No justice for dads
HAVING never put pen to paper before, I felt compelled to finally have the courage to do so. Having left the family home, I never actually thought the island's justice system would be so one-sided in favour of the woman. I am a man who gave up work to bring up my two children. I basically did everything a mother would do, i.e. clean, cook, washing, playgroups – you name it, I did it.
Well, having spent nearly £30,000 on court and advocate fees, I feel it is time for this island to change.
Having had court orders in place saying there was no reason for me not to see my children, who I love and care about, the mother still flouted this and made it very difficult for me to see them, with no repercussions. I began to think, what a complete and utter waste of time and money.
I can only see them when approved by the mother, by a female judge and a female safeguarder.
Do you and your fellow readers think that as a father who pays money each week to these lovely children who have been turned against me I should have the right to not pay this maintenance, as from what I am being told I have no rights anyway?
Come on States of Guernsey and the Safeguarder board, make it an equal playing field for us men.
Name and address withheld.
Editor's footnote: The above letter has had to be edited heavily in accord with the Safeguarder comment below.
Sue Vaughan, head of Safeguarder Services, replies: 'The Safeguarder Service cannot disclose information relating to individual children who are, or were, the subject of court proceedings.
The Safeguarder Service takes the view that the identities of individual children may be ascertainable from the detail of the letters you have received.
The court procedure contains a number of checks and balances and the evidence of a single social worker or safeguarder is never heard in isolation. Their evidence, as well as the evidence of parents and other witnesses, is tested by the other parties and assessed by the judge in the context of a plethora of other evidence and information in the proceedings.
A complaints procedure exists for complaints about social workers and a separate procedure exists for complaints about a safeguarder. Additionally, it is open to a party in proceedings to appeal against the decision of the court. Such an appeal provides an opportunity for a different court to examine the law and the detailed facts from the case to which, for reasons of confidentiality, discussion in the Press can never do justice.'
