UNIVERSITE DE PRINTEMPS
des associations parentales françaises
Pour une bonne gestion des séparations et des divorces
prenant en compte l’intérêt des enfants

Jeudi 1° mai
Matin : accueil
Après midi :
14h30 ouverture du colloque
Hommage aux pères, mères et adhérents suicidés du fait des procès «familiaux»
Présentation des associations et de leurs projets
(voir liste des associations ci dessous)
Interventions
-Histoire et sociologie des associations de pères
-Vous avez dit « féministes ?
-Constat sur la situation des pères et stratégie

Vendredi 2 mai
9 h30- 12 h et 14 h30 -18 h :
Interventions et débats :
Coût social et économique du divorce
Les violences conjugales
Médiation familiale et déjudiciarisation
Syndrome d’aliénation parentale
Evolution du droit de la famille
Divorce et Filiation dans la CIDH (Convention Internationale des Droits de l’Enfant)
Résidence alternée
Présentation du film d' Olivier Borderie sur la Résidence alternée
Séance de travail
Le Projet Parental Educatif

Associations participantes
Aide au Père. Lille
Allo Papa Allo Maman (APAM). Montpellier
Bien Etre de l'Enfant (BEE). Nimes
Centre d'Information sur les Droits des Pères (CIDP31). Toulouse
Débats Publics. Montpellier
Enfant = Papa + Maman (A=P+M). Avignon
Enfant et son Droit (E2SD). Paris
Justice Parité Parentale Normandie (JPPN). Le Havre
Le Parti des Enfants du Monde (PEM). Dijon
Observatoire des Libertés (ODL). Clermont Ferrand

Organisation Allo Papa Allo Maman Montpellier
Contact Philippe +33 06 07 49 76 65

La bala de plata
Entre los colectivos anglosajones que denuncian la discriminación del hombre en los casos de divorcio es frecuente la expresión the silver bullet ["la bala de plata"], referida a las falsas acusaciones, especialmente de abuso sexual. Para una mujer sin escrúpulos que quiera zanjar instantáneamente su proceso de separación y cercenar de raíz los ya de por sí exiguos derechos que el vigente régimen de divorcio reconoce al varón, no hay arma más contundente que una denuncia de ese tipo. Como medida preventiva, se dictará una orden de alejamiento contra el marido, es decir, se le prohibirá el acercamiento al domicilio conyugal y el contacto con sus hijos. Si las circunstancias ayudan, es también posible que el acusado vaya directamente a la cárcel, sin más pruebas que la palabra de la acusadora. Es la "bala de plata" que nunca falla y pone en bandeja un divorcio expeditivo y despiadado. Para llegar a esta situación ha sido necesario desmontar previamente uno de los fundamentos seculares del derecho: la presunción de inocencia. He aquí algunas opiniones autorizadas sobre esta práctica:
"Como es sabido, la manera más expeditiva de entablar el divorcio es, para una mujer, declarar que su marido es violento, y si ese subterfugio no basta, las mujeres pueden recurrir a lo que se denomina "la bala de plata", es decir, acusar a su pareja de abusar sexualmente de los niños. En ese caso, el hombre es inmediatamente apartado de su casa y de su familia. No hace mucho mantuve una charla con un grupo de hombres del suroeste de Inglaterra. Entre los asistentes a la reunión había dos policías. Cuando les pregunté por la realidad de los falsos abusos sexuales, admitieron que, en efecto, estaban obligados a separar a un padre de su familia aun cuando no hubiese pruebas. En una ocasión, una mujer había acusado al padre de una niña de haber abusado de ella en el baño. Llamó a la policía, y ésta se llevó inmediatamente al padre, que luego fue puesto en libertad por falta de pruebas. Deberíamos tener una ley que permitiese a las víctimas inocentes de tales acusaciones demandar judicialmente a sus agresoras. Para que se lleven detenido al hombre no se necesitan pruebas: basta con que la mujer descuelgue el teléfono." (Erin Pizzey, De lo personal a lo político, 2000)

. "Los jueces aceptarán igualmente las acusaciones de una mujer cuando dice que su marido es violento sin base ni evidencia, en un sistema donde es imposible verificar un examen cruzado de sus acusaciones. Pese a lo cual, con este pretexto privarán a un hombre del contacto con sus hijos. La falta de contacto con sus hijos es una fuente de inmensa injusticia y miseria para muchos padres. Los abogados dicen que este es un escenario muy típico. La madre decide separarse porque ha encontrado a otro hombre. La manera más sencilla de desembarazarse del padre es acusarle de ser violento con ella o los niños. El padre se marcha o es expulsado. Su acceso a los niños se limita a una orden de contacto emitida por el juzgado a recomendación de un funcionario de la asistencia social. Pero la madre tiene el látigo en la mano a la hora de controlar el contacto del padre. Éste se encuentra con que, normalmente, los niños están demasiado ocupados para verle. Cuando llega a ver a sus hijos, es a menudo el novio de su ex mujer quien le dice que se largue." (Melanie Phillips, La violación de la justicia, 1999)

· En 1963 se denunciaron en los Estados Unidos 160.000 casos de abusos sexuales a niños. Esta cifra aumentó hasta 1,7 millones de casos en 1985. La cifra siguió aumentando hasta llegar a 3 millones de denuncias en 1995, de las que 2 millones se consideraron infundadas o falsas (National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect (NCCAN): Child Maltreatment 1995: Reports From the States to the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System).

· "Siguen existiendo hombres que amenazan a las mujeres con diversos males, pero las mujeres, hoy en día, la máxima amenaza sobre un hombre es 'te voy a denunciar', es decir voy a ir al juzgado y diga lo que diga y pase lo que pase, ese señor sale condenado, con una pena mínima de 8 meses de prisión, y que según las circunstancias puede ingresar en prisión. [...] Pero existen otro tipo de mujeres que, como medio más rápido de separarse o divorciarse, ponen una denuncia por malos tratos, por insultos o por cualquier cosa similar, y automáticamente consiguen quedarse en la casa, y que el marido ceda a las pretensiones económicas del divorcio con tal de librarse de la condena penal. Esas mujeres existen, y están utilizando la justicia a su antojo, para 'colar' su divorcio y tramitarlo más rápidamente." (Carta de una abogada, letrado del Turno Especial de Violencia Doméstica, a Armando de Miguel, publicada en Libertad Digital el 1 de junio de 2006)

· Según la Memoria 2005 del Instituto de Medicina Legal de Murcia, sólo el 16% de los 117 reconocimientos periciales realizados por requerimiento judicial a supuestas víctimas de delitos sexuales arrojaron resultados positivos. Es decir, el 84% de las denuncias de ese tipo resultaron falsas, y estas cifras se mantienen en el tiempo sin sufrir grandes variaciones. (Noticia publicada en la prensa local murciana el sábado, 9 de septiembre de 2006)

"Toda persona acusada de delito tiene derecho a que se presuma su inocencia mientras no se pruebe su culpabilidad" (Declaración Universal de los Derechos Humanos, art. 11). - "Asimismo, todos tienen derecho al Juez ordinario predeterminado por la ley [...] y a la presunción de inocencia." (Constitución española, Artículo 24.2).

[JAD, 2006]

http://www.absurdistan.eu/cm_bala.htm
http://www.pormishijos.com/

Federación Andaluza de Madres y Padres Separados (FASE)
Avda. Nicolás Salmerón, 30 - 2ºB
04700 - El Ejido (Almería)
Teléfonos: 639 611 501 / 675 512 308
e-mail contacto: faseandalucia@gmail.com
Web: http://faseandalucia.iespana.es/

El libro sobre SAP e inculcación Maliciosa
Lanzamiento en Argentina

(SAP) SÍNDROME DE ALIENACIÓN PARENTAL
Proceso de obstrucción del vínculo entre
los hijos y uno de sus progenitores

Diego Hernán Cecchini

PARENTAL ABDUCTION
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION
The European Parliament

– having regard to Article 12 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, in conjunction with Article 21 (Non-discrimination) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000, which prohibit all discrimination on grounds of nationality, as well as Article 3 of the future Lisbon Treaty, which states that the Union ‘shall combat [...] discrimination and shall promote [...] protection of the rights of the child’ and, in particular, that ‘in its relations with the wider world, the Union shall [...] contribute to [...] the protection of human rights, in particular the rights of the child’,
– having regard to Article 13(1) of the Treaty establishing the European Community, under which Parliament may take action to combat all discrimination based on sex or racial or ethnic origin in Member States,
– having regard to Article 251 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, in conjunction with Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union, empowering the Council to call on any Member State guilty of breaches of democratic principles and human rights to take appropriate steps,
– having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, with particular reference to Article 9 thereof, covering compliance with judgments on child access rights,
– having regard to Article 11 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003, in conjunction with the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980, on securing the prompt return of children wrongfully removed from a Member State,
– having regard to the United Nations Convention of 20 November 1989 on the Rights of the Child and the protocols thereto,
– having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which establishes four fundamental principles, namely: protection against all forms of discrimination; the best interests of the child must be a primary consideration; the right to life and to development; and the right to freedom of expression;
– having regard to its resolution of 14 June 2006 on non-discrimination and equal opportunities for all - a framework strategy,
– having regard to Article 24(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which states that 'every child shall have the right to maintain on a regular basis a personal relationship and direct contact with both his or her parents, unless that is contrary to his or her interests',
– having regard to Article 24 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in conjunction with Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which guarantee children a right of 'participation' ensuring that their experiences and views are taken into consideration on all matters which concern them, and guarantee that that rights is not subject to any conditions or restrictions,
– having regard to the Hague Convention of 19 October 1996 on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Cooperation in respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children,
– having regard to its resolution of 16 January 2008: Towards an EU strategy on the rights of the child, with particular reference to paragraph 29 thereof, which states that 'a strategy on the rights of the child must include provisions to promote the welfare of families' and paragraph 116 thereof, which calls on 'the Member States to remove all restrictions on the right of parents to have contact with their children resulting from nationality differences, particularly in connection with the choice to speak a language other than the official language within a given country; takes the view that the removal of restrictions on multinational families in which there is a conflict between the parents should entail unrestricted freedom to speak in the language chosen by the child and the parent',
– having regard to its declaration of 13 November 2007 on 'dys'crimination and social exclusion affecting children with 'dys'abilities, calling for special treatment for children with 'dys'-type disabilities,
– having regard to Rule 115 of its Rules of Procedure,
A. whereas on 30 January 2007, during a meeting of Parliament's Committee on Petitions, a Commission representative said that the Jugendamt (German youth welfare agency) was guilty of violations of Article 12 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, which prohibits all discrimination on grounds of nationality,
B. whereas, in a letter of 10 January 2008 pointing to the wholly positive effect that bilingualism has on the development of children, Leonard Orban, Commissioner with responsibility for multilingualism, stated that the Commission takes a positive approach to bilingualism and a multilingual upbringing, which it considers to be an important part of the European project and inter-cultural dialogue,
C. having regard to the Commission document entitled 'A new framework strategy for multilingualism', which states that language is the most direct expression of culture and that respect for the individual, openness towards other cultures, tolerance and acceptance of others and respect for linguistic diversity are core values of the European Union, and to the opinion on the multiple benefits of a multilingual upbringing for young people (Report EAC 89/04),

D. having regard to the 'Preliminary Inventory of EU Actions Affecting Children's Rights' published by the Union in connection with the work on the document entitled 'Towards an EU Strategy on the Rights of the Child', with particular reference to section 1.5 thereof, which points to the importance of ensuring that the child is heard in matters concerning it, particularly in legal proceedings relating to international child abductions, and section 1.6, pointing to the need to ensure that contact is maintained with both parents,
E. whereas the report entitled 'Review of the Implementation of Brussels II regulation in relation to parental abduction of children' that was produced by the Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer organisation on 31 October 2006 states that in many Member States violations of the right of the child to have access to both parents and of the right of the left-behind parent to have a fair trial have been recorded and gives 12 examples of parental child abduction, seven of them to Germany,
F. whereas the Bamberg Declaration adopted in the framework of the international symposium on 'German youth welfare offices and European Convention on Human Rights' chaired by Annelise Oeschger, president of the Conference of International Non-Governmental Organisations of the Council of Europe (Bamberg, 20-21 October 2007), which was forwarded to the EP Committee on Petitions, stated in relation to the Jugendamt that: 'instead of arranging a rapid return of the child, the child very often gets alienated from parents by direct manipulation of the child and/or by procrastination of the proceedings by the youth welfare office and the courts'; that 'it is often made impossible for parents to assert the rights they are entitled to even after a withdrawal of custody (e.g. contact with schools and a right to say, consent to medical procedures, religious education)'; and that 'in numerous cases parents are not allowed to communicate with the children in their native language or the children are barred from speaking in their mother tongue' and may be subjected to physical punishment if they do,
G. whereas during the EP Committee on Petitions meeting of 7 June 2007, Gila Schindler, speaking on behalf of the German Government, acknowledged that the Jugendamt in Hamburg had not acted in accordance with the law in prohibiting the use of Polish during a meeting between a father and his children, stating that the parent involved, a Mr Pomorski, wished to speak to his daughters in Polish, as he usually did, but the Jugendamt forcefully insisted that German be used, thus infringing Mr Pomorski's rights, because the agency's conduct was neither proper nor legal; whereas Mrs Schindler said she was very sorry for what had happened and stated that the Jugendamt had no right to interfere in family law and that, on the contrary, its role was to ensure that decisions handed down by family courts were duly implemented,
H. whereas the Jugendamt's responsibilities have been further increased by the German federal authorities, as evidenced by an amendment to Article 6 of the German Constitution, which gives the state the role of 'primary parent', stating that every child has the right to develop its personality, to an upbringing free of violence and to specific protection against violence, neglect and exploitation, and that it is the state's role to respect, protect and promote the rights of the child's rights and ensure that it lives in an environment that meets its needs,
I. whereas the German Minister of Justice, Brigitte Zypries, has acknowledged that violations of a child's right to choose the language in which it communicates with its parents have occurred, stated that, while a bilingual upbringing, irrespective of the other language involved, is seen as positive and worthy of support in Germany, it may not in some individual cases be in the interests of the child and in such cases it is the duty of the courts – when duly applied to – to determine what form the child's upbringing should take in the future,
J. whereas Jugendamt offices do not come under the jurisdiction of any central authority, but solely that of local authorities, and whereas this arrangement leads to problems,
K. having regard to the large number of cases in which human and children's rights have been violated, pointing to the existence of a general practice of taking children away from non-German parents following the deliberate submission of false or fabricated evidence pointing to the emotional instability or criminal background of the non-German parent, as has happened, among others, to:
* Sabine Vander Elst, a Belgian citizen, who in December 2003 was in absentia deprived of parental rights in respect of her daughter who was eight years old at the time and had been abducted to Lemperheim by her father, a German citizen, and kept in Germany with the help of Jugendamt officials and the courts, which claimed that they were unable to determine where the mother lived, so as to prevent her from attending the court proceedings; the Jugendamt in Lemperheim compiled an unfavourable report on the mother's mental health without attempting to contact her, claiming that there was no need for such contact where the person concerned did not speak German; during meetings with her daughter (under the supervision of a Jugendamt lawyer), the mother was not allowed to speak French; the German federal authorities to which the mother has applied for help have refused to reply, on the pretext that her German is not good enough; the mother has had no contact with the child for some five years;
* Pascal Gallez, a Belgian citizen, who in 1998 was deprived of custody of his son (aged six at the time), who was abducted by his mother, a German citizen, and kept in Germany with the help of the courts; the courts gave the mother exclusive parental rights on the basis of a fait accompli, namely the prior abduction and manipulation of the child; since 2002 the German courts have been dragging out the proceedings concerning visiting rights for the father, at the same time allowing the mother further to manipulate the child; the courts also allowed the child's surname to be changed to his mother's maiden name, without the father being notified of the change, on the grounds that it was for the 'good of the child'; the father has had no contact with the child for some 11 years;
* Wojciech Pomorski, who has Polish and German citizenship and who in 2003 was deprived of access to his two daughters; a court in Hamburg legitimised the children's abduction by their mother, a German citizen, and granted the father supervised visiting rights, in order to ensure that he did not 'abduct the child to Poland'; the Jugendamt in Hamburg forbade the use of Polish during meetings and, when the father protested, cancelled the meetings; in a document of 29 January 2004, the Hamburg Bergedorf Jugendamt maintained that it was clear that, from an educational point of view, it was not in the children's interests for Polish to be used during meetings and that promoting the use of German could not but be beneficial to the children, since they were growing up and were – or would be – attending school in the country; in 2004 the Jugendamt helped the mother to flee with the children to Austria, where they are now living at an unknown address; the father has had no contact with the children for nearly five years;
* Elzbieta Palmer, a Polish citizen, who has been fighting for an equal right to education for her son since 2001; despite the fact that provision of such teaching is compulsory, additional German lessons were not provided for the child when he returned from Poland in 2001, and his knowledge was then assessed; the Jugendamt and the Lower Franconia Education Department refused to recognise Polish certificates attesting to the boy's state of health and intellectual development and repeatedly sent him to a school for children with severe learning and psychological difficulties (Heilpädagogisches Zentrum) or for biased psychological tests, as a result of which the boy, who suffers from a serious heart defect, developed severe psychological blocks and subsequently suffered from psychosomatically triggered life-threatening heart attacks; despite explicit medical recommendations to the contrary, the boy was sent to work during a heatwave, which caused further serious heart disorders; in May 2006 the Jugendamt pressurised the boy into seeing a doctor and secured a decision on the need for him to be placed in a psychiatric hospital on the grounds of his 'excessively emotional relationship with his mother and family'; for the past six years the boy has been refused the right to conventional schooling and the family has been subjected to harassment, with heavy fines and non-recognition of medical certificates;
* Elzbieta Nyks (a Polish citizen) and Zenon Nyks (who has Polish and Austrian citizenship), whose terminally ill daughter was taken away from them and whose older son was allowed to die; in 2003, the Nyks children were diagnosed with muscular dystrophy; in January 2006 the Jugendamt started a campaign of systematic harassment and intimidation against the Nyks, insisting that they gave up their rights to their children and agreed to them being placed with a foster family; the Nyks refused to do so, and in February 2006, with the help of the police, Jugendamt officials took the children to a clinic in Stuttgart and then to Waden, and obtained a court order restricting the parents’ rights (depriving them of their right to decide on their sick children’s medical treatment and place of stay); at the end of a long struggle, the children returned home, but only for a short time, since on 28 April 2006, the son died at the Instytut Matki Dziecka in Warsaw; the doctors’ diagnosis pointed to neglect, a lack of medical treatment and an extremely debilitated physical condition; on the family’s return to Germany, the Jugendamt took the second child away from the parents; by order of the courts, the parents may visit their terminally ill daughter for three hours a fortnight, and all attempts to get the child back have to date been thwarted by the Jugendamt;
* Beata Pokrzeptowicz-Meyer, a Polish citizen, who for the past four years has been fighting for custody of and the right to visit her son; in 2004 Jugendamt officials advised the mother, who was bringing up her son on her own, to go to Poland with her son to look for work; once she had left, together with the child’s father (who had full visiting rights at the time), they applied to the courts for an order depriving the mother of custody; the mother immediately returned to Germany with the child, and the Jugendamt took the child away and gave the mother supervised visiting rights (28 hours over a nine-month period); the Jugendamt forbade the mother from speaking Polish with the child, who up to then had been bilingual, threatening to end all visits if she did; in 2005 the mother was given a prison sentence for allegedly abducting the child and her parental rights were taken away from her; the German courts granted a Jugendamt request for the boy no longer to be allowed to learn Polish or to have any contact with his Polish family; in September 2006, in a letter to the Polish consular authorities, the Jugendamt said that the child was not Polish and would not be taught Polish; despite the involvement of three courts, the mother has had no contact with her son since August 2006;
* Miroslaw Kraszewski, a Polish citizen, who has been fighting for the right to visit his son for eight years; in 2000 the courts found that a bilingual upbringing was harmful to the child and threatened to take away all visiting rights; in response to an appeal, in 2001 the father was allowed a few hours’ supervised visiting time, but forbidden to use Polish during the visits; in 2004 the Jugendamt applied to the courts for a total ban on visits, claiming that the father was not cooperating with it and that he wanted to pass on Polish values to the child and teach him Polish; the court took away the father’s visiting rights until 2006, stating that the son was German and German alone; the father has not seen the son for six years;
* Cédric Crouzatier, a French citizen, who in 2006 lost contact with his five children (aged 11, 9, 5 (twins) and 18 months); when the mother filed for divorce, the Jugendamt became involved and drew up an unfavourable report on the father’s mental health, without attempting to contact him; it drew up a similar report on the state of health of the oldest son (aged 16), who had gone to France to stay with his father; the Jugendamt drafted an untrue report on the mental health of the other children, about which the children complained to the father over the telephone; although there has been no court ruling on the matter, the father currently has no contact with his children;
* Christian Rost, a German citizen, and Suphon Rost, a Thai citizen, whose daughter was taken away and placed in a children’s home by the Jugendamt on the basis of unproven accusations of sexual exploitation, despite the fact that during the court proceedings the parents drew attention to ADHS symptoms in the child; in March 2005, on the basis of suspicions voiced by the mother of one of the girl’s friends, Jugendamt officials took the child away while she was at school, falsely stating that she had contacted them, asking for help; for six months the officials prevented all contact between parents and child and, after granting the parents supervised visiting rights, ordered them to sign a document stating, among other things, that German would be spoken during the visits; the courts refused to take account of the evidence produced by the parents and granted the Jugendamt’s application for parental rights to be withdrawn; in December 2007 a further psychological examination found that the girl had a wide range of ADHS symptoms and ruled out the possibility of sexual exploitation of the child; despite this, the parents have still not recovered their daughter,
L. whereas more than 250 complaints have been submitted to the EP Committee on Petitions by parents of various nationalities whose interests have been harmed by the Jugendamt and who condemn the methods used by that organisation
1. Voices deep concern at the acts carried out within a Member State by an agency that has been in operation since 1939, when it had responsibility for the racial purity of German children and which is now keeping children away from their non-German parents, often against those children’s best interests;
2. Condemns the actions of the Jugendamt, which constitute discrimination on grounds of nationality;
3. Condemns the bans and restrictions placed on communication in the mother tongue of a non-German parent between that parent and his or her children;
4. Condemns the support given by the Jugendamt for parental abductions of children to Germany aimed at creating a fait accompli as regards loss of contact with the non-German parent, and the children’s forced assimilation in Germany;
5. Condemns the unfounded applications to family courts made by the Jugendamt in respect of non-German parents;
6. Recommends that children be brought up in accordance with Europe’s multicultural and multilingual traditions;
7. Calls on the German Government put an end to the discriminatory methods used by the German youth welfare agency (Jugendamt) and to bring German law in this area into line with Community law, with particular reference to Article 12 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, which prohibits all discrimination on grounds of nationality and Directive 2000/43/EC implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin, which should have been implemented in the Member States by 19 July 2003;
8. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the German Government

Confederación Estatal de Asociaciones de Madres y Padres Separados

REUNIÓN Y RUEDA DE PRENSA EN BARCELONA DE LA CONFEDERACIÓN ESTATAL DE ASOCIACIONES DE MADRES Y PADRES SEPARAD@S

HOY sábado 12 de abril se han reunido en Barcelona, los presidentes de las asociaciones y federaciones autonomicas miembros de la CONFEDERACIÓN ESTATAL DE MADRES Y PADRES SEPARADOS, tras la cual se ha expuesto un analisis de la situacion actual del colectivo y se han definido las lineas estrategicas de actuacion a seguir.
Tras las Elecciones Generales, las últimas manifestaciones habidas en Madrid y en Barcelona a favor de la custodia compartida y la aprobación por el gobierno de D. José Montilla de un anteproyecto de código de familia catalán que recoge la custodia compartida como modelo preferente, la Confederacion no tiene la menor duda de que el comienzo de esta nueva legislatura constituye una oportunidad unica para llevar a cabo una reforma profunda y moderna de la Ley de Divorcio y la Ley Integral de Medidas de Protección contra la Violencia de Género.
Durante todo el periodo electoral se han mantenido conversaciones con todos los grupos politicos, algunas de ellas muy fructiferas, a saber, Izquierda Unida, Esquerra Republicana, Iniciativa per Catalunya Verds, PSC, Coalicion Bloc Verds Valencia, para llevar a cabo la reforma de la Ley de Divorcio, que pretende,
Implantar la custodia compartida y la coparentalidad como escenario PREFERENTE tras un divorcio/separacion con hijos.
- Introducir la MEDIACION FAMILIAR como paso previo a la gestion de un divorcio por la via contenciosa.
- Liquidacion inmediata de la sociedad de gananciales
- Desvinculacion de los bienes ganaciales respecto de la forma de custodia de los hijos.
Con estos puntos construiremos un escenario de IGUALDAD, que sin duda alguna detendran el notable aumento de contenciosidad en la resolucion de divorcios, generando asi un marco que PRESERVE LOS DERECHOS DEL MENOR, especialmente en lo relativo a,
- Derecho a las relaciones familiares, tanto con sus progenitores como con sus familias extensas.
- Derecho a no ser manipulados en contra de uno de sus progenitores (SAP).
- Derecho tener una vivienda digna con ambos padres.

Mientras estas propuestas de reforma son atendidas en el Parlamento, la Confederacion propone que se lleven a cabo medidas sociales previas hacia su colectivo, a saber,
- Reforma fiscal que permita deducciones por hijos con independencia de la titularidad de la custodia.
- Ayudas para adquisicion de vivienda tras una separacion / divorcio.
- Establecimiento de pensiones alimenticias justas y equilibradas respecto a los progenitores, que garanticen el bienestar de los menores, mientras el escenario legal se termine de modificar.

Con respecto a la Ley de Violencia de Genero, esta Confederacion lanzara aportaciones concretas al nuevo gobierno de Zapatero y a todas las formaciones politicas, con objeto de que sean tenidas en cuenta en la Conferencia de Presidentes Autonomicos anunciada antes de las elecciones, para dar solucion a este gravisimo problema. Aportaciones que sin duda persiguen,
- ERRADICAR la violencia en el ambito familiar.
- PROTEGER a las personas maltratadas sin discriminacion de genero y sin LESIONAR los derechos civiles de personas inocentes.
- Potenciar los mecanismos de PREVENCION salvaguardando el interes del menor.

Esta Confederación anima, por tanto, al nuevo gobierno de Zapatero a tomar decisiones responsables, valientes y auténticamente progresistas en materia de divorcio y violencia de género, con el objetivo de reducir la conflictividad y erradicar la violencia en las crisis familiares, potenciar la igualdad mujer/hombre y defender a l@s menores de la manipulación y el maltrato.
EDUARDO VIVES TERUEL
Área de Prensa 647 96 96 04
Asociación Madres y Padres Separados
PORTAVOZ DE DAMNIFICADOS POR LOS INFORMES PERICIALES DE FAMILIA (DINPERFA) VCIA.
WWW.CUSTODIACOMPARTIDA.ORG

United Nations 1503 Petition

within events promoted for 25/04/2008

‘Alliance For Justice’ Is Born
Inaugural Conference "Rights and practice in the Family Court"
20 & 21st April-2008 United Kingdom

The UN1503 campaign “In The Interests' Of Children” has now teamed up with other concerned organizations and professionals in a joint alliance to issues including ‘restoring the balance back into the scales of justice’. To kick start the process, a 2-day conference is being held on Sunday 20th and Monday 21st April 2008 in East Grinstead, United Kingdom.
Conference speakers will include William (Bill) Bache (criminal lawyer in Angela Cannings case), Dr. Kartar Badsha (Human Rights), Sally Bunday MBE (Hyperactive Children’s support), Brian Gerrish, Eugen Hokenjos, Dr. Ludwig Lowenstein (International PAS Expert) and Vera Chaney (Green Network). Coffee and food is available. See the website link below for more information and/or contact Shaun O’Connell on [+44] (0)1704-514-377 (landline) or [+44] (0)7719-020-208 (mobile) for more.
More Information
http://www.alliance4justice.eu

Parent Alienation Awareness Day – Friday 25th-April-2008

The UN1503 supports the recognition of PAS as a major highlighted danger to children, so often deliberately ignored by Govt and state organs.

Friday-25th-April-2008 marks International Parental Alienation Awareness Day. Although many of you may be familiar with PAS, there are still many others who are not aware of its existence and the impact it has on our children’s lives until it really hits you.

PAS id defined by its founder Dr Richard A Gardner (1985) http://www.rgardner.com/refs/ as: “The parental alienation syndrome (PAS) is a childhood disorder that arises almost exclusively in the context of child-custody disputes. Its primary manifestation is the child’s campaign of denigration against a parent, a campaign that has no justification. It results from the combination of a programming (brainwashing) parent’s indoctrinations and the child’s own contributions to the vilification of the target parent. When true parental abuse and/or neglect is present, the child’s animosity may be justified and so the parental alienation syndrome explanation for the child’s hostility is not applicable.”

The UN1503 campaign clearly recognises PAS, PAS is real, it exists, but sadly many of the often ulterior motivated Govts and often State authorities do not want to acknowledge the existence of PAS and/or its impact to our children. Most Governments’ stance can be summed up by the following quote: 'the professionals involved were ready to accept the excuses of the primary carer and abuser' - and - 'too often it seemed that too much time was spent deferring to the needs of the resident parent and not enough time spent on protecting vulnerable and defenceless children'.

You can learn more about PAS and counteracting the effects PAS (see ref Dr Lowenstein, New PAS Publication) by visiting the links on the campaign website.

Working with Parent Alienation Awareness Organization (PAAO) we want in addition to raising its awareness, some clear actions being taken against this scourge to the detriment of our children. For more click on the main navigation column on the UN1503 website or visit the address http://www.paawareness.org

Good morning Concerned Parents of Georgia!

I am incredibly pleased to announce that the NPRA has rented the Auditorium at The Georgia Capitol in Atlanta for an all day education symposium "Parental Alienation and other Parenting Concerns" on Friday, April 25th (9-5). We are busy planning activities, getting sponsors and most importantly "getting the word out" that this important event is taking place (in two weeks!)

After this Sunday's S.A.D. seminar we will be working on letters, invitations, speeches and other related activities so please join us!
WE NEED YOUR HELP GETTING THE WORD OUT AND MANNING AND WOMANNING THE SYMPOSIUM!
Please forward this email to any and all that you believe may be interested in joining with NPRA to get our message across to government officials, and most importantly the media : CHILDREN NEED BOTH PARENTS!

If you have a story to tell or a message to get across THIS IS YOUR FORUM! We hope to have the attention of legislators and media representatives who you can personally inform about your experiences with our current system of family law. We also ask that you invite your own legislators to this event (contact NPRA for invitation details).

Please contact either me, Karen at 678-480-1550 or Phyllis at 678-849-8480 or email us at happychildren@comcast.net
to join in the "fun"!!!

We will also be holding a Candlelight Vigil from 8-11PM that evening in front of The Capitol.
We intend to hold candles to represent the children that we are "missing".

Any and all ideas, input and support is most welcome.
Together we CAN make a difference!

As always in hope and appreciation,
Karen Wagner
NPRA
678-480-1550
happychildren@comcast.net

Vendredi 25 avril 2008, 18 à 22h

Maison de la Laïcité
Lucia de Brouckère

60 – 62 Rue de la Croix de Fer, 1000 Bruxelles
(Métro MADOU)

SOIRÉE - CONFERENCES - DÉBATS
Accueil dès 18h00 (Sandwichs / boissons)
(PAF 5 €)

19h00 : « LES MANIPULATIONS DU CERVEAU»
Avec Dr J. Emile VANDEREYDEN, Neuropsychiatre CHU – Charleroi (Vésale)

19h45 : « LES IMPACTS DANS LE CONTEXTE DE CONFLIT FAMILIAL »
Jean Luc PIRLET, Psychanalyste - Psychothérapeute Bruxelles - Liège

« LOI SUR L’ALIÉNATION PARENTALE : DISSUASION OU DÉRIVE LÉGISLATIVE ?
Kérim MAAMER, Politologue - ULB

Une délégation du « Centre des Droits Parentaux » et du « Collectif des pères de Charleroi » se rendra chez le Secrétaire d’Etat aux familles. Les associations et groupements de parents secondarisés qui souhaitent s’associer à notre démarche sont invitées à communiquer leurs doléances dans un rapport de deux pages maximum, qui sera transmis au Secrétaire d’Etat.

CENTRE DES DROITS PARENTAUX (éditeur responsable)
Avenue Eugène Plasky, 26 – B1030 Bruxelles (Schaerbeek)
Tél : +32(0) 2 735 88 48 - www.justice-parentale.be - GSM : +32475 547.807

"Access Denied"
Pascal Gallez
Sabine Vander Elst

within events promoted for 25/04/2008

"access denied, accès interdit"
all the relevant informations concerning our Big Action

basic press release & agenda

French	English	Planning fr/en

Une longue marche, de Bruxelles à Strasbourg
"access denied" est une action organisée par deux parents qui n'ont plus vu leur enfant respectif suite à un rapt parental organisé il y a plusieurs années.
Ces deux parents, Sabine Vander Elst et Pascal Gallez, ont été rejoints, très rapidement, par des parents et associationsdont certains qui ont souhaité "parrainer" l'action avec l'apport de leur logo ou de leur nom. Des parents et des grands parents se sont mobilisés aussi, pour contribuer au succès de cette action.

"Access denied" vise à dénoncer trois aspects de la problématique des droits non respectés de l'enfant :
1. le non respect du droit de visite ou du droit de garde
2. le problème du rapt parental
3. l'aliénation parentale

L'action est présentée sous plusieurs aspects dont:
1. Pétition européenne avec témoignages, présentée sur Internet et sur papier. Voir le texte et les signatures sur http://1777.lapetition.be
2. Marche du Parlement Européen de Bruxelles au Parlement de Strasbourg, du 25 avril (jour consacré à l'aliénation parentale) au 21 mai. Le 21 mai l'action se terminera par une marche à travers Strasbourg pour arriver au Parlement Européen et y etre accueilli par le président de la commission des pétitions du PE, Mr Libicki. D'autres Parlementaires Européens nous ont déjà assuré de leur présence, aux cotés de Mr Libicki ce jour là, pour nous recevoir ainsi que notre pétition.

Veuillez prendre notre du planning de nos actions et de la marche (documents mis en pièce jointe). Un supplément d'informations au communiqué de presse sera remis aux journalistes sur les lieux des manifestations.

Pascal Gallez tel +32 473 97 42 92
http://antoinekailouisghislain.skynetblogs.be
Sabine Vander Elst + 32 497 38 69 77
http://lebensborn2-mafille-maeliss.skynetblogs.be/

planning des actions et de la marche (3 pages)	la pétition papier avec tous les logos

J'aime Papa et Maman

within events promoted for 25/04/2008

Bien entendu avec leur autorisation écrite nous publions ci dessous le Compte rendu de leur rendez-vous du 22-03-2008

Enfants du divorce engagé dans le Défi pour la Famille :
Adrien, Robin, Inès, Samy, Joachim: présents
Loïk : excusé.
Enfants du divorce sympathisants :
Raphaël, Frank, Jimmy, Johan : excusés
Ambassadeurs de notre Défi pour la Famille:
Jean-Emile Vandereyden, Neuropsychiatre:
responsable neurologie sur le site Vésale du CHU de Charleroi
présent
Spécialistes :
Benoit Van Dieren (Psychologue d’ Adrien et Robin): excusé
Parents engagés dans le Défi pour la Famille :
Thierry, Kerim, Jean-Marie, Michel: présents
Suzy, Anne, Patrick: excusés
Parents Sympathisants: Lacky

Petit dîner familial suivi d’une réunion générale et ensuite d’une réunion séparée entre le groupe des enfants du divorce (11 à 25 ans) et les autres.

Réunion générale.
Mr Vandereyden nous conseille pour la mise en route de l’association.
Pour créer une association, il faut tout d’abord quelques personnes motivées qui ont un but, ensuite des membres et enfin des actions.
Il nous fait remarquer que le but de notre association est des plus clairs.
Parce que nous voulons que ce qui nous est malheureusement arrivé n'arrive plus JAMAIS à d'autres enfants. Parce qu'avant de devenir parents à notre tour, nous voulons avoir la CERTITUDE de pouvoir conserver toute notre vie durant l'amour et l'estime de nos enfants, même après une séparation. Parce que nous souffrons d’entendre l’un de nos parents dire du mal de l’autre. Parce que la majorité des couples sont divorcés. Parce que les souffrances que nous connaissons ne sont pas les mêmes que celles de nos parents, nous avons décidé de créer une association familiale dont nous, les jeunes, seront les portes paroles.

Nous avons l’intention de créer un forum sur lequel les jeunes pourront partager leurs idées.
Le système judiciaire éclate les familles en milles morceaux et crée des ruptures entre l’enfant et l’un des deux parents ainsi qu’une branche de sa famille et même entre frères et sœurs. C’est pour ça que nous (surtout Adrien) avons peur de faire des enfants dans le monde actuel.
Certains enfants reprochent à leurs parents cette situation et diabolisent l’un d’entre eux (en général celui qu’ils voient le moins), mais ils se trompent, car c’est la justice qui en donnant raison à l’un des parents et en le privilégiant entretient le conflit et détruit des familles entières.
D’après le neuro-psychiatre Jean Emile Vandereyden, nous devrions faire connaître notre association et notre site par le bouche-à-oreille. Nous devrions améliorer la page de garde du site, créer un grand groupe de jeunes avant de contacter la presse et de mettre nos idées en commun avec un groupe d’adultes. En tout cas, les enfants du divorce doivent rester au cœur de l’action.

Réunion entre enfants du divorce :
Nous devons faire connaître notre site. Nous souhaitons que le démarrage officiel de notre association se fasse grâce à un grand karaoké familial qui aura lieu à la Grande Salle du CENTRE NATURE DE BORZEE.
Pour le site Internet, nous voulons remplacer les chansons par d’autres comme «c’est parti» qui devrait être placée aussi sur la page d’accueil pendant quelques temps. Nous améliorerons par après la page de garde et la rendrons plus accrocheuse, nous mettrons des arrières plans animés derrière les textes pour rendre la lecture plus attirante.
Nous vendrons des t-shirts de différentes couleurs et de modèles variés dont le slogan sera « j’aime papa et maman » ou avec d’autres idées comme celles d’Inès qui en a beaucoup. En attendant, nous demandons à Patrick de remplacer le t-shirts de droite présent sur le site par un t-shirts noir avec l’inscription blanche J’aime Papa et Maman dans laquelle le mot aime sera remplacé par le double cœur « symbole et logo » de notre association. Nous demandons aussi à Patrick de conserver de côté le point 1.cotisation en le faisant disparaitre sur notre site.
Sur le forum les jeunes auront la possibilité de parler entre eux et plus tard de jouer à des jeux en ligne. En effet nous avons le projet de créer un jeu où le joueur incarnera tout d’abord un père s’occupant de ses enfants durant un week-end sur deux, avec différentes taches (sortir l’enfant, travailler,…) mais durant un temps limité correspondant à la durée du week-end avec toutes les difficultés du monde et travaillant la semaine pour payer les pensions alimentaires. Puis ensuite le même joueur incarnera une mère s’occupant de l’enfant pendant quinze jours avec toutes les facilités (baby-sitter, logement social, etc…) qui lui sont réservés. Ainsi même quand le papa est disponible, la maman préfère payer le baby-sitter (argent des pensions alimentaires) plutôt que de confier l’enfant au papa. Ce jeu sera suivi d’un test de réflexion pour montrer au joueur l’injustice de la situation.
Nous diffuserons également sur le site la vidéo de l’émission « c’est la vie en + » sur le thème : Les enfants du divorces.

Nous avons l’intention de tourner un clip musical réalisé avec nous, les enfants du divorce.
Nous demanderons à Olivier qui a déjà fait un clip « Muslim aux parents divorcés » s’il peut nous aider.
Nous avons demandé à Benoit Van Dieren, Jean-Emile Vandereyden et à Catherine Lorsignol d’être nos ambassadeurs ou parrains un peu comme les artistes célèbres et les spécialistes qui sont les ambassadeurs sur le site du défi pour la terre. Jean-Emile Vandereyden a accepté d’être l’un de nos ambassadeur. Nous attendons sa photo et son mot d’ambassadeur. Le défi pour la terre qui a commencé en 2005 compte déjà plus de 800 000 personnes engagées. Nous espérons pouvoir faire mieux parce que le problème que les enfants et les parents du divorce rencontrent sont les mêmes partout dans le monde et la destruction du lien parental (le plus souvent c’est lien de l’enfant avec père et la famille paternelle qui est brisé) détruit de nombreuse famille. La destruction des liens familiaux est tout aussi grave que la pollution. Ces 2 fléaux sont une grave menace pour l’humanité. A quoi bon sauver la terre et donc nous préserver la possibilité d’y vivre si nous perdons notre raison de vivre.
Nous voulons que les jeunes couples qui décident de faire des enfants signent un contrat de parenté (s’engager à toujours s’occuper de son enfant et d’accepter l’autre parent dans la vie de son enfant en adoptant par exemple la garde partagée). Lors d’une séparation, il faudrait mieux, au lieu de confier directement les enfants à un seul de ses 2 parents, placer ceux-ci pendant un à deux mois (avec visite chez les parents le week-end) afin que les 2 parents puissent se calmer un peu et s’établir en trouvant un logement. En effet, dés le début de la séparation, le parent (presque toujours la maman) qui se voit confier l’enfant en profite trop souvent pour monter l’enfant contre l’autre parent (souvent le papa).

Inès nous parle de ses plus gros problèmes :
Il y a des parents qui ne veulent pas que les enfants téléphonent, de peur q’ils téléphonent à l’autre parent et à sa famille.
C’est ce qui m’arrive chez ma maman.
Je ne peux pas téléphoner à mon papa car ma maman me l’interdit. Elle ne supporte pas que je parle de lui ni que je lui téléphone.
Je peux rarement aller sur Internet ou sur M.S.N. Elle lit mes messages et regarde avec qui je tchate.
Je voudrais bien tchater avec mes amis en tranquillité ce qui est impossible.
Maintenant que je fais partie de notre association j’aime papa et maman, je voudrais en parler avec Adrien, Robin et Loïc, mais je ne peux pas le faire car maman me surveille et elle sera très fâchée, ne va pas me laisser continuer à tchater, elle va appeler tout de suite mon beau-père qui me privera de toutes choses (ordinateur, télé, sorties, …), elle appellera ma grand-mère qui appellera mon oncle et toute la famille sera au courant et quand j’irai chez eux, ils me feront tous la morale et me priveront chacun d’un truc ou l’autre.
Maman nous interdit, moi et mes frères de répondre au téléphone. Quand quelqu’un téléphone, elle laisse le répondeur et ne répond jamais directement. Si Adrien ou Robin me téléphonent, elle entendra leur message sur le répondeur, elle va m’engueuler en me disant que je ne peux pas donner mon téléphone à des gens qu’elle ne connaît même pas.
Donc je ne donne pas mon téléphone à Adrien et Robin parce qu’ils ne pourront jamais m’avoir au téléphone et qu’en plus je serai punie.
C’est pénible parce que je peux seulement joindre Adrien, Robin et les amis que j’ais connus chez mon papa seulement quand je suis chez lui. C’est fort rare parce que je vais chez mon papa qu’un week-end sur deux. Même pendant les grandes vacances, je ne peux aller chez lui qu’un week-end sur deux. Maintenant, ce sont les vacances de Pâques et je ne pourrais aller chez lui qu’un week-end. Heureusement que le papa d’Adrien et Robin veut bien s’arranger avec mon papa pour qu’on fasse nos réunions et qu’on puisse jouer ensemble à ce moment là.
Quand je suis chez papa, je n’ais pas tous ces problèmes. Souvent c’est moi qui réponds au téléphone et je peux téléphoner à qui je veux même aux amis et amies que mon papa ne connaît pas. Quand je suis chez maman et que je veux téléphoner à Papa, elle ne veut pas, elle dit que quand je suis chez papa, je ne lui téléphone pas non plus. Je lui réponds que c’est normal parce que je ne suis presque jamais chez lui et que je suis toujours chez elle. Elle dit alors que c’est normal que je n’aille pas souvent chez papa parce que le juge l’a décidé comme ça parce que mon papa m’a enlevé et que c’est grave.
Ma maman n’arrête pas de dire des choses atroces sur mon papa et me répète tout le temps qu’il m’a enlevé. Pourtant je pense que papa ne m’a pas enlevé. De toute façon ca fait si longtemps, je vois bien que tout ce qu’elle dit aujourd’hui sur papa n’est pas vrai du tout. Ca me fait beaucoup souffrir surtout que je ne vois presque pas mon papa et que je ne peux jamais aller en Tunisie voir la famille de mon papa. Pouvez-vous m’aider à changer la situation ?
Il y a beaucoup de problèmes que je ne dis pas parce que cela prendrait des dizaines de pages. Vous pouvez me contacter sur m.s.n sachant que je serai là (c’est que je suis chez mon papa le premier et le troisième week-end du mois). Quand je suis chez maman, je ne me connecte plus sur MSN pour éviter les problèmes. Alors envoyer moi un message, mais vous devrez être patient et attendre que je sois chez mon papa pour que je puisse vous répondre.
Je suis chez mon papa les 1er et les 3ème week-end du mois.
Vous pouvez m’envoyer un e’mail sur jaimepapaetmaman at gmail dot com ou sur lea_ines at hotmail dot com
Ines