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.
A bill has been entered in the Michigan House of Representatives to make Equal Parenting the default parenting arrangement. Judges can overrule the default only on the basis of “clear and convincing” evidence that Equal Parenting wouldn’t be in the best interest of a child.
This is a powerful bill. The requirement of clear and convincing evidence is necessary to stop the painful, and wasteful arguing over who is better or worse deserving of being a parent. If you are a parent before separation, you are a parent after. There is no valid reason for depriving children and parents of their full relationship because of separation of the parents.
The bill was introduced by Representative Runestad, who happens to be the chair of the House Judiciary Committee. This means the bill’s sponsor in a very powerful position to see it gets the full service it deserves. We can expect harsh words and tactics to be applied against this bill and Representative Runestad. On the other hand, Ex-fathers wants to encourage those who work to overcome the terror of the family court. You can help, a simple message to Rep. Runestad will let him know there is support behind him in this:
It doesn’t matter where you live, whatever state or country, we can show Michigan we are all united for Equal Parenting.
Plaid for Dad is a Canadian awareness and fund raising campaign for prostate cancer. The campaign focuses on Father’s Day June 16.
The Launch Party for Plaid for Dad for 2017:
Join the celebration at Nathan Phillips Square, Toronto, this Wednesday, May 17 between 12 PM and 2 PM!
It’s going to be a great party including:
– Big Smoke BBQ lunch with celebrity Chef Corbin
– Free concert with Kardinal Offishall
– Fun Photo booth for you and your friends
– Snap filters and more!
Help support the 1 in 8 men who will develop prostate cancer in their lifetime. www.PlaidforDad.ca
The idea that the child has a right to financial support is not supported in any way. The only right children have under our community law is the freedom from abuse and from neglect (neglect is a recent liberal addition). There never was any obligation, let alone formula, of financial support to children or for any standard of living. The maternal welfare formulae are a fabrication of the Divorce Industry backed by the ‘apparatchiks’, the bureaucrats who run our governments. The only responsibility has been that that person who is in care of a child in whatever capacity (teacher, baby-sitter, Scout leader, parent etc.) does not abuse or neglect the child. These responsibilities include providing essential medical care, seeing the child receives some education, and keeping the child from harms way.
Assigning a ‘child’ (in fact the child’s mother) rights over his ex-father’s pay cheque is a gross violation of human rights. Children (or mother’s) in intact families have no such right and there is no standard of care which works that way. On the contrary, when the courts take a child from a parent and give the child to another person (in the absence of abuse or neglect) the fair and reasonable requirement on the court is to compensate the parent who loses the child (as well as compensating the child for loss of parent). That’s the only right involved – the right to a parent-child relationship, and that’s the fair and just and predictable response to the flesh trade in our children that is going on day-in-day-out in our family courts.
Sometimes things are worth repeating. In fact, worth repeating louder, more slowly, and often. Here’s a reprise of an earlier post.
– – –
It’s 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.
Canada’s family law system is family hostile, child abusive, and extremely misandric. Perhaps for Christmas Canada’s Rulers will get nothing more than lumps of coal from Santa in their stockings. Thanks to Paulette MacDonald for giving us this.
My name is Paulette MacDonald and I am a Family Justice Advocate\Activist in Canada and that came to be once I witnessed first hand the devastation that occurs in the hands of our “secret” Family Court House’s. – and all I want for Christmas is equal, shared parenting at the onset of divorce or separation. Tall order, I know but I’m confident together we can do it. …
Read all of Paulette’s letter to Santa:
London Free Press online — Dear Santa
Retiring judge Justice Collier of Australia says, “The worst are those mothers who direct false allegations of abuse against former partners. … They’re difficult to disprove. The allegation lingers there.” He says he had trouble sleeping when making decisions after sexual abuse accusations were made.
According to the story, the judge is unhappy about retiring in such times after having had a rewarding career on the bench. Apparently the judge kept a magic wand. ”I wished I could wave that magic wand and say, ‘Be nice to each other’,” Justice Collier said. It is his belief that if parents would just be nice to each other there would be no need for difficult family-court decisions.
Although we don’t agree that false accusations are anywhere near new, it’s good to see at least one judge talking about them, even if it’s only when leaving the bench. He says he even lost sleep over them. Based on the current situation of the separation of fathers and children by Family court, you have to wonder if there is any sentient being on the bench in Family Court. Of course, (I guess to be able to get some sleep) the judge blames the parents rather than the Divorce Industry in which he has played a major role. Of course there is no mention of serious punishment for the evil doers, though.
If judges would only follow the simple rules:
– impose equal parenting as the standard (always of course In the Best Interests of the Child)
– punish recalcitrant parents — that magic wand can deal a severe caning
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.
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’.
Lucien Khodeir in the referenced article tells us that the Canadian Divorce Act requires that the Canadian child-support regulations be based on the principle that parents have a joint financial obligation to provide for their children in accordance with their relative abilities. Mr. Khodeir makes the point that Canadian Child-Support regulations do not respect this law defined in the Divorce Act. For example, the regulations do not consider the special financial burden of parents who do not have primary residence for the child but who must nevertheless keep a home suitable for the child’s visitation.
The real problem here is not the Guidelines, but the Divorce Act itself, and more importantly, the whole concept of child care after parental separation as practiced in the Courts. The normal community standard for intervention in the parental role is prevention of abuse and neglect. Parents who look after their children in their care such as by providing a home, food, clothing, education and the necessary emotional care have nothing to worry about in the way of government interference. This is the situation for intact families and all other family types and is independent of parental income or wealth; except separated parents. Family law as practiced throughout the Western World has put the focus on collections rather than parenting. Consequently, family law has violated the equality between separated parents and other parents; the equality of fathers and mothers; and the equality of children in separated families and those in intact families.
One can only wonder how in a country like Canada where the highest courts have adopted a standard of equality based on equality of outcomes instead of equality of opportunity, that family law would be allowed to produce such unequal outcomes as we see in custody determinations and financial collection orders. The obvious reason must be that the courts are not in fact interested in equality or even justice but in some malignant ideology, that has produced the misandry that is driving fatherhood to the brink of destruction, and has driven many individual fathers to destruction.