Powered by iPetitions - Start your online petition now

Signatures 347 total

Page: « 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 »

  1. 151
    Name: Neil Russell-Taylor on Mar 20, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: Famil Law MUST reflect justice for the children, and equal rights of both parents.
    Flag
  2. 152
    Name: Brian Mahony on Mar 20, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: check out www.dadsontheair.com
    Flag
  3. 153
    Name: Rod Belchamber on Mar 20, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments:
    Flag
  4. 154
    Name: Cheryl Fewster on Mar 20, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: do what ever you can!!!
    Flag
  5. 155
    Name: Natalie Stankovic on Mar 22, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments:
    Flag
  6. 156
    Name: Andrew Kercheval on Mar 22, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: Fathers have love and concern for their children as well. We do not carry the child to birth in our bodies, but we do in our hearts. I have often heard it said that the courts would prefer to err on the side of women. Why must they err at all
    Flag
  7. 157
    Name: Frank Scherl on Mar 23, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments:
    Flag
  8. 158
    Name: Ken Alston on Mar 24, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: I have fought these Acts for thirteen years now. These Acts are 'home' to unemployable public self servents, System child abusers and state funded terrorists. All suffer from the 'Selective Hearing Syndrome' - They love to hear the sound of their own voices. Power freaks the world can do without.
    Flag
  9. 159
    Name: Geoffrey Turner on Mar 26, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments:
    Flag
  10. 160
    Name: Lindesay Blackburne-Kane on Mar 26, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: It is well past time the the family law Act was changed,
    Flag
  11. 161
    Name: Andrew Walker on Apr 8, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments:
    Flag
  12. 162
    Name: SCOTT GRIMWOOD on Apr 8, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: My children are 11 & 9 they desire shared care & i have the capabilities to do so. The childrens school councillor has conducted a Ben Anthony test which has revealed that my children rely heavily on contact with me for instruction on basic daily needs. My wife has refused shared care because she would loose money from the centerlink, & she is after a larger share of the equity in our property she has vacated it is sad that my children a being denied this type of care because they are meals tickets to someone who does not wish to become employed.
    Flag
  13. 163
    Name: Debbie Hawkes on Apr 12, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments:
    Flag
  14. 164
    Name: Rebekah Griinke on May 13, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments:
    Flag
  15. 165
    Name: Tedy Shalev on May 20, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: Children need two parents!
    Flag
  16. 166
    Name: Craig Grant on May 21, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: Our Government is directly responsible for the suicides occuring on a daily basis as a result of the actions of the family court and child support agency. They are no less murderers than the likes of Hitler.
    Flag
  17. 167
    Name: Allan Grant on May 21, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: very concerned grandparents who have very little contact with our grand children and would give them the love and support that we have from our cther grand children
    Flag
  18. 168
    Name: Toon Hodgo on May 21, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments:
    Flag
  19. 169
    Name: Keenan Dodds on May 22, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments:
    Flag
  20. 170
    Name: John Fragnito on Jun 1, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments:
    Flag
  21. 171
    Name: PAUL DEREZYCKYJ on Jun 7, 2003
    Country:
    Comments: I am in full support of the above when it is proven without a doubt that the breakdown of the relationship has come about from causes than cannot be linked to any forms of abuse by iether party in any form and that the rights and feelings of the child are taken into full consideration.
    Flag
  22. 172
    Name: PAUL DEREZYCKYJ on Jun 7, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: I am in full support of the above when it is proven without a doubt that the breakdown of the relationship has come about from causes than cannot be linked to any forms of abuse by iether party in any form and that the rights and feelings of the child are taken into full consideration.
    Flag
  23. 173
    Name: Lionel Richards on Jun 8, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: Prime Care leads to SOLE Care and too often Parental Alienation. A Rebutable Presumption of EQUAL SHARED JOINT PARENTING with Mandatory Mediation is clearly in the BEST INTEREST of the CHILD. Children NEED BOTH Parents even more so after family breakdown. Good Parenting is GENDER NEUTRAL and so is DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. Correct the false stereotype imagery promoted by the misandrist radical feminists, of Male Perpetrators and Female Victims in Domestic Violence. Good luck with your petition. Lionel Richards www.OzyDads.net
    Flag
  24. 174
    Name: Greg Bennett on Jun 8, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments:
    Flag
  25. 175
    Name: David Brown on Jun 8, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments:
    Flag
  26. 176
    Name: Terry Bowker on Jun 8, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments:
    Flag
  27. 177
    Name: Robert Martin on Jun 9, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: If this situation was reversed and it would be just as unfair to my wife and still equaly unfair to my children. For the love of children, for our future, voice your opposition to the hamfull effetcts of the current system.
    Flag
  28. 178
    Name: John William Kluck on Jun 9, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: i support the case for shared parenting
    Flag
  29. 179
    Name: Matthew Andrew Kluck on Jun 9, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: My son Taj needs both parents, not just his mother
    Flag
  30. 180
    Name: John Armstrong on Jun 9, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: I agree fully with all your comments
    Flag
  31. 181
    Name: Peter Steindl on Jun 13, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments:
    Flag
  32. 182
    Name: Simon Hunt on Jun 17, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: Kids need the love and CONTRAST of both their parents. The conflict and greif cuased by father exlusion must stop being used as rationale for it continueing.
    Flag
  33. 183
    Name: Vic Fisher on Jun 22, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: 50/50 shared residency should definitely be the starting point. The present situation of discrimination against men has been the norm for far too long and is unjustified.
    Flag
  34. 184
    Name: Gaile Fisher on Jun 22, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: I agree with the Australian Government moves to introduce 50/50 shared residency as the starting point and would like to see pressure brought to expedite and support this move in the interests of dads and the children.
    Flag
  35. 185
    Name: Chris Foster on Jun 22, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments:
    Flag
  36. 186
    Name: Anthony Beck on Jun 23, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: I'm one of the lucky ones where my ex wife consented to shared residency. The main thing is that my children have flourished both socially and academically. My daughter receiving top marks in her class consistently and my 4 year old boy completely coming out of his shell. Its not easy though as my ex wife continues to threaten me over access if things dont go her way and because it hasnt been ratified by the Family Court, I have no recourse. Every lawyer I goto recommends I stay clear of the family court at all costs as they will more than likely revert the custody back to my wife. What a pathetic system we have and how antiquated it is. Until you are seperated from your children after divorce and seperation you are oblivious to the out of date, draconian system that this country has. What is even more pathetic is that if the system was reversed to favour the male parent, it would be up there with world famine. Men and father's roles cannot be dismissed by the stroke of a pen. While I admit that there parents out there that are abusive to there partners, children etc, it shouldnt be that the whole custody divide is defaulted on that. All things being equal, children need there dad like they need their mum. My only hope is that John Howard comes through with changes to this oppressive structure where nobody wins, certainly not the children.
    Flag
  37. 187
    Name: Srilal Perera on Jun 30, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: I strongly support this petition. About time that this unjust law was reformed, together with the Child Support Agency. It is obvious that who ever thought of it was only interested in the benefits the legal proffession can get out it. Let's make sure that only the children benefit.
    Flag
  38. 188
    Name: Jamie Pontin on Jun 30, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments:
    Flag
  39. 189
    Name: Bret Hodges on Jul 1, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: wish it was in place now
    Flag
  40. 190
    Name: Kerry-Ann Brady on Jul 3, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments:
    Flag
  41. 191
    Name: David FINDLAY on Jul 7, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: In a matter of hours what was once a sacrosanct right of access to ones family is in the next denied. And so a journey into an abyss begins where emotions are so raw and exposed. Ones own responses are not what one can claim as usual, are pitted against a once loving partner. It would be unfair to chronical my history...however let me say the time is here to cease the imbalance that is at the core of the driving force of this legislation. Men are emasculated, disenfranchised and denied equal access to facilities. What makes it right for one party to up and take the child/ren and claim support The CSA is so partial and lacking in interpersonal skills they require a revamp and clearer charter of aims and objectives. When is true open and constructive debate going to occur I am an Australian Citizen and I don't even register on anyone's radar for support. I have recovered from a mental illness that is a stigma now. This whole process makes life tough. Please do something to balance this inequity. Men have duties to there families and must aim up manfully. Women should cease victim status in their world of we demand equality...but to a point!
    Flag
  42. 192
    Name: Cameron Vorrath on Jul 9, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: I would love to have the opportunity to provide equal care for our son and hope in time to be able to provide this. Two loving homes and equal access / parenting of two equally qualified people can only be in his best interests. Being the father and the primary income earner doesn't mean I am therefore a less capable parent. I place a higher priority on parenting my child than my career.
    Flag
  43. 193
    Name: Mark Grosskopf on Jul 14, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: my children dont have the contact with me that they deserve and need as a father
    Flag
  44. 194
    Name: David Manera on Jul 29, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments:
    Flag
  45. 195
    Name: Gavin Dillon on Aug 6, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: It's simple as this fact the perpetrator is NOT always the MALE in seperation, however he is the victum of crime with respect to the present day Family Law Act, to the custody of children and child support payments. Today's suicide of men as a result of seperation and then the notification of child support payments needs to be high on the agenda as supporting evidence that that system is biais to the extent that loss of life is a daily event in the society that we Australian's leave in. It's a Women's court room to those Men who are the victum irrespective to the female's behaviour or actions.
    Flag
  46. 196
    Name: Peter Walton on Aug 10, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: if it were corrected i am 99% certain my ex wife and i would have reconciled but she was unable to find in her hart forgiveness or hear me tell her how much i love her or was sorry when the anger of missing my children 6 days a week did not upport this. while suicidal i rang and threatened her because she had intefeared with my children getting my life insurance so before i got to die i got locked up for eight weeks instead. just got out. the most horrible experience of my thirty five years apart from them (the law) now stopping me from seeing my 3 beautiful boys. unfortunately i feel i have been unfairly treated and so i am angry but i have never and never will be a danger to my beauties.
    Flag
  47. 197
    Name: Fred Nitschke on Aug 12, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: The stupidity of the current arrangements will come home to roost when the baby boomer generation starts retiring.The government wants retirees to be self funded in future. Goodness knows how they will ever achieve that when they have been pillaged by the current system be it through matrimonial property settlements or the Child Support Agency or both.My point is that divorce currently predicated on the "me-generation" notion that "I want to do, what I want to do, when I want to do it" . This conflicts with the notion of family and in pure economic terms is not a philosophy that this country or any other can afford. Marriage should be harder to get into and harder to get out of.Whilst the old days of divorce being based on an offence ie adultery etc. seemed outdated when Lionel Murphy introduced the Family Law Bill in 1974 somehow from a societal point of view we are much worse off. At present divorce run along the lines: " I don't want to live with you any more but I do want to maintain my lifestyle." That is not divorce, that is a perpetuation of a dependency attitude. I would have thought that genuine feminists would agree that their goals are about achieving independence and freedom of choice in all facets of life. The current systems merely promotes dependency. If you choose divorce you take your property entitlements and start again. Children should be a 50/50 arrangement. That means that parents cannot simply move where they like because it is in the parents best interests. Parents best interests are not the same as the childrens. This concept too is a bit of an Alice In Wonderland idea in that it means whatever the courts want it to mean. Further the idea of best interest of the child has paramountcy over that of parents at present. The Universal Declaration of the Rights of the Child states simply that the best interests of a child (whatever that means) are A paramount consideration and not the THE paramount consideration of tribunals dealing with custody issues. The idea that Child support is available irrespective of whether or not there is marriage ought not be supported.This only encourages career mothers with numeruous offspring with as many fathers.I understand that in the UK this is in fact the position. Child support at present is predicated on the notion of fairness in terms of allocation of income of fathers mostly to mothers. The system presumes that mother is at home minding kids and have to run a household on her own. The too need to be a rebuttable presumption. What of the circumstance when they remarry high income earning partners and have further children. Immediately there is a vastly different scenario. Mother doesn't have to finance the running of the household on her own any more.Get rid of the formula I say and have the parties negotiate there own arrangements. The formula is only for the dead beat dads that abandon families and take no part in the lives of their children.The ability to use such a formula should only be granted after a tribunal is satisfied that the father is a dead beat. I don't believe that there are too many of them as the Family Court is overflowing with residence and contact disputes. Of course this formula is all about propping up the welfare system. This brings me full circle to my introductory comments that with the current arrangements that the government will foot what is likely to be a greater welfare bill when all retirees that have have had any chance of being self funded have been pillaged by the present system are will be compelled to apply for a pension. Another issue that needs to be looked at is the so called cost of children. Children cost as little or as much as you choose to spend on them.Peer group pressure, television , obscenely high levels of merchandising of fast food and pop culture generally have contributed to this. Again this is something this society really can do with less of indeed perhaps do without. In generations past this country produced some wonderful characters. Now we are producing a nation of computer game junkies that never see the light of day and would not know how to climb a tree or build a billy-cart.I would like to think that our great land has progressed over the decades. Perhaps it has in some respects but I do believe that in terms of the traditional family unit we have lost an awful lot along the way and have paid and continue to pay a high price for this "progress" .
    Flag
  48. 198
    Name: Kaylene Smith on Aug 27, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: It is a childs right to have both parents in there life.The disagreements are between the parents not the children but the children suffer the cost of not been able to have both parents in there life because of our laws.The courts are there to speak for the rights of these children.if the courts are not going to give these children a better chance at life with having both parents being there then god help our children
    Flag
  49. 199
    Name: Leanne Harker on Aug 31, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: I definately support the right for a child to have equal access to both parents.
    Flag
  50. 200
    Name: Peter Harker on Aug 31, 2003
    Country: AU
    Comments: I definately support shared custody as I am currently struggling to get the minimum amount of contact with my daughter and it is breaking my heart that I can only see her one weekend a fortnight
    Flag

Page: « 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 »

Sponsored links