Page 680 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 23 March 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Helen Szuty mentioned earlier that she attended, along with me and a number of other members - although not the Labor members, as Mr Moore said - a meeting of men, particularly, and women who were concerned about being discriminated against in domestic violence situations.
Mr Cornwell: No Labor members were present?
MR STEVENSON: That is right; there were not any. Anyone who had any faintest doubt that men were not discriminated against would have had that doubt removed at that meeting. There were many cases mentioned, some of them quite tragic, obviously by people who were quite sincere in what they were saying. Men usually define their status from the job they have. Women have an extra role as a mother or as a child bearer that, obviously, men do not have. I think that the no fault provisions in the Family Law Act have led to the prevailing feeling by many men that they are being dealt with unjustly. I have spoken to many men who feel appalled at the injustices. Once again Mr Berry shakes his head; he is an interesting individual.
Mr Connolly: You really do collect every ratbag element in the community, every ratbag view.
MR STEVENSON: Mr Connolly as well would suggest that there are not men who feel tremendously unjustly treated in the Family Court. If you attended the meetings and listened to some of the people who had the problems you may have a different view. One could well ask, "Why did you not go to the meeting?".
Mr Connolly: I will tell you that in a minute.
MR STEVENSON: None of you went. Good; I look forward to hearing it. I am sure that the women and gentlemen who went would be most interested in hearing why none of you went along. Is it that you have already made up your minds? Is it that you will not listen to anybody else's viewpoint? Is it that you do not care about anybody else's viewpoint? Is it that you are more concerned with ideology than people?
I think that injustices are caused to non-custodial parents, mostly men, from the operations of the Family Law Act which include the non-enforcement of access orders. Certainly, support agencies energetically enforce maintenance provisions - fathers are required to support the children, which is how it should be - but there is no reasonable mechanism for enforcing access orders, if the custodial parent, usually the mother, breaches them. Many ex-wives who are hostile to their former husbands try to punish them by depriving them of contact with the children. There are many cases that I could mention. Another situation used by estranged wives is to accuse the husband of molesting the children. Obviously, there are cases where that happens, but equally there are many cases where it has not happened; it has been said by a wife who has become embittered and has resorted to those statements. I noted that Mr Moore mentioned that he wore a white ribbon to do with men against sexual abuse. Actually it comes from America. The white ribbon was to do with men against pornography.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .