Dad will help other Dads

Status
Not open for further replies.
my two cents for your book

my two cents for your book

Decent Dad said:
I have been in court for 3 years. I have joint access and joint custody. Still fighting for another year over money. My ex is the typical ex with the axe to grind. And the system is helping her all along the way.

When I am done, I am working on a book to help fathers. I am also working towards getting the Divorce Laws reformed. It is just pure bullsh*t.

The system is wrong.

I will try to help any father I can. Sorry mom, you have enough help already. BTW, I am not against mom's - just the system and people (mom's) who use it to be vindictive.
Click to expand...
Just thought I would add my two cents for your book. In those cases of divorce where children are involved there should be an automatic court appointed registered social worker who specialises in childrens issues and a mediator to facillitate an agreement based on the best interest of the children.For instance , although mom may not want dad to have anything but limited contact with the children if there is not a sound reason for it the RSW and and mediator could prevail to act in what best serves the children (obviously seeing their father).In short they would have veto power over two squabbling adults who most likely have less sense then their children anyway. In otherwords cut to the chase, cut out the high price lawyers, and deliver an agreement that is fair by the norms of current society and let everyone get on with there lives. The money saved could be better spent on the childrens education.A few lawyers may have to wait till next year for a new beemer . And just possibly the children will not have to witness their parents behaving like village idiots---even if it is only one of the parents.
 
I am a women and let me tell you I am sad to hear how people
use the system. I think people should be decent to each other.
I actually makes me sick to my stomach to read about these men
who are racked over the coils over and over and yet some women
don't get anything. I can only support you and tell you that not all
women are like this ... and I think in due time things will work out
for you and the kids. Maybe difficult right now, but stand strong.
To me being a good parent is the best thing ever, this will prove
to you in later years. When children grow up they look back and
see things for what they were.... and beleive me they will
If that is all you have for now maybe you can live on that ...
good luck and stay strong
 
As far as i'm concerned, in my opinion, the "system" is unfair to children. As horrible as it sounds i think that there should be hidden cameras in the houses of both parties involved in a custody battle to see the interactions with a child and it's parent. To see which party is the most suitable or why a child does or does not want to be somewhere. Without the parents knowing so that they can't "play it up" for the camera.

I don't care about either parent, who cares? It's the children that matter the parents can adjust, they're old enough to figure it out and be mature. It's the children that need to be litened to, interview the children with child psycologists, no matter what the age of the child. See where it fits and what it thinks of everything going on. They are smarter than people give them credit for. That's what i think.

The system is terribly flawed in this respect. What's best for every case on a case by case basis, not generalities. Every family is different and every situation is different. Do what's HONESTLY best for the children not what benifits you best. The children. Truley.
 
One thing is certain is that children do grow up and they do remember a good portion of their child hood. They will remember when one parent denied an opportunity for them to spend quality time with the other parent.

What goes around does come around.
 
logicalvelocity said:
One thing is certain is that children do grow up and they do remember a good portion of their child hood. They will remember when one parent denied an opportunity for them to spend quality time with the other parent.

What goes around does come around.
Click to expand...

So true.
You think they might forget... wrong
I can still remember things from when I was aged 5 and up.
 
logicalvelocity said:
One thing is certain is that children do grow up and they do remember a good portion of their child hood. They will remember when one parent denied an opportunity for them to spend quality time with the other parent.

What goes around does come around.
Click to expand...


It does indeed. And children will remember the trauma and the lonliness of being abandoned, or being with someone who doesn't love them. I remember my childhood. I know what they feel, i remember. Parents need to step up and HONESTLY do what's right for their children. Not for themselves.
 
Folks, sorry for not following this thread more closely. I have been posting in so many other threads and answering e-mails.

I know there are decent people out there. And that there are great women out there - I am currently married to one!

But the laws are wrong, and these biased courts are just unreal.
 
well these comments are scary, sounds like all my ex's friends (who all have ex's some more than one) and complain, however have hockey tickets, girlfriends, free time, cars and how to get out of paying - it's not cheap to feed and clothe children (they grow), plus they want what their friends have. This is disturbing in a lot of ways, because I left to save myself and give my daughter some type of healthy life.

Just remember if you have a daughter, she will most likely be one of the women "complaining" on this site.
 
A Perfect Family Law System

A Perfect Family Law System

Interesting thread.

As someone who works in the family law system, there is truth to the assertions that fathers make about bias running rampant through the system, at the same time there is also truth to the assertions that mothers make about being victimized by divorce laws.

The Divorce Act is probably in need of a makeover, but is shared parenting going to become the law of the land? Will child support legislation change to something other than the guidelines? Will pensions no longer be divisable? No, no and no.

The existing system we have sets court (an inherently adversarial process) as the final arbiter for disputes between parents. It will always be adversarial because that's the nature of law - amid adversity, the truth is bound to emerge.

What separates family law from criminal law, for example, is that while there is a burden of proof in both systems, the family law system allows for either side to make wild allegations about each other without requiring evidence to back it up. Now let me back up for a second.

Are men and women imperfect? Yes.
Did men and women create our existing laws? Yes.
Do men and women preside over family law matters in their capacity as a judge? Yes.
Are men and women imperfect? Yes.
Are you going to get perfect justice every time? No
Why?
Because men and women are imperfect.

Law is a rule book. An imperfect rule book, but a rule book nonetheless. Family law, unlike other forms of law, is often a barometer of our current place in time as a society. 40 years ago, it took an act of Parilament to grant a divorce.. now it doesn't. My mother who divorced in 1962 lost everything she had, inheritences, her home - everything - because she intiated a divorce in a period of our history where divorce simply wasn't done.

Flash forward to 1986 - a new law governs divorce. It introduces the concept of "no fault" to the process - it makes divorce easier to obtain. The trade off is that while it is easier to obtain (on paper) increased rights and responsibilites for both men and women mean that there is much more to divide - from the kids the the dining room set. What happened as a result was an initial spike in the divorce rate after the law changed in 1986, and a levelling off of divorce rates over the last ten or so years - hovering around 40% nationally.

Flash forward to 2006 - now we have twenty years of the current law. We have a generation of children from the 1986 law obtaining divorces of their own. We have increased numbers of second marriages failing because of ongoing litigation from the first marriage. In my area of work, it is very common to have men and women on their second failed marriage entering the divorce process.

No, the system isn't perfect and it never will be perfect. Emphasis needs to be placed on doing to high conflict divorce what we, as a culture, did to cigarette smoking or drunk driving - make it socially unacceptable behavior to engage in high conflict divorce. Will that happen? Probably not. Why? Because divorce is a downer that married people don't want to talk about. It's a political hot potato (everyone who has a history in the system knows about the general dysfunction of the Joint Senate Parliamentary Committee on Custody and Access hearings back in 1998.)

A perfect law will never exist. Mandatory shared parenting might be seen as a means to eliminate all of the fighting, but the reality is that in order to eliminate the conflict, you have to change people's behaviors. A shared parenting law will not change behaviors because there will always be parents out there who believe they are right and their former spouse is wrong.

So what is the alternative?

A vigorous national debate about divorce and it's impact on children. Period - end of story. Open dialogue about how the lack of programs and services for families in the process acts to increase conflict. A national discussion about the cost of accessing justice and whether there is an alternative method of dealing with dispute that can be implemented - say, for example, mandatory mediation/arbitration.

It's not a perfect world - I wish that it was. For every father's rights guy who says the system is biased, I want to introduce them to some of my female clients who have been out of the work force for 15 years and are now unemployable and who are economically dependent on their former husbands. For every mother who thinks it is her divine right to be in charge of the kids, I want to introduce them to the fathers who are taking every conceivable parent education, anger management and divorce education program known to man and who still face a wall when they try to get more time with the kids.

I think education is key in changing attitudes. Not just for those who make the decisions about family law, but for the public in general. We don't talk about divorce as a culture because as a culture, we are in love with the idea of marriage. Proof of this can be seen in last year's national debate about same sex marriage.

Opponents of same sex marriage were vociferously pointing out that SSM would destroy traditional marriage. Hypocrisy! How can SSM destroy traditional marriage when nearly half of the straight people out there are doing a pretty damned good job of it all on their own? What made me really mad was that you would think that such an obvious thing as this would have been picked up by the news media - but no. Why? Because it would have driven news coverage from same sex marriage to straight people marriage and maybe we aren't quite ready to talk about the fact that so many people in Canada see divorce as a massive, unsolvable challenge.

Divorce is hard work. I have worked in the system long enough to know that changing laws does not change attitudes - time does. Social acceptance of an alternative method of looking at divorce and it's impact can occur when there are feasible alternatives being made available. The last place anyone should be is in a court room - so why not talk about alternatives to court?

The system can change, but people have to change themselves to make whatever system we have - work.
 
Agreed Sean. This is why some people can make things work amongst themselves after a divorce/seperation while others cannot ... its a choice, and it begins with the individual.

Hubby
 
If you are in a high conflict divorce, why would any woman seek an alternative to court? The odds are in her favour to get custody and get the majority of access. Once that is established, the flood of money pours in.

It is correct that no law will change a person's attitude. If you are in a high conflict divorce, it is usually one person's attitude, or better said "their god given right" to have the kids, money, revenge, that is causing this high conflict. All these "laws" do is encourage this behaviour.

There are many places that are attempting to, or in the progress of, switching from these loosy-goosy "laws" to firm rules.

I think you are wrong that default joint custody and default joint access would not help mess of society called divorce. All this conflict is based on "kids are the prize".

Finally, I think your example of a "biased system" because a women must depend on the husand's support to survive, has nothing to do with THE SYSTEM. The SYSTEM is providing her. For her the SYSTEM works. Like most recipients though, some how it is never enough.
 
You know what, DecentDad? I'm really getting sick and tired of your attitude! I know; polite society (and internet) says not to say things like that, but I'm fed up! I keep trying to be patient with you and your intermittent remarks about the poor victimized fathers out there, realizing you (just like all of us) have your own personal situation that must impact your views, but you're just flat-out becoming an obnoxious pain in the butt! We've ALL got our own sob stories, we've ALL got our own feelings and concerns, or NONE of us would be here, but what makes you think anyone appreciates or benefits from your black and white statements such as this:

Decent Dad said:
If you are in a high conflict divorce, why would any woman seek an alternative to court? The odds are in her favour to get custody and get the majority of access. Once that is established, the flood of money pours in.
Click to expand...

I'm a woman in a high conflict divorce, seeking an alternative to court! Even if the odds were ACTUALLY in my favour to get custody and restrict my ex's access (and I continually get the impression they are NOT in spite of my ex being an alcoholic who's still drinking, heavy into drugs now, too, makes a good amount of money every year, yet hasn't paid one thin dime of support in almost 5 months), I STILL think it's imperative that parents do everything possible to work together for their kids' sake, whenever possible.. and nope; haven't seen that "flood of money" you refer to.. for goodness' sakes, tell me where to find it, ok? Because I'm having a hell of a time finding money to buy bigger shoes for my kids, and I can't afford summer PJs or T-shirts; although their "father" made about 90K last year.

I'm continually told and finding through research that if the father's got money and the mother doesn't, the most common 'tactic' is for the father to litigate until the mother has no options or finances left.. I continually see the courts bending over backward to provide "rights" to fathers who have finally 'decided', well into their childrens' lives, to be a part of things NOW that they're 'ready'... I continually see women fighting for the safety and well-being of their kids, and the father getting off on having his "rights" recognized (insert Tim Taylor's "Ugh, ugh, ugh" here), only to wind up not bothering to exercise them, to the detriment of the kids. I continally see fathers not paying their support, yet somehow, the mothers find a way to make damn sure the kids' needs are covered.

Of course, all of the afore-mentioned examples are not indicative of EVERY case, but that's what I have been seeing as the 'standard'. But that's where you and I differ; I recognize that not EVERY dad is that way, and not EVERY mom is that way, and certainly not EVERY case is so easily predicted. Please, show a little respect for the anguish others go through who are NOT in your situation, and stop generalizing every man to be a victim, and every woman to be a monster, will ya?!
 
Last edited:
This is a passionate issue and everyone has an opinion that is largely based on their own personal experiences with divorce. At the end of the day, regardless of what system we have - the extreme differences of opinion on whether the system is biased or not highlight my original assertion - that if shared parenting were the law of the land, it won't stop parents from going to war with each other.

I wish I knew of a better system. A change in law doesn't mean a change in behaviors. A change in behaviors does mean that fewer people have to access legal remedies for such huge issues. That, in my view, needs to be the starting point.
 
Sasha1 and DD,

You know what I love about differences ... it's the learning that happens when one finds themselves between both views.

Both of your views are extremely important to the members of this board in our quest to learn all we can about impending seperation/divorce that one or all of us may be facing.

Blessings to BOTH of you!

Hubby
 
Hubby, you've got the patience of a saint! Blessings to YOU, for tolerating all the raw emotions that come together on this board, and keeping an even keel, when so many of us (ahem, like myself:o ) don't.
 
The odds ARE in your favour. Apparantly statistics and facts mean nothing on this list. The majority of cases, custody and access is granted to women. That is a fact. You are guaranteed CS under the law. That is a fact. Although it may be some time in coming you will get your money through the FRO or court. That too, is a fact. You will also be able to deduct your children as an e-q-s. Deduct legal fees. Get costs when you go to court. And so on.

Statistically, the amount of father's not paying support is extremely small.

There are odd cases where women lose custody (somewhere around 10%). And yup, there are people that don't want to see their kids or help parent. And that is sad. The process of Family Law is open to equal-opportunity abuse. I make comments on what I have discovered through due diligence or lengthly observations of the Family Law system. At times my comments strike a nerve.

From what I recall, you assume your ex is making $90K. You think he is earning income under the table. That is an issue for CRA. BTW, that is not uncommon nor does it surprise me. CS laws are driving a nice underground economy.

Perhaps I am a little short in my words. But I have never attacked anyone personally. Nor have I thread-jacked any introductory, general support or other non-issue related forum.

Go Habs!
 
Divorcemanagement said:
At the end of the day, regardless of what system we have - the extreme differences of opinion on whether the system is biased or not highlight my original assertion - that if shared parenting were the law of the land, it won't stop parents from going to war with each other.
Click to expand...

I disagree (ah such the fun of the internet).

IMO, default joint custody and default 50-50 would certainly shift the "burden of proof" off the defendent and on to the applicant. It would also prevent those draconian judges from being influenced by their own out-dated thinking.

There is one statistic that we will never see: how many people give big concessions to see their children 50-50, or have joint custody or even to see them at all. To me, with tighter laws, these kind of extortion tactics would not work.

Is there a silver bullet solution to the family law crisis in Canada. I don't think so. The number one thing to start with is education of the public.
 
I disagree (ah such the fun of the internet).

IMO, default joint custody and default 50-50 would certainly shift the "burden of proof" off the defendent and on to the applicant. It would also prevent those draconian judges from being influenced by their own out-dated thinking.

There is one statistic that we will never see: how many people give big concessions to see their children 50-50, or have joint custody or even to see them at all. To me, with tighter laws, these kind of extortion tactics would not work.

Is there a silver bullet solution to the family law crisis in Canada. I don't think so. The number one thing to start with is education of the public.
Click to expand...

Again we are focusing on raising children based on a time share arrangement when in fact it is the functions of child care, the way in which child care is going to occur and finally, the degree of conflict between the parents that must be addressed before even considering "who gets the kids on what day".

If 50/50 were the norm, it will not act as a disincentive for the parent who doesn't want 50/50 because right now we don't have 50/50 and one parent is trying to increase time while the oher parent opposes the increased time.

I personally believe there should be no time share presumption whatsoever - from the outset of divorce, it should be understood that the time share arrangement will match the overall degree of function between the parents.

Apparantly statistics and facts mean nothing on this list. The majority of cases, custody and access is granted to women. That is a fact. You are guaranteed CS under the law. That is a fact. Although it may be some time in coming you will get your money through the FRO or court. That too, is a fact. You will also be able to deduct your children as an e-q-s. Deduct legal fees. Get costs when you go to court. And so on..
Click to expand...

Statistics are like "you know whats" - everyone has got one. But since you brought up the subject, the majority of families in Canada have mom as the primary caregiver to the children. Period. End of story. The reasons why women are the primary caregivers can range from lazy husbands to hyper sensitive mothers who won't let dad engage in primary care because mom will feel attacked... either way... mom is still the primary caregiver.

Therefore, it should come as no surprise that the courts generally award custody in relation to that which existed during the marriage.
 
Last edited:
Decent Dad said:
The odds ARE in your favour. Apparantly statistics and facts mean nothing on this list. The majority of cases, custody and access is granted to women. That is a fact.
Click to expand...
Ok, true; if I can somehow find the money, time, and emotional energy to keep proceeding in court, keep disputing all the lies, and keep working to "prove" that my ex's irresponsible and illegal behavior could present a danger to my kids, I will likely have custody, and the courts will bend over backward to uphold his 'right' to spend the next 18 years corrupting them.

You are guaranteed CS under the law. That is a fact. Although it may be some time in coming you will get your money through the FRO or court. That too, is a fact.
Click to expand...
Maybe so.. but the children need food, clothing and shelter NOW, not when the gov't catches up to him.

You will also be able to deduct your children as an e-q-s. Deduct legal fees. Get costs when you go to court. And so on.
Click to expand...
That will be a comfort, I'm sure, if I can ever get above the poverty line.

Statistically, the amount of father's not paying support is extremely small.
Click to expand...
Good! Now if we could just get all paying parents to stop whining about the amount, speculating how the recipient parent is spending it, etc.

There are odd cases where women lose custody (somewhere around 10%). And yup, there are people that don't want to see their kids or help parent. And that is sad. The process of Family Law is open to equal-opportunity abuse. I make comments on what I have discovered through due diligence or lengthly observations of the Family Law system. At times my comments strike a nerve.
Click to expand...
Yes they do; for me, it's because I'm sick of being treated like just another money-hungry, manipulating, vindictive mother who doesn't really care about the kids, but just wants to 'hurt' the ex.

From what I recall, you assume your ex is making $90K. You think he is earning income under the table. That is an issue for CRA. BTW, that is not uncommon nor does it surprise me. CS laws are driving a nice underground economy.
Click to expand...
Yeah, in this day and age when so many people have to drive new vehicles with big monthly payments, buy houses with ridiculously high mortgages, credit cards all over the place... it's the child support that forces them to cheat the system, right?

Perhaps I am a little short in my words. But I have never attacked anyone personally. Nor have I thread-jacked any introductory, general support or other non-issue related forum.
Click to expand...
We all are guilty of being a little short at times; we're all going through our own personal hell. And yeah, I high-jacked your thread and attacked you personally. If it makes you feel any better, if a fanatical group of 'father's rights' activists were picketing on the street in front of my house, declaring all mothers to be evil, I'd likely tell them what I thought of them, too. What you may not realize, is that I'd do the same to a fantatical group of 'mother's rights' activists claiming all fathers were deadbeats.
 
Last edited:
You both have experiences with family law that has shaped who you are right now - perhaps those experiences can help you realize the following:

a) The system has real limitations
b) The system isn't perfect and likely never will be perfect
c) You both are making broad based assertions about fathers and mothers based on your experience of family law - somewhere between what you each are saying is the truth - assuming the truth really matters.
d) There are no easy answers and never will be.

I understand why you both feel the way you feel - I deal with it every day. What's important is to learn how to manage how you feel about these things because if you can't manage your feelings, your experience of divorce can poisoin your entire life.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top