Lawmakers Say Molester Fathers Can Have Custody
And There's a Plot Twist
In an unbelievable move Wednesday, lawmakers in the UK voted that parents convicted of sexually assaulting their children (virtually always fathers) can have custody of their victims and, thus, be allowed to continue molesting them. They achieved this consensus by nixing an amendment to a bill that would have prohibited molester fathers from having custody, thus preventing the case from having to be litigated in Family Court.
This amendment was tacked on to “Jade’s Law” which prohibits parents (virtually always fathers) who have murdered the other parent (virtually always the mother) from having custody. Jade was violently stabbed and strangled to death by her ex-husband and, despite the fact he is in prison, still retains parental rights. Her parents have been subjected to costly and depressing litigation.
Even that slam dunk bill—murderers prohibited from having a right to custody—was rejected by “the government” at first. But there followed a strong campaign and a huge public outcry. Lawmakers then tabled it to appease the masses, the vociferous proletariats who really care about children. Jade’s Law was added to the broader Victims and Prisoners Act which is in the criminal code.
It only made sense that men who’ve sexually abused their children should also be prohibited from having custody. Thankfully, Baroness Chakrabarti saw this obvious fact and added the amendment to Jade’s Law.
But, amazingly, a majority of Chakrabarti’s colleagues did not agree. The Bad Guys won 154 to 144.
PARTISAN VOTE
The molester amendment to Jade’s Law was voted exclusively along party lines. All the Liberals supported it and all the Conservatives opposed.
The “Teller” for the Nay votes was a “hereditary” member of the House, which means he got his seat by being “titled”, something that has no meaning in most other democracies. James Patrick Montagu Burgoyne Winthrop Stopford, 9th Earl of Courtown (you can’t make this up) led the opposition.
Another Teller for the Nays was a woman: Susan Frances Maria Williams, Baroness Williams of Trafford. As the saying goes: “There is a special place in hell for women who don’t help other women.” And an even hotter place for women who harm other women and children.
Apparently the Conservatives took “the government’s” position so “the government” itself was opposed (whatever that means). Anyway, the opposition had scant and weak reasoning.
Lord Bellamy spoke for the opposition. He says that this issue should be handled by Family Court, a clue that is where men are being empowered. He also asserts that any law depriving a parent [read: father] of custody should be limited to rape of the child. So, he is arguing that fathers should be allowed to sexually assault their children when, where and as much as they want, as long as it does not include traditional intercourse.
Really? These Conservatives are dinosaurs. They do not deserve a seat in a legislative body. They should be transported back to the Mesozoic Era where they belong.
No wonder we’re all where we are still. After millennia.
Here is a list of all the Bad Guys. Let ’em have it if you are in their district.
The Good Guys did their best to argue why a child molester should not have custody. As if this should even need to be argued.
The fact that this vote was so partisan makes clear it’s not really about abuse or protection—it’s about power. Social Conservatives are generally for more power for men in the family. Social Liberals are generally for women gaining power to keep and protect their children.
Everyone with power knows this. You can fool the public but not the power elite.
NO MSM
You might be thinking, how can these politicians get away with something that is clearly abhorrent to the entire public? After all, there is “transparency” around legislators, unlike Family Court judges. The public is privy to who voted which way.
No worries mate, that pesky democratic power is gotten around by keeping it out of mainstream media. Controlling MSM is a critical component of the Old Boy Network’s [OBN] cover up of the cover up of men’s age-old, systemic entitlement to sexually abuse their own kids. The patriarchal pact: molest your own kids, not ours, and the Old Boys will permit it.
This lack of coverage of such a salient event for women makes it clear how important independent and social media are in getting the truth out. One activist tweeted:
This is a sickening indictment on our law makers. They would rather preserve the rights of convicted paedophiles than the safety and welfare of the children they’ve harmed and the families trying to protect them. Shame on the House of Lords! It’s a disgrace.
Sadly, even if this despicable vote had gotten widespread media, it may not have made much difference. Members of the House of Lords are not elected, so they cannot be voted out. It is hard to believe that in one of the oldest democratic countries, members of an entire Assembly are appointed by a King. (Mind you, the U.S. and other democracies have their own serious deficiencies.)
PLOT TWIST
So you might also be thinking, okay, if the OBN has so much power, why would they allow Jade’s Law, which sidesteps Family Court, where men are officially empowered in the family, to be brought to the floor? [BTW it has not passed yet.]
After all the campaigning by the activists, and initial reluctance by legislators, they finally green-lighted Jade’s Law. Many legislators even began to show enthusiastic support for it (at least without the molester amendment). It is being advertised as the “New Legislation to Protect Children”.
Sounds good, right?
But here’s the plot twist.
Buried in the fine print, there is a provision that Family Court must “review” the case first before the father’s rights are terminated. Conservatives say there needs to be a “fuller picture of the family circumstances and a fuller picture of wider implications” by a Family Court judge. So, in effect, Family Court would remain the gatekeeper for men’s power in the family.
So there you have it.
The OBN, through a back door, got the issue of fathers murdering or molesting their children back to Family Court where they want it—where judges have the power to disregard murder and sexual abuse by fathers. Or judges can acknowledge it and say it is “in the past” and everyone should “move on”, that it is in the best interest of the children the father has custody. (No matter that research clearly shows child molesters cannot be cured so it can never be in the past.)
Which happens every day in some jurisdiction in some part of the world.
The “Saving Damon” case is a good example of this phenomenon. Judges will find a way to give molester fathers custody, no matter what. [Don’t mind the warning the site is not safe: it is (made by this author).]
TAKEAWAYS
There are a few takeaways from this outrageous legislative vote.
First, the term “parental responsibility” which is being used to replace “custody” in UK Family Law is part of the gender-neutralization of parenting. It is a disguised move towards more more “fathers’ rights” and against the recognition that attachment and care by mothers is important, but that is for another article. Just note here that removing murdering/molesting fathers’ parental “responsibility” appears to relieve them of paying child support. So it is still a qualified win for men.
Although Jade’s Law is great, it will only apply to a tiny fraction of custody cases. So, unfortunately, it will not make a dent in the Custody Crisis.
There is a silver lining of sorts. This vote can be used by mothers to show their friends, family and the public that many, many of society’s most respected officials in the highest positions of power support a molester having custody of his victim. It is impossible for a normal person to contemplate one moderately decent person being OK with a child molester having custody of his victim, but 154?
The main takeaway, though, is the importance of recognizing what’s really up in the halls of power. Jade’s Law, a criminal statute, would remove power from Family Court, which is the main staging grounds for continuing male power and entitlement after divorce or separation. That is why they had to add the provision for Family Court involvement.
This shows the Family Court system with its unlimited judicial power is imperative to maintaining men’s power in the family, and, therefore, how important it is to abolish it. Once and for all.
In order for women to get due process, so as to be able to keep and protect their children, juries need to be the fact finders, not judges in a real court of law, not a court system created by men for men.
Join the fight to empower women post-separation at Women’s Coalition International.
NOTE: If you were/are not able to protect your child from sexual abuse in Family Court, please fill out our survey.
IN OTHER NEWS
SISTERS IN SOLIDARITY
Our next forum will be on May 18th so mark your calendars!
If you’d like to join SIS, please read this column and fill out the linked form. You will receive an invitation to the zoom a few days before.
CHAPTER 14 IS OUT!
“Husbandry and Homeland Security” is Chapter 14 of Mother-Fucking: The Saga of One Fucked Mother.
In this chapter, Legion ponders the role of husbands and home security. She goes over how she, the wife/mother, was expected to do virtually all the parenting, and how holidays were so much work with no help from Herry. On the other hand, husbands like Herry are allowed to get away with doing all kinds of awful things, including affairs and incest—things that, if Legion, or any woman had done them, would be used against her in society and Family Court.
This double standard, this “Flip/Reverse”, ensures triply-entitled Herry—as a male, husband, and father—skates effortlessly and arrogantly through life, all while remaining in control of his family. But is something about to happen that he may actually be held responsible for?
Dr. Blue’s novel is based on her own experience of the Post-Separation Crisis. It uniquely conveys how Family Court judges are “mother-fucking” women—a form of systemic violence directed at ex-wives—as protagonist Legion is systematically and methodically deprived of her children and money and reduced to “one fucked mother”.
Chapters are stand-alone interesting so you can begin reading anywhere. A Cast of Characters follows to help readers at any point. All published chapters are included in the Women’s Coalition News & Views Section: “The Saga of One F**ked Mother”. Sequential chapters are published every Wednesday and subscribers will find them in their inboxes, so make sure to subscribe if you haven’t yet!
You may also give a gift subscription to a mother who is going through her own Family Court nightmare and doesn’t understand why.
Or you can support the Coalition’s work through a one-time or recurring contribution at paypal.me/TheWomensCoalition.
All contributions, large and small, are greatly appreciated!
Believable, the court gave my domestic husband our multi million dollar estate, numerous businesses, leaving me homeless and indigent at 66 years old, because I reported the organized crime being done by lawyers, my own lawyers included, judges and courts all the way to The Supreme Court.
The OBN knows what it's doing. It empowers family court judges to abuse women and children. Laws, facts and evidence do not make a difference in family court. Family court judges endanger children with no consequences. Children are not protected. Mothers are not crazy. Patriarchy is entrenched in family court. Women must continue to fight for a new system. Mothers know family court must end.