http://www.blackshirts.info/adultery.html
Would that be because you were so enraged at your ex wife because she left you John? Pedophilia is ok is it John?
QLD.
Dear Sir.,
This letter is the culmination of a number of years of personal experience and self-education and is both a story and a lesson for all mothers who have been or are in the midst of divorce proceedings. I have experienced the pain of family disintegration, single- parenthood, child support difficulties and yes, the joy of rebuilding and remarriage too. There is a very disturbing phenomenon emerging from a dark source in angered ex-spouses that is becoming widely recognized in legal and medical circles because of its devastating impact.
As a woman, mother, stepmother, wife and divorcee, I have heard and shared experiences of my female and male friends. One trend has disturbed me immensely -- men whose precious relationships with sons and daughters of all ages have been almost or in some cases completely lost. I speak of successful men in their early 40s who have warm hearts, soft voices and deep thoughtful eyes who love their kids profoundly and regularly pay support, but who have not sufficient energy or desire for psychological warfare with ex-spouses seeking revenge. I suspect that there are many (both women and men) who are already beginning to see their own reflections here.
There are two important truths about this issue that most of us would prefer neither to recognize nor discuss: 1) Children make very effective weapons, and 2) sadly, motherhood can have a dark side. Women have the power (and certainly not all of us use it) to punish ex-husbands for perceived unforgivable transgressions.
There are the tried-and-true tactics -- convenient reasons why visits can't take place, ensuring his new partner will never be accepted, psychological punishment for the child who speaks well of a step- parent, locking kids into loyalty issues they struggle with but accept painfully, making Dad feel like the "wallet" and nothing more.
Women do these things with confidence because courts cannot enforce the "soft" clauses of divorce agreements such as "you will consult on matters of education and health." Controlling the behaviours, thoughts or desires of a child is tough to prove and the system has put all its effort into the really important stuff -- collecting support cash.
It gets worse. The psychiatric community has thoroughly researched and documented what has become known as the "parental alienation syndrome." (One reference book is The Parental Alienation Syndrome by Richard A. Gardner, MD.) It is a disorder that is probably most easily recognized in bogus sexual abuse charges against ex-spouses where a parent (most often the mother) convinces a child and the courts that "Daddy touched you, didn't he?"
For some women, it's handy in other ways and is used on kids from tots to teenagers in varying degrees. Here are a few examples of typical parent-alienating statements: "The way your Dad got angry at you over the car, you know that really is abusive" or "You wouldn't believe some of the things your father did/said when we were married É " or "I just don't know how we're going to pay these bills, and look at your father in that nice house," or "I guess your Dad has taken her side against you -- I would never do that to you."
I could go on, but you probably get the point. The strategy is to create a negative image of the other parent consistently and continuously so as eventually to ensure that the child himself will choose to have nothing to do with the target parent.
Women's groups should be proud of the work done to empower their constituents. And parental alienation is perpetrated by fathers as well. However, it is primarily women who seem to engage in this activity as their only means of wreaking vengeance. Although a subterranean type of warfare, it has its victims, and the most critically wounded are the very children one claims to be protecting.
Much of this is understandably difficult to accept since we want so much to live in a world where motherhood is honoured.
The father gives something very special to his children that has nothing to do with the relationship (good or bad) between him and his ex-spouse. We have every right to fear for our communal health and well-being when fathers are prevented from loving and children from being loved.
For some men, the alienation strategy is successful and they silently admit defeat, fleeing emotionally or physically -- some likely become what we refer to as "deadbeat dads," others resigning themselves to whatever sort of relationship is possible from a comfortable distance out of firing range. You can imagine the silent suffering of shattered children who stand dutifully behind their grinning victorious mothers. We have all lost something.
When society vocalizes the need for fathers to take more responsibility, we must wonder how many silent female voices will never admit publicly that they simply won't let them.
There will be a reaction from those with opposing views and examples to support "dead-beat dadism" and "single mum heroism." The real issue, however, is prevention -- what can we do?
Well, aside from raising daughters who have sufficient self-worth to renounce such tactics, if you have a friend, a sister, a daughter-in- law, a cousin who you believe to be in the process of alienating the children from Dad in whatever measure, say something in a kind, gentle and supportive way about the importance of a father in a child's life. You will surely have made a small contribution to the greater good and maybe a big difference in a child's life.
Lee Griffin-Scott
Let's hope they Google your name Leeahn to find out what you're really saying about the children and that someone steps in to save them. See Earlier Post about Leeahn Griffin-Scott
Also goes by various aliases on the net including Griffoscott, cawzforconcern, csavictim1994.
A MELBOURNE father of three has been jailed for sending a birthday card to his daughter.
The man "Mick" — who cannot be identified for legal reasons — was locked up in a suburban police station for seven nights and spent another in the tough Melbourne Custody Centre.
He says he was surrounded by drug addicts and people charged with violent offences during his ordeal last month.
Mick claims he is a victim of a family law system that is biased against fathers.
"I was jailed for nine days and eight nights for sending my 11-year-old daughter a birthday card," he said.
"Apparently I broke an intervention order.
"It's ludicrous and it breaks your heart."
The 51-year-old is estranged from his wife and claims she has brought a series of intervention orders against him, banning him from contact with his children, without any evidence.
"Until my wife divorced me I was a legally unimpeachable citizen — now
Unjust: "Mick" was jailed for eight nights.
I'm being treated like a criminal just because I want some contact with my kids," Mick said yesterday.
"And that contact was
ended arbitrarily without even a hearing or the presentation of evidence.
"jn a court of law, if you are accused of something you are supposed to have the ability to cross examine your accusers and call witnesses.
"In the secret chambers of the Family Court you are not guaranteed that at all."
Mick says the experience has cost him $20,000 and his career as a writer.
"It's a plundering and looting exercise on the part of lawyers involved in this and there are no juries or scrutiny by media to keep them accountable," he said.
The Sunday Herald Sun was denied access to documents relating to Mick's case and lawyers for his estranged wife declined to be interviewed.
Historian and academic Prof John Hirst this week called for an overhaul of family law.
"The court is not enforcing its decisions, the costs of going to court are onerous and there is little public accountability," he said.
Are fathers being treated unfairly? Have your say at heraldsun.com. au
Banned dad&squo;s agonising loss Herald Sun
December 07, 2008 12:00am
“STEVE” has been barred from seeing his daughter for seven years.
He has never harmed his only child or her mother. He has never threatened them and a court has accepted he is of good character.
But last week, after a tortuous 10-year journey through four courts, more than 20 hearings, 12 psychologists and six lawyers, he was told he could not see his daughter until she came of age.
Steve, whose real name cannot be revealed for legal reasons, has gone through more than 20 intrusive psychological examinations, while daughter “Molly” has endured seven.
He says he has spent more than $100,000 in 10 years.
His wife twice raised sexual-abuse allegations, proven false after months of investigation.
But the court accepted she would “shut down” emotionally if Steve was allowed to see his daughter and that her distress would affect her parenting skills.
It was deemed in Molly’s best interests that she not see her father until she turned 18.
Now Steve, a successful small businessman from Melbourne’s southern suburbs, faces being alienated from his daughter forever.
“It just rips your heart out. If you can’t forge a relationship with your child in their formative years, there’s a real risk that you never have a good relationship,” he said yesterday.
“There was no violence, threats, abuse, harassment or intimidation.
“I was shocked when (the judge) announced that the order would apply to both my ex-wife and our daughter and would last for 10 years.
“I was able to persuade her that this would criminalise me if my daughter tried to contact me when she grew up.
“But I bucked the system and paid the price. If you argue with the court’s finding, they label you as unco-operative.”
Steve said while everyone wanted women and children protected from violence, intervention orders should not be used as weapons in custody battles.
“These orders are being used to persecute men and children by litigants who know courts will always err on the side of caution and remove fathers without there being any violence at all,” he said.
Steve said he feared his daughter had been scarred by the court’s insistence on psychological examinations.
This year he approached his ex-wife’s new partner to see if there was any chance of mediation that would allow him to see Molly.
His wife instantly launched legal action alleging he breached an intervention order that prevented him approaching her or Molly.
“The court decided that my - very polite - conversation with my ex’s partner represented harassment. It’s just unbelievable,” Steve said.
Thanks to Laurie Nowell's repeated searches on his name, the ranking for this page has increased to Number 1 for Google searches on Laurie Nowell.
