Tag Archives: ex-fathers

Has your ‘Male Privilege’ got you down?

Is the bias against men at work, in the family court, and even in the home becoming a painful burden for you. It’s not surprising. Well, maybe this will help — a little shot of self-esteem from someone who doesn’t have to do it. Prof. Janice Fiamengo, the University of Ottawa, Canada, has an ongoing series of videos that debunk feminist propaganda. In this video she discusses the indispensable nature of men. Just what you need; nice.

The Fiamengo File Episode 15

Supreme Court of Canada report misses the whole point

According to the story as released by the Globe & Mail (Toronto), the Supreme Court of Canada has commissioned a report on family law “out of concern that justice is fast becoming inaccessible to a vast proportion of the country”. Unfortunately, the report totally ignores the fundamental human rights of parents and children. Although the report says, “estranged spouses and their children are seriously damaged by the adversarial system”, its only solution is to further abuse parents by putting them through quasi-judicial proceedings with no guarantee that they will continue to be meaningful parents to their children. Speeding up injustice is not justice.

Apparently the report suggests that judges lawyer and law schools must embrace a culture of mediation and settlement. Mediation and settlement will do nothing to stop the current bias against fathers in Family Court. Mediation in fact will be the tool that will be used to further subjugate fathers to their children’s mother just as is happening now.

Interestingly the report notes that “cuts the family legal aid have a disproportionate effect on women and children, …”. This is a red herring. First of all, women receive the bulk of legal aid. Legal aid is seldom available to fathers. Consequently, when legal aid is cut women continue to receive a far larger cut than men do. More importantly, the more obvious “disproportionate effects” are the disproportionate loss of parenting by fathers, and the astronomically disproportionate amount of child support paid by fathers. All of which happens to fathers who are more than willing and able to look after the children themselves. And indeed, poor fathers even end up paying mothers who are more than capable of supporting of the child, even to the extent of sending the child to day care when the father is available to look after the child.

The simple facts of the matter are, that Mr. Justice Thomas Cromwell, the head of the Committee on Access to Justice in Civil and Family Matters, has failed to recognize the fundamental human rights of parents to raise their children. There is no reason why good parents should have to fight to have an equal parenting role after their separation. If the Supreme Court were simply to put its much touted role of supporting substantive equality there would be no need for the fuss about the problems with mediation and payments and most importantly lawyers, family courts, and, of course, judges.

Apparently the report admits that estranged spouses and their children are seriously damaged by the adversarial system. Yet there is nothing in the Globe and Mail article to suggest that the court is accepting any responsibility for the decades of damage for which it is responsible. When we stop to consider the extent of the damage done to the individual parents, to their children, and to society by this maniacal family-law regime that has been ripping families apart without the slightest indication that it has any understanding of justice or human rights, with no feelings for the victims, with nothing but the financial gain of the divorce industry in its sights, and that there is to be no justice for any of those victims that have gone before, we must be outraged, we must take action, we must demand restitution.

It’s not that justice is fast becoming inaccessible, it’s that justice is impossible for the vast majority of fathers in Canadian family law, just as it is in most of the Western world. Until the family-law courts accept that the only principle upon which a parent can be denied their parenting rights and the child can be denied its equal parenting rights is the abuse or neglect of the child, and the courts cease to preach the unachievable, undefinable, unjust and irrational mantra of the “best interest of the child”, there can be no justice in a family-law court. And this applies equally to fathers and mothers and all other child caregivers.

Gentlemen, in spite of the seemingly favorable rhetoric, this is not a step in the right direction, this is another divorce-industry challenge to fathers. Prepare yourselves.

Supreme Court Chief Justice calls for family law overhaul

“Child’s best interests? It’s a sick joke” — Matt O’Connor

Matt O’Connor, founder of the British pressure group Fathers 4 Justice has summed up the situation of family courts in language we all can understand:
“follow the money”
“A wicked deceit”
“Like banksters and gangsters”
“family law is so rotten to the core”
“our family courts which are blighting the lives of an entire generation”
”they are rapaciously gobbling up taxpayers money”
“an orgy of greed at the expense of desperate dads and broken children”
“Nobody on these committees is above being pulled into a sordid pit of moral squalor, greed and amorality”
“selling dads down the river again and again and again”
“lay the blame at the feet of collaborators”
“they profit directly from a production line of misery”
“They know the price of everything. And the value of nothing”

This is exactly the kind of language we need to be serving the “collaborators” at their every turn, through any means available.

It’s only when we get the message across about the real issues of family law, the “wicked deceit”, the “moral squalor, greed”, that we will see the tide turn on those collaborators. But no amount of tinkering with the law will ever put an end to the racketeering of the collaborators. As Matt says they have been “selling dads down the river again and again and again”. And, to use Matt’s figure, that’s 30 years of victims of these perpetrators. These victims cannot be forgotten. They must see justice done, which means restitution. Only when we see restitution for separated fathers and children (and any other victims of the collaborators) will the agony be put to an end. It’s a simple case of ‘follow the money’. Once the money goes to the victims there will be no more incentive for the collaborators. When fathers get their dignity, families and finances back the collaborators will live in shame.

For Ex-fathers the motto must be simply ‘show me the money’.

Orgy of greed

“We’ll continue this fight for justice”

It’s good to see that removing children from their families is still punishable 30 years after the events (at least in Argentina). Fortunately, there is no time limit in international law for charges of human rights abuses. That means ex-fathers and their children everywhere still have hope of restitution and justice. The hateful, systemic separation of fathers and children is the worst human rights abuse of our time. As Juan García says in the referenced article “We’ll continue this fight for justice”

Former Argentine dictators found guilty of baby thefts

What do I think of Family-Court justice?

What do I think of Family-Court justice? I think it would be a very good idea.*

To have justice in family court we have to get rid of the meddling morons who suddenly think they have to decide if a father should parent his child just because he is no longer living with the child’s mother. We will get justice in family court when we stop the impossible task of trying to figure out who is the only parent that could possibly be in the child’s best interest and instead we start letting fathers parent their children. Let us recognize that there are not too many fathers parenting their children. Simply stated, we will have justice in family court when we get misandric family courts out of the lives of families and put equal parenting in the lives of our children.

*With apologies to Gandhi: “What do I think of Western civilization? I think it would be a very good idea.” Mahatma Gandhi

Equal Parenting solves “parent conflict”

It’s a shame that we have to go to so much trouble just to state the obvious. This is what happens when an outlandish ideology takes hold of the ruling class. In this case it’s feminism that after decades of screaming and badgering has managed to infest the legal, political, and media spheres. Consequently stupidity has ruled in family law for many decades, particularly from the early part of the 20th century. Of course there was that glorious period in the ‘sixties’ when the hope of equality was showing its face as the laws were, at least superficially, turned into gender neutral territory. That equality quickly vanished when the feminists saw women’s historical special status starting to disappear They claimed victim status contrary to any kind of logic, reason, or fact. The current state of misandry throughout our family law system is the result of the bullies and their toadies who currently decide the fate of families, with the resulting indentured servitude of fathers and the collateral damage in many families, and to our society.

Dr. Kruk, in the referenced document, gives the scientific data on the outcomes for separated families when there is “family conflict”. Equal parenting is shown to be far better than the feminist solution that has been the norm for so many unfortunate separated fathers and children for decades. Those improvements in family outcome with equal parenting are not only undeniable from the data but were always to be expected because they are so reasonable to anyone other than a rabid feminist or family-law lawyer. Of course, requiring scientific support for equal parenting should not be necessary in any society that claims equality of rights regardless of gender, but then our present ruling class has never really believed in such a thing, has it? What is it about equality that is so hard to understand?

Co-Parenting and High Conflict

Time to talk about the money

Let’s understand that even a small fraction of the money that men spend fighting in court would do immensely more if it were spent advocating in pubic. The question is how do you get the most bang for the buck (time and money)? Clearly, fathers should stop wasting their efforts on lawyers (and the family courts) and on politicians. Those people have to be seen as the opposition. Father advocates need to spend their time with their comrades, the men and women (relatives and friends like Grandparents, sisters, second wives, etc) that have been hurt or could be hurt by the intolerable situation of fathers and children in family court today. Unfortunately most of those people do not understand the problem they are caught up in. Consequently they play into the hands of the opposition.

The only way men will get their kids back is when they get their money back. As long as there is money to be made from fathers the problem will continue. We need to fight so-called ‘child support’ — the ex-father shakedown — so we can give our children the kind of child support they really need — their fathers. Ex-fathers need to stop being ashamed to talk about the money and start to point out that it was the mothers who wanted the kids but would not accept the responsibility that goes with them — the financial responsibility that goes with raising a family.

Prevent support payments from unwanted pregnancy

Unlike women who have an unquestioned right to have or not have a child after becoming pregnant, men have no choice. However, men can choose to take steps to prevent pregnancy. The use of a condom is the first line of defense. However, accidents happen including damaged condoms. Consequently a more secure approach is desirable.

The most secure method is a vasectomy. This requires a surgical intervention. Unfortunately, there are complications. For example, Wikipedia reports (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasectomy#Vasectomy_reversal) that Post-vasectomy pain syndrome (PVPS) is a chronic and sometimes debilitating condition that may develop immediately or several years after vasectomy. ne survey cites studies that estimate incidence at one case every ten to thirty vasectomies. The pain can be constant, or it can be pain that occurs only at particular times such as with intercourse, ejaculation, or physical exertion. It is possible to have a vasectomy reversed in some cases, should a return to potency be desired at some point in time. Again this is not an assured procedure. Wikipedia reports that Vasectomy reversal is effective at achieving pregnancy in only 50%-70% of cases, and it is costly, with total out-of-pocket costs in the United States often upwards of $10,000. Some men opt for cryostorage of sperm before sterilization but again costs of artificial insemination can be prohibitive.

Another possibility that has revealed itself is the use of anabolic steroids. According to .Stanton C. Honig M.D. (shonig@srhs.org) in a recent newsletter from Men’s Health Network (www.menshealthnetwork.org),
“When a man is taking anabolic steroids, it is virtually impossible for him to get his partner pregnant.” So this could be interpreted as saying there is a male contraceptive. Of course anabolic steroids are regulated drugs and it might be difficult to obtain a legal prescription for the this application. Furthermore, Dr. Honig points out that anabolic steroids can cause health problems that sometimes can be irreversible: “These include aggressive behavior, acne, baldness, prominent breasts, liver disease, high blood pressure, heart attack and stroke. In adolescents, it may result in stunted growth and accelerated puberty changes. [Performance Enhancing Drugs] can also cause sexual dysfunction. When the anabolic steroids are stopped, the “sexual rush” is gone and this will cause testosterone levels to crash to virtually zero. This may cause symptoms such as tiredness, loss of energy and loss of sex drive. Testosterone production may return in a few months, however, in certain situations, it may be a permanent problem. Luckily, there is medical treatment for this problem to raise testosterone levels back to the normal range.

Hence, it is possible to mitigate the possibility of an undesired child birth by pro-active steps, but the reliability and full consequences must be weighed carefully.

Having said all the above, remember if your partner does get pregnant by another man you can still be held responsible if you are married to her or if you have assumed any parental role toward the child (which can be interpreted as living in the same residence). Even if the mother fraudulently fails to let you know the child is not yours, she faces no punishment and you receive no alleviation of your support penalty.

Ex-fathers recommends that you should not rely to any extent on the generalized information given here, but seek competent legal and/or medical advice as applicable if you are in any such situations.

Riots Panel strikes up the band as ship sinks

The panel looking into the severe riots that ravaged British cities has failed to recognize the contribution to the riots of the the British family courts and the divorce industry. Once again the establishment has turned its blind eye on the real problem while advocating for ever greater interference with families and wasting ever greater amounts of money on unnecessary or useless approaches including “involvement of ‘communities’, ‘community volunteers’ and ‘mentors’.” The linked article by Robert Franklin, Esq tells how the panel actually reported on the extensive data they received on the problem of separated fathers and children yet failed grasp the root cause and to recommend meaningful corrective action. Yet another opportunity lost for British, its children and its fathers.

http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/2012/04/04/uk-panel-on-riots-gets-it-wrong-on-fathers-and-children/

Who wants to be a wallet?

Men want families. Most men are happy to work hard for their families. Many work under deplorable conditions risking their lives on daily basis in construction, mining, farming, and the other death industries. If they are part of a family they contribute as best they can. If they have their family taken from them then they at least expect to be left alone to re-build they own lives. They don’t work to support the abductor of their children. They don’t accept indentured servitude. They don’t work to pay a baby-sitter they don’t want. Men don’t have children so they can be wallets.