Skip to main content

The Philcox Case

The following is part of a quotation from Carol Sarler's Daily Mail Story.
When a story unfolds that is as obscene as the deaths of Amy and Owen Philcox by the hands of their father Brian, most of us try to work our way through the unthinkable steps of it: how carefully he planned the murders and how cruelly he hinted at what was to come.

What I would ask, however, is why this seems relatively common in England, but not so common elsewhere. Is it that we don't hear of stories from other countries (be they in the English speaking world or not) or is there a difference.

I have concentrated on Public Family Law issues, but from time to time see Private Family Law issues. What I see in those is that the most important objective is to obtain a situation in which the parents (and ex partners) work together to look after their children. The details of this don't matter, but the cases that have turned out well are those where there is not a continuing war between ex-partners with the children as the unwilling pawns.

It also strikes me that our system of Family Law encourages people to be intransigent and uncooperative as they get rewards as a result. It is accepted that mediation is a better way forwards, but I wonder really if we are using the right people (CAFCASS and Resolution) as the source of mediators as they normally operate in a hostile environment where a big motivator is revenge.

It is also the case that the extended family are often good potential mediators as they have an interest in resolving disputes amicably. This would, however, mean a substantial shift away from using legal proceedings towards using common sense. As with most issues we need to look at the overall picture before coming to any conclusions. However, one area that needs to be considered further here is the extended family conference as suggested by the Family Rights Group.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…