This is just a taster, but be very careful how you utilise the ACT. As an adult touch a Police Officer that is assault. You must study the ACT which is on the Child Safety website. I ahve only picked parts and it must be used as a whole. Make Docs explain in full every document. Be very careful what you sign with DOCS. Get a third party to give you advise. One poor guy I talked to in Court has signed every document required and now if he leaves town with his child he will be charged with kidnapping !

For those who are child abusers take a hike. Try to enforce what I am suggesting and you will come unstuck big time. If you have a substance abuse problem or anger management problem etc. seek help. If you are guilty, fighting back is your most stupid error. But go ahead and test it out.

First point is try to talk to DOCS civilly before you become difficult. There has to be many caring workers out there who do a great job. In our town they are idiots plain and simple. TOO YOUNG And inexperienced.
Now they are trying to cover up. So much for putting children first !

Try to negotiate AND STAY CALM but record everything just in case. They write it down at DOCS offices and change the meanings of your statements if they are vindictive. Take pen and paper as well. Who cares if you tie them up and make them work overtime. Do not let them rush you. Your child's well being is paramount. Vexatious wives with a break-up can create chaos by making false claims. This is common. You have to keep a paper trail of everything.

At our local DOCS office I can prove someone/s within are involved with a group of sexual abusers who made allegations against ourselves to cover their own abuse. The child abusers can manipulate DOCS so easily. I will not show you how as I am sure degenerates will monitor this site. I will not endanger any other children.

This is for those like myself who are caught up with DOCS workers who are acting outside of their guidelines for whatever motives. In my case this includes persons just out of nappy's; kids who have no experience in life and quite frankly no intellect. Our universities have a lot to answer for. They are reacting to malicious persons who they give absolute credibility without investigation. They will not question their masters even if they are Child Abusers.

TO DOCS YOU ARE GUILTY AND HAVE TO PROVE YOUR INNOCENCE. THIS IS THE HARD PART. FOR THOSE WITH NO MONEY IT WILL BE A BATTLE THAT CAN GO ON FOR YEAR AFTER YEAR AFTER YEAR. YOU NEED SOME SORT OF PROFESSIONAL REPORT AT MINIMUM. You need to at minimum talk to a legal aid officer.

Also reply registered mail to every phone call or contact you get with DOCS. Just listen to your tape. Very simple. Just respond I confirm the pertinent facts each time. Don't trust a word these idiots say. They will change it every time. Let them correct the record if needed. My court documents are so erroneous it beggars belief. I have on tape a DOCS idiot (20 year old) saying one thing and he changes it in the court document suggesting evil motives. I have 7 witnesses also. Affidavits are critical from your witnesses so you can introduce the evidence into court. or bring them in to testify.

ENFORCE THE WORD ALLEGATION IN COURT DOCUMENTS. They write the court documents as if you are already convicted. My own are disgracefull.

1st thing is to get a digital tape recorder. My experience to date is they change the facts so often you need everything recorded. Just tape them, don't ask, then transcribe all the important facts to paper.

By the time you get in court you'll be astounded how they rewrite the events.

Section 9 of the Act is critical. Note IT IS IMMATERIAL HOW THE HARM IS DONE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DOCS are not exempt.

9 What is harm
(1) Harm, to a child, is any detrimental effect of a significant
nature on the child’s physical, psychological or emotional
wellbeing.
(2) It is immaterial how the harm is caused.
(3) Harm can be caused by—
(a) physical, psychological or emotional abuse or neglect;
or
(b) sexual abuse or exploitation.

Now for those who are innocent, and suffering because of incompetence or just plain vindictiveness read Part .2. The legislation is good and is protective of children. DOCS just don't get it and ACT contrary to the purpose. many who read this will agree.

Part 2 Purpose and administration of
Act
4 Purpose of Act
The purpose of this Act is to provide for the protection of
children.
5 Principles for administration of Act
(1) This Act is to be administered under the principle that the
welfare and best interests of a child are paramount.
Example—
The chief executive is making a decision under this Act, concerning a
child, in circumstances where there is a conflict between the child’s
welfare and best interests and the interests of an adult caring for the
child. The conflict must be resolved in favour of the child’s welfare and
best interests. (Best interests is where you are better off) \

(2) Subject to subsection (1), this Act is also to be administered
under the following principles—
(a) every child has a right to protection from harm; (From DOCS)

(b) families have the primary responsibility for the
upbringing, protection and development of their
children; (Remember this one Ellie)

(c) the preferred way of ensuring a child’s wellbeing is
through the support of the child’s family; (And this one)

(d) powers conferred under this Act should be exercised in a
way that is open, fair and respects the rights of people
affected by their exercise, and, in particular, in a way
that ensures— (Huge. Docs never read this.)

(i) actions taken, while in the best interests of the
child, maintain family relationships and are
supportive of individual rights and ethnic, religious
and cultural identity or values; and

(ii) the views of the child and the child’s family are
considered; and
s 6 19 s 6

Child Protection Act 1999
(iii) the child and the child’s parents have the
opportunity to take part in making decisions
affecting their lives;

(e) if a child does not have a parent able and willing to
protect the child, the State has a responsibility to protect
the child, but in protecting the child the State must not
take action that is unwarranted in the circumstances;

(The parent would die for the child. DOCS goes to bed after work.)

(f) if a child is removed from the child’s family—
(i) the aim of authorised officers’ working with the
child and the child’s family is to safely return the
child to the family if possible; and
(ii) the child’s need to maintain family and social
contacts, and ethnic and cultural identity, must be
taken into account; and
(iii) in deciding in whose care the child should be
placed, the chief executive must give proper
consideration to placing the child, as a first option,
with kin;
(g) a child should be kept informed of matters affecting him
or her in a way and to an extent that is appropriate,
having regard to the child’s age and ability to
understand;
(h) if a child is able to form and express views about his or
her care, the views must be given consideration, taking
into account the child’s age or ability to understand;
(i) if a child does not have a parent able and willing to give
the child ongoing protection, the child has a right to
long-term alternative care.

Your children can resist being taken. If they are older and just want to come home, doing a runner is in your favour so don't fret at all. DOCS hate working after knock off and weekends. The poor police have to run around after DOCS stuff ups.

Note Chapter .6

Chapter 6 Enforcement and legal
proceedings
Part 1 Offences
160 Obstruction of authorised officer etc.
(1) A person must not obstruct an authorised officer or police
officer in the exercise of a power under this Act, unless the
person has a reasonable excuse.
Maximum penalty—40 penalty units.
(2) However, a child does not commit an offence against
subsection (1) merely because the child resists being taken
into custody under this Act for the child’s protection or being
moved to a safe place under section 21.

Note reasonable excuse !

Older children can resist. My child help up 1 guy for an hour and a half.

A police officer intervened. The Police to date I have had no problems with.

The Police officer sated "it was ridiculous and the DOCS officer was just traumatising our child.) She intervened. My child did a second runner and disapeared for 3 days. DOCS relented and allowed her to stay with family in the end. Overtimes a bitch !

Write to the Ombudsman, CMC, every politician you can find. LETS FORCE A ROYAL COMMISSION INTO THESE IDIOTS IN NAPPY'S.