NAPCAN ??on top of this protecting children is destroyed by ideology

It's getting close to the era of the year when?NAPCAN?(National Association to Prevention of?Child Abuse?and Neglect), an organisation founded in 1987 to advocate via the protection of children, is running its annual much talked about campaign to raise funds and awareness in the fight against?child abuse?and neglect?in Queensland.

A noble cause indeed, and in?support?of solution campaign, Fathers4Equality contacted NAPCAN?last new season and volunteered our assistance throughout their National Child Protection Sometimes a week.

Fathers4Equality?offered to distribute a?child abuse?awareness survey to our members, as okay as?assist with fund the most obvious, amongst other worthwhile measures and only this worthy cause.

After a new positive response from?NAPCAN, all correspondence came to a close.

We followed up your own offer via numerous emails possibly a number of?phone?messages left with not a NAPCAN staff, although to the frustration no one shifted our calls or email addresses.

We finally managed to talk to someone on the?phone?after persisting for certain weeks, only to be told?that NAPCAN?did not want to associate itself with single fathers' groups, so we would not be hearing from them again.

Pretty burdensome handed stuff, and quite remarkable while this single fathers' group represents fathers who wants to provide the best "care" within their children, in co-operation on the child's mother.

In fresh case, we did not listen to NAPCAN again, but for an?email?that discreetly entered my inbox standard 25th August, 2011, heralding some sort of 2011?National Child Protection advertising from NAPCAN.

Although NAPCAN's behaviour happened to be indefensible and bizarrely through step with their vacation to boldly protect the welfare of children, I can't say this really shocked me, given the enormous stigma that each separated fathers have to endure with regard to?child care?and?child abuse?in the usa.

In fact, I challenge all of us not convinced of this statement to walk in the shoes of a separated father going through a?child custody?dispute during this country.

Every step of the dispute, you will find themselves presumptions of an over-zealous and obsessed industry in the market to protect children and women from the stereotype of the sinister male.

This stereotype is a potent myth of such fabled and unchallenged proportions that many people believe it a lot, without even realising i think it.

Unfortunately, life as pointed out above complex than this, and surprisingly point on?child abuse?show quite the same story. In fact, given 80% of all familial child abuse exist in single mother households, a sad irony given that media have demonized the safest parenting arrangement, being employed as "shared parenting", and that the Gillard government will effectively bypass all?shared parenting?arrangements,. despite their own personal almost zero rate of?child abuse?incidents.

The obvious downside of organisations like NAPCAN, like other related organisations such as the NSW Department of Child Services (DoCS), is that somewhere within line their primary purpose ceased being on the exterior protection of children, and became an ideology by using a self-imposed reality of re-inforcing stereotypes of?child use. Rather than finding your chance who the abusers had been, they now became the protectors of girls and children, and the key challengers to paternalistic believe in.

And somewhere followed by all this intellectual world of one, child abuse?continued unabated.

A here's an example was the?Dean Shillingsworth, ?ody in the suitcase murder'. In this situation, the mother had festered explicit threats of looking to kill the child, but DoCS acted as a protector of the single parent's interests, at the expense of the child's health and wellbeing. As a direct resulting the complicity of Records, this child was murdered near the mother, despite all the efforts of one's child's paternal grandmother.

DoCS has apologised hard mis-handling, but I strongly question that anything will change due to a this murder.

As long as societies like NAPCAN treat the issue of child protection from an easier gender perspective, children will begin to slip through the chips, and despite your political sympathies obtained in this topic, I think you are all agree that presumptions of guilt do not have any place in the protection of babies.

Source: Ezine4Males

.