The leadership of the federal Labor Party abandoned Victorian MP Greg Wilton in the days before his suicide five years ago, his sister said today. Leeanda Wilton today publicly backed Mark Latham over his claims last week that a toxic political environment inside the ALP contributed to Mr Wilton’s death in June 2000. Mr Latham […]
MEDICAL experts who last week accused the Family Court of not caring about children yesterday blasted Chief Justice Diana Bryant for releasing a judgment critical of their evidence.
Brisbane psychiatrist Brian Ross said the court’s reaction “highlighted the perversity of a system that didn’t get the truth”.
Dr Ross said the mother involved in a custody battle over two young children had been a patient of his for three years and for the court to accuse her of being vindictive against her former husband was “a blatant misrepresentation of the truth”.
“She had no agenda. Her issue was to be protective of her children,” Dr Ross said.
Family Court of Australia Chief Justice Diana Bryant said yesterday that both public interest and the interests of the children “demanded” the details be released, to protect both the children and public confidence in the court itself.
National media reports last week aired criticisms from Dr David Wood, state chairman of the Australian College of Paediatrics and the Abused Child Trust, and clinical psychologist Sue Aydon that the Family Court did not put children first, allowed experts to be bullied by lawyers and ignored expert medical advice put before it.
There have also been other kinds of change that affect child support policy. Since the late 1980s, there has been a substantial increase in the workforce participation of mothers, particularly through part-time employment. Children in intact families tend to be supported from the incomes of both parents. The Government is refocussing its income support and work participation policies to treat both parents as potential labour force participants with the aims of improving family wellbeing over the longer term and reducing welfare dependence.
The Child Support Agency, which began 15 years ago with high ideals, has turned into a costly bureaucratic nightmare which has failed to achieve any of its objectives.
Every dollar the CSA collects for child support costs $5.58, according to an analysis by the respected independent agency, PIR Independent Research.
PIR has calculated that the scheme costs taxpayers $5 billion a year in administration, increased welfare and lost taxation revenue.
The agony and frustration felt by many of the families who deal with the agency is reflected in the hundreds of letters which have poured into The West Australian in the past few weeks. It is the biggest response to any subject since the attack on New York’s twin towers on September 11, 2001.
Surely a man’s occupation could not influence his reproductive health. Wrong. Concern about sperm has blossomed with the advent of IVF – In Vitro Fertilisation.
Before that, infertility was often considered a female problem, but IVF professionals report a significant and perhaps increasing proportion of cases in which there are problems with sperm. Debate rages about whether male fertility is on the decline.
While most American women obsess about the laments of frazzled mothers, a handful of their daughters at Wake Forest University are turning their attention to the study of that mysterious and often-demonized species — fathers. Yep, you read it right. Fathers. Dear ol’ Dad. Remember him?
After a spectacular ‘dummy spit’ in response to the release of the PIR Report into the cost of CSA to the Australian Taxpayer, CSA General Manager, Cathy Argall has been moved to the Health Insurance Commission, and 2IC Sheila Bird is now the Acting General Manager, with ex Queensland Regional Registrar Angela Tillman appointed as Acting Assistant General Manager