lunes, 21 de febrero de 2011

Australian Org to Protect Women and Kids

NPBSPPC Newsletter February, 2011

Dear Readers,

The following announcement by the Gillard Govt speaks for it self and NPBSPPC congratulates and strongly supports Hon AG to make this quantum leap into the future to protecting children and vulnerable parents from the family court abuse. The vested interests of the professionals and institutions must not be seen as more important then those who access various processes and professionals to find solutions for children and themselves. Clients must continue to name and shame corrupt professionals, if accountability is not currently present, due to the "immunity" provisions in the legislation, which allows many most trusted professionals such as the psychologists, psychiatrists and others by the public to engage in such behaviours, as Dr Wrigley did. Family court must have a standard rule of thumb to deal with these professionals which it appears that it currently does not have.

Strong response to family violence bill consultation

Robert McClelland
posted Tuesday, 15 February 2011

Attorney-General Robert McClelland today said there has been a strong community response to the Gillard Government's draft Family Law Amendment (Family Violence) Bill 2010.
Mr McClelland said more than 400 submissions were received during the public consultation process on the draft Family Violence Bill.

A total of 73 per cent of respondents expressed support for the measures and a further 10 per cent made no specific comment on the Bill but offered information about personal experiences."The public interest generated by the Family Violence Bill demonstrates that family violence is a significant concern within the Australian community," Mr McClelland said.

"The Bill has received significant backing from the community and key stakeholders in the family law system.

"The level of interest and support from the community around these changes indicate two things – that the Government is responding to a clear need to improve and strengthen aspects of Family Law, and that the overwhelming majority of the community supports the Bill as it stands."
The Family Violence Bill proposes amendments to the Family Law Act 1975 to provide better protection for children and families at risk of violence.

Submissions were received from key stakeholders in the family law system, individuals, peak bodies, academics, judicial officials and organisations.

The majority of submissions supported measures to protect children in the family law system, broader definitions of family violence and child abuse, the removal of the mandatory costs orders provision and changes to the 'friendly parent' provision.

"I would like to thank those individuals and organisations who contributed their views on the Bill," Mr McClelland said.

"There were a range of views and perspectives put forward, including a number of personal accounts of experiences with the family law system.

"The Government will consider this input and outline its response in due course.

"This Government takes the issue of addressing and responding to violence very seriously, and the draft Family Violence Bill sends the clear message that family violence and child abuse are unacceptable."

The Family Violence Bill complements a range of other measures implemented by the Australian Government to strengthen the family law system's response to family violence and child abuse including:

·     The development of a multidisciplinary training package for lawyers, judicial officers, counsellors and other professionals working in the family law system, to improve consistency in the handling of family violence cases;

·     A pilot of coordinated family dispute resolution for families experiencing violence;

·     The development of minimum guidelines for screening and risk assessment for family violence; and

·     Improving collaboration between the Federal family law and the State and Territory child protection systems.

"The Gillard Government is also working with the States and Territories to develop a national recognition scheme for domestic and family violence orders," Mr McClelland said.

"The scheme will include a national database for orders to assist the enforcement of orders by State and Territory Police.  

"Governments will consider a detailed proposal for the establishment of the scheme and database when the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General meets next month.

"There are huge advantages of having a central system where information about domestic violence and family violence orders can be accessed by law enforcement agencies, rather than require victims of violence to take steps to register violence orders when they move from one state to another."

The consultation paper and draft Family Violence Bill are available on the Attorney-General's Department website at


 Ruling debunks custody diagnosis

Tony Koch

From: The Australian

April 07, 2008 12:00AM

CHILD custody determinations in scores of Family Court decisions could be challenged following a ruling debunking parental alienation syndrome, a controversial diagnosis of the effects on a child when one parent denigrates the other.

The Psychologists Board of Queensland last month disciplined prominent Brisbane clinical psychologist William Wrigley, saying he had acted unprofessionally in giving evidence about parental alienation syndrome to the court.

An investigation found that Dr Wrigley's evidence three years ago, which had led to a mother losing custody of her two children, constituted "professional conduct that demonstrates incompetence or a lack of adequate knowledge, skill, judgment or care".

The Australian understands that Dr Wrigley has identified the syndrome as a factor in other cases to the Family Court. So have psychologists and psychiatrists throughout Australia.

The syndrome was diagnosed in 1985 by US clinical psychiatrist Richard Gardner, an advocate of a father's right to custody, even in cases where he had been accused of abuse. He argued that some parents who criticise other parents or step-parents in front of children were guilty of psychological abuse. Dr Gardner's theories remain highly controversial among psychiatrists, psychologists and therapists, who claim they are simplistic or erroneous.

The complaint was lodged by the Brisbane mother who lost custody of her two children in 2005 when Family Court judge Neil Buckley determined, acknowledging the evidence of Dr Wrigley, that she had affected the children with the syndrome.

Justice Buckley said Dr Wrigley's reports provided a "comprehensive and balanced assessment" of all relevant issues.

"It has to be said that in terms of objectivity, professionalism, fairness and balance, his reports are in stark contrast to those provided by (other professionals)," he said.

The board advised Dr Wrigley on March 3 of its unanimous decision that he had "acted in a way that constituted unsatisfactory conduct" for "referring to an unrecognised syndrome in his reports".

"It was inappropriate for the registrant (Dr Wrigley) to either diagnose the children or state there was a likelihood the children could develop parental alienation syndrome, as it is not a recognised syndrome," it said.

"To diagnose a patient as suffering from or demonstrating a potential to develop an unrecognised syndrome is contrary to the code of ethics."

However, the board advised that details of the disciplinary action not be recorded on the public register because The board told The Australian it was precluded by law from commenting on the disciplinary action taken against Dr Wrigley.

 it was "not within the public interest".


 Family Court Chief Justice Diana Bryant last year posted on the family law court website a "fact sheet" about the syndrome, which said the malady was used in evidence, but warned that it was not accepted as "a psychiatric disease".

Chief Justice Bryant's notice cited several cases "where PAS has been rejected or not accepted as a concept".

The cited cases, with names excluded, included the controversial matter for which Dr Wrigley was disciplined by the psychologists board.


SpeakOutLoud about psychological abuse

See the power and control, free your mind, open your heart, live fully

Language women should use in the Family Court

by Clare Murphy PhD on April 14 2010

Many women feel like failures because they have not stopped the man they love from psychologically abusing and controlling them

Most women who attend counselling – to come to terms with their partner's psychologically abusive and controlling behaviours – often beat up on themselves saying: "I let it happen" and "I feel like I've failed".

Women talk about the effects and impact of abuse and control

Women describe feeling emotionally beaten down, shame, guilt, anger, sadness, depression, lack of confidence, insecure, discouraged, defeated, desperate, fearful, anxious and full of dread. They talk about being codependent, having self-doubt, a low belief in their abilities, confused, a feeling of going insane and an inability to concentrate. This brief list can lead Family Court Judges, lawyers, psychologists and other supporters of female victims to interpret the effects and impacts of abuse as equivalent to passivity, incompetence, and poor mental health. So what can women and their supporters do to combat this social problem?

It is necessary to uncover ways women actively resist abuse

Women continually use multiple strategies to resist being controlled and psychologically abused by male partners.

Women seek advice and help from others, they strategically subordinate or silence themselves, purposefully choose not to state their beliefs and opinions, consciously choose when to stay quiet and when to assert themselves – all to avoid further abuse.

If a man who persistently attempts to control his partner pressures her not to work, and she defies this by going to work, regardless of abusive repercussions, this act of resistance shows that the woman does not "let abuse happen".

Women may do things to please their partner that they might not ordinarily do, they may ignore his behaviour, or they may cry as a way of showing they refuse to be content with being verbally abused and emotionally manipulated. Yet other women refuse to cry with the aim of not giving the abusive man the pleasure.

These acts of resistance prove women do not have low self-esteem, rather women resist abuse because they do esteem themselves. Women who defiantly talk to a male colleague at a party, despite their partner badgering them to stay away from all men, and women who refuse to obey their partner's rigid rule that dinner should be on the table at 5 o'clock sharp every night, are refusing to be dictated to. These acts of resistance do not entail letting abuse happen. The abuse happens because, the man who is hell bent on controlling his partner, is violating her needs and boundaries.

Many women resist being controlled by lying about where they're going, by sneaking out, by not telling their husband where they are going, or who they are having coffee with. These are acts aimed at preserving autonomy, independence and freedom.

Canadian Family Therapist, Dr Allan Wade, along with his colleagues, have researched and written some splendid articles that give an empowering spin to the language women use to describe the impact of being abused . . .

"Despair" is usually considered to be a negative effect of abuse. However, Wade and colleagues suggest that "despair" actually suggests that the victim of abuse is hoping for, or calling for, change.

"Sleeplessness" is generally labelled the problem to be solved. However, lying awake at night worrying about the crazy-making mind-games her partner is playing, is actually a strategy of resistance. In other words this kind of "wakefulness" is refusing to be content with being emotionally abused and controlled.

Using the "language of resistance" in the Family Court

When women write affidavits aimed at helping them win custody of their children, it is common to write the negative effects, or impacts, resulting from the man's psychologically abusive and controlling behaviours. However, Allan Wade and his colleagues's research shows that, by women saying they have low-self esteem, depression, anxiety, stress, etc., this language can feed into stereotypes that women victims of abuse are not capable of resisting abuse, or of maintaining custody of their children.

Allan Wade PhD, and his colleagues, strongly suggest that women and their supporters include information in written court documents about all the ways the woman has resisted, and continues to resist, each and every form of abuse by their partner. Rather than asking the woman how the abuse impacted, or effected her, instead ask how she responded when her partner did xyz. Ask her what she did when he said, or did, xyz. The woman's answers to this will represent her as active and competent.

How women resist abuse depends on the context

Women do not use the same strategy of resistance in response to abuse and control every time. Rather women decide which situation best suits which kind of resistance – always with the aim of keeping herself safe and sane, and with the aim of reducing or stopping the abuse and control.

Any small act of resistance is a sign of success

Just because a woman has not been able to stop the man's abusive and controlling behaviours does not mean she has "let the abuse happen". The fact that she has engaged in hours, months and years of subtle, and not-so-subtle, strategies of resistance, means she has successfully mustered up chunks of control over her own life – no matter how tiny that sense of control may feel. It means she has succeeded at not allowing her partner to have 100% control over her decisions, her actions, her secret thoughts, hopes and dreams. It means she has grabbed some form of self-preservation that she has refused to allow him to steal from her. What women do to resist abuse is a sign that they are capable of maintaining custody of their children.


  • Campbell, Jacquelyn C., Rose, Linda E., Kub, Joan, & Nedd, Daphne. (1998). Voices of strength and resistance: A contextual and longitudinal analysis of women's responses to battering. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13, 743-762.
  • Coates, Linda, & Ridley, Penny. (2009). Representing victims of sexualized assault. In E. Faulkner & G. MacDonald (Eds.), Victim no more: Women's resistance to law, culture and power. Halifax & Winnipeg: Fernwood Publishing.
  • Coates, Linda, & Wade, Allan. (2004). Telling it like it isn't: Obscuring perpetrator responsibility for violent crime. Discourse & Society, 15, 499-526.
  • Coates, Linda, & Wade, Allan. (2007). Language and violence: Analysis of four discursive operations. Journal of Family Violence, 22, 511-522.
  • Renoux, Martine, & Wade, Allan. (2008). Resistance to violence: A key symptom of chronic mental wellness. Context, June, 2-4.
  • Todd, Nick, Wade, Allan, & Renoux, Martine. (2007). Coming to terms with violence and resistance.   Retrieved 25 March, 2010, from

Tagged as: , , ,

{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }

1 Marlene May 20, 2010 at 3:39 pm

I have had a significant amount of experience writing and teaching community members about domestic violence and continually encounter a difficulty getting people to understand the dynamics and impact of psychological abuse. One way I am dealing with that is giving out a book of poetry I wrote on psychological abuse. It is available free (I have a grant) on my website. You can get to my website by clicking on my name above. If you'd like a hard copy you can contact me through my website.

2 Autism Custody Battles July 26, 2010 at 4:04 am

Men who threaten to take away the kids are engaging in post separation violence. It is common for batterers to threaten to take children away from the battered woman by proving her to be an unfit mother. For this reason, some lawyers advise women not to tell courts or mediators about child abuse or domestic abuse because, by doing so, they risk losing custody to the alleged abuser!

Get smart with the Thesis WordPress Theme from DIYthemes.

© 2009-2011 SpeakOutLoud about psychological abuse - Clare Murphy PhD. All Rights Reserved.

NPBSPPC Newsletter
NPBSPPC takes this opportunity to thank all contributors to our forums, surveys and on this occasion specifically thanks Dr Clare Murphy to allow us to publish her material. Thank you again.
If you do not wish to receive updates on developments, actions and the sufferings of the children and vulnerable parents, then please click on this link [unsubscribe].


You may donate by electronic transfer or through your branch to assist NBPSPPC:

BSB: 034637
A/C No: 389856

Please contact NPBSPPC at
if you have any queries.


Mothers will never give up on protecting their children because it is a natural maternal instinct!

Photo by Neuroscience Nurse Consultant Janis, thank you.

NPBSPPC is currently researching ways to highlight to the readers that childhood trauma in children actually shrinks temporal lobes in the growing kids, and causes lifelong impact on their functioning as adults. On a positive note "talk therapy" and counseling can help some, depending on the extent of the trauma. We will publish in our future editions.

NPBSPPC Website: 

Click to read how a little baby was bashed across the head to death because she won't stop crying.

In This Issue:


Justice Cronin did everything in the current context of the law to help the children and said,

"Whilst findings need to be made about events that enable categorisation of the parental behaviour that may explain the children's behaviour, the litigation process needs to initially end to allow the therapeutic reconstruction of relationships... to begin. At the same time, orders need to be in place about which there is no basis for dispute. It is a veritable Sword of Damocles hanging over the parents' heads. The reconstruction process in this case is as much about the relationship of the husband and wife as it is about that of the wife and the children.

It will, on any view, be a slow and painful process but one which must be attempted if these children are to enjoy any of the benefits of their entitlements as set out in s 60B of the Family Law Act. If this fails, the Court has lost its chance to achieve that. At that point, the legislative options are very limited."

Public Opinion on the above case:

To what extent should Judicial Officers exercise discretionary powers and the rules of evidence in the current context of the laws as the public understand it?


" The vested interest of the Professionals and the courts far outweighs the risks to children, and as confirmed by the govt's findings in various reports. W personally know that good mums lost their kids to abusive fathers and it concerns me greatly that these helpless and voiceless children will suffer harm and in many cases lose their lives from being left in the care of the abusive parents. "

"We are aware that the expanded discretionary powers are being abused by the judicial officers, where they pick and choose which evidence they will accept or not accept. This is grossly wrong and I now understand the reasons for the deaths of children and such risks in various forms are on the rise. "

"For example, we recently saw Dr Wrigley being disciplined by APA in Queensland and many more sad cases are coming out of the family courts. Corruption and collusion appears to be more obvious  and many children are left in harmful situations."

"Discretionary powers allow judges to play with the rules of evidence, and they will only accept evidence of preferred expert witnesses. In our forums we have learnt that same names seem to keep popping up, and children and mothers are struggling to protect themselves from harm, abuse, and lifelong impact. "

"We are aware that discretionary powers and rules of evidence is abused by family courts to ignore child abuse notifications."

"We are aware that such abuse of discretionary powers with no accountability to any of the professionals involved, mean corruption is out of control, where these professionals abuse, accuse, fabricate and make lies about mothers and pathologise motherhood to children. "

"Fathers appear to be the worst alienators of children from their mothers, for example in mercer v mercer, and patranage v patranage, and yet they are still given care of the vulnerable children."

"We know that children who are deprived of motherhood have a deficit and shrinkage of their temporal lobe and this may never be repaired, and any delays will mean many kids will never ever reach their full potential to enjoy things that they should, or as adults do.... "

Some of these comments are great! "The comments are just to great not to share, and they so aptly describe what is going on in the US...I don't believe people realize that the international issues are the same as we have in our small communities."

Mums and babies a natural process.

Lic. Maria Raquel Holway Ramos Mejia
Rachel Holway
Celular Claro 1558721823 y 1558958905
Buenos Aires Argentina ( Amnistia)
ICQ 73919680
Skype rachel.holway

No hay comentarios: