Last month an Australian social issues journal published the most fascinating research — Allegations of child sexual abuse — which showed judges determined that only 12 % of the child sexual abuse allegations involved in contested family court cases were found to be true
Accusations of abuse that were deliberately misleading were found to be twice as common as true allegations, according to the study by Webb, Moloney, Smyth and Murphy, which reviewed family court cases from 2012 to 2019. …
You might wonder how many of the 102 cases of deliberately misleading accusations were prosecuted for perjury? Anyone who followed submissions to the recent Family Law inquiry will know the answer to that one — precisely zero. …
That’s the real world, very different from the alternate reality occupied by these researchers who make it clear they hoped to prove false accusations were rare. One of the authors of the study proudly told the ABC that she commenced the research because she was shocked to hear from mothers reporting their child abuse accusations were being dismissed in family court.
Faced with devastating evidence that judges conclude most of the allegations didn’t stack up, the researchers do their best to massage the results to disguise the extent of the false allegation problem. … Also excluded from the false accusation category are cases they deem as “genuine but mistaken belief” which is clearly a phony category designed to minimize the rate of false accusations.
Rationality, facts … trampled underfoot in the rush to power by self-interested parties:
The bottom line is, here we have an important study revealing the true extent of the problem of false allegations of child sexual abuse in family court cases — allegations which often result in small children being subjected to multiple intrusive interviews by court experts and the shaming of innocent fathers.
But this significant news is totally ignored by our mainstream media, apart from one skewed ABC article claiming the judges have it all wrong. Oh yes, there was also a bizarre blog in Diplomat magazine claiming the study proved “the family court offers a prime example of how male supremacist groups are able to alter the culture of public institutions to the detriment of our collective social health.” …
Zealous feminists overreached when they made coercive control a form of domestic violence. Now they are hoisted on their own petard:
Amanda Sillars … runs the excellent Eeny Meeny Miney Mo Foundation which showcases the many decades of research on parental alienation (PA). Amanda is a PA victim herself and her highly professional organization makes it clear that both men and women engage in behaviours that damage the relationship between their child and the child’s other parent. But it’s most likely to happen with divorced or separated parents and because women are most often the live-in parents, they are the ones best positioned to exert this control.
Everyone knows that — including the feminists. Recognising parental alienation as coercive control of children threatens to expose women’s capacity for violence in a very public way. That would be a mighty blow to the hateful, divisive anti-male ideology so influential in our society.
That’s why the ideologues will stop at nothing to shut this down, just as they work so hard to suppress news of the appallingly high frequency of false child sexual abuse accusations used to gain advantage in family law battles. It is very revealing that in both cases their single-minded focus on women’s rights means they cheerfully throw the needs of vulnerable children under the bus.