Did the President lie to Parliament? by Robert Whiston

STATEMENT FROM LEADING EQUAL PARENTING RESEARCHER, ROBERT WHISTON

Family Justice and Family Courts - discounting NAPO

Commenting on Harry Fletcher's response to the report published by the Constitutional Affairs Committee, we should bear in mind the accuracy of his figures (see NAPO press release below this statement).

Observers will recall that, during the course of the Inquiry, Keith Vaz MP asked Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss (the top family court judge) for her view on the perception that the family court system is biased against fathers. Dame Elizabeth replied "..... it is untrue for a number of reasons. First of all, the Children Act requires us to treat spouses equally and parents equally, and my experience is that we do. I must have found, like both my brethren, for fathers on many, many occasions ...."

["MINUTES OF EVIDENCE: Question 23 taken before Constitutional Affairs Committee Family Justice: The Operation of the Family Courts. (Tuesday 9 November 2004)"]

With regard her claim to have "found" for fathers "on many, many occasions", in actual fact, of the 50 cases that came before the High Court in 2004 (when approx. 140,000 were dealt with at County Court level) only 8 were found in favour of the father, 15 others were 'dismissed' and 8 more were 'struck out'(see Judicial Statistics, 2004, Table 1.16).

'Finding in favour of the father' does not mean that the father wins the custody dispute. The above inconsistencies were brought to the attention of the Clerk to the Constitutional Affairs Committee during the Inquiry.

Was Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss being economical with the truth when answering Keith Vaz's question? Was she knowingly committing perjury or are there other disproving statistics we are not able to access?

As for Harry Fletcher he is correct when he asserts that 'research shows that only 0.8% of fathers are actually refused contact'. But it is misleading to leave matters there. As the recent Lords debate once again revealed, over 40% of separated fathers, i.e. 70,000 fathers (and increasing), have no meaningful contact with their children.

Properly gathered statistics never lie - it is the damnable 'people with an agenda' who twist and manipulate them.

ROBERT WHISTON

Family Courts - Napo's Press Release of 2 March 05


PRESS STATEMENT

Family Justice and Family Courts

Commenting on today's report, published by the Constitutional Affairs Committee, Harry Fletcher, Assistant General Secretary of Napo, the Family Court Union, said:

"The finding that there is no systemic bias against fathers in court proceedings is most welcome. Research shows that only 0.8% of fathers are actually refused contact. Family disputes only get to Court where all other procedures have failed. The recommendation therefore for greater emphasis on mediation is surprising."

He added:

"Any steps to reduce delay would be very positive. Opening up the courts to greater public and media attention will improve confidence providing that the rights of children are always protected."

ends

For further information Harry Fletcher, Napo, 020 7223 4887