FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

real farthers for Justice

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

big wave to simon anderton currently sat in the top of the Tyne bridge protesting for more rights for mums n dads of broken down relationships and have to fight for access ect.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yes the break down effect everyone in different ways...especially the children...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham

How exactly is sitting on top of a bridge helping his cause? All I'm thinking is....dick!

I get that it is a serious issue and too many parents use their children as pawns in the separation process but to be honest if someone did this as a result of it I'd question their mental health. What good is he to his kids if he slips and falls from there?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"How exactly is sitting on top of a bridge helping his cause? All I'm thinking is....dick!

I get that it is a serious issue and too many parents use their children as pawns in the separation process but to be honest if someone did this as a result of it I'd question their mental health. What good is he to his kids if he slips and falls from there? "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

"

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It's better than kidnapping them.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eerobCouple
over a year ago

solihull


"How exactly is sitting on top of a bridge helping his cause? All I'm thinking is....dick!

I get that it is a serious issue and too many parents use their children as pawns in the separation process but to be honest if someone did this as a result of it I'd question their u mental health. What good is he to his kids if he slips and falls from there? "

At least he is trying. If he did nothing would that further the cause, i dont think so

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that. "

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham


"How exactly is sitting on top of a bridge helping his cause? All I'm thinking is....dick!

I get that it is a serious issue and too many parents use their children as pawns in the separation process but to be honest if someone did this as a result of it I'd question their u mental health. What good is he to his kids if he slips and falls from there?

At least he is trying. If he did nothing would that further the cause, i dont think so "

perhaps

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them? "

i don't think i would climb to the top of a bridge in a publicity stunt, no but i would fight tooth and nail for them.

but then i dont have children of my own right now, perhaps my opinion will change when i do....thats the beauty of opinions, they are not set in stone.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"It's better than kidnapping them."

So true.

I'm supporting a friend who has temporary custody of his children after they were removed from mother in January.

The fear of her vanishing with them is very real and some of the things she's said make it a scary prospect.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *opinovMan
over a year ago

Point Nemo, Cumbria


"How exactly is sitting on top of a bridge helping his cause? All I'm thinking is....dick!

I get that it is a serious issue and too many parents use their children as pawns in the separation process but to be honest if someone did this as a result of it I'd question their mental health. What good is he to his kids if he slips and falls from there? "

By this token, one might equally call Emmeline Pankhurst a bit of a media tart and Emily Davidson a psychotic horse tripper. As I see it, they all make valid statements in their own ways as times and intolerable circumstances demand.

[Sure, I realise Davidson was aiming to pin a sash to the king's horse rather than be killed by it, but I hope you get my point]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them? "

If parents weren't so pathetic & childish when they split up & put their children first, they wouldn't need to go to court so to say the courts have failed them is a very naive view. The courts put the child first, something some parents seem to be unable to do.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them?

If parents weren't so pathetic & childish when they split up & put their children first, they wouldn't need to go to court so to say the courts have failed them is a very naive view. The courts put the child first, something some parents seem to be unable to do. "

Totally agree but unfortunately the resident parent pulls the strings and can cut contact as quick as they like.

Stupid and childish the way some people use there children as pawns.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham


"How exactly is sitting on top of a bridge helping his cause? All I'm thinking is....dick!

I get that it is a serious issue and too many parents use their children as pawns in the separation process but to be honest if someone did this as a result of it I'd question their mental health. What good is he to his kids if he slips and falls from there?

By this token, one might equally call Emmeline Pankhurst a bit of a media tart and Emily Davidson a psychotic horse tripper. As I see it, they all make valid statements in their own ways as times and intolerable circumstances demand.

[Sure, I realise Davidson was aiming to pin a sash to the king's horse rather than be killed by it, but I hope you get my point]

"

and i am sure in their day there were people who saw what they did as crazy, rash, and unrelated to the cause they wanted to further, it was only in later times that their endeavors were truly appreciated.

perhaps in years to come this stunt will be celebrated as a turning point in the fight for parental rights...who knows.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them?

If parents weren't so pathetic & childish when they split up & put their children first, they wouldn't need to go to court so to say the courts have failed them is a very naive view. The courts put the child first, something some parents seem to be unable to do.

Totally agree but unfortunately the resident parent pulls the strings and can cut contact as quick as they like.

Stupid and childish the way some people use there children as pawns.

"

Exactly, makes me mad. The pathetic reasons they use to stop the non resident parent having contact is laughable.Usually when the dad gets a new girlfriend.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eorgy26Man
over a year ago

Sutton


"It's better than kidnapping them."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

day 3

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them? "

How do you know that the courts and social services have failed him? Perhaps they have very good reasons for the decisions they've made?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I have a very good friend who the courts have failed him and his children to the point where he did something that hit the news big time by writing help on a pic of the queen in Westminster abbey a couple of years ago

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them?

How do you know that the courts and social services have failed him? Perhaps they have very good reasons for the decisions they've made?"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *dam_TinaCouple
over a year ago

Hampshire

On an unrelated matter, lols @ psychotic horse tripper

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

he's a normal fella, iv known him for years

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I tried to get the courts to MAKE my children's father see his children but you can't make them do it.....

What kind of man doesn't want to see his children ??

It was his way or no way.

All I ever wanted was regular contact for them

Kids getting over it but I'm sure it hurts them.... I'm crying just thinking about the things they say

" why doesn't my dad love me?"

He's 6

Really wish that more men were like this 'nutter' on the bridge.

Jesus is a fabulous father, step father and father to be xx

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"How exactly is sitting on top of a bridge helping his cause? All I'm thinking is....dick!

I get that it is a serious issue and too many parents use their children as pawns in the separation process but to be honest if someone did this as a result of it I'd question their mental health. What good is he to his kids if he slips and falls from there? "

It is most likley the whole situation that has impacted on his mental health to go to these extremes. Well done to the guy at least he'll get a but of publicity for his cause. Nothing is without its risks.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"How exactly is sitting on top of a bridge helping his cause? All I'm thinking is....dick!

I get that it is a serious issue and too many parents use their children as pawns in the separation process but to be honest if someone did this as a result of it I'd question their mental health. What good is he to his kids if he slips and falls from there?

It is most likley the whole situation that has impacted on his mental health to go to these extremes. Well done to the guy at least he'll get a but of publicity for his cause. Nothing is without its risks. "

*bit

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"big wave to simon anderton currently sat in the top of the Tyne bridge protesting for more rights for mums n dads of broken down relationships and have to fight for access ect. "

It is not the rights of the parents that are important. What is important are the needs and the rights of the children.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

day 4

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"big wave to simon anderton currently sat in the top of the Tyne bridge protesting for more rights for mums n dads of broken down relationships and have to fight for access ect.

It is not the rights of the parents that are important. What is important are the needs and the rights of the children."

Exactly

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"big wave to simon anderton currently sat in the top of the Tyne bridge protesting for more rights for mums n dads of broken down relationships and have to fight for access ect.

It is not the rights of the parents that are important. What is important are the needs and the rights of the children."

Agreed, but children at a impressionable age can get duped into believing that one parent is bad by the other, the law favors the mother and in some cases rightly so but not all cases.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rmrshorny2Couple
over a year ago

Seaside

Can i add to this post that i saw no coverage through the tv or heard any on radio but saw him up there on the way to work with police van one side and police car other with tape up so public couldn't walk under they played it down to my thinking

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"big wave to simon anderton currently sat in the top of the Tyne bridge protesting for more rights for mums n dads of broken down relationships and have to fight for access ect.

It is not the rights of the parents that are important. What is important are the needs and the rights of the children.

Agreed, but children at a impressionable age can get duped into believing that one parent is bad by the other, the law favors the mother and in some cases rightly so but not all cases."

There really is not as much prejudice as that within the judicial system.

As far as where the child should reside, the bias is quite rightly in favour of the parent who provided the most day-to-day care. In most "traditional" households, that tends to be the mother. Where the father has stayed at home to look after the child, the system will favour him.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"big wave to simon anderton currently sat in the top of the Tyne bridge protesting for more rights for mums n dads of broken down relationships and have to fight for access ect.

It is not the rights of the parents that are important. What is important are the needs and the rights of the children.

Agreed, but children at a impressionable age can get duped into believing that one parent is bad by the other, the law favors the mother and in some cases rightly so but not all cases.

As far as where the child should reside, the bias is quite rightly in favour of the parent who provided the most day-to-day care. In most "traditional" households, that tends to be the mother. Where the father has stayed at home to look after the child, the system will favour him."

I've been the main parent in my children's upbringing and yet the decision did not go my way. Cafcass don't always get it right. Look at fathers rights and the law needs updating. Luckily my issues were dealt with between the mother and I. Had it not been I would have been paying CSA seen them weekends and not being able to afford to live. To say"

There really is not as much prejudice as that within the judicial system" do some research on law.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"big wave to simon anderton currently sat in the top of the Tyne bridge protesting for more rights for mums n dads of broken down relationships and have to fight for access ect.

It is not the rights of the parents that are important. What is important are the needs and the rights of the children.

Agreed, but children at a impressionable age can get duped into believing that one parent is bad by the other, the law favors the mother and in some cases rightly so but not all cases.

As far as where the child should reside, the bias is quite rightly in favour of the parent who provided the most day-to-day care. In most "traditional" households, that tends to be the mother. Where the father has stayed at home to look after the child, the system will favour him.

I've been the main parent in my children's upbringing and yet the decision did not go my way. Cafcass don't always get it right. Look at fathers rights and the law needs updating. Luckily my issues were dealt with between the mother and I. Had it not been I would have been paying CSA seen them weekends and not being able to afford to live. To say"

There really is not as much prejudice as that within the judicial system" do some research on law."

I do not know your individual circumstances. The judicial system will in any event not always reach the right decision. That is the unfortunate result of humans being involved.

As for doing some research on law, you are making the assumption that I have no knowledge of it. You may well be wrong there.

I am sorry if your experience was a bad one. The law is a blunt instrument when it comes to interference in the lives of children. Best avoided but necessary as a last resort. Children's lives will always be disrupted when parents cannot cooperate.

I have known many cases where the main custodial male parent has retained the care of the children. It is still the case that the female parent is more often the main carer and people seem to pereceive this as a bias in favour of the female. That is the point I was trying to make.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rivate auditionsMan
over a year ago

West Midlands


"big wave to simon anderton currently sat in the top of the Tyne bridge protesting for more rights for mums n dads of broken down relationships and have to fight for access ect. "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"big wave to simon anderton currently sat in the top of the Tyne bridge protesting for more rights for mums n dads of broken down relationships and have to fight for access ect. "

Thumbs up from me too

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Hate bring that person but 'Fathers'.. spelt with one r

Sorry

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Hate bring that person but 'Fathers'.. spelt with one r

Sorry "

Being?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Hate bring that person but 'Fathers'.. spelt with one r

Sorry

Being?"

Touche

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"big wave to simon anderton currently sat in the top of the Tyne bridge protesting for more rights for mums n dads of broken down relationships and have to fight for access ect.

It is not the rights of the parents that are important. What is important are the needs and the rights of the children.

Agreed, but children at a impressionable age can get duped into believing that one parent is bad by the other, the law favors the mother and in some cases rightly so but not all cases.

As far as where the child should reside, the bias is quite rightly in favour of the parent who provided the most day-to-day care. In most "traditional" households, that tends to be the mother. Where the father has stayed at home to look after the child, the system will favour him.

I've been the main parent in my children's upbringing and yet the decision did not go my way. Cafcass don't always get it right. Look at fathers rights and the law needs updating. Luckily my issues were dealt with between the mother and I. Had it not been I would have been paying CSA seen them weekends and not being able to afford to live. To say"

There really is not as much prejudice as that within the judicial system" do some research on law.

I do not know your individual circumstances. The judicial system will in any event not always reach the right decision. That is the unfortunate result of humans being involved.

As for doing some research on law, you are making the assumption that I have no knowledge of it. You may well be wrong there.

I am sorry if your experience was a bad one. The law is a blunt instrument when it comes to interference in the lives of children. Best avoided but necessary as a last resort. Children's lives will always be disrupted when parents cannot cooperate.

I have known many cases where the main custodial male parent has retained the care of the children. It is still the case that the female parent is more often the main carer and people seem to pereceive this as a bias in favour of the female. That is the point I was trying to make."

Agree with many of your points. My case is going back a while and I had parental responsibility. A lot of men do not have parental responsibility which I'm sure if your child was born after 2003 the father automatically gets (being married or not) prior to this the father would have to prove he was the father just to get the legal ball rolling. Unfortunatly the way the law is its easier for the father to walk away that's why I really salute this guy. I would also support any further protest As long as they are peaceful and not risking anyone's safety

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Im a "resident parent", I gave him a list each month when child was able to see him (at least 12 days every month, mostly more). He got a new gf and started messing child about (saying he was coming but not turning up etc). I never stopped him seeing child even after calling the police a few times in a 2 week period). Last year I recd a text stating he wasnt going to see child til after court (which he had been threatening for months). A week after that I was served with papers. Still ongoing now (contact centre supervised visits which have caused a HUGE amount of stress for Small and RADICALLY altered her behaviour for the worse). Back in court soon as he wants full residency. The ONLY reason hes doing this is to spite me. If he cared about Small then he wouldnt have treat said like a toy, dumped said, not bought said a birthday present (apparently he did its at his mothers), and sent more than he has for indirect contact. Oh, and he would wish to do anything to keep said happy.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eorgy26Man
over a year ago

Sutton

That's all very well and sounds very messy but what does it have to do with this bloke up on a bridge?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

day five suppys arrived,

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

doesn't time fly! halfway there mate hope you got the shelf's sorted

hope the sun comes out for the party on the quayside later enjoy your Sunday lunch

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham


"doesn't time fly! halfway there mate hope you got the shelf's sorted

hope the sun comes out for the party on the quayside later enjoy your Sunday lunch "

Do you think he is on fab? Surely he'll have no electric up there to charge his phone?!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *at69driveMan
over a year ago

Hertford


"big wave to simon anderton currently sat in the top of the Tyne bridge protesting for more rights for mums n dads of broken down relationships and have to fight for access ect. "
A complete fool. What right does he have to cause this type of disruption ?. If he protests in this manner , he is hardly setting a good example of how to behave .Maybe he is just a bully who will not take advice from other people .

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them?

If parents weren't so pathetic & childish when they split up & put their children first, they wouldn't need to go to court so to say the courts have failed them is a very naive view. The courts put the child first, something some parents seem to be unable to do. "

No they don't put the child first as do nothing if one parent is hell bent on treating the other parent like shit

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *at69driveMan
over a year ago

Hertford


"How exactly is sitting on top of a bridge helping his cause? All I'm thinking is....dick!

I get that it is a serious issue and too many parents use their children as pawns in the separation process but to be honest if someone did this as a result of it I'd question their mental health. What good is he to his kids if he slips and falls from there?

It is most likley the whole situation that has impacted on his mental health to go to these extremes. Well done to the guy at least he'll get a but of publicity for his cause. Nothing is without its risks. "
He might get publicity but will it be positive or negative . He does not care about how much disruption he causes for other people . Just totaly selfish

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eerobCouple
over a year ago

solihull


"How exactly is sitting on top of a bridge helping his cause? All I'm thinking is....dick!

I get that it is a serious issue and too many parents use their children as pawns in the separation process but to be honest if someone did this as a result of it I'd question their mental health. What good is he to his kids if he slips and falls from there?

It is most likley the whole situation that has impacted on his mental health to go to these extremes. Well done to the guy at least he'll get a but of publicity for his cause. Nothing is without its risks. He might get publicity but will it be positive or negative . He does not care about how much disruption he causes for other people . Just totaly selfish"

You are talking absolute rubbish. Hes got off his bum to try and do something abd hopefullt some children will get to see more of an fieced absent parent as a result. Because you are a minute late for something as a result.... Didums.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Seldom see fathers for justice written with fathers actually spelt right

But most often its in spray paint on someone's wall,

Great cause in most cases poorly executed

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eavenNhellCouple
over a year ago

carrbrook stalybridge


"How exactly is sitting on top of a bridge helping his cause? All I'm thinking is....dick!

I get that it is a serious issue and too many parents use their children as pawns in the separation process but to be honest if someone did this as a result of it I'd question their mental health. What good is he to his kids if he slips and falls from there? "
because it atracts publicity which in turn brings calls for action would you have the vote if the sufferagettes hadnt protested ? would there be anti discrimination laws if black people gay people etc had just sat and done nothing good luck to him for standing up for what he believes in

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uckandbunnyCouple
over a year ago

In your bed

Do we know the facts of his case?

Very easy to see a big act and think it's deserving.

But what are the facts of his case?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them?

i don't think i would climb to the top of a bridge in a publicity stunt, no but i would fight tooth and nail for them.

but then i dont have children of my own right now, perhaps my opinion will change when i do....thats the beauty of opinions, they are not set in stone."

Yep, just the minutest of imagination normally suffices!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them?

i don't think i would climb to the top of a bridge in a publicity stunt, no but i would fight tooth and nail for them.

but then i dont have children of my own right now, perhaps my opinion will change when i do....thats the beauty of opinions, they are not set in stone.

Yep, just the minutest of imagination normally suffices! "

Must be very unimaginative then as I don't understand your comment.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross

The parent who has custody cannot stop the non custodial parent from having access that has been granted by a court.

Courts act in the best interests of the children and a lot of factors are taken into account.

Why do fathers think they do not get justice ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross

such fathers I mean. Not all fathers.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them?

i don't think i would climb to the top of a bridge in a publicity stunt, no but i would fight tooth and nail for them.

but then i dont have children of my own right now, perhaps my opinion will change when i do....thats the beauty of opinions, they are not set in stone.

Yep, just the minutest of imagination normally suffices!

Must be very unimaginative then as I don't understand your comment. "

I understand the comment, which doesn't have any substantiation in fact at all. What I don't understand are the hard staring eyes. What do they mean ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them?

How do you know that the courts and social services have failed him? Perhaps they have very good reasons for the decisions they've made?"

If you read his story he has won all his court cases from day 1 but his ex stills refused him access to his children and this is why the courts have failed him as they have not made her to allow him to see his children

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them?

i don't think i would climb to the top of a bridge in a publicity stunt, no but i would fight tooth and nail for them.

but then i dont have children of my own right now, perhaps my opinion will change when i do....thats the beauty of opinions, they are not set in stone.

Yep, just the minutest of imagination normally suffices!

Must be very unimaginative then as I don't understand your comment. "

Yep, must be!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them?

How do you know that the courts and social services have failed him? Perhaps they have very good reasons for the decisions they've made?

If you read his story he has won all his court cases from day 1 but his ex stills refused him access to his children and this is why the courts have failed him as they have not made her to allow him to see his children"

Ive just read this ..........

But Simon, a 56-year-old labourer, says the protest is not about his case, which ended 15 years ago, but about changing family law for future generations of children so they don’t have to suffer losing contact with a parent and half of their family.

15 years ago ?? Are we reading about the same bloke.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross

Just re checked. It's the same man.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them?

i don't think i would climb to the top of a bridge in a publicity stunt, no but i would fight tooth and nail for them.

but then i dont have children of my own right now, perhaps my opinion will change when i do....thats the beauty of opinions, they are not set in stone.

Yep, just the minutest of imagination normally suffices!

Must be very unimaginative then as I don't understand your comment.

I understand the comment, which doesn't have any substantiation in fact at all. What I don't understand are the hard staring eyes. What do they mean ? "
you called them hard & staring, so why are you now asking? .......I wonder what your imagination would make of ????? No, never mind!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

He is also up there to raise funds for cancer for a dear friend and fellow campaigner, who lost her fight with Cancer and its was his promise to her he would Cary on fighting for his and others including women who are prevented from seeing there children

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them?

i don't think i would climb to the top of a bridge in a publicity stunt, no but i would fight tooth and nail for them.

but then i dont have children of my own right now, perhaps my opinion will change when i do....thats the beauty of opinions, they are not set in stone.

Yep, just the minutest of imagination normally suffices!

Must be very unimaginative then as I don't understand your comment.

I understand the comment, which doesn't have any substantiation in fact at all. What I don't understand are the hard staring eyes. What do they mean ? you called them hard & staring, so why are you now asking? .......I wonder what your imagination would make of ????? No, never mind!! "

Are you in a mood or something ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them?

i don't think i would climb to the top of a bridge in a publicity stunt, no but i would fight tooth and nail for them.

but then i dont have children of my own right now, perhaps my opinion will change when i do....thats the beauty of opinions, they are not set in stone.

Yep, just the minutest of imagination normally suffices!

Must be very unimaginative then as I don't understand your comment.

I understand the comment, which doesn't have any substantiation in fact at all. What I don't understand are the hard staring eyes. What do they mean ? you called them hard & staring, so why are you now asking? .......I wonder what your imagination would make of ????? No, never mind!!

Are you in a mood or something ? "

Me? ........ why me??

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross

You're usually chirrupy.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Just re checked. It's the same man.

"

Watch his video on you tube, he still has not seen his children

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ranny-CrumpetWoman
over a year ago

The Town by The Cross


"Just re checked. It's the same man.

Watch his video on you tube, he still has not seen his children"

Know what. I will. I wasn't going to but I will. My bet before I watch it is that he will say he wasnt allowed to see his children and that his ex kept them from him. My guess is also that acting for others now relieves his guilt that he never tried to see his own children.

Let's hope im wrong.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Just re checked. It's the same man.

"

Watch his video on you tube, he still has not seen his children

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Just re checked. It's the same man.

Watch his video on you tube, he still has not seen his children

Know what. I will. I wasn't going to but I will. My bet before I watch it is that he will say he wasnt allowed to see his children and that his ex kept them from him. My guess is also that acting for others now relieves his guilt that he never tried to see his own children.

Let's hope im wrong. "

I hope you're right because that's one hell of an array of assumptions!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Just re checked. It's the same man.

Watch his video on you tube, he still has not seen his children

Know what. I will. I wasn't going to but I will. My bet before I watch it is that he will say he wasnt allowed to see his children and that his ex kept them from him. My guess is also that acting for others now relieves his guilt that he never tried to see his own children.

Let's hope im wrong. "

You could not be further from the truth

I know him personally and he what he's says is very very true

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittle_brat_evie!!Woman
over a year ago

evesham


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them?

i don't think i would climb to the top of a bridge in a publicity stunt, no but i would fight tooth and nail for them.

but then i dont have children of my own right now, perhaps my opinion will change when i do....thats the beauty of opinions, they are not set in stone.

Yep, just the minutest of imagination normally suffices!

Must be very unimaginative then as I don't understand your comment.

Yep, must be!"

Helpful as ever I see.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I guess its about drawing attention and he is doing that.

I guess even negative attention is good attention. No such thing as bad press and all that.

I don't see it the same way as you. I see him being pro-active when the courts and social services have failed him. When it comes to your children would you not do something extreme to see them?

i don't think i would climb to the top of a bridge in a publicity stunt, no but i would fight tooth and nail for them.

but then i dont have children of my own right now, perhaps my opinion will change when i do....thats the beauty of opinions, they are not set in stone.

Yep, just the minutest of imagination normally suffices!

Must be very unimaginative then as I don't understand your comment.

Yep, must be!

Helpful as ever I see. "
thank you

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"doesn't time fly! halfway there mate hope you got the shelf's sorted

hope the sun comes out for the party on the quayside later enjoy your Sunday lunch

Do you think he is on fab? Surely he'll have no electric up there to charge his phone?!"

he's being looked after by friends,updates in the evening chronicle

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Just re checked. It's the same man.

Watch his video on you tube, he still has not seen his children

Know what. I will. I wasn't going to but I will. My bet before I watch it is that he will say he wasnt allowed to see his children and that his ex kept them from him. My guess is also that acting for others now relieves his guilt that he never tried to see his own children.

Let's hope im wrong.

You could not be further from the truth

I know him personally and he what he's says is very very true"

Oops!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"big wave to simon anderton currently sat in the top of the Tyne bridge protesting for more rights for mums n dads of broken down relationships and have to fight for access ect. A complete fool. What right does he have to cause this type of disruption ?. If he protests in this manner , he is hardly setting a good example of how to behave .Maybe he is just a bully who will not take advice from other people . "

disruption ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *at69driveMan
over a year ago

Hertford


"He is also up there to raise funds for cancer for a dear friend and fellow campaigner, who lost her fight with Cancer and its was his promise to her he would Cary on fighting for his and others including women who are prevented from seeing there children"
He is hardly raising much money for cancer if we deduct the cost of policing his activities. His protest is totally selfish and shows a blatant disregard for those who abide by court decisions . What makes him think that he is so special that he can disregard the laws of the land .

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

And what laws has he broken ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

And what laws has he broken ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If parents who split up could act as mature adults, courts would not be required to make orders such as " X can see their child every other weekend from 4.30 on a Friday to 6pm on a Sunday" & "Can ring little Jimmy every Tuesday & Thursday from 6.45-7.15"

It's parents who fail their children, not the courts.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The parent who has custody cannot stop the non custodial parent from having access that has been granted by a court.

Courts act in the best interests of the children and a lot of factors are taken into account.

Why do fathers think they do not get justice ?

"

Unfortunately, it is not that simple.

The sole test used by the courts is the best interests of the children.

In extreme cases where it has been deemed best for the children to live with one parent, when the other makes contact with the children very difficult, there are few sanctions that the court can impose.

Award residence to the other parent? Sometimes not in the childrens interests.

Contempt of court and an imprisonment? Not in the childrens interests.

It is such a sad state of affairs. As I have commented previously, the law is a blunt instrument when it comes to family issues.

Responsible and caring parents solve these problems themselves. When one or both parents do not have the ability to hold the childrens interests at heart, the end result will be unsatisfactory.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I was blocked by my ex wife from seeing my children for 10 years went bankrupt by paying solicitors fees in the end I got contact with my eldest 2 when they reached 16 and 17 I lost that time with them I can never get back.

It's not just fathers that get rough treatment in the eyes of the court it's the non resident parent that is failed male or female

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"He is also up there to raise funds for cancer for a dear friend and fellow campaigner, who lost her fight with Cancer and its was his promise to her he would Cary on fighting for his and others including women who are prevented from seeing there children He is hardly raising much money for cancer if we deduct the cost of policing his activities. His protest is totally selfish and shows a blatant disregard for those who abide by court decisions . What makes him think that he is so special that he can disregard the laws of the land . "

why not ask him he's open to questions

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If parents who split up could act as mature adults, courts would not be required to make orders such as " X can see their child every other weekend from 4.30 on a Friday to 6pm on a Sunday" & "Can ring little Jimmy every Tuesday & Thursday from 6.45-7.15"

It's parents who fail their children, not the courts."

I quite agree with this but in the real world people use children as weapons and this is when the courts need to open their eyes to this

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

After myself and my ef wife split up I moved over 200 hundred miles aways back to London. Believe me it was a tough decision leaving my children behind.

The first year was very tough with regards to seeing them as their mother was reluctant and they were toddlers.

It came to s situation where there was a certain milestone in their lives which I was told not to attend. I gave her the choice that either I come with her blessing or I will turn up any way. In the end she agreed.

That night we sat down and talked and agreed that the children come first and that we are both their parents and love them equally - In my case my children are actually please too see me.

My feeling is sitting down and talking whether its one to one or through a mediator.

For me the real justice would be to make the parents talk and put the children first.

Sitting on top of bridge is not going to resolve anything.

I see my kids every holiday, we talk on the phone and Skype - I do for there benefit not mine

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"If parents who split up could act as mature adults, courts would not be required to make orders such as " X can see their child every other weekend from 4.30 on a Friday to 6pm on a Sunday" & "Can ring little Jimmy every Tuesday & Thursday from 6.45-7.15"

It's parents who fail their children, not the courts.

I quite agree with this but in the real world people use children as weapons and this is when the courts need to open their eyes to this "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If parents who split up could act as mature adults, courts would not be required to make orders such as " X can see their child every other weekend from 4.30 on a Friday to 6pm on a Sunday" & "Can ring little Jimmy every Tuesday & Thursday from 6.45-7.15"

It's parents who fail their children, not the courts.

I quite agree with this but in the real world people use children as weapons and this is when the courts need to open their eyes to this "

The courts are very used to seeing parents use their children as weapons. Do you think that a county or high court judge who has presided over thousands of cases has not seen it before? It is sad but commonplace. The difficulty is how to solve the issue in the interests of the children.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If parents who split up could act as mature adults, courts would not be required to make orders such as " X can see their child every other weekend from 4.30 on a Friday to 6pm on a Sunday" & "Can ring little Jimmy every Tuesday & Thursday from 6.45-7.15"

It's parents who fail their children, not the courts.

I quite agree with this but in the real world people use children as weapons and this is when the courts need to open their eyes to this

The courts are very used to seeing parents use their children as weapons. Do you think that a county or high court judge who has presided over thousands of cases has not seen it before? It is sad but commonplace. The difficulty is how to solve the issue in the interests of the children."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If parents who split up could act as mature adults, courts would not be required to make orders such as " X can see their child every other weekend from 4.30 on a Friday to 6pm on a Sunday" & "Can ring little Jimmy every Tuesday & Thursday from 6.45-7.15"

It's parents who fail their children, not the courts.

I quite agree with this but in the real world people use children as weapons and this is when the courts need to open their eyes to this

The courts are very used to seeing parents use their children as weapons. Do you think that a county or high court judge who has presided over thousands of cases has not seen it before? It is sad but commonplace. The difficulty is how to solve the issue in the interests of the children."

I don't disagree with you and I wish the resident parent could see the damage they are doing before it is too late and I know first hand how much it has affected my 2 eldest children who are now young adults.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Fathers for Justice have been sitting on top of things for years and have not made an ounce of difference to the custody issue. possibly because it's always 1 or 2 people at a time.

They need a new tactic, lobby together and do something as a group to show how bad (or not) the situation is.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Fathers for Justice have been sitting on top of things for years and have not made an ounce of difference to the custody issue. possibly because it's always 1 or 2 people at a time.

They need a new tactic, lobby together and do something as a group to show how bad (or not) the situation is. "

They need a new name. They assume that the female parent is the one with whom the children reside. They assume that it is the male parent who is denied the opportunity to see the children. They assume that the male parent is reasonable. Worst of all (though understandably), they assume that it is right for the absent male to be given contact (or residence) where there is conflict. Would they prefer a different test to "what is in the best interests of the children?" That test does lead to unfairness for the parents, true, but surely it is the only one that is right.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top