The second case study begins similarly. After breakups and a stay at the shelter says mother that t

Incest is one of the worst crimes we can imagine. Allegations of incest pier therefore frame hard. While research shows that not only fathers and men, but also women and mothers commit sexual offenses against children, either their own or the child's parents' place, so the claims of fathers abuse their own children over those in relation to public performances are most common or "typical."
In the following I will present and comment on any cases that unproven pier allegations of incest is used against the father in cases where there have been conflicts between parents about caring for children together. These are cases that we Mann Forum are familiar with. In some cases, I draw on other examples I know of to illustrate particular issues. I go straight to the examples and commented on them. At the end clarify some subject pier that must be taken as to what these examples can say or not say.
In connection with breakups put forward mother claims that the father had committed sexual offenses against children together. Far dismissed the claims as nonsense, whether it was something mom actually thought or it was something that she invented pier to stamp father get custody of the child, or if it was something mom thought maybe had happened and that the possibility of abuse was sufficient that justification to deprive the father visitation rights. There are very many details of events that could be mentioned, but we shall limit ourselves to a few points.
The child was referred to Nic Waals Institute that within a few months had just under twenty meetings pier with the child and the child and mother together. Far clarified at an early contact with Nic Waals Institute that he would be summoned and to give his contribution and his interpretation of it all. But Nic Waal he never contacted him.
This then is an example of a prior judgment of the father who went so far that an academic shutdown Nic Waal simply ignored father. This despite the fact that the father visited the department and presented the rules that establishes that both parents should be heard. This is hardly a case. There is reason to believe that an institution that Nic Waals Institute did something they used to do in what they regarded as comparable cases. This is disturbing and should be addressed.
However, this is not the whole story. After the case came to trial, it was concluded that the mother's story was not credible, and the father got custody. The court also found it startling - to put it mildly - that the father had not been present its history. Anyway protesting Ombudsman and "Support to incest" on the verdict, but there's no evidence that they did some own research in the matter. pier This is another factor that points beyond the individual case because pier we must assume that the two institutions have followed a practice they considered to be reasonable. It is unlikely that this was the first time they interfered (In press reports now that Inga Marte Thorkildsen as Member of Parliament intervened in a incestsak and got a fair amount of criticism for this) It is needless to point out that a judgment shall respected by government agencies as Ombudsman until the matter if necessary. taken up anew. There are of course allowed pier to believe that a judgment was wrong, but very doubtful if an organization Support to incest" does not go into the matter with their own arguments and any new information. But the center did nothing more than to protest against the verdict.
In cases like this are "best interests" must be the guiding principle. But this example suggests that when "the best interests" shall be determined repealed part of the legal rights we take for granted. After suspicions were directed against the father, it meant the possibility that the accusations voiced pier that the father was deprived of rights. And the possibility that the accusations were voiced organizations to support the native version although this was rejected by the court. Obviously, this is totally unacceptable. The principle of the rule of law should apply to all also in cases where "the child's best interests' is a factor. The example should be addressed so that one can ask whether there exists a negative culture with the presumption of guilt - of men but certainly also in different contexts to women.
The second case study begins similarly. After breakups and a stay at the shelter says mother that the father may have offended sexually against two daughters, at this time seven years of age. A relative of the father came to similar claims. That such statements were made apparent from the judgment that was handed down in court after the conflict had gone for more than years. The CPS was involved in the case both with its own employees and appointed experts. There are many things to criticize in child welfare and the proper pier handling of the case, but we'll let this lie because it becomes too extensive.
In the judgment said nothing about sexual abuse. His father tells the mother pier broke down in court and admitted that these claims are not true. This I have no documentation. It is needless to point out that in this type of case