Madrid Conference on February 22, 2013 – Spain’s abandonment of EU laws

• Programa Congreso Familia 2013 – “Buenos tratos en el ambito familiar”

D. ROBERT WHISTON – Título de su ponencia: “Situación en Europa: presunción de inocencia, detenciones y sentencias por conformidad en el contexto de la violencia intrafamiliar”

D. Robert Whiston es Presidente de la Plataforma de Padres Europeos (PEF), con representación en el Parlamento Europeo en Bruselas. La mayor parte de su carrera la ha desarrollado en torno a los negocios y las finanzas, por lo cual durante los últimos 20 años se fue involucrando progresivamente en el análisis de la investigación y la precisión de las estadísticas del gobierno. Desde 1999, sus análisis de políticas gubernamentales han dado como resultado el asesorar de manera ocasional a una variedad de ministros. Ha sido profesor de investigación para varias organizaciones benéficas y, como padre que tuvo que sacar adelante a dos hijos pequeños él solo, fue presidente de dos asociaciones de derechos paternales. Actualmente es el presidente de Men’s Aid, con sede en el Reino Unido, y el año pasado fue elegido presidente de la PEF, Plataforma de Padres Europeos, con sede en Bruselas. Robert ha aparecido en numerosos programas de radio y televisión y es autor de numerosos artículos técnicos relacionados con la violencia intrafamiliar (incluidas víctimas masculinas dentro de la VIF), derechos y protección del menor,  custodia paterna, custodia de los hijos, custodia compartida y las oportunidades en la vida para los menores.

Situation of Spain in Europe: presumption of innocence, and arrests and convictions in the context of Spanish national domestic violence law and policies

Madrid speech, By Robert Whiston, February 22, 2013

Ladies and gentlemen,

Let me first say how delightful it is to be here, and a sincere “Thank you” to all of you for inviting me – especially the vivacious Antonia Maria Carrasco who sweet talked me into diverting from my planned trip to Brussels to be here today.

I wish my arrival was under better auspices but I have never been one from shying away from injustice. From what I hear the situation developing in Spain it is one of injustice.

This then is also a learning mission. I need to listen carefully to the experiences, worries and points of view. I want to hear from Spanish organisations and understand their agenda.

I may be a ‘common’ simple man but my humanity tells me it is not right, and never is, to kick a man when he is down – and that, I am afraid to say, is what our states / nations and governments and institutions are doing to us, its citizens.

There is a “democratic deficit” at the European Commission. It is too big and too remote from people. Now our own governments are treating us in the same way and another ‘voting right deficit’ is appearing.

Instead of empowering us and treating us as equals, able to make adult decisions, the modern state treats us as naughty children and infantilises us.

Who you may be asking is this man ? He doesn’t even speak Spanish.! ! My name is Robert Whiston and I have been active with various organisations in promoting men’s and fathers’ civil and equality rights for over 20 years.

I represent a recently formed organisation called the “Platform for European Fathers”, or PEF.

PEF is an independent European and cross-national Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO), based in Brussels as a federation of national organisations, who for some time past have been co-operating as individual national equal parenting-, involved fatherhood-, gender equality- and men’s and fathers’ civil rights organisations across European borders.

PEF is an open – ‘transparent’ is today’s buzz word – and supportive and co-operative service network and platform, aimed at giving a voice to member organisations at the European policy level and working in tandem with government, state institutions and pre-existing registered organisations.

It can be characterised as a vehicle to facilitate principally an equality of parenting for father and mothers, and the promotion of shared parenting and involved fatherhood to all 27 EU countries. But it is a vehicle sensitive to the needs of each member country.

Based on the premisses of our Founding Statement we have a welcoming “open door” policy to PEF membership. At present we are composed of 23 organisations from 15 European countries – including Spain and Portugal but extending as far afield as the Netherlands, Iceland, Belgium, Slovakia, Greece, the United Kingdom, Ireland, France, Hungary, Switzerland, Germany, Malta and Austria.

Our ‘Founding Statement’ sets out our MAIN OBJECTIVES. These include, in summary form:

1. The harmonisation of European social policies
2. The promotion of father inclusive and equal parenting policies in EU legislation and institutions
3. We seek the full implementation of all European Convention articles for Human Rights and the jurisprudence by the European Court for Human Rights in all European countries
4. To seek full gender equality in society, specially for fathers and fatherhood in the parenting and caring for children at home, in childcare and in education
5. To be inclusive to all organisations representing fathers with no gender discrimination
6. To further research and promote measures to address the increasingly evident “crisis among boys” in education in their role as potential future fathers

We do not include ‘the right to a fair trial’ and a ‘presumption of innocence until proven guilty’ as they are inalienable rights ‘taken as read’ in all European countries – or until now, for it appears as if Spain has abandoned that promise of fairness and justice.

Why do men and fathers need civil rights you may ask – haven’t they already got them ? Is it not women who need to try to catch up ?

Well ‘no’ that is a very wrong assumption. If you look at the Equality Acts the equal pay laws and all the other measures promoting ‘equality’ that litter the nations of the EU like confetti, very few of them think about making men as equal as women. They assume, like most of us, that men have everything already. But there are dozens of areas where men are disadvantaged.

During the conference I am hoping to be enlightened as to the Spanish experience of men being disadvantaged.

Triangles and Squares

PEF has a unified Pan European agenda that seeks to put involved, caring and educating fathers back into children’s lives and hearts and position them ‘centre stage’ along with mothers in a child’s life.

For too long children have been “orphaned” by the actions of the state, by new and allegedly reforming laws, and by the courts who are asked to carry out such dictates.

To alter that we need to alter the thinking and perceptions of politicians and civil servants (the bureaucracy), supporting them. We need to give a voice to the tens of millions of involved fathers in children’s lives, but also to the fathers and men in Europe and Spain aspiring to be involved fathers to thewir children, but who have become ‘dispossessed fathers’ – 2nd class citizens.

• In divorce scenarios what we find is a triangle of interests – on the left fathers, on the right mothers and at the bottom children. Laws have been passed to assist mothers’ rights and children but none passed to help fathers. They cannot be a close part of their children’s lives because the triangle blocks the move.
• In the legislation scenario we find a square frame – with mothers on the right, fathers on the left, politicians and lobbyists at the top and children at the bottom. And again movement for fathers is impossible.

For 30 years or more legislation has favoured women and mothers – in itself not a bad thing. But is this also true of Spain ?

Reformers’ have every time overlooked the truism and consequences of Pareto’s Efficiency dynamics, namely that:

‘no one can be made better off without making at least one individual worse off‘

Natural laws are broken at one’s own peril and we have only to look at the present economic mismanagement in Europe and around the financial world to see that ‘Gresham’s Law’ – the age old law that states; “bad money chases out good”, is not only alive but is thriving all around us.

If we upset and forget to re-set the natural equilibrium then we can expect discord and crisis to follow. This has happened in the Spanish financial world – as in my country – and also in legislation aimed at social policy and family law making.

The dynamics of marriage, of family life and of human relationships generally, have been ignored, some might say arrogantly, in the latter part of the 20th century and into the new millennium.

Therefore, as an example, at PEF our first step in 2011 was to support a reassessment of ‘paternity leave’ initiated by the Greens/Efa in the European Parliament. Some countries offer good paternity leave provisions but some offer very little.

Why paternity leave ?

Well first of all, ask any mother and the first days and weeks after giving birth can be fretful and tense. It is a time when you want your partner in parenting to be close at hand and not working and only available at the end of a telephone.

More essential however is for fathers to bond with their new child(ren) at the earliest possible stage and take their place and fair part and share in the hands on care and education of their children at home.

Finally it is also a time when household budgets are under maximum strain so paid paternity leave’ to match paid maternity leave is essential for most young couples.

But, of course, the biggest obstacles to equality for men in Europe is in the arena of child custody. All across Europe the tragic picture is the same. In Britain, to take one example, 40% of children whose parents divorce will, within 3 years, not see their father again. In the majority of cases this is not because fathers don’t want to or don’t care – far from it – it is the court regime that prevents easy access or contact and mothers who obstruct contact visits.

Why should mothers obstruct contact visits ?

The answer falls into three main causal components:

1. It can be the unfinished anger and resentment that lingers when one of the couples is unable to move on with their lives

2. Perhaps becoming divorced has not lived up to the rosier picture painted by glossy magazine description of ‘liberation’ and ‘self-autonomy’ etc she was expecting, or

3. It could be the result of having the need to maximize in state benefits and handouts.

False allegations

Now although I am president of PEF, I am also chairman of my own country’ men’s and fathers civil right group which is called “Men’s Aid.”

For them I work as the senior researcher and that, I must confess, is my first love. I am one of those rare people that love numbers and I can make sense of numbers as I read them and graphs pop up in my mind’s eye.

In terms of data, this fertile mind of mine takes me to some extraordinary places and reveals some startling facts and figures. So I end up becoming a walking encyclopaedia of a lot of knowledge no one really wants or thinks to ask for. However, I am very useful to researchers and journalists who want facts quickly.

This is how I become interested in domestic violence and false allegations in all its guises. I could see that allegations of domestic or sexual violence was a ‘sure fire’ way of negating any chance of a father having an on-going relationship with his children after divorce.

This was, in my opinion, not only underhand conduct and repugnant to the mind but was actually not censored by the courts. It was perverse and cruel – perjury was being rewarded in the courts and the British legal system seemed not to care because it was so endemic.

And the more I spoke to my European based colleagues the more this pattern of behaviour solidified.

Public opinion & demonstrations

What I am going to talk about now is not PEF policy or Men’s Aid policy but some personal observations – an overview – distilled over the years.

I am now too old to go demonstrating on the streets but in years gone by I did when in the UK various fathers groups came together and blockaded and picketed various judges home and country estates who were infamous (in our opinion) for being unreasonable in not allowing any father contact. We interrupted their normal, quiet routine.

It was a success. Demonstrations were food and drink for newspapers sales and public opinion swung in favour of fathers within 12 months.

Two years later judges could be found writing in their professional journals and being interviewed by the mainstream media about how they had now re-evaluated their position and had always admired fathers prepared to fight for the custody of their children.

Why is this a key point ?

The reason I reveal this is because I would normally be expected to be found opposing judges and the legal system, yet here I am speaking up on behalf of His Honour Judge Francisco Serrano.

Why am I doing this ?

The reasons are simple:-

1/. I have never been one from shying away from injustice and the treatment of judge Serrano for simply doing his duty in applying the law is intolerable.

2/. The circumstances in Spain regarding the arrest and imprisonment of men for allegedly saying offensive words or being found too close to the complainant wife or even in the same town is simply insane.

It contradicts all the human rights promises and obligations that Spain signed up to when it joined the EU. Such an unconstitutional and inhuman law cannot be allowed to remain.

Let me deal first with the treatment of judge Serrano. From my understanding of the events leading up to his suspension he simply gave permission for a father to take his child to a religious festival. The EU protects an individual’s religious freedoms and judge Serrano was simply upholding the law. And returning to PEF for a moment let me underline what was stated earlier namely the; full implementation of all European Convention articles for Human Rights.

There is no conflict of interest here for me or PEF. I see a man – we see a man – who has been oppressed by the authorities for standing up in the name of the law and doing his job. It is of no importance what his rank or wealth is. He is being oppressed and persecuted. It would have been all too easy for him to bow to the political pressure and do as he was told.

When I heard about this extraordinary case of the state apparatus turning in on itself and attacking judge Serrano I wrote an article on my personal blog entitled “‘Spanish Inquisition Returns’”.

I subtitled it: ‘Quis custodiet ipsos custodes ?‘

“Who guards the guardians ?” – And I have to say Spain has brought a new dimension to the phrase. It used to imply how could we trust our state guardians or maintain their impartiality and impeccability.

But now Spain has altered it to also mean how can we protect our trusted guardians from political interference in the way they performs their duties ?

What are the options ?
These are simply my personal observations and innocent musings. They are not a call to action or to resistance.

I invite you to enlighten me but at present the answer, it appears to me, is for you and me, the ordinary men and women of Spain – to protect our trusted guardians from political interference.

I spent a little time earlier explaining how singling out one individual has the effect of others in the same profession in not wanting to attract the same attention for fear of the same action.

The same dynamics apply to bureaucracies. They have spent 99% of their existence telling others what to do, when and how. These bullies are totally defenceless to fight off attackers or condemnation by public opinion by the people that they usually oppress.

If you want to eradicate the present unfair arrest and imprisonment of men it has to be legally “set aside” or simply ignored by the enforcement agencies.

Let me ask you, ‘What it is that governments fear most’ ? Is it economic collapse, or invasion ? No, it is civil disobedience.

Let me remind you of the action of lawyers and judges who went on strike in Pakistan. Withholding one’s labour for 1 month would achieve the same result – near anarchy and panic in government circles.

Or let me sketch out another imaginary scenario. If police officers are to lose their jobs because they also are going to be accused of a crime and long before the trail they lose all contact with their children, their home and their income, why should they enforce the government’s legislation ?

With civil disobedience, either of the parties, the public, judiciary and police have the government ‘over a barrel’.

One person makes a difference

Time and again history has shown that one person can indeed make all the difference, for example, Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Winston Churchill, Charles De Gaulle, Malala Yousafzai, Aung San Suu Kyi ….  All that is needed is to galvanise behind an honest leader rather than a tyrant.

Politicians can be victims of pressure or their own politics and then we become victims of their decisions. Spain might not be in its present economic situation had the Republican government not shipped 500 tonnes of gold to Moscow for “safe keeping” in 1936.

Addressing the second point – that of impromptu arrest and imprisonment

I would remind you that it appears to contradict all the Spanish promises regarding EU human rights and consideration might be given to campaigns to counter it.

I would also remind you of Franco’s fictional 5th Column – allegedly a clandestine group of people who would undermine a larger group from within (which in 1936 meant the Republican stronghold of Madrid). This would involve acts of sabotage and campaigns of misinformation.

Misinformation in the West is endemic. Radical feminists in countless countries have all come up with a ‘1 in 4’ figure for the level of domestic violence or ‘inter-personal violence’ experienced by women.

What they do not say is how they all strive to meet that goal and what they do to achieve it. They also do not say loudly that it is ‘over a life time.’

The annual rates of offending in terms compatible with other data is between 2% and 4% per annum depending on country and marital status (married women being far less likely than single women).

Honesty such as this has landed me in trouble. As the only man at a Scotland Yard police seminar into domestic violence, I was asked not to return to the committee after 2 meetings. My sin was that I alone had read and memorised the full report (HORS 191), when others there had only written down the sentences that best suited their argument and politics.

In my humble opinion all the advanced Western countries have, since the early 1970s, faced a 5th Column without realising it because it is overt and not covert. Whole edifices of social normalcy and cultures have been convulsed by acts of sabotage and campaigns of misinformation.

In a book published in 2011 by Harvard professor Steven Pinker, for which I gathered some of the statistical data, violence in the West and domestic violence in particular has been falling dramatically for many years (Also see: Violence Vanquished; Pinker, S., The Wall Street Journal, 09/24/2011).

So why should Spain be so different that it needs such strict laws, and why do the mechanisms of that law infantilise the adult woman’s mind ?

Falling violence statistics are most unhelpful to the cause of Radical Feminism and the definition in the last 10 years has had to be expanded to off-set the decline.

I have nothing but admiration for those feminists – and I count Antonia Maria Carrasco in this category – who can rise above the petty, the self-interest of the Radical Feminists, and put their country’s interests, human rights and their nation’s welfare above all other considerations.

In terms of sexual violence UK government statistics were always absurdly high. A few years ago an independent government report at last endorsed my findings (The Stern Review). The previously used definition was misleading and erroneous; the conviction rate was simply ludicrous and the level of offending was no where as high as the UK government statistics had always insisted and the array of ages was all wrong.

There are several possible candidates for why social normalcy has been convulsed, but many feel that radical feminism, as clearly distinct from the many other forms of equality oriented feminism, is a prime suspect. Radical feminism is a fashion which, I believe, will run its course as the public wakes up to the damage it is inflicting and it will finally fizzle out.

In the meantime the infiltration has been through the organs of the state and through institutions – even the venue of this conference was not above attack.

Radical feminist theory is not shy in making its position clear – it wants power and control. It wants dominance, i.e. ‘equality’ not for humanity in general but to benefit only a small clique. ‘Working class’ men and women do not figure in their equation. Above all else, it is a dangerously manipulative ideology. Therefore, in terms of their political philosophy, the answer is clear – the disposal of rivals by whatever means.

Which brings us back to the problem of political corruption and how and who will guarantee public servants are able to perform their jobs impartially and be free from corrupting blackmail.

You, the proud people of Spain, a country my family has loved for 3 generations, do not have to suffer this indignity.

There are options. To conclude, let me therefore give strengthening resolve for the balancing struggle to come, for that is what will need to happen, by recalling some words of Churchill in the darkest days, when France, in May 1940, had just surrendered and Britain stood alone and with only half an army.

The French generals told their Prime Minister (and his divided Cabinet): ”In 3 weeks England will have her neck wrung like a chicken.” In recalling this prediction just over a year later, in Dec. 1941, to the Canadian government in Ottawa Churchill exclaimed:

“Some chicken ! Some neck !”

Thank you.

Robert Whiston 

END

PEF Annual General Meeting in Brussels from 16-18 December 2012

PEF Annual General Meeting in Brussels from 16-18 December 2012

The PEF Annual General Meeting 2012 (AGM 2012) will be held on 17 and 18 December 2012 in the Centre of Brussels in Belgium.
(Staying accomodation, breakfast, lunches and dinners will be provided by PEF at the venue. Attendance and participation on invitation only.)

Program:

Sunday 16 December 2012:
Sunday afternoon: Adviced arrival time in Brussels
Sunday evening: Shared diner of participants and accomodation arrangements.

Monday 17 December 2012:
8:00 – 9:00 Shared breakfast
9:00 – 12:00 First meeting session
12:00 – 13:30 Shared lunch
13:30 – 17:00 Second meeting session
18:00 – 20:00 Shared Dinner

Evening free to visit Brussels

Tuesday 18 December 2012:
8:00 – 9:00 Shared breakfast
9:00 – 12:00 Third meeting session
12:00 – 13:30 Shared lunch
13:30 – 17:00 Fourth meeting session
18:00 – 20:00 Shared Dinner

Return home

More information:

Peter Tromp, Netherlands
General Secretary PEF
Tel. 0031302383636
Skype username: Peterpan17

Igualdade Parental Portugal – Dia Internacional de Consciencialização sobre a Alienação Parental 25 de Abril de 2012 (International Parental Alienation Awareness Day)

Dia Internacional de Consciencialização
sobre a Alienação Parental
25 de Abril de 2012

Associação para a Igualdade Parental e Direitos dos Filhos, COMUNICADO, 25 de Abril de 2012

A Associação Portuguesa para a Igualdade Parental e Direitos dos Filhos, vem associar-se ao movimento internacional criado com o Dia Internacional da Consciencialização da Alienação Parental que, em 25 de Abril, pretende alertar a opinião pública para um fenómeno que está presente nas relações entre casais separados quando um dos progenitores pretende alienar o outro junto dos filhos.

Todos gostamos e temos direito a ter pai e mãe nas nossas vidas, independentemente de eles estarem juntos ou separados.

A criança e o jovem, precisam de reconhecer-se no pai e na mãe e ser reconhecidos por eles, construindo a partir daí a sua própria identidade.

Quando isto não acontece, a criança irá gradualmente buscar uma segurança exterior, para compensar a insegurança interior relacionada com a sua identidade. Os exemplos em que as crianças e os jovens buscam a sua identidade no exterior, por uma fragilidade interna, derivada de ausência de pai ou mãe são, infelizmente, muitos e alguns deles públicos.

É por isso condenável que, sobretudo nas situações de separação, um dos progenitores pretenda afastar os filhos da vida do outro, afastando normalmente aquele com que a criança não convive diariamente. Os filhos são influenciados pelos pais, através do exemplo destes.

Os pretextos para criar afastamento e denegrir a imagem do pai ou da mãe que não convivem com as crianças e / ou jovens, são múltiplos e cada vez mais conhecidos. Podem ser mais primários ou mais perversos. Ambas as situações destroem a identidade das crianças e dos adolescentes, com danos para a sua vida futura onde se salientam:
- dificuldades de relação com a autoridade e a frustação;
- problemas de identidade sexual;
- doenças psicossomáticas;
- baixa auto-confiança;
- dificuldade no estabelecimento de relações interpessoais saudáveis e pautadas pela assertividade;

Na comemoração deste ano, cabe também lembrar o envolvimento da Platform for European Fathers (PEF), uma estrutura que agrega um conjunto alargado de associações europeias que têm como objectivo sensibilizar as autoridades europeias e nacionais para as questões da igualdade parental, quando são chamadas a resolver conflitos parentais.

O dia 25 de Abril é, também neste contexto, e por extensão, como em tantos outros, uma chamada de atenção, mais do que de reflexão, para a justiça portuguesa que, quando chamada a arbitrar conflitos entre os progenitores das crianças e dos jovens, adopta muitas vezes decisões que sancionam comportamentos de alienação parental, promovendo e sancionando o afastamento de um progenitor em relação ao outro.

Fá-lo por ignorância nuns casos e noutros por negligência consciente. Em ambos os casos, invocando também, perversamente, o superior interesse da criança, quando este é na sua essência, ter pai, mãe e restante família alargada.

Cabe a cada um e a todos em conjunto, termos crianças e adolescentes mentalmente sãos e socialmente integrados. Para isso temos que garantir que todas as crianças e jovens possam ter liberdade de afectos pelo seu pai e mãe, sem constrangimentos destes ou de terceiros.

Para o dia 25 de Abril, a Associação tem previstas as seguintes actividades:

Lisboa
Lançamento de Balões
Distribuição de brochuras sobre a Alienação Parental
Terreiro do Paço, 15h

Évora
Lançamento de Balões
Distribuição de brochuras sobre a Alienação Parental
Praça do Giraldo, 15h

Coimbra
Distribuição de brochuras sobre a Alienação Parental (ação de sensibilização junto da população)
Parque Verde do Mondego, 11h

Porto
Exibição do documentário “Indíziel – A Alienação Parental em Portugal”
Casa da Cultura de Paranhos, 15h

Informações:
Tel. 910429050
e.mail: igualdadeparental@gmail.com

Associação para a Igualdade Parental e Direitos dos Filhos | Apartado 9865, EC Olaias, 1911-701 Lisboa |
NIPC: 509248705 | Matriculada na CRC de Odivelas sob o nº 1156/2009 | www.igualdadeparental.org |
e-mail: igualdadeparental@gmail.com | Telem. 910429050 http://igualdadeparental.blogspot.com |
www.facebook.com/igualdadeparental | http://www.youtube.com/user/IgualdadeParental

Sygapa Greece – Σύλλογος για την Ανδρική και Πατρική Αξιοπρέπεια (ΣΥ.Γ.Α.Π.Α.) – International Parental Alienation Awareness Day in Thessaloniki, Greece (April 25, 2012)

ΗΜΕΡΑ ΑΠΟΞΕΝΩΣΗΣ: 25 ΑΠΡΙΛΙΟΥ 2012 – P.A.S.

http://www.facebook.com/events/266573106764145/

Event for Σύλλογος για την Ανδρική και Πατρική Αξιοπρέπεια(ΣΥ.Γ.Α.Π.Α.)

Wednesday 25 April 2012 – 13:00 hours in UTC+03

SYGAPA – ΣΥΓΑΠΑ

Στις 25 Απριλίου καθορίστηκε η Παγκόσμια Ημέρα Αποξένωσης.

http://www.healthierworld.gr/portal/cc7146d26842552e/31ab328e47c4ea3f/d87c68a56bc8eb80/22e7bec3a6dfe804/da92ce36d3c841c7.html

Στη Θεσσαλονίκη λοιπόν, τη Τετάρτη 25 Απριλίου 2012 και ώρα 1μμ (13.00), στο ύψος του Flocafe, στην παραλία, Λεωφ. Νίκης 48 θα πραγματοποιήσουμε όπως και πέρισυ διαμαρτυρία με πανό, κλείσιμο δρόμου και διανομή φυλλαδίων/ενημέρωσης.

http://www.goodchannel.gr/draseis/pagkosmia+hmera+apoksenwsis-47052

Δέστε περισινές εκδηλώσεις και καταγραφή σε εφημερίδες, περιοδικά, ραδιόφωνο, φωτογραφίες.

www.sos-sygapa.eu

Thessalonike, Thessaloniki, Greece:

Display map

Wednesday 25 APRIL 2012 – PAS
Event for the Society for Male and Paternal Dignity (SY.G.A.P.A.)
Wednesday 25 April 2012 – 13:00 hours in UTC +03

SYGAPA
On April 25, established the World Day of alienation.

In Thessaloniki, therefore, to Wednesday, April 25, 2012 at 1pm (13.00) at the height of Flocafe, the beach, 48 Victory Avenue will hold last year as a protest banners, street closures and distribution of leaflets / information.
http://www.goodchannel.gr/draseis/pagkosmia+hmera+apoksenwsis-47052

Tie perisines and recording events in newspapers, magazines, radio, photos.
www.sos-sygapa.eu

Thessalonike, Thessaloniki, Greece
View map • Get directions

SOS Papa Belgique – L’aliénation parentale, la non présentation d’enfant! Les créances affectives! – Parental Alienation, keeping away a child from its parent! The affective and emotional damages! (International Parental Alienation Awareness Day – April 25, 2012)

L’aliénation parentale, la non présentation d’enfant! Les créances affectives!

SOS-Papa Belgique, Press Communiqué, Bruxelles le 4 avril 2012

COMMUNIQUE DE PRESSE:

Mercredi 25 avril 2012, à l’occasion de la journée internationale de l’aliénation parentale, SOS PAPA Belgique asbl manifestera devant le site Portalis – Tribunal de la jeunesse, rue des Quatre Bras, 4 – 1000 Bruxelles. Outre, le fonds des créances alimentaires, ces membres aimeraient soulever la question des créances affectives qui sont dues à l’enfant et qui ne sont jamais récupérables.

Les créances affectives sont les droits aux hébergements secondaires et/ou égalitaires et le droit aux relations personnelles qui ne sont pas respectés. Ces créances non financières sont irremplaçables et elles causent des dommages irréparables dans le développement, l’éducation et l’épanouissement de l’enfant.

La loi implique le principe des contacts entre l’enfant et le parent secondaire. Mais rien dans la Loi, ne précise ou ne garantit cet hébergement secondaire. Celui-ci est laissé à l’appréciation des juges, qui décident selon une « intime conviction », en fonction d’habitudes judiciaires fluctuantes d’une jurisdiction à une autre. L’usage jurisprudentiel consacre souvent un weekend sur deux et la moitié des vacances.

Cet usage conduit à la rupture du lien affectif. Ceci est une maltraitance envers l’enfant.

S’il existe une pratique judiciaire qui mérite d’être épinglée c’est bien celle là! Chaque weekend le droit d’hébergement accordé par décision judiciaire est violé à des milliers d’exemplaire. Il l’est, tout autant, pendant les périodes de vacances dans l’indifférence de ceux qui devraient au moins tenter d’endiguer ce phénomène massif, très pénalisant, qui accable les parents évincés au point de bouleverser leur vie.

En première ligne et à de rare exception près, on trouve les substituts de permanence qui respondent laconiquement aux services de police alertés dès le vendredi soir par les parents frustrés de leur progéniture : «qu’il (elle) dépose une plainte mais ça peut attendre lundi». Services de police débordés qui aussi se désintéressent du problème en ne voulant pas recevoir la plainte.

On ne compte plus les situations où après dix plaintes voire beaucoup plus, le parent gardien ne subit aucune sanction. Un véritable encouragement à s’installer dans l’illégalité.

La non présentation d’enfant est une situation, d’autant plus, difficile à vivre pour les parents qui en sont victimes, qu’elle empêche l’exécution d’une décision judiciaire.

Voilà pour le constat, personne ne l’ignore et cela à toujours plus ou moins fonctionné ainsi.

C’est à proprement parler un constat d’échec. Les parents évincés attendent autre chose que de l’indifférence.

Hébergement secondaire – anciennement « droit de visite » S’il est vrai que la solution de l’hébergement égalitaire a fait des progrès, il est loin de faire l’unanimité dans les milieux féministes. Le droit d’hébergement secondaire reste la solution la plus utilisée, du moins en théorie, puisque dans bien des cas ce droit est systématiquement violé par des parents qui n’ont aucun scrupule.

La Ministre a cité (en 2003) le chiffre de 17.345 plaintes pour non-respect du droit de visite. D’autres sources évoquaient aisément 50.000 droits d’hébergement secondaire non respectés. Dans le même temps, les études menées (en France, Grande-Bretagne, Pays-Bas) révélaient qu’entre 14 et 43% d’enfants n’avaient plus de contact avec l’un des parents, souvent le père.

Les spécialistes en matière de prévention présents aux états généraux de la famille ont cité le divorce conflictuel comme cause principale de rupture de lien avec un des parents.

Or, les enfants ont besoin de liens affectifs étroits avec leurs deux parents.

Le pouvoir judiciaire doit intervenir pour imposer un autre système qui puisse garantir aux enfants de garder leurs deux parents. Le modèle de Cochem pourrait être une solution.

Quelle est la réalité en Belgique aujourd’hui? Annuellement, par mille habitants, il y a quatre unions et trois séparations! En prenant le nombre moyen de fécondité par couple, nous arrivons à 66.000 enfants concernés.

La rupture du lien parental mérite une sérieuse réflexion sur les origines et les conséquences. Le non-respect de l’hébergement secondaire conduit trop souvent à la rupture du lien affectif parental. Il est souvent le fait du « parent principal » qui refuse de donner accès à l’autre parent. Les raisons invoquées s’apparentent à des doutes ou à des accusations (attestations médicales, spéculations de violence, fausses accusations d’abus sexuels, volonté supposée de l’enfant etc…).

Si le « parent principal » garde une responsabilité personnelle en cas de non présentation d’enfant, il est, néanmoins, rarement sanctionné pour ce délit. La majorité des plaintes n’ont pas d’incidence dans l’obligation de remettre les enfants. La correctionnalisation du délit prend beaucoup de temps et ce temps va à l’encontre de l’intérêt de l’enfant.

De plus, la pénalisation ne donne lieu que très exceptionnellement à une condamnation voir un emprisonnement. Pourtant, ce délit s’apparente à un « rapt parental » mais il est rarement vu ainsi par les juges (souvent des femmes). La complaisance des juges va même jusqu’à, pour soustraire le parent principal des plaintes ou de citation directe en correctionnelle, décider de retirer tout simplement l’hébergement au parent secondaire. Cette pratique s’est rodée dans les tribunaux.

En revanche, si un «parent secondaire» n’exerce plus son droit de visite, on estime que l’enfant vit un traumatisme à cause du peu d’intérêt que son parent lui porte (souvent le père). Dans ce cas, la jurisprudence a imaginé un dédommagement sous forme d’astreinte. Un pragmatisme étonnant dès lors qu’il y a un intérêt d’argent !

Il découle de cette situation routinière un sentiment d’injustice qui, dans bien des situations, va entrainer des conséquences qui peuvent aller jusqu’au suicide. On est alors étonné du geste désespéré mais aussi du silence assourdissant et gêné qui accompagne l’effroyable nouvelle.

Les pouvoirs publics n’ont pas de réponse aux abus de pouvoir du « parent principal ». Or, il ne s’agit que de justice égalitaire, au lieu de viles spéculations sur les dangers pour l’enfant. Les dictons oubliés disent ‘élève ton enfant dans la justice, il aura le sens de la loyauté’.

Intérêt et conséquences pour les enfants L’enfant est otage : tantôt isolé par le « parent principal » qui parvient à empêcher l’enfant de voir son autre parent ; tantôt rejeté par le « parent secondaire » qui n’arrive plus à supporter la terrible pression à la fois psychologique, étatique et financière.

Il est terrible pour un enfant que de voir un parent souffrant, « démoli » par le système institutionnel. En effet, l’intérêt fondamental de l’enfant exige d’avoir des parents en bonne santé psychique et économique, qui puissent contribuer à l’épanouissement de leurs enfants.

Or, la privation des enfants, qui touche beaucoup d’hommes, peut être vécue comme une torture. Elle affecte dangereusement la santé et la collectivité. Les conséquences sont terribles pour l’enfant, enjeu d’un amour démesuré, qui subit des pathologies irrémédiables dans son développement émotionnel et psychologique.

Les conditions économiques futures de l’enfant sont aussi entravées puisque le patrimoine familial, l’avenir financier et professionnel sont compromis. L’ethnographe Pascale JAMOULE, observatrice neutre le décrit bien dans son dernier ouvrage.
Quel projet?

Certains tribunaux ont pris en compte les recommandations de l’école Gardner et menacent d’inverser le droit d’hébergement du parent principal dans les cas d’aliénation parentale avérée comme un réel outil de dissuasion mais c’est sans compter avec la pression médiatique.

SOS PAPA Belgique asbl – Place de la digue, 1 bte 4 – 6000 Charleroi | N° d’entreprise: 0826 414 264 – N° CB: 751-2052377-91 | Tél. : 071/33.04.06 | Micheline Van Gyseghem – présidente, Kérim Maamer – secrétaire, Vincenzo Semeraro – trésorier, Philippe Deladrière – administrateur | Contact: 0470/822.470 | http://sospapa.info | email : vincenzo@sospapa.info

COMMUNIQUE DE PRESSE:

Parental Alienation, keeping away a child from its parent! The affective and emotional damages!

SOS-Papa Belgium, PRESS RELEASE, Brussels April 4, 2012

Translated from French to English by Google

Wednesday, April 25, 2012, to mark the International Day of parental alienation, SOS PAPA Belgium vzw manifested before the site Portalis – Youth Court, rue des Quatre Bras, 4-1000 Brussels. Furthermore, the fund of maintenance claims, these members would raise the issue of emotional claims that are due to the child and who are never recoverable.

Receivables are emotional human side to the accommodation and / or equality and the right to personal relationships that are not respected. These non-financial receivables are irreplaceable and they cause irreparable damage in the development, education and child development.

The law implies the principle of contact between the child and the parent school. But nothing in the Act, defined or secondary guarantees this accommodation. This is at the discretion of judges, who decide on a “firm conviction” based on judicial habits fluctuating from one jurisdiction to another. The use case law often spend a weekend on two and half vacation. This usage leads to the breakdown of emotional connection. This is child maltreatment.

If there is a judicial practice that deserves to be pinned this is it there! Every weekend the right hosting provided by court order is violated thousands of copies. He is just as much during the holiday periods in the indifference of those who should at least try to stem this massive phenomenon, very penalizing, that overwhelms parents squeezed to the point of disrupting their lives.

In the first line and rare exception, there are substitutes that meet continuously laconically alerted the police on Friday evening by parents frustrated with their offspring, “he (she) makes a complaint but it can wait Monday. ” Overwhelmed police who also lost interest in the problem unwilling to receive the complaint.

There are countless situations where after ten or more complaints, the custodial parent does not suffer any penalty. A real encouragement to settle illegally.

The child is not presented with a situation, especially, difficult experience for parents who are its victims, it prevents the execution of a judicial decision.

That’s the finding, and everyone knows it to more or less worked well.

This is strictly a failure. Parents evicted expect anything but indifference.

Secondary Accommodation – formerly “visitation”

While the solution of the equal housing has made progress, it is far from unanimous in feminist circles. The right hosting secondary remains the most used, at least in theory, since in many cases this right is systematically violated by parents who have no scruples.

The Minister cited (in 2003) the figure of 17,345 complaints for breach of access rights. Other sources easily evoked 50,000 secondary hosting rights are not respected. At the same time, studies (in France, Britain, Netherlands) revealed that between 14 and 43% of children had no contact with one parent, usually the father.

Specialists in prevention present at the general state of family conflict divorce cited as the main cause of failure of a link with parents.

However, children need emotional closeness with both parents.

The judiciary must intervene to impose another system that can ensure that children keep their parents. The model of Cochem could be a solution.

What is the reality today in Belgium? Annually per thousand inhabitants, there are four unions and three separations! Taking the average fertility per couple, we arrive at 66,000 children involved.

The termination of the parental merits serious reflection on the origins and consequences. The failure of the secondary housing too often leads to the breakdown of parent-child attachment. It is often the result of the “primary parent” who refuses to give access to the other parent.

The reasons are similar to doubts or charges (medical certificates, speculation of violence, false accusations of sexual abuse, alleged will of the child etc …).

If the “primary parent” keeps a personal liability in case of no show for children, it is nevertheless rarely punished for this crime. Most complaints do not affect the obligation to return the children. The correctionnalisation the offense takes a long time and this time goes against the interests of the child.

Moreover, the penalty does not give rise to only very rarely see a prison sentence. However, this offense is similar to a “parental abduction” but it is rarely seen by the judges (often women). Complacency of judges will even, to subtract the primary parent complaints or direct quotation in magistrate decide to remove simply hosting the secondary parent. This practice has honed in the courts. However, if a “secondary parent” no longer carries the right of access, it is estimated that the child lives trauma because of little interest to him than its parent carrier (usually the father). In this case, the courts have devised a compensation in the form of a fine. Pragmatism surprising therefore that there is interest money!

It follows from this routine a sense of injustice that, in many situations, will result in consequences that can lead to suicide. We are then surprised by the gesture of despair but also of the deafening silence and embarrassed that accompanies the dreadful news.

Governments have no response to abuse of power “primary parent”. Now it is only of equal justice, instead of vile speculation about harm to the child. The forgotten sayings say “raise your children in righteousness, he will have the sense of loyalty.“

Interest and impact on children

The child hostage: sometimes isolated by the “primary parent” who manages to prevent the child from seeing the other parent, sometimes rejected by the “parent school” that can no longer withstand the tremendous pressure both psychological and state funding.

It is terrible for a child to see an ailing parent, “demolished” by the institutional system. Indeed, the fundamental interest of the child requires parents to have healthy psychological and economic, which may contribute to the development of their children.

However, the deprivation of children, which affects many men, may be experienced as torture. It critically affects the health and community. The consequences are terrible for the child, issue of inordinate love, which undergoes irreversible pathologies in his emotional and psychological development.

Future economic conditions of the child are also made difficult because the family estate, professional and financial future are compromised. The ethnographer JAMOULE Pascale, neutral observer describes it well in his last work.

What project?

Some courts have considered the recommendations of the Gardner school and threaten to reverse the right to host the primary parent in cases of parental alienation proved to be a real deterrent but it is not factored in the media pressure .

Translated from French to English by Google

SOS PAPA Belgique asbl – Place de la digue, 1 bte 4 – 6000 Charleroi | N° d’entreprise: 0826 414 264 – N° CB: 751-2052377-91 | Tél. : 071/33.04.06  | Micheline Van Gyseghem – présidente, Kérim Maamer – secrétaire, Vincenzo Semeraro – trésorier, Philippe Deladrière – administrateur | Contact: 0470/822.470 | http://sospapa.info | email : vincenzo@sospapa.info

Welcome to the Platform for European Fathers (PEF)

The Platform for European Fathers (PEF) was founded at the European Parliament building in Brussels, Belgium on Monday June 27, 2011.

On the initiative of mr. Peter Tromp, chair of the Dutch ‘Vader Kennis Centrum‘ (Father Knowledge Centre), and made possible with the support of MEP mrs. Marije Cornelissen from the Greens/EFE in the European Parliament, participants of 16 father-, fatherhood- and equal parenting organisations came together on Monday 27th of June, 2011 at the PEF founding meeting in the European Parliament building in Brussels, Belgium to agree and sign the Founding Statement for the EU federational NGO ‘Platform for European Fathers’ (PEF).

• The PEF Founding Statement can be read here.
• The listing of present participating Member Organisations of PEF can be found here.

Marije Cornellissen (MEP Dutch Greens/EFA), the 'founding mother' surrounded by the founding fathers of the 'Platform for European Fathers (PEF)'. Left to right: André Müller (VeV, Switserland), Alan Beirne (PEI, Ireland), Rüdiger Meyer-Spelbrink (VAfK, Germany), Paul Coleman (PEI, Ireland), Rob Williams (Fatherhood Institute, UK, Vice Chair PEF), Robert Pigott:(IMN, Ireland), Heimir Hilmarsson (EPI, Iceland), Marije Cornellisse (MEP Dutch Greens/EFA), Jan van Baelen (VKC, Belgium), ??, Peter Tromp (VKC, Netherlands, Primary founding father and PEF Secretary), Robert Whiston (Men's Aid, UK), Vincenso Semeraro (SOS Papa, Belgium), Joseph Egan (PEI, Ireland, Chair PEF), Attila Vida (EAÉE, Hungary), Konstantina Davaki (Guest speaker LSE, UK), Pedro Duffill Hobbs (UEFFACC, Spain), Klaus Gerosa (VafK, Germany), Oliver Peter Hofmann (MP, Austria). (Not pictured in this photo: Paulo Leitao (LR, Portugal), Luis de Sousa (IP, Portugal), Sean Kelly (MSGI, Ireland), Elephterias Ayfantis (Sygapa, Greece)).

The founding of the Platform for European Fathers (PEF) was welcomed at the ‘European fathers’ congress’ in the European Parliament that was organised by the Greens/EFA on June 28, 2011 in support of paternity leave.

From the member organisations: Special Christmas Celebration for separated and divorced fathers in Vorarlberg, Austria

“Papa gibt Gas“, one of the four Austrian member organisations of the Platform for European Fathers (PEF), together with the Catholic church organises a special Christmas Celebration for separated and divorced fathers on December 24 at 14:00 hours, in the church of “Maria Bildstein” in Vorarlberg, Austria.

“Papa gibt Gas” sends Christmas greetings to all fathers in Europe and wishes them power, strength, hope and good luck for the future.