Broken Fathers Podcast

Send a text
Episode 25
Guest - Joshua and Emily Thompson
On this episode I am joined with a married couple. Josh, a 35 y/o from Sydney who is a director of a small construction company and his wife Emily who is 29 and works in child protection as a case worker and is also studying to be a lawyer. They share 1 beautiful child and 2 stepchildren together while Josh has 1 child to his x wife. Josh and Emily started their family court journey in 2020 and just finished in the start of 2025.
 
Emily, one of 13 siblings born and raised in Wollongong experienced a traumatic childhood; her parents separated when she was two, and her father struggled with heavy alcohol and drug use. Her lived experience with siblings who faced meth addiction from a young age is what ultimately led her to work in the child protection space. 

Josh met his ex at the age of 22 who was a on and off hairdresser, they were friends to start with dating then become official. Seven years later they got married, only to split one year later. Josh, reflecting now, sees the biggest red flag was when she moved in only months after they met., As soon as they ended the relationship, the first thing his ex-asked was how much money was she going to get. Josh went to work one day, came home and the whole house had been cleaned out empty.
 
Josh worked not far from his in-law’s place and was getting access to his son. The split was quite amicable to begin with, until he noticed he stopped getting in voted at the in-law BBQ every Sunday. This was when he found out she had a new boyfriend.

Josh then met his current wife in December 2020, when Joshua’s ex found out all hell broke out. Josh's neighbour would film him and take pictures when Emily was there then report it straight back to his ex.
 
An interesting point to note is that a former acquaintance of Josh’s ex used to monitor Josh’s social media via a fake account to report back to her. This individual is no longer in contact with the ex-partner and has since become close friends with Josh and Emily. Additionally, while the initial mediation went good, Josh’s ex reportedly misrepresented the outcome to others, claiming it went poorly, consent orders were made with which we ultimately withdrawn, just before the court sealed them. 
 
On December 3rd, the situation escalated when Josh was raided and accused of armed robbery. He was subsequently refused bail. This decision was unexpected, particularly as Josh requires chemotherapy every six months. Even corrective services submitted documentation stating they could not meet his medical requirements and supported his release from custody.

While incarcerated, Josh’s health deteriorated significantly, requiring specialized treatment every four weeks. Following his release on December 16, 2021, his immediate priority was contacting his son. Although Josh had been writing letters to him while inside, his ex-partner attempted to characterize this correspondence as domestic violence.

All charges against Josh were dropped, no record was made, and the police identified the actual offender. Following this, the judge’s verdict was read by Emily.
 
Despite spending nearly $500,000, the case then moved to family court. At this stage, his ex-partner employed various tactics, including forcing Josh to undergo hair follicle tests and subpoenaing numerous organizations. She also attempted to use his medical conditions against him and submitted affidavits that contained clear falsehoods, particularly regarding her financial documents. To this day, Josh has not seen his son since December 16, 2021 which was via FaceTime, and hasn’t physically seen him since November 28, 2020.
 
In closing,
Support the show

Send us a text
Episode 25
Guest - Tony Nikolic
In the next episode, I sit down with Tony Nikolic — Australian solicitor, principal of AFL Solicitors, and one of the country’s most unapologetic advocates for human and civil rights. His work is defined by a singular professional duty: to protect without fear or favour, regardless of pressure, politics, or personal cost.
Practising nationally across commercial litigation, complex family law, estates, and criminal law, Tony operates at the sharp edge of Australia’s legal system, where individual rights collide with institutional power. Tony holds two Master of Laws degrees — one in Family Dispute Resolution (with accreditation in mediation) and another in Commercial Litigation — alongside an Honours degree in Criminology, qualifications as a Notary, and a Diploma in Business Management. He is also a published author, contributing to the International Handbook of Whistleblower Research (2014), where he examined the protection of whistleblowers and taxpayers — reinforcing his lifelong commitment to accountability and justice.
Widely respected for his work in high-conflict family law, Tony represents clients in matters where parenting disputes and property proceedings intersect with criminal allegations and systemic failure. His advocacy extends beyond individual cases into the reform space, where he champions evidence-based legal change, including his proposed Family Law “Three Strikes” model, designed to address repeated breaches of parenting orders and restore accountability to the system.
We examine the gatekeeping of children, the reality that as little as 30 days of separation can sever a child’s emotional bond with a parent, and the enduring lack of meaningful support for fathers in Australia.
Restoring Accountability: The Three Strikes Reform
Tony outlines his proposed Three Strikes Enforcement Structure, a reform to the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) designed to introduce clarity, consistency, and meaningful consequences for repeated breaches of parenting orders — interim or final — while always maintaining the best interests of the child.
Key proposed reforms include:
 Strike 1 – Civil Penalty
• $500 civil fine
• Mandatory make-up time for denied contact
• Formal entry in a Parenting Order Enforcement Register
 Strike 2 – Escalation and Warning
• Further $500 fine
• Formal judicial warning
• Power to vary parenting orders to restore compliance
 Strike 3 – Criminal Referral
• Referral for criminal prosecution for serious interference
• Power to reverse custody
• Minimum six months supervised contact for the non-compliant parent (at their expense), or
• Appointment of a parenting coordinator funded by the non-compliant party
Tony also discusses his recent meetings in the United States with Robert Garza, a Texas-based father and advocate whose lived experience with parental alienation helped drive reforms restoring parenting time. Since returning, Tony has refined the model for Australia and submitted the draft Bill to Senator Malcolm Roberts.
Time Taken Must Be Time Returned
The proposed Bill further amends the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) to ensure parenting time is restored where a parent has been denied access due to:
• Child protection investigations, or
• Family violence, intervention, or restraining orders
- where no finding of abuse, neglect, or risk of harm is ultimately made.
These reforms prevent parents from being permanently deprived of court-ordered time based on unsubstantiated allegations, while preserving judicial discretion and the paramount consideration of t
Support the show

Send us a text
Episode 23
Guest - Digby Ioane
On my next episode I sit down with Digby Ioane, a Brisbane-based father of two who spent four years navigating the family court system. Born in New Zealand and of Samoan heritage, Digby moved to Melbourne at age one. He grew up as the youngest of nine, five boys and four girls, in a family-oriented home. His parents later adopted six more children from Samoa, and their house was always full. If one of his older brothers met someone who was homeless or struggling, they would bring them home too. Later, while playing overseas, Digby moved to France to join Stade Français, where he met the mother of his first child. Their relationship began to break down shortly after his son’s birth. Digby had flown his baby mother and son to Melbourne so his son could spend time with his father, who was gravely ill. She left to France early for a job interview, and two days after she left with his son, his father passed away. Digby shared in the podcast that when he tried to express how much he was hurting, she told him to “Just get over it.” That moment, on top of losing the man he described as the family’s protector whose love was “on another level,” became a breaking point.

Shortly after his first relationship ended, Digby met his second partner, the mother of his second child. Throughout their relationship, she questioned how Digby managed to afford his properties and expenses. His sister, who handled his finances, had been diagnosed with cancer. His partner used this to convince him to let her “help” and eventually “take over” managing his finances. She pushed him to set up internet banking, something he had never used before, so she could pay bills and renovation invoices while he travelled for rugby and flew frequently to Melbourne to care for his dying sister. This is how she was able to access his accounts. When his sister passed away, Digby asked her to fly down for the funeral. She agreed but asked him to pay for her best friend’s flight as well. She came down but left before the burial, flying back to Brisbane with their son because he was “sick,” leaving Digby to mourn alone. Digby remained in Melbourne for two weeks to support his family. His 12-year-old nephew, also named Digby, asked if he could move to Brisbane to live with him, just as Digby had previously done for his nephew Monty Ioane, who is now an international rugby player for Italy. 

When he told his partner the plan, she “lost it” and gave him the ultimatum: “IT’S EITHER ME OR YOUR NEPHEW.” Digby refused to abandon his nephew and stood his ground. Consequently, she left, telling Digby that her father was sick and that she was going to Canberra to stay & look after him. All of a sudden, Police are calling Digby wanting to question him about a whole list of fabricated allegations his ex has made.During the proceedings, Digby discovered that his ex had been transferring $5,000 daily from his account into her own. When the transactions were traced, they showed she had used the money to pay off her personal credit card debt and had moved funds into multiple bank accounts she controlled. On the surface, it appeared she was “paying all the bills,” but the deposits funding those bills were coming directly from Digby’s income, rental properties, and the rugby clinics. Their relationship lasted only 20 months. She had moved into a fully paid-off house, contributed nothing to the mortgage, and the household was funded by his passive income and rugby work, yet she initially sought a “70/30 split.” Following years of emotional, financial and legal pressure, Digby’s friend advised him to make a final offer of $100,000 “so she’ll accept it and disappear.” Within five minutes of receiving the email, sh
Support the show

Send us a text
Episode 22 
Guest – Pauline Hanson
On our next episode of the broken fathers podcast I sit speak with someone who’s not only seen the pain, but spoken out about it—in Parliament, on national television, and in the face of fierce opposition. She’s a a federal senator, the founder of One Nation, and one of the few politicians who’s dared to publicly call the family court system for what many of us know it to be “BROKEN”. A strong independent woman, Senator Pauline Hanson.
Senator Hanson’s first marriage was in the 1970s and after it ended, she found herself a single mother at the age of 33. She didn’t claim child support or other assets. She worked diligently to support herself and her child. She later married a second time and had two more children. This marriage also ended, there no property settlement as Pauline walked out and left the house and plumbing business to her ex. but Pauline’s hardest battle was trying to get the children's father to be involved in their kid’s lives because she knows how important it is for the children to have a father in their lives. Pauline was flat out trying to get $20 a week. When Senator Hanson joined parliament in 1996, the biggest issue that came across Senator’s desk was issues about family law system. She has personal experience with the family court system, as two of her sons have gone through it. She has witnessed firsthand the pain it caused them and felt that pain herself, how unfair and broken the system is especially knowing how much her sons love their children.
Senator Hanson argues that the courts and both parents should prioritize what is best for the children, rather than engaging in abusive, hurtful actions or using children as pawns. Pauline believes children have a right to be with their parents. Pauline grew up with amazing male role models like her amazing father and loving brothers. She’s not anti-male but she’s not joining some me2 movement and she makes a reminder to all those mothers out there you reap what you sow, that may be being spiteful and using the kids as pawns that It might be your sons being denied their children form a grandmother one day later in life. We delved into comments made by former Parramatta family court judge David Collier, who, after 14 years on the bench, observed a significant amount of false evidence presented in domestic violence and sexual abuse cases, noting that perjury always went unaddressed. We question why charges were not laid in such instances. Our conversation also touched on the perceived influence of "woke" ideologies in parliament, particularly regarding women's rights, and how the current Child Support system can be viewed as a "cash cow." We both agree that child support payments should be managed through a receipted bank account to ensure funds are exclusively used for the child's benefit. We believe that reforming child support could lead to greater accountability. Pauline suggests that all domestic violence allegations should first be heard in a magistrate's court to determine their veracity before proceeding to family court. Furthermore, these allegations should not be admissible in family court unless proven factual. Pauline mentioned that domestic violence cases consume 75% of the Queensland Police Service's resources, leading to frustration among officers who feel the system needs to be re-evaluated. Additionally, we discussed a perceived lack of courage among many politicians, attributing it to the need to adhere to party lines. The misuse of the domestic violence system as a legal weapon, often facilitated by unaddressed perjury, was another point of concern. We reflected on the powerful display of 2,400 single boots on the lawns of Parliament, representing men and boys
Support the show

Send us a text
Episode 21
Guest – Tracey McMillan
On our next episode, I’m joined by Tracey McMillan, CEO of Queensland Family Law Practice (QFLP), to unpack everything about the Family Court system. Tracey is a highly experienced family lawyer and mediator with over 25 years in practice. She’s frequently sought by media outlets and community organisations for her clear, practical advice on family law — always with a strong focus on the well-being of children.
Tracey’s expertise spans parenting arrangements, domestic violence, divorce, and property settlements. She is known for providing plain-English advice, early risk assessments, and practical strategies to minimise conflict and cost. Through mediation and parenting coordination, she helps parents reduce disputes and protect children from ongoing conflict.
She is also the founder of No Lawyers — an innovative online family law platform that helps people represent themselves and save thousands of dollars. Designed for individuals navigating separation without legal representation, No Lawyers makes it easier to negotiate property and parenting agreements and generate ready-to-lodge consent orders, all without the usual legal fees.
A proud Brisbane local and the youngest of four, Tracey discovered her calling early — torn between becoming a barrister or a psychologist. After completing her Bachelor of Laws and Practical Legal Training, she was admitted as a lawyer of the Supreme Court of Queensland. She went on to complete the Bar Practice Course — a nine-week, full-time intensive program that forms the final step in qualifying as a barrister — and was admitted to the Queensland Bar soon after. In our conversation, Tracey reflects on the dedication and resilience required to reach that point and shares how her early years in practice shaped the compassionate, outcome-focused approach she brings to her clients today. Tracey also speaks candidly about the stresses of running a law firm, the importance of maintaining boundaries, and her concept of a “third space” — a transition between work and home to prevent emotional spillover.
She explains how some legal professionals unknowingly bring courtroom energy home, affecting their families, and describes her coping strategies — such as not learning clients’ children’s names to maintain professional distance. Tracey highlights the importance of law firms properly preparing cases before briefing barristers, recalling numerous instances of receiving poorly drafted affidavits. Tracey founded No Lawyers in 2020. Although still developing, the site has already attracted over 25,000 visitors. It helps people who haven’t yet entered court proceedings to negotiate, create property pools, generate offers, and prepare consent orders. One of its most innovative tools is the “abuse tone meter”, which flags and prevents the exchange of abusive messages between parties.
In our discussion, we also explored key issues in family law — from the “uplift” in Keenan & Keenan (now embedded in written law) to the domestic-violence-leave provisions that allow 10 days off work without requiring evidence. We discussed why small businesses shouldn’t have to absorb this cost and how government support is needed. Tracey believes that while the current system is deeply flawed, there are solutions. Drawing on international examples, she proposed amending the Marriage Act to follow South Africa’s “communal property” approach, where couples agree on asset ownership before marriage.
We closed the episode with audience-submitted questions — including a case where a judge took three years to deliver a decision. Tracey also shared details of her upcoming book, due out in December – “Divorce is F*ed: A No-Bullshit S
Support the show