Reading of the despair of "Paul" who is denied access to his daughter (The Argus, December 8), reminded me of a colleague who was denied access to his first two daughters for several years.

He told me: "It appears animals have rights and divorced fathers have financial responsibilities."

This is just an extension of "divorced man's justice". This discrimination is now freely admitted in legal circles, although they use the term "gender bias".

In my case, my daughter expressed a preference to live with me so I challenged the assumption my former wife would acquire our matrimonial home and custody of my daughter only to be told by my barrister I would be wasting my time.

Instead, my daughter was thrust into a relationship with a stepfather who she detested.

So when the courts say they take the child's welfare into account, take that with a pinch of salt.

This discrimination or bias has to be paid for and the legal professional charges exorbitant fees to administer this form of justice, which is a bit like the Great Train Robbers invoicing British Rail.

With that I rest my case.

-Bill Latham, Hove