Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

Dr McIntosh - UPDATE!

UPDATE!

Kip

We supported the second letter you sent in. We have not considered this current writing and therefore our endorsement is unavailable to the correspondence at this time.

I did receive a response from the Attorney General.

I presume and hope that this third letter is just a draft as it needs some work in my opinion.

What are you trying to achieve? I do not see a direction here?

How does "monotropy" fit into the wider issue of having contacts with under three year olds?
a concept, named by J. Bowlby, describing the phenomenon in which a mother appears to be able to bond with only one infant at a time. The concept is used by Marshall Klaus and John Kennell in their studies of maternal-infant bonding in mothers of twins. When one twin is taken home from the hospital earlier than the other, the mother often reports that she does not feel that the baby discharged later is hers. The second baby to reach the home is much more likely to fail to thrive or to be neglected or abused. Nurses working in intensive care nurseries and adoption homes are also known to become attached to only one child at a time. Monotropy also may explain a mother's common tendency to dress twins alike, in effect making them one

It seems to me that it is all going off track a bit here Kip. What are you actually wanting ? Do you want the AG to take away Dr McIntosh credentials?  The point was made to the AG and basically the response was that parties are free to bring what evidence they like to the table in Court matters and it is for the Court to weigh that against the facts and make some determination on how to set up a regime that will allow parents to facilitate proper and appropriate contact with children that is reasonably practicable.
 

Last edit: by Secretary SPCA


Executive Secretary - Shared Parenting Council of Australia
 Was my post helpful? If so, please let others know about the FamilyLawWebGuide whenever you see the opportunity
 
All,
Secretary SPCA said
How does "monotropy" fit into the wider issue of having contacts with under three year olds?
I am really sorry but understanding the significance of the concept of 'monotropy' is crucial to securing 'Shared Parenting'. This is the reason Michael Lamb specifically mentioned it in his review of Dr McIntosh. I have a video on the topic called Bowlby's 'Monotropy' - A Child's Tie to His Mother - Children's Rights (Bowlby felt this concept was so important he invented the word 'monotropy' in his monograph 'THE NATURE OF THE CHILD'S TIE TO HIS MOTHER, International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 1958, 39, 350-373. SEE BELOW)

http://youtu.be/g0LFewt4Zk4

In the radio interview for 'Dads on the Air' I cover this concept in some detail and try to explain how it is connected to McIntoshes 'Toddler Guidelines'. There are 3 videos covering the radio interview which is approximately 30 mins (1) research background, (2) the guidelines and (3) current thinking on child psychology. If you go to the video - 'Men Can't Nurse' say controversial guidelines for fathers from Dr McIntosh - PART 2 - and go to 6 MINS 48 SECS you will hear me mention 'monotropy' although it is also covered earlier. (In the interview I describe how it is used as part of a process of 'boot-strapping' in family proceedings).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs0renxJ2IE&feature=BFa&list=PL7B9290DF907A0E3C

Agog says,
Agog said
Your posts have become overly long and boring and some moderators are not pleased with the way you seem to regard this site as your personal Australian blog.
I wish I could explain concepts such as 'monotropy' in a couple of sentences but these topics are complicated and deserve their own 'thread' on the forum. I am sorry he has felt obliged to express himself in this way.

I do know Michael Lamb has seen one of my first videos on attachment which was based on his own article with Joan Kelly but I do not know if he has also seen my previous letter on the forum or if he has heard my radio interview. If so I think he would be encouraged to know that he was not the only person who felt so strongly about these ideas.

Evil creeps in where honest men are frightened to stand up.

Many thanks,

kip

We may extend the analogy. It is in the nature of our constitution, as of all others, that sovereignty is vested in a single person. A hierarchy of substitutes is permissible but at the head stands a particular individual. The same is true of the infant. Quite early, by a process of learning, he comes to centre his instinctual responses not only on a human figure but on a particular human figure. Good mothering from any kind woman ceases to satisfy him only his own mother will do.

This focusing of instinctual responses on to a particular individual, which we find but too often ignored in human infancy, is found throughout the length and breadth of the animal kingdom. In very many species, mating responses are directed to a single member of the opposite sex, either for a season or for a lifetime, whilst it is the rule for parents to be solicitous of their own young and of no others and for young to be attached to their own parents and not to any adult. Naturally such a general statement needs amplification and qualification, but the tendency for instinctual responses to be directed towards a particular individual or group of individuals and not promiscuously towards many is one which I believe to be so important and so neglected that it deserves a special term. I propose to call it monotropy, a term which, it should be noted, is descriptive only and carries with it no pretensions to causal explanation.(THE NATURE OF THE CHILD'S TIE TO HIS MOTHER, International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 1958, 39, 350-373)

PS
Secretary SPCA said
I did receive a response from the Attorney General
Please may I see this reply.

Last edit: by Kip


Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.
Kip the posts are starting to get long winded. You need to articulate what you want to say in a concise manner so they do not get so boring to the reader.

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on the site (Look for the Avatars).   Be mindful what you post in the public areas
Kip, you skip direct answers, perhaps you could respond to these:
1  What are you actually trying to achieve by writing to our AG?
2  Have you actually read Michael Greens excellent material on the High Conflict argument?
3  Do you understand this site is not your personal blog and moderators can and will delete your material if you continue to ignore basic rules and what moderators are telling you?
Kip said
I wish I could explain concepts such as 'monotropy' in a couple of sentences but these topics are complicated and deserve their own 'thread' on the forum. I am sorry he has felt obliged to express himself in this way.
By all means BUT not another longwinded post. A few paragraphs with pdf attachments is fine.
Kip said
I am really sorry but understanding the significance of the concept of 'monotropy' is crucial to securing 'Shared Parenting'.
On behalf of those involved in Family Law CODSWALLOP - try arguing your theory in an Australian Courtroom.
Kip said
Evil creeps in where honest men are frightened to stand up.
Quite right but honest men in Australia spend their time getting the Family Law Act amended, trying to hold back the tide of negative changes, providing Court support and providing support for those going through the trauma of separation and lack of contact with their children. They do not spend their time writing to foreign governments or posting endless diatribes on foreign websites. They do not sit in the towers of academia divorced from the realities of the Court system promoting their personal views as the true gospel. Honest men are not afraid to stand up and try to achieve something practical.

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on this site (look for the Avatars) Be mindful what you post in public areas. 
Kip how does the phenomenon in which a mother appears to be able to bond with only one infant at a time that you refer to as Monotropy help us persuade a learned Federal Magistrate that contact time for children under three should be liberal, regular.

If I was to stand up before a Federal Magistrate or a Judicial Registrar in Australia and say well I think there might be a bit of Monotropy going on here and the (mother or father) should have liberal contact, frequent contacts and extensive contacts for the young child because of that, then I can expect to be referred to some sort of psychological assessment. (And I better not read any comments from other Moderators about the validity or otherwise of such a referral)

Kip the original issue you were unhappy with, I think, was that Jennifer Macintosh did not seem to support overnight contacts or extensive numbers of days/nights away from the mother. There was a lot of posting and I think in general it was agreed that contacts had to be frequent, and in my view that is almost every day or every other day or a number of times a week and or fortnight and would include dinner times and bed times, bathing etc… for a parent who is not the lives with parent. The issue with this sort of contact is parents have to co-operate and get along to some degree. They don't need to be perfect soul mates but they need to be civil to each other. Where they cooperate there is no problem and the cases we are taking about are the very few who do not cooperate is that correct?

So if that is correct you are seeking a resolution to the issue of overnight contacts for under three year olds. Is that what we are talking about here? I certainly refer to Michael Green QC and his work and also the AIFS research works which were published here also. I fail to see how writing to the AG will fix that. I asked previously what you expected the AG to do and as yet I still await some response to that question.

Executive Secretary - Shared Parenting Council of Australia
 Was my post helpful? If so, please let others know about the FamilyLawWebGuide whenever you see the opportunity
 
All,

Which question do you want me to answer first?

 
Secretary SPCA said
I fail to see how writing to the AG will fix that. I asked previously what you expected the AG to do and as yet I still await some response to that question.
Secretary SPCA said
I did receive a response from the Attorney General.
Secretary SPCA said
The point was made to the AG and basically the response was that parties are free to bring what evidence they like to the table in Court matters and it is for the Court to weigh that against the facts and make some determination on how to set up a regime that will allow parents to facilitate proper and appropriate contact with children that is reasonably practicable.
When did you receive this letter? Can I see a copy?

I cannot be expected to give an answer without seeing the original reply!

kip

Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.
What question do you want answer first there are plenty!

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on the site (Look for the Avatars).   Be mindful what you post in the public areas
kip said
All, Which question do you want me to answer first?
Liberi Primoris said
What question do you want answer first there are plenty!
Agog said
1  What are you actually trying to achieve by writing to our AG?
 2  Have you actually read Michael Greens excellent material on the High Conflict argument?
 3  Do you understand this site is not your personal blog and moderators can and will delete your material if you continue to ignore basic rules and what moderators are telling you?
The first question has been asked 4 times by SECSPCA and myself.
SECSPCA said
If I was to stand up before a Federal Magistrate or a Judicial Registrar in Australia and say well I think there might be a bit of Monotropy going on here and the (mother or father) should have liberal contact, frequent contacts and extensive contacts for the young child because of that, then I can expect to be referred to some sort of psychological assessment.
Kip said
understanding the significance of the concept of 'monotropy' is crucial to securing 'Shared Parenting'.
The two major elements crucial to securing shared parenting are willingness by the parents to engage and failing that Court orders

We have also lived through the 'Tender Years doctrine', 'Maternal deprivation' and other associated theories for many years. Our FLACT is far from perfect but perhaps instead of wasting our AGs time and writing your version of War and Peace on this site you should be focusing your energies on changing the dysfunctional UK Act. We do at least have a presumption of equal responsibility and our Courts are open.

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on this site (look for the Avatars) Be mindful what you post in public areas. 
Secretary SPCA said
If I was to stand up before a Federal Magistrate or a Judicial Registrar in Australia and say well I think there might be a bit of Monotropy going on here and the (mother or father) should have liberal contact, frequent contacts and extensive contacts for the young child because of that, then I can expect to be referred to some sort of psychological assessment. (And I better not read any comments from other Moderators about the validity or otherwise of such a referral)
Readers - since our Family Courts are open you will be given advance notice to attend to witness this historic event. Possibly applauding the Judge or FM that orders it? Cheering or singing "For he's a Jolly Good Fellow" about the Judge or FM is not allowed in Court.

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on this site (look for the Avatars) Be mindful what you post in public areas. 

FOURTH letter to the Attorney General, The Honourable Nicola Roxon MP (Includes AG reply to second letter)

PLEASE NOTE: SENT VIA AIR MAIL

FAO; The Honourable Nicola Roxon MP,
Attorney-General

Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600



 Australia


45 Roberts Road
Shirley
Southampton
UK
SO15 5DF
17 August 2012
Dear Mrs Roxon,

 
Re; (4) Australian Family Law: The contribution of Dr Jennifer McIntosh and Dr John Bowlby
 Since writing to you on 7 August I have now seen a copy of the letter you kindly asked Cathy Rainsford, Principal Legal Officer from the Family Law Branch at the Attorney-General's Department, to send to Wayne Butler, Executive Secretary of the Shared Parenting Council of Australia SPCA (AG-MC12/00741).


 However, although in her letter the Principal Legal Officer accurately describes the situation in civil proceedings which many parents in the UK as well as Australia would recogise, she fails to grasp the fundamental concern which I hope with your own qualifications and experience, as an honours law graduate and a judge's associate in the High Court of Australia, you may be more able to fully appreciate.


 The Principal Legal Officer dismisses the concern in the following way;

 'As you know, family law matters are civil proceedings in which courts rely on the parties to present evidence to support their submissions to the court The rules of evidence provide the ability for a party to challenge evidence presented by the opposing side or to submit alternate evidence to help the court make its decision'.


 But if the present situation was as simple and straightforward as Cathy Rainsford describes there would be no need to contact your office again online and now by air mail.


 It is the judges duty to hear and establish the facts of the case as well as to decide upon consideration of those facts whether there will be any remedy. Consideration of those facts will be supported by evidence so as to increase credibility. Generally evidence is admissible in court if it is relevant to the facts of the case but sometimes exclusionary rules apply which make it inadmissible due to public policy or some specified condition or safeguard.

 In these circumstances it is unfair to expect a parent to argue against unreliable evidence provided by a prominent government adviser who has directed research projects for the Attorney-General's Department.

 But I have been contacted from Australia by a father who found himself in exactly that situation when he was told by Louise Zammit, a counsellor from Sydney Family Law Court, that the chances of Shared Parenting for his 2 year 10 month old were very slim because the latest 'social studies' suggest it should not take place until the child attends school. He was also told that although he currently sees his child for two afternoons and one evening each week, spending a whole day together before the infant is 5 years old is out of reach.


 It is in this environment that Dr McIntosh, to put it bluntly, is acting like a 'mountebank' which is defined as a person who sells quack medicines from a platform in public places, attracting and influencing an audience by tricks or storytelling.


 The Australian Government has provided Dr McIntosh with just such a 'platform' because according to her own publicity, 'Jenn has directed several research studies for the Australian Government Attorney General's Department and Family and Community Services, including a current longitudinal study of child consultation in family law mediation. Jenn has conducted three studies into the Family Court of Australias reforms'.

 It is by association with the Australian Government and the Attorney-General's Department that Dr McIntosh is selling her own brand of 'quack medicines' at her clinic that provides, 'extensive services to families and the professionals who support them, specialising in family separation / divorce, foster care and adoption. Services include assessment, supportive counselling, child psychotherapy and family law family dispute resolution'.


 Like any mountebank Dr McIntosh is also successful at 'storytelling'. In this case the story is about, 'Attachment Theory, Separation and Divorce: Forging Coherent Understandings for Family Law'. The trouble is that all she is really doing is re-bottling a discredited theory, promoted by Dr John Bowlby during the 1950's, to oppose Shared Parenting legislation.

 The respected Cambridge University academic, Michael Lamb, has launched a scathing attack on her opinions as expressed in the Special Issue of the Family Court Review and described the publication as a 'wasted opportunity to engage with the literature on the implications of attachment research for family court professionals'. (Family Court Review, 50: 481485, 2012).


 It is for these special reasons the Attorney-General's Department should try to put right a situation it has helped to create. Specifically it could help to rectify the position fathers now face in family proceedings, by perhaps distancing itself from a set of guidelines called 'Infants and overnight care Post separation and divorce Guidelines for protecting the very young childs sense of comfort and security', produced by Dr McIntosh for the Australian Association for Infant Mental Health Inc AAIMHI. These guidelines are based on her paper, 'Infants and overnight care Post separation and divorce, clinical and research perspectives' which cites her interview from the Special Issue with Dr Schore, who Dr McIntosh says has, 'justifiably earned the nickname of, Americas Bowlby.'


 In her reply the Principal Legal Officer from the Family Law Branch at the Attorney-General's Department dismisses the Executive Secretary of the Shared Parenting Council of Australia's concern that Dr McIntoshes opinions are 'presented as fact in court' because she says the 'rules of evidence' should apply. But civil proceedings operate on the principle that all parties act in good faith and the Special Issue of the Family Court Review showed that Dr McIntoshes opinions are not grounded in the welfare of children but her own self-interest and I should be grateful if you could reconsider the situation.


 (Please find included with this letter a copy of the 'Guidelines for protecting the very young childs sense of comfort and security' together with Dr McIntoshes covering paper as well as a complete copy of the Michael Lamb review. Please also note that I will also send a copy of this letter with attachments to Dr McIntosh).


 Yours Sincerely,





 Kingsley Miller

 Attachments


 Infants and overnight care Post separation and divorce Guidelines for protecting the very young childs sense of comfort and security Australian Association for Infant Mental Health Inc AAIMHI Issued 26 Nov 2011


Infants and overnight care Post separation and divorce, clinical and research perspectives, Jennifer McIntosh, PhD. Australian Association for Infant Mental Health Inc AAIMHI Discussion paper infants and overnight care Issued 26 Nov 2011


Lamb, M. E. (2012), A wasted opportunity to engage with the literature on the implications of attachment research for family court professionals. Family Court Review, 50: 481485

Cc.Dr Jennifer McIntosh, Family Transitions, PO Box 5130, Alphington, Victoria, 3078, Australia


Professor Michael Lamb, University of Cambridge, Department of Psychology, Downing Street, Cambridge, CB2 3EB, UKProfessor Sir Michael Rutter, PO 80, Institute of Psychiatry at the Maudsley, De Crespigny Park, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 8AF, UK


 Professor Parkinson AM, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia


Wayne Butler, Executive Secretary, Shared Parenting Council of Australia, PO Box 2027 Bunbury, WA 6231, Australia

Parts of this post have been removed.
The poster had published a private letter sent to the SPCA.
The publication of that letter can only be by SPCA authorisation








Last edit: by Agog


Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.
Gee Kip we haven't heard from you for a while, some of us were missing your brief and concise posts

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on the site (Look for the Avatars).   Be mindful what you post in the public areas
All,

I hope other fathers new to the courts will find this helpful.

kip


Liberi Primoris said
Gee Kip we haven't heard from you for a while, some of us were missing your brief and concise posts

Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.
They will because they will see that they need to make their arguments, concise, relevant and to the point.

I hate to speak cliche's but there was a judge on the TV show 'Boston Legal' who quite eloquently said quite frequently, "Gibber Jabber, I don't want Gibber Jabber in my court just the facts".

The art of advocacy relies on brevity and accuracy.

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on the site (Look for the Avatars).   Be mindful what you post in the public areas
Liberi Primoris said
The art of advocacy relies on brevity and accuracy.
All,

But the letter is to the Attorney General in reply to the comments of the SPCA Secretary.

'Evil creeps in when honest men are frightened to stand up' and
Cathy Rainsford, Principal Legal Officer from the Family Law Branch at the Attorney-General's Department has side-stepped the point of Wayne Butler's letter.

She should be held accountable.

If you disagree with something in the letter make your point otherwise 'new' fathers will be able to read the correspondence for themselves and use it to advocate their own case in court from a position of accuracy and truth.

kip

Last edit: by Kip


Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.
Kip,

thanx for trying to raise awareness.

I expect you create multiple topics because you cannot make sequential posts.

Sometimes it seems some of the moderators could be ready to consider an NVC refresher.

Moderator Note
wabbit you know the rules about abbreviations etc  - so stop trying to be a smart alec!
wabbit,

I had not seen Wayne Butler's letter therefore could not comment before.

But this was lucky because in the meantime Michael Lamb had written his review of Dr McIntosh which conveniently bridged the link between my own letter and Wayne's covering letter.

Of course it also provided the ammunition to deal with the principal point made by the Principal Legal Officer from the Family Law Branch at the Attorney-General's Department to Wayne Butler.

Hope this makes sense. (You will have to read the correspondence)

kip


PS This is how I began the thread;

kip said
I live in England so it is hard to keep abreast of what is going on in Australia, so I must apologise if this sounds patronising.

Sometime ago I wrote with the support of SPCA to the Attorney General to complain about the Australian government using the work of Dr McIntosh. It is all well and good in party politics to lean to the left or right but when you represent the law, as the Attorney General, then you should represent all Australians because justice is impartial.

However Dr McIntoshes Guidelines for Toddlers were so sexist it was clear she was operating according to her own gender political motives. These guidelines necessarily disqualified her from any participation as a government adviser because they showed she could not be objective. Thus the letter.

Last edit: by Kip


Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.
Kip said
Liberi Primoris said
The art of advocacy relies on brevity and accuracy.
All,

But the letter is to the Attorney General in reply to the comments of the SPCA Secretary.

'Evil creeps in when honest men are frightened to stand up' and
Cathy Rainsford, Principal Legal Officer from the Family Law Branch at the Attorney-General's Department has side-stepped the point of Wayne Butler's letter.

She should be held accountable.

If you disagree with something in the letter make your point otherwise 'new' fathers will be able to read the correspondence for themselves and use it to advocate their own case in court from a position of accuracy and truth.

kip

 
More yada yada yada, Kip can you not get the point?

How about responding to questions put to you?

Do NOT make stupid statements about how to advocate in Australian Courts.

Why send a meaningless letter four time longer than the one sent to the SPCA?

Who gave you the right to respond to SPCA correspondence?

I have no doubt that the AG has formed the same opinion of you as site moderators.

Now be a good fellow and do what the moderators have requested.

Please supply details of how we can make endless meaningless posts on your web site.

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on this site (look for the Avatars) Be mindful what you post in public areas. 
Kip

You obviously have done much research on the subject. What would you suggest to this young father who is making an effort to get overnight.

http://flwg.com.au/forum/pg/topicview/misc/8086/index.php&start=0&filtered=1#post_50716

Executive Secretary - Shared Parenting Council of Australia
 Was my post helpful? If so, please let others know about the FamilyLawWebGuide whenever you see the opportunity
 
Agog,

This is the reply from the SPCA Secretary, after your own posting, to which I have replied with a link to one of my videos. I have also previously made a formal complaint against your comments and those of Liberi Primoris on this forum which I feel are a form of 'internet bullying'.

Secretary SPCA said
Kip

You obviously have done much research on the subject. What would you suggest to this young father who is making an effort to get overnight.

http://flwg.com.au/forum/pg/topicview/misc/8086/index.php&start=0&filtered=1#post_50716
Agog said
More yada yada yada, Kip can you not get the point?

How about responding to questions put to you?

Do NOT make stupid statements about how to advocate in Australian Courts.

Why send a meaningless letter four time longer than the one sent to the SPCA?

Who gave you the right to respond to SPCA correspondence?

I have no doubt that the AG has formed the same opinion of you as site moderators.

Now be a good fellow and do what the moderators have requested.

Please supply details of how we can make endless meaningless posts on your web site.

kip

Last edit: by Kip


Kingsley Miller is the author of 'even Toddlers Need Fathers', a critique of the principle of 'Maternal Deprivation' as applied in family courts, which Professor Sir Michael Rutter described as an, 'interesting and informative guide'. He has also received a letter from Buckingham Palace stating, 'It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book 'even Toddlers Need Fathers' and Her Majesty has noted your concerns'.
Kip said
Agog,
….. I have also previously made a formal complaint against your comments and those of Liberi Primoris on this forum which I feel are a form of 'internet bullying'.
Interesting that for someone that claims to do a lot of research he does not seem to comprehend who has been replying to his forum posts and who he has been ignoring - the senior and most experienced Family Law people on this site who are also senior Moderators and many of whom are senior members of other organisations.

I would suspect that he has even ignored any whispers they have made to him.

I can see where the 'formal' complaint is going to go.
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets