Isät - lainsuojattomat

Absent fathers to be named and shamed: F

athers who fail to pay maintenance for their children will be "named and shamed" on the internet as part of a Government drive to make them honour their family responsibilities.

Offenders with a record of non-payment could also be fitted with electronic tags, subjected to curfews or have their passports withheld, he said.

Thousands of men who don't have access to their children are choosing to start a new life in another country.

But is it the unbearable pain of not seeing their children that causes them to flee or the chance to get out paying child support?

The Planetary Alliance for Fathers in Exile (PAFE) believes men are persecuted and offers them a way out. An underground organization based in Nice, France, PAFE claims to have assisted 250,000 North American men start new lives in Europe.

PAFE prepares men to leave everything behind, lines up work for them abroad and changes their identities.

Act won't hit good hubbies: Renuka (tämä on kyllä järkyttävimpiä lakeja, mitä vastaan on tullut. Sama tulevaisuus on luultavasti Suomessakin vastassa) ja Domestic Violence Act comes into effect.

If a man commits any kind of violence or even insults his wife, he can land in jail with a fine up to Rs 20,000. The Act covers women, be they wives, live-in partners, sisters, mothers, mothers-in-law or any other woman relation.

To begin with, there is the whole question of what the Act means by domestic violence - it covers verbal abuse, emotional abuse, economic abuse and anything that tends towards them. I put it to you, that’s so wide as to be either meaningless or dangerously self-embracing.

Let me explain why this Act is imprecise. For instance, emotional and verbal abuses are defined to include insults and ridicule. That means you can’t be sarcastic to your wife, it means you can’t call you brother-in-law an ass or a mother-in-law a nag even if both are those are correct. Surely, that’s a level of silliness, but it’s a part of your Bill.

If a husband was to sell the family television at a time when his marriage was going through a bad patch, it should be deemed to be domestic violence. Now, that’s ridiculous, but it is very much a part of the Act.

This is becoming ridiculous at this stage. It means - let me interpret this for you - that a husband cannot threaten to verbally abuse. Note the words: just threaten to verbally abuse the step-brother of a former girlfriend who he parted with 10 years ago. That ambit is taking a major concern to a ridiculous extent.