Family Violence is still on the menu on Australian Family Court

Despite recent changes implementing family violence laws in the Family Court, Family Violence is still thriving.  Whilst the past year I have barely spent online, I have talked to hundreds of mothers affected by this mostly with recent cases where the judgments favor the perpetrator above the child and all victims involved.  Victims still barely have a voice.

Despite all the well crafted speeches from the court in public space, private-sphere is a different story.  Alike all forms of abuse occurring in private, so does human rights violations against the most vulnerable and least likely to afford the fine things in life that the courts actors enjoy at their expense(and sometimes the cost of a life): children and women.

The court relies all too heavily upon the notion that it makes its decisions based upon the rights of the convention of the child.  This is used to protect child's privacy, "best interests" and right to know the other parent.  I make no error in my judgement when I write that these interests are only upheld when the courts interests are upheld first and if they are compatible, the child's rights are not violated.

When family violence(not limited to domestic violence) is historical to the family, these interests usually clash with the courts.  This is because most victims are robbed of resources that the perpetrator has at his disposal.  The gender divide is just touching the surface when examining the root of the issue. Its why these laws do not work.  We could lobby again and change the laws to ensure that every child's voice is heard, but the reality is that the court navigates around these laws creatively and completely at each judges whim.  The political culture of the courts is ingrained in neoconservative values, over-toned by patriarchy with the old fashioned, "children and women should be seen and not heard".  One only needs to read the views of the judgments to find their own perfect flavor of disgust.  For many years, activists have continuely recommended the court become more open and tested with community values, but the best recommendation I have heard is a royal commission.  The court needs to be investigated, not merely touched superficially by a 2d tabloid view, but a thorough investigation where every aspect is examined.  Where the money trail is followed all the way to the end and every name of every child homicide is checked against the court records with or without the courts approval.  It is something that is no longer a request, idea or merely a discussion point:  Its an expectation.  Without it, the court remains liable to the deaths of all victims affected.

"We're not into case fixing...I can assure you that we have absolutely no knowledge, so there. Where was I..."

Jane*, a mother of three had corresponded over the years as other mothers have providing a horrific account of her story.  Leaving a violent paranoid schitzophrenic after the violence spilled out upon the children should have ended when she left.  "All I ever asked for was supervised contact, but they kept claiming that I was trying to get no contact at all", Jane provided the author correspondence confirming this was the case.
A man who had been evidentially violent and homicidal was allowed unsupervised access to the children and provided with their home address where he openly stalked and harrassed her at her home.
Despite contact with various legal advisers, officials and child protection, she was diverted back to the court that failed to protect the children.  Of course, there are many cases like these that are still being endured in silence, but what stands out is how a psychiatrists report claiming that he is suddenly cured of paranoid schitzophrenia, just in time for the court case.  The most interesting recommendation from the psychiatrist whom had not met the child at all was, "for the wellbeing of the father".  Despite an affidavit by the father raising concerns about the childs writing interpreted as a "secret code" to the mothers phone number, he is considered well enough to care fulltime on half the medication he was on previously.
"One has to wonder..whatever motivated them to act, was not in consideration of the child".
If there was any other motivator above political or idealogical, it has to be money and in *Janes case, money it was.  Googling her judges name one day, she found a document from the vicbar.  "I heard rumors that the entire bar was corrupt, but I simply put it down to a rumor".

Camoflaged in plain language, without its commentators conclusion, the reference to the judge could have been easily undone.  Its the fact that he defined his reference further to interpretation, denying unconvincingly that Federal Magistrate Norah Hartnett is "Not into case fixing", he needed to assure that they had no knowledge of a well defined description on how "case fixing" works.  "It explains why the judge told me one day that she read everything she needed to read(referring to his affidavit), she didn't need to read anything else".
*Jane is a pseudonym

Not the Family Courts Fault - No, that cannot be...

Any domestic violence expert or advocate would only need to take a two second glance at the latest articles on Kyla Rogers, to know that there must have been a family violence history leading up to this tragedy. Most murder suicides are. In light of sentencing Arthur Freeman, they thought they were able to close the book on family court triggered violence breaking out into the public and causing outrage - but here we are again. Its another one. I use to try and keep track of the murder suicides in US after family court, but there were too many. Anyone who attempts to will begin to pick up on the pattern. There is the traits of a family violence perpetrator; the control, the sense of propriety eg, "If I can't have them, no one will".

Its another growing story in the public realm that I am sure if Chief Justice Diana Bryant was to grace us with her opinion, we are most likely going to hear some sort of creative reason why this particular event was "rare" or "unforeseeable". Of course with all of the suppression with the courts room to pick and choose which stories they will allow the public to see, it may appear rare. Not to mention all of the trouble in disconnecting statistics derived from family violence homicide cases that were exacerbated by court orders. It is why during the Howard era, the only views that were heard on family courts were right wing male supremacists. Chief Justice Diana Bryant was elected during that era and whilst such figures are meant to be apolitical, she has been an outspoken supporter of these groups and said much that has trivialized and degraded the experience of family violence survivors. Why it might be unforeseeable for the Family Court is working from the mindset that all victims are liars and therefore should be punished if there is not enough evidence. The evidence that has been traditionally considered "enough" is often more than they require to convict someone for homicide in Australia. The stringent rules around what can be presented in court to "save paper", is so restricted that it is not until the final hearing that the survivor is allowed to speak. The affidavits are edited heavily with the advice of lawyers that are instructed to act impartial(which is often against) the survivor leaving most complaints of violence out. If it was a case funded by legal aid, then the survivor is not allowed to raise concerns at all. The laws also require survivors to provide their location at all times, leaving the victim wide open to danger. Any kind of protection such as intervention orders are often distorted in the court as attempting to stop contact. The culture of the family court is not just "unhelpful" towards victims, but against them with a vengeance.

Of course, there is the issue of accountability where these courts are not only violating childrens and womens human rights, but also working to conceal that they are. When there is lack of transparency in reporting in these cases, well..you know where it derives from.

Melanie Smith on Family Law Amendments

Relocation: The Path of Peace

In the wake of Human Rights day, many sentiments were shared about Family court ordered violence being a major issue. An issue that is rarely discussed is the more complex issue. For those who have lobbied for the recent changes wont be able to benefit from the protections available. "Family Law Act: Too Little, Too late" the title for Patricia Merkins article, is an understatement.

This is where victims of violence need the right to leave. The right to leave the state or sometimes the country they are in and convert contact in supervised visits over skype as what would have been offered for them if they had escaped post 2010 Family Law Amendments. The Hague convention, originally designed to stop perpetrators from abusing has now become a major tool to keep the victims within a range where they can continue the abuse.

There has been much controversy over addressing the issue on the freedom to roam and little room promoting the other basic human rights on "freedom to roam". International nomadic families is not only a phenomenon, but becoming a proven, healthy way of life. I have met children who are now adults who have spent their childhoods as nomads within the international realm and they are far more educated, cultured and wiser than those who are constrained to a suburb, just because a father demands it be that way. Why should nuclear families be the only ones privy to this existence?

Mothers, are the ones after all the ones that gave those children life. Mens groups, feminism and the rest have forgotten that fact alone. They use and particularly abuse the fact that there are a few mothers out there that are not mothers at all. Chemicals, disability or other factors have robbed the ability for some women to be able to connect with the very essence of what makes them a good mother. There is a natural instinct, no different from the results that were derived from twin studies that mothers do have a natural connection with their children. I state this important fact not to exclude others that are not mothers within this community, but to raise awareness that mothers are often placed at the last of the que when consideration is concerned. Even in psychiatric textbooks, mothers are the scapegoat of societies ills, they are the problem, the burden - but not realised that if treated properly, they are the cure. The problem is that mothers are the least listened to and considered amongst many subcultures as doormats for the abominations that people have chosen to become.

Thus, when the word, "Mother" arises, the ugly head of how every mother did not meet the pristine 15th century characterture on what mothers must be, what place within society they must be and how they must conform. There are too many ridiculous expectations on what a mother should be that have absolutely nothing to do with the raising of children. How a mother dresses has absolutely no impact on a child who is exposed to Kate Perry in her latest music video featuring all of the things young children are attracted to with the contrast of her naked body on a cloud and a gummy bear using the middle finger.

How could a mother or any parent for that matter compete with the foreboding irresponsibility of our leaders ignoring climate change or killing millions of civilians in war? The eight hours a day, five days a week of schooling indoctrination that our children to follow a state dying within a digitally globalist world? Mothers, have little influence on our children. They are already positioned within the media as an invisible member of the international community. When mothers needed help, it was the plight of fathers that were pedestaled before them and the only thing they ever wanted, was for them and their children to be safe. It is a request that should have never been difficult to ask of, yet one that has taken an enormous amount of time and effort.

Now, there still remains the problem where the families that have already exhausted family court avenues to stop violence against them and the children will continue to struggle. They are the ones that have been re-victimized by the court system, by the governments and by the general community - just for needing to be away from violence. Many argued that such acts were"maternal gatekeeping" or somehow an act of malevolence with little fact or explanation. Yet, when one of the most renown peaceful figures in the world were faced with the choice of fighting or flighting, they chose the most peaceful path and so the Dalai Lama left Tibet.

There is little refuge away from this within the current and future laws for these families. What can be done without little effort is to consider these cases properly as a necessity to grant relocation when they request for it. After all they have been through, both the children and mother can heal from their ordeal with a fresh start, new faces and a diverse learning experience that will equip them for life.

The Reality of Australia's Shared Parenting Laws - An Insight

An Insight into a Mother's Reality

I am writing of my own journey here, to hopefully give people an insight into the reality that so many Australian mothers (and some fathers) have faced and are facing, in their struggle to keep their children safe from an abusive, controlling parent, since Australia's Shared Parenting Laws came into effect in 2006.

If you look online, you will find overwhelming amounts of documented evidence and a great many blogs discussing the unforeseen effects that Shared Parenting Laws have had on abused children in Australia and in numerous other countries around the world, including Canada and the US, and you will get an idea of just how many parents are facing similar dilemmas.

I feel we all have a duty of care to these children, and I plead with you all to make their cases heard. Tell your friends and family, write about it on your blogs, sign petitions, attend protest rallies and write to your politicians. Our children cannot speak for themselves!

Here is my story:

I have come to believe that the father of my children is a complete psychopath and I am terrified for their safety. They have not seen him for months and do not want to. After much counseling, group therapy, completion of the Protective Behaviors Program, doing lots of fishing, gardening and other fun things, and receiving lots of unconditional love, they now say that they are happier than they have ever been, although I believe we all still have a long way to go.

They asked me to promise to keep them safe, and promise I did, but I am losing hope in being able to keep that promise as although I have violence restraining orders for myself and the kids, I will soon be facing their father in Family Court.

While I had always believed that my kids needed to be able to continue their relationship with their Dad if we separated, it is only in the months since our separation that I have come to be aware of what he is capable of. After he first left, I realized my kids were displaying most of the symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, which have thankfully diminished with time.

Over the months the children have slowly been revealing what he put them through, and with counseling and by reading my journals I have been able to recall all the things he has put me through. It is amazing how much we had all blocked out. Even so, once the kids remember something, we have a chat about it to help each other understand it all, and then the specifics of the event a filed away again, so the kids forget most of the details that would help my court case. For their sake, I don't believe that it is such a bad thing to process the memory and then forget it again, it just makes them miserable when they think about it all, and I for one have no intention of reminding them, they are too young to have to bear that responsibility, so I fear it's going to be my word against his in family court.

I did have support from both The Department for Child Protection and The Police Family Protection Unit, but since my ex contacted them to inform them of "his side of the story" (please also read my article entitled "The Fine Art of Institutional Grooming"), they have now decided that all my allegations are based on hearsay and cannot be substantiated, and therefore they will not support me in court. They further went on to accuse me of parental alienation, paranoia, negativity and of perpetuating fear in my children.

These departments have only met my children on one occasion, and myself perhaps half a dozen times, and if you were to contact my counselors, my children's counselors or our victim support worker, they would all tell you they believe I have gone from strength to strength since separating from their father, and have been extremely and consistently supportive, proactive, clear minded and positive in all areas of my life, including the task of helping my children heal from the harmful experiences of their own abuse and the witnessing of my abuse, at least 99% of the time, and during that 1% of times when I have had a bit of a wobble, half an hour of good, solid venting (in a safe place where I don't have to watch what I'm saying in case the kids hear it) and a box of tissues is all I need to get back on track. The kid's group therapy counselor saw them weekly for 3 months, and she says that rather than perpetuating fear in the kids, I have been successful in helping them to overcome their fears while still helping them to feel safe and teaching them how to stay safe.

The kid's child psychologist accessed all of the records from the many calls I made to the 24 hour domestic violence helpline and 24 hour crisis care helpline, and compared them to her own reports. She later told me that despite the fact that I may as well have been "hit over the head with a sledge hammer" (her words, not mine) by my ex, the reports all showed that from the moment he finally left and in the months since, I have been nothing but consistent in my story, clear minded when reasoning through rational and irrational fears, proactive in seeking support for myself and the kids and successful in implementing measures to ensure our safety. Even so, the reports of counselors are opinions based on hearsay, and will not count for much in Family Court.

Although the kids have attended group therapy sessions (Family Abuse Integrated Response) and had a few sessions of crisis counseling, they have not yet had any consistent "1 on 1" or even "2 on 1 + mum" counseling yet, due to their ages and waiting lists, but I finally found somewhere. I have already had a few sessions with their counselor, and their first appointment is this week (thank Goodness). It won't help me in court, but that is not the purpose of it anyway. I want it to focus on helping them understand and work through their confusion and grief by reinforcing what I have been teaching them about separating their Dad from their Dad's behavior and their feelings about both, and reinforcing their ability to distinguish between rational and irrational fears, so they can consistently overcome their unrealistic fears, recognize their justified fears and reinforce what they have learnt about how to get help to feel safe again when they feel their warning signs (protective behaviors program). I also want more help with giving them strategies to manage their strong emotions and stay focused at school.

I have been trying to do all of these things myself, with varying amounts of success, but in all honesty, I feel unqualified for the task. At least I have been successful in some things; the bed wetting only happened 3 or 4 times, the nightmares stopped after a few months, they no longer blame themselves for the things he did and said, and they have realized that he was wrong when he said that they can't trust me and that I'm stupid. Time has shown them that I do the things I say I will (or if logistics and life get in the way, then I do it the next day anyway), I know almost as much as their teachers and what I don't know, I know how to find out, I don't make them do things that are not safe or that they are scared of doing, although I do encourage them to be brave when I know they can do it and that they will enjoy doing it, and I almost* always practice what I preach with regards to emotional management, behavior and thinking positively (*Unfortunately, I totally failed to find anything positive about the second time I found new $15 jar of fish food all over the carpet, less than 5 minutes after I'd vacuumed, and I more than raised my voice when my youngest was about to run out onto the road to get a feather that blew across our path). It can be disheartening though, when all the weeks of progress we make are undone in less than a minute after they see him standing at the end of our street just staring at us and are instantly triggered back into Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. For a couple of weeks afterwards it is like living with wild animals on one day and zombies the next, and all routine, house order, manners, concentration, co-operation and punctuality go flying off on a little holiday....

Besides what the kids and I have experienced, I have also discovered certain information towards the end that opened my eyes to the extent of his lies, addictions to sex and violence, and his ability to hide his dark and sadistic nature and come across instead as a warm, genuine and caring human being.

All of his friends and family think he is wonderful, charming man, and that his only faults are that he is impulsive, irresponsible and homophobic. I can tell you that he is in fact, secretly bisexual, into beasteality, extremely abusive, controlling, violent, skilled at subtle cruelty, sadistic, criminally versatile and completely lacking in empathy, remorse and guilt.

He also has very contradictory beliefs and values about pedophilia and incest, on one hand believing that all pedophiles should be shot, but on the other hand saying that he believes that the perpetrator father who repeatedly molested a lady he knows was only trying to show her how much he loved her.

One of his favorite pornographic videos is an X-rated homosexual video staring multiple young men, one of whom bears an alarming resemblance to his adult son from his first marriage. He has admitted to me that he found it hard not to fantasize about things that may have been going on when this son had friends over to stay the night, and that he fears that his relationship with this son may one day turn incestuous. He also goes on about how proud he is that the boy is bisexual like him.

He has also admitted to me to being unable to stop himself from looking at his niece's breasts after she reached puberty, and trying to imagine what they looked like underneath her clothes.

My children were displaying signs of learnt sexual behaviors, had expressed ideas and opinions and displayed other signs that indicate possible sexual abuse, which lead me to speak to their child psychologist, but in a subsequent investigation they did not disclose any sexual abuse to Child Protection Officers. I believe however, that he may have been grooming them for future sexual abuse.

The only abuse I know of for certain though, is the soul destroying emotional abuse that I often witnessed and experienced, the physical abuse that I experienced myself and instances of physical abuse experienced by my children, the first few of which I witnessed and the last few of which I did not see, but soon found out about, at which point I told him that if he ever hit them or manhandled them again I would have him charged.

He has said many things to me in the 20 years that I have known him, and I have also witnessed concerning behavior and found many other strange things that make me fear him. I have listed some of these below:

• He has a long criminal record of multiple convictions for possession of drugs, cultivation of drugs, possession of unlicensed firearms and unlicensed ammunition, and restraining orders.
• I know he still has unlicensed firearms, but because I have not seen them for some time, police will not do anything about it.
• When I once became suicidal following the deaths of one of my parents and another much loved family member and finding out that he had indulged in an affair, all within a 3 week period, he kept telling me I did not have the guts to do it, but that he wished I would. One night he left his loaded gun on the table and went out after saying that there was only one way I could make life better for myself and everyone around me. When he came home he told me I had proven that I was nothing but a useless coward.
• He once told me "I reckon murder is no where near as satisfying as inducing suicide"
• Whenever we drove past an old rubbish tip near where we were living, he would go quiet, and then say that he knew of lots of bodies that were buried there.
• When I told him that his friend had raped me once, he responded with "well that's ok, I raped him"
• He once said to me "Why would you be scared that I would shoot you when I have access to explosives and I could just blow you up instead"
• A year before we separated, he promised me he would do a courses in positive parenting, emotional management and effective communication, as well as that he would attend counseling with me, but when months had gone by with excuse after excuse about going, I said "now or never" and he made a big show about signing up for the courses online. The first and only course he signed up for was a course for gay men, about how to have anal sex safely. He then informed me that it was the only course he would be attending, because he did not need to attend the others, but I did, as I was the one with a problem. I had already attended those courses during a previous period of separation.
• I once found a rope, shovel and balaclava in his car and started wondering if I was living with a serial killer. He convinced me that it was not what it seemed and that I was paranoid.
• Once when he was talking to me, after having first exploded in yet another violent rage, and then breaking down crying saying he was violent and needed help, he started confessing all these things to me including years of torturing animals when he was in his 20s, having planned to rape, torture and murder his "friend", admitting for the first time to the times that he has raped me (he had previously always denied that he had), and finally he started confessing to an incident in the 1970's where he and some of his friends picked up a woman hitch hiker. I never heard the rest of the confession as I ran out crying. Afterward, he denied having said any of the things he had said.

I have reported all this to the police but they will not do anything and tell me he's just bluffing. Further more, it is just hearsay, as I did not witness any of the actual events.

I face the same thing in family court and worse. Any allegations I make of his abuse of my children that I have witnessed will be discounted as hearsay as I have no other witnesses. I may even then be found to have "Parental Alienation Syndrome", an unprovable, fake psychological disorder that is laughed at by 95% of psychiatrists world wide, and which was actually invented by a psychologist who was later charged, convicted and jailed for multiple counts of pedophilia and incest(I read that but don't know if it's 100% true, as I have since read another article that only said he was suspected of it), and then committed suicide. If a judge decides that I have this "syndrome", then it is most likely that the kids' Dad will be awarded sole residency, and I may even be restricted to supervised contact.

I have a lawyer who is going to do his best, but he fears for me and my children and doubts he will be able to do much to help us due to the current laws.

Our journey continues....

Its not shared parenting: Its dads getting full custody

Some may wonder as to why members of the shared parenting council often celebrate, commend and applaud   the removal of a mother from a child's life.  That's because if they straight out said that they want all fathers to get full custody, no one would support them.  Shared Parenting is merely a tool for that and does not reflect the consistency in care that was provided for the children before separation.  Shared Parenting is a pathway for full custody.  

The expectations on mothers are exhaustive and so we are naturally set up for failure. Then there are those who look at our gorgeous children as if they are window shopping for mantelpieces to trophy in their lounge room.  In a world where money can buy everything(or so they market people to believe), they begin to calculate how they can wear down that mother so she will hand over that child. As though we are merely pedigree show dogs that are breeding the next batch of wonders. Today's favorite sport is not football or tennis as society bores of the ballgames - It is "who is going to get that baby." Its an intellectual sport where the player must convince the lawmakers that it is a morally superior act and should be done for the sake of the child. It is an unfair sport perhaps no different to the rabbit on a greyhound course flighting a group of dogs gone wild. The rabbit of course is the mother and the greyhounds are the team that works together in competition to rip the child away from the mother. 

Some gnaw away at the emotionality of the cruel process, pointing at every turn, "She is not mentally fit to be a mother, she is crying - She must be depressed!". The usually the crowd goes wild as they scramble in to seize the moment grabbing the child whilst the mother is still weak. The umpire in the game turns his head whilst the bribes are pushing at the seams of his back pocket. How many times have you heard a radio station offer a contestant large sums of money to lie for the audiences amusement? Since the alienation craze spread through the family courts, mothers have been losing children left right and center. They actually call protecting - "Maternal gate keeping" and thats a reason for a mother to lose a child.

In UK, mothers who have had history of violence used against them have their children not only removed -but adopted out. Its a nice little system where social workers are paid $3000 when the child is adopted. Not only do they play a sport that contemporary society considers, "Fun", but they get paid to do it. De-mothering is sadly not restricted to the UK, but everywhere and as the enthusiasm drives this culture, justifying it for empty reasons - We are going to need an Olympics devoted to the entire sport. Why we don't have it on television already? Perhaps just seeing it would expose how barbaric some members of our society truly are.

Posted via email from australiansharedparentingdebate's posterous

The Secrecy Law Scandal

Often when challenged about why the secrecy law is in place, the explanation from Australian Family Courts is to protect children's privacy. Australian Law, based upon English law often mirrors UK in legal matters. Naturally, Australian law mimicking UK law, will also mimic the adverse legal avenue where the Council of Europe found UK law to err on the side of bias when they ordered secrecy. UK was found to maintain secrecy, not to protect the children's identity, but to protect the evidence where they violated human rights from the public. This led to media reporting on UK Family Court proceeding including the revelation that a mother was ordered by the court to return to UK where she was murdered by her ex husband whom had made previous threats to kill.

Australian journalists have even spoken out on how the Australian Family Court has stopped journalists from reporting on cases even where children are dead:

Today Tonight producer stated that he had received jail threats over reporting cases where all members where anonymized.

So why do we see media reports on the family court?

In the case of Darcey Freeman, the reporting was so viral that it was reported in the UK and in US, which stretched out of the Family Courts jurisdiction and made such a lawsuit very expensive and ambiguous. Since the release of the above video, other journalists have been able to make anonymized reports on family violence cases without needing to seek the courts permission.

Beforehand, only stories that supported mens groups ideology where provided and reports that involved family violence were required to obtain permission from the courts. In fact three media reporters from three Australian leading newspapers who provided reports from the mens groups ideology where in fact mens rights advocates. It is therefore no wonder why the community attitudes on violence against women and children provided poor results. The belief that women raise violence in the family court to obtain custody is widely held:

Half of all respondents (49 percent)

believed that ‘women going through

custody battles often make up or

exaggerate claims of domestic

violence in order to improve their

case’, and only 28 percent disagreed. - page 8, Changing Attitudes Changing Cultures A National Survey on Community Attitudes to Violence against Women

It is a mystery as to why such a document is able to identify the members and explicit details of a family court case:

Draft)

It is a mystery as to why the details of the mother were revealed on the fathers facebook profile page whom has 672 friends with access to all of the court files that compliment his version of events.

He also identifies the child by providing the photos and the case information underneath. 672 friends can clearly identify the mother and the child, know who judged the case and the details of the case he believes supports his reason for custody. Where he is not identified, he proceeds to identify himself in the case:

It is also important to note that John appeals for his case as an injustice because(according to his account) he had not viewed child pornography for nine years:

The question remains unanswered to the public as to the other remaining years and what police reports was he referring to that he claimed to be untrue?

Then there are the abduction cases where the family court has a high number of fathers looking for mothers whom have absconded with the children. Research has noted that a high number of abduction cases are due to escaping domestic violence and the negligence of protection related to that area. Most abduction cases therefore produce a mens group style promotion, neglecting to add the part where child abuse was raised and not dealt properly dealt with. An excellent example is the case of Melinda Stratton and Ken Thompson. In the court ordered publication it warned anyone who recognized Melinda Stratton, "not to approach her as she might prove a danger to herself or her son". Unlike other family court releases, it did not specify a criminal or diagnosed mental health history. An aspect that would clearly be important to add when compelling the public to turn a mother and child into the police. It was later revealed that Melinda had run because of her concerns for Andrew Thompson and the courts inability to investigate child abuse. The court of course restrained the Australian from publishing most of the mothers accounts including the allegations that were made.