I ask why there is not support for men who feel caught in a corner by an abusive, narcissistic woman. If there was a refuge for men to escape to, it may avoid the inevitable blow up which could result in serious injury or worse. There a man could receive help and advice and maintain his job and perhaps contact with his children. Otherwis…
I ask why there is not support for men who feel caught in a corner by an abusive, narcissistic woman. If there was a refuge for men to escape to, it may avoid the inevitable blow up which could result in serious injury or worse. There a man could receive help and advice and maintain his job and perhaps contact with his children. Otherwise he feels cornered, alone. Faced with the possible loss of house, children, job, dreams etc, if he just left or lost his temper. I think providing such an avenue to men to withdraw from a dangerous situation would be a proactive, preventative approach. As it is men get nothing except 100% of the blame.
Totally agree. Too often a divorce creates a homeless man on one hand, and a single mother household on the other. No one cares about the former, and the latter is the highest risk place for children.
We can blame the Labor Party for the massive increase in divorce , “no fault” divorce introduced by Labor PM Gough Whitlam In the 70’s opened the floodgates. Women had complained for years about how hard it was to get out of a bad marriage and many probably had a reason. But now it’s too easy and is being abused. The traditional marriage was a cornerstone of stable societies, now gone what’s next?
Agree. Divorce is a sad event for all concerned, especially the children. If both parties could be supported to take the heat out of it and support realistic outcomes.
The stats on homeless ( and there are gender specifics) to suggest that a "couch-surfer" is homeless in the Government assessments. It would appear that the Governmemt looks at those who are "needy" and forget the folk, some in their environs, who are the very folk sleeping rough under bridges.
A woman fleeing an abusive relationship certainly; a male in an abusive relationship, both of whom are nasty folk and will exit the family home, and on what basis could the male challenge it, all things being "equal".
And the kinder? The Court will determine the welfare of those children. Mostly with mum.
And, why when the Government Agencies return children to an abusive drug affected "mum".
"The stats on homeless ( and there are gender specifics) to suggest that a "couch-surfer" is homeless in the Government assessments."
The federal definition was changed about fifteen years ago. We went from ninety five percent of the homeless being male to about sixty percent at the stroke of an administrative pen. Meanwhile those who never have a roof over their heads are still almost exclusively male.
I ask why there is not support for men who feel caught in a corner by an abusive, narcissistic woman. If there was a refuge for men to escape to, it may avoid the inevitable blow up which could result in serious injury or worse. There a man could receive help and advice and maintain his job and perhaps contact with his children. Otherwise he feels cornered, alone. Faced with the possible loss of house, children, job, dreams etc, if he just left or lost his temper. I think providing such an avenue to men to withdraw from a dangerous situation would be a proactive, preventative approach. As it is men get nothing except 100% of the blame.
Totally agree. Too often a divorce creates a homeless man on one hand, and a single mother household on the other. No one cares about the former, and the latter is the highest risk place for children.
We can blame the Labor Party for the massive increase in divorce , “no fault” divorce introduced by Labor PM Gough Whitlam In the 70’s opened the floodgates. Women had complained for years about how hard it was to get out of a bad marriage and many probably had a reason. But now it’s too easy and is being abused. The traditional marriage was a cornerstone of stable societies, now gone what’s next?
Agree. Divorce is a sad event for all concerned, especially the children. If both parties could be supported to take the heat out of it and support realistic outcomes.
Andrew,
The stats on homeless ( and there are gender specifics) to suggest that a "couch-surfer" is homeless in the Government assessments. It would appear that the Governmemt looks at those who are "needy" and forget the folk, some in their environs, who are the very folk sleeping rough under bridges.
A woman fleeing an abusive relationship certainly; a male in an abusive relationship, both of whom are nasty folk and will exit the family home, and on what basis could the male challenge it, all things being "equal".
And the kinder? The Court will determine the welfare of those children. Mostly with mum.
And, why when the Government Agencies return children to an abusive drug affected "mum".
"The stats on homeless ( and there are gender specifics) to suggest that a "couch-surfer" is homeless in the Government assessments."
The federal definition was changed about fifteen years ago. We went from ninety five percent of the homeless being male to about sixty percent at the stroke of an administrative pen. Meanwhile those who never have a roof over their heads are still almost exclusively male.