Thursday, April 23, 2009

Fathers' group asks for legislation review - North West Territories

NNSL Logo.




Cara Loverock
Northern News Services
Published Wednesday, April 22, 2009

SOMBA K'E/YELLOWKNIFE - A review of territorial legislation that one MLA called "unfair" is being considered by Western Arctic MP Dennis Bevington.

The Dads North Association asked Bevington for a review of both the NWT's Child and Family Services Act and the Divorce Act when they met with the NDP politician on April 2.

"I think there is a need for a review of the Divorce Act," Bevington said of the federal legislation, which he said relates to the question of equal parenting.

He said in the coming weeks he'll also talk with some MLAs concerning the Child and Family Services Act.

"I'm certainly looking forward (to) meeting with the MLAs and talking with them about directions they want to take, because (the child and family services act) is territorial legislation," said Bevington.

Great Slave MLA Glen Abernethy recently called for a review of the territorial act in a letter to Health Minister Sandy Lee dated March 13. He cited a specific case of a Yellowknife family that has had two children removed and given treatment that he called "patently unfair." According to Abernethy, the GNWT Department of Health and Social Services is in charge of reviewing the act.

"There's no doubt that some of the cases that we see are heartbreaking for all the individuals involved," said Bevington, speaking in general terms.

He said the important issue regarding the Child and Family Services Act is ensuring the rights and safety of the child are maintained.

"It's not an easy issue," Bevington added.

He said he would be researching the federal Divorce Act by looking at previous reviews that have been done "to see if whether all of the ideas there were instituted ... so we're going to do some research on that."

Bevington said another possibility discussed at the meeting was "the concept of a Northern ombudsperson that has the ability to interact with the government over specific cases."

Mark Bogan, president of the Dads North Association, said he thought the meeting went well, but time will tell if any changes come about.

"They are serious concerns. We've asked the NDP to take action for a while now," said Bogan. "I'm sure (Bevington) will open up a channel with the GNWT."

Bogan said some changes will be proposed, but it's a matter of what those changes are.

Bevington "said he wanted to bring us all back to the table and tell us what he's proposed to do," said Bogan of a follow-up meeting in the coming weeks with the MP.

He said Wendy Bisaro, MLA for Frame Lake, was also at the meeting.

"I think she's receptive to what we have to say," he said.

Bisaro did not return calls for comment by press time.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

A challenge to debate Shared and Equal Parenting

Article by Dave Flook, posted April 21/09

I'm Dave Flook from the London, Ontario based fathers rights/equal parenting organization Not All Dads Are Deadbeats (www.notalldadsaredeadbeats.com). I have started up a new campaign to call out the politicians, judges, lawyers etc. and challenge them to a public debate on the subject of equal parenting and the current climate of the Canadian family law system.

With so many dads being systematically removed from their children's lives I am seeking accountability. Surely, someone who creates or enforces these laws has the integrity to stand up for them. If nobody answers my challenge and if nobody has the integrity to show us why these laws are just then perhaps it's time to reconsider such laws. With 80% of the population supporting equal parenting this could be the campaign that has the marketing power to bring this fight to the masses and wake people up.

I already have a venue for this debate. It will be held at the Wolf Performance Hall in London Ontario which seats 369 people. The date for the debate is Tuesday, September 15th 2009. I have put in $100.00 of my own money and will be seeking donations. The winner of the debate will be determined by a democratic vote. If the opposition "wins" then they will receive the full cash pot. If I "win" then the money in full will be donated to a third party children's organization. In no way do I want to make a single dime off this challenge.

Please spread the word around. I will be writing a press release and trying to get it out. Also, contribute if you can! Imagine how much the media would eat this story up if there is a $10,000 pot!! My goal for this challenge is to get equal parenting in the news, on TV, and on radio. I will be calling Maurice Vellacott on Wednesday and seeing if I can get his personal endorsement.

The event will be free to attend. I will be looking into streaming technology and seeing if I can webcast it live.

Please watch the video and post it (using the youtube embed code) on your websites. Im putting my money and my reputation on the line with this one. Ideally, in a few weeks of exposure I would like to call out individuals in parliament personally.

I can be reached at (519) 680-3932 if you would like to talk about my challenge and/or offer advice.

Thanks for all your hard work everyone.... you all give me hope. (ed note: See video below or go directly to youtube. Leave positive comments for Dave he has done amazing work in a short period of time)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCYQmuZ-9Tg

~ Dave Flook
Proud Father
Not All Dads Are Deadbeats
www.notalldadsaredeadbeats.com



Griffin-Sebuliba Case—Once Again Feminist ‘Family Courts Award Custody to Abusers’ Claims Don’t Hold Up


April 19th, 2009 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & Families

Back in 2007, Glenn did a piece on the case of April Griffin and Matthew Sebuliba, but when he did, the case was far from over (See Turns Out the April Griffin Custody Case is a Little Different than Feminist Bloggers Say). My guess is it’s still not, but here’s the latest. Read the most recent article here (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 9/30/08) and a previous one here (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 6/20/07).

Griffin and Sebuliba live in Milwaukee. He’s a native of Africa, but is a United States citizen and a nurse. Griffin gave birth to Sebuliba’s son and when she applied for welfare benefits, state authorities forced her to name the father. The state filed a paternity action and Sebuliba responded with a request for joint custody.

Griffin followed that with a series of actions her own attorney called “outrageous.” She claimed, apparently without evidence, that Sebuliba had physically abused her. She claimed that allowing him to change the child’s diaper was “against her religion.” Child welfare workers stated that Griffin became hysterical during a supervised visit by Sebuliba, saying the child was not breathing, and demanded that 911 be called. EMS personnel determined that the boy was fine.

In court, she insisted on conducting the custody hearing herself, which resulted in the judge awarding custody not to her but to Sebuliba. After that, she took the boy and hid him in violation of multiple court orders. She spent 8 months in jail for contempt of court, during which the child never was found.

Once she was released from jail, the police eventually were able to locate the child in September, 2008. The boy was diagnosed with rickets, a disease resulting from severe malnutrition in which bones become fragile. In a confrontation with police, Griffin hugged the toddler so tightly that apparently she broke an arm and a leg.

As of September, the boy was due to be finally turned over to his father.

At the time Glenn wrote about this case, various feminist groups had already gone to bat for Griffin, claiming that the judge had granted custody to an abuser. One salient feature of the case is that, although Griffin claimed Sebuliba had abused her, the only evidence of abuse was of her abusing him. As in similar cases, such as Genia Shockome, Sadia Loeliger, Holly Collins, and Bridget Marks, groups supporting the mother tended to accept at face value claims made by the mother. And like those cases, judicial vetting of those claims found them to be false.

In any event, as of September, the child, who had never been in the father’s custody, was found to be suffering from a condition that comes about from being starved. Will the groups who fought so vocally for Griffin and against Sebuliba take notice?

My guess is they won’t, but that doesn’t mean we can’t look at this case and know it for what it is - the gatekeeping mother at or near her worst. Time and again we see mothers taking the most extreme actions including murder and kidnapping to enforce their idea of proper child custody.

We have a few studies on gatekeeping mothers - those who arrogate to themselves the power to decide what relationship a father may have with his child and the child with its father. Gatekeeping is seldom as egregious as it was when practiced by April Griffin. The phenomenon needs to be studied in more depth so that courts, lawmakers, psychologists and social workers can learn to spot it and deal with it effectively. More importantly, mothers need to learn to see the behavior in themselves, know that it is wrong and what to do to correct it.

Monday, April 20, 2009

The Politics of Domestic Violence

http://www.nzcpr.com/soapbox.htm#Reuben2


By Reuben Chapple

The feminist-driven “domestic violence industry” is part of an ever-expanding, tax-funded “bureaucracy of compassion” with its attendant caregivers, social workers, regulators, intellectuals and social scientists.

Its use of the term “domestic violence” rather than the more gender-neutral “relationship violence” is based on the Marxist analysis of gender relations penned by Marx’s collaborator Friedrich Engels which presupposes a male 'oppressor' ("Within the family, man is the bourgeoisie, woman and children the proletariat") and a female ‘victim.’


Feminists with a strong emotional investment in the presumption of an oppressive patriarchy base their assessment of men as “the violent sex” on police, court, hospital and refuge data while waving away numerous academic studies implicating both sexes equally in relationship violence. These seriously troubled sisters will cite police blotter statistics and other official data to falsely conclude that relationship violence is a male problem ("That’s just part of how 'they' treat 'us' as women").

There are a number of compelling reasons why a man might be reluctant to complain to authorities that his wife assaulted him. These include fear of ridicule or being disbelieved; threats that if police are called his wife will level a counter-accusation and he'll be the one arrested by an establishment predisposed to take her part; a reluctance to walk out of the home that he probably paid for; the likelihood that access to his children will be denied by a gender-biased Family Court should he leave to escape the violence; and fears for the children's physical safety if he's no longer around to protect them from a violent mother.


One of the saddest accounts of male victimisation by a violent female was that of an army drill sergeant in the United States, who placed his gun in his mouth at the dinner table and blew his brains out in front of his family, after the contrast between his macho parade ground persona and the reality of his miserable existence became too much to bear.


New Zealand has a network of Women’s Refuges but not a single Man’s Refuge. And if a man did show up at a Women’s Refuge seeking relief from a violent female partner, do you think he’d be admitted? Like police blotter statistics, “refuge data” clearly have significant limitations in terms of providing an accurate picture of relationship violence in our community.

US researcher, Dr Martin Fiebert has examined 155 scholarly investigations, 126 empirical studies and 29 reviews and/or analyses in concluding that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 116,000 and can safely be regarded as statistically robust. Fiebert’s annotated bibliography, first published in Sexuality and Culture Volume 8, Number 3-4, Summer-Fall 2004, can be viewed online at http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm.


Contrary to the demonstrably false feminist picture of relationship violence, men and women are implicated in relationship violence in approximately equal numbers at all levels of severity as assessed by a standardised "Conflict Tactics Scale.” Both sexes are more or less equally represented in every category from throwing a teaspoon all the way up to murder. In some categories (e.g. punched, kicked, hit or slapped one's partner), female involvement slightly outstripped that of males.


Approximately one third of violent incidents were found to be "he assaults her," one third "she assaults him," and one third "they assault each other.” Most of what is categorised as "relationship violence" was found to be occasional, low level, and didn't result in serious injury, i.e. shoving, pulling, slapping, throwing small objects etc.


The most violent individuals, whether male or female, represent a tiny minority of those studied. Severely violent men typically used their fists and feet on spouses or partners. Severely violent women characteristically used weapons to even up the size difference or attacked spouses or partners when they were asleep or otherwise off-guard.


British family care activist, Erin Pizzey, who set up the first Women's Refuge in England in 1971, had a well-publicised falling out with the Sisterhood after she wrote a book claiming that many women presenting at her Chiswick Women's Refuge were "at least as violent as the men they had left behind" and self-admittedly addicted to the adrenalin rush they got from provoking violent reactions in their male partners, though few enjoyed the violence itself. These women were repeatedly and often seriously verbally and physically violent both to their own children and to other women in the shelter.


The foregoing analysis demonstrates conclusively that relationship violence is in fact a human problem, not a gender issue as the feminist movement would have us believe. The time is long past for society to acknowledge the female contribution to such violence rather than simply blaming males for something women are, on all the evidence, equally involved in.

ACFC ~ Two items of Interest on Shared Parenting in two Countries

LogoHome Banner
blue bar - stationery

Learn More Join Donate







This newsletter contains two items of interest.

Oregon Shared Parenting Bill Hearing

Just in...Tomorrow the House Judiciary Committee will be hearing HB 3402 for Shared Parenting in Oregon. The hearing is at the Oregon State Capitol Room 357 beginning at noon. Please attend and show your support. The proposed law defines joint legal and physical custody as presumptively in the best interest of the child. The bill declares relocation not in the child's best interest and penalizes parents for access interference. Click here to read the bill.

Canadian Member of Parliament Conducts Equal Shared Parenting Poll

MP Maurice Vellacott sent this announcement late last week. Thanks to our friends and counterparts at the Canadian Equal Parenting Council for supplying the poll numbers. Click here for the poll. It's obvious the public 'gets it' when it comes to Shared Parenting. Our task is to turn these sentiments into reality.


Maurice Vellacott, MP
Saskatoon-Wanuskewin

Vellacott releases results of new
equal shared parenting poll

For Immediate Release April 16, 2009

OTTAWA Member of Parliament Maurice Vellacott (Saskatoon-Wanuskewin) today announced the results of a new poll on Equal Parenting after divorce.

"The results indicate that four out of five Canadians (80 percent) continue to support equal shared parenting after divorce with almost no difference by gender, region, age group, or party affiliation," said Maurice Vellacott. “This poll was commissioned in conjunction with the work I've been doing to advance Equal Parenting through Private Member's Motions and Bills,” Vellacott added.

The results are nearly identical to a survey conducted in 2007, and are part of a long term trend indicating continuing high levels of support for equal parenting.

Conducted by Nanos Research during March, 2009, the question asked survey participants was: “Do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose or strongly oppose federal and provincial legislation to create a presumption of equal parenting in child custody cases?" The statistical margin of accuracy is 3%, 19 times out of 20.

Last year Vellacott tabled Private Members Motion M-483 on Equal Parenting to gauge parliamentary support and received 17 Conservative and Liberal seconders to his motion.

"The response I received to this motion has encouraged me to proceed with the poll and the drafting of a Private Member’s Bill in this session with a view to garnering all-party support for Equal Parenting, Vellacott said.

Poll results indicate that supporters of all Parties in the House of Commons are united in their support for Equal Parenting, ranging from a low of 76 percent for NDP voters to a high of 83 percent for the Bloc.

Recalling the popular support for the 1998 “For the Sake of the Children” report, Mr. Vellacott noted that there has historically been broad political support across party lines. Canadians have long called for this; and countries such as Australia, Belgium, Sweden, Denmark, and many US states have proceeded along these lines.

Mr. Vellacott has been working with members of the extended divorce community to develop amendments to the Divorce Act. "The divorce community are the real experts in this field as they have first-hand experience with the strengths and weaknesses of the current legislation," he said. “The proposed amendments won’t solve all problems, but they will certainly address a major point of contention in divorce," he advised.

Equal Parenting calls for continuation of parental rights, and obligations with joint legal responsibility and joint physical custody, with the presumption that equal parenting time is the best interest of the child.

30

You may recall last July Parade Magazine polled readers asking: "Should Divorced Dads Have Equal Time with Their Kids?" See the results here.

These and other examples demonstrate Shared Parenting is the next family law reform.

Sincerely,

Mike McCormick, Exec. Dir.
ACFC

Your Washington DC based Shared Parenting and family law reform organization. Please support these efforts with a contribution by clicking here.

Parental Alienation Day P R O C L A M A T I O N Sault Ste. Marie, ON


The Editor, The Sault Star
145 Old Garden River Rd.
Sault Ste. Marie, ON P6A 5M5


The City of Sault Ste. Marie has proclaimed April 25, 2009 as the 4th Annual Parental Alienation Day as shown below. This year 15 countries are participating as well as cities and states within these countries. Parental Alienation (PA) can cause children emotional problems ranging from mild trauma to severe psychological tribulations. Pamela Richardson, a Canadian mother, authored the book "A Kidnapped Mind", detailing her ordeal and the subsequent suicide of her son Dash. More recently a mother in Toronto killed her 18 month old toddler son, Jayden Bernard, to prevent the father from seeing him. This is the most extreme kind of PA possible.


PA is prevalent in our community with past court cases in the public record involving it and current activity before the Family Court where it has been used against target parents to get a "leg up" in custody battles. Family Courts in Canada are starting to recognize the seriousness of the manipulation of young children and are reversing custody as a result.


I have discussed this emotional abuse of children with the Algoma Children's Aid Society (ACAS) over the past 4 years and they can do little to combat it. They cannot see the psychic bruising and it is outside of their current protective mandate. The Family Preservation Program operated by the ACAS does do its best with highly motivated dedicated staff.


With awareness we can educate to create understanding and through understanding legislative changes can be made to create environments reducing the conflict which creates this behaviour. One of the first must be changes to the divorce act making shared and equal parenting a rebuttable presumption for fit parents. Those who daily supervise or provide mental health services for children will be better equipped to recognize why children exhibit certain responses.


P R O C L A M A T I O N


WHEREAS Parents in high conflict situations may intentionally or otherwise cause children to suffer from Parental Alienation; and

WHEREAS Some of the behaviours of Parental Alienation include speaking negatively about a parent to or before a child and interfering with parental communication and time together; and

WHEREAS These destructive behaviours can interfere with a loving parent and child bond, depriving children of their right to love and be loved by both parents; and

WHEREAS These behaviours can be confusing, frightening and create a sense of insecurity well into adulthood; and

WHEREAS Awareness, education and understanding, play an important role in stopping the effects of Parental Alienation:


NOW
THEREFORE, I, Brian Hayes, by virtue of the power vested in me as Acting Mayor of the City of Sault Ste. Marie, do hereby proclaim and pronounce April 25, 2009 "PARENTAL ALIENATION AWARENESS DAY" in the City of Sault Ste. Marie.