Ottawa Divorce .com Forums

Straittohell · #11 11-07-2014, 09:40 PM

That our country exists in the 21st century, in which women have property rights, and dads actually act like parents and deserve the chance to do so. It was a dig against some people who espouse archaic viewpoints that belong in Victorian England.

mcdreamy · #12 11-07-2014, 09:55 PM

Oh, well that clears that thought up, because I am here in the 21st century as well, where I understood that women continue to be the main child care provider in the family unit, and also continue to be underpaid for similar work in the office, oversexualized, and assaulted regularly, no less. I can post th e stat #'s of each of the aforementioned if you wish, but I believe you are as generally aware of the numbers as I am.

Straittohell · #13 11-07-2014, 10:41 PM

Well, that's where my post clearly said that the courts are SLOWLY recognizing that things are changing. Which they are. Slowly.

Women are slowly gaining equality, men are slowly taking on more responsibility in the household, and courts are slowly recognizing that. Society is slowly recognizing that women are not mere sexual objects. Check out the comment strings on Jan Ghomeshis Facebook page if you don't believe how outraged many men are.

Feel free to dispute that things are different now from in the 1950s, but I'm sure you know the numbers on that just as well as I do.

I did the lions share of household chores in my household while married, continue to pull my weight with my partner, parent 50% of the time, pay loads of child support without enforcement required, and known of a number of men just like me.

Things aren't perfect but our society is changing, and not just because we are slowly recognizing the eqaulity of women, but because we are demanding more of our men, and many are stepping up and leading by example. I am a proud example of that.

We're not going to improve as a society if we continually gripe and moan about the current challenges. We're going to improve by pushing for imorovements one parent at a time.

Serene · #14 11-07-2014, 10:50 PM

If women want a new reality then they have to create it. If we continue to purport that we are the main child care providers and set aside our careers, we will never gain the traction we want.

Honestly, as much as I know equality is not here yet. I'm tired of the whining about it. Just hurry up and do something. Its not am impossible feat by far.

viewfromthecheapseats · #15 11-11-2014, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straittohell

That our country exists in the 21st century, in which women have property rights, and dads actually act like parents and deserve the chance to do so. It was a dig against some people who espouse archaic viewpoints that belong in Victorian England.

"Great change in the situation of women took place in the 19th century, especially concerning marriage laws and the legal rights of women to divorce and/or gain custody of children. The situation that fathers always received custody of their children, leaving the mother without any rights, slowly started to change. The Custody of Infants Act in 1839 gave mothers of unblemished character access to their children in the event of separation or divorce, and the Matrimonial Causes Act in 1857 gave women limited access to divorce. But while the husband only had to prove his wife's adultery, a woman had to prove her husband had not only committed adultery but also incest, bigamy, cruelty or desertion.[19] In 1873 the Custody of Infants Act extended access to children to all women in the event of separation or divorce. In 1878, after an amendment to the Matrimonial Causes Act, women could secure a separation on the grounds of cruelty and claim custody of their children." Wikipedia Women in Victorian Era.

It wasn't until almost the end of the Victorian Era that women had ANY chance of obtaining custody of their children regardless of the situation that had prompted divorce or separation. I see that the pendulum is finally starting to settle somewhere closer to the middle ground. Joint custody should be the default, there should be a requirement to prove that something other than joint custody is appropriate. That "proof" is often the point of contention.

arabian · #16 11-11-2014, 09:10 PM

Things are evolving yes but laws should always include the subsection of those who live today in subservient roles, outside of the mainstream of society (religions which endorse traditional roles for women).

mcdreamy · #17 11-11-2014, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by viewfromthecheapseats

It wasn't until almost the end of the Victorian Era that women had ANY chance of obtaining custody of their children regardless of the situation that had prompted divorce or separation. I see that the pendulum is finally starting to settle somewhere closer to the middle ground. Joint custody should be the default, there should be a requirement to prove that something other than joint custody is appropriate. That "proof" is often the point of contention.

Joint custody is more often than not the default. Joint 50-50 access is not, and the system appropriately enough looks to the best interest of the child to determine access.

Not much of a gender discussion and focus is not on what works best for the mother or the father (or their new partners), but on attempting at best to continue the kidlet's stability and strengthen the kidlet during transition.

As straittohell notes, as he was an active parent pre-separation, he is an active parent post separation.

mcdreamy · #18 11-11-2014, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straittohell

Well, that's where my post clearly said that the courts are SLOWLY recognizing that things are changing. Which they are. Slowly.

The courts aren't changing slowly -- the parenting is changing slowly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straittohell

We're not going to improve as a society if we continually gripe and moan about the current challenges. We're going to improve by pushing for imorovements one parent at a time.

I wholeheartedly concur -- if you have any friends who are getting married, having children, etc.... advise them to actively parent, involve themselves with their kids, get to know the teachers, etc.

I've mentioned this before I believe - 3 young families on my street, only one family has two parents that appear to be jointly parenting. Stop griping, moaning and get to parenting.

Links17 · #19 11-11-2014, 11:03 PM

I dont agree that even if one parent was more involved that should imply it should not be shared residency.

During a marriage for whatever reason it may be agreed due to earning potential difference and ambition that one parent child rears more and the other works more. In the case of the marriage between a doctor and a medical secretary it would make no sense in terms of the family unit for the medical secretary to work but with the spousal support principles in place if the doctor ALLOWED the secretary wife to not work he would have a bigger liability than if she worked (though the unjust SS system would grant her money anyways)

Once there is a divorce both parents are pretty much legally obliged to attempt to work full time so their agreement about the specialization of roles ENDs with the divorce.

Since that specialization ends with divorce why shouldn't the parenting roles end too?

Maybe one parent is better than the other parent but as long as both can adequately parent the children will benefit from having a solid relations with parents rather than solid with one and weak with the other.

The quebec model is now sooooo close to a presumption of shared custody i think it is just a matter of time.....

FaithandMorals · #20 11-11-2014, 11:34 PM

I agree that pre separation roles should not be weighted as much as they are.

Pre separation the parties were akin to riding a tandem bicycle together where one party did more steering etc.

Post separation both parties must ride the bike and steer independently. Put another way, they must both assume all of the responsibilities whereas before there was a division of labour.

That should be the starting point post separation. Then if one party doesn't do their bit, then the assumption of shared is restructured.

Ottawa Divorce .com Forums

User CP

New posts

Advertising

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

User Name
Password