Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Absent Fathers
Options
Comments
-
Cavehill Red wrote: »A) There is no abortion in Ireland and
That is a total crock of speculative offensive sh1t.
Eh no it isnt. CR you are confusing divorced dads with absent dads.
This thread is about absent dads. They dont want to be fathers. They dont want their kids. Not speculative. Its fact.0 -
metrovelvet wrote: »Eh no it isnt. CR you are confusing divorced dads with absent dads.
This thread is about absent dads. They dont want to be fathers. They dont want their kids. Not speculative. Its fact.
There are separated fathers, divorced fathers, remarried fathers, widowed fathers, unmarried fathers and married fathers.
There's no such thing as 'absent' fathers in law. You're inventing terms out of the air and seeking to define them in light of your own well-established antipathy towards fathers in general.
And yes, you are being speculative, because where equal parenting legislation has been introduced in Scandinavia, it has led to much greater paternal involvement in children's lives, and there is nothing to suggest that it would not do exactly the same here.0 -
metrovelvet wrote: »Eh no it isnt. CR you are confusing divorced dads with absent dads.
This thread is about absent dads. They dont want to be fathers. They dont want their kids. Not speculative. Its fact.
In a poll of young people from the year 7-11 school age group, 24%, when asked, said they 'don't see' their father.
There is a never ending amount of reasons for this and a lot of them are not down to the father just giving a hoot.
the stats don't go into the reasons why they don't see thier father, which is the main issue here. Lots of men who want to be fathers can't see thier kids. the reasons behind this are important.
How do you know they don't want to be fathers? how do you know they don't want to see thier kids? that is speculative.0 -
This thread is about ABSENT fathers. THey may not exist in law, but they exist. Sticking your fingers in your ears and singing la la la wont change that. The thread is titled ABSENT FATHERS.
You admitted to not being a family law expert. You admitted to not knowing any Scandinavian children and not knowing much about Scandinavia and yet advocate Scandiavian policy for Ireland. You may as well advocate Maoiri family policy out of context too.
I dont have an antipathy towards fathers in general. I dont have 'daddy issues' as you abusively suggested to me an another thread. I suggest you quickly depersonalise your dialogue rather than resort to character assassination.0 -
metrovelvet wrote: »This thread is about ABSENT fathers. THey may not exist in law, but they exist. Sticking your fingers in your ears and singing la la la wont change that. The thread is titled ABSENT FATHERS.
I could title a thread "Bullsh1tting people who make up stuff about fathers" but it wouldn't mean they exist in law or in fact. The OP referred to a situation in Britain relating to the lack of paternal involvement in a minority of children's lives there. To summarise that situation, he used a phrase that has no meaning in law or society. The phrases I used do.metrovelvet wrote: »You admitted to not being a family law expert. You admitted to not knowing any Scandinavian children and not knowing much about Scandinavia and yet advocate Scandiavian policy for Ireland.
No, that's not what I said. I said I don't associate with many Scandinavian children for the blindingly obvious reason that I'm in Ireland. I am familiar with Scandinavian childcare policies, and they are enlightened, humane and lightyears ahead of our Victorian adversarial, child-damaging system, so of course I am going to advocate it.metrovelvet wrote: »You may as well advocate Maoiri family policy out of context too.
:rolleyes:metrovelvet wrote: »I dont have an antipathy towards fathers in general. I dont have 'daddy issues' as you abusively suggested to me an another thread. I suggest you quickly depersonalise your dialogue rather than resort to character assassination.
You've demonstrated your antipathy to fathers on numerous threads. While I'm happy to debate with you, or inform you about the subject, what I'm not prepared to do is have you malign Irish fathers with crass offensive speculations without challenging you on it.0 -
Advertisement
-
I think we're getting slightly off topic here. I wasn't trying to start a debate on father's rights. I was specifically talking about fathers who deliberately choose not to have anything to do with their kids. Which, ok 25% is probably too high a figure, but there are a huge number of men who do this.0
-
Blisterman wrote: »I think we're getting slightly off topic here. I wasn't trying to start a debate on father's rights. I was specifically talking about fathers who deliberately choose not to have anything to do with their kids. Which, ok 25% is probably too high a figure, but there are a huge number of men who do this.
I think you should quote what actually the poll says.......does the poll say the kids have no contact with their father, or does it say the fathers have no interest in the kids.
Or even better, don't bother.......its just another row going nowhere on boards.ie0 -
Blisterman wrote: »I think we're getting slightly off topic here. I wasn't trying to start a debate on father's rights. I was specifically talking about fathers who deliberately choose not to have anything to do with their kids. Which, ok 25% is probably too high a figure, but there are a huge number of men who do this.
You're the second person I've now asked to support this assertion.
Just because a child has no contact with their father does not mean that the father has deliberately chosen to have nothing to do with them, and that is an especially relevant distinction in Ireland and Britain, where the actual legal framework and legislation discourages and disincentivises them from doing so, and facilitates mothers who wish to be vindictive in severing contact between their children and the fathers.
A man falsely accused in a family law court of child sex abuse will not see his children for at least a year, and is forced to prove the negative. He will then have minimal supervised access overseen by social workers in offices. He will be unable to sue for slander, because the family law courts are in camera.
When he manages to prove his innocence, he will have missed crucial development and bonding time with his kids, and the mother who made the slanderous accusation will face no penalty for doing so whatsoever.
During this time, that man is not present in his children's lives. Just as a man whose children are taken overseas without notice is not present in his children's lives. Just as a man whose access agreement is constantly ignored and flouted by the mother is not present in his children's lives.
Are these 'absent' fathers? And if they are, to what extent did they choose to be?
I'm not denying that there are feckless men out there who don't care who they sleep with, who don't take precautions, and who don't want to face the consequences of their sexual activities. There have always been manbabies out there, and they do proper fathers no favours.
But this suggestion that there are a 'huge number' of such fathers is not in my experience remotely true.0 -
As has been repeatedly pointed out to you this is about fathers who choose not to see their kids. You keep wanting to turn this into a parental alienation bad mommy thread.0
-
And NO ONE on this thread has provided any evidence that this is a significant issue, here, in Britain or indeed anywhere else.
To do so, we'd need to have data that examined how many fathers CHOSE to abandon involvement in their children's lives. The mere fact that many fathers don't have such an involvement in Britain or indeed in Ireland is more easily explained by the nature of the family law systems both countries languish under - antiquated, out of date, child-damaging laws that are an abomination and have led to a social experiment in which a proportion of children are growing up without the essential nurturing care of a father.0 -
Advertisement
-
Blisterman wrote: »Heard a shocking statistic today, that in the UK, over a quarter of kids have no contact with their father.
Don't think the statistics are that high in Ireland, but there's definitely a growing number of dads who don't seem to give a crap about their offspring.
I think most people can agree that it can't be very good for kids growing up without a dad. So why do so many guys run away from their responsibilities?
Should something be done? What could be done? How come it's happening so much nowadays, when it didn't before?
Bull****. You are maligning men and pedastalising women here.
A child having no contact with their father can result from a number of situations, not just the father not giving a crap about the offspring, many fathers are excluded altogether against their will.
Examples
A study in the UK showed that 70% of women admitted to interfering with the fathers custody rights in order to punish him, many fathers are excluded against their will.
UK has an established single mother on the dole as a career culture and these people often lie about the whereabouts of the father.
Fathering a child doesn't come with automatic rights in the UK, if he is not married his rights or lack of them are at her discretion.
Whats more the UK is a very feminist country, fathers are viewed as disposable and generally not needed in the first place.0 -
Blisterman wrote: »I think we're getting slightly off topic here. I wasn't trying to start a debate on father's rights. I was specifically talking about fathers who deliberately choose not to have anything to do with their kids. Which, ok 25% is probably too high a figure, but there are a huge number of men who do this.
then why are you basing the thread on stats that have nothing to do with fathers choosing not to have anything to do with their kids?0 -
A third potential issue is where the father to be expressly states that he has no interest in having a child at that point (for whatever reason) and the mother to be decides to go ahead with the birth anyway. In that situation how much responsibility should the father to be actually have?
The same amount he had in creating the child - 50%0 -
Elle Collins wrote: »The same amount he had in creating the child - 50%
How do you make that out?
(ok stupid question, i know how you make that out).
Putting it another way, after conception, a woman has the option of abortion with or without the mans consent (to the best of my knowledge).
A man doesn't have that option.
If your suggestion is that the man has 50% of the responsibility for raising a child (which I agree with), should the quid pro quo not be that the man has equal rights with the woman in deciding whether to go ahead with the pregnancy.....0 -
metrovelvet wrote: »As has been repeatedly pointed out to you this is about fathers who choose not to see their kids. You keep wanting to turn this into a parental alienation bad mommy thread.
Repeatedly pointed out where? By you?
No one has directly quoted the actual study.....0 -
Does he also get a 50% say in whether she should have an abortion or not?Elle Collins wrote: »The same amount he had in creating the child - 50%
It's a pretty tricky issue IMO. If he wants her to have an abortion, and she does not, then fair enough, her body and her morals etc., but can you really expect the man to have responsibility for a child he does not want, when there was a solution to the problem perfectly in line with his morals? (I think that a case can be made for the man paying for the entire cost of the abortion, however)0 -
Cavehill Red wrote: »You're the second person I've now asked to support this assertion.
Just because a child has no contact with their father does not mean that the father has deliberately chosen to have nothing to do with them, and that is an especially relevant distinction in Ireland and Britain, where the actual legal framework and legislation discourages and disincentivises them from doing so, and facilitates mothers who wish to be vindictive in severing contact between their children and the fathers.
A man falsely accused in a family law court of child sex abuse will not see his children for at least a year, and is forced to prove the negative. He will then have minimal supervised access overseen by social workers in offices. He will be unable to sue for slander, because the family law courts are in camera.
When he manages to prove his innocence, he will have missed crucial development and bonding time with his kids, and the mother who made the slanderous accusation will face no penalty for doing so whatsoever.
During this time, that man is not present in his children's lives. Just as a man whose children are taken overseas without notice is not present in his children's lives. Just as a man whose access agreement is constantly ignored and flouted by the mother is not present in his children's lives.
Are these 'absent' fathers? And if they are, to what extent did they choose to be?
I'm not denying that there are feckless men out there who don't care who they sleep with, who don't take precautions, and who don't want to face the consequences of their sexual activities. There have always been manbabies out there, and they do proper fathers no favours.
But this suggestion that there are a 'huge number' of such fathers is not in my experience remotely true.
Where are the statistics that highlight the emboldened as a significant issue? Are you really saying that fathers with no contact with their children are likely to fall into that above bracket?
Throughout this thread you've churned out your opinion as hard fact yet we see no real statistics to support your assertions.
Why can we not have a conversation about the full gamet of male attitudes to fatherhood.? What is so threathening about acknowledging the fact of intentionally absent fathers? Why is mere acknowledgement of it "maligning men and pedastalising women" as another poster put it?
No one is denying that the vast majority of men want to be good fathers. However the fact remains that a statistically significant amount of men do abandon responsibility for their child. No I couldn't be bothered tracing research to show you this. It's self evident if you look around,even with friends and family,and explore the issue. I'm not saying 100% of women are excellent mothers ,but more men will walk out of their childs life than women. Why is that? Why can we not have a conversation about it?0 -
Fistycuffs wrote: »Where are the statistics that highlight the emboldened as a significant issue? Are you really saying that fathers with no contact with their children are likely to fall into that above bracket?
Throughout this thread you've churned out your opinion as hard fact yet we see no real statistics to support your assertions.
Why can we not have a conversation about the full gamet of male attitudes to fatherhood.? What is so threathening about acknowledging the fact of intentionally absent fathers? Why is mere acknowledgement of it "maligning men and pedastalising women" as another poster put it?
No one is denying that the vast majority of men want to be good fathers. However the fact remains that a statistically significant amount of men do abandon responsibility for their child. No I couldn't be bothered tracing research to show you this. It's self evident if you look around,even with friends and family,and explore the issue. I'm not saying 100% of women are excellent mothers ,but more men will walk out of their childs life than women. Why is that? Why can we not have a conversation about it?
Why are you answering a question with a question?
The original post suggested a UK study saying that 25% of children saying they had not seen their father indicated that 25% of children had been abandoned by their father.
The post you quote is questioning this assertion.....
Now if you have an answer to it, then I'd like to see it.0 -
Fistycuffs wrote: »,but more men will walk out of their childs life than women. Why is that? Why can we not have a conversation about it?
I'd imagine that the number of women that abort, abandon, walk out on and force or abuse fathers out against their will is beyond the number of fathers that willfully walk out on their children.
As it stands men have no right to abort their parenthood during the pregnancy, perhaps they should have access to legal abortion and that would cut the number both the number of pregnancies and men that are absent.0 -
Fistycuffs wrote: »
No one is denying that the vast majority of men want to be good fathers. However the fact remains that a statistically significant amount of men do abandon responsibility for their child. No I couldn't be bothered tracing research to show you this. It's self evident if you look around,even with friends and family,and explore the issue. I'm not saying 100% of women are excellent mothers ,but more men will walk out of their childs life than women. Why is that? Why can we not have a conversation about it?
Your friends and famliys relationship or lack of with thier kids is not grounds for stats on a debate on "absent" fathers.0 -
Advertisement
-
Why are you answering a question with a question?
The original post suggested a UK study saying that 25% of children saying they had not seen their father indicated that 25% of children had been abandoned by their father.
The post you quote is questioning this assertion.....
Now if you have an answer to it, then I'd like to see it.
It doesn't indicate that 25% of children have been abonded by their fathers, christ all mighty, it suggests 25% of them don't "see" him. it doesn't go into the reasons why, it might be easy for you to assume they walked out, but that doesn't make it so.0 -
Fistycuffs wrote: »Why can we not have a conversation about the full gamet of male attitudes to fatherhood.? What is so threathening about acknowledging the fact of intentionally absent fathers? Why is mere acknowledgement of it "maligning men and pedastalising women" as another poster put it?
We have heard men been maligned of this for a long time now while women have always been portrayed as the innocent victims. The "full gamet" here includes the part that women are playing and pointing out the tendency to blame men for everything. Lets change the manhating record and talk about the part that women, legal inequality, feminism and society's attitudes towards fathers is playing in this.0 -
Fistycuffs wrote: »Where are the statistics that highlight the emboldened as a significant issue? Are you really saying that fathers with no contact with their children are likely to fall into that above bracket?
The statistics don't exist because family law courts in Ireland, in clear breach of EU law, are held IN CAMERA. For more on this, see this report from 2000. Nothing's changed in the meantime. There is a clear responsibility for the courts to demonstrate transparency, and yet they have not done so. Legislation overhauling this obscenity is long overdue.
And if you don't think that women have maliciously invented allegations of abuse to prevent fathers from seeing their kids, then have a read of this charter.Fistycuffs wrote: »Throughout this thread you've churned out your opinion as hard fact yet we see no real statistics to support your assertions.
On the contrary, you and two other posters have claimed that fathers abandoning their kids in Britain and Ireland are rife. I keep asking to see the statistics on that, yet none are forthcoming. That's the entire supposition of the thread. Support that, and I'll provide you with whatever evidence you want me to (with the In Camera caveat mentioned above.)Fistycuffs wrote: »Why can we not have a conversation about the full gamet of male attitudes to fatherhood.? What is so threathening about acknowledging the fact of intentionally absent fathers?
I've acknowledged that it happens repeatedly in this thread and repeatedly condemned it. What I've queried are the unsubstantiated allegations that it occurs in 'huge numbers'.Fistycuffs wrote: »Why is mere acknowledgement of it "maligning men and pedastalising women" as another poster put it?
Ah, but that's not what he did. Let's not get disingenuous here.Fistycuffs wrote: »No one is denying that the vast majority of men want to be good fathers. However the fact remains that a statistically significant amount of men do abandon responsibility for their child.
HOW statistically significant? Tell us. Give us a percentage. Show us where you got your data from.Fistycuffs wrote: »No I couldn't be bothered tracing research to show you this.
Ah, so you won't or can't. Then stop making claims you can't support. If you want to talk about the fact that it happens sometimes and is wrong, let's talk about that. If you want to keep making unsubstantiated allegations that it is a massively widespread phenomenon, then show me the figures to prove it.Fistycuffs wrote: »It's self evident if you look around,even with friends and family,and explore the issue.
Not to me, it isn't. Among my friends, I have sole custody of my kid, and two of my best mates have joint custody of theirs. Every one of us were trailed through the courts for years to achieve that. Every one of us had to spend money we couldn't afford, and fight like dogs just to be acknowledged as parents. I've met guys who were wrongly accused of child abuse in court. I've met guys who had their kids secreted away and adopted against their will. I've met guys who travel to central America two or three times a year for a decade looking for their kids after the mother skipped the country without notice. I can think of only one instance of any man I know who turned his back on his kid, and that was when he couldn't afford to take legal action and after physical threats from the mother's new fella. Three years later, he went to court anyway, despite intimidation, and got access to his kid. But even now, he doesn't get to see the child half the time and the courts take no action against the mother.
So yes, I do feel desperately sorry about your experience. It was wrong, and can never be made up. Your father will have to live with that for the rest of his life. He missed out on your childhood and can never know the full extent of the mistake he made.
But I have a different experience, and so do many other men. Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because some men are feckless does not justify the denial of human rights to fathers and children the length of this country.Fistycuffs wrote: »I'm not saying 100% of women are excellent mothers ,but more men will walk out of their childs life than women. Why is that?
Because in this country and in Britain, the legal system auto-authorises the mother to the complete denial of the rights of the child and the father. Check out Muslim countries, where the system is the exact opposite. Which parent abandons their children there? The mother. And why? Because courts automatically grant all parental rights to fathers in the event of a split.Fistycuffs wrote: »Why can we not have a conversation about it?
Isn't that what we're doing?0 -
So it can't be talked about or acknowledged. Instead it's all,100% of all absent fathers, are the result of scheming manevolent women who for some reason insist that they bear the full burden of caring for a child.
Refusal to acknowledge the more balanced reality is a very dangerous basis for a theory in my opinion. There have been some terrifying generalizations about women and mothers here. It's become a staple of The Gentlemans Club I guess. I pity your daughters.0 -
Fistycuffs wrote: »So it can't be talked about or acknowledged. Instead it's all,100% of all absent fathers, are the result of scheming manevolent women who for some reason insist that they bear the full burden of caring for a child.
Well no one can say what % because we don't have stats the same way the BBC don't have anything bar 25% don't see thier kids. we can't come up with % based on your or our friends expiriences, all we can say is not 100% of the 25% mentioned in the article is down to fathers not wanting to be fathers, we simply don't know the reasons in these cases.Fistycuffs wrote: »Refusal to acknowledge the more balanced reality is a very dangerous basis for a theory in my opinion. There have been some terrifying generalizations about women and mothers here. It's become a staple of The Gentlemans Club I guess. I pity your daughters.
no one's refusing to acknowledge, everyone ackowledges some father's are absent of their own choice but we don't have any evidence to prove how common it is.
and that comment on people's daughters.
Shame on you.0 -
Fistycuffs wrote: »So it can't be talked about or acknowledged. Instead it's all,100% of all absent fathers, are the result of scheming manevolent women who for some reason insist that they bear the full burden of caring for a child.
Refusal to acknowledge the more balanced reality is a very dangerous basis for a theory in my opinion. There have been some terrifying generalizations about women and mothers here. It's become a staple of The Gentlemans Club I guess. I pity your daughters.
I think the more reasonable people were suggesting that there is more to the 25% story than fathers walking out on their children by choice ie. mothers behaviour, social welfare fraud and / or legal injustice, (and lets not forget false accusations of abuse) fathers in UK dont dress up in disguise and climb buildings just for sport. I believe that you have been working against that more reasonable view point here.
I resent your implication that I am somehow a threat to my daughter, take your false implications of child abuse and attemts to shame elsewhere.0 -
0
-
It doesn't indicate that 25% of children have been abonded by their fathers, christ all mighty, it suggests 25% of them don't "see" him. it doesn't go into the reasons why, it might be easy for you to assume they walked out, but that doesn't make it so.
I never said the survey said that. In fact I said the survey didn't say that
I said that was the inference being taken in this discussion.
This is laughable, take the exact opposite of what I said, claim that I said it, and then scold me for it.0 -
Cavehill Red wrote: »
On the contrary, you and two other posters have claimed that fathers abandoning their kids in Britain and Ireland are rife. I keep asking to see the statistics on that, yet none are forthcoming. That's the entire supposition of the thread. Support that, and I'll provide you with whatever evidence you want me to (with the In Camera caveat mentioned above.)
I've acknowledged that it happens repeatedly in this thread and repeatedly condemned it. What I've queried are the unsubstantiated allegations that it occurs in 'huge numbers'.
Ah, but that's not what he did. Let's not get disingenuous here.
HOW statistically significant? Tell us. Give us a percentage. Show us where you got your data from.
Ah, so you won't or can't. Then stop making claims you can't support. If you want to talk about the fact that it happens sometimes and is wrong, let's talk about that. If you want to keep making unsubstantiated allegations that it is a massively widespread phenomenon, then show me the figures to prove it.
Not to me, it isn't. Among my friends, I have sole custody of my kid, and two of my best mates have joint custody of theirs. Every one of us were trailed through the courts for years to achieve that. Every one of us had to spend money we couldn't afford, and fight like dogs just to be acknowledged as parents. I've met guys who were wrongly accused of child abuse in court. I've met guys who had their kids secreted away and adopted against their will. I've met guys who travel to central America two or three times a year for a decade looking for their kids after the mother skipped the country without notice. I can think of only one instance of any man I know who turned his back on his kid, and that was when he couldn't afford to take legal action and after physical threats from the mother's new fella. Three years later, he went to court anyway, despite intimidation, and got access to his kid. But even now, he doesn't get to see the child half the time and the courts take no action against the mother.
So yes, I do feel desperately sorry about your experience. It was wrong, and can never be made up. Your father will have to live with that for the rest of his life. He missed out on your childhood and can never know the full extent of the mistake he made.
But I have a different experience, and so do many other men. Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because some men are feckless does not justify the denial of human rights to fathers and children the length of this country.
Because in this country and in Britain, the legal system auto-authorises the mother to the complete denial of the rights of the child and the father. Check out Muslim countries, where the system is the exact opposite. Which parent abandons their children there? The mother. And why? Because courts automatically grant all parental rights to fathers in the event of a split.
Isn't that what we're doing?
I haven't said anywhere that it is "rife" or that it is prevalent in "massive numbers". Personally i believe that any number of fathers choosing to do this is is significant however. The truth is that anecdotally it is widespread enough to warrant at least discussion and acknowledgement.
You have used your own personal experience as a father to illustrate the difficulties men face in trying to get custody. I am sorry to hear that you had to go through all that and im sure your child is lucky to have you.That is no more valid than me using my experience of meeting and talking to people with similar experiences to myself to illustrate that fathers abandoning their children by choice does happen. The thread was initially about absent fathers who chose to be absent. I think that itself is an interesting issue.0 -
Advertisement
-
Fistycuffs wrote: »I haven't said anywhere that it is "rife" or that it is prevalent in "massive numbers".
We've had one poster claim it was 'huge numbers.' You yourself claimed it was statistically significant. That suggests you have some statistics. I'd like to see them.Fistycuffs wrote: »Personally i believe that any number of fathers choosing to do this is is significant however. The truth is that anecdotally it is widespread enough to warrant at least discussion and acknowledgement.
If it is the 'truth' that it is 'widespread', then presumably you can demonstrate that truth with some evidence. It being so widespread and all. :rolleyes:Fistycuffs wrote: »You have used your own personal experience as a father to illustrate the difficulties men face in trying to get custody. I am sorry to hear that you had to go through all that and im sure your child is lucky to have you.That is no more valid than me using my experience of meeting and talking to people with similar experiences to myself to illustrate that fathers abandoning their children by choice does happen. The thread was initially about absent fathers who chose to be absent. I think that itself is an interesting issue.
It's an issue worth discussing but only in the context of the wider context of children who don't see their fathers. The OP suggested that this was entirely the fault of fathers, and others have suggested likewise. We're now closing in on the reality that there are many reasons, as I suggested in my first post on this thread, for why fathers don't see their kids in Ireland or Britain, and if we're going to discuss any issue relating to that, then we need to discuss ALL the issues.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement