Home / / Reply To: Female Law Courts

Reply To: Female Law Courts

Forum Scandalum Magnatum Forums Family Court Topics Female Law Courts Reply To: Female Law Courts

Felix Spencher

Welcome to the website and forum Johnny.

Sorry to hear you have been treated unfairly by a family report writer. If I had a dollar for every time someone highlighted their concerns about the way family reports are compiled I’d be a millionaire many times over by now.

Obviously each case is different and usually you have to judge things in their own individual merit – or, lack thereof their own individual merit. But, then once you hear/see the same things happening to men over several decades in the courts and/or with family reports you start to realize there is something endemic going on. Something that’s not right.

As Jake said the family report writers are meant to be unbiased, objective, and fair.

One of the problems (that is aside from the problem that they’re not always unbiased, objective, and fair) that exists is that once a decision is made about parenting arrangements there is no real mechanism (or appetite) to significantly alter that care arrangement, admit that it may be wrong, and – heaven forbid – reverse the custody arrangement it describes to one that is appropriate.

As a result some family report writers can then selectively attribute what they discover within subsequent family report interviews to theories that support their original decisions even if they’re wrong. And, aside from the aforementioned fact that there is no real mechanism/appetite to admit they may be wrong, there’s not exactly a great appetite amongst family report writer’s to highlight mother’s that are seeking to use the court system to alienate their kids from their father and to misdirect away from any accountability that they may have for the relationship breaking down, either.

For instance say the family report writer – right off the bat and at the start of an application – makes a recommendation that the mother has an exclusive care arrangement with the kids, even though the father is saying the mother extensively alienates the kids.

Then, say subpoena material that subsequently becomes available makes it obvious to the family report writer that all their theories that supported their 1st family report’s recommendation that the mother have an exclusive care arrangement are flawed, what incentive is there for the family report writer to openly acknowledge that in their reports, be accountable for the mistake, and reverse the custody arrangement?

Regardless of what incentive there is – or is not – to do that, not many would argue that it’s much easier for the family report writer to – within subsequent family reports/interviews – selectively interpret information and focus only on that which conceals the fact that the father was right in that the mother in an extensive alienator.

A strong feminist culture has long been controlling these processes of the Federal Circuit and Family Courts, and there is little to no appetite within the family report writing fraternity to highlight how many women are gaming/rorting the system.

What would go a long way to ensuring that the family report writing process was more transparent/reliable is if the family report interviews were recorded so that the family report writer then knew if they didn’t present a balanced version of the family report interview they might get caught out in the trial or even before that when/if the family report interview recording was played.

Hope this post helps.

Best regards,