Anyone read this?

[Edward]

Kids' interests No.1 priority in divorce, justice minister says

What are your thoughts?

[got2bkid]

Yes, I read this. He said "what's best for the child" trumps father's rights to bring up their children equally with the mother, and then goes on to acknowledge that RESEARCH shows kids do best when BOTH parents are involved substantially in raising the kids after divorce.

He knows the truth (kids need moms and dads and shared parenting should be the norm when no abuse by either parent exixts) but doesn't want to upset the legal community (who profits off the "winner tak all" way it is now), feminists with strong lobby groups and lots of non-profit money at stake (and who strongly oppose shared parenting because of it), and some single parents who don't want to "share" the kids after divorce.

If the shared parenting bill is NOT en-acted, it will show that is "what's best for the kids" is really NOT what is important after all.

[MaggieT]

Did that article also state that Meg Shaw (Kelowna BC) said that a shift in focus to shared equal parenting would mean that children would not be adequately "protected"?
Good Gawsh! What an antiquated thought process...(or severe case of job protection!)
To share parenting responsibilities, duties, burdens, milestones and joys should not have anything to do with protecting children.
This article also states that an increase in judges would alleviate the system from its problems.

I think a clearer understanding of separation and divorce for the couples that want to take that route for whatever reason would alleviate alot of the issues for the family law system.

We need to have a license to drive a car....they make you take classes....you need to have a license to get married...some couples take classes....there are childbirth classes, cooking classes, health classes, parenting classes.....who is holding the divorce and separation classes!!!!

If we educate the people who are making these decisions in their lives, we may alleviate the system that is created by lawyers, judges, the system, etc.

Can we not explain to people what it takes to divorce and separate. That, especially when children are involved, we will never be free of the other parent. That money issues will usually become centre ground for arguements and that emotions, reactions, actions and decisions will have effects....That essentially the once "known: family will now become the "new" type of family...

Education in the forms of....how to separate without emotion, how to turn your once "personal" relationship into a "business" relationship. How to parent after separation and divorce. How to handle finances after divorce. How to maintain a relationship with your children after divorce.

In some provinces these types of courses are mandatory BEFORE filing any type of court papers.
Why not in Ontario?
Lets teach people about....malicious mother/father syndrome, parental alienation, fairness, respect.
Lets show our children how to be good people by setting examples for them. They may never have had the joy of watching their parents be in a happy successful relationship, but lets give them the tools so that they won't repeat our mistakes.
Isn't that what we all want for our children???

[got2bkid]

MaggieT - that is a really good idea!

[In_This_Together]

I love it!

[Edward]

Originally Posted by got2bkid

Yes, I read this. He said "what's best for the child" trumps father's rights to bring up their children equally with the mother, and then goes on to acknowledge that RESEARCH shows kids do best when BOTH parents are involved substantially in raising the kids after divorce.

He knows the truth (kids need moms and dads and shared parenting should be the norm when no abuse by either parent exixts) but doesn't want to upset the legal community (who profits off the "winner tak all" way it is now), feminists with strong lobby groups and lots of non-profit money at stake (and who strongly oppose shared parenting because of it), and some single parents who don't want to "share" the kids after divorce.

If the shared parenting bill is NOT en-acted, it will show that is "what's best for the kids" is really NOT what is important after all.

True.

Also I got this from fathersandfamilies.com

Nicholson’s Press Secretary Pamela Stephens about Nicholson’s views on shared parenting.
While Stephens’ reply commits to little about shared parenting, she does carefully distance Nicholson from the apparent anti-shared parenting position depicted in the article, claiming that “comments made by the Minister were taken out of context and editorialized in the report by Mr. O’Neill [of Canwest News Service.]”
Stephens’ full statement reads:
The comments made by the Minister were taken out of context and editorialized in the report by Mr. O’Neill on August 18th. Mr. Velacott’s private member’s bill on the issue of equal parenting, Bill C-422, is being reviewed, but the Government has not taken a position at this time.
Children require love, attention, a safe environment, and financial support. Most children want and need contact with both their parents, even after a divorce. For this reason, our Government supports a child-centred policy that encourages parents to exercise child-rearing responsibilities in a way that will promote their children’s best interests.
We believe that strong families are the foundation of our society and that the best interests of the child are paramount. Our Government is committed to promoting positive outcomes for the entire family during separation or divorce.

Thank you,

Pamela Stephens

Hope this is true