Yes sammy01, I am being a responsible parent & following court orders. He is not. Surprise surprise. But there doesn't seem to be any consequences. The system is broken & is ruining kids' lives.
QLD Family Law - How to Prove Ex is an Unfit Father?
- Thread starter Just a Mum
- Start date
Yes sammy01, I am being a responsible parent & following court orders. He is not. Surprise surprise. But there doesn't seem to be any consequences. The system is broken & is ruining kids' lives.
I think that this is a trap that many separated parents fall into, particularly when they first enter the Court system. In that they expect that their own affidavit (story) will be the only one listened to, or believed, without any understanding that "their story" is only one of two (sometimes more) versions of the whole story, and, that the Judge will ultimately write their own version in the end.
Just a Mum said:
Like others, you are welcome to your views here.
Actually - your facts are the problem here. You have provided some clarification, but my responses were based on the info you provided. Thank you for getting your facts straight.
So let's check:
You're the one who asked, "Do I have any rights as a mother to say that I know this man better than some judge sitting on their pedestal?"
Guess what - that is a delusional question to ask. If that were the case, why would anyone apply to court to see their kid? If the system allowed for a mother to say she knows best?
So you have a 4-month-old. Dad clearly wants to be in the kid's life - that is why he has asked for mediation. So let the dad be involved. Unless you have clear evidence that the child is at risk and I don't think you do, maybe by your standards, but not the courts...
Now Google Jen McIntosh. Read some of her stuff. Her research is often used in parenting cases.
Short version - infants need lots of short visits, rather than extended overnight visits and magistrates don't have a one size fits all approach, but on that note, you seem to.
Yep, lets' look at this story from a different perspective.
Eldest daughter is 10 - the dad is a drop kick right. Hence you felt you could move away without even discussing it. Dad number 2, tried and convicted by the court of you, for the same offence.
So nope, I'm not delusional. What I'd encourage you to do is read Jen McIntosh to start with, so you'll at least understand how the courts approach this. But trying to 'prove' that dad is gonna damage the child shows a lack of insight.
Between you and me - if he was good enough for you to sleep with, then why isn't he good enough to be involved with his kid?
So let's check:
You're the one who asked, "Do I have any rights as a mother to say that I know this man better than some judge sitting on their pedestal?"
Guess what - that is a delusional question to ask. If that were the case, why would anyone apply to court to see their kid? If the system allowed for a mother to say she knows best?
So you have a 4-month-old. Dad clearly wants to be in the kid's life - that is why he has asked for mediation. So let the dad be involved. Unless you have clear evidence that the child is at risk and I don't think you do, maybe by your standards, but not the courts...
Now Google Jen McIntosh. Read some of her stuff. Her research is often used in parenting cases.
Short version - infants need lots of short visits, rather than extended overnight visits and magistrates don't have a one size fits all approach, but on that note, you seem to.
Yep, lets' look at this story from a different perspective.
Eldest daughter is 10 - the dad is a drop kick right. Hence you felt you could move away without even discussing it. Dad number 2, tried and convicted by the court of you, for the same offence.
So nope, I'm not delusional. What I'd encourage you to do is read Jen McIntosh to start with, so you'll at least understand how the courts approach this. But trying to 'prove' that dad is gonna damage the child shows a lack of insight.
Between you and me - if he was good enough for you to sleep with, then why isn't he good enough to be involved with his kid?
Unfortunately, I was naive enough to believe in the justice system being fair. My daughter's father's affidavit was 90% & I was fully committed to going to trial & being cross examined in the hope that when he was cross examined, too, that all his contradictions & lies would be as obvious to the judge as they were to me.
Each of his three affidavits completely contradicted the one before.
I went to the trial fully prepared & with the expense of barrister, but the judge refused to hear us & adjourned it. Absolute waste of time & money, causing stress in family's that could be better off spending the money on the children. So once again, my concerns now are for my little boy, whose father promised me the world but instead chose his ego over his son. Am I supposed to just accept that my son will be damaged & be there to pick up the pieces when his life is ruined? These "laws" are made by madmen.
Thanks for the "help", I guess I have no choice but to let my son be harmed. And before you judge me & say why did you have a child with him, try understanding the spell that narcissists cast over empaths.
He had me completely fooled unfortunately
I am a good person though & a good mum & I will continue to do the best I can on my own since the only two men I have ever put my faith in have both horribly let me down. Thanks, goodbye.
From my personal experience with the family court system last year & from the general consensus of others in the same boat, it would seem that's all that us mere mortals can expect. It would seem that most people with a law degree think that there's no need for them to treat others with decency, manners or common courtesy anymore.
Perhaps they should remember that they are not gods & should probably try to have some compassion when dealing with others, especially children.
If anyone on here has any actual legal help I'd be happy to hear it, thank you
Perhaps they should remember that they are not gods & should probably try to have some compassion when dealing with others, especially children.
If anyone on here has any actual legal help I'd be happy to hear it, thank you
Just checking - do you really, really think the family law system should have as its fall back position - 'because mum knows best'? Because that seems to be your argument - that even after your ex's spend time money, effort, getting to court so they can see their kids - because you don't want that to happen.
And after all that, if a judge determines it reasonable for dad to see his kid, there should be a law that says that mum can override that. I'm sorry but that is ludicrous... And frankly says something about your ego.
Now, if you took the time to look up Jen McIntosh as I suggested you would have found that the court system doesn't have a once size fits all mentality, as that is part of what you were asking. I have provided a link help you understand.... (So please see how I'm actually trying to answer your questions with correct info backed up by reliable info).
Post-separation parenting arrangements
Don't bother saying thanks because according to you I'm an opinionated fool. Actually, I'm well read on the subject of family law and as a result of my experiences, I am happy to spend a bit of my time here trying to save some folk some stress and money because of my experiences...
Now as far as your rant about decency, manners, etc in your last post. Here is a crazy thought for you. Have the decency to:
1 - Realise that the folk here are entitled to an opinion that differs from yours.
2 - Realise that your opinion just might be wrong (and it is).
3 - Realise that maybe, just maybe - dad wants to be a good dad to his kid and that is why he has gone to the effort of organising mediation and you are the obstacle.
4 - Realise that maybe, just maybe - dad wants to be a good dad to his kid and that is why he has gone to the effort of organising mediation and you are the obstacle. (Yep, I know I wrote that bit twice - I think in needs to sink in....)
5 - It is pretty rude and hypocritical to talk about decency while attacking me the way you have.
So since you asked about the law - the law states that parental responsibility is shared between the parents. Here is a link to show I'm not making this stuff up because I'm informed (which I believe is what you were after - informed advice...)
Children and family law | Attorney-General's Department
So, dad has just as much rights about decision relating to the kid as you. Again - no need to thank me for providing you with correct accurate and unbiased factual information...
Now to help you see that I'm actually reasonably well informed and to show what your future could look like I've found a few cases to help you the realities of court:
SS & AH [2005] FamCA 481 (10 June 2005)
So in this case, mum made some pretty out there accusations against dad. They were tested by the courts and found not to be true... The end result? The kids live with dad and see mum occasionally.
Now sadly, in my opinion, the courts get it wrong sometimes. Here is a case where a mother had so manipulated the child because of her own personal level of craziness that it was determined that forcing the child to see dad would be detrimental to the kid. In short crazy mum won...
C & C [2004] FamCA 708 (6 August 2004)
Here is an interesting case for you - in this case the dad had effectively allienated the kids from mum. I'm adding it to show that there isn't a gender bias in the courts.
Prantage & Prantage [2010] FamCA 1198 (24 December 2010)
Here is another one where the time the kids spent with mum was mimimised because of her attitude towards dad:
Irish & Michelle [2009] FamCA 66 (6 February 2009)
Now, I'm not sure if you're gonna read it (look just skimming it and working out the best bits - like the summary at the top and the final orders will save you some time - again no need to say thanks... I do understand these things are hard reading and definitely that is one of the flaws I see in the system - it is so bloody complicated that us mere mortals struggle).
But my fave bits are:
82 It is unclear whether the impact by the mother and/or her family is intentional or unintentional. In its most benign, it lacks insight.
83 The question for me is whether part of the problem, which I find, comes from the mother is lack of insight in which case the evidence of the single expert is that it can be treated. Or alternatively whether the mother proactively undermines the children’s relationship with their father.
I like that bit about lacking insight - it kind of rings a bell or two here.
So I've only spent about 15 minutes looking and found lots of cases where one parent has had their time with kids minimised because of their negative attitude towards the other parent. I also know I could spend a further 15 min and find lots of cases where evidence of abuse was found and as such, that parent didn't get time alone with their kid (good) - but you have not come here and said your ex has abused this kid.
You have come here and said his older kids are drug addicts, etc and that is not relevant according to law. Different if you could establish he gave them drugs when they were 10 for example.
Now just to take you to task over you're comment that I'm really sad. Nope - I used to be but, see, my ex accused me of domestic violence and refused me access to my kids. That made me sad. But I spent my time learning how this legal system works.
While I can agree with you that it has its flaws, it is the best system the powers that be have come up with - I definitely don't want a system where mum can override any decision by a court based on the grounds that 'she knows best' which seems to be your preferred system.
But I'm not sad anymore - see, my 3 kids now live with me for about 80% of the time. They are currently visiting their mum and that has given me a bit more time to post here.... See their mum was of the opinion that she knew best for the kids and made lots of decisions about them without my input.
So when she decided to move 6 hours away and paid a deposit on a house, etc she was committed to moving. Now my case didn't even wind up in court because my solicitor wrote to her when I got wind of this planned move. My solicitor told her that it would be a bad idea to move without discussing it with me or having an agreement from me. Without going into the details - the end result, like I sad - the kids now live with me.
Now as to your assertion that I'm a fool. Again - look on that one you've got me... I've spent quite some time here providing accurate information. Not what you want to hear but accurate information nonetheless. For all that, I've copped abuse. Yet I've kept trying - that is really quite foolish. Maybe you could spend a moment asking why I bother..
So to summarise - I hope you see past your own personal bias against both of your ex's (oh and I understand the reason for it, too - I don't have a particularly high opinion of my ex either) and in the event that (heaven forbid) you have something more solid to go on to justify your concerns about how he is gonna damage your kid, because let's face it, so far all you've got is, 'but his older kids are crap', then please get back to this site and some good folk will spend some time giving you help.
However, in the meantime, I reckon you ought to get ready for mediation. Go in being reasonable. I reckon reasonable means agreeing for dad to see the 4-month-old for 2-3 visits of 2 hours a week. And realise that without any rock hard evidence, and I mean hospital visits, police reports etc, there are no good reasons for this dad not to see his kid.
Now don't do what my ex did - handed me a child with a dirty nappy and no spares or hungry or tired - or my favourite - she told me I had to provide my own clothes for my time with the kids.
Now one more thing - my ex was adamant I should not be near the kids, but she was also adamant that the child support I paid was not enough and she should be able to tell me how much money I need to give her.
My thoughts - If a parent won't agree for the other parent to provide real physical support for the child, then they should not be prepared to accept financial support. Just seems hypocritical to me to be prepared to accept money to support the child while claiming the other parent cant provide any other support - I'd like to know your thoughts.
Final thing - I've spent a good bit of time writing to you. Now I've been pretty abrupt at times and deliberately so. Why? Well your thinking is not in line with the courts and you need to understand that... But all the info I've provided is back up by court cases and reputable sources. So I'm far less ignorant that you think. So please do me this favour:
Have a look at this website - just for a few moments.
Dads for Life | A national movement to encourage fathers to be actively involved in their child's life for life!
And specifically this one - just for a few minutes.
Non-Resident Dads Can Make a Difference | Dads for Life
Regards
And after all that, if a judge determines it reasonable for dad to see his kid, there should be a law that says that mum can override that. I'm sorry but that is ludicrous... And frankly says something about your ego.
Now, if you took the time to look up Jen McIntosh as I suggested you would have found that the court system doesn't have a once size fits all mentality, as that is part of what you were asking. I have provided a link help you understand.... (So please see how I'm actually trying to answer your questions with correct info backed up by reliable info).
Post-separation parenting arrangements
Don't bother saying thanks because according to you I'm an opinionated fool. Actually, I'm well read on the subject of family law and as a result of my experiences, I am happy to spend a bit of my time here trying to save some folk some stress and money because of my experiences...
Now as far as your rant about decency, manners, etc in your last post. Here is a crazy thought for you. Have the decency to:
1 - Realise that the folk here are entitled to an opinion that differs from yours.
2 - Realise that your opinion just might be wrong (and it is).
3 - Realise that maybe, just maybe - dad wants to be a good dad to his kid and that is why he has gone to the effort of organising mediation and you are the obstacle.
4 - Realise that maybe, just maybe - dad wants to be a good dad to his kid and that is why he has gone to the effort of organising mediation and you are the obstacle. (Yep, I know I wrote that bit twice - I think in needs to sink in....)
5 - It is pretty rude and hypocritical to talk about decency while attacking me the way you have.
So since you asked about the law - the law states that parental responsibility is shared between the parents. Here is a link to show I'm not making this stuff up because I'm informed (which I believe is what you were after - informed advice...)
Children and family law | Attorney-General's Department
So, dad has just as much rights about decision relating to the kid as you. Again - no need to thank me for providing you with correct accurate and unbiased factual information...
Now to help you see that I'm actually reasonably well informed and to show what your future could look like I've found a few cases to help you the realities of court:
SS & AH [2005] FamCA 481 (10 June 2005)
So in this case, mum made some pretty out there accusations against dad. They were tested by the courts and found not to be true... The end result? The kids live with dad and see mum occasionally.
Now sadly, in my opinion, the courts get it wrong sometimes. Here is a case where a mother had so manipulated the child because of her own personal level of craziness that it was determined that forcing the child to see dad would be detrimental to the kid. In short crazy mum won...
C & C [2004] FamCA 708 (6 August 2004)
Here is an interesting case for you - in this case the dad had effectively allienated the kids from mum. I'm adding it to show that there isn't a gender bias in the courts.
Prantage & Prantage [2010] FamCA 1198 (24 December 2010)
Here is another one where the time the kids spent with mum was mimimised because of her attitude towards dad:
Irish & Michelle [2009] FamCA 66 (6 February 2009)
Now, I'm not sure if you're gonna read it (look just skimming it and working out the best bits - like the summary at the top and the final orders will save you some time - again no need to say thanks... I do understand these things are hard reading and definitely that is one of the flaws I see in the system - it is so bloody complicated that us mere mortals struggle).
But my fave bits are:
82 It is unclear whether the impact by the mother and/or her family is intentional or unintentional. In its most benign, it lacks insight.
83 The question for me is whether part of the problem, which I find, comes from the mother is lack of insight in which case the evidence of the single expert is that it can be treated. Or alternatively whether the mother proactively undermines the children’s relationship with their father.
I like that bit about lacking insight - it kind of rings a bell or two here.
So I've only spent about 15 minutes looking and found lots of cases where one parent has had their time with kids minimised because of their negative attitude towards the other parent. I also know I could spend a further 15 min and find lots of cases where evidence of abuse was found and as such, that parent didn't get time alone with their kid (good) - but you have not come here and said your ex has abused this kid.
You have come here and said his older kids are drug addicts, etc and that is not relevant according to law. Different if you could establish he gave them drugs when they were 10 for example.
Now just to take you to task over you're comment that I'm really sad. Nope - I used to be but, see, my ex accused me of domestic violence and refused me access to my kids. That made me sad. But I spent my time learning how this legal system works.
While I can agree with you that it has its flaws, it is the best system the powers that be have come up with - I definitely don't want a system where mum can override any decision by a court based on the grounds that 'she knows best' which seems to be your preferred system.
But I'm not sad anymore - see, my 3 kids now live with me for about 80% of the time. They are currently visiting their mum and that has given me a bit more time to post here.... See their mum was of the opinion that she knew best for the kids and made lots of decisions about them without my input.
So when she decided to move 6 hours away and paid a deposit on a house, etc she was committed to moving. Now my case didn't even wind up in court because my solicitor wrote to her when I got wind of this planned move. My solicitor told her that it would be a bad idea to move without discussing it with me or having an agreement from me. Without going into the details - the end result, like I sad - the kids now live with me.
Now as to your assertion that I'm a fool. Again - look on that one you've got me... I've spent quite some time here providing accurate information. Not what you want to hear but accurate information nonetheless. For all that, I've copped abuse. Yet I've kept trying - that is really quite foolish. Maybe you could spend a moment asking why I bother..
So to summarise - I hope you see past your own personal bias against both of your ex's (oh and I understand the reason for it, too - I don't have a particularly high opinion of my ex either) and in the event that (heaven forbid) you have something more solid to go on to justify your concerns about how he is gonna damage your kid, because let's face it, so far all you've got is, 'but his older kids are crap', then please get back to this site and some good folk will spend some time giving you help.
However, in the meantime, I reckon you ought to get ready for mediation. Go in being reasonable. I reckon reasonable means agreeing for dad to see the 4-month-old for 2-3 visits of 2 hours a week. And realise that without any rock hard evidence, and I mean hospital visits, police reports etc, there are no good reasons for this dad not to see his kid.
Now don't do what my ex did - handed me a child with a dirty nappy and no spares or hungry or tired - or my favourite - she told me I had to provide my own clothes for my time with the kids.
Now one more thing - my ex was adamant I should not be near the kids, but she was also adamant that the child support I paid was not enough and she should be able to tell me how much money I need to give her.
My thoughts - If a parent won't agree for the other parent to provide real physical support for the child, then they should not be prepared to accept financial support. Just seems hypocritical to me to be prepared to accept money to support the child while claiming the other parent cant provide any other support - I'd like to know your thoughts.
Final thing - I've spent a good bit of time writing to you. Now I've been pretty abrupt at times and deliberately so. Why? Well your thinking is not in line with the courts and you need to understand that... But all the info I've provided is back up by court cases and reputable sources. So I'm far less ignorant that you think. So please do me this favour:
Have a look at this website - just for a few moments.
Dads for Life | A national movement to encourage fathers to be actively involved in their child's life for life!
And specifically this one - just for a few minutes.
Non-Resident Dads Can Make a Difference | Dads for Life
Regards
Ah, the truth comes out.
Australia's family law system has room for improvement, certainly, but it's far from broken. Indeed, your case is a perfect example of how well it actually does work. It sounds to me like the Court has done its utmost to protect this child from psychological harm by guaranteeing his right to have a relationship with his father, a right he obviously wouldn't be allowed to enjoy if left to you...
Far out, sooo much energy and time and thought wasted on how to keep a parent away from a child - energy, time and thought that should be spent finding ways to manage co parenting after separation.
It's not the child's fault that mum and dad now hate the sight of each other, it's not the child's fault that mum and dad made a life long decision to have a child but can't see past their own bitterness and bulls**t to put their child's needs first!!
Yes, there is a way to keep the father from the child. If the father physically or sexually abuses the child call the police immediately. If he doesn't, then find a way to co parent a four week old baby?
Damn, you've got decades to go... do the right thing by your baby by encouraging and and supporting relationships with others that love him - like his father.
I know eff all about family law, this is just a personal opinion so I won't be bothered at all if you attack me for being so blunt. The moment that egg gets fertilised it stops being about us and starts being about them, it's called parenting, aka love.
It's not the child's fault that mum and dad now hate the sight of each other, it's not the child's fault that mum and dad made a life long decision to have a child but can't see past their own bitterness and bulls**t to put their child's needs first!!
Yes, there is a way to keep the father from the child. If the father physically or sexually abuses the child call the police immediately. If he doesn't, then find a way to co parent a four week old baby?
Damn, you've got decades to go... do the right thing by your baby by encouraging and and supporting relationships with others that love him - like his father.
I know eff all about family law, this is just a personal opinion so I won't be bothered at all if you attack me for being so blunt. The moment that egg gets fertilised it stops being about us and starts being about them, it's called parenting, aka love.
Kids can be raised as angels and still turn into little devils. Heck, even your son could chose the wrong path of addiction later in life. Our choices aren't 100% the result of our parents. If that was the case, I should be feral and in jail or rehab.
Unless you have proof in the form of police reports or hospital visits, the courts are going to assume you just have a bad attitude and it will work in his favour. Tread carefully.
Unless you have proof in the form of police reports or hospital visits, the courts are going to assume you just have a bad attitude and it will work in his favour. Tread carefully.
Similar threads
