:
:
:
:
:
Under Section 121 of the Family Law Act, it is an offence to publish or disseminate anything which may identify or tend to identify any party to the proceedings in the court. While this does not prevent the media giving voice to the experience of family court clients, it does severely restrict the press. The Attorney-General described "compelling reasons" to drop the Family Court ban on naming people. Recent charges of "contempt" by scandalising the Family Court have been dismissed and a judgment for costs made against the Family Court. The Family Court is failing to stop its victims speaking out against institutionalised injustice. Family Court fails in medieval attempts to stop free speech
Family Law cases in Australia are subject to confidentiality, so the names of Family Law litigants and respondents have been changed. Where we use the first person singular, "I" we mean the anonymous author, not the editor or publisher. If we use the plural "we" we mean the editor. We have no intention of "scandalizing the court" or bringing the family court into disrepute.
The injustices of the adversary system on individuals and families must be redressed by bold non-adversarial "conscience driven" parliamentry debate to promote psychological healthy stability in relationships not dysfunctional conflict driven adults. The trouble is that most parliamentarians in Australia are barristers and at least solicitors, the exceptions are few Curtin and Keating at least from memory. Perhaps a few more psychologists like Carmen Lawrence from WA would help the balance, maybe not. Latham has an ex who appears to hate his guts. Don't feel alone about that old son. You can do something about it if you do not worry about your own vulnerability and divorced situation. Howard had an inquiry at least however ineffectual the result.
The law is a very philosophical place, an attempt at divine rule in the tradition of the wisdom of Solomon. Legal experts can hold completely contrary opinions and both consider themselves correct. What sort of students are attracted to law? Economically and politically orientated students good with language skills, or students full of enthusiasm for social justice. The former we believe and mainly students who could never do medicine or science, law students are to crudely generalise, not very good at hard science subjects, they have very little knowledge of biology, physics or maths. A combined legal medicine degree, some specialists in forensic medicine might cross both fields easily, but would tend to be better at medicine and mediocre barristers, which I prefer rather than the mediocre surgeon and great barrister, if you are ill(barristers only appear in court in the English/Australian tradition)
Your solicitor ( called a Lawyer in American ) is supposed to be great with the paperwork and procedure, but maybe not so good a performer in court, he instructs the barrister for you on points of law and does research for them, the beak in colloquial terms can also be a magistrate. Clients should not be disappointed that at thousands of dollars an hour, you may only meet the beak a few minutes before your case is due to be heard. "No worries mate" Your solicitor sent me all the paperwork. ( Oh No, he hasn't even got it with him, his leather folder is thinner than a single slice of bread! Yikes) You should not hope that anything you thought was relevant should have been heard by the beak before NOW. Your solicitor may be there to hold your hand and console you at a quarter of the beak's hourly rate, pheww thanks, you are a good client, an insecure one!
Hard science subjects require facts, but everything in law is a matter of legal intrepetation, which precedent to follow, or distinguish this case as unique, or which rule of legal intrepetation to use, like the literal and mischief rules, subjective opinion, the "reasonable person/man test". There is no precision in law, no facts just assertions and counter assertions to be determined by the judge as a question of law and infrequently, almost never in Family law, a jury of your peers who can determine facts. If you have a science background heading into divorce, beware, it does not make sense at all, the dispute resolution process is barristers across a table while you sit in other rooms. No psychology just confrontation trying to force an agreement. Most agreements are by consent, but you feel very much pressured and forced to accept barristers recommendations and agreements they make between themselves, warning you to accept or else, maybe you should continue? If they like your case and financial reliability as a client, not necessarily in that order. Advice can be optimistic and free if you will continue to employ the advice giver to spend your money freely. You are distressed emotionally, not up to anything really but that is the expert advice you might receive!
Some young solicitors do their best to promote social justice issues in the first few years after they graduate, but young idealistic lawyers out to right wrongs, seem to get caught after a few years in the "me" mentality of getting the most they can and doing everything for their client to win irrespective of the justice in the situation. Of course not all solicitors are devoid of moral reasoning or so manipulative of the law for their own ends, pro bono work for the public good is still alive, also at the opposite end of the age spectrum, where successful solicitors, barristers and judges might do pro bono work at the end of a long career, for example some immigration solicitors trying to help detained illegal immigrants.
A barrister with an 87% acquittal rate would consider themselves the best in their field, that they are good enough to get acquittals means they are targets for drug money to keep the wealthy drug barons out of jail. In contract or criminal law, fair enough, do your worst/best; but in Family law, the adversary model of dispute resolution is an injustice on families and individual members. The Family Law solicitor may do everything for themselves first, then the barristers, then their client, irrespective of what is good for any children involved and against the best psychological interests of dispute resolution for families. This is not contract law, it is the fabric of social relationships and emotional nurturing environments for children. It is inappropriate psychologically for parents at a time of great emotional distress and separation to inflict further atrocities on them from the adversary model of slagging each other off.
Oh, how lovely kids, mummy and daddy don't argue anymore, they employ puppets to do it for them at a thousand dollars an hour. Both be mentally well first, wish the ex you hate well in your heart, never use a barrister on a stick to denigrate, humiliate and degrade the other parent.
As the wise Judge S said in the County Court "I disapprove of the use of intervention orders as weapons in family disputes" Fear and suspicion. You don't need to commit a crime anymore to be almost considered a criminal, someone just has to fear you, no matter how paranoid, deluded or malicious that belief is. An aggrevated violence order required evidence of past assault. A civil Intervention Order may be granted on a "balance of probabilities", that someone has a fear and suspicion of being harmed. The beach of a civil order, one even consented to, for example you think the ex is delusional and you can make a potentially fatal mistake to agree to keep away from her, maybe just after she has a miscarriage.
The breach, even if the order was consented to can bring immediate jail, with no proof of any crime ever being committed. One indiscrete father who consented to an intervention order, was arrested after leaving presents at the door of his children's house on Christmas day. He was arrested for it and three months later had gone from being a professional engineer to an unemployable criminal having also had his front teeth knocked out while in jail for three months. In another case where the father was living with his children and the mother left to persue another relationship, she applied for an Intervention Order on a balance of probabilities on the matrimonial home's address when she no longer lived there. This meant dad and the kids would have to go if she succeeded. Her solicitor then said if you agree to the order we will change the address to her current residence, so you can stay in the house, a fatal mistake.
At Broadmeadows Magistrate Court in Melbourne for example, there are two lines, one for all other criminal matters and the other for Intervention Orders. What a fearful society of psychological and emotional isolation, I'm scared of you keep away, mummy, mummy, police police. Some intention is needed for assault, an action. You can get civil intervention orders on a balance of probabilities, that can have criminal consequences without any evidence ever being presented. You can be threatened and bargained to agree to consent to "keep away" from someone scared of you when you never threatened or intimidated a being in your life-time.
The adversary model is a cause of continuing unnecessary angst between people charged with responsibilities for children. Children witness disputes and people dealing with each other in fear, loathing or suspicion, poking each other with barristers on a stick, at their expense and to the detriment of both parties psychological health. The best family law solicitor would tell you that you only need their help if you are: a complete idiot, hateful towards the ex, feel you are being ripped-off or kids are not being cared for... Whatever your psychological distortion of your ex is, if you have children you should avoid the adversary system.
The best solicitor does not relate to the best possible outcome for children. Solicitors are paid by their clients to get what the client wants, they have no interest in fair and just outcomes for children.I am a wealthy barrister, a hundred bucks a word, I've got a plum stuck in my mouth, I'm really such a, really such a turd" Lyrics and music by Redgum.
Try and rate you solicitor's basic personality characteristics on some variables like, Thinking...Feeling, Judgmental, Sensitivity. Try and ask them a question about how they feel about something, not what they think, but how they feel. Can they be animated enthusiastic even?
They don't feel much generally, anaethetised against family tragedy stories. If they don't feel much about anything, watch their bill will cost more. Also rate their performance/competence in a few simple tasks to find their preferred weasel modus operandi.
Once you have categorised your solicitors responses, you can predict what they might do in future and then you might terminate their services.
What response do you get to inquiries, Do they:
Fail to mention they hate men
The male hating feminist
Tell you they failed family law twice at university
The "daddy paid for my law school" incompetent
Blame the other party or court procedure
"It's not my fault" external locus of control
Say they are always unavailable, in court or in conference
The evasive unavailable shy bookwormweasel
Do nothing, take the money and make excuses
The lazy thieving devious cheever loophole
Delay, I'm always very important and busy
The procrastinating pompus egotistical
Lie barefaced knowing you cannot verify the deception
The dishonest hedonistic opportunist
Keep telling you, don't worry, we will get them
The hate feeding malicious procrastinating weasel
Have feelings competence do everything correct, ontime and cost effective
Almost extinct. Here comes the judge
How much time do they take and what do they charge for
A. Filing initial court applications for residency
B. Do they do court appearances themselves or recommend you hire a barrister
C. Contracts do they try and conciliate with the other party before court
D. Billing costs per phone call per page of documents and per hour in court
E. Complaints how they respond, if at all.
Though it could be a very hard time, it is a great opportunity for self reflection, self-analysis and change. Why does the ex hate my guts? What did they say about me, could it be true? A time of self-doubt perhaps that is very therapeutic for you to indulge in a bit. Change is easier if you are emotionally involved, more carthasis and epiphany, in fact the emotional content is integral to the process of changing. Assume what the ex says is true for a while, make the most of their criticism. Do others "in-the-know" confirm or support your "nice" self-image? Don't be hard on yourself, let the ex do that, just be self aware, more passive less egotistical, less reactive to criticism perhaps, more observant of self.
Ok, so what the ex says is rubbish. Then you have another challenge to try and forgive them for taking advantage of a legal system designed to protect women and children, rooted in antiquated notions that males are not as nurturing as females. The stereotype is that, most blokes are fairly agro, especially if they drink. If they have used violence in any way, they should face up-to-it accept their just punishment and get some help. A promise of future good behaviour has no weight without accountability for past actions.
More often complaints of violence can be easily made by a woman stereotyping males as violent for financial reasons. A Canadian report on a battered husband syndrome. This is a great assault on the self esteem of any mature peaceful man. If the ex is completely "nuts" you need to stay sane for the children, so forget accusation, lies and deceipt as a focus of any discussion or energy, focus on the children and paperwork, but keep to the point. Some partners keep their children from the other parent for hate or financial reasons, but their turn will come, your children may need you in years to come, every dog has their day, we hope.
Make sure you do not make the most basic mistake and immediately get attracted to someone, just because they remind you of your ex. If you study yourself you will know if the ex's criticisms of you are fair minded. If you do not have kids, it might be an ideal time to disappear and go bush (after property settlement at least interim orders). The trouble is that to cope with the legal domain of the Family Court, you are going to have to be on top of the documentation requirements and that is a real pain you must endure.
The best thing you can get from divorce is personal change and not waste your life with a relationship that was not right. If you can learn anything about yourself, that would be good to help you not make the same mistake in the choice of a mate as you did before. Still, no regrets, the kids are great, genetic predispositions may be influenced with well timed environmental nurturing, we hope. Training Hitler to be Ghandi, I just hope they don't inherit too much of the ex's personality.
If you can give a little ground, you may be able to negotiate directly with the ex, it will save you tens of thousands that you could spend on the children involved. How many nights a year you each get the children (implications for child support over 110 nights minimum useful care for the assessment formula), over 145 nights is better and considered equal care. Below 110 nights, you pay extra $$$ in the child support formula. Whoever gets the largest percentage of the children will most likely get much more property as well. Consider giving ground on who gets what and the parent with the least care can make an advance payment on child care and allow the ex to have what they want. Register a non-agency agreement with the CSA.
Identifying conflict
Approaching conflict
Communication skills
Maybe if you don't, you better have a few thousand dollars to put into their trust fund, "To get things moving". If you let a solicitor conduct personal relationships on your behalf, you are stuffed financially and bankrupt as a person of free will to conduct your own affairs. If you abrogate personal responsibility to a solicitor, to conduct your affairs at arms length you will never have a fact to work with, never be in control of your own destiny, be in debt to a solicitor who cannot possibility do anything for you except perpetuate the mental frame of mind, that you are not responsible, it is all the other parties fault. What a lonely isolating life you choose when you employ a solicitor to conduct personal relationship on your behalf
No general applications are allowed to the Family Court of Australia."I'm sorry, we cannot deal with that matter in this application,
you will have to bring another application for that." Every application must be for a specific issue for the applicant alone, grandparents and friends can hire their own solicitor and fill in different forms
and have their own lawyers' picnic. There are different forms for everything, affidavits are the most often used
in conjunction with forms applying for interim residence, child support, property settlement, breach of orders, final orders
or access, each requires a different form. Interim orders gives your lawyer a tasty entree to guage your personal stupidity,
financial gullibility and recalcitrance to negotiate personally with the ex love of your life who now hates you and visa versa.
The Court has the discretion to accept documentation not in accordance with the legislation especially by self represented clients, but
almost never does in my experience. In one case I was involved in, a Magistrate agreed with a representation from a solicitor that the father's Interim
application was inadequate legally as he applied for "My daughter to continue to reside with me" The legislation says that you must seek
residence. So the difference between the tense of the verb reside must not be confused with noun thing.
If the court does not like you or your solicitor's attitude or demeanour they can strike out your application. The most expensive
senior counsel guarantees you nothing, except that you will pay more. The law is an ass. Judges are appointed from the ranks of solicitors,
expect no better from them.
Link to New Family Court Forms released March 26th 2004.
Federal Magistrates Court Forms, the webpage links change so often.
Which one to use, both of these courts have jurisdiction under the Family Law Act. You will never get it right. The Federal Magistrates Court has no convenient widely available format, there are no MS word.docs, that would be too easy for parents, they have PDF formats that you cannot save on your computer disk. Who are these forms for, us parents or solicitors only?
Put the Federal Magistartes forms up as word documents please so that we can save them to disk, instead of being trogladites obstructing applications. Perhaps the Federal Magistrates Court has a financial interest in selling copies of Adobe Acrobat, so you can save them to disk. I just applied using the Family Court Forms and now I have to transfer it all to the Federal Magistrates Court Form, all the information is on disk, but the form is made to deny parents access to it. They do have a link to where you can buy Adobe Acrobat. Buy Acrobat to apply to the FMC, Get stuffed. Accessibility for parents Not likely. What about a simple text .txt version. THIS really stinks. So now you must hand write out what you already have on disk. This system stinks of favouritism to the rich. I bet solicitors have Acrobat and a version of FMC forms they can use on a computer. Luddites.
Be prepared to fill out Family Law applications and then when you try and file them, opps, you should have used the Federal Magistrates Court Forms. The Federal Magistrates and Family Court paperwork nightmare. Have a look at some of these forms, estimate that you will need at minimum 6 of them (The bare unlikely minimum would be an interim application, Information Sheet, Affidavit, Financial Statement, Notice of Service and a Final application) forms filed over a few years at how much an hour for a solicitor to file them? Charge you for your visits, telephone attendance and court appearances. Maybe $3,000 to $5,000 per application and the Child support Appeals at $3,000 to $5,000 per application. Put aside at least $20,000 and for contingency applications another $10,000 might cover it.
If you have the full picnic with an ex who also has a hate feeding solicitor quadruple these estimates. Then if you want to argue about property values before a Judge, just give the barristers and solicitors half the value of all your assets would come close if you are well healed. If you are of moderate means forget it, you cannot afford this system. "Don't expect legal advice from me because you come to this place unrepresented", said Registrar B (as she then was) to an unrepresented father. She then ordered my daughter to be returned to the mother, even though the status quo, which an interim application should support was that the daughter did not want to go with her mother, by her own choice. They couldn't afford legal advice then, how can they afford an appeal, like doctors who bury their mistakes, a judicial bias against unrepresented litigants or respondents is rarely exposed.
Affidavits are not worth the paper they are written on. Many solicitors will write one for you to sign. "Yea verily", the Affidavits say, from the old school solicitors who cannot use plain English even when pretending to be in their client's own words. I would be up to my eight Affidavit, but with supporting Affidavits from Godmothers and such saying you are great with kids etc., about 20 Affidavits filed in three years. Usual solicitor rate for 1,500 words approx $1,500 thanks.
Financial Statements! Watch out for these, every time your income changes the court and your solicitor will want you to file another one.
I just completed my 8th Financial Statement over three years. The first one cost me $1,500, each one maybe a full-days work, receipts for everything, 26 pages of excruciating financial detail, breakdown, your use of shampoo and kids use thereof.
These are worse than any tax audit and they are ongoing. You can't appeal for anything without one attached.
The Torture never stops, thanks Mr Zappa.
Waiting to file and swear documents is so financially unnecessary and a large waste of your time.
The family psychology report can be a great deception: an incompetent (manipulated!) shallow cut and paste of the word document used in a similar consultation for another family with the names changed, 30 minutes word processing and a brief consultation. Having seen two almost identical family reports with sections cut and pasted both written by one noted "Melbourne expert in family psychology" who charges up to $1,700 for an hours work. If a dozen of her clients got together and compared reports there could be no doubt, but at the moment there are only two reports substantially the same, she could claim they were similar situations. We are forced to let her continue her practice in peace until we find more reports substantially the same. The consequences of her deception which the court accepts as "expert" are profound for parents. Don't let lawyers invite psychologists to the picnic if you can, this is vital for everyone's sanity.
Adjournments and delays because of incorrectly filed Forms, information not presented or changed circumstances will cost you extra.
Solicitors can with impunity lie; especially against, a client acting alone. After reaching an agreement in a conciliation conference the Registrar said, "Because X is unrepresented, you "Solicitor y" draw up the agreement reached before me in writing using plain English. Weasel Y's command of plain English was as inadequate as his honesty. The Deputy Registrar then left the room and weasel Y says, "That never happened"!, "We are re-negotiating this deal" he lied in-front-of a Registrar, because he knew an unrepresented client would find it almost impossible to prove the deception. Never appear alone, take a great aunt or family friend anyone who is over 18 and sane who can be a witness and testify as to what agreement was reached. You cannot subpoena a judge's Order 24 Conciliation conference notes, or the judge themselves to give evidence to demonstrate that a solicitor lied; the court will not assist you, however just your case, because expediency seems more important to them than justice and opps! it is almost the lunchtime adjournment.
The new Family Courts Forms include a Notice for a Non-Party Production of Documents. Sounds just right to subpoena a Registrar's Order 24 Conciliation Conference notes, you would think, but they do not acknowledge that they take conference notes, or that they destroyed them immediately after. The Registrar would accept service of the subpoena, but not acknowledge it or produce Order 24 Conference documents, Judges are appointed from the ranks of solicitors, what a depressing thought. Wouldn't it be great to see some senior TAFE child care teachers on the bench deciding the issues for children that they are experts in. What do solicitors know about families, that they are sources of great wealth for the legal industry. Never give up at any hurdle, a court somewhere will listen. Many of the problems caused by dishonest solicitors can be avoided if you take a witness with you to hearings and meetings, take dated hand written verbatim notes on what is said.
A lawyers picnic leads to personal degradation and humiliation.
When your partner suddenly starts to get very friendly with your relatives, it is time to worry. The family law weasel might say "Curry favour wth their family, see if their mother or sisters will write you an Affidavit of support." The ex went the week before we broke-up to visit my sister in another state far away. I thought it was unusual at the time, but she said that she just wanted to get away. In reality to further her own ends, she succeeded in convincing a country bumpkin of a girl that she was a great mother and I was, I was, just another man. Lies perjury and deceipt, get his family on your side, really neat.
As part of the new weasel's win at any cost game plan, police harassement can also be common, the ex can tell them you were domineering or violent ("You are getting very weary of lies") who had manipulated a child into staying with you even if a child refused to go with her mother, by their own will. Women can be angry aggressive and violent yelling and screaming, but using third parties to inflict violence on the former love of their life. My ex visited once and my daughter ran away from her mother to hide, rage away mum) Some stories about men being violent are fiction, complete fiction, but it does happen and police have to take the perjury of the ex seriously. They went way too far with me, searched my house, strip searched me, intimidated me generally,"you'll never see your kids outside a police station" threatened me charged me.
On appeal (after being convicted by a young inexperienced female Magistrate who would never look me in the eye, $1,500 thanks for a useless barrister) the wise honourable Judge S gave me three days to present my case unrepresented in the County Court. He said of Shane D that he showed a "regrettable lack of objectivity even arresting me and that he subjected me to a strip search was "unconscionable"
Appeal upheld. What a waste of police time and public money as well as the injustice committed on me. I made formal complaints against Constable Shane D but dropped them in return for a police promise that Shane D would be barred from having anything further to do with me. There is no independent complaints procedure against police in Victoria, hence the current problems with corruption. They review the complaints themselves and it may be that discretion is the better part of valour in withdrawing the complaint.
I would have liked to complain further about the behaviour of Shane D. Instead of listening to the County Court judge's comments on his behaviour, he compounded his disregard for the law towards me the next morning, with renewed anger in front of my children. He should not be in the police force at all, without being able to take direction from superiors or from senior Judges, who could I make that point to, the Ombudsman was not interested or able to investigate, his local Sergeant did not want me to persue the complaint. Nine times out of ten, Shane D would get away with this aggressive behaviour, I only succeeded in extracting myself from his sphere of influence, I could do nothing to moderate his behaviour and he would not listen even to a County Court Judge! See our Heretic Press Editorial on police corruption in Victoria. Editorial Police Corruption
The very next day after my successful appeal, Shane D tried to arrest me in front of my kids at a change over. Police would often park near us in an intimidating fashion when I went to drop them off or collect my children. With the ex cheering on the footpath, egging the cops on saying "Go on arrest him" after she conspired with the babysitter (and probably constable Shane D) that I had molested the babysitter's breast outside the children's school at 3.30 when collecting the kids the evening before.
The babysitter told the police I groped her breast when taking my 3 year old off her shoulder. I said to them, "I hope you have spoken to witness x about this before taking me away in front of my kids. "Oh you have a witness" They jump back in the paddy wagon and call the station who advises them to check the witness statement.
The ex and her police mate would not rest easily with the criticism they received from a county court judge, the babysitter kept provoking me, breaching court orders, hoping I would do something to show I was a neanderthal. She yelled at me in the school yards "You're not getting him". I had court orders hard won that I could get him there and then. She drove off with him taunted me for 15 minutes walking away, all I said to her was "don't be silly give me my son" The babysitter performed some very poorly executed and contrived looking theatrics. She kept walking away from me with my son looking over her shoulder at me holding his arms out saying "daddy" She would slow down stop and when I got close, she would walk away again teasing me with my boy on her shoulder, bloody nasty cow she is. When she eventually stopped after 15 minutes of this carry on, she passed my son to me, immediately yelled out "Help Help" and fell back onto a tall wire fence that supported her. I stood there looking at her, like "you are pathetic" and immediately turned to ask the name of the closest person who saw her do this as there were still other parents collecting their children from school.
But for that presence of mind and suspicion of the ex's babysitter, to get the name of a witness, I would have been locked up in front of my kids. The children do not disserve that, they should think well of their parents even if they have little to celebrate. Constable Shane D does not threaten me anymore and if there are any complaints about me originating from my ex they are passed on to senior police for scrutiny and merit before sending in headkickers. The ex is lucky she was not charged with perjury. My appeal was upheld, but what an lot effort to deal with the lies of my ex wife to the CSA, her perjury to police, corrupt solicitors and whats for tea dad? Something great darling daughter.
I needed minimal advice and case management just enough to manage the dishonesty of the ex wife's weasel, I complained to my solicitor in email regarding them breaching our agreement, their service and fees and they did nothing for months before deciding that they would not negotiate a cent of their fee or acknowledge any complaints I had about their service or our agreement for minimal case management. I paid them a retainer first of course, many thousands up-front. The complaint I made about their fees went unanswered, until the time period for making a formal Legal Institute complaint lapsed, then they took me to court, in this case with three solicitors and a barrister against me as an unrepresented client. Even the Magistrate was impressed/intimidated with the gang of four. In the Magistrates Court! Overkill against an unrepresented client or I will take it as a complement they did it fearing I may have a snowballs chance in hell of winning. The Magistrate worked to accommodate them and they did well, got a few extra thousand in costs added to their fee, which I claimed was unjust and excessive to start with. They turned $3,500 into three times that amount, with penalty interest I could be in debt to them forever, so I am definitely biased against such a firm and make no apology for trying to expose some of the Family Law rorts in Australia.
They then garnished my salary, while I still had to pay ridiculous amounts of child support based on my ex wife's misrepresentation of what she earns and somehow live on a modest wage. A lawyer's picnic. I sometimes hear them on the radio all warm and cuddly seeking publicity as a good corporate citizen, and wonder if he can be a senior partner in the same firm of the same name, who I had the misfortune to employ. I feel a rage at hippocracy and lawyer's helping themselves to excessive amounts of family income, being the vultures around the carcass of a dead marriage, with the vultures pushing the children aside to get first pickings. All the concerned lawyer crap makes you write, forces you to add balance that from a client's point of view, they can be totally lacking any mammalian characteristics like empathy. How many family law clients have they sued for outstanding family law debt? How many other family Law client's wages are being garnisheed by legal firms?
They have summoned me to court again today 30th September 2004, for an oral examination of what funds I may have to pay them, instead of feeding myself and children while unemployed. Each time they summon you to court they add an extra thousand in costs and you have to pay it. When the client notifys them they cannot pay, they will continue to act for you and then sell your house at forced auction and garnishee your salary to pay them.
Overlawyered.com in their Family Law section reports that in the U.K. Fathers have staged a law firm protest. Fifteen members of a group called Fathers 4 Justice stormed the offices of solicitors Parker Bird in Huddersfield, England, citing the firm's "major contribution in the pouring petrol on the flames in divorce and childcare cases". Locking the door behind them, chanting and waving flags until police arrived, the men said they had bestowed a "Golden Petrol Can" award on the law firm and a spokesman said "We feel that many solicitors manipulate family law against fathers." ("Angry fathers in law firm protest", Huddersfield Daily Examiner, Feb. 26)(via Law.com). David Giacalone comments (Feb. 26): " I'm surprised this sort of protest hasn't happened more often in the USA." What about Australian men, how much will it take to mobilise action against this or any other flavour of solicitor like, The hate feeding weasel Email the editor if you want to take some action, if we can be more organised in Australia to protest at the offices of a major Melbourne Family law firm.
Link toNew Family Court Forms released March 26th 2004.
To confirm the arrogance and inaccessibility of the Family Law Act and related legislation to the people it serves, see the The Case Management directions" from Alister Nicholson, were recently removed from the internet in late 2004, probably as documents of shame, by any reasonable evaluation. Downloads remain in archives. An optimistic sign perhaps? A great pity that being so legally trained, Alister could not think as a "common man/woman", like a one-eyed solicitor, or Collingwoood supporter with blinkers on, he scuttled around the sinking family law ship, failing Australian Families saying, "Ayee me lawyer mates", but we got the best paperwork filed and my case management directions are great. This is of course a joke, not to be taken literally for the purposes of saying we brought the family court into disrepute, the legislation does that.
An experiment to get rid of divorce by fault, proving adultery and "infidelity" that has gone horribly wrong into escalating, and protracting disputes, just as much as the previous system. It's just that under the Act, The detective is the "children's wishes", the hidden camera has turned into a psychologist and the femme fatale has turned into an angry crow to peck your eyes out. The solicitors and barristers are still there. I think the hidden photographer was much cheaper and more fun than the psychologist, did less damage as well. Put some child care workers in there somewhere, a brake on the legal minds of non-compus mentas, impracticle mens reas discorporated from their Yea verilies. Families don't need case management directions, they need practicle, timely and cost effective judicial review, they may be no good with case management directions and too poor for legal representation, but maybe they are great parents and you look like a mens rea looking for a reality to inhabit. So tragic, spending a minutes time on specifying paperwork case management directions that parents should file, rather than making the court accessible to non-solicitors and unrepresented litigants.
The court procedures demand that we present our case in legalistic terms which ensure ongoing work for the legal industry and not accessibility for the citizens of this country. I hope no one drove a long way across Australia with your old Family Court Forms all neatly filled out to get access to your children and when you got here discovered the change of forms (no notification at all even to pending cases asked to file extra documentation) and no transition period when both forms could be issued. I had to go on Friday 26th March and lodge mostly old forms like the Form 63 Departure application, Form 16 and 17 Financial Statement and Affidavits and return on Monday 29th March with the new Forms 11 that did not exist on Friday 26th March. No notification at all.
Goodbye to the head of the Family Court, Justice Nicholson who retired on Friday 26th March 2004, just as the Family Court Forms fiasco was hitting parents in the courts, the elite were sipping champagne for your retirement. Could you be out of touch with the world of workers on modest wages who are caring for young children? It seems that your legalistic documentation specifications further your colleagues career's at our expense, new courts where parents will not need legal help!!! The court does not seem to help, this is the adversary system, lawyer's at dawn to fight it out instead of you and me having a cup-of-tea with a pencil and piece of paper and maybe a witness. That is not too much to ask, that people can appear before the court with minimal documentation, a verbal application even, why not?
Maybe you have seen too many violent men, we know there are plenty, but do not tar-and-feather us all with the same brush. Solicitor's with self interest and rosy legal flavoured mens reas who hold stereotyped views about masculine and feminine behaviour should not be ruling over our families until we see how well they cook, clean and do home duties. 50% shared care, is the equitable rebuttable, negotiable presumption of custody, unless you are happy to hold sexist views., you must be hen pecked at home and unable to boil water yourself. I will never cook pavlova for you, or convince you that, a woman can be as violent as a man, and a man can be as good as any woman at caring for young children.
Enjoy your retirement, have you someone female to cook and clean for you? Primitive stereotypes of masculinity you seem to have promoted. Thanks Alister we have the best documentation of any Family Court in the world probably, completely unaffordable, soooo slow to hear cases and unaccessible for the population you were supposed to be serving without them employing one of your mates to intrepret the legislation and case management guidelines. Some sexist bias from Alister Nicholson former head of Family Court
Mens Crisis Support Line in Australia Ph 1800859585
Dads on the air
Jackboots Mutton killing fathers
An interview with Diana Bryant
This exact situation also happened to me
The Age readers say CSA and Family Court killing Australian men
Family Law cases online
Angry Harry exposing feminist hatred of men
Australian newsarticle links
Overlawyered Great anti-lawyer web site
Site for lone fathers
UK Fathers-4-justice
British legal system fails fathers
UK list of bad legal firms not to be hired