Help request: Child abduction and alimony

Help request: Child abduction and alimony

On 16/09/2010 12:33 AM, [Name omitted] wrote:

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:


I’m a father of two girls … My common law wife took off with the girls 18 months ago. My life has been hell.

I was the stay at home dad … Took care of kids and also worked and gave all money to wife for investments and expenses.

When she left she put a retraining order against me even though I had done nothing …. She simply told me she wishes to move away and is determined not to have me involved in my girls lifes.

I have went bankrupt and the judge states I can see my girls 6 hrs per week.  I’m currently on social assistance yet the judge does not feel I should get spousal support even though my ex earned over 120k last year. Judge Curtis is known as a pro feminist and my lawyer says there is nothing left to do. My girls want an ocl involved as they wish to live with me but the judge says no.

What r my options?

Who can help?

This will probably be too long to be displayed on your cell phone, but the next couple of paragraphs should show.

Fathers for Life has a few articles on how to select a lawyer.  Check those out and pick a lawyer accordingly.

To explore your option in Ontario, you need to get in touch with Ontario fathers-rights organizations.

Don’t just pick one.  Check out several, specifically those that have frequent meetings of their members.  You will learn more from them than you can from a lawyer, as they will have reached various points of progress (or lack of it) in their battles.  A directory is here.

Get your case out of family court and into a Court of Queens Bench.  Family courts are not there to solve family problems but to speed the easy dissolution of families. (Read more on family courts.)  Here is a summary of what family courts are all about:

[When no-fault divorce became a reality, it] became soon apparent that the courts could not cope with the flood of divorce applications that caused ever-increasing waiting periods before divorce decrees could be issued.  To expedite the dissolution of marriages, family-court systems were implemented throughout the developed nations.  Nothing much would have been accomplished by merely shifting venues and leaving the rules of the court intact.  Therefore the family-court systems were made to operate without jury trials, without the traditional rules of the court, without rules of evidence, and without the mandatory and constitutionally-guaranteed right of respondents (usually fathers, in family courts) to have legal representation [or even to face their accuser].  Many procedures that had been put into place over the centuries to ensure that anyone could be assured a fair trial thus vanished in the family courts.

That, too, was nothing new.  All totalitarian regimes that were obsessed with the eradication of enemies of the state did the same when they created their people’s courts.  We can’t be certain that the example of the people’s courts in totalitarian states was used as a model for the more recent creation of the branch of the judiciary in which the rules of law could be held in abeyance and circumvented.  One thing is certain; all of that worked fine and produced fine results.

The enormous and overwhelming backlog of divorce applications got soon cleared, and the process of the dissolution of marriages has been operating with great speed and efficiency ever since.  In some countries (e.g.: the U.K.) the process operates behind closed doors, ostensibly to protect the interests of the children, although it should be quite obvious to anyone reading this who is being protected….(Source: Freedom, Equality, and Society’s Treatment of Men and Families)

All the best,

Fathers for Life
Dads & Things

(Visited 14 times, 1 visit(s) today)
This entry was posted in Child Abduction, Child-Custody Awards, Civil Rights, Divorce, Feminist Jurisprudence, Maternal Rights, Men's Issues, Paternal Rights, Violence by Proxy. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Help request: Child abduction and alimony

  1. I am sorry, but I am not abe to tell you whether that is an effective tactic.

    It seems to me that a far more effective way to fight what is happening would be to question the validity of “no-fault” divorce.

    No-fault divorce was originally proposed to be assumed when both spouses agreed that they wanted a divorce. I don’t think that the misapplied interpretation of that, namely that “no-fault” divorce is assumed when only one spouse wants out of the marriage never was part of the original proposal. That just got in when “no-fault” divorce got its foot in the door.

    I hope that someone else who reads this can offer a better opinion.

  2. ohiofather


    Possible way to break default custody…

    I found a very interesting article on a divorce website having to do with using a legal charge, known as “Abuse of Process” to break the nearly-automatic awarding of custody to the parent who files first for divorce and the often-associated “Temporary” Custody.

    If I understood the article, I am thinking they are suggesting to file a civil suit for “Abuse of Process” against the parent who filed first, was awarded the “temporary custody” during the divorce proceeding, then won the permanent custody, and its associated child support (and often, spousal support).

    In other words, I believe this offers a backup plan for the inevitable losing of custody to the party who was “first to file”.

    An award under this claim would begin to establish a reform, but I am assuming that to truly become effective, it will need to be taken all the way to the state supreme court. This would then set the precedent which would be quoted in all future cases. I have no doubt there will be a defendant/mother who lost her case under this charge, who will appeal it all the way.

    Can others please review this article, especially you attorneys, and post your thoughts? If this has validity, it might quickly stop this madness (Custody by “First to File”). It will require someone filing the civil action in their respective state, and thereby establishing a case law for future cases to refer to).

    The topic is “Leveling the Child Custody Field”, and is located at:

    Thank you.

Comments are closed.