Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Publicly shaming Fathers

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by iona6656 View Post
    He said "women need to start paying their dues" and he's tired of carrying them. Not only is that wrong- but it's utterly laughable. If this pandemic has shown us anything is that the work that women, and more specifically mothers do is highly UNDERVALUED.

    He sounds like a bitter MGTOW dude. Yes, I am laughing AT him. He wanted to start a website of deadbeat moms. Every post I've seen from him is a gross, and contemptible, generalization of women in separation proceedings.
    I see him as generalizing for the sake of simplicity.
    Maybe it isn't catchy but what is the female counterpart to "deadbeat dad"?


    "If this pandemic has shown us anything is that the work that women, and more specifically mothers do is highly UNDERVALUED. "
    LOL who is being sexist now?

    I am a guy and care for my kids more than 1/2 the time AND I work; my kids did online school at my place not hers.

    The ex spends time with her friends, less than 1/2 time with kids and didn't work even though there was plenty available to her, paid at $0 on child support;

    What term should be used for her?

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by rockscan View Post
      Shaming parents who don�t pay support? I agree to that. Especially since they give parents who do pay support a bad name.

      You obviously had a set back in your case as you tend to poke your head up whenever you want to bang your drum about �inequality�.

      I commend FRO for posting that stuff. Too bad they can�t imprison them and make them work off their debt. Shame on them for avoiding their responsibilities!

      And I say all this as a child of a deadbeat who hid in northern Ontario working for cash to avoid paying support. We had to resort to social assistance due to the lack of support and also do the leg work to try and root him out.
      I haven't dealt with FRO personally, but there are number of true life stories with sad end about this horrible organization.
      Paul Donovan - truck driver, paid support since 1996. In 2010 (14 years after not missing a single payment) he missed two payments because industry had downturn (this happens, right)? FRO suspended his driver's license and refused to reinstate it before he pays back, yet he didn't have way earning it back without the license. Instead FRO demanded 10,000 or 6 months in prison, and judge when he explained he can't earn without license told him "she couldn't help". He ended his life on train tracks.
      Andrew T. Renouf - went out of this world after FRO garnished 100% of his income, leaving him 43 cents in the account. Food and Shelter office refused to help, because by "officially" he was employed.

      These are just first two links in google.

      How common the story that man pays support for decades, and mother brainwashes child "your dad doesn't pay for your support a dime"? It happens way more often than it seems. But judges don't even consider this as an issue.

      When father's income drops, judge imputes it. But when mother earns in cash tons of money under the table, judge closes the eyes with a very rare exception, and often dad can't afford the lawyer to bring the motion, as he pays support, but mother can. The system is extremely gender biased.

      The problem with publicly shaming fathers... Well, it isn't in "best interest of child" as they so much like to say.
      Firstly, child likely shares same last name as father. Secondly, despite what mom tells, child may still love father, he pays support or not. Thirdly, by publicly panishing in many cases you reduce father's ability to earn money, as it makes him less hirable, and thus reduces his abilities paying the support.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by respondent View Post
        I haven't dealt with FRO personally, but there are number of true life stories with sad end about this horrible organization.
        Paul Donovan - truck driver, paid support since 1996. In 2010 (14 years after not missing a single payment) he missed two payments because industry had downturn (this happens, right)? FRO suspended his driver's license and refused to reinstate it before he pays back, yet he didn't have way earning it back without the license. Instead FRO demanded 10,000 or 6 months in prison, and judge when he explained he can't earn without license told him "she couldn't help". He ended his life on train tracks.
        Andrew T. Renouf - went out of this world after FRO garnished 100% of his income, leaving him 43 cents in the account. Food and Shelter office refused to help, because by "officially" he was employed.

        These are just first two links in google.

        How common the story that man pays support for decades, and mother brainwashes child "your dad doesn't pay for your support a dime"? It happens way more often than it seems. But judges don't even consider this as an issue.

        When father's income drops, judge imputes it. But when mother earns in cash tons of money under the table, judge closes the eyes with a very rare exception, and often dad can't afford the lawyer to bring the motion, as he pays support, but mother can. The system is extremely gender biased.

        The problem with publicly shaming fathers... Well, it isn't in "best interest of child" as they so much like to say.
        Firstly, child likely shares same last name as father. Secondly, despite what mom tells, child may still love father, he pays support or not. Thirdly, by publicly panishing in many cases you reduce father's ability to earn money, as it makes him less hirable, and thus reduces his abilities paying the support.

        Go and look at the cases of the most wanted on FRO. None of those cases are ones like you note. The publicly shamed fathers are the ones who have deserted their kids and never paid a dime.

        Not the same situation.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by rockscan View Post
          Go and look at the cases of the most wanted on FRO. None of those cases are ones like you note. The publicly shamed fathers are the ones who have deserted their kids and never paid a dime.

          Not the same situation.
          Or they could decide to disappear because FRO and the court system makes their life's so hopeless that suicide becomes an only alternative.

          If system wasn't so unfair, I think we wouldn't see so many cases when parent disappears.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by respondent View Post
            Or they could decide to disappear because FRO and the court system makes their life's so hopeless that suicide becomes an only alternative.

            If system wasn't so unfair, I think we wouldn't see so many cases when parent disappears.

            You still aren’t getting it.

            I was a child of someone who refused to pay support and took off working under the table. You have no idea what that does to a child or family. FRO was built because of kids like me. The fathers who are being shamed should be. Do a google search of dads who were caught and you will see just how terrible they are.

            Not to mention those deadbeats make it difficult for all the other good paying parents. My husband is with FRO and it is not a problem or an inconvenience.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by rockscan View Post
              You still aren�t getting it.

              I was a child of someone who refused to pay support and took off working under the table. You have no idea what that does to a child or family. FRO was built because of kids like me. The fathers who are being shamed should be. Do a google search of dads who were caught and you will see just how terrible they are.

              Not to mention those deadbeats make it difficult for all the other good paying parents. My husband is with FRO and it is not a problem or an inconvenience.
              Roughly half of my friends going through a divorce have an "ex" who brainwashes the child that father doesn't pay child support, despite every single one does pay it in full. And guess what? Court doesn't care about it.

              Despite idea of child support is great, it very often goes against children. Many fathers would love to raise their children equally. And many mothers would allow that as having two parents better than one, but in many cases desire of getting that table amount starts the litigation and stupid claims in court for years "he is bad parent". Does it benefit children that their parents litigate for 3-5 years over the custody until their life savings run out? They don't have life with either of parents.

              I didn't leave my children, but I could easily see how someone with less money would have no choice. The system is broken. If all separations were starting with automatic equal parenting, and it was mother/father responsibility to prove need for different arrangements, it would've be completely different case.

              It would also help if child support money could only be spent on kids and on nothing else.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by respondent View Post
                Roughly half of my friends going through a divorce have an "ex" who brainwashes the child that father doesn't pay child support, despite every single one does pay it in full. And guess what? Court doesn't care about it.
                So because of your handful of friends we shouldn’t go after people who aren’t doing anything about their kids? Because of a small few bad mothers we as a society shouldn’t expect other parents to take responsibility?

                Despite idea of child support is great, it very often goes against children. Many fathers would love to raise their children equally. And many mothers would allow that as having two parents better than one, but in many cases desire of getting that table amount starts the litigation and stupid claims in court for years "he is bad parent". Does it benefit children that their parents litigate for 3-5 years over the custody until their life savings run out? They don't have life with either of parents.
                The amount of cases this involves is low. You are simply bitter about your experience. Not to mention that many of the cases going through extensive litigation are because both parents refuse to let shit go. It takes two to tango.

                I didn’t leave my children, but I could easily see how someone with less money would have no choice. The system is broken. If all separations were starting with automatic equal parenting, and it was mother/father responsibility to prove need for different arrangements, it would've be completely different case.
                Again the number of men being shamed is low and they are special cases where the parent has taken off and refuses to pay anything. I know a woman who has an order sitting at 200g in unpaid support. Her ex finally got caught and wants her to take pity on him meanwhile she worked three jobs to raise her kids. Should we be ok with mothers working two or three jobs to food on the table? Living on welfare? Putting their kids in foster care because their father refuses to take responsibility.

                It would also help if child support money could only be spent on kids and on nothing else.
                There are very few people who don’t spend the money on food and shelter.

                Get over your issues with support, your ex and “the system”. This has nothing to do with the majority of people but only with the few who are assholes.


                Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by rockscan View Post
                  So because of your handful of friends we shouldn�t go after people who aren�t doing anything about their kids? Because of a small few bad mothers we as a society shouldn�t expect other parents to take responsibility?
                  I could just use the same argument that your isolated personal childhood experience has nothing to do with big numbers, and what makes you think that your mother didn't lie to you? Many kids find it out only decades later that their dad in fact was paying the support and mother wasn't allowing him seeing the child.

                  Originally posted by rockscan View Post
                  The amount of cases this involves is low. You are simply bitter about your experience. Not to mention that many of the cases going through extensive litigation are because both parents refuse to let shit go. It takes two to tango.
                  This litigation happens primarily because for father it is uphill battle to win the right to spend time with children and to raise them. Why mothers don't mind 35-39% live with dad, but reject 40%-50%? The answer is simple, because they use child as an access to dad's bank account.

                  Originally posted by rockscan View Post
                  Again the number of men being shamed is low and they are special cases where the parent has taken off and refuses to pay anything. I know a woman who has an order sitting at 200g in unpaid support.
                  It would only be fair if FRO set's up a parallel page that those men committed suicide because of FRO actions and because courts are side with mothers.


                  I never had an experience with FRO, but this organization has no right to exist.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    If you have never had an experience with them you shouldn’t be commenting.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by respondent View Post
                      I could just use the same argument that your isolated personal childhood experience has nothing to do with big numbers, and what makes you think that your mother didn't lie to you? Many kids find it out only decades later that their dad in fact was paying the support and mother wasn't allowing him seeing the child.


                      This litigation happens primarily because for father it is uphill battle to win the right to spend time with children and to raise them. Why mothers don't mind 35-39% live with dad, but reject 40%-50%? The answer is simple, because they use child as an access to dad's bank account.


                      It would only be fair if FRO set's up a parallel page that those men committed suicide because of FRO actions and because courts are side with mothers.


                      I never had an experience with FRO, but this organization has no right to exist.
                      1) Agree with you . My ex is educated and capable of earnign more than me but refuses to work . I pay her 7k a month and still not enough even though children are with me 50% of the time .
                      2) The only solution to this shit is I have figured out is to get a foreign passport and move to a jurisdiction which disregards canadian courts .
                      File a petition in the local courts there which simply overturns the canadian courts jurisdiction and walk out with legal rights where you are not persecuted for being a paying parent .

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by rockscan View Post
                        If you have never had an experience with them you shouldn�t be commenting.
                        why not? You don't have experience with them as a payor either, right?

                        I do happen to know few truck drivers who's license got suspended by FRO, after years of paying a support. One of them indeed ended up in jail (was less than 6 months, I think 3 or something) because FRO frozen his driver's license and he couldn't possible earn income.

                        The other truck driver I posted prior committed suicide, again because of FRO. They were paying support for years when they could, but when their industry got temporary slowdown, the FRO actions led to one of them leaving this world, and the other one going to jail, and child rather than getting smaller support got no support at all.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by respondent View Post
                          why not? You don't have experience with them as a payor either, right?

                          I do happen to know few truck drivers who's license got suspended by FRO, after years of paying a support. One of them indeed ended up in jail (was less than 6 months, I think 3 or something) because FRO frozen his driver's license and he couldn't possible earn income.

                          The other truck driver I posted prior committed suicide, again because of FRO. They were paying support for years when they could, but when their industry got temporary slowdown, the FRO actions led to one of them leaving this world, and the other one going to jail, and child rather than getting smaller support got no support at all.

                          Actually my husband has been dealing with them for almost a decade and I assist him with all of our financial and legal matters. Whenever he’s had a problem or question he has worked through it with his caseworker. It is a challenge yes but not difficult enough to give up.

                          Your friends who had this happen had other choices and that was to deal with court and they didn’t do it. There is a former poster here who had more than $7000 in arrears filed against him and a warning that his license would be suspended. He filed in court immediately. It was dealt with and he was able to continue working.

                          If your friends were thrown in jail they weren’t paying support and they weren’t dealing with FRO or the courts and that’s on them. They don’t target people or go after people maliciously. You pay support or they deal with you. Jail is the result of a lot of support not paid and no new order which means they did nothing. I have zero sympathy for people who rail against the system but stick their heads in the sand throughout.

                          You can save your statements. I won’t be swayed. FRO and other maintenance agencies serve a purpose. The amount of people who are treated “unfairly” is low. As the tag line says “good parents pay”. If you are a good payor, there are no issues.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by rockscan View Post
                            Actually my husband has been dealing with them for almost a decade and I assist him with all of our financial and legal matters. Whenever he�s had a problem or question he has worked through it with his caseworker. It is a challenge yes but not difficult enough to give up.

                            Your friends who had this happen had other choices and that was to deal with court and they didn�t do it. There is a former poster here who had more than $7000 in arrears filed against him and a warning that his license would be suspended. He filed in court immediately. It was dealt with and he was able to continue working.

                            If your friends were thrown in jail they weren�t paying support and they weren�t dealing with FRO or the courts and that�s on them. They don�t target people or go after people maliciously. You pay support or they deal with you. Jail is the result of a lot of support not paid and no new order which means they did nothing. I have zero sympathy for people who rail against the system but stick their heads in the sand throughout.

                            You can save your statements. I won�t be swayed. FRO and other maintenance agencies serve a purpose. The amount of people who are treated �unfairly� is low. As the tag line says �good parents pay�. If you are a good payor, there are no issues.
                            the fact that your experience was successful doesn't mean that everybody's was.

                            Here are just two REAL cases I quoted prior. People have died specifically due to actions of FRO and the court. And Paul Donovan did go to court - the judge who didn't let him have his license back so he could earn money and pay support is responsible for his death just the same as FRO.

                            https://canadiancrc.com/Andrew-Renou...R_17_1995.aspx

                            https://canadiancrc.com/SUICIDE_FATH...an_London.aspx

                            Before any enforcement could take place, the system should be fixed.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by respondent View Post
                              the fact that your experience was successful doesn't mean that everybody's was.

                              Here are just two REAL cases I quoted prior. People have died specifically due to actions of FRO and the court. And Paul Donovan did go to court - the judge who didn't let him have his license back so he could earn money and pay support is responsible for his death just the same as FRO.

                              https://canadiancrc.com/Andrew-Renou...R_17_1995.aspx

                              https://canadiancrc.com/SUICIDE_FATH...an_London.aspx

                              Before any enforcement could take place, the system should be fixed.

                              Two cases doesn’t mean FRO is wrong. And you are still missing the point of the thread. The men being shamed on the FRO site are deadbeats in every sense of the word. You should be angry with them that we need enforcement agencies who take such drastic measures.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by rockscan View Post
                                Two cases doesn�t mean FRO is wrong. And you are still missing the point of the thread. The men being shamed on the FRO site are deadbeats in every sense of the word. You should be angry with them that we need enforcement agencies who take such drastic measures.
                                The FRO collected 100% of his wage - first 50% when the paycheque was issued, and second 50% when it was deposited, so let's face it, the FRO made a mistake, yet they refused to even admit it or apologize and refused attending poor man funerals.

                                The shame board is not smart for two simple reasons. It affects children, and they could quickly be bullied in school that their dad has abandoned them, as kids have internet too and often know how to use it better than parents. It also affects ability of dad to earn money to pay the support, thus once again affects the child. Same goes for driver's license - some people need it to get to/from work, some people use it for work.

                                If you really want something fair regarding the support payments, the law should be changed. There shouldn't be a need for motion with 8 months wait when there is significant material change - in most cases you won't even have money to bring that motion. There should be equal parenting from the very start. Then we will talk.

                                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