fathers

wish that I had a magic wand for you guys I know so many dads that are unable to have their children with them . through no fault of their own..just dont give up .some x wives are great mums  but can be vindictive and thats when the trouble start  when couples split up its painful and the children are then used as pawns . in some extreme  cases the mother has a good reason to banish the father .and the courts are right to support the wife if violence is present in the relationship  however some x wives  use the court just because their new partners dont agree with the father being  around .

Why is this idea important?

wish that I had a magic wand for you guys I know so many dads that are unable to have their children with them . through no fault of their own..just dont give up .some x wives are great mums  but can be vindictive and thats when the trouble start  when couples split up its painful and the children are then used as pawns . in some extreme  cases the mother has a good reason to banish the father .and the courts are right to support the wife if violence is present in the relationship  however some x wives  use the court just because their new partners dont agree with the father being  around .

right to photograph your own children, and to be protected from false accusations

I suggest this as someone without children, but having heard of this issue from several relations and friends.

 

If a parent wants to photograph their own child at a scool event, such as the nativity play or sports day, or at a significant first, such as their first swimming lesson, they should not be automatically assumed to be potential pedophiles. These restrictions are often over zealously applied by local authority employees and are an infringement on our civil liberties. They also set the tone for everyone feeling they are a suspected pedophile or pervert.

 

Any parent wanting to photograph their own children should be allowed to do so, providing no other parent raises an objection thet their child is included. This should be a common sense matter between adults, taking responsability for their own actions, not a mandated socialist nanny state restriction!

 

The child protection laws are a great thing, and save many from abuse and sufferring, but how many innocent adults have had their lives ruinned by parents or children making false accusations? There shouls be greater protection within the law so that those not found guilty are protected whilst accusations are investigated fully, and so no record of the false accuastion is recorded against them.

Why is this idea important?

I suggest this as someone without children, but having heard of this issue from several relations and friends.

 

If a parent wants to photograph their own child at a scool event, such as the nativity play or sports day, or at a significant first, such as their first swimming lesson, they should not be automatically assumed to be potential pedophiles. These restrictions are often over zealously applied by local authority employees and are an infringement on our civil liberties. They also set the tone for everyone feeling they are a suspected pedophile or pervert.

 

Any parent wanting to photograph their own children should be allowed to do so, providing no other parent raises an objection thet their child is included. This should be a common sense matter between adults, taking responsability for their own actions, not a mandated socialist nanny state restriction!

 

The child protection laws are a great thing, and save many from abuse and sufferring, but how many innocent adults have had their lives ruinned by parents or children making false accusations? There shouls be greater protection within the law so that those not found guilty are protected whilst accusations are investigated fully, and so no record of the false accuastion is recorded against them.

PARENTAL RIGHTS LAWS TO BE MORE EQUAL AND NOT SKEWED TOWARDS THE MOTHER

Regularly, there are reports about un-married fathers having to go through the expensive and laborious Court system in order to gain parental rights despite some mothers clearly being unable to look after their children.The system favours the mother on all fronts.Surely a more simplified system which takes into account the amount of time a father spends with his children and financial support should sway the rules in a more equal and fair direction.

Why is this idea important?

Regularly, there are reports about un-married fathers having to go through the expensive and laborious Court system in order to gain parental rights despite some mothers clearly being unable to look after their children.The system favours the mother on all fronts.Surely a more simplified system which takes into account the amount of time a father spends with his children and financial support should sway the rules in a more equal and fair direction.

Naming of unmarried/absent fathers on birth certificates for geneology reasons.

I was recently unable to name a father on my childs birth certificate when registering his birth, as the father is both not married to me, and absent from the childs life. At present, if a father's name is to be entered on the birth certificate, current law requires either; the father to be married to the mother, be present at the time of registration or provide the registrar with documentation to express his wish to be included on the certificate in his absence. As a result many children who's biological father is absent are being left with the indignity of having a blank space on their birth certificate where the father's name should be. This law is creating future generations of children who will effectively be eliminated from geneological, anthropological and historical records to a greater or lesser extent.

At present parents stated on birth certificates are directly linked to parental responsibility and as a result the law is in place to protect men from having all the implications of this linked to them if the child is not biologically theirs. However if the system was altered in a way that eliminated this problem, whilst still giving children the right to have a father named at their birth, both sides would be better served. For example a birth certificate as well as a 'parental responsibility certificate': the former for the purpose of geneology ect and the latter being linked to the current laws for birth certificates.

As parents have to provide no identificaton upon registering a birth under the current laws the process is already open the a level of abuse. For example, in my case I registered my child's birth with my partner (who is not the biological parent of my child) present. I was asked if I was the mother and then my partner was asked if he was the father. We explained that my partner was not here to register his name, being honest people. Yet it would have been very easy for him to have just replied 'yes' and the registrar would have been non the wiser. With research suggesting upward of 20 percent of UK residents having incorect parentage registered on their birth certificates surely this system is ready for a review?   

Why is this idea important?

I was recently unable to name a father on my childs birth certificate when registering his birth, as the father is both not married to me, and absent from the childs life. At present, if a father's name is to be entered on the birth certificate, current law requires either; the father to be married to the mother, be present at the time of registration or provide the registrar with documentation to express his wish to be included on the certificate in his absence. As a result many children who's biological father is absent are being left with the indignity of having a blank space on their birth certificate where the father's name should be. This law is creating future generations of children who will effectively be eliminated from geneological, anthropological and historical records to a greater or lesser extent.

At present parents stated on birth certificates are directly linked to parental responsibility and as a result the law is in place to protect men from having all the implications of this linked to them if the child is not biologically theirs. However if the system was altered in a way that eliminated this problem, whilst still giving children the right to have a father named at their birth, both sides would be better served. For example a birth certificate as well as a 'parental responsibility certificate': the former for the purpose of geneology ect and the latter being linked to the current laws for birth certificates.

As parents have to provide no identificaton upon registering a birth under the current laws the process is already open the a level of abuse. For example, in my case I registered my child's birth with my partner (who is not the biological parent of my child) present. I was asked if I was the mother and then my partner was asked if he was the father. We explained that my partner was not here to register his name, being honest people. Yet it would have been very easy for him to have just replied 'yes' and the registrar would have been non the wiser. With research suggesting upward of 20 percent of UK residents having incorect parentage registered on their birth certificates surely this system is ready for a review?   

Remove the requirement to notify the government of “private fostering”

If I were to arrange for my 15 year old child to stay with a friend for 28 days over the summer holidays, I would be legally obliged ot notify the government, and a social services would need to assess the friends my child is staying with.

Parents should be able  to make arrangements for their childrens' care without unnescessary interference from the government. The requirement to notify the government of "private fostering" should be removed.

Parents are responsible for the welfare of their children and the government should not intervene in private child care arrangenents unless there is reason to suspect a child may be at risk of harm.

There is even a government web site which encourages citzens to snoop on each other in order to report suspected cases of "private fostering" which the government may be unaware of.

This site should be abolished to save costs.

Why is this idea important?

If I were to arrange for my 15 year old child to stay with a friend for 28 days over the summer holidays, I would be legally obliged ot notify the government, and a social services would need to assess the friends my child is staying with.

Parents should be able  to make arrangements for their childrens' care without unnescessary interference from the government. The requirement to notify the government of "private fostering" should be removed.

Parents are responsible for the welfare of their children and the government should not intervene in private child care arrangenents unless there is reason to suspect a child may be at risk of harm.

There is even a government web site which encourages citzens to snoop on each other in order to report suspected cases of "private fostering" which the government may be unaware of.

This site should be abolished to save costs.

The Family Rights Act – 2010

Mr Cameron you are right..our  society is 'broken' and wee have a problem.

Current family law is a mess and fails children and fathers alike.

It is all to easy for a woman at the moment to get a divorse, + a hansome financial settlement even in 'short' marriage and get primary care of the children. The vast majority of men did not long to have children, respecting the union of marriage, only to have the horror not only of divorse but to then find children taken away and contact denied so easily by abusive mothers.

All this is possible currently under the shocking legislation known as the Children Act. We have the most regressive family law in the World it needs to change. It is time to  respect and enshrine the rights of each parent and give children fundamental human rights.

This country urgently needs to readdress the unfair avdantage that some abusive women can exercise over loving, responsible fathers over child access and contact.

Solution:  Abolish the Children Act.  Natural law and rights of father and children to be enshrined in legislation which will recognise fundamental Human Rights of the child to have equal access to a father unless it can be proved that it would not be in the best interests of the child. Women/ mothers to no longer have an assumed right to be primary carer of child. Each parent should apply on equal ground if they want of need more of less that 50% access caring responsibilities for child care. So what if the mother was child caring and the man working. If a partner wants to break up marriage each need to re apply on equal grounds of entitlement to contact.

Partntal responsibility. Abolish the current system whereby it is far too easy for a step parent (father)to aquire parental responsability by virtue of perhaps committing adultery with a married woman. Then adding his name to the childens name then aquiring parental responsibility. Under the current law,  not only is all of this possible it can be done with considerable ease..This has to be made much harder. 

 

I urge the repeal of the Childrens Act to be replaced with a new Bill of Family Rights. Let's give our children the rights they are entitled to and respect the value of marrige and the rights of fathers. I urge your support for change.

 

 

Why is this idea important?

Mr Cameron you are right..our  society is 'broken' and wee have a problem.

Current family law is a mess and fails children and fathers alike.

It is all to easy for a woman at the moment to get a divorse, + a hansome financial settlement even in 'short' marriage and get primary care of the children. The vast majority of men did not long to have children, respecting the union of marriage, only to have the horror not only of divorse but to then find children taken away and contact denied so easily by abusive mothers.

All this is possible currently under the shocking legislation known as the Children Act. We have the most regressive family law in the World it needs to change. It is time to  respect and enshrine the rights of each parent and give children fundamental human rights.

This country urgently needs to readdress the unfair avdantage that some abusive women can exercise over loving, responsible fathers over child access and contact.

Solution:  Abolish the Children Act.  Natural law and rights of father and children to be enshrined in legislation which will recognise fundamental Human Rights of the child to have equal access to a father unless it can be proved that it would not be in the best interests of the child. Women/ mothers to no longer have an assumed right to be primary carer of child. Each parent should apply on equal ground if they want of need more of less that 50% access caring responsibilities for child care. So what if the mother was child caring and the man working. If a partner wants to break up marriage each need to re apply on equal grounds of entitlement to contact.

Partntal responsibility. Abolish the current system whereby it is far too easy for a step parent (father)to aquire parental responsability by virtue of perhaps committing adultery with a married woman. Then adding his name to the childens name then aquiring parental responsibility. Under the current law,  not only is all of this possible it can be done with considerable ease..This has to be made much harder. 

 

I urge the repeal of the Childrens Act to be replaced with a new Bill of Family Rights. Let's give our children the rights they are entitled to and respect the value of marrige and the rights of fathers. I urge your support for change.

 

 

Father’s rights to see their children

Allow a father 50% access as a legal right.

If a poisonous mother gets a child to say they dont want to see their father ignore it! You wouldn't let your child refuse to go to school or dentist!

If not let us have the right to egg Mps and Judges who are biased for an easy life!

Why is this idea important?

Allow a father 50% access as a legal right.

If a poisonous mother gets a child to say they dont want to see their father ignore it! You wouldn't let your child refuse to go to school or dentist!

If not let us have the right to egg Mps and Judges who are biased for an easy life!

Scrap perverse laws extending parental rights past age of majority

Amend the general definition of "parent" in education law, by replacing the phrase "parent" with the phrase "relevant person", as defined below:

"relevant person" means –

(a) in relation to a pupil under the age of 18, a parent of the pupil;
(b) in relation to a pupil who has attained that age, the pupil. 

The definition of "parent" in section 576 of the Education Act 1996 would remain the same.

This simple change would allow 18-year-old men and women attending school to take their own decisions over their own education, as the adults they are.

Why is this idea important?

Amend the general definition of "parent" in education law, by replacing the phrase "parent" with the phrase "relevant person", as defined below:

"relevant person" means –

(a) in relation to a pupil under the age of 18, a parent of the pupil;
(b) in relation to a pupil who has attained that age, the pupil. 

The definition of "parent" in section 576 of the Education Act 1996 would remain the same.

This simple change would allow 18-year-old men and women attending school to take their own decisions over their own education, as the adults they are.