|Home | Bookmark | Tell||Active petitions in over 75 countries||Follow GoPetition|
Petition Tag - family law
CORPORAL PUNISHMENT IS A LEGALIZED FORM OF CHILD ABUSE.
The law in NC doesn't give grandparents any rights for visitation.
This petition is for the parents who play an active and vital role in their child or children’s lives. Unfortunately, for unmarried parents, the laws currently in place in Arkansas and states like it presumably assign one parent to be a “custodial parent” and the other as a “noncustodial parent”, without making a reasonable assessment to determining whether this is the best decision to make in regards to the child or children.
Therefore, this injustice causes an inequality for parents who are present in their child or children’s live by way of multiple levels of support. The laws possibly do this because traditionally one parent is the breadwinner while the other raises the child or children, but times change, and with the change of times comes a need for change of laws. Not all laws from yesteryear are applicable to today and the future, and that is why this petition urges lawmakers to revise statues such as “Arkansas Code of 1987 Title 9: Family Law (Subtitle 2: Domestic Relations).” to reflect the 21st century. If both parents play an equal role, then both parents should have equal parenting rights protected by the law, which leads this discussion to the concept of shared parenting.
Shared parenting refers to a collective agreement in child custody in which the care of the children is equal or substantially shared between the biological parents. More and more parents today are moving away from the traditional custody agreements that consist of a “custodial parent” and “noncustodial parent”. Instead, they are opting for shared parenting. In a shared (or joint) parenting agreement, both parents have almost equal physical custodial time with their children. Moreover, both parents are responsible for making the important decisions in their child's life. Shared parenting is a valiant attempt by both parents to be involved in their child's life for the benefit of the child. Shared parenting heavily involves both parents and does not mean that one parent has the kids almost all of the time with occasional visits to the other parent. This type of parenting is one of the best ways for unmarried parents to work together in the best interest of their child or children, especially when both parents are truly active in their child or children’s lives. Having both parents in a child’s life as true equals is in the best interest of the child. Out with the “Custodial/Noncustodial” and in with “Equal, Fair, and Balanced Parenting”. Shared parenting is more effective than ¾ parenting from one parent and ¼ parenting from the other and vice-versa. Of course, there are exceptions to the rule when one parent is inactive or significantly less active in a child’s life.
Shared parenting is great if both parents do it! Although, there has been a dark past of have the experience of one parent not being in their lives as much as they should or at times not being in their lives period. Those individuals most definitely do not need or deserve same rights as a true parent who is there day in and day out and actively present in their child’s life. Individuals who are not mature enough to be responsible parents make it difficult for those who are. This cause some of them fight back through use of the court system, but can end up being futile because the burden of proving that the other parent is “unfit” is left up to them to substantiate although the point of “fit” or “unfit” is not necessarily an issue. A hardworking parent who has a major part in their child’s life should not have to resort to such madness only to possibly secure their rights as a parent.
The law should be in the best interest of the child, and having both parents in a child’s life as true equals when both play pivotal roles in the child’s life is in the best interest of the child.
Protecting children from violence and abuse must be the paramount consideration, not secondary to the rights of the parent to have contact with the child. Too many children are being cruelly separated from their protective parent – usually the primary carer they have known since birth.
These parents may have raised allegations of abuse and violence against another party. Instead of investigating the allegations from the child protection point of view, the courts (often via single experts and ICL’s advice) label the protective parent ‘delusional’ or worse. The courts remove the child from that parent’s care and place them in an abusive situation with no review or follow-up to check on their welfare.
Children are being removed or forced into coerced shared parenting arrangements which are inflicting permanent emotional, psychological, physical and sometimes sexual damage on them.
British Govt Detains Nigerian Couple’s Six Children was published by the National paper Leadership on 21 August 2011 and named the family, while the children's identities still need to be protected for legal reasons in the UK. Their horrendous 'case' is one of the representative stories that shall form the foundation for a Parliamentary Inquiry into White Collar Crimes.
In April 2010, five Musa children were taken by Haringey Council without any legal justification, and completely false allegations, such as the mother being a sex worker, the children being from different fathers and a visibly faked letter by the eldest daughter were gradually fabricated after the event.
DNA tests took unduly long and proved the contrary, but Haringey Council was adamant about inventing more reasons for keeping the children away from their parents.
The photo gallery shows clearly what a happy family they were, before they met Haringey Council. But their sixth child was taken by nine police officers at birth. In August 2010, the oldest daughter reported being "inappropriately touched" and she has not been seen or heard by either parents or siblings since. The other children have not been seen since May 2011, and the High Commission of Nigeria has been refused consular visits - contrary to Article 36 of the Vienna Convention.
Does this family have human rights? asks Christopher Booker in one of 14 articles about the Musa Family in The Telegraph: "A council whistleblower has said that, at a recent case conference, the social workers admitted that maybe they had made a mistake, and that the mother they had falsely accused was in fact devoted and blameless. But apparently, because of “press interest” in the case, the officials agreed that the council could not afford the very damaging publicity which might follow, if the unhappy children were reunited with their parents. It was therefore vital that the council should continue to justify its actions."
The news release Cash for Kids - especially Cute Nigerians was published on 21 August 2011 to present their story, perceived to be the worst of all known cases, as part of a larger picture. More on Social Services stealing Children aka State Kidnapping.
Unfortunately, their case of child snatching is only one of many, as Christopher Booker also wrote: Britain's forced adoptions: the hidden scandal we can't ignore. Hence our petition that The Secrecy of Family Courts should be Lifted NOW.
Fascinating comments have been expressed by signers of this and other petitions advocating the Rule of Law.
Since "chronic litigant" Maurice J Kirk BVSc has acted as their McKenzie Friend, there are news on his site and his support site, besides the Musa site. While trying to help the Musa Family, he ended up in Cardiff prison where he fears to be locked into a mental hospital for life. The Nigerian Standard covered his involvement here.
On 28th November 2011, the Musas were arrested and refused bail on two occasions. Since then, a completely staged 'court case' with a rigged jury has found them guilty of child neglect and abuse and they were sentenced to SEVEN years imprisonment! A seventh child, a boy, was taken from the mother right after birth.
Their mistreatment in prison opened another can of human rights worms!
You can use Email a Prisoner to write to Gloria Musa as prisoner A 2767 CJ in HMP Holloway and Joseph Musa as A 2793 CJ in HMP The Verne respectively.
What can one call it, when victims are not only punished without crime, but also criminalised by those who are committing crimes behind the doors of official institutions?
In line with our request to the UK Judiciary The Secrecy of the Family Courts should be lifted NOW, President Zuma of South Africa is prepared for his country to boycott the Olympics in 2012.
He will call for other African countries to follow suit, as soon as he gets the 2,000 signatures that were collected via Facebook.
By way of example, there is a high profile case of Vicky Haigh who has not seen her 7-year-old daughter for 17 months is reported on www.vickyhaigh.wordpress.com and the Nigerian family whose six children were taken under completely false allegations by Haringey Council.
Do consider signing Paedophiles' rights? What about the rights of our children!, too!
This petition was started by Jane Davies in the streets of Carmarthen and published on Unity - Injustice. It is an expression of campaigning efforts by many individuals, organisations and John Hemming as the leading MP.
"Lifting secrecy" implies not issuing 'injunction', 'reporting restriction' or 'gagging' orders, as reported in The untold story of gagging orders by The Independent: only 69 related to celebrities, while 264 were about children and young adults.
By publishing this petition, a site to support Vicky Haigh and this site to support Bishop Gloria Musa, I hope to raise awareness online. Here are the marvellous comments by petition signers.
Please note the videos of rallies Against Child Abuse in London!
Please note also that 100,000 signatures get us a formal debate in Parliament. At 100 per day, that means in 3 years!
The worst case and international cover-up seems to be Linda Lewis, but Ian Josephs who publishes Forced Adoption [revamped into Punishment without Crime] and has been helping families since the 60s, reckons that the Musa case is the worst. With a rigged jury and farcically staged case, they ended up getting 7 years in prison!
The Education Select Committee has received this portfolio of nine cases for its investigation into "child protection".
The Attorney General received this 4-page letter which was left unacknowledged.
The Petition with its comments is with the President of the Family Courts, Justice Munby.
A second petition to Stop Forced Adoptions in the UK is now aimed at MEPs, UKIP and Parliaments in Brussels in London.
Dossier of Evidence in support of our petition to the EU Parliament;
Great Britain: The Stolen Children - Special Radio Prize for "shocking and relatively unknown human rights violations"
The Child Protection System in England - Submission to Education Select Committee by Florence Bellone - winner of above prize
MP claims 1,000 children "wrongly" adopted every year - BBC
Social Workers sex up abuse claims to snatch children for adoption - Sunday Express
Abolish Adoptions without Parental Consent - aiming at 2,000 signatures for non-UK MEPs who are supporting the issue. See Abolition of Adoptions without Parental Consent - submitted to the Petitions Committee of the EU Parliament.
How many people know about the scandals of child 'care', secret family courts and forced adoptions? - a compilation of links to online petitions;
Paedophiles' rights? What about the rights of our children! - 3,470 signatures on 24/05/2013.
There has been a great travesty done to our Armed Forces Members, Veterans and their Children of this Great State of Texas which I am sure you are unaware of.
The laws of the State of Texas do not protect single or divorced Military Personnel, Veterans and the bond they have with their Children should they be separated during their time of military service and/or during their time of rehabilitation. There is no time allotment for reintegration into civilian life and re-acquaintance between parent and child during which their parental rights would not be jeopardized.
At this time Texas State Laws are written, if a Military Personnel designates a non parent as conservator/guardian while they are on active duty, rehabilitating, reintegrating into civilian life or allowing their child/children and themselves to become reacquainted and the child lives with the non-parent conservator/guardian for 6 months the non-parent conservator/guardian has full custody rights to the child during or after the Military Personnel's term of duty is completed. This has been upheld in over 30 cases which we know of in the State of Texas where the Military Personnel/Veteran has lost custody of their Child/Children.
This is a great disservice to OUR Military Personnel, Veterans and their Children. If it was not for their military service these men and women would not have had to defend their parental rights or lost custody of their children. We ask that you support us and our Military Personnel, Veterans and their Children by establishing Family Laws within the State of Texas to protect the Military Personnel, Veterans and their Children from dissolution of the parent/child relationship. Also we ask that the law be written protecting Military Personnel and Veterans who may have lost custody of their Child/Children due to their military service up the time the new law comes into effect.
Please support our Military Personnel, Veterans and their Children from the lack of laws which protect them in our Great State of Texas.
Statement of Grievance or Opinion
1. The Federal Recommended Child Support Guidelines, the Divorce Act, the Matrimonial Property Act and unequal, arbitrary access orders are unconstitutional. They violate Sect. 7, 15.1 and 28 of The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the inalienable rights of both parents to raise their own children as they see fit.
2. That Canada is engaged in a reign of terror against families. It targets divorced and child apprehension ordered families and violates their Canadian Charter Rights and parental rights and destroys their lives forever. Canada treats divorced parents unequally and discriminates against one parent while systematically rewarding the other parent.
3. Judges have the power to seize children for any arbitrary reason and adopt them out without a valid reason or any criminal conviction against the parents relating to the welfare of the child.
4. Judges have unlimited power to interfere in parents lives and make all parenting decisions while downloading arbitrary costs onto the parents until long past the age of majority.
5. Canada violates Sect. 24 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. There is no court of competent jurisdiction and no judge that upholds the GUARANTEED Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. There is no legal counsel available anywhere in Canada that offers Charter Rights service.
6. Parents and families are victimized by unconstitutional family law practices. Judges violate parents’ rights by awarding complicated, unnatural, unequal, unconstitutional, unending, exclusionary and biased court orders. Canada has implemented a cult of exclusion, entitlement and alienation against the other parent and their families. The parents are completely at the mercy of the judges for very long periods of time. This slavery lasts for years until the family is financially bankrupt and any relationship with the children is completely destroyed. This continues for multiple generations. Canada is committing Crimes against Humanity.
7. Judges have unlimited power to ruin a family. Judges arbitrarily interfere in a divorced family’s normal daily life. In addition to mandatory child support, they force parents to pay for unwanted, arbitrary, unnecessary expenses, bogus medical costs, exorbitantly expensive private schools, universities, extended university tuition, and long term child support for adults who have no illness and are not attending post secondary education. Throughout the life of the child and long past the age of majority, the judge is in control and makes all family decisions while downloading all the expenses onto the parents, especially the non custodial parent.
8. Divorced parents do not have the right to enter into their own negotiated divorce settlement and negotiated child parenting plan as the Federal Child Support Guidelines are mandatory.
9. Canada and the police are not protecting people under the law, especially in family court and in criminal court. Victims are not getting help from the police and the courts when a crime(s) are committed against them. They refuse to lay charges.
10. Divorced spouses are treated differently. One parent/spouse loses everything and the other parent/spouse gets everything, all the time. Children, home, assets and income are unfairly seized and redistributed to the other spouse without any consideration for the displaced parent. This is unconstitutional and violates Sect. 7, 15.1 and 28 of the GUARANTEED Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
11. Canada has implemented mandatory child support. It is a huge incentive to deny the other parent access to children on an equal shared custody basis. Spouses who provide equal shared custody could lose their child support. Both parents should be responsible for their own child care expenses.
12. Canada has violated the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and in particular, Sect. 24 of the GUARANTEED Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. There is no court of competent jurisdiction and no judge that upholds the GUARANTEED Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. There is no conflict - free, competent, legal counsel or law firm that will provide Charter Rights service to the victims. There is no funding. Canadians are not protected. There is no GUARANTEED Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This is the biggest fraud committed against Canadians by the government of Canada.
13. Canadian non custodial parents’ rights have been irreparably violated and abused by the Canadian judicial system when it comes to their parental rights, their children, their homes and their incomes. They have suffered extreme mental, family, social, alienation and financial destruction to their families. This destruction will continue into the next generations of children and their families. Their children have been taken away either by force, alienation or greed and they will never, ever recover.
Workers within all branches of Child and Family Services Authority in Alberta have been maliciously abusing their powers and misinterpreting their mandates. The Minister responsible for those branches is as guilty as the workers for blatantly closing her eyes on the partial list of the following issues:
usage of threats,
usage of coercion,
fabrication of evidence,
breach of human rights,
breach of constitutional rights,
breach of laws,
not following their own protocols,
various forms of discriminations,
internal and external collusions,
parading children to adoption candidate prior to Court procedures,
If more people knew about how Parental Alienation and Hostile Aggressive parenting works, and how damaging these behaviors are to children, then more people can help deal with the problem.
With awareness and education will come social change. Just as now one can't slap a child, or smoke while pregnant, without everyone knowing that is not acceptable behavior, when social change happens, parents behaving in parental alienation or hostile aggressive parenting behaviors will be recognized. These adults will understand how their behavior hurts their own children, and if they choose to do it regardless, they will not be able to get away with their behavior as easily as today.
There are many professionals such as judges, lawyers, psychiatrists, teachers, police officers, as well the general public that have no idea this problem exists, or if they do, don't realize the harm it does. The aim of the Awareness Day is to make everyone aware of these problems and encourage the alienating, hostile aggressive parents to seek help.
With awareness comes education, and with education, comes the power to stop the mental and emotional abuse of children.-Sarvy Emo
Australia says “No” to “Shared Care” when there is history of Domestic Violence, Child Abuse and entrenched Parental Conflict in which arrangements are unable to be agreed by Consent; and when children choose to live with one parent.
Shared parental responsibility laws began in Australia in 1995 and were strengthened in 2006. The first review of the 2006 amendments, by the Australian Institute of Family Studies, occurred in December 2009. Any changes would not be expected to take place until at least July 2010. In the meantime, the SFLC and the newly formed Support Network "What about me", will continue to campaign for change to these laws, which neglect to protect Children and Parents from ongoing Domestic Violence and abuse.
Cases which end up in the Family Court, where the fate of the children is decided under the new laws, are those cases in which the main feature is entrenched conflict and often family violence. Studies show that these are the situations where shared care works least well.
Family Court Judge Justice Tim Carmody, who resigned a year after the 2006 amendments were introduced, says that shared care should not be a starting point, but an end point of family law.
‘Where the parents are co-operating and friendly, some form of shared care can work. But in cases of entrenched conflict, which represent the bulk of matters litigated in the Family Court, it puts the child right in the middle of the conflict. It’s like social engineering, a way of society forcing the parents to, in a sense, stay married and decide the most fundamental things they were not able to agree upon when they were together.’
Not enough action is being taken against dead beat parents who work under the table, jump from job to job, house to house in order to avoid paying child support.
They don't file taxes, don't keep their addresses current with the USPS and 'fly under the radar' as much as possible to avoid being help responsible for their own flesh and blood. It's time for it to stop.
Judicial abuse occurs when the effects of law itself are damaging to the person access to justice. In the most severe forms, Judicial abuse often occurs involving the most vulnerable members of our world: Children. For some time, judicial abuse has occurred across systems and mostly against mothers and children. Considering that it was not that long ago that both women and children were seen and not heard, just as things were improving it seemed as though humanity was finally valuing each and every prescious human life. Out in the public, such things would and do cause enough outrage for a sense of "natural justice". Away from the public eye, these human rights atrocities occur almost unseen and unheard like a thief in the night.
There are laws that prevent survivors from speaking out about their experiences. Whilst it is "for the children", children are not allowed to speak about the proceedings either. The media have written too few articles on the family court. To bring the case to the media, participants must seek permission from the court itself or face imprisonment. Controversially, fathers rights groups were allowed to heavily voice their stories of "no contact", "falsely accused of child abuse and domestic violence" and few were allowed to challenge that except in utilizing generalist terms and evidence based research. We are aware that most of these stories are not the case at all but are withheld by law to bring the public the truth.
In the process of seeking more time with children and promoting what appears to be the most noble cause, has entrenched the rights of mothers and children in their ability to seek safety from violence. Heads have been quoted in the media for stating that "family violence is our core business". The propaganda that is spread about the voices of children and their access to justice promotes the profitability in manufacturing child abuse and domestic violence. They can do something about it, but it is not within their best economical advantage to do so. This will continue until something is done.
Single mothers and their children have been seriously disadvantaged by legislation and reforms implemented by the previous Howard Government and continued (validated) by the Rudd Government.
Sole parent families experience higher rates of poverty and social isolation then two parent families and are among the poorest in this country.
These families struggle to survive on welfare payments which do not reflect the real costs of living while being threatened by unreasonable "welfare to work" obligations to maintain their welfare payment or face losing their entitlements.
Motherwork, volunteer work, study, disability, caring for children and family with disability are not being taken into consideration and mother's are still obligated to look for work, often that is low paid, demeaning and inflexible.
Motherhood is undervalued in Society in general but current legislation further undermines the work and responsibilities of single mother's whilst caring for their children. Single mother's receiving Parenting payment are forced onto Newstart allowance which undermines their role and work as mother's and primary carers of their children who should have the same right to their mother's care and time as any other child in Australia.
Many single mothers don't have family or other social support so are suffering in silence whilst living in poverty doing their best to care and provide for their children.
The harsh obligations and scrutiny of Welfare to work is pushing single mother's to breaking point and this is surely not a good outcome for women and their children. Welfare to work needs to be repealed for single mother's, primary carer sole parents and/or primary carer sole parents of children with special needs and/or too young to be left unsupervised.
Currently many fathers are taking advantage of Family law acts "Shared parental responsibility" and "a child's right to know both parents" etc...only to continue abuse and control (especially emotional and psychological), over their ex-partners. Primary carers are finding themselves unable to protect vulnerable children because of fear of contravening orders.
It is very apparent that the best interest of the child comes secondary to "a meaningful relationship with both parents" as experienced by many concerned single mother's. Judges and mediators (Family dispute resolution practitioner's) bare no accountability to decisions that place women and children at risk of harm. Relationship centres and Family dispute resolution practitioner's are failing to put children and women's safety and well being first and are insensitive to the needs and service of women and their children and the hardship women and their children endure as a sole parent family especially when there is conflict between parents or in cases of Domestic Violence, child abuse/neglect.
Family law needs to be made safe, fair, dignified, just and inclusive of all women and their children.
Family Law and other concerning legislation needs to be urgently reviewed and reformed in regards to the negative impacts on children and women. Judges and Family dispute resolution practitioner's need to be held accountable if their decisions place children and women at risk of harm. The best interest and safety of the child MUST be considered before "their right to know both parents".
The new child support reforms have put less money into the hands of those who actually feed and care for their children while putting more money into the pockets of those who rarely have contact with their children and are already financially better off.
Changes are needed to provide a safe, fair, just and dignified existence for single mothers and their children, to empower and support women to care for and protect their children and to assist them out of the poverty trap not force them into one.
We are the Brauer - Harris family.
We have been abused by the judicial system for more than 13 years.
We are a retired couple who are still paying child support for a nearly 21 year old man and can't find any way of terminating judicial corruption and child/adult support.
No less than ten judges have systematically denied us the right to terminate child support for an able bodied man.
The Family Law System is abusive and corrupt and responsible for destroying millions of Canadian families, forever.
We must stop this now! Not another day must pass, when
another family is destroyed.