Fathers seize child agency office

Expatica ^ | 20 November 2003 | Novum Nieuws

[RogerFGay]

Fathers seize child agency office

20 November 2003

AMSTERDAM — A group of angry fathers, who are involved in custody battles over their children, took over an office of the Dutch child protection agency Kinderbescherming on Thursday, the International Day of the Child.

Between 15 and 20 men seized control of the building in Zutphen and effectively imprisoned five staff members, Kinderbescherming spokeswoman Annette van der Hoorn said.

The men, who have been denied visitation to their children, said they had taken the drastic action on World Child Day to highlight the injustice of their situations.

They have not allowed anyone in or out of the offices and hung banners from the window of the offices.

The men have demanded the child protection agency only give advice on how custody arrangements should be made. Present legislation means that parents who breach an imposed custody arrangement forfeit their custodial rights.

The fathers have also demanded a meeting with Justice Minister Piet Hein Donner, the mayor of Zutphen and Kinderbescherming director H. Pasman.

Van der Hoorn said the agency's staff members who were being held in the building did not appear to be in any direct danger. Staff were continuing with their work and the police were not called to the scene.

The UN designated 20 November as the International Day of the Child after the signing of an official convention on the rights of children in 1989.

[RogerFGay]

can't get to my own ping list right now

[cantfindagoodscreenname]

Van der Hoorn said the agency's staff members who were being held in the building did not appear to be in any direct danger. Staff were continuing with their work and the police were not called to the scene.

Weird.

[Cagey]

November 20th?

Keep us updated! Hahaha

[m1-lightning]

That a true fight for men's rights. Just here in America, over 70% of all women win full custody of children after divorce.

[Orangedog]

70% is low. It's more like 85 to 90%.

[Pedantic_Lady]

That a true fight for men's rights. Just here in America, over 70% of all women win full custody of children after divorce.

Do you think that the men should always get full custody of children after a divorce? There's one country I can think of where this is already true: Iran.

[Orangedog]

Do you think that the men should always get full custody of children after a divorce? There's one country I can think of where this is already true: Iran.

So therefore, custody always going to the women is a good thing?! Oh that's right, I forgot about the double-standard.

[bikewench]

Neither partner should get full custody. It should automatically be joint.

[Pedantic_Lady]

So therefore, custody always going to the women is a good thing?! Oh that's right, I forgot about the double-standard.

No, it makes no more sense than always favoring the father.

[thoughtomator]

Those 30% of cases where women don't get full custody rights must be well-hidden. In the town where I grew up over half the families were divorced; in not a single case, to my knowledge, did any father have any better than a once-every-other-weekend claim to see his own children.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

When was this, twenty, thirty years ago? Aren't things improving?

[Orangedog]

How many divorced fathers do you know with full custody of his kids? I've never known any myself.

[Pedantic_Lady]

Neither partner should get full custody. It should automatically be joint.

Joint meaning?

[Pan_Yans Wife]

Full custody granted by the courts? One. Full custody by default, because the ex-wife just dropped out of the picture? Two.

In the first instance, the wife abandoned the children. In the second, the children were used as a tool to get even, and when that didn't work to agitate the ex-husbands anymore, the ex-wives just dropped off the kids.

In all three instances, the children were better off with the father.

[thoughtomator]

The time frame for my childhood is 1972-1990; figure the time frame for my firsthand observations on divorced families covers 1980-1990. From what I have read and heard, things have not improved; rather they have gotten even worse.

If there are any fathers out there who have gotten custody of their children in a contested situation, speak up, I'd like to hear how you achieved itl.

[Jonx6]

"That a true fight for men's rights. Just here in America, over 70% of all women win full custody of children after divorce."

"Do you think that the men should always get full custody of children after a divorce? There's one country I can think of where this is already true: Iran."

How in the world did you make that non sequitur leap?
Your moniker does not suit.

[m1-lightning]

Do you think that the men should always get full custody of children after a divorce?

Did I imply that? I believe that would only be the other extreme.

Do you think men should have rights in abortion decisions of their children?

[Lurker]

I had 'joint' custody until my ex-wife had the courtesy to die.

In my case 'joint' meant a 250 mile round trip to pick my 5 year old up for his every other weekend visit and a 250 mile round trip to drop him off.

My court mandated mid-week visit became impossible due to the distance.

When I complained to the judge involved, he told me that 'you could do it if you wanted to. Why don't you take Wednesdays off work?'

That is what was called 'joint custody' in Illinois.

L