Our thanks to Ed Bartlett for this piece in the Guardian. He writes:
“Of course, it is a well-proven fact that mothers are more likely than fathers to engage in child abuse: See Victims by Relationship to Their Perpetrators. Tables 3-9.”
Extracts from the Guardian piece take up the remainder of this blog post:
“The family courts will no longer work on the presumption that having contact with both parents is in the best interests of a child, in a landmark change that domestic abuse campaigners have said “will save so many children’s lives”. [J4MB emphasis.]
The move has been heralded as “groundbreaking” by family lawyers and campaigners who have long argued that the “pro-contact culture” in the family courts places the rights of abusive fathers over the safety and wellbeing of children.
Currently, under the Children Act 1989, courts in England and Wales are guided to work on the principle that children should have contact with both parents unless there is evidence that a parent could put the child at risk of harm.
The government confirmed on Tuesday that it would repeal the presumption of parental involvement from the act “when parliamentary time allows”….
Dr Charlotte Proudman, [J4MB emphases.] a family law barrister, and co-director of Right to Equality, described the move as “a victory for children’s rights, for survivors and for justice” and “a vital step in dismantling the pro-contact culture that has dominated family courts for too long”.
“It sends a clear message: children’s welfare will always be the priority and parents who undermine their welfare cannot use the system to continue to perpetrate harm,” she said.
The change comes after decades of campaigning from the domestic abuse sector, with experts describing the issue of the family courts as the biggest area of concern for domestic abuse victims and survivors.
“It’s incredibly significant because it absolutely reorientates the way that these courts work,” Farah Nazeer, CEO of Women’s Aid, said.
Abusers have long used the family courts as a way of retaining control over their ex-partners, while women who raise domestic abuse in the courts have often been subject to counter allegations that they are attempting to “alienate” the child from the father.
“This is the policy area and area of concern that the vast majority of survivors and children want us to work on, because it’s the one that really touches the core of their safety,” Nazeer added.”
If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.
We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.
Our YouTube channel is here.
Justice for Men & Boys 
As expected an inability to tackle any of the substantial problems the Country faces (from “boats” to inflation to housing to falling real wages to Gov. debt). Means space for “progressive” politics (virtue signalling). Having achieved a proliferation of abuse accusations by making legal aid conditional on accusations of Domestic Abuse the next step is to make these quickly cut off contact for fathers. The fathers being “guilty” by accusation rather than any proof of risk. Much like the shameful Australian repeal of the presumption of equality in parental responsibility in law. All in complete absence of any actual data on there being commonly a risk o the child from their natural fathers.
“Currently, under the Children Act 1989, courts in England and Wales are guided to work on the principle that children should have contact with both parents unless there is evidence that a parent could put the child at risk of harm.“
Already in law protects children from risk of harm, and as we know courts are apt to act on little more than accusation or suspicion. The next step clearly is to do away any consideration risk and simply assume the male parent is an abuser.
“
LikeLiked by 1 person