Phoebe 123
Member
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2011
- Messages
- 96
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- 2011
I just made another 1000+ word essay on "Effectiveness of the Law in responding to issues concerning family members?" This is an 25 mark essay, but give me a grade out of 15.
The main cotemporary issues concerning family members are problems such as marriage, separation and divorce, custody of children, property rights, surrogacy and birth, abuse of children, adoption of children, domestic violence, same-sex marriages and so on. These issues are in the media every day today, broadcasted on the news and TV, written in the newspapers waiting for responses. The law, just like in every other area, does it’s best to respond in the most efficient way possible to achieve justice for all parties involved, and just like every other area, there are areas where it could improve dramatically and more interest and action can be undertaken so that there are few unhappy parties complaining about the Australian Legal System and how it’s lacking in following up issues and cases, or how the law is unjust. For purposes of this essay, I will talk about different cases and new legislation that been enacted to protect family members and satisfy their concerns and situations. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
fficeffice" /><o></o>
<o> </o>
For example, there has been a lot of controversy in the media and the law about same-sex marriages and gay and lesbian people, and whether they deserve to be part of de facto relationships. The media made a great fuss about this; there several newspaper articles written such as “Man and man caught making out” when two gay men were spotted doing this on a public beach, this newspaper article was made on the 16<SUP>th</SUP> of December 1992. This was not seen as acceptable to society or appropriate. In 1999, there were amendments made to the 1999 Property Legislation Amendment. This is where NSW became the first Australian jurisdiction and state to acknowledge same-sex couples and accepted them being part of de facto relationships. Federally, the Same-Sex Relationships Act 2008 and the Same-Sex Relationship Act 2008 provided entitlements for same-sex couples in areas such as joint social security, employment entitlements, superannuation, workers compensation, and joint access to Medicare Safety net, hospital, visitation, immigration, inheritance rights and the ability to file a joint tax return. However, unfortunately, in our cotemporary society today, there are still several issues about gay and lesbian couples, and the media still exploits these couples, and there are still many young people and adults who get influenced by the media who think it is morally wrong, however the law has done their part and responded to this issue by acknowledging same-sex couples. <o></o>
<o> </o>
Another example where the law has been particularly effective is in the issue of domestic violence. These laws have been undergone numerous changes and amendments over the past decade, major reforms which have been undergone include the Crimes Apprehended Violence Legislation Act 1999 which introduced two categories of Apprehend ended Violence; these included Apprehended Domestic Violence Orders and the Apprehended Personal Violence Orders. The NSW Government introduced several new law reforms to come to the aid of the issue of Domestic Violence. These new legislation included the Crimes Amendment Act 2006 enabled protection of children and victims of sexual assault in AVO proceedings, revised restrictions and prohibitions imposed upon the offender. There was several other legislation such as Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act states that the Australian Parliament recognizes that “Domestic Violence extends beyond physical abuse and may involve the exploitation of power imbalances and patterns of abuse over many years.” The Crimes Domestic and Personal Act in two sub-categories; for those who experience domestic violence and those who experience no domestic violence, also called personal violence. A domestic relationship is defined as those who are married and those in a de facto relationship. The parliament has released several other legislation acts to prevent domestic violence within families. In three specific cases including R vs. Immigen (2003), R vs. Mary (2007) and R vs. Lawrence (1992), all these three cases are similar and significant as the cases were against parents who had abused their children or someone else from their family. Media reports such as “16 year old found bruised and shattered in home”, and “Mother arrested for uncharacteristic abuse of child” were all media reports that related to these cases. These cases were treated effectively and justice was served as in all three cases, the offender was found guilty and sentenced. Overall, the law has been quite effective in responding to this issue however there are still cases where the law has neglected domestic violence/justice has not been served. Such examples of cases include R vs. John (2009), R vs. Maurice (1987) and R vs. Middleton (2007). In all of these cases, there was an clear miscarriage of justice. The defendant was let off quite easily, due to the ineffectiveness of the prosecutor and the police to find contaminating evidence. <o></o>
<o> </o>
Another very contemporary issue today is marriage, divorce and separation, and the rights and obligations of both parties to a marriage after divorce, which parent gets custody of the children, or if it is part-time custody between them both. Such issues, however, are only a part of the conflicts that face both parties to a marriage after they choose to separate; there is talk about who moves out, how the children will be told, how they will go about their lives, etc. The Family Law Act covers all children after separation and divorce. The Family Law Act went through major changes in 1996. The changes were an attempt to deny and oppose the argument that one parent must “win” a child in a custody battle and to emphasize the notion for parents to have equal and continued responsibility for their children. The legislation Family Act Law 2006 introduced all these new concepts and notions. Each parent has a right and responsibility equal care for their child before a custody battle however when making the decision the judge must use discretion in looking out for the best interests of the child to have both parents play a major role and responsibility to them, with the exception if one parent has an history of child abuse or domestic violence, if so then the judge takes this into consideration when making a decision. Since the chances to the Family Act Law, children’s best interests are now taken into consideration, as well as those for the mother and father. This is an example of the law being cooperative, reasonable and fair and looking out for the best interests for all members in a family, the wellbeing of the child, and the responsibilities of the parents after the divorce. However, today, there are many families who are in crisis and their children because of only being raised by one parent after their parent’s divorce, the laws and courts that are enforceable have occasionally tried to do their best to look out for the best interests for all, but they are quite a few circumstances where the courts consider and analyze the parent’s mental stability, previous criminal recorded, history of violence in making a decision. This is important as it assesses whether a parent is mentally capable/stable enough to look after a child. Relevant cases to look at to support this are Marone vs. Marone (2008), or Chambers vs. Chambers (2009.) In the case of Marone vs. Marone, this was a custody battle over a new born baby, Mrs. Marone was seen drinking excessive amount of vodka, displaying unstable and characterized as “crazy” around her newborn son, she lost custody of her son, and wasn’t allowed visitor rights unless someone was present. Similar situation in the Chambers vs. Chambers (2009) except that the father had an history of abuse and violent behaviour around his childen, the court ruled in the favor of the mother as the father was accused to be dangerous and it was in the best interests of the children to be separated from him. <o></o>
To conclude, the law has corrected several things; as in the rights of gay and lesbian couples, the notion that a child requires both parents to have an adequate sense of wellbeing, and other discrimination acts, however today there are still many cases that go unheard of and reports that get neglected or where there is clearly an miscarriage of judgment being taken place. There have been several amounts of enacting and amending legislation for reform, but there is still some greater attention required for the contemporary issues. <o></o>
<o> </o>
The main cotemporary issues concerning family members are problems such as marriage, separation and divorce, custody of children, property rights, surrogacy and birth, abuse of children, adoption of children, domestic violence, same-sex marriages and so on. These issues are in the media every day today, broadcasted on the news and TV, written in the newspapers waiting for responses. The law, just like in every other area, does it’s best to respond in the most efficient way possible to achieve justice for all parties involved, and just like every other area, there are areas where it could improve dramatically and more interest and action can be undertaken so that there are few unhappy parties complaining about the Australian Legal System and how it’s lacking in following up issues and cases, or how the law is unjust. For purposes of this essay, I will talk about different cases and new legislation that been enacted to protect family members and satisfy their concerns and situations. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com
fficeffice" /><o></o><o
> </o>For example, there has been a lot of controversy in the media and the law about same-sex marriages and gay and lesbian people, and whether they deserve to be part of de facto relationships. The media made a great fuss about this; there several newspaper articles written such as “Man and man caught making out” when two gay men were spotted doing this on a public beach, this newspaper article was made on the 16<SUP>th</SUP> of December 1992. This was not seen as acceptable to society or appropriate. In 1999, there were amendments made to the 1999 Property Legislation Amendment. This is where NSW became the first Australian jurisdiction and state to acknowledge same-sex couples and accepted them being part of de facto relationships. Federally, the Same-Sex Relationships Act 2008 and the Same-Sex Relationship Act 2008 provided entitlements for same-sex couples in areas such as joint social security, employment entitlements, superannuation, workers compensation, and joint access to Medicare Safety net, hospital, visitation, immigration, inheritance rights and the ability to file a joint tax return. However, unfortunately, in our cotemporary society today, there are still several issues about gay and lesbian couples, and the media still exploits these couples, and there are still many young people and adults who get influenced by the media who think it is morally wrong, however the law has done their part and responded to this issue by acknowledging same-sex couples. <o
></o><o
> </o>Another example where the law has been particularly effective is in the issue of domestic violence. These laws have been undergone numerous changes and amendments over the past decade, major reforms which have been undergone include the Crimes Apprehended Violence Legislation Act 1999 which introduced two categories of Apprehend ended Violence; these included Apprehended Domestic Violence Orders and the Apprehended Personal Violence Orders. The NSW Government introduced several new law reforms to come to the aid of the issue of Domestic Violence. These new legislation included the Crimes Amendment Act 2006 enabled protection of children and victims of sexual assault in AVO proceedings, revised restrictions and prohibitions imposed upon the offender. There was several other legislation such as Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act states that the Australian Parliament recognizes that “Domestic Violence extends beyond physical abuse and may involve the exploitation of power imbalances and patterns of abuse over many years.” The Crimes Domestic and Personal Act in two sub-categories; for those who experience domestic violence and those who experience no domestic violence, also called personal violence. A domestic relationship is defined as those who are married and those in a de facto relationship. The parliament has released several other legislation acts to prevent domestic violence within families. In three specific cases including R vs. Immigen (2003), R vs. Mary (2007) and R vs. Lawrence (1992), all these three cases are similar and significant as the cases were against parents who had abused their children or someone else from their family. Media reports such as “16 year old found bruised and shattered in home”, and “Mother arrested for uncharacteristic abuse of child” were all media reports that related to these cases. These cases were treated effectively and justice was served as in all three cases, the offender was found guilty and sentenced. Overall, the law has been quite effective in responding to this issue however there are still cases where the law has neglected domestic violence/justice has not been served. Such examples of cases include R vs. John (2009), R vs. Maurice (1987) and R vs. Middleton (2007). In all of these cases, there was an clear miscarriage of justice. The defendant was let off quite easily, due to the ineffectiveness of the prosecutor and the police to find contaminating evidence. <o
></o><o
> </o>Another very contemporary issue today is marriage, divorce and separation, and the rights and obligations of both parties to a marriage after divorce, which parent gets custody of the children, or if it is part-time custody between them both. Such issues, however, are only a part of the conflicts that face both parties to a marriage after they choose to separate; there is talk about who moves out, how the children will be told, how they will go about their lives, etc. The Family Law Act covers all children after separation and divorce. The Family Law Act went through major changes in 1996. The changes were an attempt to deny and oppose the argument that one parent must “win” a child in a custody battle and to emphasize the notion for parents to have equal and continued responsibility for their children. The legislation Family Act Law 2006 introduced all these new concepts and notions. Each parent has a right and responsibility equal care for their child before a custody battle however when making the decision the judge must use discretion in looking out for the best interests of the child to have both parents play a major role and responsibility to them, with the exception if one parent has an history of child abuse or domestic violence, if so then the judge takes this into consideration when making a decision. Since the chances to the Family Act Law, children’s best interests are now taken into consideration, as well as those for the mother and father. This is an example of the law being cooperative, reasonable and fair and looking out for the best interests for all members in a family, the wellbeing of the child, and the responsibilities of the parents after the divorce. However, today, there are many families who are in crisis and their children because of only being raised by one parent after their parent’s divorce, the laws and courts that are enforceable have occasionally tried to do their best to look out for the best interests for all, but they are quite a few circumstances where the courts consider and analyze the parent’s mental stability, previous criminal recorded, history of violence in making a decision. This is important as it assesses whether a parent is mentally capable/stable enough to look after a child. Relevant cases to look at to support this are Marone vs. Marone (2008), or Chambers vs. Chambers (2009.) In the case of Marone vs. Marone, this was a custody battle over a new born baby, Mrs. Marone was seen drinking excessive amount of vodka, displaying unstable and characterized as “crazy” around her newborn son, she lost custody of her son, and wasn’t allowed visitor rights unless someone was present. Similar situation in the Chambers vs. Chambers (2009) except that the father had an history of abuse and violent behaviour around his childen, the court ruled in the favor of the mother as the father was accused to be dangerous and it was in the best interests of the children to be separated from him. <o
></o>To conclude, the law has corrected several things; as in the rights of gay and lesbian couples, the notion that a child requires both parents to have an adequate sense of wellbeing, and other discrimination acts, however today there are still many cases that go unheard of and reports that get neglected or where there is clearly an miscarriage of judgment being taken place. There have been several amounts of enacting and amending legislation for reform, but there is still some greater attention required for the contemporary issues. <o
></o><o
> </o>
Last edited:
