You are currently browsing the archives for the Parental Alienation category.
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Nov | ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | ||||
- Abortion (37)
- Anorexia Nervosa (6)
- Battered Men's Shelters (4)
- Books & Films (9)
- Censorship (43)
- Charitable Status (1)
- Child Abduction (28)
- Child Abuse (30)
- Child Murder (70)
- Child Support (14)
- Child-Custody Awards (71)
- Civil Rights (136)
- Corruption (3)
- Divorce (112)
- Economy (12)
- Education (72)
- False Allegations (22)
- Family (236)
- Feminism (174)
- Feminist Jurisprudence (180)
- Gay issues (31)
- Health (105)
- Humour (9)
- Judiciary (65)
- Marriage (5)
- Maternal Rights (16)
- Media Bias (77)
- Men and Women Work (51)
- Men's Issues (299)
- Organizational News (33)
- Parental Alienation (7)
- Paternal Rights (83)
- Paternity Fraud (28)
- Propaganda Exposed (230)
- Religion (7)
- Shared Parenting (22)
- Single-Parent (8)
- Social-Destruction Enterprise (109)
- Suicides (16)
- The New World Order (248)
- Tips and Notes (8)
- Uncategorized (2)
- Violence by Proxy (19)
- Web Statistics (6)
- Women's Violence (301)
- November 11, 2011: Men, women and war
- October 11, 2011: Husband-Killing Syndicates
- September 30, 2011: MGTOW
- September 28, 2011: Catherine Kieu Becker pleads not guilty in penis-slicing
- September 26, 2011: Divorce factories
- September 22, 2011: Dr David Evans: Four fatal pieces of evidence
- September 12, 2011: Abuse of the Elderly
- August 16, 2011: The battle for the family -- Front-line news
- August 13, 2011: The London Riots -- Causes
- August 12, 2011: Justice for Judges -- we need more of that
Blogroll
- Angry Harry
- Canada Free Press
- Dictionary for Dads
- Fathers for Life
- Le Blogue de GERARD
- Marty Nemko's Men's Issues
- Mensactivism.org
- P.A.R.E.N.T. International
- REAL Women of Canada
- roadkillradio.com
- Robert Whiston
- Stephen Baskerville
- The Historyscoper's Soros Watch Blog
- The Rights of Man (UK)
- Today's Family News
- UK Centre for Crime and Justice Studies
- William Gairdner
Help Lines for Men
Men's and Family Rights Organizations
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- November 2009
- October 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
Archive for the Parental Alienation Category
Toxic Parenting
May 7, 2011 by Walter Schneider.
The following contains excerpts leading to and from an article identified at the website of the canadiancrc.com:
The sins of the mothers
The Sydney Morning Herald, Sydney, Australia, Adele Horin, September 12, 2008
Unfortunately the article shown there does not identify a link to the original article, but it shows enough (perhaps all) of the text of the article to make me wonder.
When Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton and Britney Spears ran amok, the public blamed their mothers. Their fathers - Lohan’s had served time in jail and had addiction problems - escaped rebuke entirely.
Now an Australian study provides some evidence that bad mothering has a worse effect on children than bad fathering….
It shows that mothers who exhibit “toxic” behaviours - from being cold and indifferent to being abusive, manipulative or over-controlling - are far more likely to warp their children’s outlook on life than fathers with similar behaviour.
Wayne Warburton, a research fellow at Macquarie University’s Children and Families Research Centre, said: “Mothers have a really powerful effect on the way their kids view the world and themselves, probably because kids spend more time with their mothers, especially in the crucial early years.”
Dr Warburton asked 441 university students to fill out detailed questionnaires on the parenting styles of their mothers and fathers, and on their own patterns of thinking.
He asked them to recall 72 parenting behaviours, including “making a child feel ashamed”, being unloving or rejecting, and frequently telling the child they were stupid or would fail. He also asked questions designed to uncover destructive thinking patterns in the students, such as being “clingy” out of a fear of being abandoned.
He found young adults were two-thirds as likely to develop unhelpful patterns of thinking if the toxic parenting they had experienced came from their father rather than their mother. [my emphasis –WHS]
If a range of poor parenting behaviours existed, they tended to be found in the same parent, the study found.
Just over 22 per cent of the mothers and 14 per cent of the fathers were classified as toxic.
Dr Warburton said he was surprised that toxic mothers outnumbered toxic fathers. “When I first saw the figure I thought many of the people came from single-parent families but that wasn’t true. I’m at a loss to explain it.”
He said while mothers had more influence on their children, it was surprising that fathers had two-thirds the effect of mothers, given their lower levels of contact. “Fathers still have a significant effect on the development of their kids’ patterns of thinking.”
Of course, newspaper articles often do not accurately reflect the details, research procedures and findings of such studies, but I wonder why Dr. Warburton was surprised by his findings. I suspect that he does not have children of his own, or that, if he does, he did not spend much time thinking about what sort of messages his children got from either parent about the other respective parent.
In other words, did his questionnaire include anything that addressed to what extent the students he surveyed had become alienated against one or the other parent? If it did, he could not possibly be as surprised by the results of his survey as he had become.
Parental alienation is as likely to occur in intact families as in divorced families. Perhaps it is even somewhat of a toss-up whether toxic varieties of parental alienation are more likely to be found in divorced or in intact families.
Let’s hope that Dr. Warburton’s puzzlement about the origins and causes of toxic parenting will eventually lead him to explore the issues of parental alienation, the increasing disfranchisement of paternal influence and the escalating power of maternal influence and control over children.
Perhaps the solution to his puzzlement will then become apparent, namely that the puzzle of toxic mothering cannot be solved through expunging fathers from the lives of their children but must involve policies that will return us to having a much-increased, strengthened, even controlling, presence of fathers.
Nevertheless, Dr. Warburton’s study has left its mark on Australia’s psycho-therapists. Consider this commentary and advice:
Ask the Therapist
Since I was a teenager, my mother and I have not gotten along. She often makes me feel bad about myself by saying mean and hurtful things. I never feel my best around her. I have tried over and over to make her happy, but nothing works. I am 35 now and she is in her late sixties.
This year, my older sister and brother are planning a Mother’s Day dinner for her at my sister’s home. They asked me to participate in the planning and attend. If I go, I know that I will have a terrible time. On the other hand, they told me that she is not feeling well and may not be with us many more years. If I don’t go to the dinner, I will feel guilty. I am anxious just thinking about this decision. What should I do?
— Alicia in Oak Park
In that article, Susan A. Horen offers, amongst other things, this:
Dr. Wayne Warburton, a researcher at Macquarie University’s Children and Families Research Centre in Australia, confirmed this fact about toxic parenting in a recent study. As much as we hear about fathers who don’t do a good job of parenting, Warburton found that young adults are 50 percent more likely to develop unhelpful patterns of thinking if the toxic parenting they had experienced came from their mother rather than their father.
Toxic parenting can occur when people who have significant personality disorders become parents. The most common disorders are narcissistic, antisocial, histrionic and borderline. All of these disorders have core elements of selfishness, insensitivity to others, narcissism, a refusal to accept personal responsibility for their behavior and a sense of entitlement that allows them to abuse others when their selfish demands are not immediately met.
Damage from toxic mothers often continues into adulthood.
Toxic parenting is never a good thing. In extreme cases is can lead to serious social dysfunctions in the affected children, such as in the case of a young woman raised from birth by her father. The woman took a firearm to work and threatened to shoot her boss, after which she was remanded for observation to the psychiatric ward of the hospital where she has been residing for the past few months.
She is now permitted to spend weekends at home with the father whom she supports and who had fashioned her into the twisted individual she has become. That is quite likely to counteract whatever positive outcomes are to be hoped for from the course of medicating and counseling she is receiving.
Posted in Parental Alienation, Family, Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »
PAS and the vilification of fathers
February 23, 2011 by Walter Schneider.
Nila M. Fordyce wrote 2011 02 21:
I finished reading your report on the Internet about PAS and found [that,] from my experiences and research on the above, [it is] fairly on-line - as far as the descriptions go. However, I truly believe the best way to eliminate a lot of this problem - especially in California, is to get a task force to go in and get rid of all the bad evaluators and judges. I am so sick and tired of the wrong doing and biases against fathers. It’s absolutely egregious to the relationships they have with their beloved children. They all just assume all fathers are bad!
And this is so far from the truth! I am 62 years old brought up in an upper middle - class family and surroundings - never new but maybe one unfortunate incident. My DAD was my hero and he still is at 87. I had a closer relationship with him, than I did my mother.
He listened, and my mother did not. I can’t imagine growing up with out a father. I watch the younger set around me now, and it’s the same way! Fathers play an extremely vital role in the growth of a child. And the Evaluators and Judges destroy that chance for our children. This is found especially in Move Away Cases. Most States do not allow this to happen, but in Los Angeles, Ca. they sure do.
These are horrific laws to begin with, and the sad thing, nobody cares what is in the best interest of the child, nor do they even no the correct way to handle it in the evaluations or courts. And sorry to say, it’s usually your narcissistic mothers with no strong or centered family values. Again, I am talking about very good fathers here, that are getting crucified by these people. But everyone is getting their pockets full!! As I have found out from various professional sources and experience there are alot of very bad evaluators, Psychologists, attorneys, Judges, and mothers (that Lie, they all do) out there that are fracturing the lives of children and the parent left behind. This is irreparable, and needs to Stop!!!!!! My Dad (a Doctor), told me many years ago, that just because someone has a Professional title or Doctor in front of their name, does not mean they are good at what they do. And just because a mother is a mother does not mean she is the better parent and deserves full custody of a child.
Please help to rid of the BAD PEOPLE.
Thank you for Listening.
Nila M. Fordyce
That is all true, but for as long as professionals can make more money from the existence of PAS than from preventing it, little help can be expected from them.
It is easier and more profitable to apply Band Aids and to let such a massive problem persist than to eradicate it once and for all. However, it is not the divorce industry, its judges and its adjuncts, such as psychologists, court-appointed evaluators and so on that control things in that respect. The people that are most affected by the vilification of men and fathers are those fathers and their children. It is up to them and their wives to find ways by which the divorce industry can be starved out of existence.
Posted in Parental Alienation | Print | 1 Comment »
The divorce from hell?
December 24, 2010 by Walter Schneider.
It reads more like one hell of a divorce.
…Catherine once tried to run over Larry with a van. “This is always a telltale sign that a husband and wife are drifting apart,” Judge Quinn remarked dryly.
No kidding…, but there is much more in the article.
Toronto Globe and Mail
December 16, 2010
In family court, a judge turns to ridicule to defuse the rage
By KIRK MAKIN
A feuding couple and their ‘high-octane hatred’ prompt a highly unusual judicial roasting
In a novel twist, Judge Quinn granted the wife, Catherine, sole custody of the feuding couple’s 13-year-old daughter. However, he ordered Larry to pay Catherine just a dollar a month in spousal support.
That appears to have been a good decision, as the daughter seems to have become alienated beyond repair against her dad. However, although the article identifies a-dollar-a-month in spousal support for the ex-wife, nothing is mentioned about how much child support the father will have to pay for kids he no longer will be able to see.
Besides, will all of the actors in the drama have seen the last of the case? Surely there is nothing preventing someone from launching an appeal. You want to take bets on who will launch one of those?
At any rate, you will want to watch this video:
Parental Alienation ~ Emotional Kidnapping
Listen well to what Alec Baldwin says as he is being interviewed in the third video in the series. It shows how hard it is even for men who were put through the parental-alienation grinder to get away from preconception and perhaps even all-out indoctrination about men’s paternal rights.
At minute 2:22, Alec Baldwin states that men have to earn 50:50 custody. Why would that not be true of women?
At minute 3:12 Alec Baldwin mentions that he has no respect for men who abuse women and fight for custody to gain power, out of spite and for no other reason than to hurt women. Well, why does that not cut both ways?
The point that one needs to pay attention to is that if not even the target in a case of parental alienation feels that equal rights come into the picture when awarding equally or equitably shared parenting, then why would he expect the judges to have more objectivity than such a victimized father does?
Posted in Parental Alienation, Child Abuse, Child Support, Judiciary, Child-Custody Awards, Divorce, The New World Order | Print | 1 Comment »
Man Woman & Myth
October 31, 2010 by Walter Schneider.
Many thanks to George Rolph for pointing me to this.
Truth, Lies and the War on Men
The website identified by the preceding link is one of the most important ones I have come across in decades. It answers the concerns of many men’s and fathers rights activists who wrote to me over the years and expressed the wish for a video lectures series on men’s and fathers’ issues.
Well, the video project by Man Woman & Myth is the answer they sought and to which many of them through their efforts tried to contribute more or less successfully.
About the Video Project
The Project
A documentary series, 7 years in the making, exploring all aspects of male-female relations from a man’s point-of-view. Looks at the various reasons behind the negative treatment of men in Western society, including the root cause: Feminism.
Consists of 49 short films on Feminism, Misandry, Equality, Domestic Violence and Education as well as Family issues like Paternity Fraud, Fatherlessness and Reproductive Rights.
As of now I have only been able to quickly browse the website and looked at no more than a quick sample of the 49 videos that are available there. I am amazed at what has been put together.
I will watch all of the videos in the coming weeks and try to give that top priority. As I go along with that, I will report on what I find. It is quite obvious already that not many words at the website are wasted and that all of them are intended to mean what they say.
The first lesson I learned is that the website owner means everything he states in his “Notes on the Video”. Read all of the notes. Just as there is no way you can take in all of what the 49 videos present without watching all of them, so you will not be able to successfully understand the problems you may encounter in downloading, file-sharing or watching the videos without reading all of the notes.
As of now, my first impression is, Wow! The Man Woman & Myth video project either used the website of Fathers for Life to develop its scripts or it took its guidance from some of the same sources that guided me and the contributors to Fathers for Life over the years. The video-project leader quite rightly states:
As a result of years of feminised programming, any film like the ones found here will be a bit like a bucket of cold water in the face in terms of the presentation of what I see as basic reality. Many people will not be used to this degree of forthrightness and honesty and some may be a little shocked.
That is absolutely no exaggeration, at best an understatement, and it is no wonder. Look at the individuals that were interviewed and whose views are being presented:
Principal Interviewees
- Angry Harry
Psychologist and prominent Men’s Rights activist, angryharry.com.
- Erin Pizzey
Author and Domestic Violence expert. Opened the world’s first domestic violence shelter in London and is a patron of the Mankind Initiative Men’s Charity. Author of the book “Prone to Violence”.
- Stephen Fitzgerald
Former Director and National Organiser of the Mankind Initiative Men’s Charity.
- Michele Elliott
Founder and Director of Kidscape, a children’s charity, and author of the book “Female Sexual Abuse of Children”.
- Oliver Curry
Evolutionary Psychologist at the London School of Economics and contributing author to Demos, the independent think tank and research institute.
- Professor Colin Francome
Professor Emeritus of Medical Sociology, Middlesex University. Author of the book “Improving Men’s Health”.
Alright. That is all I can say for now. I will be back about this and present more of my impressions as time goes on. I hope that if you watch any of the videos, and you absolutely should, you will be able to post a comment here.
Posted in Civil Rights, Paternal Rights, Social-Destruction Enterprise, Media Bias, Maternal Rights, Parental Alienation, Child Abuse, Violence by Proxy, False Allegations, Men and Women Work, Education, Feminism, Propaganda Exposed, The New World Order, Women's Violence, Feminist Jurisprudence, Family, Divorce, Health, Men's Issues, Paternity Fraud | Print | No Comments »
Custodial mother needs help
September 12, 2010 by Walter Schneider.
The names (except mine) shown in the following are not the real names of the parties, to protect the innocent and the guilty.
Hello Mary,
You raised a number of points that call into question Canadian rules and practices pertaining to child support due to someone like you, someone who appears to be a citizen or resident of Canada.
Firstly, I don’t know whether you are in fact residing in Quebec. That makes it impossible for me to direct you to an organization that may be able to help you or to direct you to someone else who can do so.
If you wish to spare yourself the reading of all I stated, the most important aspect of your complaints is that you did not specify what you need help with. The unmentioned solution to all of your problems is quite simple and obvious: apply in the court to have it grant fully shared custody to the father of your children. In addition, you should perhaps objectively examine whether there was an equitable sharing of all of the marital assets in your case and determine whether some of the assets you received should not in all honesty be transferred to your ex.
You raised many concerns. It will be easier for me to answer each of those by inserting my responses between the lines of your message — which I will now do.
On 11/09/2010 6:27 AM, Mary More wrote:
Subject: deadbeat dads.
The header of your e-mail messages identified the subject as being that you need my help, but, as your message shows, that is not truly what your message is all about.
I am writing to you for assistance in a matter that relates to my children. I am a single mother of two teenage daughters that I am in custody of. I have been separated form my husband for the past 5 years and am now divorced. During this time I have not received any financial support from him in order to help provide for his two girls.
I am not able to direct you to a source of help because you did not tell me which Province you are located in. I could look that up but would have no guarantee that I would be right. You are in a better position to determine and identify that.
Why is Canada letting dead beat dads walk freely without having any consequences for their actions.
Perhaps the father of your children is a dead-beat dad, but I would leave the determining of that to the courts. Even the worst judge would make at least a pretense of listening to both sides of a dispute before he decides where between the two sides the truth may is. I have not heard anything from the other side in the argument.
The fact that you label your ex-husband a dead-beat dad does not look well. Did he leave on his own volition, or did you kick him out?
That you allege that Canada has a policy of “letting dead beat dads walk freely without having any consequences for their actions” does not look good either. The reality of that is that your accusation is not founded on facts. The statistics on that do not support your accusation. Moreover, my experiences as someone who has been active for decades in the field of child-support issues don’t support your accusation either.
The reality of those circumstances is that non-custodial fathers are more like than separated non-custodial mothers to pay child support, to pay much more child support and far less likely to default on such payments. Furthermore, such fathers who default on child-support payments are far more likely than defaulting mothers to be prosecuted and to have to cope with and suffer from draconian enforcement measures.
Is it fair that one parent can walkout without taking any responsibilities providing for his kids? Is it fair that all the burden of raising kids falls on one parent?
Court hearings ostensibly determine what is fair in such matters. Unfortunately, such court hearings are seldom fair to fathers. In the vast majority of divorces the courts grant women the kids, car, cash and castle and send the father packing, often with nothing more than a set of underwear, a toothbrush and a razor.
In the United States many deadbeat dads have their passport revoked, have their driver’s license suspended……. Why doesn’t Canada take drastic measures when it comes to deadbeat dads.
You correctly deem the common practice of depriving fathers who default on child support to be drastic, which of course it is. How do you figure anyone is more likely to be able to make child-support payments when his constitutional right to free movement has been restricted? Someone without a driver’s licence is not likely to be able to acquire any jobs that require a valid driver’s licence. Moreover, he quite likely will be severely handicapped in travelling to a job for which he does not even require a driver’s licence but cannot travel to when no public transportation is available to help him get there.
Moreover, it is not only driver’s licences and passports of fathers defaulting with child support payments that are suspended, All government-issued licences of defaulting fathers are suspended, which of course severely curtails their ability to earn a living. Do you feel that those suspensions can possibly be any good for the affected children?
Jake Eke is in a new relationship with a divorced woman Liz Tryhard that has two kids, he is leading a normal life and supports her kids and helps her renovate the house…..Doesn’t his own kids deserve a dad? Why can’t he help support his own kids? Doesn’t his kids have rights? Is it fair that he has neglected his own kids?
I assume, although you do not directly or indirectly state so, that Jake Eke is the father of the children you had with him.
You sure checked him out good, right? Is it a criminal offence for him to have entered a relationship with a divorced woman who has children?
I wonder whether he thinks that he is living a normal life. Is it normal for all men to form relationships with divorced women who have children by other men, after their ex-wives most likely kicked them out?
You told me that he can’t support his own kids because he is considered to be disabled. If you feel that to be a false and fraudulent claim, telling me about it will not do you or anyone else much good. Tell the judge in your case. As they say, you will have to prove that in a court of law.
1) Mr. Eke has declared that he is sick and unable to provide. If that is the case why isn’t he forced to fill up disability papers and get help from the government .
It is a little inconsistent on your part to call him first a dead beat dad and then to call him Mr. Do you always do that so as to make sure that the recipients of your complaints about him are first put into the right frame of mind?
I do not know where Mr. Eke lives or whether it is possible for him to make false claims where he lives about disabilities that prevent him from earning a living. If you are sure that he has engaged in an act of defrauding his government, you should perhaps consider pursuing criminal charges.
2) I am well aware that Mr. Eke is working in the renovation business and gets paid cash. He keeps claiming that he is building his cliental slowly and that business is slow……….why isn’t he forced to get another job and provide for his kids?????
It amazes me to read how much you know about the man. Yet you fail to consider the realities of the current state of the economy. Canada is suffering under the same depression that has the US in its grips. There is little money available for housing construction. There is much competition for jobs in the construction trade, and money for home renovations is even harder to come by than is the case with money for new construction jobs.
Getting paid cash for work done is what many men do who have been driven into the underground economy to be able to eke out a living.
Did you not know any of those things before you decided to kick him out?
His daughter who is 17 of age has a job as a bus girl and makes minimum wage, why can’t he work?????
Nothing wrong with that.
What is wrong with this picture??????
I don’t know. You tell me.
I am a kindergarten teacher in a private school, my pay cheque is not enough so after I am done my job at 3 everyday I continue to my second job from 4-7 and than work on weekends, if I can be responsible why can’t he????????
Is being a kindergarten teacher a well-paying job? If not, do you have a low-paying job because you chose to have it for convenience and not for economic considerations? Were you forced into taking your job?
If you need a better-paying job, why don’t you get one? If you expect that the father of your children be forced into getting another job to be able to pay for his kids, why does that not apply to you?
I have to do 3 jobs, get a line of credit, take a loan from the bank refinance my mortgage, seek help from my mom who is living on her pension and be the sole provider for those girls.
So, you indicate that you like to do low-paying jobs, live on credit, and have even your mother support you. Has your mother not done enough for you yet?
Was being the sole provider for “those girls” your choice?
You have without a doubt some serious problems with matching your income to your expenses. From what you explained, it appears that your debts are steadily and perhaps even quickly increasing. The first and most important objective for successful debt management is to have a lot of income left at the end of the month, rather than having a lot of month left at the end of the money.
One way by which you can make a start with that is to cut back on a few things, such as those that you expect your ex-husband to cut back on. Cancel your subscription to cable TV, cancel your cell phone and cut out all other things that are not absolutely necessary to survival, including the use of your car (sell it) and other such luxuries.
If that is not sufficient to bring your expenses into affordable limits, consider what capital assets you can sell. If it is cheaper to rent an apartment than to make mortgage payments, you should go for the cheaper alternative. You have a great advantage in that respect. No one will expect you to live in a cardboard box under a bridge. Our society does not expect that from women, while that expectation is at times the only one left for men who have all of their licences revoked.
I did not bring these children to the world by myself,
I hope not. That would have been a miracle.
On the other hand, it is not difficult to become a father or a mother, while to be a father or a mother is a much more difficult task. The burden of that is much lightened by sharing it.
It is about time that the government takes action and goes after those dead beat dads who are basically getting away with murder.
The government has done quite a bit to help out women already. Women live on average six more years (in the US) and 7.2 more years (in Canada) than men do. Now you want to have your ex prosecuted for murder yet?
I am frustrated at the legal system in the pursuit of this basic right for child support. I have exhausted my financial capabilities in hiring lawyers to pursue him and have contacted the child support office in Montreal who have indicated that they have no recourse because of his lack of declared income. So far my experience has been a series of “road blocks” and I am entirely exhausted.
Sorry, but that is pretty much the way it is. If there is no income, then there is nothing to declare or to confiscate.
It will be up to you to prove in court that his claim to be disabled is fraudulent. However, even if you should be able to prove that, what do you expect will happen? Should he go to jail? Do you think that will ensure that his child support payments can be made?
My ex-spouse is a home renovator and thus much of his work is paid in cash. The amount of declared income is unknown
You already stated all of that.
since he has not filed an income tax return in the past few years. I am puzzled at how the governmental system has neglected to look into this case to allow a citizen to neglect his legal obligations toward his family and government. Why don’t we have any rights?
You told me that the government already looked into his case. The problem is that you are not happy with what the government found. However, if you want the father of your children to go to jail, and if you are absolutely sure of your allegations about doing work for cash under the table, then talk to the government and insist they they prosecute him for defrauding the government and for income-tax evasion. Both are crimes that would warrant incarceration, but you have to prove them in court. If you fail to prove your case, then you are potentially liable to be convicted of slander and libel.
However, the government has done a lot for women in that respect. Women can commit the crimes of slander and libel with impunity.
Hoping to hear from you
Thank you for taking the time to read my letter, I will keep trying until my voice his heard and things will change. It is so unfair.
Mary More
I will post your help request and my responses to Dads & Things. It is our policy to not show the real names of the warring parties in such a case.
Other than that, I tried to offer some advice where I deemed it possible and necessary to give advice. Unfortunately, you did not actually ask for specific help, but you railed against your ex, you slandered him, you slandered the Government of the Province of Quebec, the Federal Government of Canada, all of Canadian non-custodial fathers, and you vented your frustration.
It seems that all the help you wanted was to have someone listen to you. I have done that and hope it will make you feel better.
Regards,
Walter Schneider
Fathers for Life
Dads & Things
Posted in Judiciary, Civil Rights, Child Support, Maternal Rights, Violence by Proxy, Parental Alienation, Paternal Rights, Men and Women Work, Child-Custody Awards, Feminist Jurisprudence, Shared Parenting, Men's Issues, Divorce, Feminism | Print | No Comments »
FACTS EVERY ONE SHOULD KNOW ABOUT DESERTION
September 7, 2010 by Walter Schneider.
Guest post by Roger Eldridge, National Mens Council of Ireland
Note by F4L: I am not a legal expert in such matters, but, having gone through the experience of being deserted, some years ago, I am quite confident that what Roger describes applies as well in Canada and perhaps also in other nations.
Roger has told it well, and it should be shown to as many people as possible. –Walter
It is very clear when discussing their difficulties with callers to our help-line that many - men in particular - are very confused about the difference between separation and desertion. This is not their fault as the legal profession have made it their business to eliminate the word and concept of “desertion” from all family law proceedings. I sat in with a member of our Family Integrity and Marriage Reconciliation (FIRM) Self-Help Group when he went to discuss with his solicitor what he could do. Despite the facts supporting it, whenever he described himself as being “deserted” his own solicitor got very cross with him and told him that the judge would be very angry if he ever said anything like that in court. When he tried to talk about it further his solicitor told him that she will not represent him if he ever used the word again!
Hopefully the information given below which has been taken directly from three different legal sources will clear people’s heads and stop them mistakenly believing they are “separated” when really they are “deserted”.
The reason why solicitors create this confusion is because they have been assisting spouses who are the deserters to profit at the expense of the actual deserted spouse for the past thirty years. They tell the deserted spouse that the other spouse - the actual deserter - is entitled to separate and tell them that they should just accept that they are now “separated” and deal with it. By doing this the deserted spouse loses everything and especially is seen to be going along with the breakdown of the marriage instead of getting help to reconcile it.
Some of the most important aspects of family law are the provisions for maintenance. It is a duty of spouses to maintain the family home and the other spouse and children living there. If one of the spouses deserts the family they are still held to this duty and are forced to pay money for the maintenance of the deserted household. Logically and in the statute there is a bar to a deserter receiving such maintenance.
However the law is being operated by solicitors so that the husband is always the one ordered to pay maintenance to his wife regardless of who is guilty of desertion. This creates an ever lengthening queue of wives outside solicitors’ offices who are led to believe that they can just walk out on their marriage and still be kept in the style (or better!) they were when they were acting as a wife in the home. They are told to ensure they keep the kids with them and refuse to let them stay at home even though the law presumes that the children should be at home. This has been used for many years as a sort of “gray area” which is used to justify the “legitimise” the deserter and get money from the deserted spouse for the maintenance of the children. Solicitors advise their deserted clients to pay this money even though it is against their best interests and those of the children in the long run.
In all of this confusion and corruption of the law any chance of a reconciliation of the family is buried in anger and injustice. This has to stop.
Please pass the information below to anyone you know who is having problems in their family (i.e. by now almost everyone!) and let them know that we are available to talk to them and assist them to resist the worst practices of the courts. This is the necessary first step before moving on to the more important one of helping them to reconcile their marriage. When leaving a marriage doesn’t bring instant rewards it gives people a chance to rethink their plans. It is this critical period of time that needs to be seized upon if we are ever to stop the wanton dismemberment of families and destruction of society.
God bless, Roger Eldridge
Chairman, National Mens Council of Ireland
Executive Director, Family Rights and Responsibilities Institute of Ireland
National Office: Knockvicar, Boyle, Co. Roscommon
Website: www.family-men.com Email: familymen@eircom.net
Telephones: 00353 (0) 7196-67138, 00353 (0) 83-3330256
******
http://www.the-divorce-directory.com/article_desertion.html
DESERTION
Desertion, known in some states as abandonment, is considered grounds for divorce in states that have fault divorces. There are two types of desertion, actual desertion and constructive desertion. Both types of desertion must be continuous and uninterrupted for a specific period of time between one and five years depending on the state.
The most obvious situation which would constitute desertion is when one spouse leaves without a trace, never comes back and never again makes contact. However, there are other situations which constitute desertion.
Desertion vs. separation: Desertion is not the same as separation. In a separation both spouses consent to living apart. Desertion only occurs when one spouse does not consent to the separation.
The necessary elements to establish desertion include:
• No longer living in the same residence
• No longer having sexual relations
• Deserting spouse intends to end the marriage
• Deserting spouse was not justified in leaving the residence
• Deserted spouse did not consent to the desertion • Desertion has been continuous and uninterrupted for the amount of time designated by law in your state
Actual desertion vs. constructive desertion
In actual desertion the deserting spouse leave the home. Constructive desertion occurs when the deserted spouse leaves due to unbearable conditions at home caused by the other spouse. Combined with the above elements of desertion, depending on the state, conditions for constructive desertion can include:
• Physical abuse
• Mental cruelty
• Adultery
• Nonsupport
• Unjustified refusal to have sexual relations for a significant period of time
• Knowing transmission of a venereal disease
Couples contemplating divorce should be cautious about moving out of the residence in a manner which can be claimed as desertion. To avoid a claim of desertion both parties must agree to the separation and should provide each other with contact information.
The desertion period must be continuous and uninterrupted. One night spent under the same roof or one meeting for sexual relations can be considered an interruption in the desertion period, and the required length of time would start over after that date.
Exceptions
Unintentional abandonment is not considered desertion. If a spouse goes missing for a specified period of time, and efforts to find the spouse are unfruitful, the abandoned spouse may obtain a divorce. However, situations such as military personnel missing in action do not constitute desertion.
If you are facing or contemplating divorce, have been forced out of your home or have been abandoned by your spouse, contact an experienced divorce attorney today.
******
Desertion Grounds
Desertion must be proven by a preponderance of the evidence. There are two main elements to prove to establish abandonment/desertion grounds for divorce; (1) the actual breaking off of the matrimonial cohabitation (abandoning the usual marital duties, not just sexual intercourse must be established), and (2) the intent to desert the marriage.
The breaking off of matrimonial cohabitation means that the couple must actually have separate addresses, and not just maintain separate sleeping arrangements. Ceasing to engage in sexual intercourse, even without just cause, does not constitute desertion. But where there is a significant abandonment of marital duties, which results in practical destruction of home life, a party may be guilty of desertion.
The second element to establish abandonment/desertion is the intent to desert the marriage. The desire to separate is not necessarily synonymous with the intent to desert the marriage. Where the parties separate by “mutual consent,” neither party has established grounds for desertion. If the person deserting cannot legally justify the desertion, then proof of the actual breaking off of the matrimonial relationship with the intent to desert entitles the other spouse to a divorce.
“Constructive desertion” involves actions or conduct resulting in the other spouse’s forced separation. To prove constructive desertion, the spouse leaving the home must prove that the misconduct by the spouse remaining in the home constitutes grounds for divorce. Traditionally, this spouse must show that the remaining spouse conducted himself/herself in such a manner as to provoke the leaving.
It should be noted that excessive alcohol consumption not sufficient, standing alone, to constitute constructive desertion, nor is demanding that a spouse leave is not constructive desertion. Generally speaking, a spouse is not justified in leaving the other just because there has been a gradual breakdown in the marital relationship or because the parties are unable to live together in peace and harmony. The party claiming justification for leaving has the burden of proving it, unless the justification appears from the testimony given by the other party.
Defenses to desertion include (1) agreement, (2) recrimination, (3) justification, (4) pending divorce case, or (5) relocation of spouse.
Agreement: When the separation is by consent or agreement, or is acquiesced to by the other spouse, there is a presumption that the separation by consent continues until a spouse withdraws the consent and offers to resume the cohabitation. Refusal without justification will give rise to desertion.
Recrimination: Where the deserted party as well as the deserting party is guilty of a fault ground, the deserted party is barred from a divorce on the grounds of the desertion.
Justification: Where there is violence, even though the acts do not amount to cruelty, there may be a sufficient basis to constitute a fault ground for divorce.
Pending divorce case: A spouse is not guilty of desertion where the leaving takes place after the divorce case has been instituted and during the pendency of the case.
Relocation of spouse: A spouse is no longer expected to follow the other spouse’s change of abode, and the refusal to follow to relocate is not desertion.
******
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/desertion
DESERTION
The act by which a person abandons and forsakes, without justification, a condition of public, social, or family life, renouncing its responsibilities and evading its duties. A willful Abandonment of an employment or duty in violation of a legal or moral obligation.
Criminal desertion is a husband’s or wife’s abandonment or willful failure without Just Cause to provide for the care, protection, or support of a spouse who is in ill health or necessitous circumstances.
Desertion, which is called abandonment in some statutes, is a divorce ground in a majority of states. Most statutes mandate that the abandonment continue for a certain period of time before a divorce action may be commenced. The length of this period varies between one and five years; it is most commonly one year. The period of separation must be continuous and uninterrupted. In addition, proof that the departed spouse left without the consent of the other spouse is required in most states.
Ordinarily, proof of desertion is a clear-cut factual matter. Courts generally require evidence that the departure was voluntary and that the deserted husband or wife in no way provoked or agreed to the abandonment. Constructive desertion occurs when one party makes life so intolerable for his or her spouse that the spouse has no real choice but to leave the marital home. For an individual to have legal justification for departing, it is often required that the spouse act so wrongfully as to constitute grounds for divorce. For example, a wife might leave her husband if she finds that he is guilty of Adultery.
In desertion cases, it is not necessary to prove the emotional state of the abandoning spouse, but only the intent to break off matrimonial ties with no animus revertendi, the intention to return.
Mere separation does not constitute desertion if a husband and wife agree that they cannot cohabit harmoniously. Sexual relations between the parties must be totally severed during the period of separation. If two people live apart from one another but meet on a regular basis for sex, this does not constitute desertion. State law dictates whether or not an infrequent meeting for sexual relations amounts to an interruption of the period required for desertion. Some statutes provide that an occasional act of sexual intercourse terminates the period only if the husband and wife are attempting reconciliation.
Unintentional abandonment is not desertion. For example, if a man is missing in action while serving in the Armed Services, his wife may not obtain a divorce on desertion grounds since her spouse did not intend to leave his family and flee the marital relationship. The common law allows an individual to presume that a spouse is dead if the spouse is unexplainably absent for a seven-year period. If the spouse returns at any time, the marriage remains intact under common law.
Laws that embody the Enoch Arden Doctrine grant a divorce if evidence establishes that an individual’s spouse has vanished and cannot be found through diligent efforts. A particular period of time must elapse. Sometimes, if conditions evidencing death can be exhibited, a divorce may be granted prior to the expiration of the time specified by law.
In some jurisdictions, the law is stringent regarding divorce grounds. In such instances, an Enoch Arden decree might be labeled a dissolution of the marriage rather than a divorce.
Upon the granting of an Enoch Arden decree, the marriage is terminated regardless of whether or not the absent spouse returns. Generally, the court provides that the plaintiff must show precisely what has been done to locate the missing person. Efforts to find the absent spouse might include inquiries made to friends or relatives to determine if they have had contact with the missing spouse, or checking public records for such documents as a marriage license, death certificate, tax returns, or application for Social Security in locations where the individual is known to have resided.
Desertion is frequently coupled with non-support, which is a failure to provide monetary resources for those to whom such an obligation is due. Nonsupport is a crime in a majority of states but prosecutions are uncommon.
West’s Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2.
Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc.
All rights reserved.
desertion n. the act of abandoning, particularly leaving one’s spouse and/or children without an intent to return. In desertion cases it is often expected that a deserter who is the family breadwinner may not intend to support the family he/she left. Such conduct is less significant legally in the present era of no-fault divorce and standardized rights to child support and alimony (spousal support). Desertion can influence a court in determining visitation, custody and other post-marital issues.
Copyright © 1981-2005 by Gerald N. Hill and Kathleen T. Hill.
All Right reserved.
desertion noun abandonment, abandonment of allegiance, abjuration, absence without leave, act of forsaking, apostasy, AWOL, defection, departure, derelictio, disloyalty, flight, forsaking, forswearing, leaving, mutiny,quitting, recreancy, renouncement, renunciation, repudiation, resignation, secession, unlawful departure, willful abandonment
Associated concepts: constructive desertion, willful desertion
See also: absence, dereliction, disloyalty, flight, infidelity, revolt, schism, sedition
Burton’s Legal Thesaurus, 4E.
Copyright © 2007 by William C. Burton.
Used with permission of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
DESERTION, torts. The act by which a man abandons his wife and children, or either of them.
2. On proof of desertion, the courts possess the power to grant the ‘Wife, or such children as have been deserted, alimony (q.v.)
DESERTION, MALICIOUS. The act of a husband or wife, in leaving a consort, without just cause, for the purpose of causing a perpetual separation. Vide Abandonment, malicious.
A Law Dictionary,
Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States.
By John Bouvier. Published 1856.
******
“It might be said that it is perverse for a divorce lawyer and family court judge to be espousing laws and policies which will reduce family breakdown, and with it the need for such services. Like most family lawyers, I have seen at first hand too many of the consequences of family breakdown and too many consequences of the impact on children. If one result of these proposed reforms is less need for divorce lawyers then most in society will rejoice!”
CHAIRMAN’S FOREWORD
David Hodson,
Chairman of the Family Law Review,
Centre for Social Justice
Posted in Civil Rights, Child Support, Maternal Rights, Parental Alienation, Paternal Rights, Divorce, Family, Child-Custody Awards, Men's Issues, Child Abduction | Print | No Comments »
New Brazilian Law: Parental Alienation is Child Abuse
September 4, 2010 by Walter Schneider.
August 26, 2010
New Brazilian Law 12 318 defines and punishes parental alienation
by Father Knowledge Centre
Breaking news: Brazil has ratified a law that defines and punishes parental alienation as a form of child abuse
On the 26th of August 2010 the Brazilian Parliament has ratified with immediate effect a law against parental alienation. The law defines parental alienation as a form of child abuse. It provides Brazilian judges and courts with seven measures to deal with parental alienation. Amongst those are fines, contrary custody and/or care and residence decisions and care supervision orders.
Below you will find the text of this new Brazilian law in an English translation and below that the Brazilian original text.
Peter Tromp
Father Knowledge Centre Europe
_________
Information on parental alienation syndrome (PAS)
Posted in Parental Alienation | Print | 2 Comments »