disrespect.  They were called liars and accused them of coaching their children to lie.  The fact that very young children at the time were bleeding from the anus or vagina did not move police or Child Protection Authorities into doing proper investigations into the complaint of child sexual abuse. 

Stockholm Syndrome. The solution for children who don't want to go to the abusive parent

Judge Jarret and his circus of Court Reporters including Anthony Smith have "New Ways of Making You Speak".  We'll make it simple for those of you who haven't had to endure the Dark Side of the Family Court...  It seems these days that the solution for children that do not want to go to visit their abusive parent, is to accuse the mother (generally) of alienating the child from the father, coercing the child, coaching the child, and then to force that child to then live full-time with the other parent.

Furthermore, to ensure the fullest extent of Stockholm Syndrome is endured by the child, both the magistrates and court reporters and ICL's collude together and prevent the child from having any contact with the mother for at least (generally) six months.  This is to ensure that the child realises that no matter what, there will always be abuse, that the government will ensure that the child will no longer have the protection of his or her mother, and that protecting your child from any sort of abuse is futile. 

Family Courts have always been known for dirty tricks, but recent stories to emerge from Britain show gutter tactics have reached new lows

A father recently appeared in a UK Family Court, representing himself in a custody dispute.

He made his argument, quoting a judgment sent to him by a well-known fathers' support group.

The opposing barrister pulled him up – claiming the case he had mentioned had never appeared in the law reports. The father was made to look a fool and a conman, and the angry judge warned him he could face up to $20,000 in court costs.

But when the source of the offending email quoting the forged case was finally traced, it turned out to have been sent by the wife's barrister – who is now scheduled for a court appearance for perverting the course of justice.