This tab contains blog posts submitted by network members. When writing a blog for your profile you have the option to submit it into this tab for other members to read.
Dads who don’t live with their children are being frozen out by schools – despite laws to tackle the issue. A major new study has also found many schools are “hostile” towards estranged dads, who are edged out of their children’s education. Campaign group Families Need Fathers Scotland said the ingrained attitude is out of step with Government guidance on how schools should engage with dads. Last night Scottish Conservative chief whip John Lamont said it is vital steps are taken to ensure strong father figures in childrens’ lives are enshrined. He said: “It’s important this organisation continues to campaign on that front. The more information there is available, the more we’ll be able to correct the situation in future.” Families Need Fathers carried out a major campaign to highlight the issue in 2011. However, they claim little has changed since then, and a new, soon-to-be-published study has found many councils and schools are not adhering to guidance on how schools should engage with dads. Fewer than half of councils contacted by the group provided details of their policy on schools engaging with non-resident dads. Just two councils – Edinburgh and South Lanarkshire – have specific initiatives to tackle the issue. Only six were able to provide figures on the proportion of children whose parents do not live together. The vast majority of councils also said they don’t have any published guidelines for head teachers on non-resident dads’ involvement in activities such as after school clubs. In some cases fathers have wrongfully been denied school photos of their children or been excluded from having input to their learning. Ian Maxwell, national development manager for FNFS, said: “There’s been a real lack of progress. Some councils and schools are trying their best but the majority have a long way to go. How do councils hope to make effective plans to include dads if they haven’t gathered basic statistics?” Figures show that as much as 31% of children in some regions do not live with both parents. Campaigners argue the lack of effort of some schools on the issue is in conflict with the Scottish Schools (Parental Involvement) Act 2006.
This legislation had highlighted the need for schools to reach out to non-resident fathers in particular. FNFS said it is aware of one case where a school lied to a dad when he tried to get his child’s school photo, denying one had been taken. In another case, school staff ripped out a form asking for comments from parents or guardians at the back of a report card before sending it to a dad. Ian Maxwell said that when couples split up it is often left up to non-resident parents to try to establish contact with schools. He said: “The onus is on them to tell the school who they are and that they want to be involved in their child’s education. Often the attitude of school reception staff can colour the relationship for good or ill. “It is not uncommon for the school to check with the resident parent before acknowledging the status of the non-resident parent. “The legislation and guidance makes clear the resident parent should not have a veto on the school’s engagement with the non-resident parent.” A spokesperson for Children in Scotland, which campaigns on behalf of young people, said it has produced a briefing paper urging MSPs to engage with councils to ensure improvements take place. They added: “We hope, too, that local authorities and schools will review their policies and procedures to ensure staff are aware of fathers’ rights to be involved in their children’s education.” The Scottish Government said it is working with partners across health, education and the third sector to ensure there is proper engagement with dads. http://newfathers4justice.co.uk/2014/07/06/schools-under-fire-for-snubbing-estranged-fathers/
The Rt HonMichael Gove MP The Rt Hon David Laws MP
Secretary of State for Education Minister of State for SchoolsDaveyone has had first hand experience of this.
In spite of having attained a Joint Residency order, equal contact and Parental Responsibility in 2004 my ex partner has withheld contact with my children since 19th September 2007, although I have seen them 3 or 4 times in that time as they live nearby. My eldest is now 18 and has left school so is getting on with life, my concern is for my youngest now 15 and having been absent for much of the past year and missing all his crucial exams. I was alerted by the sudden stopping of Parent Mail which was my only contact into his world and having attended his parent evenings thought this absence issue had been overcome. When I expressed my concern to the school I was told, after some fobbing off, that they were not at liberty to tell me as it breached my sons data protection and I now believe I have exhausted the Schools complaints procedure. Due to their ages I will allow my sons to contact me if and when they choose to do so, but I am concerned however by the absence from school by my son who was described as intelligent enough to have attended secondary school 2 years before he left primary school and the cavalier way the school has handled this matter seeming to enjoy the fact they can keep me in the dark with immunity ! Why has he been allowed to be absent so often? Why has the Mother, who has assumed sole care for him, not been brought to book? What can I do to ensure my son is able to continue in a fulfilling and enjoyable time in his life?
Matthew Hancock MP Lord Nash
Minister of State for Skills and Parliamentary under Secertary of
Enterprise. State for school (Unpaid)
Edward Timpson MP Elizabeth Truss MP
Parliamentary under Secertary of Parliamentry under Secertary of
State for Children and Families. State for Education and Childcare.
#M25Blockade~24th July~For The Children! @FubarRadio @jongaunt @BBC3CR @BBCLondonNews @BBCLondon949 @BBCEssex @LBCBy Daveyone
AT 10AM ANDY 07827731060 Thanks to the 'bikers guide' ( see the July events page and then scroll down.) Tax the cars make sure they have mot tyres with in legal limits insured. We will not break an laws on this event trust me we are going to stick to the road traffic act but it will be fun. http://www.thebikerguide.co.uk/motorbikeevents2014.html We have a week of protests in London 19th to 26th July 2014 https://www.facebook.com/events/158705407658385/?fref=ts The 70 year old who is walking for justice Sid Hingerty walking from Glasgow to Brussels. and grandparent parachute jumps.! https://www.facebook.com/groups/217227415144741/ https://www.facebook.com/events/823843657627026/ Vigil / Picnic / Protest in Soho Square.London on Thursday 24th July.3pm Friday July 25th conference in London's Holloways Road at the Resource for London Center 9 to 5pm. https://www.facebook.com/events/439559902831182/ Mums Dads Grandparents and Children marching for justice. The Parents Join Forces No more children stealing by the uk Social Services ENOUGH IS ENOUGH Imagine the scenes, if all major highway networks throughout the UK were blockaded by thousands of motorists on the 24th of July . You didn't need much time to organise the petrol blockades did you? Organising something like this is just as do able. All major motorways and A roads are blocked. How many long distance lorry drivers do you know that have had their children stolen by the state? Start talking to them now and ask them to apply the same tactics as in the fuel crisis back in 2000. If we are to get the Governments attention and I mean full attention, then we must demonstrate how much power we do have. We are the people..We are the parents. ....Thoughts please. http://www.yourthurrock.com/2014/06/07/focus-on-child-safety-awareness-in-june/
Imagine blocking the entire road networks with protesters in their cars, vans, motor homes and lorries...? This will send the Government in to a blind panic, you protest about fuel duty, poll tax,Bedroom Tax and blood sports but what about the children? All major roads blocked EXCEPT HARD SHOULDERS ( these must remain open for emergency personnel.) It must be done peacefully. The mission is to get the whole country to stop working and bring disruption and chaos. Petrol prices, poll tax and blood sports matter but NOT as much as your children do. All this taking place on the same day.JULY 24th 2014 You have the choice whether to work or not but, you didn't have a choice when they come to take your children away.... "CHOICE" - an act or instance of choosing or opportunity to choose. The child had no choice about going with the $social $services...... choose to get behind the blockading of all major highways in the UK. M25, M4, M5, M1, M23, M6 etc......this would cause major disruption around the country. Spanning from Lands End to John O' Groats. This is the ultimate choice, one that does not require you to think, only act. Bringing the country to it's knees will make the PM panic. Forever hearing about strikes by NHS staff, emergency services and rail services but, what if the country went on strike, nothing would get done. At least we would have succeeded in getting their attention. Thoughts please. Will you save Thousands of children being stolen every year with no rights forced adoptions parents alienated against each other and the children. Andrew peacher 07827731060 firstname.lastname@example.org www.freedomtalkradio.co.uk
Dear Member of Parliament
I will never get those childhood years back to be part of my children's upbringing and whilst I have been scathing about child services/CAFCASS in the past at no time did they ever render me an unfit parent. After 10 years of venom being dripped into their ears daily it is unlikely I will ever re-establish a relationship with my children and as it is clear they do not want this now I will not return matters to court . However the one lifeline I had into their alienated world was via the school Parent-mail system and to date I have attended every parents evening which is quite heart-rendering when you do not see your kids. Last month I noticed Parent-mail messages had stopped .so simply asked the school why? What then transpired was beyond belief, besides being fobbed of by the reception staff it took 2 days for someone at the school to respond as the receptionist said they were not at liberty to talk to me. When I finally got through to the deputy head a meeting was to be arranged and confirmed for the following week, in the meantime my youngest child's report was to be sent as this too had been omitted. I noticed many cases of absence and that he had not attended any exams with all results marked absent .When the deputy head called to confirm a meeting for 2 pm last Friday
I expressed my concern as to the amount of time my son had been away from school as I thought this was an issue we had dealt with a year ago and was assured by the deputy head and head of year I would be kept informed, as I heard nothing I assumed all was fine. None the less I was expecting to meet with the deputy head plus either the Headteacher or head of year but instead was greeted by the deputy and ushered into an empty classroom , I thought this matter deserved more attention but once I started to ask about my son I was told the school's solicitors had advised him to say nothing and not answer any of my concerns in spite of me having PR and that I could be prosecuted for their cavalier attitude on absence but more to the point why in this overrated OFSTED school ( If OFSTED was able to make spot checks it might reveal some home truths) allowed the mother to keep my son home when they live close to the school and seemingly with immunity? Later I did ask the police to make a welfare check on my son to ensure he was being cared for and was OK! "We need to respect your sons data protection, so we cannot tell you any information about him!" http://www.education.gov.uk/dfe/b00221161/children-families-bill
They make a killing (often for real) by alienating loving Dads (most often) from their children and this industry makes vast amounts of money worldwide out of this misery.
This INSTITUNIONAL ALIENATION extends from a self-serving parent through the Court Judge to the Barristers, lawyers , Social workers, if the police become involved they are not equipped to deal with civil law so will arrest adad for harrasment even though he has arrived for contact with the order waving above his head Chamberlain style.
"I attended a parents evening and noticed a school friend of my eldest son who had been treated for leukemia throughout her primary years,it was sad to see her in a wheelchair and on a drip when all her friends were running about although she always seemed to have a smile on her face. I said to her mum how nice it was to see her looking so well and was told she was in remission. The mother then said but I feel for you Dave not seeing your boys , at least I could hug my daughter every day!"
I am often asked how to contact my MP on this subject so I offer you a basic example here that may be altered to include you specific questions, and can be copied/pasted & sent via this site https://www.writetothem.com/
Family Justice and Child Welfare are in Urgent need of Reform!
Fathers are still being made to feel little more then sperm donors and walking ATM machines when at the very least they should start from the stand point of equal in Parental responsibility with the mother. Quite why we are expected to go to court to resolve family matters, parents are not criminals why not attend an organisation such as ACAS? . In fact if we were criminals we would be safe in the knowledge that our case would be scrutinized by the press and public for fairness, then in the cases where a judge has been too lenient on a child murderer or too stiff on a pensioner they have imprisoned for not being able to pay her council tax, there would be uproar!
Family Court on the other hand hides behind sinister secret courts where similar injustice occurs everyday but goes unchallenged in fact the only one of four Justice Ministers to hold the office in the past ten years,and willing to see change was Jack Straw who attempted to open courts to public/press scrutiny but was shot down by the very judges needing to be checked What have they to hide?
In a word incompetence as they rely too heavily on spurious testimony from so called court reporters from Child Protection Services, the very same who were qualified to visit Baby P 60+ times without recognising there was a problem, something someone with modest parental experience would have recognised instantly . Interestingly Baby P was so named in the press for many weeks even after his death so who exactly were they trying to protect? I have witnessed sex discrimination & bias that would not be tolerated anywhere else but the Judges use the court reporters as scapegoats if anyone dares challenge them . So now you have good parents both Mums and Dads being alienated from their children where in the worst excesses you witness many children undermining the authority in the home, at school and even the police . In the last week alone we learn of a well loved and long serving teacher being stabbed to death in her classroom by one of her pupils and in another incident primary school pupils putting bleach in their teachers morning coffee!
The sole motivation for all this is money, the legal professionals see this as their golden goose and so does the Government. I could never understand that whilst I was spending a fortune trying to have modest contact and visitation with my own children throughout most of 2004 the very same council evaluating me as a parent said 'but of course you are eligible to adopt'. I said all I wanted was to be a part of my children's lives even after separating from their mother . I have subsequently learned there is a whole related industry of force adoptions also funding local councils and in turn Governments! When will this Corruption END? It has to be the duty of your good-self and 650+ colleagues to address this matter with urgency as it has been described as the terrorist from within!
You can also contact the House of Lords and other representatives.
his public appearances. Not an easy task. So he recruited his wife to make the job easier. She didn’t. He was making a speech about the rights of working fathers to see their families. So who better for Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg to call on for support than his wife Miriam… Mrs Clegg, a lawyer who earns four times as much as her husband, then put her hand up and said: ‘This is the moment of truth. You have spoken a lot about measures, which is all well and good. But an awful lot is about attitudes. ‘There are many, many dinosaurs, not here but out there, that still think that a man who takes care of his own children, he is some kind of less of a man. 'So if you and other modern working fathers could start saying not only loudly, but also proudly, that taking care of your own children and being responsible for those children does not affect your level of testosterone – and that men who actually treat women as equals are the ones with more cojones.’ Hmm. In how many ways can one person be so wrong in so short a span of time? Of course her remark about testosterone levels in parenting men is just false. Shortly after birth, a father whose partner allows him contact with his child, very definitely undergoes a drop in testosterone levels. Other hormone levels change as well. So the feisty Ms. Clegg might try reading an elementary book on parenting before she shoots off her mouth on the subject of the male response to pregnancy and children. But far more important is her assertion that “an awful lot is about attitudes.” She’s right about that of course, but somehow neither she nor her husband managed to notice that the very bill his government worked so hard to pass will do absolutely nothing about those attitudes except leave them in place.
Indeed, that’s perhaps the most glaring flaw in the whole bill; it requires nothing of judges, so their attitudes will be the deciding factor in custody cases. And we know what those attitudes are; mothers get custody, fathers get the bill. And of course Ms. Clegg assumes the same nonsense those judges do – that fathers don’t want any part of their kids. Neither she nor her husband nor indeed anyone in the government wants to acknowledge that for decades now, fathers have been “saying not only loudly, but also proudly” that they’d like to see their children once in a while after their wives have filed for divorce. That’s true regardless of their testosterone levels or anything Ms. Deputy Prime Minister imagines about their “cojones.” Needless to say, the Cameron/Clegg government wants that notion kept securely under wraps. After all, if they were to admit the truth – that divorced fathers want meaningful relationships with their children and the kids do far better if that happens – they might find themselves required to actually do something to further that end. And we can’t have that. So it’s far better to, while they were trying to justify their failure to follow through on the reforms they promised three years ago, plant Miriam Clegg in the audience and give her a script that was sure to deflect attention from the real issue. Spanish-born Mrs Clegg appeared to hijack her husband’s press conference with a colourful intervention, suggesting that men who treat women as equals have ‘more cojones’ than those who don’t… It seemed to be a spontaneous interjection, but aides admitted it had been planned to generate publicity about an issue the couple believe needs debating. Well, not too much debating. Again, the Deputy Prime Minister’s wife seemed to be present mostly to take attention away from the real issue. And if her slightly blue language wasn’t enough, surely a straw man would do the trick.
Mrs Clegg also hit out at ‘dinosaurs’ who believe childcare should be left to women and asked her husband to send out a message that caring for children ‘does not affect your level of testosterone’. It’s like setting up a mobile over a baby’s crib in the hopes of diverting its attention. Having done nothing to improve the lot of fathers in family courts, the government figured it would be better if the public kept its eyes focused on those “dinosaurs” instead of the guy in the Batman outfit scaling the walls of yet another public building to highlight the plight of fathers in family courts. The real scandal is the refusal of family court judges to learn the first thing about what actually promotes the “best interests of children” and act accordingly. That’s broken up more families than any T-Rex Miriam Clegg imagines to be wandering the streets. That scandal was the thing the government promised to fix three years ago and that has now gone unaddressed. No wonder they want us to look elsewhere. Clegg himself seconded his wife’s emotion. ‘The idea that it is not manly to care is as absurd as saying that it is not womanly to work.’ Oh, it’s manly alright. It’s also good for children whom study after study show to benefit from continuing real contact with their fathers post-divorce. So you’d think the government would have made it easier on dads to do the caring for children Clegg seems so intent on. But no. It’s more “judicial discretion” exercised in all but complete secrecy for the fathers of Great Britain. And we know what that means – mothers getting sole or primary custody in 90% of cases and judges winking at their violations of access orders. Clegg of course knows this very well. If he didn’t, he’d have been able to be honest about just what his government has and hasn’t done. And he wouldn’t have had to plant his wife in the audience to divert attention from his government’s treachery. Contribute NATIONAL PARENTS ORGANIZATION IS A SHARED PARENTING ORGANIZATION National Parents Organization is a non-profit that educates the public, families, educators, and legislators about the importance of shared parenting and how it can reduce conflict in children, parents, and extended families. Along with Shared Parenting we advocate for fair Child Support and Alimony Legislation. Want to get involved? Here’s how: Become an official member of the National Parents Organization team. Join our Facebook Page. Together, we can drive home the family, child development, social and national benefits of shared parenting, and fair child support and alimony. Thank you for your activism. #NicholasClegg, #MiriamClegg, #sharedparenting, #familycourtreform, #GreatBritain Back to Blog https://www.nationalparentsorganization.org/newsletter/archive/enews-2014-04-30.html
April 29, 2014 By Rita Fuerst Adams, National Executive Director, National Parents Organization As a founding member of the International Council on Shared Parenting, National Parents Organization is promoting shared parenting internationally. This includes promoting the work our Canadian neighbors are doing to pass Bill C-560, a private members Bill to amend Canada’s federal Divorce Act to introduce a rebuttable presumption of equal shared parenting. In response to the debate in the Canadian media and in the Canadian Parliament to date, our Canadian colleagues have collaborated on a document which focusses on the substantive issues and which dispels the rhetoric of opponents. The document, called: “Myths and Facts Concerning Bill C-560” also addresses universal concerns, with well-crafted responses, to shared parenting. Our Founder and Chairman of the Board, Ned Holstein, M.D., M.S., serves on the Board of Directors and the Scientific Committee of the new umbrella organization, International Council on Shared Parenting. Knowing the importance of passing shared parenting legislation in other countries to our own work in the United States, National Parents Organization is asking our members to encourage members of the Canadian Parliament to pass Bill C-560 for the children of Canada. Brian Ludmer, a founder of Lawyers for Shared Parenting, sent this letter to the Canadian Parliament. In it are the email addresses for members of the Canadian Parliament who serve on the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, as well as the names of the leaders of the various Canadian federal parties and key Ministers. Their contact information is available on the Parliament of Canada website. Ask each of them to support Bill C-560 by sending the Bill to Committee for further study. Tell them this is in the best interests of our children. Many of our members email, call, and write letters to support the work of affiliates in other states. It is equally important for us to support the work of fellow activists in other countries. Join Lawyers for Shared Parenting and Canadian Equal Parenting Council in working to pass this legislation. National Parents Organization and Robert Franklin have regularly written about shared parenting legislation in Canada. In Canada, Barbara Kay and Prof. Edward Kruk Demolish Arguments Against Shared Parenting Law Opposition to Shared Parenting in Canada Typically Weak, Dishonest Barbara Kay: Solution to Family Court Crisis is Equal Parenting Presumption Barbara Kay to Government: ‘What the heck are you waiting for’ on Shared Parenting?