Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Equal Shared Parenting

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Equal Shared Parenting

    Sorry guys, I am posting it here as I don't have time to search for the previous thread on the topic.

    Here is what I just received from Maurice Vellacott via email.

    S031 - Equal Shared Parenting - Jan. 31, 2014

    Mr. Speaker, I have had a difficult decision to make. I have 4 items on the Order Paper, and all of great importance. Two of the motions are explicitly pro-life measures, one is a democratic reform initiative, and the one bill I have on the order paper is for the sake of the children. They all deserve to proceed in this place, but regrettably I can only choose one at this time.

    I have selected Bill C/560 to move to 2nd reading debate in this Chamber. It is my bill to amend the Divorce Act to make equal shared parenting a rebuttable presumption on cases of marital breakup involving children.

    Aside from proven abuse or neglect, over three quarters of Canadians want equal shared parenting to be the presumption in our courts when marriages unfortunately break down. Research clearly demonstrates that equal shared parenting is in the best interest of children.

    Also based on conversations I have been a part of, I have good reason to believe that the other 3 items I have on the order paper will be picked up in due course by other good MPs who have spine and foresight. And for that I am truly grateful!
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    My P.S. - Why copy-paste is not working?
    Last edited by Mother; 01-31-2014, 02:19 PM.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Mother View Post
    Sorry guys, I am posting it here as I don't have time to search for the previous thread on the topic.

    Here is what I just received from Maurice Vellacott via email.

    S031 - Equal Shared Parenting - Jan. 31, 2014

    Mr. Speaker, I have had a difficult decision to make. I have 4 items on the Order Paper, and all of great importance. Two of the motions are explicitly pro-life measures, one is a democratic reform initiative, and the one bill I have on the order paper is for the sake of the children. They all deserve to proceed in this place, but regrettably I can only choose one at this time.

    I have selected Bill C/560 to move to 2nd reading debate in this Chamber. It is my bill to amend the Divorce Act to make equal shared parenting a rebuttable presumption on cases of marital breakup involving children.

    Aside from proven abuse or neglect, over three quarters of Canadians want equal shared parenting to be the presumption in our courts when marriages unfortunately break down. Research clearly demonstrates that equal shared parenting is in the best interest of children.

    Also based on conversations I have been a part of, I have good reason to believe that the other 3 items I have on the order paper will be picked up in due course by other good MPs who have spine and foresight. And for that I am truly grateful!
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    My P.S. - Why copy-paste is not working?
    Private Member's Bill - Bill C-560 - First Reading (41-2)

    I've been following this but it's the first time I've actually read the bill.

    Some interesting changes, for the better IMO

    1. (1) The definitions “custody” and “custody order” in subsection 2(1) of the Divorce Act are repealed.

    (2) The definitions “corollary relief proceeding” and “divorce proceeding” in subsection 2(1) of the Act are replaced by the following:


    “corollary relief proceeding” means a proceeding in a court in which either or both former spouses seek a child support order, a spousal support order or a parenting order;

    divorce proceeding” means a proceeding in a court in which either or both spouses seek a divorce alone or together with a child support order, a spousal support order or a parenting order;


    (3) Subsection 2(1) of the Act is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order:

    “parenting” means the act of assuming the role of a parent to a child, including custody and all of the rights and responsibilities commonly and historically associated with the role of a parent;
    Replacing custody order with parenting order is a great first step.

    Comment


    • #3
      I can't back any motions this member makes, given his pro-life stance. Thank Gawd he's not running for the next term.
      Start a discussion, not a fire. Post with kindness.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by mcdreamy View Post
        I can't back any motions this member makes, given his pro-life stance. Thank Gawd he's not running for the next term.
        So you are judging a book by it's writer instead of content?

        There is no "Pro-Life" in the bill, if you read it.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by mcdreamy View Post
          I can't back any motions this member makes, given his pro-life stance. Thank Gawd he's not running for the next term.
          If that were the only way to look at it, it would be hard to vote for anyone.

          Its entirely possible that he could be right on one issue, and wrong on another.

          I've only voted for one political party in my life. Yet I have good friends in all the parties (party activists included). And sometimes I agree with them, sometimes I don't. They still remain valued friends.

          I have a friend who is a pro life activist who moved from the conservative party to the liberal party because of some issues with economic policies. he has fewer people in the liberal party who agree with his pro life stance, but he is comfortable with his decision.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by mcdreamy View Post
            I can't back any motions this member makes, given his pro-life stance. Thank Gawd he's not running for the next term.
            So you are against everything he does, including something you would otherwise support, because of another unrelated position?

            Comment


            • #7
              Just a thought - if we intertwined every issue with other issues, we'd never be able to cast our vote!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by mcdreamy View Post
                I can't back any motions this member makes, given his pro-life stance. Thank Gawd he's not running for the next term.
                Wow! Your marriage must not have been all that bad.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Pastor Vellacott is part of a small faction of Conservative backbenchers that are motivated by an extreme social conservative agenda - like making homosexuality a crime, teaching creationism, and ending abortion.

                  He would direct legislation to constantly ensure that the roles of women and children within a family unit would remain subservient to those of men. Imo, none of the policy he produces is going to be based on the principal of equality.

                  I’ve had the opportunity to work in community groups with another backbencher MP, who shares the above views, and interestingly enough happens to also have a current motion requesting the re-evaluation of the recognition of human life [Vellacott dropped his abortion bid, to focus on parenting - he knew he had a backbencher coming in to refocus on the abortion debate again].

                  So, yes FB, I have judged that book.

                  Yet I have good friends in all the parties (party activists included). And sometimes I agree with them, sometimes I don't. They still remain valued friends.
                  DTD, with respect, the above individuals would never be a friend of mine, due to the reasons set out above.

                  Just a thought - if we intertwined every issue with other issues, we'd never be able to cast our vote!
                  As a mother of a young daughter, I will not ever vote for a candidate (nor support any of their motions) who is so extremely far from representing my views on the most important issues. And I do hope, as an adult, our daughter will share those same social accountability standards when she votes.

                  So you are against everything he does, including something you would otherwise support, because of another unrelated position?
                  Hammer, his social agenda doesn’t help, but frankly I’m not sure I’m convinced that presumptive equal parenting is in the best interest of the child.

                  Wow! Your marriage must not have been all that bad.
                  Did you have a question, or was that just a random drive-by comment?
                  Start a discussion, not a fire. Post with kindness.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    mcdreamy, you have your opinion and you have every right to have it. I respect it. No one is trying here to convince you to vote for Vellacott or become his friend.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by mcdreamy View Post
                      I can't back any motions this member makes, given his pro-life stance. Thank Gawd he's not running for the next term.
                      Thank God your vote has no magical power to back him or anybody else anyway!


                      Originally posted by mcdreamy View Post
                      Did you have a question, or was that just a random drive-by comment?
                      QUESTION: Which came first? the kettle or the pot?
                      Last edited by AnarX; 02-04-2014, 11:36 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I'm on board with mcdreamy here. I've encountered the man and dealt with his supporters, and he is a nutcase. Everything for them is about rolling back the progress in women's equality that has been made in the last few decades, dressed up as "preserving the traditional family". They're not interested in shared parenting for the same reason that members of this forum are - because they think it would be better for kids. They're interested in the issue because they think it would cut down the number of men who are paying child support, "unfairly" ordered by "rabid feminist" judges. For people are truly interested in shared parenting, if you have friends like Vellacott, you don't need enemies.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by stripes View Post
                          I'm on board with mcdreamy here. I've encountered the man and dealt with his supporters, and he is a nutcase. Everything for them is about rolling back the progress in women's equality that has been made in the last few decades, dressed up as "preserving the traditional family". They're not interested in shared parenting for the same reason that members of this forum are - because they think it would be better for kids. They're interested in the issue because they think it would cut down the number of men who are paying child support, "unfairly" ordered by "rabid feminist" judges. For people are truly interested in shared parenting, if you have friends like Vellacott, you don't need enemies.
                          ...and as a matter of fact there are a lot of men who are paying child and spousal support unfairly. The discrimination of men is here, in one of the most democratic countries in the world.

                          Why men do not have equal rights with women in family court? Why it is not 50/50 by default (minus proven abuse and neglect)? Why a woman can just take the child(ren) and take off? Why a man must prove in court he has right to be in child(ren)'s life a much as a mother has?

                          Tell me: what is going to happen to a man if he unilaterally takes a child(ren) and takes off? What happens if a man starts to dictate to a mother if she can see their child, when , for how long, what to do with the child etc... I can go on and on and on.

                          How many cases when a father took the children and a mother must fight in court for 50/50 access? I don't know the exact number but I know this: very few. I personally don't know a single case like this.

                          Any bloody criminal, dirty murderer, child molester has more rights in this country. At least they have presumption of innocence.

                          A man in family court system in Canada DOES NOT HAVE ANY!

                          I don't care what else Vellacoutt is fighting for and what he believes in as I am not familiar with his platform. All I know: our society needs this Bill. Equal Shared parenting must be a law.

                          To the women who don't like this bill: you don't like it, why? No more free money? No more dictatorship? Any other reasons?

                          I will vote for a devil if he or she makes equal share parenting a law.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            ...and as a matter of fact there are a lot of men who are paying child and spousal support unfairly. The discrimination of men is here, in one of the most democratic countries in the world.
                            Mother, I think a reasoned argument for presumptive equal parenting fails once you start arguing for the best interest of the man on separation, in lieu of the best interest of the child on separation.

                            Maybe that is why I'm having issues with it (and I don't have any skin in the game).

                            As you said however (and it was a wonderful reminder after just watching the Sochi Olympic news), we do have the luxury of living in a country where we may have our opinions on social trends and movements, and share them with others, without fear of persecution.

                            Stripes - the MP I've had to volunteer with above makes my skin crawl - just so far from my field. He's not my local MP, so I don't have to deal with him regularly. I'm just not prepared to ban Darwin from the kidlet, push the LGBT back into the closet, and re-open the abortion debate! Those rights just seem to be so basic to me.
                            Last edited by mcdreamy; 02-05-2014, 07:36 PM. Reason: "push"
                            Start a discussion, not a fire. Post with kindness.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Mother View Post
                              A man in family court system in Canada DOES NOT HAVE ANY!

                              I don't care what else Vellacoutt is fighting for and what he believes in as I am not familiar with his platform. All I know: our society needs this Bill. Equal Shared parenting must be a law.

                              To the women who don't like this bill: you don't like it, why? No more free money? No more dictatorship? Any other reasons?

                              I will vote for a devil if he or she makes equal share parenting a law.
                              Do you honestly believe incarcerated people have more rights than a separated father?

                              You need to tell that to all the women out there fighting for their children to even be recognized by their father, all the women that are living on poverty lines because their ex's have dodged FRO or are intentionally unemployed.

                              Women have been fighting for equal rights in EVERY other aspect of life for how long now? Perhaps settling one may settle the other.

                              I'm with McDreamy on this one. I can't support anyone who professes to support equality in one arena while encouraging inequality in the other arenas.

                              Comment

                              Our Divorce Forums
                              Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                              Working...
                              X