TOGETHER WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE!

For the price of a cup of coffee each month you can help us.

Coffee to Support NCPA

$ Donation Amount:

Make this donation every

Select Payment Method

Offline Donation
Stripe – Credit Card

Personal Info

First Name *

Last Name

Is this donation on behalf of a company?

Company Name

Email Address *

Credit Card Info

This is a secure SSL encrypted payment.

Card Number *

CVC *

Cardholder Name *

Expiration *

Billing Details

Country *

Address 1 *

Address 2

City *

State *

Zip / Postal Code *

Donation Total: $5.00 One Time

Did You Know?

There are many hundreds of children suffering from abuse as a consequence of Family Court orders than you would want to believe?

Many Primary Carers/Protective Parents have been imprisoned, without being given the right of a trial by jury, after fleeing into hiding to safeguard their children when the Court failed to do so?

Under Rule 15.61 (2), an expert witness has immunity from prosecution and cannot be held accountable for their reports and the consequences?

The reports of these experts are usually subject to a Gagging Order so they may not be viewed by any other party, particularly another medical professional who might question the veracity and the integrity of the report?

Lawyers advise clients not to mention the abuse of their child knowing as to do could result in them losing custody of the child? … and frequently does!

Under the Shared Parenting principle, it is deemed by the Court to be in the best interests of the child to spend equal time with each parent (apparently) regardless of the their behaviour?

A senior Family Court judge has publicly stated that, “Even paedophiles have the right to a relationship with their children…” and such decisions frequently occur.

The draconian provisions of Section 121 of the Act ensures the child and the protective parent are silenced, indefinitely, as the provision enables the Family Court to act in almost total secrecy? “ Justice is not only NOT seen to be done, the injustices are not being seen.”

Family Court judges are not bound by the Evidence Act, 1955 ( Sub Division D of the Act) and are able to make subjective decisions on what they will, or will not, accept into evidence and then proceed to hand down Orders regarding the safety of a child base on only part of the evidence available?

Empirical evidence shows that when children complain of abuse, 96% are telling the truth? Yet, the Court and its experts deny this fact and claim all complaining children have been coached.

When a child returns from a custody visit showing obvious signs of abuse/sexual abuse court orders prevent the protective parent taking the child to a doctor or hospital without the family first obtaining permission from the alleged perpetrator and/or the Family Court?

The NCPA is dedicated to changing the Law, the system and the modus operandi of the Family Court of Australia and to give children a voice where they, their safety and their welfare are concerned?

Niki gave vivid illustrations of the harms caused to children by appalling Family Court decisions. She has met with a great many Federal and State MPs and is unrelenting in her call for urgent investigations through a Royal Commission.
The NCPA has been calling for a Royal Commission for the last decade, after the ‘Shared Parenting’ amendments of 2005-2006 had disastrous consequences leading to abuses of many thousands of children throughout Australia. The late Emeritus Professor Freda Briggs and Charles Pragnell, Vice Chairman of the NCPA, were instrumental in initiating the calls at that time for a Royal Commission into such occurrences.
The NCPA also pressed for the Senate Inquiry into the Family Courts and which took place in 2017, but which was nullified when Attorney-General Brandis and Chief Justice Diana Bryant refused to give evidence. They would not have been able to do so with a Royal Commission and so the NCPA continues to pursue that avenue as well.”