All, On my facebook timeline page there was a discussion about the best way to campaign for the wishes of separated fathers and their children. The Family Justice Community was set up by Tim Haries but after a discussion I felt that he envisaged a type of organisation similar to that originally established as Families Need Fathers FNF. There has been widespread dissatisfaction for some years with the charity FNF who were very recently described as Muppets. I am proposing to take legal action in the High Court by way of Judicial Review to force them to return to the aims of the organisation as originally intended. I have prepared a draft pre-action protocol below which I would like to send to the Chair of FNF outlining the case for reforming the charity. I have not approached any of the individuals mentioned in the letter because I am using it as a template to try to give people on facebook the gist of any proposed legal action. I apologise to anybody mentioned in the letter if I have misrepresented their view. If those mentioned would like to clarify or withdraw their contribution or if somebody has been involved with FNF and would like to be included please contact me. Many thanks, kip DRAFT FAO; Chairman Families Need Fathers Dear Gerry Karlin, PRE ACTION PROTOCOL Although I am a member of Families Need Fathers FNF I am writing to inform you of a proposed legal challenge by a group of individuals who are dissatisfied about the running of the charity. Some years ago I stood as a candidate as a trustee for FNF. I was concerned at that time that the constitution of the charity was changed so that it no longer reflected the original aims and the term father was removed altogether from the instrument of governance. This has led to the situation in which fathers join the charity with an expectation that it will represent their wishes effectively when in reality this is not the case. Because this claim embarrassed the hierarchy a pretext was found to exclude me from the election and I was also banned from the FNF forum which is still in place. I was told that I could apply the following year to become a trustee but each time this undertaking is ignored. This is one reason for making a legal challenge. Because FNF has not acted democratically and refuses to permit free debate it has failed to listen to its members and made legal action the only way to reform the running of the charity. If this challenge goes ahead I hope the application will include other individuals who share my concern about the running of FNF. For example possibly Shaun OConnell who operates as a McKenzie Friend. He has wide ranging experience of the family court system and can vouch first hand about the effectiveness of the support given by FNF to its members. Nick Langford, a former member of FNF, also experienced difficulties. As a result he joined the group Fathers4Justice with whom he acted as Research Officer for many years. Tim Haries has received notoriety for receiving a prison sentence for defacing a portrait of Her Majesty the Queen but it could be argued that he also felt obliged to take direct action in the absence of effective representation by FNF. Similarly it could be argued that it is the failure of FNF that has led to the extreme campaign stunts of Fathers4Justice, such as climbing public buildings dressed in Super Hero costumes. The former President of the Family Division, Dame Butler-Sloss, accused Fathers4Justice of even making threats against her. When it materialised that the campaign group has never made any such threat she was forced to take the extraordinary step of making a public apology in the House of Lords. This is significant because Dame Butler-Sloss opposed Clause 11 making Shared Parenting legislation part of the Children & Families Act 2014 which would have guaranteed children a relationship with both parents post separation. The debate in the House of Lords was characterised by false claims, for example misrepresenting the Australian experience of Shared Parenting since 2006 as a failure, when the Attorney Generals Department has recently stated that the government has no intention of rolling back the reforms! It was the voice of the people that forced the UK government to reconsider Shared Parenting legislation and the prejudice of a retired judge sitting in the House of Lords should not be allowed to dictate what is in the best interests of children. However successive leaders of FNF have been too worried about their own careers to launch any effective defence of the wishes of fathers and the welfare of their children. Traditionally they seem more concerned about their own respectability than campaigning on behalf of the members of their charity. As a consequence of the failure of Clause 11 it could be argued that fathers will have less opportunity for involvement with their children post separation and whilst groups opposed to Shared Parenting are more organised and emboldened by their success FNF is nowhere to be seen. There can be no doubt about the positive contribution ordinary members make to FNF but they are lions led by sheep and I should be grateful for a response to these concerns. Yours Sincerely, Kingsley Miller, 4 April 2014
Posted on: Sat, 05 Apr 2014 07:19:08 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015