Ottawa Divorce .com Forums

billiechic · #21 12-07-2011, 12:42 AM

Thank you Nadia for pointing out the obvious. red was chosen to illistrate the difference, and not becasue I am angry. well, maybe a little, but aren't we all fed up with being on here

But apparently Tayken cannot take the time to read even just a little bit about my history. It is quite easy to find out that I did in fact agree to 50/50 for two reasons:
1: i was intimidated into that agreement as he threatened to take my kid overseas
2: I firmly believe that my daughter deserves her father, and that he loves her, and that weekend fathers are not enough.

Just because my ex abused me does not mean he will abuse her. I know that. But it is a fact that abusers of spouses have a much higher chance of becoming abusers of children than non-abusers. (Don't ask me to quote a fact, ask any professional, I don't think this is in dispute)

So just because he abused me, does not mean that automatically rules out 50/50. In court maybe, and in fact many lawyers and court officials told me to fight for sole custody. But my daughter comes first, and I KNOW her dad loves her.

My intention of reporting to CAS was to INTERVENE. To have the situation investigated, protect my child, and if need be, make resources available for her father to get help. He was always so remorseful after he abused me and wanted help, so I had hopes that he would take the chance to make changes for our girl.

And even though I feel it is a little bit of an invasion of my privacy, I feel I have to defend myself here and address the hidden allegations by Tayken that I am calling CAS excessively.

FYI, this was the first and only time I called CAS. The other times they were called by counsellors, the police and once by an anonymous person. All calls were related to the domestic violence and were a result of routine and the duty to report. All CAS investigations have come up with a sparkling clean assessment, and recommendations that I continue exactly what I am doing as I am doing everything I can for my daughter. Only my call was related to my daughter's safety.

So again, Tayken I suggest you read your history or PM the poster before you post wild accusations or insinuate they are creating their own drama. I'm sure there are still some senior members around here who can vouch for me and tell you I am certainly not the crazy beeeeotch you have assumed I am. Anyone?

billiechic · #22 12-07-2011, 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by standing on the sidelines

so are you saying that that no one can make any conclusions on their exs mental state unless they are a qualified doctor??? Using your logic then Billiechic cannot make assumptions on what her ex may or may not do to the child.

I think that was directed to another poster. Since they do not know me personally, they cannot assume anything about my mental state.

I don't think she was referring to anyone making assumptions about their ex. God knows we know more about them than almost anyone, and wish that was not the case.

Mess · #23 12-07-2011, 02:20 AM

^ You mean I can diagnose my ex after all? Bonus!!

Tayken · #24 12-07-2011, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia

Billiechic, I think you did the responsible thing.

Tayken: Maybe she agreed to 50/50 because she felt that the child had a right to have a relationship with the other parent. Just because a spouse is abusive towards their partner does not 'automatically' mean that they are going to make a bad parent and therefore should have their access reduced. She made a conscious decision to encourage his relationship with the child by agreeing to 50/50 and didn't think her own relationship with him should discolour that in any way. I think that is a very difficult to do, but the best of us manage to do it under the most difficult of circumstances.

Yet, the CAS are now involved over an incident while with the other parent. The logic is hard to follow between the "emotional reasoning" from the facts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia

No one knows if the slap on the face or elsewhere on the child is going to lead to something a lot worse. But why take the chance? Why not get the parent the help he needs now in respect to anger management and parenting before the situation deteriorates. Hopefully CAS will recommend this.

Wishful thinking. CAS is not "parental police" they investigate abuse. It would be interesting to see the resulting letter posted to the site after CAS is done their investigation and the finding. Cogent evidence, not an opinion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia

Tayken, I don't care what model you are using to assess people's mental health, but unless Billiechic is a patient of yours, you have absolutely no right to draw any conclusions on her psychological state of mind based on what is posted on this forum.

I am studying emotional state not "psychological state" or "mental health". Emotional state may be grounded in psychological categories but, it is just observations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia

Why would you assume the worse? Why not simply accept what she is saying at face value and respond supportively?

Because the original poster is assuming the worst by contacting the CAS to file a complaint of abuse. Very serious matter. Furthermore, CAS, judges and others don't accept everything at "face value". Balance of probability.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia;81184

I agree, calling the CAS to investigate on "false" charges will eventually bite you in the butt. But there is a difference between filing a genuine complaint and making false allegations left, right and centre.

CAS is the best organization to determine that. Like I said. The use of CAS is for a reason. Understanding the reason is what they are good at doing. Genuine reasons (like abuse) are easily separated from a disgruntled spouse by CAS.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia

I think you got caught like a deer in the headlights mate, and then got all (very,um very) defensive about the use of font, capital letters and color...

Nadia

Defensive? Could you please provide the particulars on the 'defensive' words I presented in my argument? I would be more than happy to address them but, blanket statements without particulars are impossible to address.

Good Luck!
Tayken

Tayken · #25 12-07-2011, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billiechic

Thank you Nadia for pointing out the obvious. red was chosen to illistrate the difference, and not becasue I am angry. well, maybe a little, but aren't we all fed up with being on here

Red just represents anger.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia

But apparently Tayken cannot take the time to read even just a little bit about my history. It is quite easy to find out that I did in fact agree to 50/50 for two reasons:
1: i was intimidated into that agreement as he threatened to take my kid overseas
2: I firmly believe that my daughter deserves her father, and that he loves her, and that weekend fathers are not enough.

So you were (1) emotionally abused which the court could have protected you from and gave into the controlling demands of the other parent for 50-50? Does #1 overrule your logic of #2 which is your daughter's "best interests"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia

Just because my ex abused me does not mean he will abuse her. I know that. But it is a fact that abusers of spouses have a much higher chance of becoming abusers of children than non-abusers. (Don't ask me to quote a fact, ask any professional, I don't think this is in dispute)

And as such no professional would recommend that a child be left alone with a parent who has committed violent acts of intimate partner abuse without clinical clearance that it won't continue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia

So just because he abused me, does not mean that automatically rules out 50/50. In court maybe, and in fact many lawyers and court officials told me to fight for sole custody. But my daughter comes first, and I KNOW her dad loves her.

I can be argued against the Best Interests rule in the CLRA that the prior acts are reason for the grounds of sole custody. Just pointing out a fact. The argument is a hard one and I don't disagree with your statement but, you are sighting abuse that is all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia

My intention of reporting to CAS was to INTERVENE. To have the situation investigated, protect my child, and if need be, make resources available for her father to get help. He was always so remorseful after he abused me and wanted help, so I had hopes that he would take the chance to make changes for our girl.

What resources are you leveraging for yourself in all this? This is not a rude question. It is a honest question. The reason I ask is that intimate partner abuse results often in post traumatic scars.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia

And even though I feel it is a little bit of an invasion of my privacy, I feel I have to defend myself here and address the hidden allegations by Tayken that I am calling CAS excessively.

Privacy is a matter of how much you choose to disclose on the forum.

If you are not calling CAS excessively that is good.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia

FYI, this was the first and only time I called CAS. The other times they were called by counsellors, the police and once by an anonymous person. All calls were related to the domestic violence and were a result of routine and the duty to report. All CAS investigations have come up with a sparkling clean assessment, and recommendations that I continue exactly what I am doing as I am doing everything I can for my daughter. Only my call was related to my daughter's safety.

Yet, despite findings no intervention on your child's behalf to restrict the other parents access? Rather puzzling but, I haven't seen the reports just your posts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia

So again, Tayken I suggest you read your history or PM the poster before you post wild accusations or insinuate they are creating their own drama. I'm sure there are still some senior members around here who can vouch for me and tell you I am certainly not the crazy beeeeotch you have assumed I am. Anyone?

Could you please provide the particulars to the "wild accusations" or "insinuations" which appear to be projections of "emotional facts". I would be more than happy to address each one.

Yours very truly,
Tayken

WorkingDAD · #26 12-07-2011, 05:10 PM

You maybe surprised but mom already involved CAS (assembling another bunch of lies)

I had a visit from CAS worker - nice lady. that was nice of her to read our case from CanLii before she came so she got an idea what she id dealing with...

I am not ready to share details yet but what I can tell for sure. People forget one thing when using CAS. CAS is a last resort and should be used when you have very very good reason. I am talking about case when parents use CAS against one another especially.

I was came across one material during my research for the trial.

Quote:

Remedies for Unfair Tactics in Family Law Cases
How to Handle Questionable Allegations of Child Abuse
Lorne V. Glass and Tammy Law
Glass Murray Bianchi

it's about 20 pages reading.
here is some points from it.

Quote:

According to the 2003 Canadian Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse
and Neglect, 49% of all reported allegations of child abuse and neglect made to child protection agencies were regarded as substantiated by the worker
undertaking the investigation, 29% were unsu bstantiated but made in good faith, and 4% were considered to be intentionally false. Of the reports that were intentionally false, it was fo und that the majority of such allegations were made by the non-custodial parents. The Study also found that non-custodial parents generally made allegations with respect to neglect, while custodial parents generally made allegations about sexual or physical abuse. Interestingly, the Study also found that although intentionally false allegations were infrequent, where there was an ongoing custody or access dispute at the time of the report, the rate of intentionally false allegations increased significantly to 14%.2 Clearly, in the context of custody and access disputes, false allegations of abuse are a significant problem that lawyers should be aware of.

and this one I think should keep in mind anyone who decided or will decide to step on that path

Quote:

Although some parents may believe that making allegations of abuse is an effective way of obtaining custody of their children, the lawyer should inform such parents that repeated false allegations of a buse may sometimes prompt action by a children's aid society. In some high conflict cases, a children's aid society may feel it necessary to apprehend the children from both parents and place them with a foster family. In Re S.(D.),5 for example, the Court held that the children were at risk of suffering emotional harm while in the care of their father. In coming to this conclusion, the Court pointed to the intense conflict between the father and the mother, the father's failure to protect the children from matrimonial conflict, and the
father's act of unwittingly encouraging the children to make false disclosures of abuse. The Court found that the children's aid society's decision to apprehend the children was justified on the basis of the father's failure to protect the children from emotional harm.

Quote:

In addition, there has been at least one case where a child protection court
has ordered a change in custody where the court found that the significant false allegations of abuse by one parent against the other had led to emotional harm in the child. In Children's Aid Society of Ottawa v. y.(p.),6 the court found that the child suffered from emotional harm as a result of the father's repeated false allegations of abuse in front of the child as well as the derogatory comments made by the father against the mother. Although a final joint custody order had previously been agreed to by the parties, the court held that the false allegations of abuse generally arose after the joint custody order was made and that there was a material change of circumstances that justified granting the mother sole custody over the child with supervised access to the father.

Mess · #27 12-07-2011, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tayken

Red just represents anger.

And black represents evil. Stop quoting people in black font.

I've known Billie for a long time and I have to bluntly say that you have just plained assumed a lot about her, and what you assumed is wrong.

Her stance is that even though her ex was abusive and controlling toward her, that he is a decent father and cares about their daughter. She believes in the best interest of their child, and she believes that the best interest is maximum involvement of both parents. She's put that into practice. It doesn't make the relationship between her and her ex any less toxic.

Billie has been walking a fine line between dealing with the abuse of her ex and the fundamental need of a child to have two parents. She's done an admirable job and far better than I could have done or 99% of divorced parents. That said, you can't make a silk purse out of a pig's asshole, and her ex definately qualifies as the latter.

Honestly, I think it's better you stand down on this, there's nothing to accomplish here by dragging it out.

Tayken · #28 12-08-2011, 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mess

And black represents evil. Stop quoting people in black font.

No problem. But black is the colour of font used to print books.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mess

I've known Billie for a long time and I have to bluntly say that you have just plained assumed a lot about her, and what you assumed is wrong.

So I take it you have met the other parent and the other parent has posted in response to the allegations being made against him. Have you reviewed the continuing record.

Thank-you for your opinion. I do value them as you tend to have a good perspective on things. Without true insight from the other person who the allegations are being made against responding it is just a one sided debate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mess

Her stance is that even though her ex was abusive and controlling toward her, that he is a decent father and cares about their daughter. She believes in the best interest of their child, and she believes that the best interest is maximum involvement of both parents. She's put that into practice. It doesn't make the relationship between her and her ex any less toxic.

I agree. But, calling CAS doesn't "improve" the toxicity either. CAS just adds unnecessary stress on both parents (and children especially) in the matter. That is why I take the position that CAS an organization for "children" and not toxic parents. The involvement of these agencies (and law enforcement) rarely helps the toxicity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mess

Billie has been walking a fine line between dealing with the abuse of her ex and the fundamental need of a child to have two parents.

It is a difficult rope to walk. I don't disagree. But, there is a lot of reliance on past events in the communications from the poster of this abuse. If the abuse continues it isn't good for the child and a different access / custody arrangement may be in order.

Toxicity can have a damaging effect on children.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mess

She's done an admirable job and far better than I could have done or 99% of divorced parents. That said, you can't make a silk purse out of a pig's asshole, and her ex definitely qualifies as the latter.

So I take it you know him personally? You have seen the court file? Or just the postings on a public message board with no substantiation to any of the claims?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mess

Honestly, I think it's better you stand down on this, there's nothing to accomplish here by dragging it out.

Thank-you for your opinion. I have no intention to enter into a "flame war" on this board. It is a public form filled with opinions. Just like a pig's asshole, everyone has an opinion. If the OP doesn't want opinions, might i suggest that a public message board is not the best place to post your personal problems then.

Good Luck!
Tayken

Tayken · #29 12-08-2011, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by standing on the sidelines

so are you saying that that no one can make any conclusions on their exs mental state unless they are a qualified doctor??? Using your logic then Billiechic cannot make assumptions on what her ex may or may not do to the child.

Interesting observation. As abuse is rooted in a mental health condition the allegation of "abuse" is an observation of a mental health condition by the accuser. Now, the right thing is to call CAS and have a professional investigate the allegation of the mental health condition being made. That is why CAS exists and why Social Workers do the investigations. Because they are clinicians with mental health training.

Abusive people have underlying mental health conditions. Like any other health condition it requires proper treatment. But, a finding of abuse has to be made by the clinician for the next phase of treatment to start. The challenge with mental health (and all health care) is that if the person refuses to get treatment there is rarely anything that can be done.

The only option for parents is motions in court and eventually trial and sole custody. It is unfortunate that the health care system isn't more involved in family dispute resolution. On high-conflict cases at a minimum...

The litigated process is all about conflict. Which is unfortunate.

Collaborative law takes a different approach but, is very costly to most families unfortunately.

Good Luck!
Tayken

Mess · #30 12-08-2011, 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tayken

So I take it you have met the other parent and the other parent has posted in response to the allegations being made against him. Have you reviewed the continuing record.

Thank-you for your opinion. I do value them as you tend to have a good perspective on things. Without true insight from the other person who the allegations are being made against responding it is just a one sided debate.

It's not a debate, it's an ad hominem on your part. You feel, even though you do not know either parent, have any access to the continuing record or any direct information about the situation, that you have enough information to form a deductive conclusion.

I'll remind you that every assumption you make lowers your likelyhood of being right exponentially.

Having made your conclusion about Billie, you label her and of course now she's wrong because of your label.

Usually you are fair minded and knowledgable and I was thinking your first post to her was just an off day, but there is no call here to keep pushing the issue. You aren't "right". You aren't even in the loop.

Ottawa Divorce .com Forums

User CP

New posts

Advertising

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

User Name
Password