Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jail time for withholding access

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

  • Jail time for withholding access

    Mothers who deny fathers access to the couple¿s children after a break-up could be jailed | Daily Mail Online

    Discuss.

  • #2
    Thanks for this Blink. It rang in some emotions given the crap I've been through. This means that some of our higher aboves are starting to "get it". If FRO can take away licences and give jail time for non payment.... the courts can take away licences and give jail time for gatekeeping.

    Now.....if they can apply the same tactics to false allegations and fibbing in court we'll be set.

    The courts can no longer be a chess board or playground of strategy for manufactured, false status quo in custody/access disputes. It's about time someone started to do something about it.

    Comment


    • #3
      Here's a recent update from Ontario on the woman who abducted her daughter (Amber Alert).

      http://www.wellandtribune.ca/2017/01...ss-to-daughter

      Comment


      • #4
        I still hold our family courts and the government accountable, this is a system they created, that a child can, has, and continues to be stripped from a parent. Our legal system doesn't view both parents as "parents" rather one as parent and one as visitor. If the presumption was 50-50 (in concrete and in black and white) , with no excuses for any lame sorry ass loser to argue otherwise, then we wouldn't even have any of these problems. It is so bad that a Canadian doctor (neurosurgeon), yes a Canadian doctor, recently killed his wife after being made aware that he was going to have to deal with the court system.

        Toronto doctor?s killing shocks medical community - The Globe and Mail

        Another Canadian doctor got fed up with our legal system and abducted his children to Iran.

        http://news.nationalpost.com/news/ca...ocated-in-iran

        The interview is awesome: http://globalnews.ca/video/2709062/e...he-middle-east

        We have doctors breaking the law, because of family law.What better do we expect from non-doctor citizens?

        Legal aid isn't helping anything, matter of fact, the chaos I am in is due to Legal Aid Ontario's bias, prejudice, and ignorance towards me as a father.

        The latest downfall from Legal Aid Ontario https://nowtoronto.com/news/legal-ai...le-family-law/

        The Ontario Debt is the icing on the cake for our sorry ass government: http://www.debtclock.ca/provincial-d...ntario-s-debt/

        Family law kills parents and/or children and destroys children in Canada. Canadian ignorance doesn't help anything. Do gun's kill people, or do people kill people, or does our family legal system kill people? Why do people get this way when they learn that they have to deal with the Canadian family legal system?

        Thank you for your post BlinkandImGone, and I encourage all father's, wife's of father's, family of father's grandparents, to continue to fight and fight and exercise your constitutional rights and your freedom of speech and opinion. Stand up to the system and don't let them bully you. Yell at our judges right back. Raise your voice at our judges right back. (Given that we have some very rude ridiculous judges in Canada) If they don't give you what you want, don't give them what they want. Make their lives as miserable as they have made yours and we will continue to see the bias being eliminated. If they continue to be biased against fathers and ordering them to only be able to see their children "every" "other" "weekend" then they are digging their own graves and bringing the administration of the justice to question.

        I am well aware of the family law crisis in Canada.
        Last edited by trinton; 01-07-2017, 06:00 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by trinton View Post
          I still hold our family courts and the government accountable, this is a system they created, that a child can, has, and continues to be stripped from a parent. Our legal system doesn't view both parents as "parents" rather one as parent and one as visitor. If the presumption was 50-50 (in concrete and in black and white) , with no excuses for any lame sorry ass loser to argue otherwise, then we wouldn't even have any of these problems. It is so bad that a doctor, yes a doctor, recently killed his wife after being made aware that he was going to have to deal with the court system.

          Toronto doctor?s killing shocks medical community - The Globe and Mail

          Family law kills and destroys. Canadian ignorance doesn't help anything.

          So the father killed his wife because he had to do what everyone else has to do (go through family law process upon divorce)?

          Sick. Hope he rots in jail forever. (I could care less what his occupation used to be).

          One wonders how many other women in Canada live with a monster, too afraid to file for divorce....

          Comment


          • #6
            We don't know what she filed for divorce for.

            If she wanted to civilly divorce him splitting everything 50/50 then I would take her side, but if she wanted to take everything from him, including custody of his children, and cash for life, then his actions as a result of frustrations are justified and rather very normal and common these days. People's brains apparently stop working when they are faced with our legal system. He probably heard horror storries from other fathers and men who went through our legal system and thought that he make some noise.

            Reminds me of this guy that went to the courthouse with a Chainsaw after being served with court papers: Chainsaw-wielding man at family court sentenced to 6 months in jail - Newfoundland & Labrador - CBC News

            Our family court process stinks. It is emotionally and financially draining. It is abusive to Canadian citizens both emotionally and financially. It is worst than air pollution.

            It needs to be reformed. Rather sooner than later. Otherwise, we will see more and more of the killing, unless we see more and more of the women jailing when they use their gender and the court system to cut off and deny access. Sorry ladies, you don't get to do that just because you are a mother. The word mother has lost it's reputation. Mother's are supposed to want what is truly best for their kids, not what is truly best for themselves.
            Last edited by trinton; 01-07-2017, 06:20 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              I’m not sure how the best interests of a child are served by jailing either parent for withholding access (I’ve seen both, withholding). Such an inflammatory title to the article, and then it goes on to be fairly non-gender specific.

              In any event, it appears the article posted by the OP is from 2012, and from the UK. [One can always be hopeful posters read links, but I suppose it’s that whole horse, water thing… ].. It appears from later UK news in 2013, the bid referred to in this article failed, as it should have.

              We should also discuss jail time for non-payment of child support- I’ve never figured that nonsense out. How can that in the best interests of the child? Here - In Ontario - we need to have this discussion.

              Back on the OP's article/topic - I don’t believe the UK (under their 1989-2004 Childrens Act) has the authority to take driver licences for non-payment of cs, nor have their fathers rights groups been successful in the presumption of shared custody – and for some reason, I think that unmarried fathers really, really, get dinged in the UK, with little or no access rights (I have a couple of peeps in N-IRL, and every once in a while this topic comes up in our chit-chat). The UK has some huge strides to make, to get it real into 2017.

              Trinton – and what would we do with those lame sorry-ass parents who willingly don’t seek 50-50 on dissolution of a parental relationship, and then return a few years later at their own convenience, that wish to then seek to parent? Do their rights supercede those of the child at that time? I wouldn't think so.
              Start a discussion, not a fire. Post with kindness.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by trinton View Post
                We don't know what she filed for divorce for.

                If she wanted to civilly divorce him splitting everything 50/50 then I would take her side, but if she wanted to take everything from him, including custody of his children, and cash for life, then his actions as a result of frustrations are justified and rather very normal and common these days. People's brains apparently stop working when they are faced with our legal system. He probably heard horror storries from other fathers and men who went through our legal system and thought that he make some noise.

                Reminds me of this guy that went to the courthouse with a Chainsaw after being served with court papers: Chainsaw-wielding man at family court sentenced to 6 months in jail - Newfoundland & Labrador - CBC News

                Our family court process stinks. It is emotionally and financially draining. It is abusive to Canadian citizens both emotionally and financially. It is worst than air pollution.

                It needs to be reformed. Rather sooner than later. Otherwise, we will see more and more of the killing, unless we see more and more of the women jailing when they use their gender and the court system to cut off and deny access. Sorry ladies, you don't get to do that just because you are a mother. The word mother has lost it's reputation. Mother's are supposed to want what is truly best for their kids, not what is truly best for themselves.
                You think he was justified in murdering his wife??????

                Both were highly-educated, successful doctors so I don't think it was a matter of 'cash for life'.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by mcdreamy View Post

                  Trinton – and what would we do with those lame sorry-ass parents who willingly don’t seek 50-50 on dissolution of a parental relationship, and then return a few years later at their own convenience, that wish to then seek to parent? Do their rights supercede those of the child at that time? I wouldn't think so.
                  I wouldn't call them lame sorry-ass parents without knowing their story. Because a lot of the times, the mother is given everything, including a lawyer from the victim of domestic violence hotline and the father is given nothing and to make things worst, has his access cut off by the lame sorry-ass mother.

                  The father is then bullied and taken advtange of , not having a lawyer although financially eligible, due to our lame sorry-ass ill-funded legal aid system, and is forced to sign something under duress when the lame sorry-ass duty counsel refuses to give him legal advice because she was overloaded by our lame sorry-ass fludded and back-logged court system and didn't have time to discuss with him.

                  The father then is given time to see his child, but after he reviews it with a lawyer, realizes how badly he was screwed over and the sole custody one sided order end's up right back in court. The father can't even enjoy holidays or get information from 3rd parties.

                  Your rationale is that the lawyer wasn't sleeping on the job but rather the father didn't know what he was going. Let me ask you this, when you go to the hospital for treatment, do you know what you're doing or do you trust your doctor to take good care of you and give you the best treatment possible so you don't end up back on the hospital bed the next day?

                  The judges are ultimately responsible for ensuring that the order is fair to the parties and that the order is in the best interests of the child. When a father appears without a lawyer, he is generally uneducated and royally screwed over. He is at disadvantage, especially when he is given no legal advice by duty counsel.

                  So to call the parents lame and sorry ass because they were prejudiced against by our lame and sorry ass legal system, is taking a bit far. Our lame and sorry iss ill funded legal aid system should either fund both parents when they are both eligible or not take sides at all. And when the loving fathers go to courts, the court should immediately restore their access 50/50 and tell them that's what the presumption is, not that you have no access and the presumption is that you are guilty until proven innocent, so give us custody and child support or you're a deadbeat.

                  I take it you have had difficulties and unpleasant experience with our our court system yourself, and there must be a very good reason why you are still posting here today reading these articles.
                  Last edited by trinton; 01-07-2017, 07:10 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Your words: ..."The father is then bullied and taken advtange of , not having a lawyer although financially eligible, due to our lame sorry-ass ill-funded legal aid system, and is forced to sign something under duress and when the lame sorry-ass duty counsel refuses to give him legal advice because she was overloaded by our lame sorry-ass fludded and back-logged court system and didn't have time to discuss with him....'

                    Legal Aid websites (Canada-wide) clearly set out their qualifying income for various levels of coverage of legal aid certificates.

                    Is Legal Aid underfunded and understaffed?

                    It is generally accepted that before people go to court they should have some basic idea of the process they are about to get involved with. An exception to this might be if the litigant had a mental deficiency or was below basic intelligence level as there is ample information online available to anyone. There are family law information clinics where people can obtain information from lawyers for free. Sure you have to probably wait a while but 'beggars can't be choosers' can they?

                    Ultimately, in family court, you are 100% responsible for your own misery. You can educate yourself or not. Options are readily available for those motivated.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by arabian View Post
                      Your words: ..."The father is then bullied and taken advtange of , not having a lawyer although financially eligible, due to our lame sorry-ass ill-funded legal aid system, and is forced to sign something under duress and when the lame sorry-ass duty counsel refuses to give him legal advice because she was overloaded by our lame sorry-ass fludded and back-logged court system and didn't have time to discuss with him....'

                      Legal Aid websites (Canada-wide) clearly set out their qualifying income for various levels of coverage of legal aid certificates.

                      Is Legal Aid underfunded and understaffed?

                      It is generally accepted that before people go to court they should have some basic idea of the process they are about to get involved with. An exception to this might be if the litigant had a mental deficiency or was below basic intelligence level as there is ample information online available to anyone. There are family law information clinics where people can obtain information from lawyers for free. Sure you have to probably wait a while but 'beggars can't be choosers' can they?

                      Ultimately, in family court, you are 100% responsible for your own misery. You can educate yourself or not. Options are readily available for those motivated.
                      Let me tell you something about legal aid and I will also take the opportunity to say the same about OCL. These organizations operate on money and funds. They have a pool of funds they use to fund parents. When a mom and dad run to them (when both are financially eligible) they will fund the mom because she claims she is a victim of domestic violence and they will tell the father to screw off. The father is disadvantaged because clearly he cannot afford a lawyer on welfare. True story.

                      Legal aid is going to continue to say fuck off to the father and tell him he is responsible to know the law. we don't care if you went to law school or not, go learn the law, but we will help out your ex. she doesn't have to learn the law, we'll help her screw you over. We don't have enough money to pay both of you.

                      This is of course not to mention that the courts don't like self represented parties because the system is designed for experienced professionals.

                      The same is true with OCL, they will often decide to take your case or not depending on their funding pool. If it is running low, they will preserve it for critical cases, if it is the beginning of the year and the got a ton of funding, then it's we'll take whatever comes our way.

                      Legal aid does of course have duty counsel services, but they're not your lawyers, some are very good and some are useless. You go see them and rely on them, but they refuse to give you legal advice, you are screwed over and end up back in court.

                      Let me ask you this, why do we even have lawyers, why do we even need lawyers if you are expected to know everything yourself? Why do lawyers themselves hire lawyers to represent them? If the lawyer's know it all why don't they just represent themselves then?

                      Not to completely bash the system, things have been going well for me so far, but is just taking way too long and I continue to miss out on my child's childhood while waiting for the wheels of our justice system to turn. Taking a person's house, car or salary is one thing but taking a person's child is another.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Women and children are still often considered to be vulnerable in our society. This will change when women are in work-force at the same percentage as men. You can argue this any way you want to. Don't get mad at the system - get mad at your "bros" who happily go along with their partners not working and staying home to raise the children. People naively do this when kids are young because they want to save money on daycare. THAT is the problem IMO. If you want women to stay home to raise children you should play them a wage, fully taxable, where they pay CPP and EI. Then when the marriage ends they can fall back on their EI or CPP. It certainly would make women AND men more accountable and we would probably see more people planning for their retirement at a very young age.

                        I think it's about evening the playing field. You want a woman/slave to stay home and have your kids and keep your house then you're going to pay for it sooner or later. A smart guy would plan for marriage failing right from the start.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by arabian View Post
                          Women and children are still often considered to be vulnerable in our society. This will change when women are in work-force at the same percentage as men. You can argue this any way you want to. Don't get mad at the system - get mad at your "bros" who happily go along with their partners not working and staying home to raise the children. People naively do this when kids are young because they want to save money on daycare. THAT is the problem IMO. If you want women to stay home to raise children you should play them a wage, fully taxable, where they pay CPP and EI. Then when the marriage ends they can fall back on their EI or CPP. It certainly would make women AND men more accountable and we would probably see more people planning for their retirement at a very young age.

                          I think it's about evening the playing field. You want a woman/slave to stay home and have your kids and keep your house then you're going to pay for it sooner or later. A smart guy would plan for marriage failing right from the start.
                          Funny thing is no, I wouldn't want her to stay home. I would want her to work just like everyone else. And she got a job and started working but chose to put the child in daycare as opposed to giving me that time extra time. If you are no longer a stay at home mom, and are working, and are not available to look after the child all day, then why on earth would you choose a total stranger over the child's other parent. The only thing I can think of is resentment and control.

                          But to answer your question, they do pay their wage. And pay even more of it when they seperate through spousal support and child support. That is why I will never ever merry a women that doesn't work. She should be earning close to or more than my income, knowing what the system can do to me if she ever decides she wants to move on. Unless I truly trust her, even then, you would be surprised how unexpectedly and unilaterally people change.
                          Last edited by trinton; 01-07-2017, 07:46 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Stay single and keep your own respective residences. No mingling of finances - just dates and vacations together. Sounds perfect to me!

                            Hey don't forget I got royally screwed by my ex. I'm now old and have no retirement funds. It's not just men who lose out financially when a marriage ends. Don't forget that. I'm fortunate in that I am intelligent and am employed. Many women my age aren't so fortunate and cannot support themselves after being homemakers their entire marriages. 40 years ago it was quite normal. It is still acceptable and I applaud anyone who does it. I hope they have contingency plans in place for when their marriage ends though. I certainly didn't think my marriage would end after 30 years and spouse absconds with money. Who does at that stage? That is why I think there should be a mandatory sort of thing one pays into (lets call it MI - marriage insurance). If/when marriage ends a portion of that money is paid for legals/court services). Lawyers would have a hey-day with that one for sure.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by arabian View Post
                              Stay single and keep your own respective residences. No mingling of finances - just dates and vacations together. Sounds perfect to me!

                              Hey don't forget I got royally screwed by my ex. I'm now old and have no retirement funds. It's not just men who lose out financially when a marriage ends. Don't forget that. I'm fortunate in that I am intelligent and am employed. Many women my age aren't so fortunate and cannot support themselves after being homemakers their entire marriages. 40 years ago it was quite normal. It is still acceptable and I applaud anyone who does it. I hope they have contingency plans in place for when their marriage ends though. I certainly didn't think my marriage would end after 30 years and spouse absconds with money. Who does at that stage? That is why I think there should be a mandatory sort of thing one pays into (lets call it MI - marriage insurance). If/when marriage ends a portion of that money is paid for legals/court services). Lawyers would have a hey-day with that one for sure.

                              Nah, I wouldn't want lawyers anywhere close to any sort of marriage insurance. You could be sure they would make 5 or 6 useless phone calls and 3 or 4 letters a week just to take as much of that insurance money as they possible can.

                              I thought you royally screwed over your ex with spousal support? and that he is not able to end it? Isn't he the rat in the wheel in a sense ?

                              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