UK Family Law Reform
Family Legislation Leaves Fathers and Children Out in the Cold
September 21st, 2012 by Robert Franklin, Esq.
Almost 2 1/2 years after the coalition government of David Cameron and
Nicholas Clegg was voted into office, its draft legislation on family
justice has finally been published. During all that time, plus the run-up
to the election, both Conservatives and Liberal Democrats made noises
about improving the pitiful lot of fathers in divorce and custody cases.
The infamous Family Justice Review, aka The Norgrove Report, made its
recommendations which were summarily tossed into the nearest dumpster,
and the government soldiered on to, advocates for fathers and children
hoped, reform family law to ensure a meaningful relationship between
children and both their parents post-divorce. The governments exact
recommendations havent been known until now, but their publication reveals
that fathers and their children are to get nothing. Thats right, the
closest thing the draft legislation contains that might be called father/child-friendly,
is the admonition that, the arrangements for children following parental
divorce or separation reflect the benefit to the child of maintaining
the ongoing involvement of both parents in a childs life.
requirement that any court actually do anything at any time regarding
paternal custody, paternal parenting time or enforcement of visitation
orders. Theres not a peep about the rights of children to keep Dad in
their lives post-divorce. What does a fathers ongoing involvement in
his childs life mean? Thats not defined, so it can mean anything any
individual judge wishes it to mean. Perhaps a Christmas card once a
year would suffice. What about monthly visits via Skype with his child
whose mother has been allowed to move with him/her to Australia? Come
to think of it, the latter has already been ruled to be sufficient father-child
contact by one British court, and theres nothing to suggest the draft
legislation would change that ruling.
In fact, the Norgrove Report, that so many thought to be DOA at the
time of its publication, has, like Nosferatu, come back to life in the
form of the draft legislation. Like the Norgrove Report, the draft legislation
has nothing to do with fathers or their childrens welfare and everything
to do with expediting the process of divorce and custody proceedings.
Theres mandatory mediation and time limits placed on temporary orders,
etc., so its clear what the government deems important lowering costs.
Im all for efficiency, and mediation can be a good thing, but fathers
and children will not benefit one whit from mandatory mediation. Thats
because, when one of them files for divorce, both Mom and Dad know that
she is 90% likely to get custody, so when they go to mediation, Mom
wont agree to anything less. Why would she?
The simple fact is that, after years of waiting and wondering, another
government has kicked fathers to the curb. Yet again, fathers have been
deemed too unimportant to children to merit a single line in a statute
assuring their full participation in their lives post-divorce. Once
again, the value of fathers in the eyes of elected officials has been
made clear; fathers are wallets and little more. The government has
again looked at the continuing scandal of fatherless children in the
country and shrugged its shoulders.
Its a national disgrace, but of course its not confined to England.
The same scenario plays out in country after country, state after state.
It is long past time for it to end.
Fathers rights activists have for decades showed public officials and
anyone who would listen the mountains of social science on the importance
of fathers to children. Anyone who wanted to could see the deleterious
effects of fatherlessness in newspapers, magazines and the Internet
every day of the week. A few minutes thought would tell anyone that,
as a simple matter of economics, keeping fathers and children connected
makes sense. How much money do we spend every year trying to address
social problems crime, drug and alcohol abuse, boys educational difficulties,
teen pregnancy etc. that fathers themselves could hugely ameliorate?
The reasons to keep fathers in childrens lives are many and there is
no real counterargument.
The point is, weve been right all along, but have almost nothing to
show for it. Rightness, justice, morality, gender equality, childrens
well-being should be enough, but they arent. That means it is time to
take the next step. We have to stop asking and start demanding. As a
practical matter, that means that elected officials must not only respect
us, they must fear our electoral clout. They need to know to a certainty
that they have to vote the right way or risk losing their seats in Parliament.
I guarantee that once that message is delivered in only a few elections,
the same officials who seem not to grasp the importance of fathers will
begin to do exactly that, the right legislation will start to be passed
and wrong legislation, like the draft legislation thats just been made
public, will start to fail.
Fathers rights to their children and childrens rights to their fathers
transcend party politics. Those who support those rights must vote solely
on the basis of a candidates support or opposition irrespective of party.
We must become single-issue voters. Weve tried Mr. Nice Guy and he finished
last. Its time for a change.
Heres the draft legislation
Join us in campaigning
for equality and justice.