4th february 2002

I make no apologies for repeating this call for groups around the world who
care about our children to send a simple message of support to be read out
at the public meeting in Dublin on Monday evening 4 February. This meeting
is being hosted by Vocal Ireland, Parental Equality and Amen.

It would appear as the veil of secrecy is being torn down millimetre by
millimetre that we are beginning to uncover a deliberate attempt to pervert
Irish society by a small group of radical feminists in the mid eighties.

By employing methods that they imported directly from their ideological
sisters in the US and Britain, they set up copy-cat groups here even without
having any real evidence of the need for their existence. Specifically these
organisations were the Irish Woman's Aid, the Dublin Rape Crisis centre and
the Rotunda Sexual Abuse Centre.

It now appears that they then set about, through misrepresenting facts, to
create a poisonous society where men and women would be set against each
other through the medium of inventing the father as toxic to his family.

An important and indeed vital part of this was their necessity to change the
perception of the father in his natural and traditional role as being the
primary provider and protector of his children to him being the most
dangerous person to be around children.

With the help of many kind hearted but gullible groups and individuals who
sincerely believed they were helping a clearly identified problem these
radical feminists started a campaign of propaganda with the clearly intended
target of manufacturing contempt for men and fathers and so making it easy
to eliminate them from the family.

Key to this was the work done by Dr Moira Woods. As she produced so many
guilty verdicts with the most casual of investigations one has to assume she
was acting almost exclusively on ideological and political grounds which was
that ALL FATHERS were, by definition in contemporary radical feminist
circles, considered to be rapists and sexual abusers of their children.

This she did with unbelievable ease. 'Working' mostly on her own she 'found'
1300 children had been sexually abused by their fathers in a three year
period. The ensuing media frenzy and headlines, where only rumours and
figures could be reported because of the enforcement of the 'in camera'
rule, created such a shock wave in the Irish Psyche that after the three
year period of her reign even sensible decent Irish people everywhere were
willing to believe even the most vile propaganda about fathers, including
soon also the stuff the Domestic Violence industry spewed out.

We now know that there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever which suggests
that fathers or husbands batter their wives at the enormous rates that the
DV propaganda would have us believe. In fact every single study worldwide
shows that the level in married couples is extremely low and is the same for
wives abusing husbands as it for husbands abusing wives. This is all
contained in a report prepared for the Department of Justice by Keiran
McKeon but one which the Dept have suppressed for the past eighteen months.

Following the Medical Council's finding of Woods to be guilty of
professional misconduct in three families cases we now must demand to
uncover what she did to the other 1297 children and families.

Eddy Harnon was on Ireland's prime time talk show on Saturday night with his
daughter who they accused him of abusing. It was very disturbing but no-one
could have watched and not realised the innocence of the man.

This group's determination to see this through to secure the finding of
guilty of professional misconduct against the leading feminist instrument of
misery for the past twenty years is, I believe, the hole in the Berlin wall.

At the public meeting we need to show our strength so I am asking again for
anyone reading this to just hit the reply button and add a few lines of
support. With our combined strength we can drive a wedge into the crack in
the wall which will never be allowed to close again.

I would like everyone to email their messages of support direct to me.
Roger Eldridge email:

Thank you and best wishes, Roger

"The young of all animals need to be nurtured.

Uniquely in the animal kingdom however human young require in equal measure
an additional input they need to be socialised conditioned to understand
the advantages and constraints of living in a society with its set of rules.

Humans have evolved in societies as a result of the caring by both parents
in balance. the nurturing tendency of mothers and the socialising tendency
of fathers.

It is how well this combination is acknowledged and respected which
ultimately measures the success and well-being or otherwise of a society"

Roger Eldridge, June 2000
Foreword to "Things for Dads to do with Kids"
by Sam Carroll.



27th January 2000
In Ireland the family courts are held "in camera" which usually means that
nothing is recorded about what goes on in them and so any abuses are
impossible to complain about as the public are kept in the dark.

Almost all fathers complain that the solicitors they hire do not represent
them at all and merely take money from them for going "through the motions"
on the way to conceding sole custody to the mother.

According to the Courts Service in 2000 one in nine persons appearing in the
family courts represented themselves. As mothers are ALWAYS represented by a
solicitor usually paid for by free Legal Aid this means that ONE IN FOUR
fathers were representing themselves in the year 2000. As this trend was
rising rapidly then due to the increased success of shared parenting groups
to let fathers know what a waste of money solicitors are I imagine this
figure is now moving towards I in 2 or 3 fathers are representing themselves
and for the first time Judges are getting to hear what the fathers actually
feel about the system.

Up till now solicitors acted like an anaesthetic to dull the pain without
ever attempting to create a more healthy situation or outcome.

One interesting thought is what happens if a father feels that he has not
been properly represented by his solicitor and feels that the solicitors fee
should not therefore be paid. It is my understanding, and I would like some
advice on this, that for the solicitor to get their money they would need to
take the case to the CIVIL court. Obviously for the father to properly be
allowed to make a defence he would have to explain to the Judge (and anyone
from the general public who is free to attend as this is no longer an
"in-camera" family court case) what the solicitor did and did not do well in
his representation of his family court case. To me this appears to be a
SERIOUS FLAW in the in-camera system as the father MUST be allowed in the
Civil Courts to have his say and all the details of the family case will
then be able to be heard in public.

Most fathers would relish this opportunity as generally they feel that an
injustice has been perpetrated against them and their children by the whole
court system.

The corollary to this is that it is unlikely that a Judge would allow such a
case to proceed in open court and this makes it very difficult if not
impossible for a solicitor to ever recover fees from a dissatisfied father.

Roger Eldridge