Saturday, December 31, 2011
Sunday, December 11, 2011
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Saturday, November 26, 2011
Friday, November 4, 2011
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Monday, October 3, 2011
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Monday, September 26, 2011
Friday, September 16, 2011
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Monday, September 12, 2011
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
Sunday, September 4, 2011
Protect your children from CAS
Before your kids head off back to School in Sept 2011, remember to put the Forms for children or parents to sign to get CAS workers out of the schools into place.
Helps parents deal with the issue of CAS workers going into their children's school, parents need only to get their children or themselves to fill out the new updated Cease and Desist form which is attached to this post and to submit it to their local Board of Education and the Principal of the school were the children attend. Optionally, a form can be sent to the CAS. Parents do not have to be affected by CAS or have open cases to submit a form to the CAS. Submission of this form will protect a child as long as the child remains in school with the school board named on the form. Teachers and Principals who ignore this form open themselves wide open to a lawsuit by students and/or their parents.
Copies of the form for both children and parents have been included along with instruction and a copy of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
'via Blog this'
Helps parents deal with the issue of CAS workers going into their children's school, parents need only to get their children or themselves to fill out the new updated Cease and Desist form which is attached to this post and to submit it to their local Board of Education and the Principal of the school were the children attend. Optionally, a form can be sent to the CAS. Parents do not have to be affected by CAS or have open cases to submit a form to the CAS. Submission of this form will protect a child as long as the child remains in school with the school board named on the form. Teachers and Principals who ignore this form open themselves wide open to a lawsuit by students and/or their parents.
Copies of the form for both children and parents have been included along with instruction and a copy of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
'via Blog this'
Friday, September 2, 2011
German High Court Rules That Lazy Single Moms Are Not Entitled To Child Support If They Don’t Work Full-Time | Children's Rights Initiative for Sharing Parents Equally
Monday, August 15, 2011
Saturday, August 13, 2011
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Monday, August 8, 2011
Saturday, August 6, 2011
Friday, August 5, 2011
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Monday, August 1, 2011
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Friday, July 29, 2011
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Monday, July 25, 2011
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Saturday, July 23, 2011
Friday, July 22, 2011
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Monday, July 18, 2011
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Sunday, July 10, 2011
Thursday, July 7, 2011
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
Monday, June 27, 2011
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Friday, June 17, 2011
Saturday, June 11, 2011
Friday, June 10, 2011
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Missisauga Dad gets into the weekend Spirit-Re tax and "What about single dads?
Posted by: Mississauga Dad | May 26, 2011 11:27:11 PM
What about single dads? What do we get besides a slap in the face, a kick in the ass, and a court system that mandates that everything possible be done to destroy us financially, emotionally, and psychologically?
I am a single father of two teenage boys - I get, and got, nothing from their mother in terms of support, nothing from the government - not even any tax breaks. I am hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt after suffering through the abuse and harassment of the family courts for years.
My ex cost me tens of thousands of dollars in litigation in order that she obtain sole custody and residency of our children. Once she had done so, and had received all of the 'financial perks' that the courts award to single mothers as 'primary caregivers', (perks that came out of my pocket of course), she decided that she couldn't look after the children after all and shortly after winning her windfall, phoned me and said the boys and their possessions were waiting in her porch so please come and get them. They have been with me fulltime ever since.
I have spent additional thousands of dollars in expenses making sure that the boys see their mother every weekend, during all holidays, for at least half of each summer, and for any other time either they or she desires. In all the hundreds and hundreds of times the boys have been to visit and/or stay with her she has NEVER picked up or driven the boys or paid for their bus or train fares. Yet when the boys with living with her she made no effort to, and in fact impeded in every way possible, any attempts for me to spend time with them. And if I was fortunate enough to get any time I, again, picked up all the expenses. She absolutely refused to drive the boys to or from my home.
My ex cost me tens of thousands of dollars in litigation in order that she obtain sole custody and residency of our children. Once she had done so, and had received all of the 'financial perks' that the courts award to single mothers as 'primary caregivers', (perks that came out of my pocket of course), she decided that she couldn't look after the children after all and shortly after winning her windfall, phoned me and said the boys and their possessions were waiting in her porch so please come and get them. They have been with me fulltime ever since.
I have spent additional thousands of dollars in expenses making sure that the boys see their mother every weekend, during all holidays, for at least half of each summer, and for any other time either they or she desires. In all the hundreds and hundreds of times the boys have been to visit and/or stay with her she has NEVER picked up or driven the boys or paid for their bus or train fares. Yet when the boys with living with her she made no effort to, and in fact impeded in every way possible, any attempts for me to spend time with them. And if I was fortunate enough to get any time I, again, picked up all the expenses. She absolutely refused to drive the boys to or from my home.
The boys' university education is already looked after because of a Trust Fund that I set up solely and totally with money I earned. She never contributed a cent to the fund but I was not given any kind of "credit" for my contributions during divorce proceedings - in fact she did everything she could to try to wrest control of the fund into the hands of her and her father.
I will never be able to retire - I am in my late fifties now - I will have to work until I drop dead in order to have any chance of paying all of my debts - debts that were mandated by the systemic hatred, harassment, abuse, and discrimination routinely and knowingly inflicted on fathers by the socialist feminazi family court system.
And my ex? She's living in a nice, large condo in downtown Toronto. She doesn't work - she lives off the money the courts stole from me to give to her.
Is it any wonder that the biggest cause of death for divorced fathers is suicide?
Friday, May 27, 2011
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Monday, May 9, 2011
Friday, May 6, 2011
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Monday, May 2, 2011
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Friday, April 29, 2011
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Monday, April 25, 2011
Saturday, April 23, 2011
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Monday, April 11, 2011
Sunday, April 10, 2011
Monday, April 4, 2011
Friday, April 1, 2011
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Saturday, March 26, 2011
A program to fix our ailing family courts - The Globe and Mail
A program to fix our ailing family courts - The Globe and Mail: "A program to fix our ailing family courts
KIRK MAKIN
From Saturday's Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Mar. 25, 2011 6:44PM EDT"
KIRK MAKIN
From Saturday's Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Mar. 25, 2011 6:44PM EDT"
C-422
C-422
Bill C-422
The election call kills private members bills – including Bill C-422.
This message is apparently from an aide to Maurice Vellacott.
The election call kills private members bills – including Bill C-422.
This message is apparently from an aide to Maurice Vellacott.
This note is not intended to provide exhaustive information. I just want
to let you know that, due to the election call, all legislation
including private members bills – including Bill C-422 – “die” and are
null and void. Obviously, nobody knows which MPs would be coming back to
Parl. after an election, so items on the schedule from a previous
Parliament are not carried over.
Any equal shared parenting private members bills that are introduced in
the next Parliament will get a different # because bills are numbered
based on the order in which they are tabled and introduced so,
technically speaking there is no longer a Bill C-422. If you refer to
equal shared parenting legislation as C-422 to Members of Parliament
following the election, most of them will not know what you are talking
about. If you are a group leader, please pass this info to your members to help Canadians communicate as effectively as possible with their
political representatives.
to let you know that, due to the election call, all legislation
including private members bills – including Bill C-422 – “die” and are
null and void. Obviously, nobody knows which MPs would be coming back to
Parl. after an election, so items on the schedule from a previous
Parliament are not carried over.
Any equal shared parenting private members bills that are introduced in
the next Parliament will get a different # because bills are numbered
based on the order in which they are tabled and introduced so,
technically speaking there is no longer a Bill C-422. If you refer to
equal shared parenting legislation as C-422 to Members of Parliament
following the election, most of them will not know what you are talking
about. If you are a group leader, please pass this info to your members to help Canadians communicate as effectively as possible with their
political representatives.
I think every Candidate and Party Leader needs to put Family Law Reform as one of their main priorities in this election. I will be questioning everyone I can about this issue and I will post every response I get back.
Friday, March 25, 2011
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Monday, March 21, 2011
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Sunday, March 13, 2011
Father fights archaic law for parental rights after a man uses his daughter to sell drugs
Father fights archaic law for parental rights after a man uses his daughter to sell drugs: "NBC25 has been following the tragic story of a Fenton father who's been fighting to have parental rights of his little girl after she was used to sell drugs by another man."
Friday, March 11, 2011
"A Nightmare For a Brother"
by Jeremy Swanson
Ottawa
One of our activists-brothers in Ottawa-one from our local Ottawa support group was supposed to be in court recently. I know him well. I was at court to support him. The case was adjourned even though no settlement was reached. So now he has to go back again. He has a long history of trouble with his ex wife who is almost completely mad in my view. He is a former medical professional who has been ruined completely in family court and lost everything-to the point of total financial destruction. Like so many of us. His horrors know no bounds and there is no end in sight. This in essence is what is happening now:
Because he has been late to drop off his daughter several times recently she wants the court to enforce it because he is in "breach" of the court order. He usually has to wait for her anywhere from 15 minutes to 2 hours but there is no problem in reverse. She can do that. She can 'breach' a court order. She is a woman after all The Court ordered that he can take his daughter to an activity while in the mother's care but since the summer of 2006 she has denied her daughter the right to go to an activity with her father as ordered . However there seems to be no problem for her to disobey a Court order. She is a woman after all. His wife calls the police anytime she wants to and they are always there attending her calls even though there is no reason to attend. She just does it and they just automatically respond. She is a woman after all. And there is outrageous gender bias in the courts. This is the primary reason why this all happens.
She can do all of this without any court ordering that the police intervene. She calls the police, lies to them, makes up stories, exaggerates and generally obfuscates about anything to do with her former husband-and they respond instantly in believing her-whatever her imagination comes up with. Its like a bizarre game of 'pick-a-problem'. He never knows what is going to happen. Or when. There is no stability to the situation. And this goes on an on and on ad nauseum. And now, bored with the routine she has dragged him back into court again. Why? He has done nothing. He is a model citizen and a loving Father. Why? Because she is obsessive and deranged. Why? Because she can. She is a woman after all. And this is Ottawa. This is Canada. It is the norm. There is no truth. There is no honesty. There is no justice. Not for men.
Can you imagine now what she will do to our brother if the Court accepts her motion? She is also asking the court to rule that he pay her lawyer's fees of $5,000.00 but, "if he agrees to the police enforcement" then she will accept $1,000.00. This is a classic double-edged blackmail. And she is convinced the court will do this. And they might. We all know that there is only "judge’s law" in Canada these days. he can't pay it anyway. He cannot even afford to eat properly. There is no clear picture emerging as to how long this "deal" would go on for-even if he did accept it. This is an ongoing question with no apparent emerging answer. It will go on and on and on for who knows how long. This is a woman who cannot stop her compulsive behaviour until she gets what she wants. Clearly she wants our brother dead. She wants to kill him and he is of mind that she will have to do that before he gives up. And he certainly will fight on until someone in the judicial system (psychologist or psychiatrist et al) has the courage to diagnose her and tell it like it is and what she is and has done.
So far because of the system that we have she has gotten away with her lies to the police, the CAS, the Criminal and Family Court, the Family Court Clinic, the Arbitrator. But in this society of inequality and bias but all of those are supporters of immoralities, lies and false and malicious accusations. All the ingredients that make the divorce industry thrive. And all on the backs of men like our brother in Ottawa. His case and his valiant fight for justice and for his daughter's well being is a living example of one man's courage and refusal to give up his rights and that of his daughter. it’s also an example of the gross imbalance between the rights of men and women in our society. The Charter of Rights notwithstanding.
Remember they do this to us because they can. And they do this because we let them.
Why Women Divorce
"After researching women's sexuality for more than ten years, I can honestly say that most of our societal beliefs about females are grossly distorted and many are completely erroneous."
-Michelle Langley, author of Women's Infidelity
McGuinty Government Improving Family Justice For Victims Of Abuse
March 11, 2011 10:30 AM
McGuinty Government Improving Family Justice For Victims Of Abuse
A new support program will soon be available across Ontario to help victims of domestic violence through the difficult process of separation or divorce.
The new Family Court Support Worker program will provide assistance to victims, most of whom are women and children, at a time when they are at the greatest risk of further violence. The new support workers will:
- Provide victims with information about the family court process
- Document the history of abuse for the court
- Refer victims to specialized services and supports in the community
- Help with safety planning related to court appearances
- Accompany victims to court proceedings, where appropriate.
This new program is helping Ontario take the next steps in its family law reform strategy to provide improved supports for vulnerable Ontarians who come before family courts.
QUICK FACTS
LEARN MORE
CONTACTS
- Nauman Khan
Minister's Office
416-326-1785 - Brendan Crawley
Communications Branch
416-326-2210
Ministry of the Attorney General
ontario.ca/attorneygeneral
ontario.ca/attorneygeneral
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Sunday, March 6, 2011
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Monday, February 28, 2011
Sunday, February 27, 2011
Friday, February 25, 2011
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Saturday, February 19, 2011
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Friday, February 11, 2011
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Charter of rights? HMMMM Not always applied in Family Court in Ontario
SECTION 15(1)
15.(1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.
Updated: April 2005
OVERVIEW
In general terms, the purpose of s. 15(1) is to prevent the violation of essential human dignity and freedom through the imposition of disadvantage, stereotyping, or political or social prejudice, and to promote a society in which all persons enjoy equal recognition at law as human beings or as members of Canadian society, equally capable and equally deserving of concern, respect and consideration: Law v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration),1999 CanLII 675 (S.C.C.), 1999 CanLII 675 (S.C.C.), 1999 CanLII 675 (S.C.C.), [1999] 1 S.C.R. 497.
The analysis under s. 15(1) proceeds in three stages, with close regard to context. At the first stage the claimant must show that the law, program or activity imposes differential treatment between the claimant and others with whom the claimant may fairly claim equality. The second stage requires the claimant to demonstrate that this differentiation is based on one or more of the enumerated or analogous grounds. The third stage requires the claimant to establish that the differentiation amounts to a form of discrimination that has the effect of demeaning the claimant's human dignity. The "dignity" aspect of the test is designed to weed out trivial or other complaints that do not engage the purpose of the equality provision: Law v. Canada
A person asking for equal treatment necessarily does so by reference to other people with whom he or she can legitimately invite comparison. Claims of discrimination under s. 15(1) can only be evaluated by comparison with the condition of others in the social and political setting in which the question arises. A s. 15(1) claim will likely fail unless it can be demonstrated that the comparison, thus invited, is to a "comparator group" with whom the claimant shares the characteristics relevant to qualification for the benefit or burden in question apart from the personal characteristic that is said to be the ground of the wrongful discrimination: Hodge v. Canada (Minister of Human Resources Development), 2004 SCC 65 (CanLII), 2004 SCC 65 (CanLII),2004 SCC 65 (CanLII), [2004] 3 S.C.R. 357, 2004 SCC 65.
The enumerated grounds are only indicators of suspect grounds of distinction. It follows that decisions on these grounds are not always discriminatory. The same applies to the grounds recognized by the courts as “analogous” to the grounds enumerated in s. 15. To say that a ground of distinction is an analogous ground is merely to identify a type of decision making that is suspect because it often leads to discrimination and denial of substantive equality: Corbiere v. Canada (Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs), 1999 CanLII 687 (S.C.C.), 1999 CanLII 687 (S.C.C.), 1999 CanLII 687 (S.C.C.), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 203; Gosselin v. Quebec (Attorney General), 2002 SCC 84 (CanLII), 2002 SCC 84 (CanLII), 2002 SCC 84 (CanLII), [2002] 4 S.C.R. 429, 2002 SCC 84.
Contents | Interpretation | Waiver | Criminal Code | Statutes | Cases
SECTION 24(1)
24.(1) Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances.
Updated: April 2005
OVERVIEW
Section 24 provides a remedy only to the individual whose own Charter rights have been infringed. A claimaint who relies on the infringement of a third party’s rights has no standing to seek a remedy: R. v. Edwards, 1996 CanLII 255 (S.C.C.), 1996 CanLII 255 (S.C.C.), 1996 CanLII 255 (S.C.C.), [1996] 1 S.C.R. 128. While the claim must be a personal one, it is not always necessary for an applicant to await the actual violation of his or her rights. Relief may be granted for a prospective violation where there is a high degree of probability that the Charter infringement will occur: Phillips v. Nova Scotia
The applicant bears the burden of establishing that his or her rights have been infringed or denied. The standard of persuasion required is only the civil standard of the balance of probabilities: R. v. Collins, 1987 CanLII 84 (S.C.C.), 1987 CanLII 84 (S.C.C.), 1987 CanLII 84 (S.C.C.), [1987] 1 S.C.R. 265.
A “court of competent jurisdiction” is a tribunal that has jurisdiction over the person and the subject matter and, in addition, has the authority to make the order sought: R. v. Mills, 1986 CanLII 17 (S.C.C.), 1986 CanLII 17 (S.C.C.), 1986 CanLII 17 (S.C.C.), [1986] 1 S.C.R. 863. Whether a court or tribunal enjoys the power to grant the remedy sought is, first and foremost, a matter of discerning the intention of Parliament or the Legislature: R. v. 974649 Ontario Inc., 2001 SCC 81 (CanLII), 2001 SCC 81 (CanLII), 2001 SCC 81 (CanLII), [2001] 3 S.C.R. 575. A justice presiding over a preliminary inquiry does not have the jurisdiction to grant a remedy under s. 24 since the justice’s only task is to determine whether prosecution in other proceedings is warranted: R. v. Hynes, 2001 SCC 82 (CanLII), 2001 SCC 82 (CanLII), 2001 SCC 82 (CanLII), [2001] 3 S.C.R. 623. By contrast, where a labour arbitrator is, by statute, empowered to deal with all disputes arising between parties to a collective agreement, the arbitrator has the requisite authority to consider Charter questions and grant the appropriate remedies: Weber v. Ontario Hydro, 1995 CanLII 108 (S.C.C.), 1995 CanLII 108 (S.C.C.),1995 CanLII 108 (S.C.C.), [1995] 2 S.C.R. 929.
The language of s. 24(1) gives a wide discretion to fashion remedies, and it cannot be reduced to some formula for application in all cases: R. v. Mills, supra. However, it does not provide an alternative basis to s. 24(2) for the exclusion of evidence, except where the admission of evidence obtained in conformity with the Charter would infringe a Charter right (as with compelled statements subject to use immunity which are sought to be introduced in subsequent criminal proceedings): R. v. White, 1999 CanLII 689 (S.C.C.), 1999 CanLII 689 (S.C.C.), 1999 CanLII 689 (S.C.C.), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 417.
In my opinion this section of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms should Guarantee Equal Parenting unless there is a danger to the child. It also should protect against Bias and Discrimination in the Courts to the self-represented.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)