Grow up be a mother and let your children see dad.
You money loving, selfish women.

After reading some of the comments about fathers and the right to there children can I say some of you people are disgusting and don’t deserve a place on this planet. You seem very upset that you can let a man sleep with you and have his children, yet deny him a place of father?

Its mothers with attitude like that, that need a public flogging! You are scum of the earth and don’t deserve the right to have children.

Should women be allowed to go out and get pregnant on purpose? I would like to see a law were women could be jailed if found guilty of such an offence (oh and of course this has never happened has it ladies?)

I work all over the country and see all sorts of women that I personally would not touch with a barge poll and wonder how the hell they got pregnant. See the thing is that most men don’t fully understand how and when a woman can get pregnant unless they are doctors or just people who are not so stupid. (Oh how I learned from my mistake) 11th day after the first day of the period until around the 21st day after. Hmm you are very clever aren’t you?

Some of the posts on this tread just makes me realise just how numb some of you female types are and that you don’t think linier.

A child has the right to his father and if you think not then you should dam well keep your legs closed if you’re not prepared to share a child with his natural father. My father was not allowed to see me and I know exactly what it is like to want but not to have. I met my father 30yrs later and we could not achieve anything due to the time period we had been apart. And you think that is fair?

I now have a child that I am fighting for the right to have in my life and have already won the parental responsibility order and contact order through CAFCASS and the family court. That is because I have a right to my child and I can look after him dam well and from some of the posts written by women on here you don’t deserve children.

You all go on about how hard done by you are, yet do women not manipulate men and push them to behave in a manner that they would normally not? Yes of course you do and you dam well know it. You push and push and bait men to act in a violent manner for all sorts of reasons that most men don’t understand.

Fair enough there are some bastard men out there but this is my post and I am concentrating on the bastard women out there and there are plenty of you. You can’t beat a man so you decide to deprive him of his children out of spite because it’s the only control you have in the said situation.

Five years in and I am still being dragged from pillar to post with mental abuse and just constant withdrawal of my child if I don’t conform to mother! So what does father do? He gets annoyed and then says stupid things that he will smash her in, because he knows he has no law to protect him even though he has a court order. He can’t control his temper because he knows he is being held over a barrel. I say that if you tease a tiger expect to get mauled and it’s all you deserve.

You say you will walk away from the child because its making you ill then get a reply of you’re just like your father! More emotional terrorism that only women can produce.

You meet a new girl because the mother wants nothing to do with you, but when she finds out you have moved on in life you then get “wait for it” what happens if me and your son bump into you and your new girlfriend on the street? What are you going to do walk past us? Again more mental torture that breaks a man down. You can’t fucking win!

Somebody posted that there is no proof that single parent children have problems and don’t get into trouble? Is that so? Well maybe you should get your facts right!

Also someone posted about abuse and something else? Again get your facts right. Most assaults on women in a relationship are normally started by women but it’s the man who gets arrested. The statistics are on the internet if you care to look for them. It’s just that the man always gets arrested as usual. Again there are plenty of websites out there that have information for men in such relationships. One of the websites actually tells the man to run! And run fast and as far away as he possibly can from that type of women.

You think I might be a male chauvinist but I am not! Or I never started out that way until I wanted to be a proper father. I have looked after my child from the age of 6 months old and have never let him down until mother stops contact. I tell my son @ 4yrs old that I will never leave him and he trusts me.

And then there is the magical CSA. You take the woman to court because you want access to your child, but she won’t let you see the child because you’re taking her to court. She then contacts the CSA because you have given her no money for the child? What you want me to pay for a child I can’t see?? Fuck that! Its pay as you go women….
No man should be made to pay for a child he actively wants to see but is being denied access to the child, but I’m sure there is plenty of women out there who disagree.

Women have no right to take a man’s money while denying him access to his children. And I think that no woman should have a lifestyle better than if she had no children on the fact of the CSA. Those that do are scum!

What goes around ladies what goes around. I hope that every one of you women out there who have removed the right for your child to see there father lose your children as they get older. Children grow up and realise what’s what and that’s when you lose and the search for father begins. I know because I have done it! My mother does not exist in my life and she brought me up and worked her arse off for me. She removed my right and I have now removed her right to me. I have lost both parents and now about to lose my own child. Who is to blame ladies??

You wonder why groups like fathers4justice pop up? Because something needs doing! Not that I would choose them to fight my battle.

If a father wants to see his children you should be dam well lucky and respect him for owning up to his responsibilities. But I forgot your women and you are never happy what ever happens.

Most men are tossers I admit and I can’t stand them myself but there are a few good ones out there just like I am told there are women. It’s just shifting through the shit to find them

there are wonderful absent parents in this world who are denied contact, while the system allows abusive parents unsupervised access. some women do lie about domestic abuse, but remember, many do not lie, their experience is real, so please dont tar everyone with the same brush.

[All cases involved straight-forward contact applications with no significant allegations made by either party. Full documentation available.] 8 District and High Court Judges: In a three year case extending over more than twenty hearings, none of the presiding judges have told a mother who has broken a contact order more than one hundred times either a) that contact is a good thing, or b) that breaking court orders is wrong. Dame Justice Hale: in a case where a father was appealing an earlier decision of only one hour contact per month, concluded that “this appeal is unmeritorious”. Judge Catlin: a) when a mother refused to obey an order for shared residence, he ordered the cessation of all contact between a father and his two sons in response to unsubstantiated charges of abuse; b) at a subsequent hearing 12 months later, when all charges of abuse had been dismissed by the investigating officer, he ordered 1 hour of contact between father and son per month. Mister Justice Sumner: ordered costs against a father who sought any summer holidays with his child. Mister Justice Johnson: ordered a father declared a vexatious litigant for seeking more than one overnight per fortnight with his 5-year old son. Upheld on appeal by Thorpe. Mr Justice Sumner: “It is simply not on” for any parent to return a 3½ year old child home as late as 6 pm on a Sunday. District Judge Kenworthy-Browne: A child of 3 “will have developed no Christmas associations with the father, and even if he has spent Christmases at the father’s home, he will not remember them. As such, he will not expect increased contact with his father over the holidays.” District Judge X (case pending): ordered the cessation of all contact between parent and child, with no review, “in order to try to move forward and restore the relationship.” Judge Segal: cancelled after 30 minutes a full hearing at which the father sought any summer holidays and rescheduled it for after the summer. Upheld on appeal. District Judge Lipman: ordered that a father be allowed only 2 weeks of holiday (out of a possible 13) per year: “You have the midweek contact (3 hrs per week) instead of this.” District Judge Hindley: dismissed a father’s application to phone his 7 yr old daughter on Christmas morning calling it “too disruptive - she would be opening her Christmas presents.” Judge Milligan, to a parent who had been unsuccessfully trying to see his child for 2 years:“This is a father who needs, in my judgment, to think long and hard about his whole approach to this question of contact and to ask himself sincerely whether in fact he seeks to promote it for his own interests dressed up as the child’s interests.” District Judge X (case pending): ordered that a father who had not been allowed to see his children for 4 months should have his case deferred for another 4 months pending investigation of an unsubstantiated 1972 domestic disagreement from a previous marriage. Mr Justice Cazalet: in hearings spaced over 2 years 1) ordered end of Friday overnights on grounds that the child had to rest after school, and 2) ordered end of Saturday overnights on grounds that she had to rest all day Sunday before school on Monday. Deputy District Judge Pauffley, in raising a father’s contact to 18 hours per month after 1½ years of litigation: “What will never be helpful is for the father to see his contact in terms of mathematical division. Apparently he is running at a disadvantage of 999 to 1 . . . The court does not look at it in those terms.” District Judge Thomas, in reply to a father who had been cut off from all contact with this three children for six months: “And I see that you would like me to grant an Order that the mother file a statement to show good reason why there should not be normal contact. Well, I’m not going to do it!” Judge Calman ordered that a father, who lived within 300 yards of his son’s primary residence, should never answer the door when his son rang. Rt Hon Lord Justice Thorpe, in rejecting the appeal of a father who wanted to cross- examine a Court Welfare Officer (whose evidence prevented him from seeing his children), affirmed that “there is no right of cross examination of Court Welfare Officers.” Mr Justice Wilson, acting against what he called “the deep wishes and feelings of three intelligent, articulate children,” ordered the end of all direct contact with their father. Upheld on appeal by Butler-Sloss, LJ. Judge X (case pending): after repeat applications about serial breaches of a contact order since early 2001, ordered that the issue be reviewed in late 2002. Mr Justice Munby ordered the end of all direct contact between a father and his three children while noting that the mother “wished the children could have contact with the father. She said there was no need for all this litigation. The children should see the father.” Judge Segal postponed a full hearing in order to obtain a Court Welfare Officer report on two parents who had brought no charges of misconduct against one another by stating: “Well, I think both parents have fallen over backwards to avoid causing the child any sort of harm, but a child always suffers when a marriage breaks down . . . You see, it is possible to kill with kindness by doing too much.” Mr Justice Sumner reproved a father who had made one application to the court over two years of litigation, and sought more than twenty-six nights of contact with his child per year:“You feel better because you can put pressure, you can bring everybody to court.” Judge Turner, in reply to a parent who sought to question a Court Welfare Officer’s report:“That confirms my suspicions. This is what members of the public do when they disagree with the recommendations. I believe that its totally wrong that members of the public can challenge Judges and Court Welfare Officers. Officers should not be subjected to it. There is a procedure outside the Court about making a complaint against the Judge. Members of the public should not have the right to make complaints.” Judge Agliomby, on refusing overnight contact for the third consecutive year: “The point that struck me most was that the very first question the father asked the mother was whether they might not get on better if she let him see the child.” Judge Lamdin dismissed a father’s request (after three years of litigation) for any overnight contact with his six year old on the grounds that “the child is growing up knowing his father, and that what we are talking about, i.e. overnight staying contact, is something quite different.” Judge Kenworthy-Browne, known by the staff at First Avenue House for repeatedly bringing his dog to court, rebuked a litigant-in-person for not wearing a tie. Senior District Judge Angel misinformed a complainant that “there is an unrestricted right of appeal” in contact cases. (There is, in fact, little if any right of appeal.) When this was brought to the attention of the President of the Family Division, her office replied that she“considered the matter closed.” Mr Justice Munby sentenced a father to four months in prison for giving his children Christmas presents (a bike, a camera and a walkman) during a scheduled contact meeting. Upheld on appeal by Thorpe LJ and Butler-Sloss LJ. Judge Goldstein, after a father filed a complaint against him, ordered all contact between that father and his children stopped for three years. Overturned on appeal by Butler-Sloss LJ, who described the judge’s behaviour as “outrageous.” Judge Plaskow rejected a father’s request for overnight contact with his 4-year-old, and ordered court costs against him, on the grounds that the child might require a special diet. Judge X (name withheld by litigant) told a father who sought more than 2 hours contact with his young child per fortnight that “it may well be that the father is being too possessive.” Judge Agliombi warned a father who was arguing that costs should not be ordered against him because the mother was depriving their child of a father: “If you go on like this you stand in great danger of never having staying contact with your son.” Judge X (case pending) ordered that a father, who had waited seven months for a full hearing without seeing his children, be permitted for six months to write them no more than one card/letter every three weeks, without any direct contact. Judge Lloyd ordered that an ordinary father be permitted to write his child once per fortnight on the condition that the letter’s contents be reviewed by an officer of the court.