Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Montreal dad eager for reunion with young daughter found in B.C.


Last Updated: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 | 8:56 AM ET Comments83Recommend133

10-year-old Ashley Gonis. 10-year-old Ashley Gonis. (Family photo)

A Montreal father says news that his daughter has been found safe in Vancouver more than two years after her disappearance is like "a gift from God."

Frank Gonis said police told him Friday they had located his daughter, 10-year-old Ashley Gonis, at a SkyTrain station in the neighbourhood of East Vancouver.

"The police called me on Friday early in the morning and it was like, I don’t know, a gift from God. It's amazing that she’s safe," he said.

Ashley disappeared in January 2007, along with Gonis's ex-wife, after a parental dispute that he says ended with him being awarded sole custody of the girl.

When she surfaced on Friday, police said Ashley told them she had run away from an "abusive situation at home" and walked for hours before making a 911 call.

Gonis said he can't imagine what her home life has been like since she disappeared from Montreal more than two years ago.

"The information I’ve gotten is there is a lot of work to be done with her … a lot of brainwashing to cut through … but hopefully it will be all for the best," he said. "She is still young. There is time for her to recover."

Gonis said he wanted to fly to Vancouver the same day he heard the news, but was waiting to get his legal paperwork in order before going to B.C.

"I want to make sure I got all my ducks in a row so I don’t go there and end up having to fight social services to get my daughter back," he said.

Ashley was placed in the care of the B.C. Ministry of Children and Family Development after being found.

Gonis said he's ready to give Ashley whatever help and support she needs.

"I just want her home, you know, and then whatever comes up, we’ll deal with it then, you know," he said.

Ashley was listed as a missing child due to parental abduction on the website of Enfant-Retour Quebec, a non-profit organization whose mission is to assist families searching for their missing children.

Frank Gonis made a public appeal for the safe return of his daughter after she and his ex-wife vanished, according to media reports.

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Men Shouldn't Be Overlooked as Victims of Partner Violence

Psychiatr News August 3, 2007
Volume 42, Number 15, page 31
© 2007 American Psychiatric Association


Clinical & Research News

Joan Arehart-Treichel

In addressing intimate partner violence, the focus is usually on women who are physically battered by husbands or boyfriends. However, women sometimes hurt their partners as well.

Women are doing virtually everything these days that men are—working as doctors, lawyers, and rocket scientists; flying helicopters in combat; riding horses in the Kentucky Derby. And physically assaulting their spouses or partners.

In fact, when it comes to nonreciprocal violence between intimate partners, women are more often the perpetrators.

These findings on intimate partner violence come from a study conducted by scientists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The lead investigator was Daniel Whitaker, Ph.D., a behavioral scientist and team leader at the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (which is part of the CDC). Results were published in the May Journal of Public Health.

In 2001, the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health attempted to amass data about the health of a nationally representative sample of 14,322 individuals between the ages of 18 and 28. The study also asked subjects to answer questions about romantic or sexual relationships in which they had engaged during the previous five years and whether those relationships had involved violence.

Of those subjects, 11,370 reported having had heterosexual relationships and also provided answers to the violence-related questions. So Whitaker and his colleagues decided to use the responses from these 11,370 subjects for a study into how much violence is experienced in intimate heterosexual partner relationships, who the instigators are, and whether physical harm accrues from the violence.

The 11,370 subjects, Whitaker and his colleagues found, reported on 18,761 relationships, of which 76 percent had been nonviolent and 24 percent violent. That almost a quarter of the subjects had engaged in violent relationships may seem high to some people, but "the rates we found are similar to those of other studies of late adolescents and young adults, a time period when interpersonal-violence rates are at their highest," Whitaker told Psychiatric News. Also, he added, "these rates demonstrate the magnitude of interpersonal violence as a health and social problem."


Figure 1

Furthermore, Whitaker discovered, of the 24 percent of relationships that had been violent, half had been reciprocal and half had not. Although more men than women (53 percent versus 49 percent) had experienced nonreciprocal violent relationships, more women than men (52 percent versus 47 percent) had taken part in ones involving reciprocal violence.

Regarding perpetration of violence, more women than men (25 percent versus 11 percent) were responsible. In fact, 71 percent of the instigators in nonreciprocal partner violence were women. This finding surprised Whitaker and his colleagues, they admitted in their study report.

As for physical injury due to intimate partner violence, it was more likely to occur when the violence was reciprocal than nonreciprocal. And while injury was more likely when violence was perpetrated by men, in relationships with reciprocal violence it was the men who were injured more often (25 percent of the time) than were women (20 percent of the time). "This is important as violence perpetrated by women is often seen as not serious," Whitaker and his group stressed.

Of the study's numerous findings, Whitaker said, "I think the most important is that a great deal of interpersonal violence is reciprocally perpetrated and that when it is reciprocally perpetrated, it is much more likely to result in injury than when perpetrated by only one partner."

The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, upon which this investigation was based, was funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development with co-funding from 17 other federal agencies.

http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/42/15/31-a





An abstract of "Differences in Frequency of Violence and Reported Injury Between Relationships With Reciprocal and Nonreciprocal Intimate Partner Violence" is posted at <www.ajph.org/cgi/content/abstract/97/5/941>.
{blacksquare}

Britain's worst hour

The UK has had well over a decade of social engineering and Political Correctness at the hand of the socialists. Could the lack of fathers in the lives of their children, aided and abetted by the judiciary, not enforcing contact orders have any bearing. Before Canadians get self righteous just look at Vancouver. We are heading there but have time to stop.MJM

Britain's worst hour

Megan O’Toole, National Post Published: Friday, April 10, 2009


A drinker outside a British pub. Binge drinking, public violence and a feeling of cultural angst is plaguing Britain's youth.

Matt Cardy/Getty ImagesA drinker outside a British pub. Binge drinking, public violence and a feeling of cultural angst is plaguing Britain's youth.

Something is rotten in Britain. Young men are stabbing each other to death at an unprecedented rate, the centres of many towns are no-go areas on weekends as drunks spill out of bars and terrorize passersby, and Britons are obsessed with celebrities such as Jade Goody, whose funeral last weekend led to scenes reminiscent of the death of Princess Diana.

In a recent article, British talk show host Michael Parkinson heaped scathing criticism on Ms. Goody, calling her "all that's paltry and wretched about Britain."

Brought up by drug-addicted parents in a poor neighbourhood of London, she was transformed by the glare of reality television into a multi-million-dollar product whom the public was urged to celebrate, especially after being diagnosed with cervical cancer, Mr. Parkinson noted.

"Jade Goody has her own place in the history of television and, while it's significant, it's nothing to be proud of," he wrote in the Radio Times.

"When we clear the media smokescreen from around her death what we're left with is a woman who came to represent all that's paltry and wretched about Britain today. She was ... barely educated, ignorant and puerile. Then she was projected to celebrity by Big Brother and from that point on became a media chattel to be manipulated and exploited till the day she died."

What made Ms. Goody stand out in her reality-TV appearances was her shocking ignorance of her country's geography, her naked and drunken exploits and her racist bullying of an Indian housemate.

But she is not the only sign something has gone awry.

Over the past 25 years, an incredible decline in unity has become evident in everything, from rioting at soccer games to the "alien nation" characterized by high numbers of immigrants in some areas, said Ninian Mellamphy, professor emeritus of English at the University of Western Ontario.

"It looks as if the whole nation has, to a greater sense, kind of lost its moral focus," he added, noting this may reflect resentment at a loss of status resulting from the dissolution of the British Empire.

"[It took away] a kind of self-respect that had to do with British power and perhaps British arrogance, and so you have an arrogance now that has no relationship with power."

Last year, Ray Winstone, an actor known for tough-guy roles, threatened to leave, saying Britain had "gone to the dogs" and citing increasingly lawless behaviour among youths. "We're a mess. And do I really want to live in this mess any more? I feel bad saying it, but I'm just not sure."

In Mr. Mellamphy's eyes, the spiritual malaise gripping modern Britain has created something of a "moral vacuum" that feeds off itself.

Last week, two brothers, aged 10 and 11, were accused of attempting to murder two other boys, who claimed they were robbed and beaten in a wooded area in northern England. The accused, who had recently been placed in foster care, became some of the youngest people ever charged with such a serious crime in Britain.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown's office called the crime a "disturbing but singular event" that should not be used to draw conclusions about the state of society.

Yet signs of cultural decline have also become evident in the familial sphere, an area the opposition Conservative party has identified as a priority, touting a goal to make Britain the most "family-friendly" country in the world.

It seems they have far to go. In February, Alfie Patten, 13, was reported to have fathered his 15-year-old girlfriend's baby. Though The Daily Telegraph dubbed him "the exploited face of broken Britain," it soon appeared he was only one of several teens claiming paternity. DNA tests later confirmed he was not the father.

Other young people, increasingly girls, are getting drunk at an alarming rate. A Daily Mirror series on the "epidemic" said more than 5,000 teenage girls landed in hospital last year because of binge drinking. Those same teens - loaded up with cheap alcohol - have been fuelling soaring crime rates.

"Last year violent crimes by teenage girls reached a shocking 23,000, many of them alcohol-related," the Mirror said, going on to note that British teenagers "now drink more than almost anywhere in Europe."

But it's not making them any happier. A recent report by the New Economics Foundation found Britons aged 16 to 24 experienced some of the lowest levels of trust and belonging - key elements of social well-being - in Europe. Only Bulgaria and Estonia reported lower rates.

Part of the problem seems to be the number of people leaving school without any qualifications as the dropout rate remains stubbornly high.

Education experts are trying to reshape the curriculum to equip students with the skills they need to function today.

A new report on the primary school curriculum in England and Wales encourages educators to place more emphasis on technology than on traditional subjects.

According to its recommendations, students would not necessarily have to learn about the Victorian era or the Second World War - teachers could choose two "key periods" of British history - but learning skills such as blogging, podcasting and Twittering would take a central role.

The report also calls for a shift from core subjects to cross-cultural "themes," such as sex and relationships, healthy eating, Internet safety, dealing with violent behaviour and managing money.

With such a dramatic confluence of ills, Mr. Mellamphy, an expert in British culture, says it is difficult to envision how British society may begin to right itself.

"There's certainly a need for some kind of a movement [toward] integration rather than resentment," he said. "How exactly they're going to do that, morally and politically, I can't guess."

National Post, with files from news services

motoole@nationalpost.com

Abuse excuse: how liberalism keeps women in their place

April 14, 2009

By Carey Roberts

Liberals have become the unapologetic predators of women, gleefully playing on their fears and psychological vulnerabilities, all in the name of curbing domestic violence. Of course women's only hope lies in heavy-handed state intervention.

Before proceeding, I will warn you this column is filled with high-octane statements made by the willfully dishonest, the social schemers, and the patently unhinged. As you wade through the claims, keep in mind two facts.

First, all forms of violent crime have fallen dramatically in the past 30 years. The incidences of rape, intimate partner homicide, and non-fatal partner violence are now half what they were in 1980. We've made tremendous progress in the last three decades and everyone should be feeling a lot safer.

Second, research shows women are more likely than men to instigate partner violence — http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/42/15/31-a . But that's one of those inconvenient truths the liberals will never concede.

Let's start with the willfully dishonest.

A few months ago Human Rights Watch issued a press release with the screaming headline, "Soaring Rates of Rape and Violence against Women." The release claims a recent Department of Justice report shows "huge increases" in domestic violence and rape. "The numbers in this survey show an alarmingly high rate of sexual violence in this country," throbs the HRW drumbeat.

Want to know what the Justice report really says? In 2007, "The rates for every major violent and property crime...were at or near the lowest levels recorded since 1973."

So how does Human Rights Watch get away with such a misleading claim? Because three years ago the Justice Department fine-tuned its survey methods, causing an anomaly in its crime numbers. The DoJ report emphasizes the apparent uptick in rapes does "not appear to be due to changes in the rate of criminal activity during this period." But apparently the Human Rights Watch people decided to skip over that particular sentence.

You can see the Ms.-Information here: www.hrw.org/en/news/2008/12/18/us-soaring-rates-rape-and-violence-against-women And here's the Justice report: www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cv07.pdf

Next up, the social schemers.

To drive home the message of men as inveterate abusers, the domestic violence industry has organized a series of high-profile "awareness months." January is Stalking Awareness Month. February is when we focus on Teen Dating, when couples can celebrate Valentine's Day by watching a performance of the Vagina Monologues. March is Women's History Month, so anything goes then. April has been designated Sexual Assault Awareness Month. And June? Soon that will be Domestic Violence Awareness Month.

So ladies, after all those Take Back the Night rallies, you'll be so scared that you will have divorced your husband, hired a security guard, and taken up residence in a lock-down facility. All these consciousness-raising events are taxpayer-funded, thanks to the federal Violence Against Women Act.

Now ready for the unhinged? I'll warn you, this gets wild.

A few weeks ago the National Organization for Women of New York State issued a press release on a pending hate crime bill. Mind you, hate crimes are already illegal in New York, so you'd think things have been taken care of. But no, the NOW isn't about to let go of such a juicy issue.

The NOW leads off with some old fashioned demagoguery: "Men who assault their wives are living up to cherished Western cultural prescriptions." Not only that, "we cannot deny that women are in a class by themselves, discriminated against, hated, used, disrespected, and abused." Yes, life is grim when the federal government doles out a measly $1 billion for abuse-reduction programs.

Now hold on, it's about to get hallucinogenic...

"In the hospital, from the time parents scream 'it's a girl!' they begin to ask themselves how they willl keep their little girl and woman-to-be from the violence that many women face," the NOW explains. That's right, why waste time celebrating your precious new arrival when you should be worrying about domestic violence? Let's hold a shelter fundraiser right here in the nursery!

To top it off, the NOW-NYS demands, "When a police officer is called to the scene of a violent assault against a woman by her husband/partner or stranger, the officer should arrest the perpetrator of the 'hate crime.' And this mandated arrest needs to be judicially enforced." http://www.nownys.org/pr_2009/pr_022609.html

Of course we needn't worry about probable cause or due process. Once we declare war on the national epidemic of partner abuse, normal constitutional guarantees are no longer in effect. And don't you dare mention that the perpetrator turned out to be the victim's jealous lesbian heartthrob.

Just imagine, these are the same women who boast when the Sisterhood takes over, tolerance, fairness, and understanding will finally prevail.

© Carey Roberts

Saturday, April 11, 2009

18-year-old can seek custody of brothers in brainwashing battle

This is indeed a sad and desperate story. Children are always the victims in an Alienation situation and these 3 may well have life long problems as their estrangement is both egregious and bizarre given the behaviour of the parents. We clearly don't have all the details. Judges in our Family Law (FLAW) have been practicing social engineering on families for the past 40 years with terrible results. Many of the social problems faced by children are the direct result of this.

Law makers and the judiciary need to wake up to the dysfunction being created while lawyers line their pockets helping families destroy themselves. The adversarial winner take all approach may be the root antecedents of the problem. We don't know.

The law has to be changed to one that treats parents equally upon separation and divorce. A rebuttal presumption of shared and equal parenting needs to be enacted. In all studies it shows when this is in place children do far better having both parents equally in their lives, divorce rates drop and high priced lawyers are less needed. In the Belgium model any parent who does not comply with child exchange on a scheduled basis is probably going to jail for abduction. That should knock some sense into recalcitrant parents quickly and improve cooperation in the best interest of the children. We have failed miserably so far. This case is testament to how very dysfunctional it can get.MJM

From Friday's Globe and Mail

An 18-year-old will be allowed to seek custody of his younger brothers to help rescue them from their warring parents and therapists who hope to deprogram them, an Ontario Court judge ruled Thursday.

Judge Steven Clark expressed optimism that his precedent-setting move may help shame the parents into recognizing the destruction that they have brought upon their family.

“Perhaps by adding P.F. as a party, the parents may come to realize that through their intransigence, their eldest child has now had to forsake some of his own adolescence and take on the mantle of a possible parent to the children, where they have both, arguably, failed,” Judge Clark said. “Having regard to the high conflict in this case, it may well be in the best interests of the children to become more invested in their own process by seeing that their brother has been named as a party.”

P.F. injected himself into the parental alienation case after his brothers – 12 and 14 – were bounced from a hospital psychiatric ward into a foster home in December because they refused to participate in a court-ordered therapy program.

Jeffery Wilson, a lawyer for P.F., told Judge Clark at a hearing last month that his client's plan to raise his brothers on welfare – augmented by support payments from their parents – is feasible.

However, in his judgment Thursday, Judge Clark also said he was afraid he may have created an “unsound” precedent that can be used in future cases by multiple family members who are intent on interfering in emotionally freighted family dramas.

Marvin Kurz, a lawyer for the mother, maintained that the woman's ex-husband is using her eldest son as a puppet in an attempt to get his two youngest sons back.

The startling chain of events highlighted a growing controversy over parental alienation and the therapies used to reverse it. A handful of U.S. therapists have touted their deprogramming clinics in Canada, resulting in at least three judicial treatment orders.

“P.F. is essentially seeking to rescue his brothers from the professionals who are trying to deprogram them and, if necessary, to wrest them from the parents who are battling for control of them,” Judge Clark said Thursday.

He said that, while his decision could lengthen or derail the case and potentially allow P.F. to “confuse or even stupefy the other parties,” it was worth the risk.

Judge Clark also remarked that, “part of the reason why the children were brought into care included that fact that they felt trapped in the legal system, and they felt forced to be in a therapeutic setting which fostered a sense of despair and accentuated feelings of helplessness in them.”

He said the real difficulty that bedevils the case is that for whatever reason, the children are distrustful of their mother and believe that any attempt by therapists to repair the relationships amounts to an abusive experiment.

“In the final analysis, this court finds that it owes this family the opportunity to see if something can be salvaged, and whether the family unit can be rehabilitated and reunified,” Judge Clark said.

The hearing to determine custody of the children is expected to resume in the near future.

Kirk Makin is The Globe and Mail's Justice Reporter

From Friday's Globe and Mail

Despite risk of ‘unsound' precedent, judge sends message to warring parents ...Read the full article


  1. Steve St-Laurent from Vancouver, Canada writes: What a mess! It seems both parents overlook an important point: children are NOT property. From the moment of birth they are people in their own right with their own rights.

    As the Lebanese-American poet Khalil Gibran put it, your children pass through you, not from you. The warring parents might give this some thought.
  2. Brian G from Canada writes: The children have been rescued from the parents. Now someone should rescue the parents from the lawyers.
  3. dennis baker from penticton, Canada writes: The system will not relinquish a dime for the family in the first place, yet have untold financial resources to pay lawyers, judges,shrinks,foster parents, group homes and what ever else.

    The eldest must make do with welfare, to support the other two.

    thats the problem the system is intended breakup familys to provide fodder as employment.



  4. Angry West Coast Canuck from Canada writes: It's cases like this that make you wish for the right of children to divorce their parents. It's obvious that age isn't an indicator of maturity. It's just as obvious that the intervention of lawyers has probably made a bad situation infinitely worse.

    As for 'the system' breaking up families, note that it's the 'pro family' crowd that is mainly responsible for creating insanely destructive 'family' environments in the first place, mainly by insisting that family members are 'property' of the patriarch, rather than independent thinking and feeling individuals regardless of their age.
  5. Cut The Crap from Canada writes: If one parent seeks to harm the children, and the other seeks to protect them from harm, on-lookers will only observe two parents fighting.

    Imagine you are attacked on the street and you defend yourself by fighting back. The police come by and see two people fighting; they appear equally guilty.

    It is fashionable to claim that both parents are guilty in this situation, but that is often not the case. One parent may well be using or abusing the children, but outsiders cannot tell which one. The oldest son is probably the most important person to listen to; he probably can shed light on what is going on in this family.
  6. Jaded in Vancouver from Canada writes: Except for the immediate and extended family, why is this anyone else's business ? This is hardly a news article, but a private matter which doesn't belong in the media.
  7. Jim Mohagan from Funkytown, Canada writes:
    Angry West Coast writes: note that it's the 'pro family' crowd that is mainly responsible for creating insanely destructive 'family' environments in the first place, mainly by insisting that family members are 'property' of the patriarch

    Nice attempt to smear fathers with feminist ideology, but the article specifically states that the children are distrustful of their mother. Maybe they know something you don't.
  8. Seasoned Warrior from Been down so long it looks like up to me, Canada writes: Why didn't the judge also order the parents into therapy? Seems like their the ones who need it more than the kids.
  9. garlick toast from Canada writes: It seems like the 18 yr.old is the only adult in this mess. Good luck to the children.
  10. John Ridout from Canada writes: It is hard to imagine the depth of pain these two parents are causing their children. And from the age of the children, the parents are certainly old enough to know better. When loves turns to hate, its venom will live on for years to come!!! The older brother's love and concern for his brothers is a light in this darkness.
  11. North Star from Canada writes: Kids are much smarter than we give them credit for. Hope you rescue your brothers from this adult insanity.
  12. J Planet from Everywhere, Canada writes: If the older brother is successful in obtaining custody of his brothers, a corporation or organization should open a bank account for these three children, to allow the public to make donations to help them out.
  13. Mom Ottawa from Ottawa, Canada writes: Personally, I think the mother should move to a tropical island and sell necklaces on a beach to support herself. Do some reading and make peace within herself and realize that she did the best she could to fight a futile battle. It is not worth fighting anymore. The other side was too strong for whatever reason. Life is not fair. Perhaps when her sons are older, they will see how they were brainwashed by their father.
  14. BCer living in Ontario westerner from Canada writes: Mom Ottawa from Ottawa, Canada writes: Personally, I think the mother should move to a tropical island and sell necklaces on a beach to support herself. Do some reading and make peace within herself and realize that she did the best she could to fight a futile battle. It is not worth fighting anymore. The other side was too strong for whatever reason. Life is not fair. Perhaps when her sons are older, they will see how they were brainwashed by their father. ---------------- Perhaps you know more about the case than is presented in the article, but nowhere does the judge condemn only the father. Most likely when they are older they'll be POed at both parents for trying to use them as weapons in their fight against each other, and then again maybe the mother is truly a psycho that they are best away from. Not enough information here to even form an opinion.
  15. D F from Canada writes: How shameful. Here are 2 supposedly intelligent and educated people who can't get their act together enough to save the most important thing they have ever had, their family. How selfish, how immature, how abusive. Out of all rotten things some glimmer of good can usually be found. I hope they find it, because otherwise, the three young lives in question have so much damage to repair. Hopefully they come out stronger, rather than shells of their former selves.
  16. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: Speaking from direct experience, BOTH parents in an unhappy marriage can and do have no compunction in using any and all children in the family as weapons against each other. This has its own set of consequences. And this is well before one gets into a discussion of one parent attempting to poison the children against the other parent. Note that this only really works when the parents are divorced and the children are young.

    The critical issue here is that the system does not have a fair and balanced perspective and approach to these issues. It tends to assume that the father is the one at fault, consequently giving support and custody to the mother. Trust me on this one this is something that should be considered - very closely and carefully - on a case by case basis. Far too often both parents are FUBAR.
  17. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ Brian G: Lawyers are the only thing that will save them from prison. The parents have been very stupid indeed, and both should go to prison.
  18. Squish_a_p From BC from Canada writes: Jaded in Vancouver, I'm sorry but I must dissagree with you. My children's father did this to them in the 90's. It's only been through talking about parental alienation that has brought the issue to light. It's too late for my kids but if making it a public issue helps other children and educates parents to the damage they can do, then I'm all for it.
  19. Jarek Walter from Toronto, Canada writes: All of us have to be very careful with our comments. It's almost impossible to fairly judge the situation without knowledge of all the facts and court documents. I'm wondering if all comments would be the same if the article would mention following facts available in court documents:
    - the mother had a custody of children for the eight years since the divorce. During this time children were happy, were very good students involved in number of extra circulum activites;
    - the father started to seek the custody only two years ago when he was evicted from his apartment for unpaid rent and when he was living in a shelter for the homeless;
    - the 'possesion' of children allowed the father to obtain social financial assistance and accommodation.
    The question to be raised is: Where was the father when the mother was struggling to provide the best for the children during the first eight years following the divorce?
    -
  20. brad brien from Canada writes: Anyone supporting the mothers or fathers position is simply falling into the same downward, un-adult, un-parent mindset as these two so called 'parents'. They both left the 'Sandbox' long ago and should always place their childrens needs and wellbeing before their own ! Sometimes giving-up or giving-in on what we think we must keep, have or obtain from a broken marriage can be the best for all. Neither side needs to 'win' ! Always remember, when a child is in need, suffering or in trouble, you (the adult) must run towards that child, never run away !!!
  21. Jenna Beason from Canada writes: Jaded in Vancouver from Canada writes: Except for the immediate and extended family, why is this anyone else's business ? This is hardly a news article, but a private matter which doesn't belong in the media.

    I can't help but notice that you not only took time to read the article but you commented as well.
  22. Jenna Beason from Canada writes: D F from Canada writes: How shameful. Here are 2 supposedly intelligent and educated people who can't get their act together enough to save the most important thing they have ever had, their family.

    Trust me D F, not every family can (or should) be saved. My parents' marriage was a nightmare, the divorce even worse, but afterwards their hatred at least simmered at a distance. Given a choice I far preferred post-divorce life, even with the attempted brainwashing against the other parent, which was done by both sides. I applaud this 18-year old for stepping up for his brothers and want to smack these parents upside the head.
  23. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ Jaded in Vancouver: This is a public issue because the affected children may carry on the tradition. Also, they will act out and need treatment on their own cases. This treatment is publicly funded, and the acting out is not necessarily limited to anti-social behaviour in the workplace. It can extend to substance abuse and addictions to nasty stuff.

    Twits like you are a root cause of these problems. We are all connected.
  24. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ Give peace a chance: It takes two to Tango, dudette. And men are just as stupid, nasty and 'evil' as women. Spare us the sexism. It doesn't help.
  25. brad brien from Canada writes: Hey, Wise the F@#&-up !!! Are we using this issue as a person-to-person sparring match, or are we 'talking' about the wellbeing of three children??? Spar somewhere else!
  26. William Blake from Canada writes: Jaded in Vancouver from Canada writes: Except for the immediate and extended family, why is this anyone else's business ?

    Um, because it is creating a potentially far-reaching precedent in family law? Why would family law be anyone's business?
  27. Canadian Woman from Toronto, Canada writes: Thank you William Blake for pointing out the potential this case has to set precedent that may play out not just in Ontario but across the country. I wonder how many eldest siblings would have welcomed this kind of state protected, finacially sound, publicly transparent, socially supported legal action in days gone by? Judge Steven Clark is a visionary leader whose argument deserves the attention of all Canadians.
  28. BCer living in Ontario westerner from Canada writes: Walter from Toronto, Canada writes: All of us have to be very careful with our comments. It's almost impossible to fairly judge the situation without knowledge of all the facts and court documents. I'm wondering if all comments would be the same if the article would mention following facts available in court documents: - the mother had a custody of children for the eight years since the divorce. During this time children were happy, were very good students involved in number of extra circulum activites; - the father started to seek the custody only two years ago when he was evicted from his apartment for unpaid rent and when he was living in a shelter for the homeless; - the 'possesion' of children allowed the father to obtain social financial assistance and accommodation. The question to be raised is: Where was the father when the mother was struggling to provide the best for the children during the first eight years following the divorce? - So do you have access to the father's side of the story. Perhaps he was paying huge child support payments and the mortgage on the house the mother and 3 children lived in. If the case was as you have presented with your one sided information, the judge would have decided in the mother's favour a long time ago. Things are never as simple as presented on paper.
  29. brad brien from Canada writes: Canadian Woman from Toronto: I'm confused . Please elaborate on your statements. What is the 'potential impact' to us common folk ?
  30. Ivan Wilson from Canada writes: brad brien from Canada writes: Canadian Woman from Toronto: I'm confused . Please elaborate on your statements. What is the 'potential impact' to us common folk ?

    It's called legal precedent - go and look it up and do some reading before you ask silly questions.
  31. Bobcat 64 from Halifax, Canada writes: This is absolutely ridiculous. Me and my ex didn't exactly like each other after our divorce but we were smart enough to not involve the kids. I would never ask them to pick one parent over the other. It is extremely important that kids maintain a great relationship with both parents, unless one is abusing that child. This sounds like mental abuse and it disgusts me that a parent could do that to their own children. Sounds like the 18 year old is more mature than the parents.
  32. Don Portz from Trochu AB, Canada writes: As some posters have mentioned, we should not be making judgement on who or which of the parents are in fault, as we do not know all the circumstances. However I recall the comments made by a divorced lady when I was still fairly young and I had understood (from others) that she had been unfairly treated and probably abused. Her Comments when asked was; I'It takes TWO to fight'.
    I have never forgotten those comments of some 50 yrs ago.
    My only hope is that the children get the help that they need to become responsible citizens and a chance at a productive happy life.
  33. brad brien from Canada writes: IVAN WILSON: Thanks for the info regarding 'Legal Precedent', very helpful. Are we still discussing the three children in this case, or has it been reduced to squabling legalphiles without compassion??
  34. marlene stobbart from High River, Canada writes: These troubles brought to mind the Colin Thatcher family tragedy and difficulties of those children. Disfunctional families cause children to have difficulties in both present and future life. That the 18 year old brother is wishing to help his siblings is admiable. I trust the state will also be there to help as his task is formidable and will before ever having to deal with the warring parents and guilt they will bestow upon him.
  35. Jarek Walter from Toronto, Canada writes: In reply to BCer living in Ontario westerner from Canada who wrote: 'So do you have access to the father's side of the story. Perhaps he was paying huge child support payments and the mortgage on the house the mother and 3 children lived in. If the case was as you have presented with your one sided information, the judge would have decided in the mother's favour a long time ago. Things are never as simple as presented on paper'. Court documents clearly state that the father owns the mother huge amount of overdue child support payments previously ordered by the court. And I totally agree with you, that things are never as simple as we see them, as the judge sees them, as involved parties see them. Let's hope that the court will find the solution which would be the best for the children. The only thing we know for sure is, that the children will be suffering from this horrible experience for the rest of theirs lives and no court decision will be able to erase it from theirs memory.
  36. Orest Zarowsky from Toronto, Canada writes: @ brad brien: Pipe down you troll. Stop being obtuse - deliberately.

    So far, you haven't said anything worthwhile.
  37. harry carnie from Northern B.C, Canada writes: It would appear Bob Barker`s 'spay and neuter'
    should be extended into other areas of our society.
  38. J Planet from Everywhere, Canada writes: Most on this site appear to want to take sides or issue polemic. If you care about these children, put your money where you mouth is. I challenge everyone here who claims to care about the welfare of these children to see to it a trust fund is opened for them, and to make a donation to support them. If you aren't willing to take that step, then quit your blather.
  39. Mark Couvier from Toronto, Canada writes: Re: J Planet from Everywhere: 'a trust fund is opened for them'

    I think it's too early - do we know who is going to control potential trust fund? Before making such proposals we have to wait for the result of court proceedings. Until such decision is reached, nothing prevents us from sharing our thoughts, feelings and reflections.
  40. xtrump 42 from Middle Earth, Canada writes: Jarek Walter, You make a very good point. The author of this story, (or the G&M editor) should be chastised for only telling ' half the tale' and misleading the public.

    Very second rate job of reporting.
  41. G D from Canada writes: This story is lacking on important facts, as other posters have noticed. I myself am confused as to why more information is not available as the court documents are usually made public unless there is a publication ban.

    Naturally, the Globe and Mail may be respectfully holding back some identifying information (exact dates & places, names, etc.), but what's the deal with the parents? Couldn't the circumstances be better described?

    It is not that very meaningful that a brother adopted his siblings unless we know what it took for the court to arrive at that decision.

    I learned more about the situation through the some of the posters (who hopefully know their stuff), and I am disturbed by the sexism (both ways).

    And...It is quite possible that the father had good reason to ask for custody. It is also possible that he was a scoundrel trying to find an excuse to get financial assistance and found the children to be the perfect cash cow. I don't know, and don't even know where to look, because I do not have the names of the adult parties involved.
  42. Mark Couvier from Toronto, Canada writes: For these seeking more information:

    http://blog.separation.ca/?p=83 or Google search on Filaber v. Filaber
  43. Squish_a_p From BC from Canada writes: Right on Orest Zarowsky from Toronto! This has nothing to do with gender. There are good and bad in both sexes.
  44. brad brien from Canada writes: I apologize for being 'obtuse-deliberately'. My intent is to draw attention to the fact (as seen in many of the above comments) that important family issues, requiring mature thought and resolve, are often reduced to petty squabbles. The real issue tends to be lost or sidelined due to individuals focusing on their own needs.
    Family law regarding childrens wellbeing is about just that, THE CHILDRENS WELLBEING ! It shouldn't matter so much that the Mom or Dad comes out ahead. What's important is that the children have what they need to carry-on and grow as successful human beings.
    Mom and Dad can be proud of the fact that, even though they lost something substantial (money, house, etc.) they have held on to their rights as a good parent!

    Parenting is not forced onto any of us, it's a choice. Resolving important family issues is no different, we all have a choice in the outcome. As a parent, the choice is clear, what is best for the children, I (the parent) come second !!!
  45. Dick Garneau from Canada writes: Jaded in Vancouver from Canada writes: 'why is this anyone else's business ?'

    We have lost the concept that from conception the child was the most important asset of a society.

    The framework of the family is the basic structural foundation of a society.

    That my dear Jaded is why the public is interested and very concerned.
    .
  46. Donald Wilson from Canada writes: For those wishing to assist the older brother financially ; go to the Salvation Army and offer to make a donation that you wish to be directed to the brother . They are able to obtain the name and contact the un-named brother in this case . you will get a tax deduction receipt for your donation and have no fear that your money will get used somewhere else . ............................. There is more to this saga than is written in this article . Thus it is difficult to determine who is the nut-case in the matter .
  47. You (Mike Murphy, from Sault Ste. Marie, ON, Canada) wrote: This is indeed a sad and desperate story. Children are always the victims in an Alienation situation and these 3 may well have life long problems as their estrangement is both egregious and bizarre given the behaviour of the parents. We clearly don't have all the details. Judges in our Family Law (FLAW) have been practicing social engineering on families for the past 40 years with terrible results. Many of the social problems faced by children are the direct result of this.

    Law makers and the judiciary need to wake up to the dysfunction being created while lawyers line their pockets helping families destroy themselves. The adversarial winner take all approach may be the root antecedents of the problem. We don't know.

    The law has to be changed to one that treats parents equally upon separation and divorce. A rebuttal presumption of shared and equal parenting needs to be enacted. In all studies it shows when this is in place children do far better having both parents equally in their lives, divorce rates drop and high priced lawyers are less needed. In the Belgium model any parent who does not comply with child exchange on a scheduled basis is probably going to jail for abduction. That should knock some sense into recalcitrant parents quickly and improve cooperation in the best interest of the children. We have failed miserably so far. This case is testament to how very dysfunctional it can get.


Friday, April 10, 2009

Grieving Parents Lose Thousands To Con Artist

My comments on Mens News Daily

We ought not to be shy about ostracizing him. I have been a close watcher and member of PAAO over the past 4 years and this guy seems to have usurped the name and original trade mark logo of the organization. Any one who would take advantage of abused children to assuage their ego is more than a cretin.

He is in my sights and will be pointed out for what he is until he gets the message he is no longer wanted. The gender feminists just love to have men like this they can point to as part of the FR movement. He needs to be ostracized without compulsion or delay.


Whether by disease, accident, murder or suicide, losing a child is one of the worst experiences a person could face. Another tragedy that ranks at the top of the list is having a missing child. Strangers abduct a small percentage of these children. Most are abducted by one of their parents.

There’s one type of parental child abduction that doesn’t get much attention. It happens when one parent uses the legal system to postpone or eliminate any chance of the other parent spending time with the children. One way is by claiming fear of domestic violence. Studies now show that sixty to eighty percent of allegations of domestic violence are later found to be unnecessary or false.

Many parents who find themselves victims of this hidden crime are confused, outraged, overwhelmed and desperate. Those who look for help online can find a wealth of information on websites and in related forums. Some offer in-person meetings and conferences. Others offer interactive Internet talk shows.

As described in Defiant Dads, most of these people are knowledgeable, sincere, and generous with their advice and encouragement. Unfortunately this is not true of everyone a parent might come across in the online community, which is often called the fathers’ movement, the family rights movement or the equal parenting movement. One man who has taken advantage of these vulnerable parents is Torm Howse, creator of the website UnitedCivilRights.org.

Howse, who has spent time in prison for intimidation and battery, been convicted of child abuse, and allegedly has warrants out for his arrest, offers his services writing legal papers. His own emails quote the rate of $40 an hour. He has told some parents that $400 would get his services for life. Yet he was able to get $1,000 from one parent and $3,000 from another. Howse usually has the money sent through the website’s PayPal donation account.

“Torm Howse works on people’s vulnerabilities. That’s what he did to me,” said Donald Tenn, board member of Fathers 4 Justice – US and father to abducted Madison Tenn, “I paid him $200 because he told me that he guaranteed I would get Madison back. I still haven’t received one piece of paper from him, and know I never will. I can take someone hurting me, but Howse exploits little children like my daughter Madison.”

“I was new in the movement, extremely vulnerable and desperate to find someone to help me. I worked with Mr. Howse to create the United Civil Rights Councils of America, not knowing he was a master at manipulation,” said Theresa Martin, who lived with Howse for a year, “He convinced me he was losing his storage unit in Indiana so I agreed to him storing his items in my home. When he showed up with his stuff he said he wasn’t about to go anywhere.”

“I thought I needed Torm to help me. I believed in my heart he was the only one who could,” she explained, “We had agreed he’d rent a room from me, but he didn’t pay me. I asked him to leave my home every single day for almost a year. He just refused!”

Howse left some parents at risk of jail. “When Torm Howse first started he was on time,” said Gary Helman, “then after the first hearing he started delaying everything. I was always getting emails from him saying I will have it tonight. I paid for an interlocutory appeal that he never finished. I paid for a civil suit that he never finished. I paid for an appeal and I never received it. I paid him $3,000 over all. Last July Torm called me and said, ‘they’re going to take you to jail. The food is not bad there,’ and he laughed.”

“I let Torm Howse stay in my house for a week, and paid him $1,000 to rewrite my complaint. It had been weeks and he wouldn't get it done – ‘trust me, it is a complete victory’ he kept saying,” David Bardes told me, “Then one day he just walked out. I was left to do all the paperwork myself, with very little time.” These are just some of the people who claim Howse has defrauded them. When asked to comment, Howse declined.

There were many objections when Howse first proposed his equal parenting class action lawsuits a few years ago. Ray Lautenschlager, of Parents And Children for Equality (PACE) said “Mike Galluzzo, Chuck Evans and I told Howse that his civil suit was a doomed effort because the wording and legal approach would not work, based on past experience and what we were finding out with the Galluzzo case at that time. The end result was a mass dismissal of all of the cases that they brought forth. And financial losses that were unnecessarily placed on the people that this wannabe leader had duped.”