The Retreat Strategy


Ivor Catt  3 june03 

[ Index ]



Hole in one.


In this article, we will concentrate on certain key aspects of the divorce process.


Should a judge step out of line and act fairly, in the best interests of all parties including the children, he puts his career in jeopardy. Further, he puts his own marriage in jeopardy, risking himself becoming homeless and losing all contact with his own children. If we want judges to act properly, we have a duty to minimise the risk they face when they do so.


We will make the judge able to claim that he submitted to Superior Power. We will further buttress his psyche by showing him how much good he will do if he acts properly, and how much damage he will do if he follows the pattern set by Sloss and Thorpe. To this end, the bundle of “Retreat” documents that he receives a few days before the first scheduled divorce hearing, which hearing he should cancel in order to save taxpayers’ money, since the hearing will serve no purpose, will include a further two classes of “Retreat” documents, or he will be given their www addresses so that he can access them.



Traditionally, the exclusion of the father, confiscation of his children, assets, present and future earnings, has been achieved by a very inefficient procedure, involving a great deal of court time and expense, a great deal of delay, and a great deal of stress and soul-searching, which includes the judge. In this particular divorce action, which he will describe as a “Retreat Strategy Divorce” when he discusses it with his peers, all the time, expense and stress is short-circuited. In one fell swoop, with no time and effort, the judge can immediately achieve what in the past has been so arduous and stressful; he can exclude the father and confiscate the father’s assets. (Admittedly, he will not take the father’s future earnings, because there will be none. However, we can advise him that half of divorced fathers cease to be economically active. If we leave out amicable divorce, we can conclude that more than half the father victims of contested divorce cease to earn any income.) In the book Stolen Vows , we read that a major career pressure on a judge is to complete divorces cases expeditiously. Whichever way he jumps, every “Retreat Strategy” divorce will take minimal time, and so improve the judge’s career prospects. Sloss has said recently that in half of divorce cases, the children lose all contact with their father within two years. Leaving out amicable divorce actions, we see that this figure is much higher in the case of contested divorce actions, which includes “Retreat Strategy” divorces. The “Retreat Strategy” divorce puts the father-child link at no more risk than the traditional adversarial divorce process. Thus, neither the father nor the judge will be acting irresponsibly, or against the interests of the children involved, by cooperating in a “Retreat Strategy” divorce.



The statistics are slim, but so far, every father who has adopted “The Retreat Strategy” to the extent that he was able, has retained his children and the family home. Thus, so far, the statistics indicate that the father is much the more responsible and thoughtful of his children’s future if he announces that his will be a “Retreat Strategy” case, and the judge will be acting much more in the interests of the children involved, if he bows to the pressure inherent in “The Retreat Strategy”, and signs the courts order prescribed by the divorcing father. As a bonus, the drain on the taxpayer will be massively reduced.


Ivor Catt    3 june03    11.46