I thought rather than going back to the begining of the when and why's I jumped in as an advocate for childrens rights start with the here and now. I sat on a phone with a nice fellow discussing his case. Average guy that meets all your psychological norms tests, good dad and works everyday. One of the first things I noticed from the first of the conversation that this gentleman was worried after meeting with his laywer. He like alot of men I encounter doing this is he said here is my laywers name and what do you think of him. I always try to not drill a laywer to bad because they say" Only a fool represents themselves". I think that should be changed to only a foolish judge thinks that a man without money can afford to pay the exsorbent cost of a laywer. He then asked that question well I just got served papers for primary residence, as he had looked after the child in that capcity since he and his ex seperated. The laywer that he spoke to forgot to mention things like status quo and parentus to him. So as all people that seem to call, education on the system was always the first place I have to start. Our system here in Canada has been on a downward spiral since around 1968 a year after we became a true country. The no fault divorce act as it has been deemed and the start of the destruction of the family and family value. So here is some of the beginings for people that choose to read this will understand.
We all have relationships some good, some bad and well statiscally 51% plus that result in marriage end in divorce. So if you have 10 close friends that are currently married in the first 5 years of it well they will go through this game of hell. So you ask how is that education, more of a little profescy of where you who read this may be someday. If your female, you stand a pretty good chance to take the fellow your with if you have children to the cleaners. If your male well stats that you can find 87% of custodial parents in this country are female. So looking at that you say well I have joint custody but who possesses the primary residence status. So lets take a look at the first part of a seperation.
So people grow apart, never were more than a chaser and a chasee, and well some just didn't do that main thing take a look at this person and with the quirks you both posess and say in 50 years will I be able to look at you the same way I did after the wedding night. Another key thing people go on ooh its my soul mate, fairy tale romance, well guess what they still are human and so are you. So when the fairy tale ends and reality sits in will you be able to say the same thing. Do you share common interests, do you like to do things together and still have that time for hanging with the guys or hanging with the girls. If your a parent then well that is limited especially when your kids are young. They grab alot of your attention and well are really demanding of your time. So now I painted a negative picture to some, the truth and reality to others. So I could go on what the back ground of relationships are like but when you read this an examine yours, hopefully your not calling me and saying what the hell did I do.
So in the begging of a seperation it usually goes with one person initiating it. Yes sad to say but from anywhere's you read even good ole cosmo, for the ladies, females initate the seperation. So generally from the 133 cases I have worked on over the last 10 years it is one cheated on the other, they were really better off as friends,one had deeper childhood psychologial issues that were never dealt with, and addictions, seem to top off the list as the most prevelant things I came accross. So then we as adults seperate, take a minute if you have a child and look in their eyes if your divorced and say did I hurt you when we broke up. They as children will spit and spudder because of that question. For the love of god if they are little don't do that because they are probally already confused as it is. MOre for the 13 years of age or older.This one is more for the normal people, ones that do not try to beat the hell out of each other or do just right down nasty things to each other. This is for the ones that just found out they should of never been together.
So next is you get your place I'll get mine and we both share time and responsiblty with the child. Common sense most would say. Ok when did emotion and common sense ever enter into the same equation? If your quick you know that answer never. So the person you loved or loved you just looked you in the face and said thats it, thats all ,bye bye. So yes your jumping up for joy, wait, no your not your going through the stages of divorce. Same as death we morn everything death, and so on the same way. We go through stages. The thing with this is well the casulty become the innocent bystanders called your kids.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
New dad gets helping hand - Published Wednesday July 22nd, 2009
FREDERICTON - Shaun Nixon said he'd be out on the street with his four-month-old son Tobias if it hadn't been for the eleventh-hour generosity of a Fredericton firefighter.
Enlarge Photo Stephen MacGillivray PhotoStephen MacGillivray/canadaeast news serviceShaun Nixon holds his son Tobias with Shawnee Main and her son Graeson. haun Nixon said he'd be out on the street with his four-month-old son Tobias if it hadn't been for the eleventh-hour generosity of a Fredericton firefighter.
Nixon and Tobias had been living in the Comfort Inn on Prospect Street since his girlfriend abandoned them about a month ago.
But recently, he ran out of money to pay for his hotel stay and, with no family or friends nearby, he faced a daunting future.
Nixon couldn't turn to the Fredericton Men's Shelter because of Tobias and the Transition House doesn't allow men.
The government-subsidized apartment he'd secured isn't available until Aug. 1.
Nixon and Tobias had nowhere to go.
That's until Shawnee Main, a firefighter and single mom, heard about Nixon's struggles on the evening newscast.
She felt she had to do something, so she paid him a visit with words of encouragement, a pile of baby supplies and a promise to pay his hotel bill until his apartment is ready.
"It really hit me. I am a single mom with a big support system, but I couldn't imagine not knowing where my kid is going to sleep at night," she said. "(Nixon) has no family here in Fredericton that I know of.
"He must've felt pretty overwhelmed," she said. "He's a new parent and he's doing it on his own and that alone is tough. I felt for him."
"(What she did) meant everything to me," Nixon said. "I didn't have any time at all and she really saved my rear.
"Knowing that a total stranger would step up like this and help me out just means the world."
Enlarge Photo Stephen MacGillivray PhotoStephen MacGillivray/canadaeast news serviceShaun Nixon holds his son Tobias with Shawnee Main and her son Graeson. haun Nixon said he'd be out on the street with his four-month-old son Tobias if it hadn't been for the eleventh-hour generosity of a Fredericton firefighter.
Nixon and Tobias had been living in the Comfort Inn on Prospect Street since his girlfriend abandoned them about a month ago.
But recently, he ran out of money to pay for his hotel stay and, with no family or friends nearby, he faced a daunting future.
Nixon couldn't turn to the Fredericton Men's Shelter because of Tobias and the Transition House doesn't allow men.
The government-subsidized apartment he'd secured isn't available until Aug. 1.
Nixon and Tobias had nowhere to go.
That's until Shawnee Main, a firefighter and single mom, heard about Nixon's struggles on the evening newscast.
She felt she had to do something, so she paid him a visit with words of encouragement, a pile of baby supplies and a promise to pay his hotel bill until his apartment is ready.
"It really hit me. I am a single mom with a big support system, but I couldn't imagine not knowing where my kid is going to sleep at night," she said. "(Nixon) has no family here in Fredericton that I know of.
"He must've felt pretty overwhelmed," she said. "He's a new parent and he's doing it on his own and that alone is tough. I felt for him."
"(What she did) meant everything to me," Nixon said. "I didn't have any time at all and she really saved my rear.
"Knowing that a total stranger would step up like this and help me out just means the world."
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
DFCS says it "missed the signs" that led to boy's death
DFCS says it "missed the signs" that led to boy's death
By MEGAN MATTEUCCI and CRAIG SCHNEIDER
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The state child welfare director on Monday said his agency “missed the signs” while investigating child abuse against a 6-year-old boy, a special needs student who police say was beaten to death by his mother’s boyfriend.
Enlarge photo FORSYTH COUNTY Eder Acosta, 20, is charged in the death of his girlfriend's 6 year-old son.
Mark Washington, director of the state Division of Family and Children Services, said the agency responded to four prior complaints regarding trouble in Bryan Guzman-Moreno’s Forsyth County home.
“I can see we missed asking the right questions, bringing in the right specialists and making the right decisions at the right time,” Washington said. “I have very strong concerns and questions about what I see.”
Police say the mother’s boyfriend, 20-year-old Eder Acosta of Cumming, beat Bryan to death Thursday.
Acosta, who is not the boy’s natural father, was arrested Saturday for Bryan’s death, Forsyth County Sheriff’s spokesman Capt. Frank Huggins said. He allegedly attacked Bryan early Thursday after taking the boy’s mother, Laura Moreno, to work at 6 a.m. He returned to the mobile home the couple shared and began beating Bryan, Huggins said.
“By 6:30 a.m., the boy was at the hospital in full cardiac arrest,” Huggins said Monday.
State Child Advocate Tom Rawlings said he is also looking into the case. He said Acosta had been accused in January of hitting the boy.
Rawlings said the January accusation was among three complaints to DFCS of child abuse against Bryan. He said there was another complaint involving a fight between two uncles in the home.
Rawlings said that in January, another child of the boy’s mother had said he did not want to be in that house because his mother and her boyfriend fight a lot.
The sibling also said that Acosta had on one occasion hit Bryan hard on the leg with his fist because the boy would not go to the bathroom, Rawlings said.
Rawlings said DFCS worked with the family for some months after that, but it remains unclear whether the agency had an open case on the boy at the time of his death.
The state child advocate is a post appointed by the governor to watch over state child welfare services.
In September 2008, DFCS looked into a complaint regarding a bruise on Bryan’s thigh, and in November of last year, DFCS looked into a report of scratches on the boy’s face, he said.
The agency did not substantiate either of those instances as child abuse, he said.
Washington, the DFCS director, said “hot buttons” and “cues” were missed during the agency’s work on the cases involving Bryan.
Noting that the boy was uncooperative and had difficulty communicating, Washington said the DFCS workers should have brought in specialists who work with children with such conditions.
Washington said he is not sure exactly what was missed.
“It’s very important that we learn what we missed, why we missed it, and how we improve our practice.”
On Thursday, Acosta assaulted the boy and drove him to the emergency room at Northside Hospital-Forsyth, deputies said.
“He told the ER he [the boy] had a medical problem and stopped breathing,” Huggins said.
The boy was later transferred to Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta at Egleston, where he was pronounced dead.
An autopsy showed the boy died from blunt force trauma. Coroners found extensive internal injuries to the boy’s head and body, Huggins said. The injuries were not visible when Acosta brought the boy to the emergency room.
Huggins declined to release details about the attack, including if a weapon was used.
Acosta is being held without bond in the Forsyth County jail on charges of murder, cruelty to children and aggravated battery.
The boy, who attended special needs classes, was scheduled to enter first grade next month at Sawnee Elementary School in Cumming, Forsyth County Schools Superintendent Buster Evans said.
Two other children, including a 1-year-old and an 11-year-old, were home at the time of the attack. They were not injured and have since been turned over to DFCS, Huggins said.
Deputies interviewed the boy’s mother, and she’s not expected to be charged, Huggins said. Several other relatives who live with the family were also interviewed.
Huggins declined to say if Acosta has a prior criminal record. However, he said Acosta had never been arrested by the Forsyth County Sheriff’s Office, and deputies had never been to the couple’s home prior to the murder.
Staff writer Katie Leslie contributed to this article.
By MEGAN MATTEUCCI and CRAIG SCHNEIDER
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The state child welfare director on Monday said his agency “missed the signs” while investigating child abuse against a 6-year-old boy, a special needs student who police say was beaten to death by his mother’s boyfriend.
Enlarge photo FORSYTH COUNTY Eder Acosta, 20, is charged in the death of his girlfriend's 6 year-old son.
Mark Washington, director of the state Division of Family and Children Services, said the agency responded to four prior complaints regarding trouble in Bryan Guzman-Moreno’s Forsyth County home.
“I can see we missed asking the right questions, bringing in the right specialists and making the right decisions at the right time,” Washington said. “I have very strong concerns and questions about what I see.”
Police say the mother’s boyfriend, 20-year-old Eder Acosta of Cumming, beat Bryan to death Thursday.
Acosta, who is not the boy’s natural father, was arrested Saturday for Bryan’s death, Forsyth County Sheriff’s spokesman Capt. Frank Huggins said. He allegedly attacked Bryan early Thursday after taking the boy’s mother, Laura Moreno, to work at 6 a.m. He returned to the mobile home the couple shared and began beating Bryan, Huggins said.
“By 6:30 a.m., the boy was at the hospital in full cardiac arrest,” Huggins said Monday.
State Child Advocate Tom Rawlings said he is also looking into the case. He said Acosta had been accused in January of hitting the boy.
Rawlings said the January accusation was among three complaints to DFCS of child abuse against Bryan. He said there was another complaint involving a fight between two uncles in the home.
Rawlings said that in January, another child of the boy’s mother had said he did not want to be in that house because his mother and her boyfriend fight a lot.
The sibling also said that Acosta had on one occasion hit Bryan hard on the leg with his fist because the boy would not go to the bathroom, Rawlings said.
Rawlings said DFCS worked with the family for some months after that, but it remains unclear whether the agency had an open case on the boy at the time of his death.
The state child advocate is a post appointed by the governor to watch over state child welfare services.
In September 2008, DFCS looked into a complaint regarding a bruise on Bryan’s thigh, and in November of last year, DFCS looked into a report of scratches on the boy’s face, he said.
The agency did not substantiate either of those instances as child abuse, he said.
Washington, the DFCS director, said “hot buttons” and “cues” were missed during the agency’s work on the cases involving Bryan.
Noting that the boy was uncooperative and had difficulty communicating, Washington said the DFCS workers should have brought in specialists who work with children with such conditions.
Washington said he is not sure exactly what was missed.
“It’s very important that we learn what we missed, why we missed it, and how we improve our practice.”
On Thursday, Acosta assaulted the boy and drove him to the emergency room at Northside Hospital-Forsyth, deputies said.
“He told the ER he [the boy] had a medical problem and stopped breathing,” Huggins said.
The boy was later transferred to Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta at Egleston, where he was pronounced dead.
An autopsy showed the boy died from blunt force trauma. Coroners found extensive internal injuries to the boy’s head and body, Huggins said. The injuries were not visible when Acosta brought the boy to the emergency room.
Huggins declined to release details about the attack, including if a weapon was used.
Acosta is being held without bond in the Forsyth County jail on charges of murder, cruelty to children and aggravated battery.
The boy, who attended special needs classes, was scheduled to enter first grade next month at Sawnee Elementary School in Cumming, Forsyth County Schools Superintendent Buster Evans said.
Two other children, including a 1-year-old and an 11-year-old, were home at the time of the attack. They were not injured and have since been turned over to DFCS, Huggins said.
Deputies interviewed the boy’s mother, and she’s not expected to be charged, Huggins said. Several other relatives who live with the family were also interviewed.
Huggins declined to say if Acosta has a prior criminal record. However, he said Acosta had never been arrested by the Forsyth County Sheriff’s Office, and deputies had never been to the couple’s home prior to the murder.
Staff writer Katie Leslie contributed to this article.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
The Reality of Equal Shared Parenting Around the World and Canada - by Edward Hoyt, Founder of " New Brunswick Childrens Equal Parenting Association"
To Start this I would like to quote British senior judge Mr. Justice Coleridge, responsible for family courts across South-West England from the Daily Mail.
"Family life is in ‘meltdown’. Family breakdown is a “cancer” behind almost every evil affecting the country. Mr Justice Coleridge blames youth crime, child abuse, drug addiction and binge-drinking on the “meltdown” of relations between parents and children. He warns that the collapse of the family unit is a threat to the nation as bad as terrorism, crime, drugs or global warming.
The speech to family lawyers contains a fierce attack on the “neglect” of successive governments. The 58-year-old judge, who is married with three grown-up children, will say family breakdown is an epidemic affecting all levels of society from the Royal Family down. It is “on a scale, depth and breadth which few of us could have imagined even “a decade ago. It is a never-ending carnival of human misery. A ceaseless river of human distress. “I am not saying every broken family produces dysfunctional children but I am saying that almost every dysfunctional child is the product of a broken family.”
The judge, who is in charge of family courts across South-West England, will say he has a duty to speak out. He will call on the Government to put the family at the top of its agenda, alongside the economy and the war on terror – and make it “rather more important than taking oaths of allegiance”. His speech will say: “Families are the cells which make up the body of society. If the cells are unhealthy and undernourished, or at worse cancerous and growing haphazard and out of control, in the end the body succumbs. “In some of the more heavily populated urban areas, family life is quite frankly in meltdown or completely unrecognisable . . . it is on an epidemic scale. In some areas of the country family life in the old sense no longer exists.”
The judge condemns families with a mother and several absentee fathers. He says: “Single parents often do a fantastic job, but a great many, perhaps through no fault of their own, do not. “A large number of families now consist of children being brought up by mothers who have children by a number of different fathers, none of whom take any part in their lives or support or upbringing. “These are not isolated, oneoff cases. They are part of the stock-in-trade of the family courts.”
Judge Coleridge has spent the past eight years presiding over cases of divorce, children in care and family break-up.”
(Coleridge, Daily Mail, 4 April 2008) "
To introduce this I will give a little background on myself. I have been a parent for nineteen years as a "Single Father" of my son as his natural mother has by her own choice never been involved in his life. I have also been a"Parentally Alienated" father of a near 15 year old daughter. I have been in the " Equal Parenting" movement in Canada for 10 years now and seen first hand the damage that our current system does to children. I beleive by people and politican's alike reading what other countries are doing may bring a little light on how far behind here in Canada we really are when it comes to parenting. I have worked with some of the orginal founding parents of the Shared Parenting movement and the new, as they have appeared over the years. I have witnessed and participated in court cases here in New Brunswick and Canada as an observer and an active participant. In the 10 years that I have been in this; I have witnessed everything from Shared Parenting by choice working to murder cases because of the adverseral systems curently in place. I do not hold a PHD from a university but do hold a degree in the school of life. The last count of peer reviewed studies, magizine articles and books on the subject of Equal Parenting that I have read is 1109.I have written in News Papers and Magizines in Canada on the topic but beleive that more knowledge nees to be out there for the public.This article shows the different legislations shown from different countries and is a framework in which Canada must start to adopt before it is too late.
To begin the different countries I will start with Germany as they were the first to come forward with true changes towards "Shared Parenting".
Germany - 1998
Germany has a post-divorce presumption of joint legal custody was already in effect in family law since 1998, when several years ago the family court judge Jurgen Rudolph a German Regional Family Court justice in the city and district of Cochem.
The German "Federal Ministry of Justice" in Berlin states they still will introduce more postive changes even with the Cochem model "Cochemer Modell" and Cochem Court Practises,"Cochemer Praxis" to create an even more child centric model. This in Germany has recieved country-wide acknolegment as being the best practice for child centered approach to child custody arrangements.
In his courtroom was continuously confronted with more than capable parents fighting each other with the assitance of their lawyers over post-seperation arrangements concerning the residence, care and access over their children and was demanded to decide in favour of one parent. Parents and lawyers from both sides seemed to be only involved in painting their adversarial ‘opponents’ as black and incapable as possible during the divorce proceedings in the family court.
The position he took in this was that he considered post-divorce physical custody arrangements between principally fit and capable parents. This was at that time not to be a standard-decision for the family court and himself as the family judge to make and decide on by default that one parent would have custody the other become non-custodial or as we refer to as a vistor. That lawfully existing care-obligation in Germany for both parents to care for their children the making of physical custody arrangements over their children had by default to be considered primarily as a matter of responsibility for both the divorcing parents themselves to decide on in the first place.
Proceeding this and him witnessing in-fights between parents and their lawyers taking place in adversarial divorce proceedings, the regional family court of Cochem then experimented by changing its family court practises. The new revolutionary family court practice divorcing parents were strongly encouraged by the court to first come up themselves with a mutually and consensually agreed “Parenting Plan” for the residency, care and access to and over their children, as a mandatory precondition before being able to enter and finalise their divorce settlements in the Cochem family court.
As the parents now needed to come up with a mutually agreed parenting plan or parenting arrangement proposal, this mandatory demand of the court both not only resulted in a reinstatement of the equal level playing field and cooperation between the parents looking for divorce (instead of the previous court practises magnifying the differences and conflicts between the parents). But equally important, it also lead to a complete practise overhaul within the professions involved in the divorce proceedings in the family court.
Rather than adding fuel to the fire in an already adverserial situtation, the parents in their conflict, Lawyers, Social Workers, Youth Welfare Workers, began cooperating with each other in order to offer mediation and other support services and help to the divorcing parents who were in need of support in making the parenting plan needed in order to finalise their divorce proceedings. It did take time but the cooperation between professionals evolved from cooperation on the individual case levels created a more structured network cooperation of the involved professions around the "Cochem Family Court."
Spain - 2005
They introduced a new shared parenting law which is regarded as wholly inadequate by Spanish family rights lobbyists. Government officials and professionals on their own initiative are attempting to introduce policies reintegrating alienated children with their alienated parents and there is a vigorous movement for change.
Belgium - September 2006
The Socialist Party implemented presumptive 50/50 joint physical custody legislation reffered to as effective bi-location of the child,after parental separation by the Belgian Federal Government on September 4th,2006. This was approved by the Belgium "House of Commons" and "Senate" and brought into legislation. It introduced an immediate unilateral court-access for either of the divorced or separated parents in requesting for additional reinforcement orders if needed. It also introduced a presumption of dual location or shared residency which by law should be taken into serious consideration and thorough investigation with priority in each individual case by the Belgian family courts and judges on the request of either one of the divorcing parents separately.
In the situation where both separating parents consensually forward shared residency, care and access proposals between the two of them in the divorce and separation proceedings, the law puts the Belgian family courts and judges under the obligation to accept those mutually consented proposals as leading in the court-orders to be subsequently imposed in the divorce and separation proceedings.
In effect with regard to the post-divorce residency, care and access arrangements of either parents involved were then again acknowledged and reinstated at the core of Belgian family law and family court proceedings regarding physical custody, residency and care. By law Belgian family court judges were obligated to explicitly specify in their court-orders, their decisions and provisions with regard to the imposed post-divorce residence and care arrangements in writing if they were to deviate from the presumptive and preferred bi-location or shared parenting arrangement in their court-orders and reasoning behind the altering. These new Belgian laws have put "Shared Parenting" at the forefront of the family courts decision-making regarding the care, access and residency of the children. The legislation while the need and obligation imposed by law on the Belgian Family Courts and judges to extensively specify in writing in their imposed court-orders as to why a shared parenting or bi-location order was not imposed, opens the possibility for appeal of the courts decisions and motivations.
The underestimated new portion of the "Belgian Family Law" reform is the introduction of immediate or priority access to the courts and judges on the request of either one of the parties in conjuction or individually. This can be activated unilaterally and individually as they can proceed without the need of legal represention by a lawyer at the court-session requested, for an additional reinforcement orders of the court."When court-ordered parenting arrangements were not sufficiently complied with by the other parent and when there were complaints about the other parent with regard to abiding by the specific parenting arrangements laid down by the judge in the original case residency, care and access orders."
This laws framework has been around for 3 years and is in its infancy stages to evaluate its effects but first impressions that it will contribute to "The Best Interest of the Children" involved and now will adjust under the care of the non-confrontational but separated parents.
Italy - March 2006
The use of "Joint Legal Custody" and portions of "Joint Physical Custody" are now introduced. .On March 16,2006 this change became effective.
Australia - 2006
The introduction of " Shared Parenting Legislation" and Family Dispute Resolution to help people affected by separation and divorce sort out their dispute as an alternative to going to court. A family dispute resolution practitioner is an independent person who can help people discuss issues, look at options and work out how best to reach agreement in disputes about children and parenting arrangements after family breakdown. There still today through seeing social media's,Facebook,Twitters etc. that there are still along way to go even in Austrilia.
USA and Canada - 2009
In the United States there have been a few states there have been "Shared Parenting" bills but the norm in the USA is still archaic custody arrangements pitting parent against parent and children being the losers.
Introduced this year in Canada; Bill C-422 by Maurice Valacott; MP, a "Shared Parenting Bill", after many pressure groups approached this Member of Parliment. This was to start the process to move towards a more functionable and 21st Century approach to parenting. In Saint John, New Brunswick on July 31,2009 a meeting will be held by " The New Brunswick Children's Equal Parenting Association" in conjuction with " The Canadian Equal Parenting Coalition" to introduce this bill to people and why it is the nessesary move for well adjusted children and Families in Canadian Society. The "Social Movement" towards equal parenting being spearheaded by these groups and others such as " FACT - Fathers are Capable Too" from the 1990's and newcommers such " Not All Dad's are Dead Beats" are challenging the social fabric of Canada. The basis of many studies done from the orginal founders of the "Equal Parenting "movement to today's leaders all see the same outcome "Equal Shared Legal Custody".
All of the studies done from writers such as " Warren Farrell" and professor of social work and family studies at the University of British Columbia " Edward Kruk" state the evolution of two natural born parents create a more adjusted and functionable society. In the meantime here in Canada we are still in the "Infancy Stages" but progressing rapidly into an more forward thinking and having notice taken by the political forefront of Canada. I believe that it is more a common sense principal to be adopted into our Judicary and Legislations. In the long term of these changes will create a stable growth in Population and more of a well adjusted society.
Edward Hoyt
Founder
New Brunswick Children's Equal Parenting Association
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Marginalized fathers capitalize on unofficial Fatherless Day
June 17, 9:09 PM
California protesters for equal parental rights
A special group of California dads will be gathering at the state capital in Sacramento Friday to honor and bring attention to their missing and exploited children. Left behind and marginalized fathers and their supporters will be gathering at state capitals across the country on June 19th, unofficial Fatherless Day, to communicate the necessity of equal parenting rights.Acknowledging that some mothers lose contact with their children by way of the same corruption, equal parenting advocates say this week is for the dads. National representative Donald Tenn said he can't keep up with the calls and emails coming into Fathers 4 Justice, especially now. "This week is one of the hardest for most of the dads I know," said Tenn, whose daughter Madison was abducted to Illinois by her mother Shannon Phillips three years ago.
Madison's daddy Donald Tenn
These men say they've been robbed of their right and duty to be fathers by a corrupt legal system. Claiming the current family court system not only ignores, but rewards deceit, they point to this video of Nancy Schaefer speaking of how corruption in family courts devastates parents and children, including families of divorce. Tenn told the story of a local father who missed his children so much he became overcome with grief. On a website describing his plight, the father had included plans to commit suicide. After being contacted by fathers advocates the man changed his mind and took down the website. "He now has hope," Tenn explained, "it's all I can give him, but at least I can give him that."
Fatherless rally in Sacramento '08
Northern California father Nate posted to the California Fathers 4 Justice forum, "For the past five years I have felt I was alone. No one could understand what I was up against, not even my parents or siblings." "There is unity when you align yourself with like-minded individuals," responded Fathers 4 Justice member Robert Saunders, "I see empowerment as one of the most important things a wronged parent can do to gain and maintain the strength to fight the oppressive, immoral and corrupt anti-family court system. Those interested in family law reform are encouraged to meet Friday at the north steps of the capital at 9:00 am. Participants will lobby with legislators, then return to the north steps at noon to rally until 3:00 pm. Last year's speeches, like Tenn's story of his daughter's abduction drew tears, indignation and applause. (Tenn's speech here)Nate spoke for many marginalized parents who I've spoken with when he wrote, "They can take our freedom, our money, our rights, but they can not take our love for our children."
June 17, 9:09 PM
California protesters for equal parental rights
A special group of California dads will be gathering at the state capital in Sacramento Friday to honor and bring attention to their missing and exploited children. Left behind and marginalized fathers and their supporters will be gathering at state capitals across the country on June 19th, unofficial Fatherless Day, to communicate the necessity of equal parenting rights.Acknowledging that some mothers lose contact with their children by way of the same corruption, equal parenting advocates say this week is for the dads. National representative Donald Tenn said he can't keep up with the calls and emails coming into Fathers 4 Justice, especially now. "This week is one of the hardest for most of the dads I know," said Tenn, whose daughter Madison was abducted to Illinois by her mother Shannon Phillips three years ago.
Madison's daddy Donald Tenn
These men say they've been robbed of their right and duty to be fathers by a corrupt legal system. Claiming the current family court system not only ignores, but rewards deceit, they point to this video of Nancy Schaefer speaking of how corruption in family courts devastates parents and children, including families of divorce. Tenn told the story of a local father who missed his children so much he became overcome with grief. On a website describing his plight, the father had included plans to commit suicide. After being contacted by fathers advocates the man changed his mind and took down the website. "He now has hope," Tenn explained, "it's all I can give him, but at least I can give him that."
Fatherless rally in Sacramento '08
Northern California father Nate posted to the California Fathers 4 Justice forum, "For the past five years I have felt I was alone. No one could understand what I was up against, not even my parents or siblings." "There is unity when you align yourself with like-minded individuals," responded Fathers 4 Justice member Robert Saunders, "I see empowerment as one of the most important things a wronged parent can do to gain and maintain the strength to fight the oppressive, immoral and corrupt anti-family court system. Those interested in family law reform are encouraged to meet Friday at the north steps of the capital at 9:00 am. Participants will lobby with legislators, then return to the north steps at noon to rally until 3:00 pm. Last year's speeches, like Tenn's story of his daughter's abduction drew tears, indignation and applause. (Tenn's speech here)Nate spoke for many marginalized parents who I've spoken with when he wrote, "They can take our freedom, our money, our rights, but they can not take our love for our children."
Friday, June 12, 2009
Bad mom really needed jail time
Bad mom really needed jail time
By MINDELLE JACOBS
Last Updated: 12th June 2009, 2:12am
Email Story Print Size A A A Report Typo Share with:
Facebook Digg Del.icio.us Google Stumble Upon Newsvine Reddit Technorati Feed Me Yahoo Simpy Squidoo Spurl Blogmarks Netvouz Scuttle Sitejot + What are these? Most fathers who've been denied access to their kids by demented ex-wives give up the fight rather than bankrupting themselves in lengthy court battles.
A Toronto surgeon had the money -- and the persistence -- to keep going. He won sole custody of his three daughters because his ex-wife spent more than a decade brainwashing the children to hate him.
She was subsequently fined $35,000 for contempt for ignoring repeated orders to get counselling. And on Tuesday, an Ontario judge imposed an even harsher punishment, ordering her to pay more than $250,000 of her ex-husband's court costs.
The father's expenses were "a litigant's worst nightmare," declared Ontario Superior Court Justice Faye McWatt. "She has acted deceitfully and in bad faith throughout the litigation."
If the mother in this case had been jailed the first time she ignored court-ordered access, everyone would have been better off.
The mother would have learned the courts don't take kindly to breaches of court orders, the father would have been able to bond with his children much earlier and court resources could have been used for more worthwhile purposes.
It's a pleasant surprise that the mother was actually punished; better late than never. Still, the father likely faces a huge challenge winning over his kids. Reversing the damage done by a parent who spends years alienating the children from the other spouse is a long-term process.
These girls, now aged 14, 11 and 10, may forever be damaged by their mother's sick, selfish actions -- behaviour McWatt bluntly described as "emotional abuse."
The couple split up in 1999 but K.D., as the mother is known, denied A.L., her ex, virtually any access. At the same time, she was over-protective of the kids to the point of infantilizing them. The oldest child wasn't even toilet-trained at the age of five. The middle girl was still using a bottle at night when she was three.
One psychologist warned as early as 2000 that the children were at "significant risk" of being alienated from the father.
A.L. gave up fighting for access for about six years because his ex warned that if he pressured her, he wouldn't get anything. But it didn't matter what he did. He still didn't get to see his daughters.
He only saw them for two weekends between 2000 and 2006. Then K.D. wouldn't even allow him to speak to them.
For a while, there was still a bond between father and daughters. Early on, one daughter would hug him and warn: "Don't tell mommy I did this."
By 2006, though, the bond seemed broken. The oldest showed no affection, the middle daughter stopped looking at him and the youngest only spoke to him in a monotone.
It's been 11 years since the release of the parliamentary report on child custody and access, with its dozens of recommendations, including the proposal that the terms "custody and access" be replaced with "shared parenting" in the Divorce Act.
A NUTBAR
But that assumes both parents are reasonable. In this case, the mother is clearly a nutbar who used her kids as weapons against her ex. Jail might have taught her a lesson a lot sooner.
A.L. is "exhausted but very, very happy. He has his children," says his lawyer, Harold Niman.
"This kind of case will hopefully send a message to those people who think it's OK to undermine a relationship between the children and the other parent."
MINDY.JACOBS@SUNMEDIA.CA
By MINDELLE JACOBS
Last Updated: 12th June 2009, 2:12am
Email Story Print Size A A A Report Typo Share with:
Facebook Digg Del.icio.us Google Stumble Upon Newsvine Reddit Technorati Feed Me Yahoo Simpy Squidoo Spurl Blogmarks Netvouz Scuttle Sitejot + What are these? Most fathers who've been denied access to their kids by demented ex-wives give up the fight rather than bankrupting themselves in lengthy court battles.
A Toronto surgeon had the money -- and the persistence -- to keep going. He won sole custody of his three daughters because his ex-wife spent more than a decade brainwashing the children to hate him.
She was subsequently fined $35,000 for contempt for ignoring repeated orders to get counselling. And on Tuesday, an Ontario judge imposed an even harsher punishment, ordering her to pay more than $250,000 of her ex-husband's court costs.
The father's expenses were "a litigant's worst nightmare," declared Ontario Superior Court Justice Faye McWatt. "She has acted deceitfully and in bad faith throughout the litigation."
If the mother in this case had been jailed the first time she ignored court-ordered access, everyone would have been better off.
The mother would have learned the courts don't take kindly to breaches of court orders, the father would have been able to bond with his children much earlier and court resources could have been used for more worthwhile purposes.
It's a pleasant surprise that the mother was actually punished; better late than never. Still, the father likely faces a huge challenge winning over his kids. Reversing the damage done by a parent who spends years alienating the children from the other spouse is a long-term process.
These girls, now aged 14, 11 and 10, may forever be damaged by their mother's sick, selfish actions -- behaviour McWatt bluntly described as "emotional abuse."
The couple split up in 1999 but K.D., as the mother is known, denied A.L., her ex, virtually any access. At the same time, she was over-protective of the kids to the point of infantilizing them. The oldest child wasn't even toilet-trained at the age of five. The middle girl was still using a bottle at night when she was three.
One psychologist warned as early as 2000 that the children were at "significant risk" of being alienated from the father.
A.L. gave up fighting for access for about six years because his ex warned that if he pressured her, he wouldn't get anything. But it didn't matter what he did. He still didn't get to see his daughters.
He only saw them for two weekends between 2000 and 2006. Then K.D. wouldn't even allow him to speak to them.
For a while, there was still a bond between father and daughters. Early on, one daughter would hug him and warn: "Don't tell mommy I did this."
By 2006, though, the bond seemed broken. The oldest showed no affection, the middle daughter stopped looking at him and the youngest only spoke to him in a monotone.
It's been 11 years since the release of the parliamentary report on child custody and access, with its dozens of recommendations, including the proposal that the terms "custody and access" be replaced with "shared parenting" in the Divorce Act.
A NUTBAR
But that assumes both parents are reasonable. In this case, the mother is clearly a nutbar who used her kids as weapons against her ex. Jail might have taught her a lesson a lot sooner.
A.L. is "exhausted but very, very happy. He has his children," says his lawyer, Harold Niman.
"This kind of case will hopefully send a message to those people who think it's OK to undermine a relationship between the children and the other parent."
MINDY.JACOBS@SUNMEDIA.CA
Monday, June 8, 2009
The Truth About Deadbeat Dads BY GLADYS POLLACK
For decades, they have been pictured as living the high life -- driving their Porsches, vacationing in exotic places -- while their former wives and their children haunt food banks and live off welfare. Branded as "deadbeat dads," they are viewed as heartless men who have simply walked away from their family responsibilities. The fact is, sure, there are some dads who fall into this category -- men who have fathered children but don't want to honour their obligations to them -- but a closer examination reveals another story.
In general, statistics indicate that between 85 to 91 percent of Canadian children covered either by private or court-ordered child-support agreements actually receive payments, the vast majority receiving regular support payments. And statistics also reveal the close association between the regularity of payment and the frequency of contact between fathers and their children.
Studies also show that many noncustodial fathers who do not pay child support simply can't afford to. Some are unemployed or on sick leave. In fact, one of the best predictors of nonpayment is the unemployment rate. Higher incomes are associated with higher compliance rates, and lower incomes with lower rates. One study suggests that a father's ability to pay, in addition to his willingness to pay, determines the extent to which he fulfills his child-support obligations.
Burdened by unrealistic court- imposed support payments, continuing legal fees, increased taxes due to changes imposed by Bill C-41 and estrangement from their children, some men find themselves caught in a downward spiral of depression and have resorted to the ultimate escape: suicide. With a divorce, funds that were unable to support one household are now expected to support two. Add to this the cost of expensive litigation, the fact that one party may be trying to use money as a means of obtaining concessions such as access or custody, and we have a recipe for disaster -- with children often caught in the maelstrom
What happens after the break-up of the family? Eighty-seven percent of children end up living solely with their mothers after a parental separation (only 7 percent live with their fathers). Only 30 percent of children report visiting their fathers every week. One quarter of children visit their fathers irregularly -- once a month or on holidays. A whopping 15 percent never see their fathers.
And what has Bill C-41 done for fathers? Under the changes to the tax treatment of child support, which came into effect on May 1, 1997, it is no longer taxable in the hands of the receiving parent and no longer deductible in the hands of the paying parent. It is worthy of note that when the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada rose in Parliament to speak in favour of Bill C-41, he stated that the revenue derived from ending the deduction of child-support payments would yield the federal government more than an additional $1 billion dollars over a five-year period.
Finding solutions that are in the best interests of the children was the aim of the 1998 Senate-Commons Joint Committee on Child Custody and Access. Understanding that children of divorce are entitled to a close and continuing relationship with both parents, the committee recommended that the terms "custody" and "access" be stricken from the Divorce Act and a new term, "shared parenting," be incorporated. Both parents would have access to information and records regarding the child's development and social activities, such as school and medical records and other relevant information. The federal government has apparently shelved the committee's recommendations, however, in the interests of further study.
Yes, there are some deadbeats who don't care about their kids. But it's unfair and unproductive to label every father who falls behind in his support payments a "deadbeat."
In general, statistics indicate that between 85 to 91 percent of Canadian children covered either by private or court-ordered child-support agreements actually receive payments, the vast majority receiving regular support payments. And statistics also reveal the close association between the regularity of payment and the frequency of contact between fathers and their children.
Studies also show that many noncustodial fathers who do not pay child support simply can't afford to. Some are unemployed or on sick leave. In fact, one of the best predictors of nonpayment is the unemployment rate. Higher incomes are associated with higher compliance rates, and lower incomes with lower rates. One study suggests that a father's ability to pay, in addition to his willingness to pay, determines the extent to which he fulfills his child-support obligations.
Burdened by unrealistic court- imposed support payments, continuing legal fees, increased taxes due to changes imposed by Bill C-41 and estrangement from their children, some men find themselves caught in a downward spiral of depression and have resorted to the ultimate escape: suicide. With a divorce, funds that were unable to support one household are now expected to support two. Add to this the cost of expensive litigation, the fact that one party may be trying to use money as a means of obtaining concessions such as access or custody, and we have a recipe for disaster -- with children often caught in the maelstrom
What happens after the break-up of the family? Eighty-seven percent of children end up living solely with their mothers after a parental separation (only 7 percent live with their fathers). Only 30 percent of children report visiting their fathers every week. One quarter of children visit their fathers irregularly -- once a month or on holidays. A whopping 15 percent never see their fathers.
And what has Bill C-41 done for fathers? Under the changes to the tax treatment of child support, which came into effect on May 1, 1997, it is no longer taxable in the hands of the receiving parent and no longer deductible in the hands of the paying parent. It is worthy of note that when the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada rose in Parliament to speak in favour of Bill C-41, he stated that the revenue derived from ending the deduction of child-support payments would yield the federal government more than an additional $1 billion dollars over a five-year period.
Finding solutions that are in the best interests of the children was the aim of the 1998 Senate-Commons Joint Committee on Child Custody and Access. Understanding that children of divorce are entitled to a close and continuing relationship with both parents, the committee recommended that the terms "custody" and "access" be stricken from the Divorce Act and a new term, "shared parenting," be incorporated. Both parents would have access to information and records regarding the child's development and social activities, such as school and medical records and other relevant information. The federal government has apparently shelved the committee's recommendations, however, in the interests of further study.
Yes, there are some deadbeats who don't care about their kids. But it's unfair and unproductive to label every father who falls behind in his support payments a "deadbeat."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
