http://www.f4e.com.au/blog/2011/07/14/kids-to-be-denied-their-fathers-because-of-one-mans-vote-tony-windsor/
Please read the following letter that was sent to Tony Windsor, Federal Member for New England, on the proposed 2011 child custody/ family law changes currently before Parliament, designed to prevent most separated fathers from having contact with their children. The office of Tony Windsor has made it clear to me that they do not care to respond to the serious issues confronting separated fathers and children of separated families, despite being given ample opportunity to do so in response to this letter, and in previous discussions. Because of their condescending and dismissive attitude, I now publish this letter, unfortunately without any official response from Tony Windsor. The attitude of his staff has given me the impression that Tony Windsor has sold out his beliefs on shared parenting, since he has jumped into bed with Julia Gillard and the Greens. I consider Tony Windsor’s actions to be a total betrayal of the natural rights of the children of Australia, and I feel ashamed on his behalf that he didn’t even believe that this issue deserved an explanation, much less a simple response. Please feel free to distribute this letter to any print, radio or other media outlets in Australia, and in particular in Tony Windsor’s electorate of New England, including the regional centers of Tamworth, Inverell and Armidale. =========================================== From: Ash Patil Fathers4Equality-Australia To Tony Windsor Email: [email protected] Parliament Ph: (02) 6277 4722 Tamworth: Toll Free: 1300 301 839 Inverell: (02) 6721 0144 Federal Member for New England PO Box 6022, House of Representatives Parliament House, Canberra ACT 2600 CC: Tamworth, Armidale & Inverell & other media Dear Mr Tony Windsor, You may recall that we corresponded back in November 2005, whereby I wrote you, as I did for every other Member of Parliament, to ask for your thoughts on Family Law reform. Specifically, you were asked for your views on a Rebuttable Presumption of Equal Parenting Time, given the enormous community support for Shared Parenting, and in response to the recommendations by the Hull bi-partisan (Coalition/Labor) Child Custody committee, after 3 years of intensive community consultation. We appreciated your response to our questions back in 2005 Mr Tony Windsor, whereby you not only indicated that you supported Shared Parenting as a concept, but you highlighted your support for even stronger measures that would enforce a Presumption of Equal Parenting Time. On November 4, 2005, YOU wrote: “On a personal basis, I would not be opposed to an amendment to the Family Law Act to incorporate a legal presumption of equal parenting time in the event of separation, rebuttable if child abuse can be reasonably substantiated, or if the parent’s mutually agree to an alternate arrangement. Should the feedback from the residents of the New England Electorate differ from my own view I would have to re-examine my position however to date the comments I have been receiving have generally been in line with my own views on this matter. Thank you once again for writing to me and I hope the foregoing will clarify my position on this issue. Tony Windsor MP Member for New England Yours sincerely It was therefore a complete shock that we learned that on the 31st May, 2011, you voted with the Gillard government and the Greens to pass what is widely believed to be a Trojan-Horse bill designed in practice to deny fathers any form of meaningful contact with their children after separation. The bill was passed by one vote ONLY. This bill, deceptively called the Family Violence Amendment bill, 2011, is not only anti-Shared Parenting, it is in fact anti-Contact, as it legally endorses Perjury, Parental Alienation and Unsubstantiated Allegations as legitimate means to deny a child their natural right to have any contact at all with their father. The obvious question Mr Windsor is why did you support this bill, a bill that goes against your own personal beliefs, and those quite clearly of your constituents (then and now)? Were you perhaps distracted by all the attention and the extra roles lavished on you by a Gillard government desperate for your support, that you let this most malicious bill pass without due scrutiny? You must be aware that the bill you have voted for explicitly: creates an effective presumption of guilt against innocent fathers makes conclusive evidence, especially in defence of abuse claims, subservient to subjective beliefs removes penalties against knowingly false allegations of child abuse & domestic abuse provides tacit encouragement for Parental Alienation by removing the ‘friendly parent’ provision perpetuates the offensive and unfounded stereotype that men are a natural threat to their children perpetuates the untruth that Shared Parenting exposes children to child abuse. In fact, shared parenting households are statistically the safest environments for children. perpetuates the unfounded presumption that mothers are unable to harm or abuse their children perpetuates the unfounded presumption that women never engage in domestic abuse has so diluted the concept of domestic abuse, that it can be applied to any form of behaviour, whether it is real, innocent and benign, or completely imagined; contravenes the United Nations Convention on the rights of the Child by denying the child their right to participate ‘meaningfully and fully’ with both their mother and their father. contravenes the International Bill of Human Rights by denying fathers their right to a fair trial violates Sex Discrimination standards, by procuring laws designed to only protect half the population from domestic violence, while ignoring or dismissing the other half. has slashed funding for post-separation mediation to force parents back into the Court system will in effect divert seriously scarce child protective resources from their primary task of genuine child protection, to that of chasing up legally motivated allegations. will promote sole maternal custody, which according to the Australian Institute of Criminology, accounts for almost 80% of all familial child abuse. Shame on you! Mr Windsor, you are married man and a father with 3 children. You may very well have an optimal relationship with your wife, but you like every other human would have at times had tensions and disagreements with your wife. You should realise that if you had separated (when your children were young), that even a decent father as yourself would have been completely removed from your children’s lives, if relied upon this bill. There is simply no reasonable reason why laws designed to reduce the incidence of domestic violence, cannot also respect the human rights and natural justice of men, women and children. Given that over half your electorate are males and children, you have an obligation to seriously consider the implications of this bill, if passed by the Senate. This bill will not reduce the heat of divorce. It will not encourage mediation and agreement. It would not share the burden of child raising. It will not promote equality for women. It will only further disenfranchise already maligned fathers, creating the potential for more tragedies. People will be asking why the government chose again to promote a “winner-takes-all”, litigation-intensive, archaic, punitive set of laws designed for mass punishment, in the hope that it would instil fear, enforce compliance and subdue violence. This form of mass punishment has not worked in Egypt, it has not worked in Syria, and it will not work in Australia. We need laws that apply to all Australians and encourage co-operative parenting, reduce litigation and the enormous legal bills that destroy the future of our children, and we need all Australians to be judged by the one standard, the one law, not selective laws depending on one’s gender. We are all equal after all, right, so why is this bill designed to only protect one gender? If this bill is passed, the next father or mother who either suicides or commits a tragedy against their children, people across Australia will be wondering what pushed them over the edge. This bill is an opportunity to make a genuine effort to diffuse separations, not to create more reasons for people to lash out at a system that has completely betrayed half of all Australians. Please take this opportunity to re-think this poorly thought-out bill. Please tell us what you can do to amend this most malicious bill, before it’s too late. Please do not tell us that since you thoughtlessly voted for it, then you can now wash your hands and do nothing. We understand that you can influence the final vote in the Senate, if you show an interest. You can otherwise not blame fathers and children for holding you and others like you responsible for taking Australian families back to the dark ages in family law, for you had that final vote that could have amended this bill into something workable, but chose not to. We would appreciate a written response within 7 days of the posting of this letter. Ash Patil Fathers4Equality-Australia Website: www.fathers4equality-australia.org Email: [email protected] –end of letter to Tony Windsor, Federal Member for New England– -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
