Quaker Steeplechase


The Quaker Steeplechase in action


How Friends House sandbags attempts by Quakers to become informed on social issues.
"I would advise that your concern about Child Contact Centres needs to pass
through your preparative and monthly meeting in order for it to passed on,
if the testing confirms your concern, to the Yearly Meeting", From: "Michael
Hutchinson" <Michaelh@quaker.org.uk>, Quaker HQ, see below;


The idea that too much should not be imposed on local Quakers directly
contradicts the (now entrenched) concept of the Quaker Steeplechase, whereby
Friends House will refuse to address any communication (even facts, let
alone opinion or worries,) which has not been packaged as a 'Concern', and
gone through the daft steeplechase of PM, MM, GM, Suff, (as Amber did,)
gathering other people (barnacles) on the way.

Again, she wanted me to send the information off on what I began to call The
Quaker Steeplechase, which is the prescribed way of promoting a Concern.

Quaker End Game



Dear Ivor Catt
I am sorry to be slow in responding to your last email - I regret workload
problems mean that this was not just yourself.

However, I have nothing more I can say on the matter you rasie. The
advice I have had is that it is not a problem. However, if you feel a
concern that it is then you need to express this through the structures
of PM and monthly meeting.

With good wishes
Michael Hutchinson


----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Hutchinson" <Michaelh@quaker.org.uk>
To: "Ivor Catt" <ivorcatt@electromagnetism.demon.co.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 8:37 AM
Subject: Re: CCC

> Dear Ivor Catt,
> Many apologies for the delay in replying to your email (below) - I have
> been absent from the office for a period.
> I am passing on your email to the Children & Young People's Section,
> and will pass on comments further to this reply.
> As you know, the Society is based on its monthly meetings, and I
> would advise that your concern about Child Contact Centres needs to
> pass through your preparative and monthly meeting in order for it to
> passed on, if the testing confirms your concern, to the Yearly Meeting.
> We have a duty of advice only, and I am not aware of other concern on
> this matter that would prompt us to take action ourselves, but I will
> make enquiries to see if any has been received.
> With good wishes
> Michael Hutchinson
> copy sent by slomail.   19feb03
> To Michael Hutchinson,
> Assistant Recording Clerk,
> British Yearly Meeting (BYM),
> Quaker Life, Friends House,
> 173 Euston Rd.,
> London   NW1 2BJ
> Dear Michael Hutchinson,
> I was in dialogue with Edgware PM a few months ago. They run a Child
Contact Centre. They wrongly believe that it helps to keep families
together. In fact, CCCs are part of the attack on families.
> I understand that by approaching you, email and copy by slomail, I will
have properly approached the whole of BYM asking BYM to address this very
serious problem. CCCs are rapidly increasing in number.
> http://www.fathercare.org/elvis.htm  discusses the present crisis, and if
no joy is gained via you from BYM, it is proposed that The Society of
Friends be cited on that website as a good example of a religious
organisation which is being suckered into attacking the family. Also see
> http://www.fathercare.org  So far, there have been protest demonstrations
outside judges' homes and in anti-family radfem universities including RHC.
In future, the escalating number of protest demonstrations will also be at
Child Contact Centres. I will advise the protest organisers that Edgware
> PM is ideal for the first CCC protest, which will be very damaging for the
Society of Friends. (cc of this letter to Matt O'Connor, 01787 281 922,
protest organiser.) My mother was a Quaker, and I have been a Quaker for
> I look forward to hearing from you.
> Yours sincerely,
> Ivor Catt          01727 864257
> 121 Westfields,
> St. Albans AL3 4JR          19feb03
> http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/Y2DLESB.htm
> http://www.ivorcatt.com/2903.htm
> http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/tc03ahos.htm
> http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/19159.htm
> http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/ya5edick.htm
> ________________________________________________________________________
> This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
> service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
> anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
> http://www.star.net.uk
ael Hutchinson
> Assistant Recording Clerk
> & General Secretary Quaker Life
> Friends House
> 173 Euston Road
> London NW1 2BJ
> 020 7663 1000 (direct line 1124)
> michaelh@quaker.org.uk

Michael Hutchinson, Top Cheese at Britain Yearly Meeting, kicks information on social problems into the long grass, wrong classifying “information” as a “concern”. Use of The Quaker Steeplechase (the “Concern” protocol) insulates Friends House officials and committees from up to date information on developing social problems.

Ivor Catt  15may03 




-----Original Message-----
From: fried [mailto:fried@aesops.force9.co.uk]
Sent: 14 May 2003 01:38
To: Ivor Catt; michaelh@quaker.org.uk
Subject: RE: [sharedparenting] No to 'contact centres'

Dear Michael H.,


For what it is worth, I will add my word to that of Ivor and of Matthaus, in letting you know that the situation with contact centres is catastrophic for families. I also have been denied access to my own daughter for nearly eight years, although I have done nothing to justify this whatsoever, having had three years of stable and happy shared parenting before the courts' catastrophic intervention. Part of our present desperate situation was brought about by having to see my own daughter in the humiliating and humanly degrading circumstances of a contact centre, which were so traumatic that the experience was not repeated.


My mother and grandparents were Quakers (Jillian Dingle) and I attended a Quaker boarding school (Saffron Walden). I have fallen out of contact with Quakers, as I have lost faith in their will to act in the face of wrongdoing. Certainly, these human rights atrocities of separating willing parents from their children, inflicted by the courts since I was a child myself, must be by far the worst and most extensive human rights abuses occurring in this country in the present day, destroying as they do the core and meaning of so many people's lives, in the face of massive indifference and hostility. It is shaming to all those who profess to hold moral values not to speak out on these issues. Whilst they do not, people like myself and my daughter will have our lives blighted, ruined and lost, for no reason at all, our stories will be contemptuously dismissed, we will be invisible in the public eye, and our fight to remain committed parents to our children regarded as the aberrant behaviour of lonely obsessives. To admit that our cause was just would be to put many of our most respected citizens in the dock, we know that, and it is because we know that, that many people, like the Quakers, will probably not speak out.


All that is required for the nightmare to continue is for good people to say and do nothing. The most crippling aspect of our plight is the lack of recognition and support, the  taboo on talking about what is one of the most blatant areas of discrimination in the UK today, the designation of what a family is, on what are frankly sexist grounds, by the forcible denial of the exercise of parenthood  to one of the parents, normally the father.


I am aware that many Quakers are in fact social workers, probation officers, lawyers, etc., as I grew up amongst them. It is not as though you have nowhere to start looking, if you want to start putting the system right. This is half the problem. Most fathers, faced with the family court system, are so shocked and set aback by the apparent indifference of the society at large that they retreat into themselves. The effect of this social tolerance of real human brutality means there is no one to turn to for support when your own child is effectively abducted with the full backing of the system.


To anybody who dares to suggest that this is a complicated professional problem, I would just say that nobody knows how to be a father to my daughter as I do, and nobody has any business to stop me being her caring parent unless I represent a real and present danger to her. It is, at root, that simple. It is also that simple for any of us as parents, who in "professional" terms could be regarded as unrivalled "specialists", their specialism being their own children. Separation of children from their natural parents by legal duress, with the full force of the law, is the precise reverse of civilised behaviour, to a Quaker it goes against every rule of human social behaviour and every approach to conflict resolution that they hold dear. There never has been a thread of justification for policies of single residence and contact post-separation which place one parent, and one parent alone, as primer inter pares, with effective control of access by the resident parent, be they the mother or the father. The failure to speak out as Quakers against this is complicity in the worst human torture you could inflict on a loving parent and child, their removal from each other without cause, without solution, and in the face of massive indifference by all the bleeding hearts for selective "lost causes" out there.




PS: I attach mailings describing recent policy proposals by govt. which could compound our suffering



Julian Fitzgerald

56 Louis Street

Leeds LS7 4BN

T: +44 (0)113 229 8949

E: fried@aesops.force9.co.uk




 -----Original Message-----
From: Ivor Catt [mailto:ivorcatt@electromagnetism.demon.co.uk]
Sent: 13 May 2003 23:44
To: michaelh@quaker.org.uk
Cc: Stephen Baskerville US; R.J.Whiston; Normanaudrey@aol.com; Markharrisdadof3@aol.com; John; geoffrey ben-nathan; fried; dave@dunelmsystems.co.uk; ; bogles@bogletowers.fsnet.co.uk; hock; Anthony Pace; john arnison
Subject: Fw: [sharedparenting] No to 'contact centres'



----- Original Message -----


From: Ivor Catt

To: Michaelh@quaker.org.uk

Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2003 10:58 AM

Subject: Fw: [sharedparenting] No to 'contact centres'



----- Original Message -----


From: Darryl McDowell

To: Undisclosed-Recipient:;

Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2003 2:41 AM

Subject: Fw: [sharedparenting] No to 'contact centres'


Well worded rebuke. Puts the whole mess into perspective.


----- Original Message -----


From: Roger Eldridge


Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 11:44 PM

Subject: [sharedparenting] No to 'contact centres'


From: "Matthaus Huber" <matthaus.huber@btinternet.com> Date: Fri, 14 Mar
2003 01:32:57 -0000 To: <fnf-chat@yahoogroups.com> Cc:
<fathers4justice@yahoogroups.co.uk>, <ukmm@mono.org> Subject: [ukmm]
"contact center" -

Letter to my solicitor, draft, please comment and advise

My son [name] does not any longer want to enter into that container room [ a
"porta-cabin" called "contact center"]. I do understand this.

He is inside rooms from 9:00 am to 3:30 p.m.. [ his school] He spends the
day inside a nice building, spacious, bright and with his friends.

He then -twice weekly- in haste gets picked up from his school by someone
with who he is not on speaking terms. Someone who seems not to speak to him
ever. That person, an  SS "contact worker" takes him in a race by car
together with his brother half his age to the car parking of a major  SS
building. His father then comes and carries him on his arms into a tiny,
dark container room.

There is a very disorderly heap of plastic [ some kind of old toys, neither
for his age nor of his taste nor of any interest] in a corner on the floor.
Furtheron there are about 10 chairs for adults in the room around a naked
table. I understand he feels uncomfortable in this rather weird, strange,
unnatural setting or surroundings.

The woman who brings him stays in the room, expressionless and silent. Daddy
is -for Health and Safety reasons not allowed to take him to the loo. The
boy is not allowed to leave the room, nor is his Daddy.

His Daddy never locked him in before. He never has been with his Daddy in
such an appalling container before, not for a minute. I do understand that I
might "get done" for cruelty against animals should I lock my dog in and
keep him inside almost without break from 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.

In the best interest of the child [name] I will not take him anymore into
that container room [called contact center]. I demand animal's rights for my





See the book "Stolen Vows" promoted at www.stolenvows.com for analysis of
the way adjuncts of the Divorce Industry like CCCs and the Quakers support the attack on the family as an institution.
> Ivor Catt  may03