Has there been a degradation of men’s rights in Australian Family Law and Child Support?

Has there been a degradation of men’s rights in Australian Family Law and Child Support? By Jade McNamara.

I write this article as a woman. One who has recently soldiered with her husband through what can only be described as a ‘very bloody’ and extremely one-sided war. I witnessed the Family Court and Child Support favour and reward my husband’s former wife, ignoring countless, very significant factors. …

I married a wonderful man in 2013. He had a young son, whom he share-cared with his former spouse (let’s call her Wendy), on a 50/50% time basis. My husband was the sole payee of Child Support. Wendy was disinterested in working, and had been a serial welfare abuser both prior to and after that former marriage.

Not long into our marriage, I began to realize that our sanctuary of coupledom was becoming negatively infiltrated. Wendy was a formidable presence: constantly forwarding bills and costs for the son; attacking us; accusing us; and criticizing us. There was a note pad that travelled between the two homes, in the son’s school bag. Dealing with ‘the note pad’ became a dread to my husband and me. I began to feel more and more like I wasn’t the only wife in my marriage. …

We were served with a summons to court. Wendy … was requesting 75% of our wealth. I remember asking myself the question, “How has she been given permission to seek so much?” It seemed to me unfair and unlawful.

A nasty three and a half year battle followed that 75% claim. During multiple court appearances I watched lawyers, barristers, registrars and magistrates ignore significant factors pertaining to Wendy, including that she: brought no assets into that marriage; was abusive as wife and mother; was disinterested in working; entered into adultery; and refused to contribute to the majority of costs of the child. Further to this, Wendy’s barrister saw fit to abuse my husband and accuse him of ‘warehousing’ money because he chose to donate money to the church, of which we are members. …

We waited six months after the final trial for the Magistrate’s decision. This decision equated to an order for my husband to pay Wendy a sum of money that was much more than her 50% share of the marital asset pool. Interestingly, within this order was the addition of an amount of money that came from assets obtained after the divorce of that former marriage. …

The result of our court appearances included an order to pay Wendy a sum equal to 85% of the original marital asset pool. In order to raise this money and pay our legal fees, my husband and I were required to access all of our savings, sell all of our shares, and re-mortgage our home. …

Within six months of the end of court proceedings, my husband received a message via text from Wendy. It read ‘Our son will be living with me now, don’t bother coming to pick him up.’ …

Currently, it has been 14 months since we have seen or heard from my husband’s son. His mother now owns an unencumbered home, has a bank account full of savings, and receives a substantial weekly wage from us via Child Support.

I asked our lawyer if there was a bias towards women in the Family Court. His answer astounded me: “Yes, previously the Family Court favoured men, now the pendulum has swung the other way.”

Reporting from the 2017 Federal Parliament Family Court enquiry revealed that, in Australia, an average of 10 men and 3 women are suiciding each week due to Family Law matters.

I’ve heard similar stories. The damage done by the Family Court is immense. Reform is desperately needed, but can only be achieved by disobeying the feminists.

Full story at the link.