Top News

Family court is supposed to protect the best interests of children, but for many fathers in particular, it becomes a painful, expensive, and disheartening experience - one that has little to do with what's right for their children and everything to do with inequality and a system that inadvertently rewards conflict. From the moment a relationship breaks down, the legal system often treats fathers not as equal caregivers, but as outsiders fighting just to remain in their children's lives. When legal aid is handed out to one parent but not the other, it creates an uneven playing field that leads to devastating consequences - not just for the parent left to fend for themselves, but for the children caught in the crossfire.

Most working fathers are not sitting on wealth. They're squeezed between earning just over the legal aid threshold, and being nowhere near rich enough to fund a legal team. That gap - the "missing middle" - is exactly where many dads fall, and it's where justice stops.

Now flip the coin. The other parent, often able to make unchecked allegations - of fear, control, or abuse - immediately unlocks full legal aid. There's little or no investigation, even less oversight, and the financial burden lands squarely on one side. That parent can afford to drag things out for years, because they're not paying.

The other - usually the dad - bleeds financially just trying to stay in his child's life. The system doesn't just allow this imbalance. It incentivises it.

One of the most damaging tactics increasingly seen in family court is the relentless character assassination of one parent by the other - a strategy of throwing as much mud as possible in the hope that something sticks, or at least that the perception of the accused is permanently tainted.

These smear campaigns, often built on distortions or outright falsehoods, shift the focus away from the child and onto a cycle of defence, stress, and reputation management.

The parent under attack is forced to spend time, money, and emotional energy rebutting lies rather than focusing on their child's well-being. And when these claims are finally disproven, there are rarely any consequences for the accuser.

No accountability, no deterrent. Meanwhile, the child continues to live in uncertainty, caught in a battle they never asked for, and whose voice is rarely heard.

Family court today has become increasingly adversarial - a space where conflict too often overshadows cooperation. Rather than encouraging resolution and shared parenting, the current structure can unintentionally reward delay and division.

Parents who simply want to co-parent and move forward are often burdened with high legal costs and complex proceedings, while others, with access to legal aid, may feel less pressure to resolve matters quickly.

To truly serve children, the system must be restructured to support both parents equally, reduce opportunities for unnecessary conflict, and reward those who prioritise the child's needs over point-scoring.

This system invites delay, dishonesty, and division. The losers? Fathers. But more importantly - the children. What's needed is a complete rethink. A family court that actually does what it says on the tin: put the child first. That means:

1. No legal aid without independent fact-checking when allegations are made.

2. Immediate suspension of legal aid when a claimant is convicted of abuse or dishonesty.

3. Caps on legal aid funding to prevent endless litigation.

4. Fast-tracked hearings for basic child contact, so children don't spend years in emotional purgatory.

What sort of system do we have when a dad has to remortgage his house just to hug his own child - while the other parent burns public money with no accountability? A failed one. A system that punishes truth and rewards tactics.

This isn't a father's rights issue. It's a child protection emergency. And until we fix it, we are not doing a good enough job at protecting children's rights.

Level Playing Field campaigns for fairer laws in family court