Thursday, July 9, 2009

M25 Batman on Day 21 of hunger strike in prison

Contact: Kris Titus
Phone: 1-888-345-2262 ext.703

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 9, 2009


For Immediate Release July 9, 2009
Starved for Justice
M25 Batman on Day 21 of hunger strike in prison

The Global Battle for equal rights.


F4J Fathers 4 Justice activist, Geoff Hibbert, has literally put his life and his freedom on the line to raise awareness of discriminate family courts.

Geoff Hibbert, aka M25 Batman, will face sentencing on July 16th. Geoff has been held in custody pending his sentencing and is now on the 21st day of a hunger strike after being convicted by a Jury after police halted traffic on the M25 highway for many hours, he faces the possibility of a 7 year sentence.

"People in family court are literally starved for justice. People who have never gone through the family courts have a hard time believing they are unequal and unjust, but that's exactly what they are!" laments Kris Titus, National Coordinator, F4J Fathers 4 Justice Canada, who also faces trial for non-violent direct action in Canada.

Don Tenn, National Coordinator of F4J US says, "The US branch of F4J supports Geoff in his efforts! Of course we also want Geoff to know that he is not alone, we are thinking of him and wish to say, "Thank You" for his sacrifice for OUR children." Mr. Tenn also awaits trial for non-violent direct actions stemming from an 80 hour stay atop a tower crane in Ohio.

Both organizations hope that Mr. Hibbert's incredible sacrifice will not go unnoticed and be for naught.

It is when people decide to take to the air that these issues get noticed. It's a really sad state of affairs when regular moms and dads have to go to extremes like these to be heard on an issue affecting millions of parents and children worldwide.

F4J Canada has set up a superhero write-in campaign to support heros like Geoff in prison or facing trials.

"We just pray he lives long enough to see the positive affects of his action. Geoff's 21 day hunger strike has affected F4J members worldwide.

He is a testament to the endless lengths a father will go to love his children. We honor him, as it should be," ends Titus.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTACT: Canada National Coordinator, Kris Titus 1-888-345-2262 ext. 703
US National Coordinator, Don Tenn 614.448.3276

National Website for more information about F4J Fathers 4 Justice Canada Canada: www.f4jcanada.ca

National Action website: www.f4jcanada.com
National Website for information about F4J US: www.f4j.us
-End

Wednesday, July 8, 2009

The Plans of Feminists

Mother must give daughter to father

I believe Overington shows a clear bias towards moms in her writing up of these columns. Its subtle but after reading each one she produces it reinforces my belief she is a non equality feminist supporter, perhaps a maternalist herself, and this newspaper demonstrates a lack of objectivity.MJM




Caroline Overington | July 09, 2009

Article from: The Australian

THE Family Court has ordered a Melbourne mother to hand her 19-month-old daughter over to the child's father, after she left Darwin with the child without his permission.

The mother, who has always been the primary carer of the child, has been ordered to hand over the child "outside the front gate" of the grandmother's house in Melbourne today or face the consequences, which include a possible jail term.

Federal magistrate Janet Terry said shared-parenting laws introduced by the Howard government in 2006 required her to apply a presumption that it was in the best interests of the child that her parents had equal shared parental responsibility for her.

"This is a very sad case," Ms Terry said. "I am faced with the choice of making an order that a 19-month-old girl be separated from her mother in order to ensure that she has the opportunity to develop a relationship with her father."

She said the principles of the new Family Law Act "make it clear that children have a right to know and be cared for by both their parents".

Ms Terry said the mother had acted "high-handedly" in removing the child from Darwin without the father's permission, and had refused to return to Darwin while a final settlement was worked out by the courts.

That being the case, the child should be returned to Darwin "at a time nominated by the father by text message sent to the mother".

The mother will not see her daughter again until August, when a five-day visitation is scheduled.

The father plans to take the child back to Darwin, where she was born, pending the final custody hearing.

The mother is originally from Melbourne but moved to Darwin in 2006 to take up a teaching job.

She met the child's father shortly after she arrived. They lived together for about a year, and had a child in 2007. When the relationship ended in May, the woman returned to Melbourne, taking her daughter with her. The mother told the court she wanted to stay in Melbourne with the child until the final custody hearing.

She said she would not return to Darwin pending a full court hearing because she had no support, no friends or family in Darwin.

Ms Terry said the couple "did not have an easy relationship.

"On May 9, without the father's knowledge or consent, the mother flew to Melbourne with (the child). The father was distressed when he discovered what had happened.

"He informed the mother that if she did not return to Darwin, he would apply for an order (to have the child returned.)"

He wrote by email, saying: "I do not think you fully comprehend what this feels like. It hurts me to have her taken away."

The father told the court he'd vacate the marital home in Darwin so the mother could live there with the child while a settlement was worked out.

The court ruling acknowledges that the "mother has always been (the child's) primary carer.

"A separation from the mother will be hard in the short term. However, children are sometimes forced to adjust to changes of this nature, for example if a parent dies.

"I am concerned that unless the importance of the child's relationship with her father is made clear to the mother, the stage will be set for a long history of difficulties spending time with the father."

The mother will appeal.

The shared-parenting laws are being reviewed by the Australian Institute of Family Studies. The federal government is awaiting its report before deciding whether the law needs to be changed.

Tuesday, July 7, 2009

Vanity Fair ~ The Last of Heath

Was Heath Ledger's fight with his ex over custody a contributing factor in his death. There is clearly a link that would add to whatever else was affecting him at the time. Here is an excerpt from Vanity Fair Magazine and you can go here to read the rest.MJM

How his relationship failed
• Terry Gilliam—Ledger’s friend and mentor, and the director of Doctor Parnassus—agrees with Pecorini that the romance between Ledger and Williams began to unravel during the Oscar campaign for Brokeback Mountain. “The whole machinery started growing up around them,” Gilliam says. “That was the moment when it changed, when he realized, Uh-oh. We perceive the world differently. He didn’t care about things like those awards.”

According to Pecorini, “Heath was always blaming himself [about the relationship], asking, What did I do wrong?” Adds Gilliam, “Because he’s a much nicer person than I am, he really thought he could do the right thing. He was trying to be decent and graceful, give her whatever she wanted—the house, every fucking thing. But once it started going south, it went very quickly. He was overwhelmed by lawyers, and there were more and more of them, as if they were breeding. I said, ‘This is bullshit. Heath, just end it. Get out—it’s bad. You’ve got to just walk away from it.’ The stakes kept going up. He wouldn’t listen to any of us.”

As Ledger’s relationship with Williams unraveled, and the pair started dealing with lawyers and custody issues, according to Gilliam, Ledger fell apart. “The thing that really made Heath snap” was legal wrangling over his daughter, Matilda, Gilliam says. “He said, ‘Just fuck all of you! I’m not giving Michelle anything.’???” Recalls another source, when it came to Matilda’s care, “there were definitely heated conversations, and emotions were high.” (Ledger’s lawyer declined to comment on any aspect of the separation or custody dispute.)

Sunday, July 5, 2009

The Honourable Maurice Vellacott MP ~ Dads on the Air







"THE WORLD'S LONGEST RUNNING RADIO PROGRAM ON FATHERS' ISSUES"


USA-Canadian Eastern time: 8.30pm to 10pm Monday 6th July 2009 USA-Canadian Pacific time: 5.30pm to 7pm Monday 6th July 2009. UK GMT time: 12.30am to 2am Monday night ( Early Tuesday morning) (Local Sydney Time: 10.30am to 12 midday Tuesday 7th July 2009 )


Listen online via live streaming at www.893fm.com.au/On-Air or in MP3 format at www.dadsontheair.net .

Dads On The Air

Monday 6th July 2GLF FM 89.3 and ONLINE www.dadsontheair.net


SHARED PARENTING-WHY IT WORKS.


With Special Guests: The Honourable Maurice Vellacott MP (Canada) Michael Green QC (Australia)


With moves clearly afoot to wind back the modest reforms of the previous government on shared parenting legislation designed to encourage a relationship between both parents and children after separation, we take a look at the very strong case for shared parenting as the norm post-separation, with advocates arguing it works best for both children and parents - as well as saving the government a great deal of money by encouraging single parents to get off welfare and into work. The Honourable Maurice Vellacott MP is a Canadian Member of Parliament who has just introduced a parliamentary private members bill (C-422) promoting shared parenting into the Canadian Federal legislature in Ottawa

He says a recent poll demonstrated that 78% of Canadians support equal shared parenting, with slightly more women than men support cooperative care of children post divorce. Surveys in Australia have shown similar high levels of support, with the main obstruction to the common sense notion coming from bureaucrats and the family law industry itself. As well regular guest Sue Price from the unfashionably named Men's Rights Agency will talk about the devastating impacts on individuals and the broader community of the sole mother custody model which has done so much harm over recent decades. She dismisses the current spirited campaign by feminist lobby groups outside Family Courts as nothing but hysterical male bashing by people with absolutely no knowledge of family law.

We close the show with an extended interview with Michael Green QC , author of the book Shared Parenting, who is also alarmed at the current moves to unwind shared parenting legislation. He argues that with legislation in many jurisdictions now enshrining shared parental responsibility and parenting time, there is ample research which indicates how important it is for children to continue meaningful relationships after family breakdown.

Maurice Vellacott was born in 1955 and has been married to Mary since 1976. They have four children and six grandchildren. Maurice grew up in rural Saskatchewan, and currently resides on a small farm just outside of Saskatoon in the constituency. He is the Member of Parliament for Saskatoon-Wanuskewin,

Here is part of the statement Maurice Vellacott made at the time of introduction of a Shared Parenting Bill to the Canadian Parliament:

"Unfortunately, many Canadian families experience the breakup of a marriage. When this happens, the results can be devastating for children. Children are caught in the middle, but should not be used as a weapon or alienated from one of the parents.

"Aside from proven abuse or neglect, Canadians want equal shared parenting to be the presumption in our courts when marriages break up because it is in the best interests of children and because it is part of an enlightened equality agenda. Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff has written, "These groups demanded that the "custody and access" regime created by the Divorce Act of 1985 be replaced with a "shared parent" regime in which both parents are given equal rights to bring up their children. These are sensible and overdue suggestions, and the fact they are being made shows that men and women are struggling to correct the rights revolution, so that equality works for everyone."

"Bill C-422 would direct courts to make equal shared parenting the presumptive arrangement in the best interests of the child, except in proven cases of abuse or neglect. This bill is very important in bringing Canadian legislation in line with what the best research says about the best interests of children. With limited exceptions, children generally demonstrate superior outcomes when both parents - mom AND dad - are actively involved in their children's lives, even if the parents divorce or separate. This bill also reflects the spirit of recommendations made over 10 years ago in a Joint House-Senate committee presented to Parliament entitled "For the Sake of the Children." A recent poll I commissioned, conducted by Nanos Research, shows that 78% of Canadians support equal shared parenting, with a high of 86% support in the province of Quebec. Slightly more women than men support equal shared parenting. Among supporters of major political parties, about 78% of Conservatives support equal shared parenting; 75.8% of the NDP; 80.6% of Liberals supported equal shared parenting; and 83% of Bloc supporters endorsed equal shared parenting.

"I am grateful today for the many expressions of support from Parliamentarians on a multi-party basis. I am thankful that two of my colleagues, Liberal MP Riaymonde Folco and Steven Blaney, both representing Quebec ridings, are on the platform today and can speak to the French perspective on this widely-supported initiative in Quebec. Countries, such as Denmark, Belgium and Norway, as well as some U.S. states, have implemented equal parenting, joint custody or shared parenting presumptive legislation, resulting in lower court costs, less conflict and improved social outcomes for the children of divorce. In the few years that I have been dealing with this issue, I have heard from so many men and women who have urged me to pursue these reforms. In just the past 24 hours since introducing this bill, I have received an outpouring of thanks and appreciation from across Canada. Many of these people have been working with their own Members of Parliament, as well as with their provincial politicians, to build a strong non-partisan foundation for pursuing lasting equal shared parenting reforms that will be in the best interests of Canadian children. Equal shared parenting is the right thing to do for Canadian children. As Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff has said, "these are sensible and overdue suggestions, and the fact they are being made shows that men and women are struggling to correct the rights revolution, so that equality works for everyone." This bill is one of the most apolitical, non-partisan pieces of legislation introduced in this current Parliament. I look forward to strong support for this important piece of legislation from all members of Parliament who are committed to the best interests of our Canadian children."

-----------------------------------

In between our two primary interviews we talk with Sue Price from the Men's Rights Agency, who has become alarmed by the demonstrations being mounted outside Family Courts by feminist groups claiming that shared parenting is forcing children to spend time with abusive parents. She argues these groups-and who knows how much taxpayer money these groups are directly or indirectly receiving - are driven by an anti-father anti-family ideology but unfortunately their hysterical male bashing is apparently being listened to by the government.

We close the show talking with Michael Green QC, who has long been one of the country's most well informed critics of the present family law system. His book, co-authored with Jill Burrett, has made a significant contribution to the debate.

Shared Parenting shows how parents can resolve issues and work together after separation and how both parents can maintain meaningful relationships with their children.

The authors, Jill Burrett and Michael Green, bring to this work their expertise in counselling and mediation, respectively. They provide sample parenting plans - both complex and simple - for various types of separated families. The practical tools they offer work in every party's best interests - especially the children's.

With legislation in many jurisdictions now enshrining shared parental responsibility and parenting time, the authors show separated parents how to make this work. They cite supporting research which indicates how important it is for children to continue meaningful relationships after family breakdown.

Myths and misconceptions are dealt with, together with practical advice on how parents can get past their hurt and anger and focus on approaches that will benefit their children. The authors also tackle the nuts and bolts of weekly routines and include useful suggestions on timetabling and communication between households.

Once a good shared parenting arrangement is in place, the emotional benefits reveal themselves:

* mums becoming more comfortable with sharing the children;

* dads learning to truly be with the children; and

* children being happier in shared care arrangements, and so benefiting their parents.

With over 30 years' experience as a lawyer, Michael Green now runs a private mediation practice specialising in family conferencing, mediation, life skills programs and dispute resolution. He conducts programs to assist men and women to better manage their lives and parenting following separation and divorce. He is the father of two children and the author of Fathers After Divorce, a book that has helped many men become successful separated parents.

From the Introduction to Shared Parenting:

Equal shared parenting is the new way to look at parenting after separation and divorce. In many countries (including the United Kingdom, the United States, New Zealand, Canada and Australia) cooperative shared parenting has for decades been rightly regarded as the best way of ensuring children of divorced parents adjust well to family change, so in many ways it's actually nothing new. But because for so long it's been presumed that dads either can't or don't want to be involved more often than fortnightly (and even that they aren't sufficiently competent to do more!), equal shared parenting seems new, challenging the assumption that upon separation children live with one parent or the other. For far too long there's been a misplaced belief that children, especially those under 10, are better off with their mother. This has helped to spawn another (hotly debated) belief - that the legal system disadvantages fathers.

We believe that this situation has seriously disadvantaged children, and that fathers should be more engaged with their children than they have been. This requires real time, just like most mothers have always known - and given. We also believe that, for a very long time, gender stereotypes, 'the system' and other complex prejudices have discouraged some fathers and caused others to participate little in parenting, especially after separating.

We don't think fortnightly weekend parenting is meaningful shared parenting. We think that shared parenting means having real chunks of time engaged with your children for a flexible 35-50 percent or more of their available time.

Sole-mother 'custody', with mother doing all the parenting and father merely paying the bills and popping into the kids' lives from time to time, isn't really good enough for children - and often not for mothers - in either separated or 'intact' family situations.

We want to:

* help co-parents get real about what's possible for their own families, in their own unique circumstances. Gearing your life around children's real needs demands great self-sacrifice and compromise. If you aren't really up to full-on shared parenting, maybe you shouldn't be signing up for it. If you are, we want to encourage you to do it well.

* help you to be self-responsible and creative about separated parenting. We recognise that for many mothers shared parenting is difficult to contemplate, and for many fathers it's difficult to achieve.

* discourage you from following misplaced advice from the wrong people, and help you get reliably informed about the myths and realities of child psychology and legal precedents.

* help you avoid using the legal system except for its mediation and information services.

Next week: Former premier of Victoria Jeff Kennett from Beyond Blue talks about the many issues facing men in Australia today. As well we will be playing the press conference from the recent health conference at Parliament House in Canberra.

www.dadsontheair.net

===========================================================================================================

Canadian Listeners: The time for listening live on cable on Monday is 8.30 PM Ottawa-Toronto time which is 7.30 pm Manitoba time 6.30 pm Saskatchewan and Alberta time and 5.30 pm British Columbia time.

American Listeners: Same as above according to adjoining states and time zones i.e. New York and Washington DC 8.30 pm and Los Angeles and San Francisco 5.30 pm

United Kingdom Listeners:: 12.30 am (early Tuesday morning)

Western European Listeners: 1.30 am (early Tuesday morning)

Australian Listeners: Tuesday 7th July 10.30 am Sydney Time

Friday, July 3, 2009

Ann Coulter On Single Mothers: The Statistics From Guilty

Right Wing News

John Hawkins

At long last, I've finally gotten around to reading Ann Coulter's latest tome, Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and Their Assault on America. So far, the book has been outstanding and I would highly recommend it.

As fans of Ann Coulter's books know, she has made a name for herself by throwing bombs, but she is also one of the best researchers in the business. In her latest book, the statistics she cites on the negative effects of single motherhood on children are so stunning that I thought those stats alone deserved a stand-alone post.

What follows is culled from the chapter in Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and Their Assault on America entitled, "Victim of a crime? Thank a Single Mother."

Now, it's worth noting that I don't list these numbers to put down single mothers or insinuate that they're bad parents, because I don't think that's the case. However, as a society, we need to understand: staying in marriage, even a bad marriage, is better for the children except in the most egregious cases because single parents, even conscientious, well meaning single parents, generally don't do as good a job raising their children as two parent families. If you don't buy that right now, I think you will after you take a look at these numbers.

"Of all single mothers in America, only 6.5 percent of them are widows, 37.8 percent are divorced, and 41.3 percent gave birth out of wedlock. The 6.5 percent of single mothers whose husbands have died shouldn't be called 'single mothers' at all. We already have a word for them: 'widows.' Their children do just fine compared with the children of married parents." -- P.35
"Here is the lottery ticket that single mothers are handing their innocent children by choosing to raise them without fathers: Controlling for socioeconomic status, race, and place of residence, the strongest predictor of whether a person will end up in prison is that he was raised by a single parent. By 1996, 70 percent of inmates in state juvenile detention centers serving long-term sentences were raised by single mothers. Seventy-two percent of juvenile murderers and 60 percent of rapists come from single-mother homes. Seventy percent of teenage births, dropouts, suicides, runaways, juvenile delinquents, and child murderers involve children raised by single mothers. Girls raised without fathers are more sexually promiscuous and more likely to end up divorced. A 1990 study by the Progressive Policy Institute showed that after controlling for single motherhood, the difference between black and white crime rates disappeared.

Various studies have come up with slightly different numbers, but all the figures are grim. According to the Index of Leading Cultural Indicators, children from single-parent families account for 63 percent of all youth suicides, 70 percent of all teenage pregnancies, 71 percent of all adolescent chemical/substance abuse, 80 percent of all prison inmates, and 90 percent of all homeless and runaway children.

A study cited in the Village Voice produced similar numbers. It found that children brought up in single-mother homes 'are five times more likely to commit suicide, nine times more likely to drop out of high school, 10 times more likely to abuse chemical substances, 14 times more likely to commit rape (for the boys), 20 times more likely to end up in prison, and 32 times more likely to run away from home.' Single motherhood is like a farm team for future criminals and social outcasts.

....Many of these studies, for example, are from the 1990s, when the percentage of teenagers raised by single parents was lower than it is today. In 1990, 28 percent of children under eighteen were being raised in one-parent homes (mother or father), and 71 percent were being raised in two-parent homes. By 2005, more than one-third of all babies born in the United States were illegitimate. That's a lot of social problems coming.

...Imagine an America with 70 percent fewer juvenile delinquents, 70 percent fewer teenage births, 63 to 70 percent fewer teenage suicides, and 70 percent to 90 percent fewer runaways and you will appreciate what the sainted single mothers have accomplished." -- P.37-38

"But Americans used to be able to care about the circumstances of their children's births: The illegitimacy rate has gone up by more than 300 percent since 1970. Moreover, even assuming that, sometime around the year of 1969, the entire human race lost the ability to defer gratification, there's still the wholly volitional decision not to give the baby up for adoption.

In 1979, only about 600,000 babies were born out of wedlock and one quarter of them were put up for adoption. By 1991, the number of illegitimate births had doubled to 1,225,000 annually, but only 4 percent were allowed to be adopted -- and most of those babies were snapped up by either Angelina Jolie or Mia Farrow. By 2003, 1.5 million illegitimate babies were born every year, but only about 14,000 of them, less than 1 percent, were put for adoption. Not surprisingly, unwed mothers who care enough to give their children up for adoption also come overwhelmingly from responsible backgrounds. They tend to have higher education and income levels and to come from intact upper-middle-class families with highly educated parents.

You will note that we do not read about adopted children filling up the prisons, welfare rolls, and runaway shelters. Adopted children are no worse off -- and, indeed, are generally better off -- than nonadopted children." -- P.43

"A 2008 study led by Georgia State University economist Benjamin Scafidi found that single mothers -- unwed or divorced -- cost the US taxpayer $112 billion every year." -- P.51
"According to the US Justice Department crime statistics, domestic abuse is virtually nonexistent for married women living with their husbands. From 1993 to 2005, the number of married women victimized by their husbands ranged from 0.9 to 3.2 per 1000. Domestic violence was about 40 times more likely among divorced or separated women, ranging from 37.7 to 118.5 per 1000. Even never married women were more than twice as likely to be victims of domestic violence as married women." -- P.57-58
"A Cornell study found that unwed mothers are 30 percent less likely to marry than other single women..." -- P.70

http://www.rightwingnews.com/mt331/2009/04/ann_coulter_on_single_mothers.php