Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bringing Family Issues to the fore front

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bringing Family Issues to the fore front

    Hey I just sat and heard Justin Trudeau speak at Trent University.
    He had a lot of good things to say. Then he asked for questions.
    The first question was about tuitions and the costs of tuitions. The second was about attack ads. Then I got to stand up and ask a question.
    My question to Justin was simple.

    What is your position on the presumption of equal shared parenting in custody and access cases in family court barring any involvement with "A child in need of protection"?

    Justin needed clarifying the question, which is I think where I missed up, I talked about eliminating "The best interests of the child" and replacing it with "A child in need of Protection" and although I didn't like everything he said, I did like some of it. I will post the audio of this question online soon.
    So I have two other questions that I'd like to ask Justin or other MP's perhaps some we can hone the questions so they make more sense and perhaps some people can start asking these questions and bring family law reform to the for front of the media.

    So here are the questions I think we should be focusing on.

    1. What is your position on the presumption of equal shared parenting in custody and access cases in family court barring any involvement with CAS or "A child in need of protection" given the recommendations of the Special Joint Committee on custody and access "For the sake of the children" and how it is to better to remove custody and access from a family court system that is so adversarial where lawyers actually encourage conflict so they have more billable hours.

    2. What is your position on the equal funding of domestic violence support systems and public awareness campaigns, given that Stats Canada has published that domestic violence is now done by both genders equally both in numbers 51% man / 49% women and severity, yet there are no public awareness funding or support funding for men and fathers who live in fear that they will lose their children if they leave a situation let alone have a place to take themselves and their children.

    3. What is your position on the Child Support Scandal that started in 1997 and now grows by $100,000,000 a month? And has now grown to an estimated $20,000,000,000 by the end of 2013.

    Just to clarify here I'm not posting or stating that I am for or opposed to any of these issues, but they seem to be the ones that would sort out a lot of other problems. No name pointing here, no discussing of the issues, simply focus on the questions and making them the best questions to propose.

    And if anyone is near a Justin Trudeau or other candidates then stop in and ask one of them a question, lets all work together and bring family law reform to the fore front of the debate.

  • #2
    I agree the first is the main issue. The rest typically sorts itself out. If the Divorce act had that change I wouldn't be in the court process right now.

    The 2nd one is an issue, but you have to be careful because you don't want to take funding away from where it's needed. Any attempt to "reallocate" $ would be opposed pretty vehemently.

    The third one is also tough to get any traction with. I agree it's an issue, and there are some blatant flaws in the guidelines and the model that sets the table values that create an imbalance between support payer and the support receiver. Unfortunately because of the political climate any attempt to bring this topic to the forefront will bring criticism from some very vocal and influential groups.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by involveddad75 View Post
      ...
      3. What is your position on the Child Support Scandal that started in 1997 and now grows by $100,000,000 a month? And has now grown to an estimated $20,000,000,000 by the end of 2013.
      ...
      "Child Support Scandal"? This is not a reasonably worded question. Could you elaborate?

      Comment


      • #4
        This is a great idea.

        Justin is in the process of a very extensive touring of the country looking to hear the voices of Canadians.

        I've yet to attend one, but plan on it at some point.

        Perhaps we should all come up with a 'standard' question to ask him.
        That way - assuming a few of us attend his events and ask the SAME question - he might take the issue into consideration.

        So what, exactly, do we all think is unfair about the way things are.
        Please let's continue "The Best Interest of the Child' angle to the question - as I FIRMLY believe in that concept.

        Comment


        • #5
          Maybe a good place to start, in asking Justin would be...

          What was his position on the following?

          http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...velacott-5302/

          Comment


          • #6
            I've written my member of parliament before regarding family issues, I would ask of her those similar questions, as well as my MPP.

            Not totally sure what you mean about the child support scandal either.

            Comment


            • #7
              There are a few reports going around regarding FCSG
              and how Quebec is different from the rest of canada, the arguement is that Quebec's guidelines actually follow the divorce act becuase they take into account the incomes of both parents where as the rest of canada only takes into account the income of the payer's income unless you are over 40%
              lucien khodeir wrote a letter on Sept 2t 2012 and has written two books in the subject.
              The letter can be found here: www.childrenwith2homes.ca/plea_to_gic.pdf

              Vernon Beck wrote a report on the effects on support recipients and support payers as a result of the application of Canada's federal child support guidelines in various family situations Dated April 2009

              Alar Soever wrote a report in 2002 titled Federal Child support guidelines: A breakdown of the democratic process and the canadian legal system.

              These are the main remarks that outline the problems with the federal child support guidelines.

              I have provided the link to the latest one only, search for the other two.

              Again not taking a position here, just would like to fomulate good valid questions, thats all.

              Comment


              • #8
                Since being instituted, the guidelines have done a lot of harm.

                The problem is that no one is going to win an election or stay in power by passing legislation that takes away money from single parents, even if it is unjust, even if it is hurting families, even if it is driving countless Fathers away from their children and into poverty, despair and suicide.

                It was much easier to win an election on the premise of reducing the cost of divorce by normalizing child support. I agree with Mr Khodeir's letter... guidelines are a good thing, but a bad guideline is even worse than not having one at all.

                I did my budget recently and realized that 50% of my expenses would vanish if I didn't exercise access to my son. Literally $900/month is spent on fixed and variable child costs. I don't even make $2k per month net so this is huge.

                That's enough to convince me that the guidelines are wrong and there needs to be some consideration of the child costs to the non-custodial parent.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Here's another good read on the subject of the inequity of the Child Support Tables:

                  The Anatomy of Canada?s Child Support Guidelines: The Effects, Details, and History of a Feminist Family Policy by Douglas Allen :: SSRN



                  Abstract:

                  "Recent studies have shown that Canada’s Child Support Guidelines, adapted from the U.S. “Wisconsin” model, have serious negative incentive effects on marriage stability. The source of this outcome is found in the design of the guidelines, which consistently transfer net wealth to the custodial parent. This paper examines the details of Canada’s guidelines, and then traces backwards to their source. It argues that the guidelines are the logical implication of family policy based on feminist theories of the family. The paper concludes that an institutional view of the family is a better model to base family law on."

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    And this:

                    http://qed.econ.queensu.ca/pub/cpp/March2000/Barham.pdf

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Thanks for the additional documents

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I salute those who have recognized the damages this system causes and are making efforts to change. change will eventually come, but not soon.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by SingingDad View Post
                          I did a quick read of this.

                          It seems, despite their significant effort, that they ignore child costs of the NCP. Hard to understand why they would do this. Perhaps I missed it - I didn't read every paragraph.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by billm View Post
                            I did a quick read of this.

                            It seems, despite their significant effort, that they ignore child costs of the NCP. Hard to understand why they would do this. Perhaps I missed it - I didn't read every paragraph.
                            I don't perhaps and I'm not suggesting anything here, but again perhaps it was written as part of a woman studies.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by sahibjee View Post
                              I salute those who have recognized the damages this system causes and are making efforts to change. change will eventually come, but not soon.
                              I would suggest three possible people would be the best people to do this.
                              1. Someone who doesn't have children, make a challenge on behalf of the children and access parents.
                              2. Someone who has finished paying child support and is no longer paying.
                              Sue the goverment and social services and justice department for the loss people not currently paying child support.
                              3. The children themselves, who are now adults sue the goverment for lost disposible income and money that could be going towards activities and other areas because more money than should have been transfered has been transfered to the other parent.

                              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