NPBSPPC Newsletter June, 2010
Dear Members, Service Provider Organizations, Law Reformers, Individuals and any interested persons, Decision Makers, Politicians, Domestic violence and child abuse services, Advocates, Mental Health Professionals and Citizens, both here and Internationally.
Congratulations to our first ever Female Prime Minister, Ms Julia Gillard!!!
Welcome to NPBSPPC Newsletter and thank you for your ever-increasing and an ongoing support. NPBSPPC takes this opportunity to acknowledge all authors and contributors of material through individual submissions or through other organizations. NPBSPPC specifically acknowledges Mr Julian Real of USA, and Dr Michael Flood(Australia), Andrea Dworkin(UK) and Jennifer Drew(UK). Julian thoroughly researched this global phenomena with the other mentioned authors in making a special contribution to NPBSPPC June edition of our Newsletter, on ongoing systems abuse of women and children who are struggling in the family courts, and not being able to protect themselves from abuse and lifelong harm. NPBSPPC recommends this masterpiece by Julian who describes the heart of the problem of how perpetrators of abuse access these systems to inflict such cruel, inhumane and ongoing violence and abuse of women and children.NPBSPPC submits this Newsletter to the ALRC violence reforms, which closes on 25 June 2010.NPBSPPC demands that the Australian Government complies with the United Nations Convention of Human Rights to protecting and eliminating all forms of systems abuse, violence and abuse towards women and children through legislative reforms.World Consensus on domestic violence and abuse towards women and children, a recommended reading on agreements by various Nations, please click on the link below to read:
Womens Consensus Statement (PDF 59kb)
Family Law harms children:http://www.smh.com.au/national/law-fails-children-exposed-to-harm-20100623-yz90.htmlMr Charles Pragnell on the "Shared Parenting" debate.
"The very term `Shared Custody/Parenting' is an atrocity and violation of children's rights under international laws. It treats children merely as objects to be divided up in the same way that other joint possessions when couples separate. And the decisions to do so are made by Judges/lawyers with little or no knowledge of the needs and rights of children. The Australian Government are hypocrites when they criticise human rights abuses in other countries when children's rights are being violated and breached by the Family Law Act and by Australian Family Courts every day in this country - if they spent less time and effort on concerns for asylum seekers and refugees and more on the nation's own children, then they would be acting with more honour and integrity."
It is to Australia's continuing shame that children are treated the way they are in the Family Courts and in ways that are reminiscent of the way children of the `Stolen Generation' and those deported from England were treated. Of course it is hypocritically claimed in all cases that `It is in the best interests of the child', just as in the case of those other poor hapless children. I cannot say, `Forgive them for they know not what they do', as the government and the Lawyers and the others engaged in the family law system know exactly what they are doing - they are legally abusing children. There will be no foregiveness for these."Charles Pragnell.Website: http://www.nccps.org.au/eap/charles_pragnell.html
Further on Australian Shared Parenting Law Debate, informatively discussed, on Women's position on protecting children, and men's perspective on other issues, recommended reading:
http://aspld.blogspot.com/The Following is Father's Rights submissions to the ALRC Inquiry: http://www.familylawwebguide.com.au/forum/pg/topicview/misc/5440/index.php&keep_session=630256165 "It confirms absolutely (if further confirmation were necessary) that their major concerns are for MONEY and PROPERTY, and that Shared Parenting has little, if anything, to do with the care and welfare of children.""We see your true Colours...."Charles.Dr Lesley Laing on Family Laws:http://www.bensoc.org.au/uploads/documents/no-way-to-live-full-report-june2010.pdfA recommended reading by Mr Julian Real, thank you, Admin NPBSPPC. Julian's autobiography is at the end of this article.The Heart of Justice
by Julian Real, copyrighted 2010. All rights reserved.
Men have asked over the centuries a question that, in their hands, ironically becomes abstract: "What is reality?" They have written complicated volumes on this question. The woman who was a battered wife and has escaped knows the answer: reality is when something is happening to you and you know it and can say it and when you say it other people understand what you mean and believe you. That is reality, and the battered wife, imprisoned alone in a nightmare that is happening to her, has lost it and cannot find it anywhere.
-- Andrea Dworkin, “A Battered Wife Survives”, in Letters From a War Zone
The issue concerning men's unearned rights and unjust male ownership of women and children is one which continues to exist not only in Australia, the US, and the UK but also the Scandinavian countries. Increasingly, there is a pernicious patriarchal myth that children must have regular contact with their violent fathers/stepfathers. Family court systems refuse to accept that the male partner who commits violence against the female partner cannot be viewed as an appropriate 'parent' when it concerns the welfare of the children. Male supremacist thinking is that issue of violent male partners is separate to the issue of 'the same violent men being granted contact/guardianship of the child/children.'
The dangerous and sometimes deadly belief is that in a household wherein the man commits violence against his female partner, this domination supposedly does not impact on the child's/children's welfare. This is partly due to the unquestioned presumption of public and private male dominance. Even worse, despite efforts to make international legislation concerning the rights of children more just and humane, this harmful impact is commonly ignored; the 'rights of the violent male partner' supersede the rights of the child/children not to be subjected to male violence. Contact with violent fathers is seen as vital because of this misogynist myth that children need the abusive 'male role model in their lives'. We must not question 'violent man's suitability' since mere fact he is male is prioritised over e verything other factor. The effects of violence and the rights of children, hand in hand, go ignored. The mother--’the female role model in their lives’--is constantly subjected to the most minute, discriminating sexist male-centered scrutiny concerning their suitability to parent their child/children. Male sex right over children always trumps women's and children's right not to be forced to live or have contact with violent, manipulative, self-obsessed men.
-- Jennifer Drew, UK Feminist Activist and Researcher Challenging Male Violence Against Women
In countries which have national laws that impact people globally, across class, race, ethnicity, and gender what is the moral and political obligation of such a country’s legislative bodies and criminal justice systems to understand, empathically, the experiences of those most marginalised, most disempowered, and most harmed? If laws center the experiences of the most privileged and powerful, the people with the most financial access to those legal systems, and the people with the least likelihood of being arrested due to social position and political clout, what is the impact on those with the lowest social position and the least political clout?
Cases flash before my eyes. A mother appeals to the court to prevent the man who regularly raped her from having custody of the children he also sexually abuses. The court doesn’t believe her that he repeatedly raped her because she’s his wife and finds inconclusive evidence of him having abused his children. Because the court determines her to be a liar they award sole custody to the man who then goes on to sexually assault his children until they leave home. A woman fights for her children’s rights to be free of the man who has terrorised all of them, sometimes with fists, sometimes throwing objects, sometimes with verbal assaults that cut as swiftly as a sharp knife. Or, on the gentler side of things, a man seeks psychological control and power over his family and his spouse decides she wants more out of life for herself and her children than to be dominated in this way. She leaves, with her children. He sues her for custody because he wants her back. The children are less important to him. I knew this father who pretended to want custody to care for his children when all he really sought was to have more abusive access and control over the children’s mother. The mother told me that was his sole motivation. I wanted to believe he was more complex than that, more humane. He wasn’t. He lost his custody case and has done very little to keep in contact with his children, now grown, although he was not legally or otherwise restricted in his ability to contact or visit with them. He lost control of his first wife so he married another woman and had two more children. So much for his court-pleaded desire to raise the first two.
There are so many cases of men using the unjust while socially real power they have to oppressively regulate the lives of women they love, hate, or regard merely as a pawn in their sadistic mental chess game called life. (He may tout that she is The Queen who holds all the power. Sometimes he actually believes his own grand delusions of political impotence.) When seen collectively and compassionately the cases, sorted and stacked, cease being anecdotal and instead reveal patriarchal patterns of men terrorising women and children, using any and all means available to them to attempt to regain the forms of control and dominance that usually escalates with little to no intervention. Misogynist violence is minimised by society generally--or normalised, or naturalised. It is blamed on women; it is seen as a weakness in men, a cause for concern and pity. Perhaps therapy will help (him).
In most cases men’s sexual violence against women can and will be ignored altogether. Most battered women remain silent. Most raped women never speak about it. Most girls violated by their fathers are too afraid to say anything for years, if at all. In my own family of origin, virtually all the female members are survivors of abuse from men in the family. None of them prosecuted. None of them ever accused the perpetrator of assault. The lie is that women make false allegations against men about battery, rape, and incest. The truth is that most women are silent, sometimes due to being killed, sometimes due to taking their own lives to escape the present or past horror and pain. Those that survive and build up the courage to speak out, to confront, to challenge the wrongs of his rights and the legi timacy of his entitlements are seen as scornful and uppity. A woman who publicly challenges a man’s ability to do what he wants and not be accountable to anyone--which is usually how it goes--is presented socially as someone who doesn’t know what she’s talking about. Confused. Irrational. She may speak; but being believed is another matter altogether. Remember: he defines and authors reality; she cannot. That’ s how he wants it and that is, too often, how the courtroom sees it.
The reality presented before a judge or a jury is tightly bound to male supremacist beliefs and attitudes, values and practices that do to women what men do to women: make them seem incapable of telling the truth about their own experiences. He’ll do just fine with a misogynist attorney appealing to the court’s patriarchal sympathies. She will need extensive outside verification: corroboration, reports, findings. Compounding the problem is the reality that child welfare and social service agencies are often so underfunded and understaffed that they must pick and choose which cases they can investigate.
My hearts breaks when I learn of yet another case where men are allowed to abuse their children and torture their ex-wives. What I feel vacillates between despair and outrage. Girls and boys are being ordered by court into the homes of their abusive fathers rather than their caring mothers because the fathers have social status and political power, not because they are the best parents. Custody may be determined based on the father having economic stability when a mother is poor for having spent years raising children and finally leaving him without his blessing or access to the financial portfolio he filled because she took care of the family from home, out of love, not for money.
What is horrifying is learning what happens when a woman leaves an abusive man. A woman who worked in the medical field as a technician, assisting a male doctor I’d seen for years, suddenly wasn’t around. I inquired about her absence. Co-workers looked down. I felt dread. They quietly told me she’d been killed by her ex-boyfriend. I felt sick. Only a month or two ago she was with him and alive. Now she was away from him and dead. That’s quite a high price to pay for deciding to be single. The newspapers reported him saying “I realised she wouldn’t come back and I couldn’t bear the thought of her being with another man.” His lethally jealous, irrational rage betrays his truth claim; it’s not like she had the chance. Let’s be thankful t hey didn’t have children because they likely would have been raised by the man who murdered their mother.
This is more than wrong. It is immoral and unacceptable because it is preventable destruction of human life presented as acceptable and fair by men’s lawyers and patriarchal judiciaries allegedly empowered to protect the vulnerable and the harmed from such abuses. Instead laws and courtrooms conspire to do just the opposite--adding promise to a husband’s threats and force to his fist.
The fact that men dominate, control, and regulate every institution in society is somehow missed when the legal lens focuses in on particular cases argued with spurious logic by attorneys well-paid by selfish and sadistic men. With increasing vigor and determination, Father’s Rights groups are attempting to misuse questionable facts to make it appear that women have all the control and only want more and with that presumed power they only want one thing: to punish the men who hurt them. If that’s how the world really worked the medical technician would be alive today and her ex-boyfriend would be dead. Men’s capacity to project onto women what they themselves feel and do is astoundingly, acidly hallucinogenic and horrifyingly effective in accomplishing their goals of continued domin ance.
Centuries of documented despicable patriarchal violence by men against women and children is conveniently kept out of view when the hostile fathers’ attorneys build bogus cases against the women who loved them and were compelled to leave them when unable to endure their hatred and hostility. Wicked is a word applied to step-mothers and women generally. Not to men who have demonstrated a willingness to be wicked in ways women have never been, not necessarily because they lacked the cause. But women’s rage is institutionally impotent while simultaneously demonised. Men’s rage, however, is systemically existent and institutionally enforced. His rage cannot be demonic because he’s always entitled to it as a human quality. Law tries to curb its uglier expressions, but for him to b e enraged, in and of itself, is no crime at all. When women rage, they are portrayed as many things--none of them especially human.
Misogynistic Men's Rights Groups are organising to do what they do best: spread woman- and child-hating, utterly self-serving and self-centered portraits of themselves as the Fathers Who Always Know Best. Online and off, they distribute distortions about their own children's testimony against them and about the caricatured characters of their ex-wives, who are, after all, the mothers of their children. The pain she allegedly caused him, actually generated by his own commitment to control and conquest, is played up to epic proportions. He suffers; therefore he is victimised by her, not by inflicting his own inhumanity against her. Meanwhile, her pain, from his outbursts and his beatings, is downplayed, denied completely, or blamed on her decision to stay with him. When are men not socially responsible fo r their own violent behavior? When the recipient of them is a woman.
His abuses may be emotional, psychological, physical, or sexual. Some may be public but most are expressed privately against the wife and kids, intentionally hidden from public scrutiny so as to maintain his social standing as “a good man”. Because of a socially ingrained sexist assumption that men speak both with greater authority and more accuracy in society-at-large, fictional tales can be promulgated by these male supremacist men and their adoring attorneys who are never paid to be truthful, only convincing.
Consider the following assessments made by a loving father and husband I know who has been studying the contours and conceits of sexist men’s stories. What follows are excerpts on myths about domestic violence, researched and compiled by the sociological specialising on gender violence, Dr. Michael Flood, from Fact Sheet #2: The Myth of Women’s False Accusations of Domestic Violence and Rape and Misuse of Protection Orders.
Myth:
Women routinely make up allegations of domestic violence and rape, including to gain advantage in family law cases. And women use protection orders to remove men from their homes or deny contact with children.
Reality:
The risk of domestic violence increases at the time of separation.
Most allegations of domestic violence in the context of family law proceedings are made in good faith and with support and evidence for their claims.
Rates of false accusations of rape are very low.
Women living with domestic violence often do not take out protection orders and do so only as a last resort.
Protection orders provide an effective means of reducing women’s vulnerability to violence.
Reality:
Separated women are at elevated risk of violence by men, whether physical, sexual, or lethal, relative to women in intact unions (Brownridge, 2006), and women are at risk of increasingly severe violence when separating from violent partners (Riggs et al., 2000). The risk of post-separation violence decreases with the passage of time since separation, and is greatest in the first two or three months after the commencement of the separation, at least from homicide data. [...]
Reality:
Further situational variables influence post-separation violence. Leaving a marital or cohabiting relationship or trying to leave it increases women’s changes of being physically or sexually assaulted especially if they are connected to men with patriarchal and/or sexually proprietary attitudes (DeKeseredy et al., 2004). Women are at greater risk of post-separation violence if they are more ‘available’ for victimisation: if they live in the same city as their former partner, and at riskier times such as court appearances and exchanges of or visits to children (Brownridge, 2006). The presence of a new partner can be either a risk or a protective factor, as can children. For example, joint custody may become an opportunity for conflict and violence, may incr ease opportunities for violence at visitation and the exchange of children, and children may be used as tools for violence by abusive men (Brownridge, 2006). [...]
The Australian evidence is that protection orders provide an effective means of reducing women’s vulnerability to violence. An early study in New South Wales found that the vast majority of complainants experienced a reduction in violence and abuse from the defendant in the six months after the order was served on the defendant, and over 90 per cent reported that the order had produced benefits such as reduced contact with the defendant and increased personal safety and comfort (Trimboli & Bonney, 1997). Finally, research among young women aged 18 to 23 and subjected to violence by intimate partners found that “preventive strategies for young women at the early stage of a relationship can eliminate, or at least reduce, physical violence by a partner” ( Young et al., 2000, p. 5). The severity of violence was reduced after legal protection, but the benefit was not as marked unless women sought help from the courts as well as the police.
Mothers are desperately awaiting the feel of their sons and daughters arms around them, finally out of the psychological and physical grip of their patriarchal parent. So let’s get to the heart of the matter. Women are socially and legally disadvantaged in life and in law due to men's jurisdiction over each. The sexist beliefs and attitudes that are foundational to men's violence against women and children are supported, not exposed, not challenged, not remedied, when judges and juries carry those same beliefs and attitudes into the courtroom. This effectively ensures that at the end of the day, male supremacists win, patriarchal power is bolstered, and abusive fathers and husband regain control and custody. Women lose credibility, if not courage. They lose faith that justice is fair and unbiased . Mothers and children lose trust and hope in systems that are supposed to protect and defend their human rights to not be dominated and violated. More heart-breaking still is the loss of mothers and children’s irreplaceable relationships to each other. They are legally and forcibly separated for months, years, and sometimes forever. This is not justice. This is the tyranny of unearned patriarchal privilege ruling justice systems.
Some of these fathers have controlled, dominated, manipulated, violated, subordinated, raped, and battered the children’s mothers secretly, others have done so in front of the children, also to them, but none of this is appreciably and appropriately factored into who gets custody when parents separate and divorce due to domestic violence. Why are men being given visitation rights to children they abuse? Why is a man who batters his children’s mother being given full custody when the children need to be safely with her, and they all need reliable protection from him? With official rulings such as these, one wonders: where is the heart in justice?
If our choices rest between a woman who has been harmed significantly by a husband’s abuse but who is still standing and speaking out, naming him as the perpetrator of that harm, the best parent available to the children ought never be the abuser. Even if he is rich and she is poor.
The fact of him being male ought not be reason to grant him access to family members he has terrified. Being male doesn’t preclude being a good parent but being an abusive husband and father always does--definitionally--if reality is allowed to be defined by the harmed, that is. Being an abusive husband in a home where there are children means you are unequivocally an abusive father also. To believe otherwise is to deny children have human feelings. To believe otherwise is to deny that everyone in a home with domestic violence is impacted negatively by that violence. We know this is the case with alcoholic homes. We know this about families where there is rampant drug abuse. The same is true in any home with children where misogyny is expressed by domineering men who ps ychologically control and terrorise women. Whether he appears kind or callous to his children, the fact of him systematically subordinating their mother to his will, regardless of how he directly treats the children, ought to be sufficiently substantiating evidence he ought not parent them.
Overwhelmingly, by all accounts, it is males, not females, who use brutal force, bone-breaking force causing bodies to bleed and faces to bruise beyond recognition. These male supremacist traumas are not only physical. Men humiliate and degrade women with sarcastic ridicule and caustic contempt. Men’s attitudes and entitlements, both interpersonal and institutional, reveal their behavior, their actions, are aimed at women because they are female.
No child is safe when home is a war zone. Ought the safety and care of children and the humanitarian well-being of women be more centrally valued in society and in law than preserving a detrimental father-child relationship when determining where and with whom children will best be raised? If a husband and father has demonstrated his ability to terrorise and dominate other human beings “in his care”, why doesn’t the courtroom see this as just cause to award sole custody of children to the mother, without visitation by the predator?
This would be an absurdly unnecessary thing to say except that it is not routinely believed: criminal terrorists ought not be made legal guardians of those they terrify. Findings of post-traumatic stress due to threats and violence, and symptoms of Stockholm Syndrome due to degradation and domination exacted against the wills and beings of mothers and children ought not be ignored, understated, or deemed irrelevant when custody rulings are rendered in any court of law that calls itself just and humane.
Sources for some of the content above:
http://ncmbts.blogspot.com/2010/06/fact-sheet-2-myth-of-womens-false.html
https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&ik=a59f80d383&view=att&th=129126bf40b51a50&attid=0.1&disp=vah&zw
http://factscourtwatch.org/Emotional-Psychological%20Abuse%20Fact%20Sheet.htm
Julian Real is a U.S. writer working to illuminate and eliminate men’s social and sexual domination of women. He has also been an activist in support of feminist campaigns for justice for thirty years, largely working out of public view due to death threats made against him by Men’s Rights Activists. He worked collaboratively with Nikki Craft to create feminist websites including the Andrea Dworkin Memorial, Hustling The Left, and The Nikki Wiki. He is the author of dozens of essays published many places online, including xyonline.net and nostatusquo.com. Since the autumn of 2008 he has hosted the blog, A Radical Profeminist, which spotlights and challenges white men’s violence against women of color.
Motherhood is non-neogtiable! "Our children are our future." Stop violence against mothers and Children!
Website for more information and resources:http://www.safety4parentsandkids.org.au
NPBSPPC Newsletter AnnouncementsThe Focus of this Month's Newsletter is the true Outcomes of abusers accessing systems without accountability to the lifelong harms, trauma and abuse of vulnerable Children and Mothers from abuse and Domestic Violence. All recent studies demonstrate this. NPBSPPC demands Julia Gillard Government removes immunity provisions from the Family Law Act in the current reforms and to urgently protect and return children to their Mothers who are left in harmful situations by the Howard Government.
Mother's will never give up fighting for their children, because it is a natural maternal instinct that only mothers only understand!
Photo by Janis, a nurse.
Public Opinion on Systems and Professionals.
".....but kids are more interested in love over money... yes it is true about how they use the money through the system and send women to the favoured court experts and then the money hungry solicitors want a piece. Not sure why they made the laws because they are not considering best interests its all about the money to gain or the future money to save ... and revenge... we will be heard very soon i am sure.... Too much chaos from these laws,, women no longer equal, women and children have no voices, women and children at risk and a war male v female. We will be safe soon, we will be heard..." by a Mother.
Casualties,Mistakes and Outcomes by Family Courts
A child is abused after moving to Fiji - Australian Courts and Governments should learn some lessons from Fiji
A CHURCH pastor who was found guilty by the High Court in Suva for raping his daughter who was nine years old has been jailed for 15 years.
Justice Salesi Temo told the 42-year-old man he had not only breached parental trust but had ruined his daughter's world.
The offences were committed between January and May 2006.
"She was already traumatised by the break-up of your family in 2005. She looked to you for fatherly support and guidance. She trusted you as a father. You were supposed to respond in kind. You were supposed to guide and counsel her to become a strong and confident young girl," Justice Temo said.
"However, you did exactly the opposite. You ruined her world by indecently assaulting her, and raping her twice. Then you committed incest on her."
Justice Temo said the girl was emotionally scarred for life. He said at times she cried without a reason, had very low self-esteem and was frightened.
"She gets so angry easily and wants to be left alone on most occasions. She stares a lot. Her school grades have deteriorated. She shuts down when questioned. On occasions, she changes from a happy little girl to an angry one, and then a dumb one," Justice Temo said.
The High Court in Suva highlighted her medical report dated June 12 in 2009 that at the age of 12 years and eight months old, the girl was sexually active and that she had been subjected to other sexual activities with other men.
Justice Temo said those were the by-products of his offence.
"You turned your own daughter into this kind of world. Instead of living her life as a young innocent girl, she is now being exposed to the above kind of world. In a sense, your have ruined her life as a child, given your offending," he said.
He said the father had total disregard to his daughter's right to live a happy and peaceful life, not only as a child but also when she grows into the adult world.
The High Court heard that following his separation from his wife in 2005, he moved with his three daughters in January 2006 to their new residence in a squatter settlement in Suva where the abuse started.
It heard that the men sexually abused his daughter between February 11-18, February 19-28 and again between May 1-31 in 2006.
Timoci VulaTuesday, June 08, 2010
Father and son jailed for sexual assault
By Tom Nightingale
Fri May 21, 2010
Map: Maryborough 3465
A father and son from central Victoria have been jailed for sexually assaulting family members.
The court heard the 37-year-old son committed incest and indecent acts with his daughter, soon after gaining custody of her nine years ago.
The abuse continued for several years at their home in a small town near Maryborough.
The court was told the man realised he could no longer trust himself, and told his daughter to report the offences.This morning he was sentenced to seven-and-a-half years' jail, with a minimum of five years.
The man's father also abused his grand daughter and one of his daughters 20 years earlier.He was sentenced to five years and five months' jail with a minimum of four years.
Both men pleaded guilty and Judge Michael McInerny said they had shown genuine remorse.
Latest News
"Which Child do I kill first? (Brisbane)
Brisbane Times: Father who abused his family asks the mother which child do you want me to kill first (Australia)http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/which-child-do-you-want-me-to-kill-20100517-v99f.html
How to recognise Sociopaths who kill (UK)
http://www.childrenwebmag.com/articles/parenting-articles/sociopath-fathers-the-'charming-killers
Jaycee Dugart Case (USA)
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2010/06/17/2010-06-17_kidnapping_victim_jaycee_dugard_has_new_terror_her_father_kenneth_slayton_.html
How To Prevent Domestic Abuse
Prevent your daughter from becoming a domestic abuse Victim, watch video by clicking here: http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/video?id=7336089§ion=view_from_the_bay&syndicate=syndicate
Shared Care Dangerous
Shared care can be dangerous in situations of domestic violence - and an increased percentage of proceedings are used to gain custodies of children either as a revenge towards the mothers or are primarily focused on avoiding child support payments by many fathers:
Read More: http://www.watoday.com.au/opinion/politics/reports-show-shared-care-needs-fixing-20100203-nd7a.html#comments
Cycle of Domestic Violence explained
Read More: http://www.fremantle.wa.gov.au/dvc/cycle.html
Institutional forms of domestic violence and abuse
"Perfecting the fine Art of Institutional Grooming" by systems explained here to abusing women and children http://hubpages.com/hub/The-Fine-Art-of-Grooming
Much more information on family Court and systems that are enjoying immunity and allowing corruption and greed to breed found here:http://hubpages.com/hub/Protecting-Abused-Children-From-Dangerous-Shared-Parenting-Laws-How-to-do-Your-Bit
NPBSPPC acknowldege safety-at-last
My Journey, My Way
I will not forget the purposeOf embarking on this journey,Lest I lose direction andFail to reach my destination.And though the path I followIs fraught with danger,I am not afraid.Fear and angerHave ever been your tools;I no longer use them as my compass,For experience has made me wise.My courage comes from having faithIn the morality of my purpose, andI trust instead my own toolsOf love, intelligence and empathy,To show me the way.
NPBSPPC acknowledges safe-at-last for the above Poem
2006 Reforms, two case laws and legislationin family law and other law articles and procedures here:http://www.thefamilylawdirectory.com.au/article/interim-parenting-orders.html Australian Shared Parenting debate,click on the link below:http://aspld.blogspot.com/2010/04/court-like-communist-china.htmlPaedophiles behind face of Respectabilityhttp://www.news.com.au/opinion/paedophiles-behind-face-of-respectability/story-e6frfs99-1225777275022
Further Reading
NPBSPPC acknowledges safe-at-last for the following articles:
http://hubpages.com/hub/Signs-of-Domestic-Violence-Emotional-Abuse Abusive cycles, impact and outcomes on children and victims thoroughly researched and discussed here with a worldwide audience.
Domestic Violence Survival kit and Information:http://hubpages.com/hub/Domestic-Violence-OK-So-its-Abuse-What-Now
A good resource Website and debates, on shared parenting:http://australiansharedparentingdebate.posterous.com/
The Geneva Conventions of 1949:http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/html/genevaconventions
Recent Conference Papers and discussions at Father's groups, which the Mothers do not have any funding for to organise: How will this benefit people who are unfairly assessed? Example: the mum wants to have the kids but can't afford legal rep and can't get legal aid.http://www.familylawwebguide.com.au/site/pg/news/view/861/index.php&keep_session=16962464
Federal Attorney General address to the Pathways Network Conference:http://www.ag.gov.au/www/ministers/mcclelland.nsf/Page/Speeches_2010_10June2010-AddresstotheFamilyPathwaysnetworksforum
AIFS Conference:http://conference.aifs.gov.au/poster-program.php Anyone attending or any stakeholder groups presenting as parents of children affected by these studies?
Minister Bowen gets a win in the Senate, posted on the Father's rights Website:http://www.familylawwebguide.com.au/site/pg/news/view/861/index.php&keep_session=16962464
I Will Prevail!
Sometimes, I wish I did not understand the quantum physics behind certain things;It makes me fear other things even more...On the other hand, knowledge is power.Enlightened, I can liberate myself and mine from those fears,And with that freedom, the brilliance that lies within us shall manifest.As our gifts of intelligence, empathy, creativity, compassion,
Adaptability, passion and wisdom start to show,Our light will shine more and more brightly,And our love for each other will be all we need
To ensure our light never dims again,But only grows brighter.How bright will their light shine...
If I do this right?May our light then become a beacon
To others who are lost in the darkness,And may it help them find there own light.There is no choice between darkness & light.Darkness is but the absence of light.My light will never again be dimmed,I will prevail!
(Inspired by "Our Deepest Fear", written by Marianne Williamson and spoken by Nelson Mandela in 1994, during his Presidential Inauguration)
"Our Deepest Fear"
In the 1900's, these brave women fought for us, most died from horrific punishments for speaking out.by Marianne Williamson
from A Return To Love: Reflections on the Principles of A Course in Miracles
"Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate.Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure.It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us.We ask ourselves,Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous?Actually, who are you not to be?You are a child of God.Your playing small does not serve the world.There is nothing enlightened about shrinkingSo that other people won't feel insecure around you.We are all meant to shine, as children do.We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us.It's not just in some of us; it's in everyone.And as we let our own light shine,We unconsciously give other people permission to do the same.As we are liberated from our own fear,"Our presence automatically liberates others."
NPBSPPC acknowledges safe-at-last for the above poems.
Please visit: www.safety4parentsandkids.org.au for resources, Information and help sites.
Get Help for Yourself
Please seek Professional assistance, such as: calling Parentline, Kids Helpline, or other support services posted on the NPBSPPC website.
You know to call Parentline and allow your children to seek assistance through Kids Helpline http://parentline.com.au/ and hopefully they are not obstructed to do so to obtain some help for their vulnerable selves. Look after yourselves and your children during traumatic times and get support from professional services.
NPBSPPC dedicates the June Newsletter to all our children who are the most vulnerable, precious and innocent persons that deserve our nurturing, love, care and protection to optimising their full human potential.NPBSPPC also dedicates this Newsletter to the recognition and acknowledgement of our very first Female Prime Minister, Ms Julia Gillard. Together with other female leaders including Premier Anna Bligh of Queensland, our Governor General, Mrs Quentin Bryce, and our Chief Justice of the Family Court of Australia, Ms Dyana Bryant, Ms Gillard sets the highest profile standard for our daughters to inspire to and achieve.Thank you.
NPBSPPC.
Please feel free to forward, post or link this newsletter to others or your websites. NPBSPPC.
NPBSPPC website: www.safety4parentsandkids.org.auContact us on: admin@safety4parentsandkids.org.au
