Comments on: An Unspoken Wound: How the UK gets it wrong for children affected by family separation

By: An Unspoken Wound: How the UK gets it wrong for children affected by family separation « The Centre for Separated Families

Wed, 14 Apr 2010 16:44:24 +0000

[...] This article was written by CSF Director, Karen Woodall, for The Comment Factory [...]

By: george rutter

george rutter — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 15:32:37 +0000

Thank you for your reply. I do think it is important that legally parents are treated on equal basis. I am sure that is in the best interest of a child.I agree the courts are not the best way forward but mediation whatever form it takes requires the consent of both parents to co-operate. Our experience of the concept of Parental Alienation by the resident parent leads us to the conclusion that really expert help is required on a mandatory basis rather than Cafcass type of approach.We really do need a model that includes independent, objective assessment by Child Care Psychologists perhaps who can identify the abuse taking place. Reform of Family Law is essential and I am lobbying politicians to this end. Green Papers are expected from both Major Political Parties on the Family, and we all must push for recognition of the needs of a child to have both parents active in their lives.
grbasf

By: leapin lizrd

leapin lizrd — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 09:45:13 +0000

and if presumption of shared care was present in law this would change your experience how grbasf? You have had a raw deal and would, under any legal process continue to experience the same thing. The only way is to keep it out of the courts and make sure that services do not favour one parent or the other. Mandatory mediation won't do much more than uphold the status quo, most mediation being delivered in the model of support that this article seems to be attacking – ie the lp/nrp way of thinking. Presumption is a red herring, surely your case proves that.

By: grbasf

grbasf — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:54:39 +0000

Psychological therapy of the child concerned in our family was ordered by the Judge and agreed by both parents through the NHS. The end result being that the Resident Parent (the Mother) simply walked away from court and ignored the whole matter. The system does not follow through.
The whole system needs radical overhaul of the Family Courts with Cafcass being replaced by a team of psychologists who are indeed experts.
grbasf

By: grbasf

grbasf — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:45:46 +0000

In our case the Father has not seen his child for nearly four years now, having had to withdraw from the Court Process due to lack of funds. Presents for Birthdays and Christmas etc though sent are totally ignored. A Family Assistance Order made by the courts was of no value whatsoever merely maintaining the status quo.
grbasf

By: grbasf

grbasf — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:43:28 +0000

Any mediation or counselling services must be mandatory and robust and any agreements reached must be able to be enforced in law. The concept of a Shared Legal Presumption ensures that both parents enter into negotiation/mediation from a level playing field., unlike the present skewed system which operates through the courts and CAFCASS a sole model system of parenting. This includes the bias system of Legal Aid which favours the Resident Parent (usually the mother).
grbasf

By: grbasf

grbasf — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:41:17 +0000

I fully agree with nnooxx and his desire for shared parenting to be enshrined in law. My family's experience of a Shared Residence Order was it was a useless piece of paper as far as contact with the child was concerned. The Resident Parent (the Mother) simply has to apply for amendment to the Order to protract the Court process and stifle contact, legally this is called maintaining the status quo and many people are using this tactic to delay and eventually deny contact.
grbasf

By: Charles Adams

Charles Adams — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 21:36:44 +0000

LETS BE CLEAR- End ANY service in which vested interests lie (as they massage an old idea a large number of parents abuse, and couple that with an automatic presumption of 50/50 of starting contact and work back from THAT…that WILL stop the 40% dont see the NRP (who CAN also be women!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) The you can bring the assisted services in but only AFTER the automatic presumtion.

By: angelwings

angelwings — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:53:23 +0000

just read this article and agree with every word, its time this country shifted itself and got on with doing something different. I have been on my own with my kids for ten years and no-one anywhere has ever said to me where's their dad and why's he not with them. if anyone had bothered to help us both when we were first going our separate ways we might not have got into this mess. All anyone ever said to me was that I shoudl make sure to get child support off him. When I tried he got mad and I got madder and it ended up with us having such a fight that he went off and we've never seen much of him since. I wish it hadn't been like that and someone had sat us down and told us how to do it. I feel like my children lost out because I got bad advice and I am not proud of it. Time to change the way we do things for sure.

By: Kristen Pettersen

Kristen Pettersen — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:27:51 +0000

In Norway there is not a presumption of shared care as you say nnooxx, the law in Norway has just changed to say that it is not good for children to live in two homes but that they should have time with both parents, also that it has been taken out of the legislative framework and given back to parents to sort out for themselves. What is different in Norway is that delivery of services to support both parents are done in ways that demonstrate the value of each, something I think this article is actually arguing for not against.

By: nnooxx

nnooxx — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:39:28 +0000

Graham, you have my sincerest sympathies regarding your daughter's situation.

Sadly in England&Wales a Shared Residence Order is only a piece of paper, the schedule of residence of a child is rarely enforced by the toothless system and recalcitrant parents are assessed, maybe asked to go on courses and family therapy which are wholly inadequate when you have a parent who will not engage.

Whereas in Australia, Sweden, Norway and other countries where Shared Parenting is enshrined in law and put into practice by the Courts and the system as a whole, your dreadfully sad situation would be a small minority not a large majority as in this country.

Services such as counselling, parenting classes and mediation abound here but are not used because there is no expectation in Law that Shared Parenting will be expected of parents. Again in other countries it is mandatory that Shared Parenting is a starting point and the whole culture changes and is supportive but it has to start with a change in the law to recognise the importance of both parents to children.

By: Graham

Graham — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:06:14 +0000

nnooxx, you are absolutely right about everybody in this field having a 'vested interest'. As someone who has been through the court system, I'm only too well aware of what that. But, you are wrong about changes to the law being the silver bullet. I have a shared residence order – something I presume you would be in favour of – but I have not seen my daughter for 3 years. Why? because her mum is unable to distinguish between the ending of our marriage and my daughter's need for me to be part of her life. No amount of legislation can ever change that. The only thing that might make a difference is the kind of services that this article calls for.