One in four (3 million) children in the UK have harmfully-low levels of contact with one of their biological parents after divorce or separation. One in seven children has less than 7% of parenting-time with their fathers.
One third to half of child-arrangements in the UK, following separations of parents, are handled by the Family Courts. These orders control us and influence even self-made arrangements.
Countries around the world, most recently Australia in 2006, have instigated into their Family Law a presumption of shared-residence of children following divorce or separation of their parents.
Studies of children who have inadequate parenting-time with both biological parents, indicate that they have a significantly higher-risk of:
o Abuse of alcohol or drugs in childhood.
o Risky early sex, and in girls a high incidence of teenage pregnancy.
o Poor educational attainment.
o Abuse/neglect by the prime/resident parent (up to a four-fold increase).
o Mental & health problems in adult life.
o Being unemployed as an adult and failing in their relationships.
UK Family Courts have a ‘Mother Centric’ policy: that awards an estranged parent, often the father, an average of 0 to 7% of a child’s time, (a maximum of 23% in an uncontested case i.e. every other weekend and half the holidays). While no child arrangement can alleviate the damage of parental-separation in the first months, research has shown that spending 35-65% of non-educational time with both biological parents greatly reduces long-term risks of harm.
During 2006-14, the UK Parliament and MOJ reviewed and rejected repeated calls for a change in: Family Law, court rules, and court practices, to ensure shared-parenting following divorce or separation of parents. Instead, the UK continues to allow Family Courts to issue over 51,000 orders a year for the benefit of only one-parent, usually based on their gender, in a way that consistently harms, and abuses the human rights of, children and their other (estranged), parent.
Through fundraising, this fund will finance legal action (s) (e.g. Collective Redress Action) to compensate victims of 'No Contact' orders (AKA Indirect Contact Orders) made in UK Courts under Private Family Law, where there are no Criminal or Public Law convictions for violence or abuse, of any kind.
In the future, it is hoped all children will have a guarantee of shared-parenting in families that may contain separated biological parents, but are also families that are seen as life-style choices, rather than failures to be dealt with at court.
The DOUBTFIRE FUND was the idea of a small collection of authors and publishers. The concept is to support the cause of parents estranged from their offspring by Family Court intervention and who, like the fund's namesake, will do anything for their children
After 30-years of using a Mother Centric policy, the UK Family Courts have damaged the lives of an estimated 3 million parents & children. This fund will finance legal action(s) to bring about much needed change in family law.
Donations go automatically to a community bank account. Gifts will be made to a charity(s) who agree to do research, or manage a litigation team working with a selection of parents and/or children seriously harmed by Family Court rulings.
Donating even a small amount will help us fund our mission.
If you are in court over your children and handling litigation yourself, go to the Help4 Litigants in Person section for low-cost help.
I am looking for: any qualified lawyer in Family Law, who has personally been affected by the abuse of father's rights in the UK Family Courts and would like to volunteer for technical or sub-editing of publications by Manhandle Press. Also, for those with a lot of time to spare, help in fundraising articles and qualifying case histories.
Want help with your court case? Go to Help4 Litigants in Person and review the information, free help lines and Court Document Templates.