December 5, 2020 at 5:48 am #251Johnny PetheridgeParticipant
I am new here but just wanted to see if anybody has experienced anything similar to what happened to me last week.
To give you some background I am the respondent in a family law matter that involves me and me my ex partner whom is the mother/applicant. We have 2 kids and basically the mother only wants me to see the kids for 3 nights every second weekend.
If that arrangement was put in place I would also have to pay her a substantial amount of my pay cheque.
Currently we have a 6 and 8 arrangement which means the kids are with me 6 nights, and her application seeks to change that to the aforementioned 3 nights upon the basis that includes the fact that I hire a nanny to pick up the kids after school and therefore aren’t there for them until I get home after work.
The court ordered a family report to better understand the particulars of the case and recently we had a family report interview.
The resulting family report has now returned and it is as if all I said to the family report writer went over her head and that is what my gripe is about.
I thought they were meant to be even handed about this but all the interview instances where I detailed how the mother alienates the children were omitted from the family report even though the negative things the mother had to say about me were included – even though they weren’t true.
The family report was also skewed in other ways as some of the things I did say that were included were slightly changed and not exactly how I said them.
The report recommends that the mother’s time with the children could be expanded on a temporary/experimental to see if it works but I know once this is brought into effect the kids will then be under pressure from their mother to say it’s what they want as the mother heavily alienates the children.
Despite all the examples I provided the family report writer of the mother’s alienation tactics and how beneficial it was for the children to spend time with their father, if you read the report you would never know it as it paints the mother as a parent without fault.
To me this approach seems incredibly biased, unfair, and as if the federal circuit court exists only to support women; hence the title of this thread.
Can anything be done about this and am I correct in assuming that the court will now take the recommendation of the family law court to increase the mother’s time, and implement it?
December 7, 2020 at 4:00 am #255Travis BlaxhallParticipant
Love the title of your thread – couldn’t be more accurate if you tried.
Sounds to me as if you’ve just found out about how biased the family report writing component of the “female law courts” can be.
In case you didn’t know it’s long been a concern of men that have been shafted by the system as to how family reports are compiled. I’m currently in the NSWFCC and I remember when our family report was released it stunned me with the degree to which it only captured information from our family report interviews that favored my X and a custody arrangement she wanted. It was so biased that it was breathtaking. In the very least I recon they should record the interviews for family reports and make the recording available for the parties so that it deters how much editing goes on. But if they do that then they won’t be able to be as biased.
Even though I don’t agree with and/or support them, you’ve got to hand it to the feminists. I mean, my God they’ve got this “legal” system so sewn up that it works perfectly for them day in, day out.
December 7, 2020 at 4:48 am #256Jake PetersonParticipant
Yep – agree – love the title of your thread Johnny.
My 2 cents worth . . . .
2 of the biggest problems – or should I say rorts – that the federal circuit and family law courts have going on in them are family report writers and ICL’s.
The ICL’s are meant to be independent – which means unbiased, objective, and fair. But they’re not.
The family report writers are also meant to be unbiased, objective, and fair. But they’re not.
Almost always they will look for ways to put the children with the mother and/or provide her with the majority of a shared care arrangement, and in the process of doing that the family report writer will provide “interesting” and unbalanced narratives throughout reports and, in the case of the ICL, look for ways to favor the mother because doing that is all they know and virtue signals to WLS.
December 10, 2020 at 7:28 am #279Felix SpencherKeymaster
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.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.