Do you think that woman receive preferential treatment

[susiecanoe]

They are the biggest joke. FRO is incompetent and ineffective. Did you know, that if you file a case with FRO, it can take up to two years before anything is done. When the other party gets the papers from FRO, ( as happened in my case), they just start a new motion ( usually to change the current order and rescind child support or change the terms or whatever) and then you spend the next two years in court trying to get that resolved. Meanwhile, FRO has done nothing. And it has cost you in legal fees what you lost in child support. o Unless you like to chase good money after bad, I have figured that if a party is not going to pay, they are not going to pay.

[logicalvelocity]

They are the biggest joke. FRO is incompetent and ineffective. Did you know, that if you file a case with FRO, it can take up to two years before anything is done. When the other party gets the papers from FRO, ( as happened in my case), they just start a new motion ( usually to change the current order and rescind child support or change the terms or whatever) and then you spend the next two years in court trying to get that resolved. Meanwhile, FRO has done nothing. And it has cost you in legal fees what you lost in child support. o Unless you like to chase good money after bad, I have figured that if a party is not going to pay, they are not going to pay.

and did you know by default - Some enforcement measures that FRO yields are quasi criminal in nature such as incarceration. Thankfully, it takes time rather than railroad a parent directly to jail on untested evidence during a Default hearing.

[susiecanoe]

FRO does not work in the interests of anyone. Except of course the well paid government bureaucrats that work there.

[logicalvelocity]

LOL, yes and their tenure is pensionable. Just a typical bureaucracy with broad powers is my view.

[Mess]

I don't believe the FRO is particularly well-organized, well-run or designed properly. But I do think that it should not "work in the interests of anyone". It should not take sides or make judgements, it should just enforce court orders.

[IAMTheWiser]

Yes and they always will...So Fathers lets do something about it!

[dadtotheend]

Yes and they always will...

Nope. Pendulum has already swung back to the middle.

[susiecanoe]

My response was not intended to state the FRO works for any one party in particular. Rather it was to state that they do not benefit either party. It is very poorly run, mismanaged, incompetent and ineffective. As for the comment about fathers - lets unite... again this is not a gender issue, it is a systemic issue. It really does not matter who is right, who is wrong, but what does matter is that people ( both mothers and fathers) are left trying to fumble their way through an ineffective system that is not benefiting the children. No child in this country should have to suffer because the other party refuses to pay child support due to their anger or bittnerness over their divorce or at their former spouse.

[pokeman]

yes - not only ontario - alberta

my wife beat my kids till they bleed from the mouth ,
a man judge gave me the kids, about 40 women involved
in this case sense have worked hard over the past 3 years
to get them back to her ... several have told me to my face
"children with mother"

the reason I got a 'man' judge is because children's services
wanted one ... to make sure the mother didnt get immediate access
just because she's a women

not saying men judges here are crooked - just saying they dont care
much for those playing the 'mother card'

since then lawyers have selected the judges and physcologists ... cause they know which way the chosen professionals lean ... not a man judge in sight

[dadtotheend]

Cry me a river pally. You have temporary sole custody. If that changes, it's your fault.

[pokeman]

read my other post

http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...ienation-7538/

[dadtotheend]

I read it already.

[pokeman]

oh

well i dont have sole custody ... and i dont have all my children either

[InterprovincialParents]

The law is biased towards mothers, and the changes to child support with the implementation of the guidelines, which was supposed to help families, has actually increased the number of people living in poverty in the country. Only now, it is not the unemployed or underemployed...it is fathers, it is blended families, it is children.

What the justice minister needs to consider is that what is best for children is what is best for all, not just the first-born...or first family, or custodial parent. In trying to equalize the system, they went too far...fathers' rights groups and people like me exist because of the disparity in the system, and that affects all fathers-heck, all parents-which also affects the children.

What is horrifying to me is that the courts are now tying child support to access...filled out any forms lately? One question asks about whether child support is current...sometimes our laws, and our lack of ability to CHANGE them sickens me

[billiechic]

do the forms ask you for details about WHY CS is current or not?

IMHO a parent who does not make some sort of arrangement to pay does not show much interest in what's best for their kids. Whether you can pay all of it or have to play catch up is a moot point. If you are not adult enough to acknowledge the NEEDS of your kids, then you are not RESPOSIBLE enough to be caring for them.

While support is not directly related to access, one's commitment to their kids is VERY relevant. One way of evaluating this is to make sure they are meeting financial obligations to their children.