 |
Dads UK is run on a voluntary basis and as such we receive no funding. Although our running costs are fairly low, we do have to find the money somewhere. We are therefore asking our members to make a small donation to Dads UK so that we can continue to provide what we believe is the best support forum for dads around.
Whilst we're happy to receive any amount, we would suggest a donation of £5 as a baseline.
Thank you for your support!
|
|
|
Guests: 2, Members: 0 ...
most ever online: 42
(Members: 0, Guests: 42) on 28 Jun : 04:29
Members: 755
Newest member: mark08 |
|
|
The material on this website is published for information only and is presented in good faith. You are strongly advised to consult a solicitor or other qualified legal practitioner before acting upon any information on this site.
Dads UK cannot assume responsibility for any use or misuse of the information presented herein. If you see any inaccuracies or out of date information, you are encouraged to contact us and we will make the appropriate corrections.
Dads UK acknowledges copyright exists on this information, where appropriate. If you feel an item or article violates copyright, please contact us. |
|
|
Our news can be syndicated by using these rss feeds.
|
|
|
|
- Are you a single father, bereaved husband or gay father?
- Are you going through a divorce or fighting for custody?
- Do you find it difficult being without your children?
- Would you like some advice from men who are, or have been through similar situations?
- Are you interested in supporting the rights of fathers, their families and partners?
Dads UK is a news and information site dedicated to giving a voice and support to all people interested in fathers' rights. This includes partners, grandparents, uncles, aunts and anyone who has some kind of involvement with the father. Dads UK supports the growing demands of fathers in today’s society.
Registered members of this site can contribute articles, submit news items and links to useful resources, as well as participate in our very active forums (separate registration required). Please join us today and help promote the rights of fathers and their families.
|
|
|
Important note for users of our forums |
|
|
|
|
Please note our forums require separate registration from the main site. If you are already a forum member, but not signed up for the main site, you will need to register for the main site.
We hope to be able to integrate the two systems in the near future.
Thank you  |
|
Saturday 24 May 2008 | Fathers Not Involved - A Single Mother’s View. | | | |
| The passing of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill this week raised quite a few concerns for me, not least the further downgrading of the role of the father in our families and society today.
Why should it concern me? I am after all a woman, a single parent, and if I were to really look at the description of terms, a liberal feminist, since I believe that men and women should be considered equal in terms of law and society. So I should be jumping for joy, but I’m not, in-fact what I am, is very worried about our children and the state of our society.
Recently Mr Justice Coleridge stated that "We are experiencing a period of family meltdown whose effects will be as catastrophic as the meltdown of the ice caps." And that Judges are witnessing a "never-ending carnival" of human misery, and almost all of society's social ills can be traced back to the collapse in family stability.
Our family law system is a shambles, claiming to have the ‘best interests of the child’ at its heart when in reality it has successfully aided resident parents with their own desires placed at the forefront, and greedy lawyers with huge amounts of money guiding their lack of principles, to legally destroy the lives of millions of children in our country, and leave them not only without one of their parents in their lives but also lacking half of their entire family and identity.
Undeniably some changes in family law were most definitely necessary. After all the traditional system long discriminated against women and gave them no rights to their person, property or children. The balance needed redressing, but no-one should be more equal than others under the law and that is just what our family law system delivers in reality and why the balance needs to be redressed again. It is necessary because our children are suffering and dying as a result of many of its shoddy secretive practices with a winner takes all ideology which causes harm to our children and certainly can not be deemed as being in the best interests of the child
A myriad of research now highlights the fact that children brought up without the influence of both of their parents in their lives are more likely to commit suicide or self harm and suffer from depression or other mental health problems. They are also at much greater risk of taking drugs, behaving antisocially, committing crime, ending up in prison and of underachieving in school and leaving school with no qualifications.
Added to this a new study by researchers at Rochester Medical Centre, New York, surveyed 1,619 children and found that Children who have been separated at any point from one of their parents scored significantly worse both on their ability to learn new tasks and their pre-literacy skills. The study, carried out by paediatricians in the U.S., held that children of divorced or separated parents are "at increased risk of learning difficulties".
This new research, and numerous pieces of old research studying thousands of children brought up in single parent households and those brought up by both a mother and a father, brings into question why our family courts so often use the ‘best interest of the child principle’ to reduce the number of parents in a child’s life to one when clearly being parented by two parents enhances their wellbeing and is ultimately much better for their long term welfare and best interests and society’s best interests too.
A recent report from Unicef placed the UK bottom of the league of 21 industrialised nations for child well-being and deemed our children to be the unhappiest in Europe, this raises further concerns as to the welfare of our children and we need only to look at our government and its policy on the family to see why.
As a previous Labour voter it distresses me to need to criticize a Labour government, but the evidence of a decaying society where children are confused, unhappy and sometimes out of control and where young people and adults alike fear for their lives as a result leads me to that criticism. It is time to stop the rot and to heal our children and families and thereby improve the lives of us all. Government policy on families will not do that, but then many politicians don’t want it to and so have embarked on a catastrophic crusade to demonise fathers and remove them not only from the lives of their children but from having a beneficial role in society too.
And it’s no wonder they pursue that policy at our peril, after all Harriet Harman, Labour Deputy Leader as well as Minister for Women, yesterday declared in a in interview that marriage was 'irrelevant' to public policy and described high rates of separation as a 'positive development', as it reflected 'greater choice' for couples - well what about the children? Further to this, in 1990 Harman co-authored a report with Patricia Hewitt and Anne Coote entitled "The Family Way" which criticised the family unit and mothers who stay at home and questioned whether men were an asset to families at all and whether "the presence of fathers in families is necessarily a means to social harmony and cohesion”
Added to this attack on men as members of a family, we have Ms Harman and Margaret Hodge, ex Minister for Children and, according to her list of responsibilities on her UK Parliament biography, Human Right’s Champion, involved in the wrongful removal of hundreds of children from their families aided by the secretive processes of the family court system. Incidentally, as Labour Leader of Islington Council, Ms Hodge was also accused of being involved in the cover-up of child sex abuse allegations so I for one worried when Tony Blair put her in charge of even more children’s lives.
With such pedigrees from our Labour MP’s can we really feel certain that our government truly has the welfare of our children at its heart especially since the path has long been set towards the destruction of traditional family life?
That is just one of the questions I asked myself when I looked at the Human Embryo and Fertilisation Bill, a Bill which, in my view, clearly proposes to eliminate the need for a father. The Government does argue that research evidence shows that it is the quality of parenting that counts, rather than gender of the parents, unfortunately the study quoted as research for this Bill looked at only a small group of 70 children to support its view and even then the study only followed the children until they were two so showed no evidence on the long term outcomes for those children. They then totally ignored the evidence of numerous other pieces of research showing that the opposite was in fact true.
One facet of the Bill which enshrines in Law the fact that IVF can be used to create a child without the need for a father to be a part of the relationship may on the surface seem only fair to same sex couples who wish to parent a child, and I personally would not take issue with that, and indeed know many same sex couples who would make excellent parents should they have that opportunity, but my concerns centre on the fact that the next logical step in the process of the removal of the need for a father in IVF would be to remove the word ‘Father’ from birth certificates and then perhaps even ‘Mother’ and to replace them with terms such as “birthing parent” and “supporting parent”.
Similar moves are currently already being considered in Australia where a controversial new Bill is being debated that will in-fact remove the word ‘father’ from birth certificates. The Bill will basically give the lesbian partner of a woman who has a child after becoming pregnant by a fertilisation procedure, the legal position of a married woman's husband. The terms “birth mother" would replace "mother" and "both parents" would replace "the father and the mother" on birth certificates. Some MPs are apparently concerned that the role of fatherhood would be undermined by the bill and I would share that concern.
With the fact that the removal of the need for a father in IVF cases has now been enshrined in law, the term supporting parent, or something of its ilk will appear via the backdoor route of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill since the political correctness of the 21st century could not possibly discriminate against the minority of ‘supporting same sex partners’ by allowing the term father to remain on a birth certificate, it just wouldn’t be fair would it?
Well neither is the current family law system which allows a child to be denied the right to be parented by two parents. It could be argued, and probably will be, that the removal of the need for a father prior to conception from the IVF rules will aid the removal of the best interest of the child principle as being the standard in child custody and contact cases since, if a father is not necessary before birth why should it be necessary after separation?
As for the child and the damage that the loss of a father from their life does to them, well Ms Harman obviously doesn’t care about that, since she, and her feminist cronies and emasculated male colleagues want to put the rights of the woman far beyond the needs, rights and desires of the child with no consideration of the rights, duties or responsibility of both parents towards their children or society.
Strange thing for a woman to say perhaps, especially as I have already stated that I am a single parent, (and in my opinion I’m quite a good one), and I do not hold the view that people should remain in unhappy marriages just because society dictates it or they have no other choice, I have never even been married so it would be hypocritical of me to argue that way. However, I do hold the view that, unless there is a legally proven good reason why it should not be the case, a child should be parented by two parents, whether they live together or not, or get on or not. I know that is not always an easy course to take since I have done it myself without recourse to law, lawyers, residency or anything else of a legal ilk. Perhaps the fact that I was the child of divorced parents and experienced the unhappiness of that situation helped me to put my children’s needs ahead of my own in the shared parenting stakes, it certainly helped my resolve when the going got tough because I knew the alternative would be worse for my children.
I believe strongly that when we have children we have a duty to protect and care for them and a responsibility to them, and to society, in regard to their upbringing and welfare. I further believe that when allegations of abuse are made, be they sexual, emotional, physical or neglect, that they should be investigated fully in a criminal not family court, to ensure the safety of all, most especially our children, and to ensure that abhorrent false accusations are not rewarded with full custody and no contact but are instead punished as perjury, since they would then have to be made in open court.
I do not believe that one parent has the right to eliminate the other from a child’s life because they don’t want them in it and by the same token I do not believe that one parent should be allowed to disregard their duties and obligations to their child because they don’t want a part in the child’s life. It took two people to create that child and, if one person didn’t want a child they should have ensured they used contraception to prevent its conception, because those two people should both be responsible for the child and its parenting.
To you who do not feel this situation will have any bearing on your lives, especially the women amongst you, I say Beware! Maybe the family law system benefits you now but that may not always be the case. Your sons and grandsons certainly will not benefit from the secretive practices of our family law system and neither will their children. You may be one of those who in the future will have the horrors of this system turned against your family and if that is the case you may never see your grandchildren or great grandchildren again. Unfair legislation has, as the past shows only to well, the capacity to turn on us all.
And beyond this, well once the system has gotten rid of the fathers, there is only one parent left to go and then the state will have all our children to itself, (despite its appalling record on ‘looked after children’)
Beyond fantasy you might think?
Well, let’s face it the adoption targets managed to net quite a few lovely babies straight from maternity wards as well as pretty young children for the adoption market, before they were abolished after sustained outcries by prominent figures at some of the cases involved. And now we have some MPs backing ‘Stonewall’ proposals to have the words dad and MUM removed from early learning stage books, to be replaced by the term Carer because not all children have a mum and a dad! Sounds reasonable maybe, until you really think about it and then, given what is happening to fathers now, it should scare the hell out of you. It does me!
I do not want to see any downgrading of a father’s role in a child’s life and nor do I wish to see any downgrading of a mother’s role just to comply with political correctness gone mad. I certainly do care for my children, but I love them too and that far exceeds the role of a carer. Perhaps if the Feminazi members of our government dispensed with their nannies and spent more time with their own children instead of deriding those parents who want to be with their children as much as they possibly can be, they would understand why so many fathers fight to stay in their children’s lives after separation or divorce.
The balance in our Family Law System must be redressed now, not in favour of men or women, but in favour of the real long term best interests of the child who should have the right to be parented by both of their parents, and in doing this not only the welfare of the child but also that of the family and society as a whole would benefit. It’s time our politicians stopped allowing themselves to be ruled by fascist feminism at its worst and swapped political correctness for common sense policies, then we will all benefit, not just the minority at the expense of reason and justice.
Tracey Wilkinson
Party Secretary
Equal Parenting Alliance
23 May 2008
www.equalparentingalliance.org
[Submitted by Baldrick] | |
Thursday 28 June 2007 | New Campaign for Child Benefit reform | | | |
| A new UK campaign has been launched to seek reform in the way Child Benefit is allocated to parents after separation and divorce.
Child Benefit For Two (CB42.org) will lobby the Government on the current legislation which only supports the issueing of Child Benefit to one parent.
The campaign has started with a Downing Street petition calling for public support of the reforms.
You can find the link to the online petition from the campaign website:
| |
Tuesday 05 June 2007 | The changing face of the family - One parent can do just as good a job as two | | | |
| The traditional image of the family as mum, dad and 2.4 kids no longer reflects reality. Ground-breaking new research shows that in modern Britain it’s time to accept that successful families come in all shapes and sizes.
Government and church ministers might blame single parent families for society’s ills but most parents in the UK recognise that the notion of family has changed. More than three quarters of mums and dads see the family as an emotional support network rather than as a physical presence and almost half of all parents think their family bears only a slight resemblance to the Victorian ideal.
The majority of parents and children recognise that lone mothers and fathers are just as able to bring up youngsters well as two parents. Nearly nine out of ten single parents believe they are equally capable of giving their children the love and support they need and their kids agree! A massive 80% of youngsters from so called ‘broken homes’ say their mums and dads do a good job and add they are very proud of them.
Stepfamilies also come up trumps. Debunking the myth of rejection and conflict 79% of stepparents claim their stepchildren support them. Interestingly, children in families with stepfathers are more likely to see their parents as friends than the average youngster.
OneUp magazine’s research reveals single parent and stepfamilies receive greater support from grandparents, aunts, uncles and even friends than traditional families. It’s not an easy ride, though: 84% of single mums and dads and 71% of stepparents say they have overcome significant obstacles in bringing up their children.
Only 14% of single parents receive any assistance from the Government and just one in five feels supported by teachers or other members of their local communities. In fact almost three quarters of all parents, and 93% of single mothers and fathers, believe single parents are often wrongly used as scapegoats for social problems. Even more significantly, over two thirds of married couples agree single parents are often wrongly maligned or vilified.
For more information visit www.oneupmagazine.co.uk
[Submitted by Mulrennan] | |
Thursday 31 May 2007 | TOP STRESSES FOR PARENTS IN 2007 REVEALED | | | |
| Almost a third of British parents feel their greatest stress is not spending enough time with their children; a fifth worry most about their children getting a job and one in ten are most concerned about their child’s diet, according to research out today. Over 1,000 British parents were questioned about their key stresses in 2007.
The research revealed the teenage years are by far the most stressful for parents, with the ages of 15-16 years being cited as most stressful for nearly a third of parents and the ages of 13-14 being the most stressful for one in five. In contrast, the next most stressful age was 1-6 months named by 19%. But age 7-8 must be the wonder years – being cited least often as stressful by under 1% of parents.
With many working parents coping with today’s long hours’ culture, maintaining a work/life balance and seeing enough of their children cause parents the most worry by far, with 30% overall citing this as their number one stress. This rises to 40% of those with children aged 7-9. Although this is quite balanced across the sexes, interestingly fathers worry far more about children getting a job or having a successful career with a quarter of men being stressed about this aspect most, compared with a much smaller 14% of women. Parents with children aged 19+ are perhaps unsurprisingly, concerned about their child’s employment future above all else (28%).
With society’s growing awareness of obesity issues and the importance of healthy eating, 12% of parents overall said ensuring their child eats properly is their biggest cause of stress. These figures rise dramatically for parents of children under three, with a third of those with babies under 12 months and 29% of those with toddlers aged 1-3 most concerned about their child’s diet. Talking to their children about issues such as sex, alcohol and drugs is the most stressful aspect of parenthood for one in 20 parents.
A spokesperson from Directgov, said: “Being a parent can be fulfilling and stressful. The parenting section of Directgov offers parents a one-stop website they can rely on for tips and advice throughout their child’s development. Directgov contains information on everything from nutritional advice for babies and young children, how to find childcare and your rights to parental leave, through to tackling issues your children might face, such as bullying, teenage pregnancy, drugs and crime. The education and learning section provides support for children and their parents and includes advice on finding schools, revising for exams and preparing and applying for learning after 16.”
Judy Reith, parenting coach, said: “Apart from the first few months of a baby’s life, stress as a parent does seem to peak during the teenage years, as children become more independent and more subject to outside influences. Getting the right advice can be difficult as parents are bombarded daily with information. It’s important that parents have a place they can turn to, to help them sort out the practical as well as emotional issues that accompany parenthood at every stage. I recommend they try the parenting section on www.direct.gov.uk.”
[Submitted by Mulrennan] | |
| NSPCC calls on Brown to take urgent action in his first 100 days | | | |
| Four out of five kids say violence is a ‘major problem’
Violence is a major problem for 81% of young people nowadays, reveals a new survey by the NSPCC out today. The children’s charity is urging Gordon Brown to use his first 100 days as Prime Minister to help tackle violence against children.
Violence is now part and parcel of life for many youngsters. According to the NSPCC survey of more than 1000 boys and girls aged 11-16, two in five children see violence as simply ‘part of growing up’.
There are often problems at school, where 42% of youngsters say they have been hit, punched or kicked. Three quarters of children say they have been bullied while one in five admit they are afraid of violence in school. One in ten have been attacked with a weapon or object while on school premises. Three in five children have witnessed violence on the streets and say they are scared weapons would be used against them or their friends.
Even at home many children cannot escape violence. One in four said they had seen adults in the family being violent towards each other. Around half of domestic violence incidents (47%) involved physical assaults and 13 per cent involved the use of a weapon or object. One third of young people believed the person being violent had been drinking alcohol or taking drugs the last time.
One in six young people said they took no action the last time they saw something violent or abusive happening on the street or at school - because they did not know what to do. Only one in four believe young people know how to protect themselves.
The charity is also urging children to log on to the www.donthideit.com and phone ChildLine on 0800 1111 to speak out about bullying, violence and abuse.
Listen to top hip hop artist Lowkey as he gives us the lowdown on opening up about issues that may be affecting youhttp://www.podmaster.co.uk/podcast.php?ID=63
[Submitted by Mulrennan] | |
| Struggling with the pressures of modern parenting? | | | |
| Join Jan Fry as she discuss many issues facing today’s parents from baby to teenager and beyond…
‘Kids don’t come with an instruction manual’ is how the saying goes and for countless parents nothing could be truer. After all how do you cope with a tantruming toddler; a stroppy teenager or a child who refuses to go to school? Many mums and dads blame themselves and feel totally bewildered asking ‘is this normal behaviour?’ or ‘how do other families deal with it?’
With over 24 million people in the UK caring for children, parent and family issues high on the political agenda and a host of popular television programmes dedicated to parenting, the role of a parent has never been so debated or scrutinized. Whilst much of this is welcome news, it has also left many parents feeling confused, isolated and fearful of being labelled a ‘bad’ parent – not knowing where to turn for sound and practical advice and reassurance.
Even the Prime Minister admits that parenting is probably the toughest job we will ever do. There are many problems facing parents and few have a simple answer. How do you choose the right school for your child? How would you deal with divorce? What would you do if you found your child drinking alcohol or even taking drugs?
Most parents find some stages of their children’s upbringing more difficult than others, some prefer the pre-school years whilst others favour the later years when their children are more independent. If your memories of being 8-years old are bad ones because you were bullied at school it is likely to have a bearing on how you tackle your own child at the same age.
Modern mums and dads can become especially anxious as their children grow up and assert their independence. Many wish they could just ground their little ones until they are 30 and avoid all the worry, others will be relieved that their family has come through the turbulent teenage years relatively unscathed.
What does being a parent mean to you? What are your main worries? How do other families deal with problems?
Join Jan at http://www.webchats.co.uk/webchat.php?ID=386 as she offers the best advice to anxious mums and dads.
Chat spokesperson’s biogJan Fry is Deputy Chief Executive for national charity Parentline Plus and a mother of two. Starting her career as an education journalist, Jan’s flair for copy writing and public affairs led her into press & PR where she has worked in both the public and corporate sector for many years. Jan is committed to and focussed on supporting parents and families and has worked for a range of national voluntary organisations including Maternity Alliance, Brook and the Daycare Trust.
[Submitted by Mulrennan] | |
Wednesday 28 March 2007 | Activ-Dads - West Midlands - Solihull | | | |
| Activ-Dads have now launched a new and exciting webiste for Dads, Step-Dads, Grandads, Male Carers and Guardians in across solihull.
It is in the early stages of development but already has a feedback sheet, guest book and details on a number of different activities.
So have a look and tell use what you think, what you want added or hoow we can reach as many Dads as possible.
Cheers
Andy Giles - Activ-Dads
[Submitted by Andy Giles] | |
| To demonise divorced dads is a distraction | | | |
| IAIN MacWHIRTER - The Herald
When politicians start taking about family values, journalists reach for their chequebooks. I hope David Cameron and Tony Blair, who are both marching into this moral terrain, recall John Major's, "back to basics" initiative in the 1990s. That became "back to my place", as half a dozen Tory ministers who didn't match up to the family ideal were forced to resign.
The education secretary, Alan Johnson, yesterday tried to prevent history repeating itself by insisting that the traditional 2.4 family has no moral superiority over any other form of domestic arrangement.
However, he and David Cameron may have stepped into another moral minefield by calling for action against so-called "deadbeat dads". Feckless fathers don't just live in inner-London estates, and a lot of Labour MPs are divorced.
advertisement
Johnson's complaint is that fathers spend too little time with their children in marriage and then lose touch with them altogether in divorce. Half of fathers lose contact with their children within a year of separation. Nearly two-thirds lose contact within two years.
The answer is parenting classes for fathers and fathers-only nights at local schools. The Tory leader wants them named and shamed.
Deadbeat dads are taking over from welfare mums as the new social pariahs. An easy target for "right-thinking" politicians. But, as those who work with relationship breakdown will tell you, it is a myth that fathers are walking out on their offspring. Forty per cent of marriages end in divorce, and the vast majority arise, not from paternal irresponsibility, but hostile incompatibility. Just as it is futile to apportion blame to marital breakdown, it is wrong to assume that absent fathers are unconcerned about the welfare of their children. Most fathers are desperate to keep in contact with their kids and to exercise their responsibilities as best they can. Many of them don't get the chance.
Those who seek to demonise absent fathers forget that the majority of divorce actions are taken out by wives. High-profile divorce settlements have provided a potent financial incentive to end relationships on the most acrimonious terms. The children rapidly become pawns in protracted legal battles over custody and maintenance.
The reality is that the economic basis of the family has been undermined
The first action of a wife on the point of separation is, understandably, to seize command of the principal asset - the family home. It is generally the father who leaves because there is a legal presumption that the children will remain with the mother.
It's hardly surprising that fathers often find it difficult to maintain contact when access to the children is policed by one of the aggrieved parties to a divorce action - the mother. This almost guarantees that access will be fraught.
The absent parent is easy to blame since they are not there, and this is often accompanied by spurious claims that the fathers are in some way a threat to the stability or even the safety of what remains of the family. I'm not saying that some abusive fathers don't deserve to be placed under legal restraint, but it is very easy to construe the often desperate attempts by an absent father to assert rights of contact as a form of aggression.
Many absent fathers go through real mental trauma through being separated from their children. It is a form of living bereavement. They find that they are written out of their own children's lives and given little scope to form enduring relationships with them.
Men don't get married with the intention of abandoning their children, who are generally the most important thing in their lives, even after divorce. But absent fathers often find that access is infrequent and so hedged about with arbitrary restrictions that they lose heart.
It is easy to say that absent dads should fight harder to keep contact, but it is difficult to do so when arrangements are changed at the last moment and when the only contact is in a soulless "family" room in a council office block.
If absent fathers are going to be brought back into their children's lives then the courts must be prepared to enforce contact orders - at present they don't. Organisations such as the Child Support Agency should make contact a condition of maintenance. And politicians need to engage their brains.
Does it matter if fathers are excluded from the family? Yes, it does. Children need both parents. In some parts of Scotland, half of all children are now living in single-parent families and the father is ceasing to figure as a significant role model, or even a normal part of domestic life.
Children are increasingly growing up in one-sided female-dominated households. They are then cared for by female childminders before they go to primary schools where they will be taught by women teachers. This is particularly damaging for boys, but also affects girls, who come to see men as a race apart. Society cannot function with sexual apartheid.
But demonising dads for this is no more helpful than condemning teenage mums. Both are sexist stereotypes which cloud debate and obscure the reality that, increasingly, marriage is becoming unsustainable.
This is caused, not by feckless fathers, but by a complex range of factors including work pressures, breakdown of community, disintegration of the extended family and the presumption today that it requires two incomes to maintain a decent family living standard.
At a recent conference I chaired on the breakdown of the family, the speakers invariably cited working arrangements as a principal cause of relationship breakdown and anti-social behaviour in children.
The mainly female academics, teachers and social work professionals wanted more support for mothers to be able to look after their children full-time, rather than handing them over to childminders while they went out to work.
No-one wants to put the clock back to the days when women were excluded from careers and chained to the kitchen sink. But women - and men - increasingly want the choice to be able to raise their own children, and they are surely right to do so. If the two-parent family has a future, this is it.
Unfortunately, stay-at-home parenting conflicts with government policy, which is to force lone parents out to work to keep them off benefits. Raising your own children is becoming a privilege of the rich. Attacking divorced fathers is a convenient distraction from the reality that the economic basis of the family has been undermined.
This is much more serious than the scrapping of Married Couples Allowance. The reality is that we are being overwhelmed by family breakdown which is the defining social phenomenon of the age. And deadbeat dads, far from being the cause, are the first casualties.
http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/features/display.var.1223383.0.0.php
[Submitted by Baldrick] | |
| Call for the NSCFC to support Early Day Motion 128 Parenting time presumption | | | |
| Thanks to the hard work of many campaigners, as of yesterday EDM 128 Parenting Time Presumption become 5th out of nearly 2400 EDM's before parliament and with 323 MP's signing now has an overall majority of MP's in support,detail as follows:
151 Conservatives
105 Labour
46 Lib Dems
21 Others
We still have 5-6 months to get more MP's signed up to this and with gathering momentum who knows what could be achieved, and what may be prompted as a result.
I am contacting all of the groups known to me to canvas support and ask if your organisation would canvas support from members, lets keep up the pressure on those MP's yet to sign (for more information on the EDM and level of support please see an update below)
Regards Ian
PLEASE CASCADE OUT MESSAGE TO ANY OTHER LINKS & FORUMS
Web link
http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=28316&SESSION=875
Link to email MP although letter possibly more effective
http://www.writetothem.com/
PARENTING TIME PRESUMPTION
18.05.2005
May, Theresa
That this House believes that separated parents should each have a legal presumption of contact with their children, so that both parents can continue to parent their children and children are able to benefit from
being parented by both their parents, as well as from contact with any grandparents and extended family members able and willing to play a role in their upbringing; and urges the Government to replace the legal term`contact' with `parenting time' and to ensure that parenting time orders can be and are made and enforced by the courts, save where a child's safety would be at risk. | |
Thursday 01 March 2007 | To demonise divorced dads is a distraction | | | |
| IAIN MacWHIRTER - The Herald
28th February 2007
When politicians start taking about family values, journalists reach for their chequebooks. I hope David Cameron and Tony Blair, who are both marching into this moral terrain, recall John Major's, "back to basics" initiative in the 1990s. That became "back to my place", as half a dozen Tory ministers who didn't match up to the family ideal were forced to resign.
The education secretary, Alan Johnson, yesterday tried to prevent history repeating itself by insisting that the traditional 2.4 family has no moral superiority over any other form of domestic arrangement.
However, he and David Cameron may have stepped into another moral minefield by calling for action against so-called "deadbeat dads". Feckless fathers don't just live in inner-London estates, and a lot of Labour MPs are divorced.
[ Read the rest... ]
| |
|
|
Date published: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 04:25:53 GMT
Details
Date published: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 00:03:27 GMT
Details
Date published: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 11:00:00 GMT
Details |
|
|
[ Dads UK ]
