Why has she meekly followed the government line and called these two highly principled fathers “thugs” belonging to a “gang”?

There has been no discernible change in the operation of the ‘secret’ family courts, or any of worthwhile note in the pipeline. How can the comment “bam! The family courts are reformed” be at all justified?

Regards and thanks
Jeff Botterill

– BEGINS –
“The family courts are reformed,” declares Heather Brooke (Comment 8th Feb). She is woefully misinformed: far from caving in to fathers’ rights protestors, this government and the family law industry have cynically instituted a succession of mock inquiries and sham reforms, including the few minor legislative changes contained in the Children and Adoption Bill currently completing its passage through Parliament, which do nothing to address the fundamental problems with the system and the institutional prejudice against men which pervades it.

Until the principle of equality in post-separation parenting is enshrined in legislation and backed up with sweeping reforms of the bodies which implement the law, this country will continue to see the further rapid growth of an alienated and disenfranchised underclass of separated fathers, and a generation of children damaged – senselessly – by the deprivation of the love and full engagement of a perfectly good parent.

As an investigative journalist, Brooke would be advised to check her facts properly; as a campaigner for open government, she might also consider devoting some of her energies to probing the operation of our Orwellian family courts.
– ENDS–

For reasons of economy, my letter couldn’t address all my concerns about the factual accuracy of your piece:

1) you assert that ‘a gang of thugs invaded Parliament’ to throw condoms. What happened is that, in May 2004, two respectable, besuited F4J members got access to the Commons gallery as guests: Guy Harrison, the multi-millionaire businessman who last year also staged a protest on the roof of Westminster Hall, and Ron Davis, who had engaged the Prime Minister earlier that year on a radio phone-in programme, and received a promise from Tony Blair to look further into the issues and write back to him (he did so, on 24th March 2004, but was predictably non-committal with regard to any reform).

You can download a recording of this conversation at: http://www.gcook62.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/lbc_radio_tony_blair_130104.mp3. I highly recommend that you listen to it. He hardly sounds like a mindless thug, does he? Astonishingly composed, in fact, given what he has been through at the hands of the family courts (and knowing the circumstances of his story, I think it is a miracle that he is still standing, let alone in possession of any functioning mental faculties).

2) In the same sentence (implying that Guy Harrison and Ron Davis might be responsible) you also assert that letters of excrement were sent to the head of the Family Court. I would be interested to know your source for this claim.

I look forward to reading your response to my comments.

Graeme Cook

This was such an article and articulates exactly my frustration
with our confused, spineless politicians – who seem consumed by
their obsession that we never give offence to our Muslim
citizens but are equally confused as to how, exactly, to
protect the rights, persons and feelings of non-Muslims.

Thank you.

John A Blackley