Subject: Fathers-Time to Act
From: "Fatherhood Foundation" <[email-masked]>
To: "Warwick Marsh" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:06:52 +1000

Issue No. 105-30th August, 2004

visit us at www.fathersonline.org

Welcome to fathersonline.org

Grandads

Laughter

Single Dads

Special Feature

Thought for the Week

News & Info

Dad's Prayer

Mission Statement & Help Us!

Welcome to fathersonline.org

Dear Warwick,

The Fatherhood Foundation has been committed to a process of change through building relational bridges with both sides of politics.  In this we have been very successful, but the unfortunate truth of the matter is we have been totally ignored.

Last year the Fatherhood Foundation spent a lot of time and money putting together a comprehensive plan to strengthen and support Australian fathers and families.  Our plan, called the ‘Australian Fatherhood Initiative – Media and Mentoring Strategy’ was a result of extensive communication between the Australian community and the historic Fatherhood Forum, held in federal parliament in February 2003.

The Fatherhood Forum released The 12pt Plan, to turn the tide of fatherlessness in Australia, on 26th June 2003 with bipartisan support.  In August 2003, the Fatherhood Foundation convened the inaugural National Strategic Conference on Fatherhood.  Further father-friendly policy was developed with a particular emphasis on mentoring.  It was from all of this public and community input that the Fatherhood Foundation developed the Australian Fatherhood Initiative - Media and Mentoring Strategy.

Our proposal contained seven scaleable modules and totalled an approximate 12 million dollar investment over a 3 year period to strengthen and support Australian families and fathers and to help turn the tide of fatherlessness in Australia.  Our finished proposal was extremely comprehensive and 90 mm thick. This was presented to the seven senior government leaders and senators at Parliament House, Canberra on 23rd March 2004.  Five months later we have yet to receive even a letter of acknowledgment concerning our submission.

If we had been the only fatherhood group that is being ignored, it would not be so bad.  However the Lone Fathers Association has been running for thirty years.  Today it gets a pittance in government support.  If its purpose was to support women’s issues, it would have received hundreds of millions of dollars.  What about the noble efforts of the Shared Parenting Council?  After a long inquiry and a lot of hot air, what has happened?  The central request for fathers and mothers to be treated equally as parents before the Family Law Court has been totally ignored.

The time has come to say, ‘enough is enough’.  The ever increasing fatherlessness and family breakdown is the most critical problem facing Australia today.

The Fatherhood Foundation calls upon the fathers and men of Australia to rise up and take part in Operation Tidal Wave.  We call on the political parties that want the vote of the fathers and men of Australia to do the following as a matter of urgency.

1)     Call a National Summit on Fatherhood to turn the tide of fatherlessness in Australia as a matter of priority.

2)     Initiate the ‘presumption of shared parenting’ in family law as a matter of utmost priority.

3)     Develop a comprehensive national men and father’s policy based on The 12pt Plan http://www.fathersonline.org/press-release-26-06-03.html to urgently address the crisis in men’s suicide and health.

Lovework

The elction has been called. Let Operation Tidal Wave begin.

Let every father speak up for the needs of the children and on behalf of those crippled and damaged by our current family law legislation.

Write an email, write a letter and make a phone call, to your local federal member.

Find a political party or local member who will initiate father-friendly reform to support families and get behind them.

Write to your local paper or phone the local radio station talkback and ask:

“When will our children have true justice?

When will mothers and fathers be treated equally?”

This flood of emails, letters and phone calls is called Operation Tidal Wave.

Together we can make a difference!

Let’s start this week and not stop, until we achieve genuine father-friendly reform.

Our children need fathers, and we are the only fathers that they have.

Let’s make a stand for our children.

Yours for the children of our nation

Warwick Marsh

____________________________________________________________

Warwick Marsh  has been married to Alison for 28 years. He is the father of five children, four boys and one girl, ranging in age from 23 years to 11 years.  Warwick is a musician, songwriter, producer and public speaker who likes to think he can still laugh at himself.

Back to top

Grandads

Fathers then & now

Fathers of 1900 didn't have it nearly as good as fathers of today; but they did have a few advantages:

In 1900, fathers prayed their children would learn English.
Today, fathers pray their children will speak English.
In 1900, a father's horsepower meant his horses.
Today, it's the size of his minivan.
In 1900, if a father put a roof over his family's head, he was a success.
Today, it takes a roof, deck, pool, and 4-car garage. And that's just the holiday home.
In 1900, a father waited for the doctor to tell him when the baby arrived.
Today, a father must wear a smock, know how to breathe, and make sure film is in the video camera.
In 1900, fathers passed on clothing to their sons.
Today, kids wouldn't touch Dad's clothes if they were sliding naked down an icicle.
In 1900, fathers could count on children to join the family business.
Today, fathers pray their kids will soon come home from college long enough to teach them how to work the computer and set the VCR.
In 1900, fathers pined for old country Romania, Italy, or Russia.
Today, fathers pine for old country Hank Williams.
In 1900, a father smoked a pipe.
If he tries that today, he gets sent outside after a lecture on lip cancer.
In 1900, fathers shook their children gently and whispered, 'Wake up, it's time for school.'
Today, kids shake their fathers violently at 4 a.m., shouting: 'Wake up, it's time for hockey practice.'
In 1900, a father came home from work to find his wife and children at the supper table.
Today, a father comes home to a note: 'Jimmy's at baseball, Cindy's at gymnastics, I'm at adult-Ed, Pizza in fridge.'
In 1900, fathers and sons would have heart-to-heart conversations while fishing in a stream.
Today, fathers pluck the headphones off their sons' ears and shout, 'WHEN YOU HAVE A MINUTE..'
In 1900, a father gave a pencil box for Christmas, and the kid was all smiles.
Today, a father spends $800 at Toys 'R' Us, and the kid screams: 'I wanted Sega!'
In 1900, if a father had breakfast in bed, it was eggs and bacon and ham and potatoes.
Today, it's Special K, soy milk, dry toast and a lecture on cholesterol.
In 1900, a Father's Day gift would be a hand tool.
Today, he'll get a digital organizer.
In 1900, fathers said, 'A man's home is his castle.'
Today, they say, 'Welcome to the money pit.'
In 1900, 'a good day at the market' meant Father brought home feed for the horses.
Today, 'a good day at the market' means Dad got in early on a share deal.
In 1900, a happy meal was when Father shared funny stories around the table.
Today, a happy meal is what Dad buys at McDonald's.
In 1900, a father was involved if he spanked the kid now and then.
Today, a father's involved only if he coaches footy and organizes Boy Scouts and car pools.
In 1900, when fathers entered the room, children often rose to attention.
Today, kids glance up and grunt, 'Dad, you're invading my space.'
In 1900, fathers threatened their daughters suiters with shotguns if the girl came home late.
Today, fathers break the ice by saying, 'So...how long have you had that earring?'

One thing that never changes.

Families need Fathers

Back to top

Laughter

A man was driving home from work one evening when he suddenly realized Christmas was tomorrow and he had not yet purchased his daughter a gift.
So, the man rushed off to the nearest toy store and asked the sales clerk;
'How much is that Barbie in the window?'

The sales clerk replied in a condescending tone, 'Which Barbie?

We have:
Barbie Goes to the Gym for $19.95
Barbie Goes to the Ball for $19.95
Barbie Goes Shopping for $19.95
Barbie Goes to the Beach for $19.95
Barbie Goes Nightclubbing for $19.95 and Divorced Barbie for $265.00.'

The overwhelmed man asked, 'Why is the Divorced Barbie $265.00 and all the others are only $19.95?'

'That's obvious!' said the sales clerk. 'Divorce Barbie comes with Ken's house, Ken's car, Ken's boat, and Ken's furniture.'

Back to top

Single Dads

Child Support and the Deadbeat Dad -

Myth Versus Fact
By Quentin Kay

Part 1

It was fascinating to watch the media recently making a complete botch of facts (as per usual) in order to generate reader interest.  This mangling of fact in favour of 'readability appeal' (fiction) happens all too frequently in our media - something that is costing us dearly as a society as our perceptions of social reality become evermore distorted by the nonsense we read in newspapers.

The recent reporting of child support debt is a case in point.   The SMH (per reporter Tony Vermeer on 1 August 2004) claimed that 'Figures for 2003-2004 showed 41 per cent of fathers pay $5 or less a week in maintenance'.  Really Tony?  So 41 in every one hundred child support paying fathers pay less than $5?

Shocking figures indeed.  And entirely inaccurate.  (The $5 amount of course is the minimum that must be paid even if the payer is unemployed or on a pension.  Thus we are supposed to assume that 41% of fathers are throwing in their jobs to avoid paying child support).

The actual CSA figures (well according to the Adelaide Advertiser) said: 77 PER CENT of parents pay under $100 a week.   OF THOSE 56 PER CENT pay less than $40 a week.   OF THOSE 41 PER CENT pay $5 a week or less. If you do some basic math (or just use common sense) then the number of payers who pay $5pw or less actually falls to 18 for every one hundred. A figure significantly less that that touted by Vermeer.

Of course even the statement that 77 percent of parents pay under $100 a week is value laden.  We are supposed to be indignant that so little is paid when we all know it costs more than a hundred dollars a week to feed, clothe and house children.  The issue is not what is paid however, but what the actual child support liability is when both parents incomes, ages and number of children and the extent to which the children are cared for by both parents is all fed into the mixing pot.  To talk about what is paid as opposed to what is actually liable to be paid is entirely misleading.

Note that the CSA itself also uses the term 'parents' as opposed to 'fathers'.  This is because some 10% (or more) of non-custodial child support payers are actually mothers.  So, returning to our much maligned $5 fathers, let's drop our 18% by another 10 % (1.8) to arrive at a closer figure for fathers.  That brings us down to 16.2 in every one hundred.

Now as bizarre as it may seem to poor old Tony, some fathers actually do only have a $5 per week child support liability.  Say for example, they have two children but one is already 18 and out of the system.  The other is still in the system but aged $16+ and the mother and father are earning roughly the same income  - averaging around the $30,000 mark and the child spends some nights a week with the father.   The result is a child support liability of only $5 per week.  In fact there are a number of different permutations of number and age of children, shared care and parental incomes that can bring about such a small child support liability.

Of course it is impossible to say how many fathers fall into this category but lets 'guestimate' that it is 3 in a hundred.  That brings our 16.2 down further to 13.2 in one hundred who purportedly fall into the 'Deadbeat Dad' category.

Now strange as it may seem in this land of milk and disinformation, we currently have a national unemployment rate running at a seemingly intractable, but historically low,  5.5%.  If you accept that the national unemployed figure must in fairness be equally applied to our remaining cohort of '$5 fathers'  (i.e. that we must assume that they face the same barriers to employment, such as re-training needs, language and cultural barriers, regional job shortages etc) then the remaining figure drops to about 12.5 in every one hundred.  (In fact, structural unemployment becomes a major factor for many divorced fathers because the most common age for separation and divorce is after 40 and we all know how anyone over 40 faces an uphill battle to get back into the labour force if they have lost their job).

Then of course there are those who are on permanent disability pensions. Hardly surprising that this group would feature given the shocking rates of workplace injury amongst the largely male blue collar workforce.  Lets allow a grossly understated 1% for this group, bringing us down to 11.5%.

As odd as it may seem, a small percentage of this remainder are not actually unemployed or on a permanent disability pension but simply are not earning sufficient income to actually incur a liability.  The obvious example of this is the drought stricken farmer.  But there are others.  Someone who was retrenched and is trying to establish a small business or pursuing further study to get back into the workforce are other obvious examples.  How do we account for them statistically?  Well we can only guess - but lets assume for the sake of neatness that it is about 1.5% which then rounds our residual non-paying or $5 father group down to a nice even 10 in one hundred (or 10%).

Now we are arriving closer to the 'hard core' of non-paying fathers - and it is a figure far different from Tony Vermeer's 41%.

The next question then becomes why doesn't this hard core group just pay up?

(to be continued next week)

_________________________________________________________

Back to top

Special Feature

Executive Summary

Discussion Paper by Patrick Murray, Aug. 2004, ver. 1.02

Family Relationship Shop Fronts Proposal

A proposed solution by the Federal Government to the Family Law parliamentary hearing known as the Joint Custody Inquiry.

Moving forward on the findings of the parliamentary review of the family law is a political hot potato. The main recommendation was to establish a new family tribunal to arbitrate enforceable parenting plans for warring couples. The Prime Minister has side stepped the issue by proposing a feel good solution with a position paper due in two months time thus placing it outside the current election battle zone.

He is proposing 65 family relationship shop front centres, with a range of information, advice, education, counselling and mediation services. Three hours of free counselling or mediation would be compulsory for conflicted couples. These shop fronts would be tendered out to the existing relationship agencies, such as Relationship Australia or Centacare. Is all this just palliative care for terminally ill relationships or a breakthrough cure?

Avoiding band-aids and fire fighting involves taking a broader view as does Professor Denis Ladbrook from Curtin University. He sees us in a brave new world of family stripped of traditional roles, structures and sanctions. There is no longer one dominant model (patriarchy), but a general expectation that it can be a negotiated relationship of equals. This requires the acquisition of more effective personal skills that women and especially men are yet to achieve. It also requires a society that models the new behaviour (by treating men and women as equal in relationships).

The stripping of traditional roles leaves us faced with significant losses of personal and social identity particularly for men. This brings with it fear, insecurity, pain anger and violence. Should we step back and take a fresh look at how to deal with this? Rushing in with new solutions that appear to be more of the same may look good to a confused and hurt society, but will it help?

It is not new. We already have a 55 million-dollar government funded relationship agency industry (100 organisations 400 locations). It is already under its primary dispute resolution programme doing the bulk of what is being proposed. Has this been working? Will more of it work better? A major review of the industry was done in June this year titled Review of The Relationship Services Programme. (available on http://www.facs.gov.au ).

The question as to whether the increase in government spending has resulted in a decrease of the divorce rate or disputed family breakdowns with associated damage to children has not been asked?

The review raises a number of critical issues: the lack of clarity around objectives and outcomes, the lack of access for rural and regional areas, men, indigenous and new migrant groups, victims of family violence and low income groups.

Studies published by the American Psychological Society are quite scathing about claims of effectiveness for marriage and family therapy models used by agencies. They use words like .professional scandal. and .not a scintilla of evidence for the general superiority. of these particular therapies.

There is no significant scientific research on the effectiveness of outcomes for clients using these agencies compared with those attending private therapists or no therapists at all. There are no stated outcomes for this government funding, which can be effectively measured. Staff competencies are stated in terms of therapist inputs and not linked to effectiveness for the client. The $55 million is presumably about preventing a problem. Without answering that why is more of the same being proposed.

It seems to be accepted that fathers and their children are not receiving equitable access and treatment under the current system. Any new proposals should clearly attempt to remedy this. Research in this area has shown that many men are suspicious, skeptical or threatened by human services generally, as they expect them to be judgmental, patronising and not male friendly. This is particularly so with men from lower socioeconomic groups. It has also been shown that where services are demonstrably male friendly, men use them and outcomes are positive.

Parliamentary inquiries for a number of years now have stated that there are a lack of experienced and mature male counsellors available in the broader family law system. Nothing has been done to rectify this. Male counsellors make up less than 10% of most agencies counselling staffnumbers. Government needs to address this imbalance with a pro-active labour market programme aimed at getting more male counsellors. Much of counsellor training industry dominated by women has a pro female and anti male bias which does not encourage male students. This also needs to be considered.

There is a strong culture of portraying men as .the problem. in this field. It is called pathologising the male or using the deficit model of men. I have coined a syndrome for this, MDM, the morally diminished male. This syndrome has infected many counsellors in this industry. As soon as men seeking help sense this, therapeutic effectiveness goes out the door. These problems are addressed in recent reports, conferences and by many men working at the coalface. They are not isolated observations.

So what are some positive elements for consideration:

 National access for help and resources through a relationship support line

 Subsidised services to low income clients via private and agency therapists. (which could be partly funded by ceasing subsidising funding in high income areas)

 Providing Internet based centrally accessible training and other resources, courseware etc., available to any potential provider.

 Providing relationship mentor training for regional and rural areas, where almost no services exist.

 Providing transparent and public feedback of client satisfaction for all services.

 Getting more male counsellors. Putting some quotas for an acceptable minimum percentage of male counsellors for government subsidised services.

A service with these ingredients would be flexible and modular, capable of being adapted to feedback. Rigid relationship agency contracts as proposed may not work and not be readily changeable. If any such initiative is seen as a failure it will entrench the current perception of bias and lack of equity for men and their children

The current proposition may well be a feel good diversion that avoids many of the hard issues. Both parties are frightened of tabling concrete policies that effectively deal with the serious lack of services for men in family law and other areas. Where are the brave Aussie politicians and bureaucrats?

Note: this is a summary of a longer discussion paper by Patrick available from him by email. [email-masked]

Back to top

Thought for the Week

All that needs for evil to triumph

is for good men to do nothing

Edmund Burke

Back to top

News & Info

OPERATION  TIDAL  WAVE

The massive increase in fatherlessness in Australia over the last three decades has gone hand in hand with spiralling family breakdown.  Traditional morals and family values have been abandoned in favour of the ‘if it feels good, do it’ moral relativism.  We have sown a wind and reaped a whirlwind.  Our children continue to pay the price for our selfishness.  The time to act has come, but this will involve a change of heart and a change of mind on our part.

The federal election has been called, and we are soon to celebrate Fathers’ Day.  We must make use of this critical moment in time to initiate Operation Tidal Wave and make a call to the political parties of our nation to prioritise fatherhood and bring justice to our children.  We must focus on three specific issues over the next six weeks of this important federal election campaign.

We call upon the men’s and father’s groups of the nation to unite and speak with one voice to all political parties, politicians and the media.  We must send a tidal wave of emails, letters, faxes, make phone calls and issue press releases to all media and politicians. Let the men and fatherhood vote decide the next election. Let us work together for the good of our children and the future of our nation.

TO THE GOVERNMENT, OPPOSITION

AND ALL POLITICAL PARTIES

FROM THE

FATHERS & MEN OF AUSTRALIA

Presumption of  Shared Parenting

We call for the presumption of equal parenting in family law as per point 6 of The 12pt Plan at http://www.fathersonline.org/press-release-26-06-03.html

National Fatherhood Summit

We call for a National Summit on Fatherhood to be held, as a matter of urgency, to turn the tide of fatherlessness in Australia and to strengthen and support fathers for the sake of the mothers and children of Australia.

Father-Friendly Men’s Policy

We call for the development of father-friendly policies and pro-active marriage and family policies to support men as fathers and to address the crisis in men’s suicide and health.  We put forward The 12pt Plan to strengthen and support Australian fathers and turn the tide of fatherlessness in Australia as the foundational document for equitable and inclusive fatherhood and manhood policy development in Australia.

.

For further enquiries call:

National Fatherhood Coalition
PO Box 440                 WOLLONGONG   NSW   2520

Warwick Marsh: 041 822 5212                  or                                 02 4272 6677

Barry Williams: 0417 668 802                    or                                 02 6258 4216

__________________________________________________

The Family Council of W.A

Invites you to attend the

2004 WA Fatherhood Forum

Come and be informed on this important issue

Saturday 11 September  9.30 am – 4.30 pm

Christ Church Grammar School - Queenslea Dr. Claremont

Cost : $20 (includes morning tea and buffet lunch)

Bookings essential:

Family Council of Western Australia

Tel: 9321 2333 by Thursday September 9th

Media Release:

fathers4equality

http://www.fathers4equality-australia.org
Within the past 8 days, since the launch of the Fathers4Equality website, we have achieved the following:

Equal Parenting Petition: 193 signatures
Electronic Megaphone Emails to Federal Politicians: 873 emails
New Fathers4Equality members: 28 new members (current total of 140 members)
Distribution of our latest Press Release to over 16,000 media points
'Equal Parenting laws 'INEVITABLE', says Australian Fathers Group'

This is a promising trend, but with an upcoming Australian election only weeks away, we need to continue to build the momentum so that Equal Parenting becomes an election issue.

Please help by actively promoting the Online Petition, and the Electronic Megaphone.

We need MORE Signatures, and we need MORE emails to Politicians.

How can YOU HELP!

(1) Please distribute this email to any individuals or groups who may be sympathetic to our cause.
(2) Please print out as many copies of our website homepage, and distribute on community boards, work bulletin boards, telegraph polls, construction site boards, shopping centre information areas, doctors surgeries, shop counters, outside courts, etc, etc, etc. We are only limited by our imagination.
(3) Write a story about the lobbying efforts of Fathers4Equality, and
encourage your local newspaper to print it. (always remember to add our web address name).
(4) Call Talkback radio, and ask the listeners to visit our website, sign the petition, and use the Megaphone, if they support Equal Parenting.

We are not asking for your money, only your TIME. Please help us help our kids.

Fathers4Equality
http://www.fathers4equality-australia.org
__________________________________________________________

Ps Peter Morgan

17.3.23 - 15.8.04

Memorial Service  Great Hall, Parliament House, Canberra

11.30 am Tuesday 31st August, 2004

___________________________

Letters

Dear Fatherhood Foundation

“All the rest of the stuff you send out is simply putting more fuel on the wild-fires of increasing family and social breakdown and killing off the men.” (letter last week)

Stuff like this just can’t be taken seriously. The guy is clearly off the planet. Just keep doing what you’re doing, its great – and blessing our men. Also, the stuff on Peter Morgan is inspirational!

Ian Freestone

***********************

Dear Fatherhood Foundation

I would just like to register my support of your newsletter. While the views are often diverse, I believe they all uphold the biblical standard of fatherhood, and highlight the crucial role a father plays in the lives of his children. As a youth worker, I see too many fatherless boys with no idea how to be a man, and too many girls with no idea of how a man should really treat her because their father is not present to do this.

Thank you for highlighting these issues and for your support of fathers everywhere,

Sincerely,

Janna Murphy

***********************

Dear Fatherhood Foundation

In reply to Tom and Lee's letters I would like to state that these men have got this Fatherhood Foundation message all wrong (let me validate that I'm a married man with a son).

Firstly, in reply to Tom's letter the Bible promotes Man having the authority in the home but this doesn't mean he lords it over his wife. 'Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her' (Eph 5:25). In response to this scripture I realise that marriage from a man's/father's perspective means self-sacrifice (i.e. the giving up of self for the glory of God). Yes the man is the head of the home but he needs to be Christ-like in this responsibility.

Secondly, in reply to Lee's letter I don't believe for one moment that the Fatherhood foundation is undermining in any way single fathers or the political issues surrounding them. Rather, knowing Warwick Marsh and his heart from meeting him in person I would say that the Fatherhood Foundation wants to help single fathers, including the political issues surrounding them.

Finally, I'd personally like to encourage the Fatherhood Foundation for having the initiative and vision to launch out into such a venture that inspires fathers, renews families. I applaud you as you've been a help to me and I'm sure many others in this 'great south land of the Holy Spirit' (Terra Australis).

Regards

Tim Banfield

***********************

Dear Fatherhood Foundation

Thanks for your efforts. Thanks for your newsletter. Thanks for the encouragement. Thanks for keeping on. May you receive Grace and Consolation from our Lord who loves us.

Kind regards Kev Peagam.

Back to top

Dad's Prayer

Dear God

Help me rise up.

Help me stand up.

Help me not bow down:

to my own apathy

or the world’s system of control,

but help me make a stand

for my children

and the children of Australia.

Help me make a stand for

truth and justice.

Help me make a stand for

love and peace.

Back to top

Mission Statement & Help Us!

Mission Statement
The Fatherhood Foundation is a charitable, non profit incorporated association with a goal to inspire men to a greater level of excellence as fathers, by encouraging and educating them, thereby renewing and empowering families.

Click here for more information about us

Help Us!

The Fatherhood Foundation believes that the key to life is giving.  That's why this newsletter is given freely without expectation.  Life is also about relationships.  That's what being a good father is all about, developing relationships with your loved ones.

If you would like to give financially to the Fatherhood Foundation,

please mail your cheque or money order to:

Fatherhood Foundation

PO Box 440

WOLLONGONG  NSW  2520

AUSTRALIA

You have received the fathersonline.org newsletter because you have subscribed, or you have been subscribed by a friend.  If you do not wish to receive future emails, please click the UNSUBSCRIBE button below or send an email to [email-masked] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject heading.

Back to top

visit us at www.fathersonline.org

This message was sent to you by Fatherhood Foundation using em@il bl@st!
We thought it would be great to pass on information to you about us and hope our message was well received.
If you don't wish to receive any further electronic messages to this address from or authorised by the sender then please click the unsubscribe button below.