Multiple divorces increase dropout rate

This is an interesting study but it doesn't break a lot of new ground. We already know the impacts of many social dysfunctions visited upon children given the social engineering of Family Court Judges by awarding custody in a 9-1 ratio to moms only, disenfranchising fathers. These details are missing from this story. The 38% divorce figure is misleading as married families are now a minority in Canada given the burgeoning common law relationships which are breaking up at a far faster rate than traditional marriages.

Dr Edwark Kruk's study, mentioned by two of your columnists recently, clearly shows the impact on children in fatherless homes.

Perhaps more details will arise as to the custody and co-habitation arrangements within this study.MJM

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Alberta Study

Keith Gerein, Canwest News Service

http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=1470887

Parents thinking about getting divorced, especially for the second or third time, should consider the impact of that decision on their children's schooling, new research from University of Alberta suggests.

The groundbreaking study -- believed to the first in Canada to look at the long-term impacts of family upheaval on educational attainment -- found children who experience changes to their family structure are much more likely to become high-school dropouts than classmates whose parents stay together.

The findings were particularly grim for children who live through three or more parental changes, such as divorce or death, remarriage and another divorce. Such children have just a 40% chance of completing their high-school diploma, a success rate half that of children with no upheaval.

"This is a long-run picture, where we can look at number of changes a child experiences and link it to how they finish up as they enter into young adulthood," said Lisa Strohschein, a professor at the University of Alberta, who co-authored the project. "We hope the more of these kids we can get to finish school, the better position they will be in to get into post-secondary education and find good jobs."

The study, considered especially relevant at a time of high divorce rates and increasingly complex family relationships, is published in the new edition of Canadian Journal of Sociology.

Previous research has linked family breakups with negative outcomes for children, but such work usually focuses only on short-term impacts, Prof. Strohschein said.

For her team's study, the scholars tracked the lives of more than 9,400 children from birth to age 20. The data was from a group all born in 1984 in Manitoba into two-parent married households.

Of the initial 9,403 children, 7,569 saw their parents stay together, 1,325 experienced one divorce and 172 had a parent die.

A small number, 285 children, lived through two family transitions (divorce and remarriage) while 52 experienced three transitions.

Analysis of the data found children whose parents stayed together were 78.4% likely to finish high school by age 20, well ahead of classmates with one change to family structure.

Interestingly, there was little difference between children who experienced divorce and those who had a parent die. Both groups were about 60% likely to get a high school diploma. Also at around 60% were children whose parents divorced and remarried.

The biggest concern was for those children in twice-divorced households.

"It's that cumulative effect," Prof. Strohschein said. "Things really seem to fall off when there is a loss of a second marital relationship. It's really striking."

The divorce rate in Canada has been holding steady in recent years at around at around 38%. Prof. Strohschein said the study generalizes because in some cases divorce can be a benefit to children, if the household is particularly dysfunctional.

© 2009 The National Post Company. All rights reserved. Unauthorized distribution, transmission or republication strictly prohibited.

No more tug of war

The following letter from Grant Brown encapsulates the Family Law (FLAW) problems in short to the point form. it is in response to Justice Brownstone's 1o steps following the letter. Brownstone has opened up a dialogue between the 50% of families who will see their marriage or common law relationship fail and the very flawed Family Law in this country but Grant adds his very salient perspective.MJM

Letter to the Editor National Post

Fathers 'reduced to ATM status' by the courts

Published: Tuesday, April 07, 2009

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=1471166

Re: No More Tug of War, Justice Harvey Brownstone, April 3.

What Justice Brownstone fails to mention in his attack on separated parents is the extent to which they are merely responding rationally to the adversarial, winner-take-all system they face in court.

A survey of family court cases in Ontario since 2000 reveals that almost 80% of the time costs are awarded against the father. That gives a fair indication of a father's chances of success in family court.

Nearly always, he is relegated to the status of a visitor in his child's life, and reduced to the psychological state of an ATM.

Justice Brownstone also admonishes parents to separate financial issues from parenting issues.Yet family court judges are so eager to award mothers exclusive use of the matrimonial home and begin the flow of "maintenance" that parenting issues usually get dealt with summarily on the basis of myths and stereotypes.

Judges create the unseemly focus on money matters, while refusing to take access denial and parental alienation seriously. (One judge, now on the Court of Appeal in Alberta, told me that it is not his job to "punish" mothers who deny access and alienate the children.)

Until family court judges clean up their own act by implementing a presumption of equal shared parenting and favouring the more co-operative parent in custody disputes, nothing is going to change significantly.

Grant A. Brown,

Edmonton.

No more tug of war

Book excerpt: A judge with years of family-court experience offers 10 tips to parents facing separation or custody battles

Harvey Brownstone, National Post Published: Friday, April 03, 2009

Parents must learn to love their children more than they dislike each other. Make your child's wellbeing the focal point of every discussion you have with your ex-partner.

BE CHILD-FOCUSED

Parents must learn to love their children more than they dislike each other. Make your child's wellbeing the focal point of every discussion you have with your ex-partner. Before taking a position on any issue, ask yourself, How will this affect my child? Never let a discussion with your ex-partner be about your needs or his/her needs; it should always be about your child's needs. The first step to being a mature, responsible co-parent is to always put your children's needs ahead of your own.

LEARN TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN A BAD PARTNER AND A BAD PARENT

The fact that your ex-partner was a bad partner does not necessarily mean that he/she is a bad parent. The way that a person treats his/her spouse in an unhappy relationship when no children are present may not be a good indication of how that person treats his/her children. Your child is entitled to get to know the other parent in his/her own right and to have a relationship with the other parent that is independent from your own. If your feelings about the other parent are standing in the way of your child's relationship with him/her, you should seek help from a counsellor or therapist.

NEVER SPEAK NEGATIVELY TO THE CHILD ABOUT THE OTHER PARENT

Your child has a right to a loving relationship with each parent, free of any influence or brainwashing. It is unfair and cruel to place your child in a conflict of loyalties and make him/ her choose between you and your ex-partner, as this deprives the child of an important relationship. Never draw your child into your disputes with the other parent.

NEVER ARGUE OR FIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR CHILDREN

No exceptions. If you and your ex-partner cannot behave civilly in front of your child, then don't be together in front of your child. I cannot understand why so many parents have trouble pretending to get along with each other for the few minutes it takes to pick up or return a child at access exchanges. Why are parents able to behave well in a courtroom in front of a judge but not in front of their own children? There is absolutely no good reason for parents to expose their children to their conflict.

LISTEN TO THE OTHER PARENT'S POINT OF VIEW, EVEN IF YOU DON'T AGREE WITH IT

If you are going to communicate directly with your ex-partner, remember that communicating with maturity starts with listening. In any disagreement, try repeating back to your ex-partner what his/her position is, and the reasons why he/ she is taking that position. I often do this in court and am frequently amazed by many people's inability to correctly repeat back to me what their ex-partners have just finished telling me only a few seconds before! You cannot decide whether you agree with someone if you have not clearly understood what he/she is saying. Even if you end up disagreeing with the other parent, you should at least be able to convey to him/her that you have understood his/her point of view. Good listening skills are not acquired overnight, but post-separation counselling can be very helpful in speeding up the learning process.

CONSIDER MEDIATION BEFORE GIVING THE DECISION-MAKING POWER TO A JUDGE

Too many parents react in a knee-jerk way to each other's conduct by running to family court without first getting legal advice or considering the impact of starting a court case. It is essential to consult a family law lawyer before taking any steps to resolve a conflict with an ex-partner. It may not be necessary to turn the decision-making power over to a judge. Many thousands of parents have found mediation to be a beneficial problem-solving mechanism, so it is definitely worth exploring.

SEPARATE YOUR FINANCIAL ISSUES FROM YOUR PARENTING ISSUES

In any family breakdown, there are two types of issues to be resolved: financial issues and parenting issues. These are completely separate matters and should be dealt with that way.

Your relationship with your children should have nothing to do with financial transactions or property transfers. It can certainly be a challenge to behave civilly with someone whom you think is trying to cheat you financially, but the ability to keep parenting issues separate from financial matters is a hallmark of maturity.

YOUR CHILDREN STILL SEE YOU AS A FAMILY, SO COMMUNICATE

If you truly accept that your children are innocent and bear no responsibility for your separation, then you know that they are entitled to be part of a family and to have their parents behave like family members, even though they live apart.

I have had situations in which a child's health suffered because one parent didn't tell the other about the child's medical problem, so the child didn't get the proper medical attention in the other parent's care. This is unforgivable. When a child is going frequently from one parent's home to the other's, it is vital that each parent know about anything important that has happened to the child while in the other parent's care, especially an illness. Parents should have equal rights to obtain information about their children from schools, doctors and other service providers.

Both parents should be able to attend special events in the children's lives, such as religious ceremonies, school events, sports tournaments and music recitals. Even if there is a restraining order prohibiting contact, speak to your lawyer about the possibility of amending the order to permit at least some minimal form of communication regarding your child, even if it is in written form, or through a third-party intermediary. Your children need you to know what's happening in their lives even when they're with the other parent.

BE FLEXIBLE AND REASONABLE IN MAKING ACCESS ARRANGEMENTS

By far, the greatest area of conflict between separated parents is that of organizing, carrying out and enforcing access visits. Family courts everywhere are swamped with parents complaining of each other's frequent cancellations, lateness and a myriad of other misbehaviours. In a great many of these cases, a little common sense and fairness from both parents would have gone a long way toward resolving the problem. Be flexible and reasonable in accommodating your ex-partner's work schedule and travel concerns, as well as changes in your child's routines. Remember that access schedules must be adjusted to accommodate changes in the parents' and children's lives. This is not only normal but is to be expected, so go with the flow.

DON'T HESITATE TO GET HELP

Family breakdown is one of the most stressful and painful experiences anyone can go through. You do not have to do this alone. There are specialized counsellors and therapists who can help you. Many community organizations offer programs to help separated parents make the transition from ex-partner to co-parent. There are social workers and parenting coaches with the expertise to help you and your ex-partner develop a workable parenting plan.

Excerpted from Tug of War by Harvey Brownstone, published by ECW Press. Copyright Harvey Brownstone, 2009. Reprinted with permission.

National Post ~ Lorne Gunter: Promote equal parenting

My comments on the National Post Website are as follows:

Lorne:

You are at risk of hate mail from gender feminists and the usual trolls who will leave drive by smears at your even thinking of granting we men - we evil abusers no less - equality with respect to our children.

You do have the pulse of many tens of thousands of fathers across this country but more than that you have described you have empathy for children caught in the custody wars. They are the victims.

On another page of your paper today we read of the tragic death of a toddler at the hands of his mother. http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/story.html?id=1467691

The actions she took are the extreme for alienators. She didn't want the dad to have any access and killed the child in revenge.

Belgium and Australia introduced Shared parenting laws in 2006. In Belgium it is working well with a great reduction in court disputes, elimination of the bureaucracy hired to collect child support - they do other stuff now, and automatic jail time for withholding children from the other partner. In Belgium they call this activity "abduction."

Belgium does have the best interest of children in mind unlike this country. You are being generous to judges and lawyers when you indicate 80% of custody awards go to mum. When you factor in joint custody awards (physical custody to mom), court ordered and court approved (prior agreement) custody the figure is closer to 90%.

The legal system is in great disrepute. Its hard to say how much more men are willing to take. Over 3,000 men commit suicide each year across Canada. If only 400 of those, a conservative number, were directly related to Family Law (FLAW) it would be an epidemic greater than SARS but it flies under everyone's radar. How many victims of FLAW are those we read about having just killed family members? Did they pass the breaking point thanks to judges like Paul Cosgrove who will now get a gold plated pension of $170,000.00 dollars a year for incompetence and corruption. Go figure. If a visible minority were treated the way men are in family court there would be outrage in our liberal media.

I think it important to note that Judges, lawyers, mental health workers, child protection workers, legal aid in Ontario and in other provinces, child protection agencies, child support collection agencies , welfare workers all play a role in the current dysfunctional system of Family Law (FLAW). Each add to the burden children face given Dr, Kruk's research as noted. When Parental Alienation is brought into play they then become complicit in child abuse. What kind of system do we have when child protection agencies enable emotional abuse of children by ignoring Parental Alienation. Criminal perhaps? Hyperbole is not on my radar today but examination of Child Protection Services mandates are in order when they overlook this area. Currently they say they don't have a mandate because they can't see the bruising. Its so sad that children suffer so much because of this nonsense.

Shared and equal parenting must be enacted as in the Belgium model. This will reduce incentives for divorce, reduce court time freeing up judges for other important work, reduce the transfer of wealth from children's legacies to lawyer's pockets, and improve the mental health of children. It is indeed in their best interest.

Lorne Gunter: Promote equal parenting Posted: April 06, 2009, 5:04 PM by NP Editor Lorne Gunter, Full Comment Children who grow up without both parents in their lives are more prone to a whole host of social problems. According to a three-year study done by Edward Kruk, an associate professor of social work at the University of British Columbia, 85% of young people in prison and youth detention are fatherless. This is a particularly important finding since, according to Statistics Canada, youth crime is the only category of crime that has been consistently increasing over the past decade. Nearly one-in-five young Canadians will have a run-in with the law — more than twice the percentage of adults — and most of them have no father in the home.

Father 'sorry' he failed to protect boy. Mother charged with first-degree murder.

This is a follow-up to a story where alienating tactics have led to tragedy.MJM

---

Father 'sorry' he failed to protect boy Jayden's Funeral Catherine McDonald, National Post Published: Monday, April 06, 2009 http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/story.html?id=1467691 Richard Williams had waited five months to see his son, Jayden, who had been in his mother's care. On Saturday the Brampton father, his family and about 80 friends gathered to lay the 18-month-old boy to rest. The toddler was found without vital signs in a Mississauga parking garage more than a week ago. His mother, 34-year-old Nadine Bernard, is charged with first-degree murder. Mr. Williams, wife Joy and their two children stood by a tiny white casket as a montage of photos of the child's short life played overhead. In the background, lullabies could be heard as mourners wept during the private service at Scott Funeral Home on Main Street. "Son, I am sorry I was not able to shield you from all your pain," Mrs. Williams said on her husband's behalf. Their daughter said she "will miss hearing the pitter-patter of [his] little feet in the bathtub;" their son spoke of "missing being able to play piano [for Jayden] and missing being able to teach [Jayden] soccer and basketball." Mr. Williams told Global News exclusively last week about the extra-marital affair that led to the birth of Jayden in September 2007. Last July, Mrs. Williams found the child's christening card and confronted her husband about it. He told her of the affair with a co-worker and the birth of the boy. Ms. Williams, desperate to keep the family together, decided to welcome the child into her home. "There was no way I wasn't going to love that baby," she told Global News. The couple's two children, aged 11 and 17, also spent months getting to know their half-brother. But in October, 2008, Ms. Bernard allowed Jayden to visit only with his father, Mr. Williams said. A month later, she denied him visits with his son altogether, he said. Last month, Mr. Williams was given joint custody and was permitted to have two visits a week with Jayden. Ms. Bernard never showed up for any of those court-ordered visits and was threatening to move to Florida, Mr. Williams said. Mr. Williams' lawyer told Ms. Bernard's lawyer he would recommend his client seek full custody if she did not honour the joint custody agreement. On March 27, Peel Regional Police were called to the parkade at 1 Robert Speck Parkway where they found Jayden's body in the passenger seat of a vehicle. His mother had tried to kill herself and was taken to hospital before being charged, police say.

Base child support strategies on relationships

April 5, 2009

Child support orders have been around for decades. In the 1970s and early '80s court custody orders typically included provisions requiring one parent to pay some money each month to the other parent to help support the children. The paying parent usually gave a check or cash to the receiving parent with little state involvement in the process.

Not anymore. Child-support collection in America has become a major state enterprise. Annually taxpayers shell out over $5.4 billion to underwrite child-support collection efforts. Nationally, child support enforcement agencies employ more than 55,000 people in their war on "deadbeats." Compare that with the Drug Enforcement Agency which employs a mere 1,900 agents in America's war on drugs.

The original purpose of child support collection was to obtain money from parents whose children received welfare benefits from the state. Today over 80 percent of the funds received by child support collection agencies come from families not presently receiving welfare.

Child support enforcement agencies have been granted authority well beyond that of ordinary debt collection companies. Wage garnishment, driver and professional license revocations, bank account attachment, property liens and seizures, tax refund interception and prison are all tools readily available to child support enforcement personnel.

No one argues that parents who have the means to pay child support and refuse to do so should be accountable. On the other hand, evidence suggests that all too often it is the poor who bear the brunt of the child support agency's heavy hand.

The federal Office of Child Support Enforcement reports $110 billion of support arrearages nationwide. Less known is the fact that the same office reports over 70 percent of this amount, and 70 percent of the people who owe it, earn poverty level wages. Urban Institute reports estimate upwards of 90 percent of the debt is owed by people earning less than $25,000 per year.

Researcher Sanford Braver indicates the No. 1 cause of non-payment of child support is lack of, or under, employment. The second leading cause of non-payment is lack of relationship with the children.

Best estimates indicate men are obligated to pay child support in about 88 percent of cases. An interesting social paradox exists relative to parents who do not have the money to care for their children. When custodial parents are unable financially to care for their kids a number of state aid programs are available including: subsidized housing, education assistance, day care services, cash, food assistance, medical care and several other programs.

Non-custodial parents living apart from their children and unable to financially care for them (pay child support) are typically subject to punitive measures like arrest, incarceration, license revocation, seizures and forfeitures, etc. Many of these individuals are involuntarily separated from their children. In divorce cases, limiting parents' access to their kids via a custody order often serves as the triggering event leading to child support agency involvement.

Incarcerating indigent people for non-payment does not raise compliance, it simply costs taxpayers money. Debtors' prison formally ended over 150 years ago in this country; for indigent incarcerated child support obligors it is alive and thriving.

Social science research is leading us in new directions as we examine how to address the growing problems related to both father absence and non-payment of support. There are a number of things we know; when parents practice shared parenting (substantial time for kids with both parents), have stable employment, reasonable support orders and are able to obtain order modifications reflecting changes in life circumstances, payment issues are rare.

As new approaches to issues facing the modern family are developed, let's reward child support agencies and family courts for serving kids' best interest when they recognize relationships are more important than revenue.

Michael McCormick is executive director of the American Coalition for Fathers & Children.

---

Prosecuting Attorney, Ron O'Brian is Nifonging Paul Fisher and Donald Tenn

Fathers 4 Justice US®

Action Alert!
	It is time for the united front of Fathers-4-Justice and all of its supporters to inform Prosecuting Attorney, Ron O'Brian, and his staff that we do not agree with his “Nifong” type application of the law in the cases, “Ohio vs. Paul Fisher” aka Superman and “Ohio vs. Donald Tenn” aka Spiderman. Full story here “No Jail for being a Dad” It has been asked that you call (614) 462-3555 and ask for Ron O'Brian between 9:00 AM and 2:00 PM eastern time. If he is unavailable, leave a message and request a return call. As always, be polite and courteous. With the volume of calls expected, you will most likely be talking to over-worked secretaries, please be considerate. Our message is simple: Inform them that you will be watching these cases, and that you will be notifying other public officials of your disapproval of the conduct of Ron O’Brian’s administration. Also, state that you are displeased with the severity of the charges and feel this entire charade is wasting taxpayer dollars. It is self-evident that there was no malice or intent to cause harm. The demonstration was peaceful and brought much needed attention to government policies that are harming America's families and children. If you do not receive a return call, please call everyday until you do, or until the verdict has been reached on April 13th. This is your opportunity to take a stand against the "war on fatherhood."