THE FAMILY COURT
ACT - "IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD"
This is the catchphrase of the Family Court
cartels. Whenever a child is taken away from a parent or both parents, we here
the term loud and clear, spewing from the mouths of judges and lawyers. The
interesting question is, what is "in the best interests of the
child"?
Family Law legislation clearly states that, when
determining what is in the "best interests of the child", the court should take
into account:
a) ensuring the
children have the benefit of both of their parents having a meaningful
involvement in their lives, to the maximum extent consistent with the best
interests of the child; and
(b) protecting
children from physical or psychological harm from being subjected to, or exposed
to, abuse, neglect or family violence;
and
(c) ensuring that
children receive adequate and proper
parenting to help them achieve their full potential; and
(d) ensuring that
parents fulfil their duties, and meet their responsibilities, concerning the
care, welfare and development of their
children.
The Family Law Act makes clear that:
1. both parents are responsible for the care and
welfare of their children and;
2. arrangements which involve shared
responsibilities and cooperation between the parents are in the best interests
of the child.
According to the Family Law Act, the primary
considerations that a Judge must apply when determining what is in the best
interests of the child are:
1. The benefit of children having a
meaningful relationship with both parents;
2. The
need to protect children from physical and psychological harm. This includes
children seeing family violence, being
neglected, or being physically or psychologically hurt.
Other factors to be considered
are:
3. the child's relationship with each
parent and other people, including grandparents;
4. the willingness and ability of each
parent to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing relationship between
the child and the other parent;
5. the attitude of each parent to the child
and the responsibilities of parenthood...
Is the Family Court protecting children
from disputes and emotional abuse? Is the Family Court ensuring parents are
acting in the best interests of their children? Or is the Family Court allowing,
and even encouraging children to be used to create conflict. We are seen
increasing cases of
children being taken away from one parent
and given to the parent who uses the child to make false abuse claims, and how
children are used to extort parents. And now the cartels are pushing for
children to testify in Family Court proceedings, subjecting them to coercion,
pressure and guilt.
Is the Family Court ensuring that the
separation process is quick, so as to avoid unnecessary turmoil on children and
their families? We have seen how the courts drag cases out using the DV
Method.
If the Family Court ensuring that children have
contact with both parents? We have seen that the courts are too willing to
remove children from parents and even place them in environments where they
continue to be subjected to emotional and psychological abuse.
Then what is 'in the best interests of the
child'? Each year, thousands of children are dragged to doctors, psychologists,
child services and police, forced to make allegations against their own parents.
Children quickly learn about molestation, rape and pornography as more and more
pressure is placed upon them to make statements to officials (imagine what would
happen if children were made to testify in court). Each year, thousands of
parents hear their children making allegations against them. Each year,
thousands of parents are detained by police, accused of molesting their own
children, have their homes searched, their phones searched, their computers
searched, their friends and work colleagues questioned... One simple allegation
and a person's life is destroyed. There are no penalties for the accusers. Each
year, thousands of children are taken from their parents and forced to have
Supervised Contact, with someone standing no further than 3m from the parent and
the child. And each year, the Family Court cartels take a share of the billions
of dollars in profits.
It is clear, that the intention of the
government was to ensure that children have the input of both parents in their
lives to ensure the child is protected from abuse and has the advantage of
proper parenting (and to a greater extent than Judge Tom Altobelli's view
that a Christmas card each year is sufficient). So what happened? How did the
Family Court deteriorate into a cesspool of domestic violence allegations, child
abuse allegations and psychologists? With Julia Gillard's Emily's List pulling
the strings in the executive, judiciary and legislative branches, laws were
amended and watered-down case by case and domestic violence loop holes became
central to the underpinnings of the Family Court.
Although,
again, the legislation states that children should have a meaningful
relationship with both parents, there is also a requirement to protect children
from abuse. Of course, this makes sense. However, the legislators did not expect
to open the flood gates for domestic violence accusations as parents, lawyers,
psychologists and doctors all scrambled for a share of the $13 billion-per-year
booty that is on offer. Now, instead of protecting children from abusive
relationships and conflict, the Family Court cartels are subjecting children to
further abuse by rewarding parents who continuously make false accusations and
drag their children to police and doctors claiming sexual abuse:
Why does the Family Court have to deal with abuse claims?
Abuse is a crime. The police have enough resources to investigate abuse claims (and would
have even more resources if some of the $13 billion went into prevention). The
Department of Community Services investigates all allegations of abuse and has
the power to remove children from parents. There is no need for the Family
Courts to investigate complaints of domestic violence. When a parent makes an
application to the court, the police or government departments can submit a
report or "flag" cases of abuse. However, the new domestic violence laws have
the exact opposite effect of protecting false allegations of abuse. As a
result, Australia has become a country where children are taken away from their
parents for no reason at all, except for pure greed and corruption. Now we have
more and more legislation taking away children's rights to be cared for by both
parents. And as the definition of "domestic violence" is widened, and more
legislation uses domestic violence as an excuse to remove children from their
home, the Family Court cartels get rich. The result:
* children being
brought up without access to both parents;
* children being
educated in molestation and abuse as they are used by parents and the Family
Court cartels in a domestic violence manipulation
battle;
* children coerced
into making complaints against another parent of sexual abuse, sexual
molestation and, one of the most common complaints, subjected to
pornography;
* parents falsely detained, arrested and even
imprisoned based on absolutely no evidence except the coerced statements of children;
* the Family Court
cartels rewarding parents for making false domestic violence and child abuse
allegations;
* children losing
their parents forever;
* high rate of
suicide and murder as parents are psychologically pushed to their
limits;
* as public
services are cut back (education, health etc) the government is still throwing
billions of dollars away on
domestic violence;
and, most
importantly...
* real victims of
domestic violence and child abuse do not receive help as resources are drained
by false accusations.
The police in reality are corporate thugs, who work for
corporations, and NOT the ‘Queen’ as per oath.
* psychologists: the
Family Court is run by psychologists. Psychologists prepare Family Reports which
are submitted to the courts. It is well accepted within the legal industry that
the recommendations in the Family Report are what judges will make in the final
orders. Psychologists meet with each parent and the children for only about one
hour each. That means you have one hour to convince them that you and your
children are being abused. For a few hours work, psychologists can make in
excess of $4,000 per report and its a guaranteed stream of clientele. To stay in
favour with the judges and continue to receive referrals, psychologists will do
anything they can to make the decision process for the judge easy, and domestic
violence is a key decider. Even where there is no evidence of domestic violence,
or where domestic violence and child abuse allegations are false, psychologists
will create terms (eg. separation-engendered violence) to ensure that some type
of domestic violence is present [insert example]. 
* politicians:
politicians and interest groups go hand-in-hand. The last thing a politician
wants is interest groups on their back. What would happen if a politician came
forward to the public, claiming that domestic violence was Australia's biggest
rort and that they were taking domestic violence out of the Family Court
equation? Interest groups would destroy their career instantly with media spin
doctoring and political pressure. Imagine a judge not handing out a DVO and
domestic violence did occur. The interest groups would rally outside the
courthouse. We have already seen what happens when judges come forward with
statements exposing the Domestic Violence Method: they are quickly ostracised by
the legal community. And of course, we all know that politicians also receive
campaign donations from interest groups... millions and millions of dollars in
donatin. 
