Submission regarding the review of Domestic Violence Act 1995

Domestic Violence Act Review
Ministry of Justice
PO Box 180
WELLINGTON
dvareview@justice.govt.nz


Submission of the New Zealand Fathers Coalition to the Ministry of Justice on the Review of the Domestic Violence Act 1995 ("the Act") and Related Legislation

Introduction
I am writing this submission because I feel that both the Care of Children Act and Domestic Violence Act has made life totally unfair for fathers and children living in New Zealand. An atmosphere of distrust and suspicion can be attributed to the actions of a radical feminist Labour government, who are totally out of step with traditional values adhered too by the majority of correct thinking countries in the world.
The time has come to say fairs - fair and address the gender imbalance that is saturated in bias legislation, which is detrimental to children. I have little faith that this submission will make any difference to the unfortunate predicament faced by so many non-custodial fathers. The words of Labour MP Tim Barnett still haunt me, when I asked the chairman of the select committee hearing submissions relating to the Care of Children Bill if the government could help me? He replied;
“ Labour will not help fathers.”
I asked Sue Bradford, last year at select committee, if she thought that making smacking illegal would result in police being called to meaningless incidents that could possibly see fathers criminalized? I was appalled when she walked out the room, without even acknowledging or answering my question. Since the unnecessary law change several fearful parents have contacted me wanting advice. They have said that their children have rung police after the most trivial incidents. Recently I spoke with a friend in police, who told me that they are obliged to act on any complaint from a child (many calls are trivial child tantrums). He said, “many cops are leaving, because they signed up to fight crime and they certainty did not sign up too act as government social workers.”
This nanny state social engineering is both disrespectful to parental rights and undermines the God given right to maintain dignity within parent/child relationships.
The radical feminists have no regard whatsoever for traditional family values and seem hell bent on creating a huge fractured family business.


The absurdity of the law
The family court is a civil court that allows false allegations to form a strong foundation that can create lengthy proceedings full of adversity. The court does not listen to the repeated cries for help from a disgruntled litigant, who is strenuously trying to clear his name, because delaying and adversarial tactics for effect create a file number. From that file number so many people can make a living from all the misery and untruths. Nobody cares about the children or the falsely accused. Vindication is a delusion as politicians and judges are far from human. That is probably why Justice John Hansen said our judicial system needs a “radical rethink”.
The personal experience is a deep wound to the sense of self worth, faith in love, and very necessary faith in government and law, but that is as it is intended to be. These are not small issues, or esoteric psychobabble. These wounds cause real wounds to the psyche, which often manifest themselves as physical illness - due to long-term stress and a sense of helplessness. I am suffering from endogenous depression as a result of this major depressive episode that was not of my making.
It is so easy to reach desperately for an easy, all-encompassing solution - appealing to the cosmic referee for a judgment. It will never come.
That is a lesson most men, and the women, who care for these wounded men, too often are unable to learn.

Consider this: In a criminal trial, it is not incumbent on the prosecution to prove motive. Although punishments in family law are increasingly similar to criminal prosecutions, - depriving a person of their civil and human rights - to attempt to examine any alleged actions in a relationship without examining the motives is ridiculous.
In the present state of administrating the law - The function of the courts is to administrate the law. It is assumed that the woman is consistently that if a woman commits a crime, her motivation must be a reaction to the man.
The man's motivations are not assumed or examined. If anything, the courts (and other agencies in the social and legal structure) seem to assume the man is simply evil - although the term is never spoken. This obscure and ambiguous presumed motivation cannot be left to stand.
If you read carefully every case, the man has to prove he is a rational, "normal" human being. He must defend himself against this assumption in the law.

Despite the highly charged emotions which surround these circumstances, any indication that the man is upset - angry, frustrated, or hurt - is taken as proof that the man is some sort of uncontrollable animal.
What is required in a criminal case is to prove that a crime has occurred, and that the accused is guilty of that crime.

In family law, the crime is assumed if the allegation has been made. This attitude turns the law on its head.
Further, the accusation is taken - although the accusations are obviously contrived - as proof of the crime.
To attempt to refute this "proof" is only taken as further proof of accuser’s guilt.
To establish equality before the law, we must assert these principles of law in family law.

* Motivation is the key to any action.
* The law cannot assume only a woman has good motivation for any action.
*There must be proof some crime has occurred, and the guilt in that crime must come from somewhere besides those who intend to profit.
* Any professional or organisation that can be shown to have perverted the course of justice must be punished severely.
* Ideally, these professionals and/or organisations should be removed from the family law process.
* There can be no presumption of guilt, or innocence, for any party (including family and friends)

Treating these procedures and policies like a war, where colloquially anything is fair, is destroying families, the courts, and the future of society.

The limitations of the law need to be understood. The law can tell you what you cannot do. The law defines punishments if you do those things.
It cannot tell you why you should or should not do something; nor can it tell you what to do. (If the law tells you what to do, then you do not live in a free society.)

Reasserting established legal principles into family law is only a step, but is only a step. The fact that these are emotionally charged situations has to be respected in the policy and practice of the law, especially the administration of the law. In fact, it could be said that Motive is everything is family law (while it is unnecessary in criminal law.)
The criminalisation of family (and relationship) law has gone too far. It is time to reverse this illegitimate direction in the law.

I call for a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the workings of the Family Court
False allegations and untrue wildly exaggerated statements under oath have been used against me, in conjunction with the Domestic Violence Act have burdened me by imposing a protection order against me. They have demonised me. Sadly they have broken up my family; evicted me from my home and they are directly responsible for the arson of the family home and destruction of all my assets. The state system wrongly took custody of my two daughters and the relationship with my daughters has been disrupted, damaged, denied and destroyed, as a result of malicious judicial proceedings. I have been subjected to injustice; had my life unjustifiably invaded by police, judges, lawyers, social workers and psychologists. A family court psychologist (John Watson) is responsible for my mother’s death. I have been abused, traumatised and victimised by unwarranted, drawn out, expensive and injurious family court proceedings. The whole travesty of justice was based on spurious grounds and the resulting injustice, discrimination, disregard, injury, suffering, trauma and exploitation through by the justice system, which has me feeling bitter, hurt, depressed, shell shocked and shattered self esteem levels.
How many forced clients of the family court are victims of a miscarriage of justice?

Part Three – A list of questions
PROTECTION ORDERS

Police-issued orders

1.Do you think police-issued orders should be introduced or do you believe that current police powers are sufficient for enforcement purposes? Please give reasons for your view.
No. Why do police need increased powers, as they already have a vast array of offences to which to they can charge someone with violence.
Example 1
I was living in a stable and happy family environment in a small rural community in the Buller region. Both my young daughters were flourishing in a settled routine at the local primary school. My partner and two loving daughters went to Ashburton for a trip in the school holidays, while I stayed in the family home on the West Coast, so I could look after the family property and many pets. They did not return, so I travelled to Ashburton to find out what was wrong. On arrival, Ashburton police immediately confronted me and told to go back to the West Coast. Incredulously they did not give a reason why and insisted that I must “ get off their territory now! ”. A detective gave me his card and I was escorted back too the West Coast.
The next day back in Buller I rung the local police from the family home to find out what was going on? One hour later I am confronted by a large continent from the members of the Armed Offenders Squad.They were going to shoot my dog until I pleaded for them not to do so. They served me Without Notice protection orders. My firearms were seized and police said;
“ I was going to prison for several years and I certainly won’t need my guns in the future.” I was arrested and remanded in police custody. I was forced to sit half naked on the freezing concrete floor of the cellblock at Westport policestation while two women were observing me from behind the two-way mirrors. They were busy writing notes, and to this day I do not know who they were? Naturally custody was automatically awarded to the lying ex and I become a forced court client and bewildered non-custodial parent. The principal of the local school and everybody else in the community could not believe how a totally irrational maternal family could legally destroy and abduct my family from the region. I was devastated.

Example 2
Ashburton lawyer Paul Finnigan 16 December 2001 “ It’s useless trying to defend the protection order tomorrow, because the judge has already made his decision and didn’t you know - they hand them out like raffle tickets.”

Judge JJD Strettell - 17 December 2001
“Prima facie there had been psychological abuse and emotional abuse directed in to relation to Miss K and to the other persons which would justify the final protection as sought.”

Example 3
Judge P J McAloon - 19 December 2002;
“ Another matter relates to criminal charges and Mr Neave ( my lawyer then and now a District Court Judge) has made the comment that on some occasions these do display, in his view, a degree of overreaction by police which has an adverse effect on Mr Burns’ health.”

Example 4
Leader of Opposition –23 March 2004
“Dear Mr Burns
Thank you for your letter of 2 March, concerning matters between yourself and the Family Court. I note your comments and have forwarded your letter to National’s family spokesperson Judith Collins, for her information. Regrettably, as you have already written to the Governor-General, the Attorney General, the Prime Minister and the Commissioner of Children (who are the appropriate people to investigate and progress such matters) I am unable to assist you further.
With best wishes
Yours sincerely
Don Brash.

Example 5
C J Shannahan, Staff Officer (Acting) for District police commander
Canterbury 8 March 2005; “ I appreciate the frustration you feel. However, there is nothing the Police can do as matters currently stand. We investigate complaints of alleged offending not alleged false allegations made in the context of proceedings in the Family Court for the advantage of one party over another. That is one of the functions of the Family Court; to sift truth from lies.”

Example 6
Hon Justice John Hansen - 27 April 2006 Christchurch High Court Judgement;
“ Furthermore, while I have every sympathy for the predicament in which the appellant finds himself, the essential thrust of the appeal is his contention that the original protection orders were invalidly made. With respect, that is something that must be determined on an appeal from the family court in relation to those protection orders, and not in these criminal proceedings. “

2.What do you see as the benefits of police-issued orders?
This is totally unnecessary and the real concern here is that a radical feminist government is building a platform for a police state to exist in New Zealand, so they can classify fatherhood as criminality.


3. What disadvantages would there be in introducing police-issued orders? How could those disadvantages be addressed?
This is a further weapon of war to add to an already substantial arsenal for mothers who are free and encouraged too eradicate fathers from the family home with malicious false allegations.

4.Do you have any views on the length of the short-term protection order?
I gave notice that I wished to defend the temporary without notice protection order the day after they were forced upon me. Three different Westport lawyers told me that I would only have to wait 42 days for a hearing. However it was more than six months before I had a hearing.

5. What conditions do you think should be attached to police orders?
The truthful family situation and statements from the children involved. A quick investigation and talk with schoolteachers, neighbours and family members could ascertain the need for such action.

Application for temporary orders

6. Should the Court be required to give written reasons when a section 13 application for a temporary protection order is either declined or put on notice? Given that the Domestic Violence Act 1995 is an act of confusion and absurdities, the Court should not be required to give reasons when a section 13 application for a temporary protection order is either declined or put on notice.

7. Do you think an applicant, who has had his or her application for a temporary protection declined, should be eligible for a hearing to address the issues that led to the decline?
No as judges don’t allow males to defend family court protection orders .

8. Do you think that rather than a without notice application being placed on notice that it should instead be referred to the applicant and the following queries made: whether the applicant wants the application to proceed on notice, or make a new application, or withdraw application completely.
Yes

Discharging orders

9. Do you think the Act should be amended to emphasise that the Judge can discharge a protection order (including a temporary order) only if he or she is satisfied that the order is no longer necessary for the protection of the applicant, or child of the applicant’s family, or both?
I have been seeking to have the horrible protection order discharged since 19th July 2001. I have tried with hearings in Family, District and High Court. I have made formal appeals to Court of Appeal and Supreme Court without success. I also appealed to the Human Rights Review Tribunal and it was struck out and now I face a substantial crown law bill.

10. Do you believe that over-ruling the applicant’s wishes is desirable?

Whoever wrote this question needs immediate mental assistance. The truth is important to children, who are in love with dad one day, then the next day, they are programmed by a malicious maternal parent to hate him. Parental alienation syndrome (PAS), which is, the brainwashing and poisoning of vulnerable children’s’ minds by criminal custodial parents has caused great trauma for my family. PAS is running rampant in New Zealand society and the Family Court fails to acknowledge the condition. They actually encourage it, as lengthy litigation is a good earner. That’s why they’re reluctant to seek mutually agreeable solutions that could reduce any stress to the children.

11. Do you think it would be more appropriate for the Act to specify criteria that have to be met before the Court discharges a protection order? What criteria do you think would be appropriate?
What about accessing the truth, which is plain to see. Just ask the kids involved!

12. If the wishes of the applicant to discharge appear to diverge from the interests or safety of the children, how should the Court give children status in the Court?
This is a loaded question and I will not answer it because the Domestic Violence Act is unlawful gender discrimination and it’s against the many articles protected by Human Rights and Bill of Rights legislation. How can we have discussion on child interactions and relationships, when the current gender bias bureaucracy openly endorses callous disrespect and the continual, calculated and systematic degradation of fatherhood ?

Undertakings

13. Do you have any experiences or views on the use of undertakings in domestic violence proceedings? Do you believe they are a useful tool for resolving cases or, do you think their use puts victims at risk?
The worse experience in my life was being denied the right to put my defence which was crucial evidence at the court hearing in the Family Court Ashburton on 17th December 2001. The extensive CYFS report would have shown the court that I was a victim of a sinister campaign orchestrated by malicious false allegations made by the maternal family, who had accused me of child abuse and domestic violence
The truth is a “useful tool”, because I fail to understand how 205 Court Hearings since 2001 relating to my Family Court Case could be in the “child’s best interests.” Who said a lie couldn’t run far as it has short legs, obviously didn’t know about the trauma faced by a forced client of the Kangaroo De- Family Court. The blood money that the so-called feeder industry of professionals leaches sucking a living from the misery of the judicial system could be jeopardised if other common sense methods were utilised.

ENFORCING PROTECTION ORDERS

Arrest

14. What is your view on the current criteria in section 50(1) for arrest without a warrant for breach of a protection order – how are the criteria working in practice?
I have been arrested on whimsical evidence presented to police, who have more than happy to incarcerate me on several occasions.

15. Should the statutory criteria for arrest without a warrant for breach of a protection order be kept, or should the criteria be amended or repealed?
No, as it is more than adequately covered, for example, provisions of sections 51, which restrict the right to bail. The power to arrest without warrant under the Act should be abolished

16. If you believe the criteria should be amended, what criteria do you believe should be included?
I was sent to prison for sending birthday cards to my alienated daughters that both contained money in them. The whole breach of protection order scenario is open to abuse from callous judicial authorities, like over zealous police and interpretation by gender bias authorities.

17. Is there any reason why the law should treat arrest without a warrant for breaches of protection orders differently from arrest without a warrant for other offences?
“Yes. Arrest without a warrant in relation to domestic violence in general should occur under more restrictive conditions than apply to other offences, because of the way that an extreme political group (Feminists) have captured the issue (domestic violence), which should properly be a scientific issue dealt with by rational scientists. The atmosphere of totalitarian hysteria and propaganda, which surrounds this issue, creates huge civil liberties problems for the hated out-group (men).” PZ

Penalty

18. How should the Court enforce programme attendance?
The Court already has ample scope to deal with people who refuse to do the programmes. If you don’t attend the relationship services programs then (Section 39,DV Act 1995 Regulation 10 (1) DV Regulations 1995) becomes applicable.

19. Should the two-tier system, with a lower penalty for first offences, be kept? If so, what are your reasons? If not, why not?
Two Westport lawyers (Martin Sawyers & Doug Taffs) both advised me to plead guilty to 2-x breach of the protection order, because police would drop male assaults female and six threatening to kill offences. I was compelled to express guilt, which is against rights contained in the New Zealand Bill of Rights. I had not assaulted or threaten to kill anybody. I had many witnesses to testify, but this did not matter.

20. Should failure to attend a programme be a separate offence? Why?
Current legislation adequately provides scope for the Court to determine the appropriate penalty. The consequences of not attending a programme are a breach of protection order and a judge can issue a summons requiring a reason why a respondent did not attend. It is already an offence to fail, without reasonable excuse to attend a programme. If convicted you may be sentenced to a maximum of 6 months imprisonment or a fine not exceeding $5000 or both.

LINKS BETWEEN THE FAMILY AND DISTRICT COURTS

Bail

21. What advantages would there be if affidavits from protection order proceedings were made available to Judges hearing bail applications, where the offence is either a breach of the protection order, or a charge of assault against the protected person? What would the disadvantages be?
The affidavits should be made available. There are no significant disadvantages and in the case of the falsely accused it would be advantageous for the respondent, so he can show that lies in the Family Civil Court have lead to criminal offending. Maybe they could be addressed within criminal jurisdiction ?

Principal Family court Judge Peter Boshier is on record as saying “ False allegations made by a custodial parent were not tolerated by Court. In most cases, the custody order was reversed and the mother was ordered to pay for counsel for child and psychological reports.”
I would be interested to know if any mother had been caught out lying in the Family Court had ever been referred onto criminal jurisdiction to face perjury charges?

22. Have you a view as to how the disadvantages could be addressed?
The evidence is presented to the Family Court in the form of a sworn affidavit. Politician, Winston Peters is correct when he says, “ You have only too look at the false allegations in the Family court to see the value of affidavits.”

23. Should affidavits be available only in cases where the bail hearing relates to the same incident that led to the protection order being issued?
No. They should be allowed, as evidence within all criminal proceedings.

24. What other information about the victim’s situation should a Judge consider when deciding bail?
The judge should be legally required to investigate the so-called applicant’s credibility. The so –called victims own culpability in terms of contributory psychological and physical violence must be a consideration for fairness and balanced justice. Often custodial mothers can lie with total immunity and any consequences in the Family Court. They can do so without fear of ever being charged with perjury in criminal jurisdiction where they would be subject to police laying an indictable charge of wilfully attempting to pervert the course of justice, which carries seven years jail as maximum penalty.


Sentencing

25. What advantages would there be if a Judge when sentencing an offender for a crime involving domestic violence was able to make a protection order? What would the disadvantages be?
I totally agree that a judge should have the right to authorise protection orders so a hearing could determine the validity of evidence presented. In an open District Court the family dynamics and truthful parent/child interactions could be revealed, unlike the secret Family Court where lawyers and psychologists ride the shady gravy train. With all the back room deals, it’s little wonder the secretive workings of the Family Court provide an ideal breeding ground for false allegations to thrive.

26. Have you a view as to how the disadvantages could be addressed?
Judges aren’t at all hesitant about jailing fathers and they shouldn’t be hesitant about jailing mothers who flout the law. Many mothers will be facing contempt of court and perjury charges. Build more women prisons.

27. Do you think a Judge should be able to make a protection order in these circumstances?
The victim can withdraw the complaint and at any time

28. Do you think the victim’s consent should be necessary before an order was made?
No .

29. Does the proposal raise any special concerns for the children of the offender/respondent?
No. The provisions relating to children in the Act are discriminatory, bias and prejudice in that they show no evidence of any consideration of the various ways that various factors (including Parental Alienation Syndrome) can affect children. One of the worst things one can do to a child is undermine a child’s confidence in the non custodial parent. The alienating parent, while seemingly acting in the best interests of the children, is actually working to destroy the relationship between them and the other parent .The DV Act encourages conflict that can seriously impact on children. Kids need reconciliation and don’t need litigation. All references to children and young people in the Act should be deleted, as it is just radical feminist rubbish.


CHILDREN

30. Should the Court be required to provide parties the opportunity to review contact issues after a defined period after a temporary order is made?
Only if the children are safe, as it’s totally unfair place children in a vulnerable situation where they are endangered. I did not see my daughters for two and half years after the protection order was made even though a CYFS report written in 2001 describes me a “wonderful, loving, caring and kind father whose daughters adore him to bits.” The judge at the defence of protection order hearing would not allow me to conduct any form of defence and the criminal family court judge never acknowledged this CYFS Case Report!

31. Do you think it would be helpful to have counsel for the child appointed for any domestic violence cases where children are affected?
In my case I have had two counsel for children lawyers (C4C). The first lawyer for my children (Chris Robertson) in 2001 refused to allow my mother to drop Christmas and birthday presents for her dearly loved and sadly missed grand daughters at his Ashburton office. My mum was so offended she had a heart attack and was admitted to a cardiac ward in Christchurch hospital. He was acting as a C4C in my case even though he was a cousin to a court protected person. ? The second counsel for child lawyer, a female Christchurch based barrister (Adrienne Edward's) has unfortunately told lie after lie. Tragically neither of them have ever bothered to witness the loving interaction between myself and any members of my family, even though it is a legal obligation for them to do so. My four children can not understand why the court would do this? My 23-year-old twin sons are bewildered and disillusioned, because they cannot understand why the system would choose to persecute me?



32. Should the protection order continue to cover the children when the protected person dies? If so, for how long?
As a victim of false protection orders it feels as though one is dead and living in a bewildered and disgusted zombie state!

33. Do you know of any cases where the protected person died and contact between the children and the respondent was an issue?
No

34. Should a child, who is covered by a protection order obtained by their parent or caregiver, continue to be covered by the order when they turn 17 and they remain living with the applicant (parent or caregiver)? Please give reasons for your opinion.
No comment

35. If you think a protection order should continue to cover children 17 years and over in the circumstances outlined above, do you think the order should permanently cease to apply to the young person once they move out of home, or should it be reactivated upon their return to their home up to a certain age?
Children deserve protection if it’s based on credible evidence that court protection is warranted.

36. When the young person continues to live with the protected person should the protection order cease to cover them at a particular age?
The matter should be judged on its merits on each individual case. The primary focus for the Court should be a determination to settle differences immediately even when conflicted is heated or high.

PROGRAMMES

For respondents

37. Do you think attendance at programmes by respondents of temporary orders should be delayed until a final order is made?
Yes, as the presumption of guilt is often not a true reflection of the situation.

38. Should there be compulsory summons to a Family Court of respondents if they fail to attend a programme?
Once again only if credible evidence can be verified by authorities.

39. Should respondents be eligible for more than one course? If so, what eligibility criteria, if any, do you think should be applied?
Only if factual evidence is supplied too the judge.

40. Should there be a specific power under the Act to direct a respondent to undergo a drug and alcohol assessment and attend a drug and alcohol programme or receive mental health treatment if necessary, in addition to stopping violence programmes?
Totally unnecessary. For example; After reading a malicious psychologists report presented to the court and written by Michael Davidson, that recommended I see my children “in a few years”. I was so desperate to see my daughters. I could not bear the thought of not being able to see them for years . I had nothing wrong . I was a good dad, however out of shear frustration and overwhelming grief .I rung police and lawyers in a state of shock - I told them - that I was desperate to see my daughters. It was a genuine plead for help, however it was nearly a fatal move for me, as I drove into a roadblock set up by the Armed Offenders Squad. Naturally I was arrested and remanded in custody and put in a round cell in Christchurch Prison in the Designated Care Unit. Then I was sentenced under Section 121 (11) Criminal Justice Act to Hillmorton Hospital Forsenic Unit called Te Whare Manaaki for the duration of three months. It was against my wishes and I was forced to take the take antipsychotic medications like olanzapine and risperidone and I did not recognise my mother who came to visit me. I became an outpatient after that and the Mental Health psychologist that was helping with my severe depression was appalled that the family court judge would not release the Family Court specialists report writers report that caused me to react so irrationally in the first place? Six months of grief all caused through callous lies from the family court .That was in 2002 .Nothing changes .

41. Do you have any suggestions as to how to encourage respondents to attend the programmes?
It is a sad indictment that the direction of the court has not addressed the real needs for so many children. The family court was first set up as a mediation service and now it has become a meandering road of meaningless litigation. I think it’s worth mentioning that not once in over seven years has the court in it’s cruel wisdom has never assisted my four children in any way at all. Why not think of the children and not stop greasing the expensive and farcical Kangaroo De Family court gravy train ?


For protected persons

42. Should programmes be available to protected persons for longer than the current three-year period? If so, for how long, for example, for the duration of the order, or for some other length of time?
My ex, her parents, her sister and family and my two daughters’ are still court protected after seven years. The power of false allegations from females is beyond belief. I cannot find any meaningful assistance to my difficult circumstances even though everybody is sympathetic!

43. Should protected persons be able to attend more than one programme? If so, in what circumstances or situations would further programmes be helpful?
I have ordered to undertake two stop violence programmes and a compulsory mental health treatment order - all because the Family court will not believe a lying mother.

44. What are your views about applicants being required to attend an initial session for assessment of their need to attend a programme? If you think it is a good idea do you think failure to attend should attract a penalty or would it be better if attendance was voluntary?
As I have already stated they are far from “voluntary”.

45. Do you think the Family Court should provide victims with a point of access to a wider range of social services? If so, what social services do victims need most that are not already available to them? Who would be best placed to provide this service? And how would it be delivered?
It would be impossible to provide any more assistance to women seeking court protection, because she already has the entire judicial system at her disposal including victim support, government, police, legal aid, judges and CYFS.

46. Can you suggest other ways to encourage more protected persons to attend programmes?
A service agency should be able to provide practical counselling by experienced divorcees.

47. Should programmes be extended to children who used to be protected persons?
Children deserve the truth and the Court should be working towards (where possible) a mutually agreeable solution within 2- 3 weeks or sooner. This mutually agreeable solution would reduce stress for children and allow them to continue in a settled routine.

For programme providers

48. Should the Act allow programme providers of respondent programmes to receive the contact details of the protected person, if the protected person wishes to be informed of the respondent’s progress on the programme? If you believe they should – what do you think are the advantages of this proposal?
It is everybody’s best interests that the program provider works in with the family so to avoid conflicts that might seriously impact on the children.

49. Do you think the information provided should be limited to the respondent’s attendance?
All information surrendered to program provider should be available to a Family Court judge.

INTERFACE BETWEEN THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT 1995, THE CARE OF CHILDREN ACT 2004 AND THE FAMILY PROCEEDINGS ACT 1980

Care of Children Act 2004

50. Do you believe it would be appropriate to include a definition of psychological violence in the Care of Children Act 2004 that is consistent with the definition in the Domestic Violence Act 1995?
Absolute not, because I have clearly outlined it is already adequately covered by current judicial powers in authority, as they have many options to deal with Domestic Violence.

51. Do you have any comment to make, where allegations of domestic violence have been made in proceedings for a parenting order, on whether there is a need for the Court to obtain a report from a specialist in domestic violence before making the order?
My case has needed four specialist reporters prepared by two different Christchurch psychologists. Both of these reports were untruthful and malicious lies. Both psychologists upset my mother to the extent I had to apply to court so I could get a judge to stop them constantly harassing my mother who was suffering extremely bad health at the time. They did not stop and my heartbroken mum passed away four days after a malicious phone call from a psychologist who was told to say away by a Family Court judge.

52. Should section 4 of the Care of Children Act make specific reference to relocation as a result of domestic violence?
No.

53. Should a report from a psychologist always be obtained before a party who has used violence against the other party is granted unsupervised contact?
I have more than enough evidence to show a fair Court of Law that both Family Court psychologists are guilty of malicious behaviour and despicable conduct!

54. Should the age of a child in the Domestic Violence Act be raised to 18 so as to be consistent with the definition in the Care of Children Act and UNCROC?
No

Family Proceedings Act 1980

55. Do you agree with maintaining the status quo on the provisions relating to mediation and awaiting the outcome of the Family Courts Matters Bill?
Yes, however surely Children and falsely accused father’s deserve a better system.

The above submission is both true and correct .
Without prejudice

Peter Burns
Chairman Children Needs Parents Trust
NZ Fathers Coalition
International Fathers4Justice Co-ordinator
Proud father of four New Zealand born children .

You may send a written submission to:

Domestic Violence Act Review
Ministry of Justice
PO Box 180
WELLINGTON