Private Member’s Bill C-422 - Equal parenting (Mr. Velacott)

[SillyMe]

Heh, heh...who would have thought there would be a back peddling Part II

I just love when people have no idea about the court system. Yeah right, lets go to court every year. Hell, it takes a year in court just to get started...

[billiechic]

I'm sorry all of the good dads were subject to that article. it was a piece of spewed garbage.

I'm not sure if I support the bill yet. I am more worried about what sorts of "proof" would be needed to change the situation from equal parenting to something different.

Most of you know I came from an abusive relationship. I choose not to call the police, so my "proof" can only come from my sworn affidavit and from what I told the women's shelter and counsellors. Is that enough to change the automatic shared parenting, shared custody? How exactly do you quantify what is enough?

I think if this goes through there will be A LOT more unnecessary court time with parents fighting to get something different. While it could be a very good thing for many families, there are others who should not have shared parenting (abuse and PA situations) that are going to be forced to prove something that really is common sense.

[HammerDad]

Originally Posted by SillyMe

Heh, heh...who would have thought there would be a back peddling Part II

I just love when people have no idea about the court system. Yeah right, lets go to court every year. Hell, it takes a year in court just to get started...

I do agree with her that there should be a sliding scale, but I am pretty sure that the new bill takes it into consideration.

Also, share parenting should actually help ELIMINATE her concerns about different house schedules as each parent will see how these changes affect the child and are more likely to work together towards a common schedule that best suits the child (in the small percentage of instances where the child is very young).

Anyway, I don't like the idea that I am not going to be treated as an equal just because I didn't give birth to the child I helped create.

[logicalvelocity]

For immediate release:

HOUSE OF COMMONS
CANADA

Maurice Vellacott, MP
Saskatoon-Wanuskewin
Vellacott commends Green Party
for passing Equal Parenting motion

For Immediate Release August 26, 2010

OTTAWA – Saskatoon-Wanuskewin MP Maurice Vellacott commends the Green Party for adding a commitment to equal shared parenting as a party policy. Last year, the Conservative MP introduce Bill C-422, which would amend the Divorce Act to require judges to order equal shared parenting for divorcing parents unless it is not in the best interests of the child to do so.

Over the weekend, the Green Party passed a policy motion declaring that “the Green Party of Canada will make the necessary changes to the Canada Divorce Act so that in the event of a marital breakdown, the Divorce Act will mandate a default of equal parenting – defined as equal time and responsibility unless there is consent from both parents, or there are specific criminal convictions related to the children that preclude equal parenting.

“My work for equal shared parenting has always been a non-partisan effort,” said Vellacott. “Equal parenting groups in Canada are also talking to Members of Parliament from all parties,” he added.

“A survey I conducted shows a large majority of Canadians supports equal parenting, regardless of what political party the respondents support,” Vellacott said.

“Congratulations to the Green Party for voting to add equal parenting to their party policies.”

– 30 –

For further comment, call (613) 992-1966 or 297-2249

[InterprovincialParents]

The problem with this bill is two-fold...number 1, it needs to pass second reading before an election...highly unlikely... and it creates less work for the law society members...who are also the members of Justice Canada, who would be responsible for revamping the legislation...no way will they allow us parents to take away their bread and butter!

It needs much more publicity and support!

[rwm1273]

Originally Posted by billiechic

I'm not sure if I support the bill yet. I am more worried about what sorts of "proof" would be needed to change the situation from equal parenting to something different.

Most of you know I came from an abusive relationship. I choose not to call the police, so my "proof" can only come from my sworn affidavit and from what I told the women's shelter and counsellors. Is that enough to change the automatic shared parenting, shared custody? How exactly do you quantify what is enough?

From what I have seen of the bill, and I have seen many variations of the wording, and have spoken to many of the players involved with it, If there are any concerns as to violence, then this does play a part in the access, and will be decieded by a judge, much as it is now.

The biggest thing this bill will do for most starting on the divorce path is to start it out on equal footing. Neither parent is to be given more advantage or weight in the outcome. But each case will still be considered on it's merits, and according to the best interest of the child.

For me, I was active in raising the kids before the separation, but was removed of my rights after. I fought long and hard to get my rights, and now have custody because of how the mother acted, and continues to act. I should never have had to fight for my rights.

Feminists claim that women and children will be harmed by this bill, they go on to say that more women look after kids than men any ways, and that this bill is only there to let men get out of child support obligations.

None of these arguments are true. If the role of the parents before the divorce was 90% mom looking after the kids, then it will most likely stay that way after the divorce. Bill 422 will make no difference.

If the access is still less than 60/40 split, then full guidelines will be used.

If there was any violence in the relationship, then this will affect how access is divided.

[rwm1273]

The Canadian Bar Association National Family Law Section (CBA Section) appreciates the opportunity to explain why it is critical for legislators to retain the “best interests of the child” test as the paramount consideration in making determinations of custody and access of children. We have frequently stressed this point in past submissions,1 and are prompted to reiterate it now in response to a Private Member’s Bill sponsored by Maurice Vellacott that would instead impose a presumption of equal parenting time.
The CBA represents more than 37,000 lawyers across Canada. The CBA’s mandate includes improvement in the law and the administration of justice. The CBA Section includes family lawyers from every part of the country. We are collaborative practitioners, litigators, mediators, arbitrators and parenting coordinators. Our clients are fathers, mothers, same sex partners, surrogates, step-parents, grandparents, extended family members and children. The CBA Section believes that any discussion of “parental rights” is misguided when resolving arrangements for children. The sole focus must be what is best for children. In light of this position, we vigorously oppose passage of Bill C-422.
At first glance, it could seem that the ideas proposed by the Bill are only about equal treatment of mothers and fathers. We certainly support equality between the sexes. However, the Bill would actually not advance equality. Rather, it would change the primary focus in custody and access matters from what is best for children to equal parental rights. Parenting is not about adults claiming rights. It is about the desire and ability to put children’s interests first. Where divorcing parents cannot do that, for whatever reason, courts must not only be free to, but required to do so.


Why are these people against C422? Bottom line is there will lose their gravy. No more big drawn out legal battles. Obviously they know it is the right thing to do, otherwise they would not be against it.

[rwm1273]

Here are two reports of groups that oppose C422.

http://www.cba.org/CBA/submissions/pdf/10-43-eng.pdf

http://www.nawl.ca/ns/en/documents/2...C-422brief.pdf

Both have vested interests to oppose any changes to the status quo. Both are money related, and nothing to do with children's rights.

[InterprovincialParents]

You guys sound surprised....I am not, although I'd do my happy dance if it passes into the senate!

[TheRespondant]

You know....we need events, rallies, etc. that can bring bills and legislation into focus and into the media eye. More awareness means a bigger louder voice.

I once was a musician who used to perform at such "fund raiser", or "awareness" -type gigs... I can tell you that at the grassroots level, they are not *that hard* to arrange and with things like facebook, youtube and twitter...promotion has never been easier.

Anyone else agree? You pick the location, I'll bring the sound system.