I must say, reading that Times article, I am particularly disappointed in all those women who would rather "work things out" with their partners rather than send the criminals to jail.
In 1990, I wrote a social policy paper with Patricia Hewitt called The Family Way.
I quote myself:
'It cannot be assumed that men are bound to be an asset to family life, or that the presence of fathers in families is necessarily a means to social harmony and cohesion.'
I've only been itching to have this law on the statute books for 17 years and when i finally get it on there, NOBODY USES IT!Aaargh!
Isn't it a crime to know that a crime has been committed and not report it?
(Note to self: Make a new law for that if there isn't one already. )
It's almost enough to make me sit back and take stock of it all.
Luckily I am a strong woman. Strength means having the self-confidence not to doubt yourself, and that is something I've never ever done.
The battle for equality needs a general who doesn't stop to ask questions. Onwards march!
3 comments:
Smash them Harriet... Smash them...
Speaking as a man and, technically, a father I was itching to be sent to jail rather than deal with the results of my wife being "in The Family Way".
I wonder if you would consider adding a clause to enable men to turn themselves in, regardless of a lack of proof and against the protestations of the wife?
@tbrob, Thank you .
It's nice to know I have some support out there.
@anonymous (do take a name next time, you know I am easily confused).
I find your proposals interesting indeed. Sadly, I'm not sure how far we can take them. The Civil Liberties Lobby has become very powerful and efficient ever since I stopped being their solicitor.
It might not be worth whipping them into a frenzy.
I find with these sorts of clauses, its best to sneak them in when no one's looking or when there's a possibility that they might be buried by very bad news, but thank you very much for your contribution to my blog.
Post a Comment