{"id":23609,"date":"2022-04-29T16:58:31","date_gmt":"2022-04-29T14:58:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/donnexdiritti.com\/?p=23609"},"modified":"2023-04-30T17:58:58","modified_gmt":"2023-04-30T15:58:58","slug":"the-polish-drift-of-italy-starts-from-afar-who-salvini-fontana-and-pillons-friends","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/donnexdiritti.com\/2022\/04\/29\/the-polish-drift-of-italy-starts-from-afar-who-salvini-fontana-and-pillons-friends\/","title":{"rendered":"The Polish drift of Italy starts from afar: who are the friends of Salvini, Fontana and Pillon?"},"content":{"rendered":"

In Poland, the influence of the most reactionary and fundamentalist positions of the Catholic Church is by now evident and the attack on rights – especially those of women – is daily. Our country is also embarking on the same path: between Minister Fontana’s positions against abortion and gay rights, the motions of various municipalities in support of self-styled ‘prolife’ associations and the obscene Pillon bill on shared custody<\/strong> – which, in fact, questions the right to divorce \u2013 the signs of the reactionary drift are all there.<\/p>\n

The European context<\/strong><\/h5>\n

\"\"The rise of the right, inside and outside the government coalitions in Europe, with parties and groups that make direct reference to the principles of the Catholic Church as the founding points of their politics, has among its worrying effects the dismantling of rights, starting from those of women. There are many signs in this direction. Let’s line up some. 333 reactionary and ultra-Catholic associations from nine Central and Eastern European countries <\/strong>\u2013 such as Lithuania, Slovakia, Romania and Ukraine \u2013 have addressed a letter to the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Thorbj\u00f8rn Jagland,<\/strong> asking for the revision of the Istanbul Convention to the fight against gender-based violence.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"In Chi\u015fin\u0103u, Moldova, this year the World Congress of Families brought together all the main parties and NGOs that defend the natural family (man\/woman) and oppose abortion, civil unions and the dissolution of the sacred bond of marriage<\/strong>: a gathering attended by the Vatican Secretary of State, Pietro Parolin, and which Matteo Salvini<\/strong> greeted with a message read from the stage in which he underlined that: \u201cin these times of destructive and irrational aggression against the founding values of our cultures, the efforts to protect the natural family are vital to the survival and development of humanity\u201d.<\/p>\n

\"\"In Poland, where Law and Justice (PiS) was reconfirmed as the first party in the recent administrative elections, with some losses in the cities, the right-wing government has repeatedly tried to narrow the scope of the law on voluntary abortion,<\/strong> inducing every time thousands of women to take to the streets to stop this project. It is a 1993 law among the most restrictive in Europe (in fact it allows abortion only in case of danger to the woman’s life, rape or serious malformation of the fetus) that the Catholic right-wing PiS would like to sweep away in a country which already every year about 150,000 clandestine abortions occur.<\/p>\n

The attack on 194<\/strong><\/h5>\n

A drift towards which Italy has been heading for some time due to the continuous attacks and sabotage against a law, the 194 of 1978, now almost impossible to apply given that 70 percent of doctors refuse to practice the voluntary interruption of pregnancy (IVG).<\/p>\n

A DRAINING OF WOMEN’S RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION WHICH PUT ITALY ALMOST ON THE SAME LEVEL AS COUNTRIES WHERE ABORTION IS FORBIDDEN<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\"\"such as Malta, and increasingly distant from countries where objection is almost non-existent \u2013 such as England (10 per cent), Norway and Germany (6 per cent), France (3 per cent) \u2013 or entirely non-existent, such as Sweden and Finland. As if that weren’t enough in recent weeks Pope Francis has compared those who practice abortion to those who hire a hitman to solve a problem and pro-life motions have sprung up in various Italian municipalities. The first was Verona where the city council accepted with 21 votes in favor – including that of the leader of the Democratic Party, Carla Padovani – and six against, the motion 434 of the Northern League Zelger<\/strong> aimed at financing pro-life Catholic associations and describing Verona as \u00aba city in favor of life\u00bb.<\/p>\n

\"\"A motion that has made converts and which, according to what was declared by the youth manager of the League, Roberto Todeschini, will be brought to all municipalities “with the aim of extending it to a regional and national level”.<\/strong> And in fact, a few days later, in the municipality of Ferrara, the councilor Alessandro Balboni of the Brothers of Italy<\/strong> filed a similar motion for economic support for women in order to distract them from the intention to practice IVG, proclaiming Ferrara \u00ab city that protects the defenceless\u00bb, and a very similar one was presented, again by Fratelli d’Italia, to the municipality of Rome to proclaim the capital a \u00abpro-life city\u00bb and prepare \u00abresources necessary to support pro-life centres\u00bb .<\/p>\n

\"\"
Matteo Salvini and Lorenzo Fontana<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Motion also arrived in Milan where the Forza Italia councilor Luigi Amicone, together with the League, asked to recognize “Milan as a city for life” and to provide in the budget “adequate funding” for pro-life groups<\/strong>; as well as in Modena, where the Northern League councilor Luigia Santoro asked the municipality to “propose initiatives and policies to support motherhood and the prevention of conditions that lead to abortion”. Ultra-reactionary Catholics also have supporters in government. In the front line for the safeguarding of traditional Catholic values is the Minister of the Family Lorenzo Fontana who, immediately after the inauguration of the Lega-5 Stelle government,<\/strong> made it clear what he is made of by declaring that “the family is the natural one” and that “unfortunately in our [government] contract there is no restriction on abortion”.<\/p>\n

FOR FONTANA “ABORTION IS THE FIRST CAUSE OF FEMINICIDE IN THE WORLD” AND THE VALUES TO DEFEND “ARE THOSE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\"\"
Roberto Fiore<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

opposed to “gender” and rainbow couples, while migratory flows lead to “a devastating watering down of the identity of the country that welcomes” and “the ideal society, for those who want to lead without anyone bothering, is a light dictatorship \u00bb. An extremist Catholic, linked to extreme right-wing groups in Verona, and a member of the No194 Committee, the Northern League member Fontana signed in 2011 to repeal the law on IVG and punish women and doctors with a sentence of between 8 and 12 years<\/strong>: a card claimed by the president of the committee, the lawyer Pietro Guerini, who publicly congratulated the minister on his inauguration. Committee which also has close relations with Roberto Fiore, leader of Forza Nuova<\/strong>, as evidenced by the participation of the latter, last October 13th in Milan, in the march against the 194 organized by the association.<\/p>\n

\"\"
Alessandro Fiore<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

An sympathy evidently also shared by Fontana, who in 2015, at the Verona Family Day, had himself photographed with Luca Castellini, leader of Forza Nuova,<\/strong> and has never hidden his sympathy for the friends of ProVita, whose spokesman is Alessandro Fiore,<\/strong> eldest son of Roberto, and whose president, Toni Brandi, organized the first Festival for life in Verona in which the minister also participated.<\/p>\n

FONTANA REPRESENTS THE TRAIT D’UNION BETWEEN THE RIGHT AND THAT RELIGIOUS INTEGRALISM WHICH WOULD LIKE TO ERASE FOREVER THE SELICITY OF THE STATE<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

On the other hand, his spiritual father is Vilmar Pavesi, the ultra-reactionary monarchist parish priest who celebrates mass in Latin in a church attended by men only.<\/p>\n

A new front: shared custody<\/strong><\/h5>\n
\"\"
Simone Pillon and Matteo Salvini<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Today, however, in Italy, together with the historic one against abortion, there is another front that dares for the first time where others had not yet dared: that for the restoration of parental authority, canceled by legislative progress on the right to family, and the questioning of divorce. The project has the face of Simone Pillon, the neocatechumenal Northern League senator now famous for the impressive number of criticisms of the family law bill he presented to the Senate commission in the drafting session.<\/strong> A proposal that even bothered<\/p>\n

THE UNITED NATIONS THAT IN A LETTER TO THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENT SHOW “GRAVE CONCERN” ABOUT THE DDL<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\"\"and requested clarifications for its incompatibility “with the obligations of the Italian State in the field of human rights”. Fierce criticisms have come from everywhere, with the birth of No Pillon committees in Milan, Florence, Turin, while the Network of anti-violence centers (DiRe) has launched a petition for the withdrawal of the bill which has reached almost 100,000 signatures, and a national mobilization.<\/strong> It is not only civil society but also lawyers, magistrates and organizations that deal with children’s rights who are asking to quash the Pillon bill and who express strong concern: from the Italian Coordination of Services against Child Maltreatment and Abuse (Cismai) to the Italian Association of Family and Minor Lawyers (Aiaf), passing through the National Union of Juvenile Chambers, the National Association of Family Mediator Lawyers (Anamef) and the Democratic Judiciary.<\/p>\n

\"\"
Simone Pillon and Lorenzo Fontana<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

However, Pillon’s friends are also turning up their noses, with Fontana talking about corrections to the text and the Minister of Public Administration Giulia Bongiorno who wants to rewrite it<\/strong>, even if it is more the other part of the government coalition that represents an obstacle: for the pentastellata Maria Edera Spadoni, vice president of the Chamber, it is unacceptable that “cases of domestic violence against women are not foreseen by the articles” and for Vincenzo Spadafora<\/strong>, undersecretary of the M5S with responsibility for equal opportunities, “in cases of ill-treatment in family the Pillon decree does not help”, so much so that they too would like to write a new proposal. But what does the bill 735 propose?<\/p>\n

\"\"There are four pillars: compulsory family mediation for a fee with a detailed plan which could include, in case no agreement is reached, even a coordinator (a figure to be invented); perfectly equal times with a minimum of 12 days a month with each parent and the child who will go back and forth with the suitcase; direct maintenance, which excludes the assignment of the house<\/strong> (possibly whoever stays pays the rent to the other) and the allowance, whereby each parent will provide for needs on the spot while adult children who need money will have to go to the magistrate; and finally the introduction of so-called parental alienation and false abuses.<\/p>\n

\"\"This in a general loss of discretion on the part of the judge, who will have to apply what is established in the parenting plan, and in an overall increase in the difficulty of separating and divorcing which could make many couples give up making a right substantially inaccessible. A bill that would make those intending to separate and divorce even poorer, with the costs of compulsory mediation and a possible coordinator, entirely borne by the couples, which could become exorbitant.<\/strong> In a context in which, moreover, even now separating means an impoverishment for both spouses.<\/p>\n

IN ITALY IN FACT WHEN MUMMER AND FATHER SEPARATE THE ECONOMIC CONDITION OF BOTH WOMEN (50.9 PERCENT) AND MEN (40.1 PERCENT) WORSENS DEARLY<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\"\"And this is due to an inefficient social system which, unlike the countries of Northern Europe, leaks from all sides and, in the event of separation, causes very strong imbalances. In a general crisis, still to be overcome, in which employment is increasingly precarious and the reintegration of mothers into the world of work is an obstacle course, the family nucleus in which the mother stays at home with the children and the father goes to work remains the backbone of the company.<\/strong> In fact, in Italy, one in three women stays at home after having their first child, while those who go back to work do it part-time and with salaries halved (according to Istat data), due to the now almost total absence of a welfare enable both parents to work full time without leaving their children on the street.<\/p>\n

\"\"In fact, if the Italian State took care of those services that a family should be guaranteed and worked to facilitate the full-time employment of women\/mothers with salaries equal to those of men, in the event of separation mothers and children would not only weigh on what today is often the only entrance to the house, namely that of the father,<\/strong> who, in turn, in these conditions, struggles to support the household economy when the couple separates.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Circumstances which even now lead many couples to remain as if “separate at home”, in order not to find themselves in a state of poverty: therefore a structural problem which certainly cannot be resolved, as the Pillon bill would like to do, by taking away the marital home from the minor, who he has the right to it regardless of which parent stays in it<\/strong> (sometimes the house remains with the child with alternating parents), nor leaving child support to chance or taking it away from them once they come of age while maybe they are still going to school. On the division of the permanence of children in their parents’ homes regardless of age – a three-month-old child is not like a 15-year-old boy – and on compulsory mediation for all, Pillon has already taken a step back,<\/strong> declaring that the design is aimed to that minority of couples (18 percent) who face a high-conflict separation, while the majority of couples (82 percent) today separate by mutual consent.<\/p>\n

BUT THE PAINFUL POINTS OF THE DDL, WRITTEN TOGETHER WITH PEDIATRICIAN VITTORIO VEZZETTI AND CHILD NEUROPSYCHIATRIST GIOVANNI BATTISTA CAMERINI, DON’T END THERE AND ON THE REST PILLON DOESN’T SEEM TO WANT TO GO BACK<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\"\"
Vittorio Vezzetti<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

In article 11, cases of domestic violence that exclude shared custody are equated to the quality of the living spaces of former spouses. The hypotheses of \u00abdanger of harm to the psychophysical health of the minor\u00bb which do not envisage the shared are in fact listed as follows: \u00abviolence; sexual abuse; neglect; unavailability of a parent; evident inadequacy of the spaces set up for the life of the minor”, putting everything on the same level. In the same article it is specified that these reasons for exclusion of shared custody must be “proven and motivated”<\/strong> without clarifying whether, in cases of violence and sexual abuse, to define them in this way it is necessary the third level of judgement, for which in Italy it is necessary to wait years and years, in the meantime exposing the victims to serious dangers.<\/p>\n

\"\"
Andrea Coffari<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

In article 12, even in the face of serious cases of abuse which provide for exclusive custody to the caring parent, the text protects double parenting at all costs, forcing the child to spend the night alone with the non-custodial parent even if abuser or mistreat. Girolamo Andrea Coffari, expert lawyer for minors (to whom he dedicated the book Breaking the silence, Laurana Editore, 2018),<\/strong> underlines that \u00abthe bill 735 protects fathers accused of violence or abuse, and discourages mothers from reporting by punishing their children who speak and show a legitimate refusal towards the abusive parent who, thanks to these provisions, can still visit the child for at least twelve days a month and alone”.<\/p>\n

\"\"A critical point on which Pillon has shown no intention of backing down, despite having declared that children “have the right not to be exposed to violence”, stating that he does not question “neither the protection order nor the precautionary measure of the ban on approaching\u00bb: measures which, however, clearly contrast with article 12 of its bill. In articles 17 and 18, written by the neuropsychiatrist Camerini, it is assumed that children are not able to discern and for this reason, if they refuse a parent,<\/strong> even in the absence of “evident conduct” of the other that could have led to this outcome, the the magistrate can remove parental responsibility from the latter, guilty of “parental alienation”, punishing him even if he has never spoken ill of the ex. Unheard of alter part,<\/p>\n

THE CHILD MAY BE WITHDRAWN AND PLACED IN A SPECIALIZED STRUCTURE OR ASSIGNED TO THE OTHER PARENT EXCLUSIVELY, EVEN IF THE LATTER HAS LOSE THE CUSTODY FOR SERIOUS CONDUCT SUCH AS VIOLENCE AND ABUSE<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In fact, these are articles in which domestic violence is minimized, if not even considered irrelevant, which instead represents 80 percent of cases of violence against women in Italy. Pillon therefore seems more concerned with punishing the parent who speaks ill of the other, rather than alienating the one who uses violence, because false accusations are closely related to parental alienation which, according to the minister, are real violence.<\/strong> \u00abIf the woman has the will to exclude the man or vice versa\u00bb, says Pillon, it means that \u00abthe first one who makes the complaint takes the whole package: house, children, allowances, and all the rest\u00bb (Speech by Simone Pillon at the meeting \u00abShared custody: everything you would like to know about the Pillon bill\u00bb, organized by the blog \u00ab27esimaora\u00bb of Corriere della Sera in the Senate on 17 October 2018).<\/p>\n