At last, a Tory MP I can fulsomely praise: Kate Kniveton.
Her voting record would, no doubt, dismay this socialist, but she’s become an unlikely heroine, bringing some small hope to many divorced or separated mums and their children.
After going in and out of the family courts, she has managed to get a ruling that stops her ex-husband, the disgraced Tory MP Andrew Griffiths, from seeing their young child.
Horrified? Don’t be.
Charlotte Proudman, Kniveton’s dogged, skilful family barrister, has successfully upended the hard and fast dogma that it is always in the best interests of a child to have relationships with both parents – a presumption legally established in the 1989 Children Act.
First, the backstory, a tale of hideous entitlement. Griffiths, who represented Burton, was forced to resign from his ministerial post in 2018 after the Sunday Mirror revealed that he had sent sexually explicit texts to two female constituents.
There had been previous complaints about inappropriate behaviour. Kniveton left him and got divorced. Griffiths claimed the sexts were symptoms of a mental breakdown. After a brief suspension, he carried on being a Tory MP. In the 2019 election, he was deselected. Members chose Kniveton instead.
They’d married in 2013. Their child was born just before the scandal broke. In 2020, Kate Kniveton disclosed that she’d been subjected to coercive control, domestic and sexual abuse, including rape, by her former husband. I remember thinking then: why would a privileged, middle class woman, so brutally dehumanised, stay in such a relationship?
Kate Kniveton has now told her story, honestly and with self-respect. She endured ruthless cross examinations. Most such women feel shame, because in our still patriarchal world, victims are still somehow held responsible for “allowing” themselves to be abused and violated.
A family judge concluded that Griffiths was indeed a wife beater and rapist, and barred him from seeing his child for three years. He is allowed to send only cards and presents. It took five years of court battles and thousands of pounds to get this judgement.
Louise Tickle, who covered this case for Tortoise Media, vividly described how Kniveton wept on the witness stand as she told the court of her fears that contact between her child and her rapist would cause serious harm to them both: “He still doesn’t acknowledge the rapes.
“To me, he is a man who has not changed.”
The manipulative Griffiths was first overly contrite: “The thing that keeps me awake at night is the idea that [my child] will grow up hating me and thinking I’m a monster.” Then he showed his true colours by saying Kniveton needed therapy. Now he bitterly denounces the judge and Kniveton’s “radical barrister” and presents himself as the victim.
An East Midlands radio journalist I know has talked to locals about the case. Most believe a child needs a father, “whatever he’s done”. That kind of twisted thinking permeates our society, and until now, prevailed in the criminal justice system.
A joint BBC and Manchester University study last September found dozens of children who’d been forced to see violent dads. As a feminist, I do not think the interests of fathers count more than those of children and mothers. Too many mums are accused by the authorities of turning kids against their dads when they are trying to safeguard them. I don’t deny fathers are sometimes unfairly demonised. But dismissing genuine maternal concerns has far worse consequences.
I asked the “radical” Ms Proudman what the landmark ruling could mean. Not as much as it should, apparently: “There is a culture of pro-contact or contact at all costs – even with parents who are perpetrators of some of the most heinous forms of violence.”
Will this judgement help to change that? Possibly – but she cautions that “most mothers will never be able to speak out about their experiences in the family courts.
“Children who grow up in domestic abusive households can suffer profound emotional and psychological affects, which in my view the family justice system still doesn’t fully understand.”
Our nation cares about the mental wellbeing of its young, yet sanctifies fathers, however mad, bad or dangerous. How can this be tolerated?
Not every father should have the right to see their child
10
0
13.02.2024
At last, a Tory MP I can fulsomely praise: Kate Kniveton.
Her voting record would, no doubt, dismay this socialist, but she’s become an unlikely heroine, bringing some small hope to many divorced or separated mums and their children.
After going in and out of the family courts, she has managed to get a ruling that stops her ex-husband, the disgraced Tory MP Andrew Griffiths, from seeing their young child.
Horrified? Don’t be.
Charlotte Proudman, Kniveton’s dogged, skilful family barrister, has successfully upended the hard and fast dogma that it is always in the best interests of a child to have relationships with both parents – a presumption legally established in the 1989 Children Act.
First, the backstory, a tale of hideous entitlement. Griffiths, who represented Burton, was forced to resign from his ministerial post in 2018 after the Sunday Mirror revealed that he had sent sexually explicit texts to two female constituents.
There had been previous complaints about inappropriate behaviour. Kniveton left him and........
© iNews
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Andrew Mitrovica
Mort Laitner
Nikkei Editorial
Rami G Khouri
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
