" Kids " as a Weapon !

When " No Fault " divorce became the law in Australia it was intended to do away with messy trials in which a " guilty party " needed to be identified and publicly humiliated as the cause of the marital breakdown.  It was reasoned that generally there was some guilt on both sides and it would be more harmonious if both partners were free to walk away from the union without recrimination and get on with living their lives.

That was amazingly successful where both the partners were reasonable people and their finances were split evenly down the middle, but a problem arose where there were children of that union that the judge needed to take into account.   In many cases, a harmonious split changed to a turf battle as both sides fought to gain sole custody of the children.

Generally, the divorce court believed that the interests of children were best served by them having access to both separating parents.  As a result, one parent was granted the right to have the children live under their roof and the other had visiting rights.   This was usually at the discretion of the judge and it could vary - from the kids living week about with each of the former partners to set patterns that included annual holiday periods.   It was usual for the custodian parent to be granted child support payments paid by the non-custodial parent,

All that opened a complex can of worms, including the issue of either party taking the children overseas - and out of the jurisdiction of the court.  Generally, that required the permission of both parents and the International recognised Hague convention promised the return of any abducted children.  Unfortunately, some countries did not sign that accord and their courts issued rulings on strict religious grounds.

Unfortunately, no fault divorce is not delivering the harmony its contenders promised.  The matter of child support payments is ignored by some people and it now pursued through the taxation office.  When payment is final extracted it is often reason for the delinquent to direct bitter recriminations at the former partner and use the kids as a weapon.

We are now seeing child access used to indoctrinate the children to make them unmanageable for the partner providing them with residence.   The visiting party fills their heads with " children's rights " and decries rules on time for bed and need to do school homework to a schedule.   As the children grow in age and stature they can becoming intimidating and pose a physical threat to the parent providing shelter.  The courts seem reluctant to make any changes to the visiting arrangements despite appeals for relief.

It seems that a percentage of divorcing parents see their kids as personal property to do with as they please, and in many cases also regard their former partner in a similar light.  This had resulted in physical attacks - and in some cases murder.  In many cases the threat is well hidden and consequently the police are powerless to intervene.

There is no obvious answer to this problem.  The Family Court makes decisions from what it is able to observe and with the expectation that fair minded people will accept justice.  When someone has a partner that does not fit that mould it is inevitable that they have a personal problem that can only be attributed to a past bad choice.  Only luck will determine the final outcome.