Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Question for StillPaying and Others Who 'Trust the Process'

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

  • #16
    I'm interested in the proportion of rulings that result in 50/50 custody arrangements as compared to sole custody for the mother or father. This kind of data could be invaluable in truly understanding the current state and effectiveness of the family court system.
    Like everything else, your analysis is off on this as well.

    50/50 means 2 fit parents on their own.

    Sole custody alone does not support your theory of 1 or the other/broken system. You would have to look at the history of each case, abuse towards partner or kids, arrests, conduct, involvement, etc. Just because there are NCPs doesn't mean the system is ineffective. Your invaluable data is useless when you don't understand it.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by StillPaying View Post

      Far, far less than the amount of people who now benefit from WD's work.
      We are on different pages here. You saying system is fair and I am saying it is ineffective. We are discussing different qualities that can’t be compared, but until it is effective the fairness see only 1% who have finance and years of time to gamble their case to trial.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by rockscan View Post

        There are so many things now to help with the process. The problem isn't the family court process but lack of blowback for high conflict parties. People who make false accusations? Punishment. Withholding kids? Punishment. Wasting the courts time by not providing documentation? Punishment. There is no consequence for being difficult. Judges can award costs but that doesn't always happen and they don't sanction parties for their bs.
        If there are no consequences for lying in Family court, if judges orders for parenting time could be ignored, and so on, then there is an issue with Family Court. Essentially the only effective thing about Family Court now is the FRO for child support enforcing, but they have so many issues on it’s own that they deserve their own thread.


        Comment


        • #19
          Respectfully, that sounds a bit rich coming from you. You're paying for a top priced lawyer, going on 4 years, while still being a deer in the headlights towards the system, not understanding why you only get an hour sneak peak of your kids per week.

          Complaining nonsense will not help you. Read the Family Law and Divorce Act. Understand it. Then use the steps in the process to help your case.

          Comment


          • #20
            StillPaying, I respect your viewpoint but I have to disagree with your counter-argument—or lack thereof. You mentioned that every case has to be looked at individually, which is a tired trope. While individual circumstances matter, the larger trends—represented by aggregate data—can't be ignored. It's not practical to review each case in isolation when discussing systemic issues.

            Your argument about individual circumstances is akin to dismissing the data that smoking causes cancer by saying we need to look at other factors for each smoker. The point of data is to give us an overview, a snapshot of the system's effectiveness, and its biases. I presented a data point to make a case for systemic issues, and your response didn't provide any counter data or compelling arguments.

            On another note, I'm still awaiting your original answer to my question: "You've expressed strong trust in the system. What was your specific experience that led you to this viewpoint?" I'm genuinely curious, as it might help me better understand your position. As Tayken mentioned, people get emotionally invested in these matters and might not see the larger picture.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by rockscan View Post

              The courts work on legislation or jurisprudence and are supposed to be fair for all. Unfortunately the fair for all means false allegations and bullshit actions. The court can't change itself, policy needs to be brought forward to become legislation. If you want new laws, talk to your local politicians.
              You're right, Rockscan, that the courts operate based on legislation and established jurisprudence. However, I'm quite skeptical about the prospect of meaningful legislative change. There's a lot of money tied up in the existing system, and those who profit from its inefficiencies have little incentive to push for reforms, such as a presumption of 50/50 custody or stricter penalties for perjury and contempt. I think it's important to recognize the system for what it is, flaws and all, while also acknowledging the proverbial elephants in the room.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by StillPaying View Post
                Respectfully, that sounds a bit rich coming from you. You're paying for a top priced lawyer, going on 4 years, while still being a deer in the headlights towards the system, not understanding why you only get an hour sneak peak of your kids per week.

                Complaining nonsense will not help you. Read the Family Law and Divorce Act. Understand it. Then use the steps in the process to help your case.
                StillPaying, while I understand you have your own viewpoint, I think it's important to clarify that both Challenger and I are seeking to understand the varying opinions about the effectiveness of the family court system. Making personal remarks about someone's understanding or lack thereof doesn't contribute to this discussion in a meaningful way.

                Instead, it might be more productive to share what specifically has led you to trust the system, as that can help illuminate why we might be seeing things differently. We are all emotionally and personally invested in this system in one way or another, and understanding the basis of our differing opinions can help make for a more productive conversation.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Learn the system or data or stats or analytical thinking.... something. You can't misrepresent everything and act like you have a valid viewpoint. Crazy in = crazy out.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by newerwavers View Post

                    You're right, Rockscan, that the courts operate based on legislation and established jurisprudence. However, I'm quite skeptical about the prospect of meaningful legislative change. There's a lot of money tied up in the existing system, and those who profit from its inefficiencies have little incentive to push for reforms, such as a presumption of 50/50 custody or stricter penalties for perjury and contempt. I think it's important to recognize the system for what it is, flaws and all, while also acknowledging the proverbial elephants in the room.
                    Nope. Legislative change comes from the governing party. Legalized pot? From a liberal convention I attended back in the early 2000's. Assisted dying? Same convention. The pc party passed policy to prevent transgender care this weekend. If you want change, it has to come from the government. The family court system is a body that applies the law. You want better laws, get the government involved. The policy decisions they make become legislation. The reason nothing has changed is because they had other priorities.

                    It is a really simplistic view to think it is the fault of lawyers and judges. They have enough on their plates with backed up cases. And a lawyer won't lose money with change. They will make money defending the idiots who get punished.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Challenger View Post
                      If there are no consequences for lying in Family court, if judges orders for parenting time could be ignored, and so on, then there is an issue with Family Court. Essentially the only effective thing about Family Court now is the FRO for child support enforcing, but they have so many issues on it’s own that they deserve their own thread.

                      Nope. They can't apply a law that doesn't exist. You want a law, get a policy in place to have it legislated.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Tayken View Post
                        Also, that case law is being fed to various AI platforms now... Which will have an even larger impact across the whole justice system.
                        Bingo! The topic of AI and its effect on the legal system is so significant that it deserves an entire thread on its own. I'm 200% in agreement with you. Frankly, AI is the one glimmer of hope I have for real, substantial improvements in what I perceive to be a deeply flawed and biases legal system—not the influence of one-off case laws, even if they've been cited multiple times.

                        I can comment that in GTA family legal circles, for example, the unspoken use of LLMs by lawyers, and especially by paralegals, is substantial. This kind of reminds me of how, in the GTA, legal professionals typically affirm publicly that the system isn't biased, perhaps to attract both mothers and fathers. However, privately they're very open about the biases present.

                        I predict a sea change is coming. The impact of LLMs is and will be profound on the family legal system.

                        Mark my words, there will be significant resistance from those who have the most to lose from this technological shift—just like the pushback against the presumption of 50/50, only bigger.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by StillPaying View Post
                          Learn the system or data or stats or analytical thinking.... something. You can't misrepresent everything and act like you have a valid viewpoint. Crazy in = crazy out.
                          I'm not sure I follow your point, StillPaying. The aim here is to have a productive discussion about the data and experiences that inform our opinions on the family court system. Making ad hominem remarks doesn't contribute meaningfully to this dialogue. If we could steer the conversation back to understanding the systemic issues and data at hand, that would be much more constructive for everyone involved.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by rockscan View Post

                            Nope. Legislative change comes from the governing party. Legalized pot? From a liberal convention I attended back in the early 2000's. Assisted dying? Same convention. The pc party passed policy to prevent transgender care this weekend. If you want change, it has to come from the government. The family court system is a body that applies the law. You want better laws, get the government involved. The policy decisions they make become legislation. The reason nothing has changed is because they had other priorities.

                            It is a really simplistic view to think it is the fault of lawyers and judges. They have enough on their plates with backed up cases. And a lawyer won't lose money with change. They will make money defending the idiots who get punished.
                            Rockscan, while I agree that legislative changes are crucial for reforming the family court system, that's not the focus of our current discussion. We're here to discuss the existing system, its flaws, and how it impacts those who are navigating it right now. Most people don't have the resources or influence to enact legislative change, so understanding the current realities is vital. It's noteworthy that you also seem to acknowledge that the system could use improvements, which aligns with the points Challenger and I have been making.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by rockscan View Post

                              Nope. They can't apply a law that doesn't exist. You want a law, get a policy in place to have it legislated.
                              Rockscan, it appears we're veering off the main topic. The discussion here is centered on evaluating the current state of the family court system, including its inefficiencies and lack of deterrents for issues like perjury and contempt. We're not debating the process of legislative change, nor are we suggesting that anyone here has the time, money, or resources to lobby for new laws. We're simply discussing the existing system and its effects on those who must navigate it.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by rockscan View Post

                                Nope. They can't apply a law that doesn't exist. You want a law, get a policy in place to have it legislated.
                                Dear MP, could you please lead initiate to criminalize Perjury in Canada and punish it up to 14 years in prison… But wait a second, it already exists, sections 131, 132 of Criminal code, so the law is there, just it isn’t being followed.

                                And when it comes to judges, if judge ordered something and it isn’t being followed, if I was a judge, I’d probably find a way to motivate non complying party. I am talking specifically here on orders that I already issued.

                                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