- Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 


Prostesting Dad on the Jacques Cartier Bridge....

September 19th, 2005, 04:50 PM
Right now, since 6:30 this morning, there is a dad way way up on the Jacques Cartier Bridge (Montrealers must have heard about it as traffic is jammed all over as a result).

He is fighting for equal rights for dads in custody cases. It's the second time he's been up there, only this time he is prepared to stay up there as long as it takes to be heard.

Everybody is angry about it but I sympathize. Having grown up with a single dad, I saw the raw deal they get. He had to pay my mom money in several settlements- even though he had us. And then on top of that, so many people judge men who are single parents. If you see a single dad, the only person who you might be able to judge fairly is the mom.

How come being a single mom is so incredible while being a single dad isn't? Of course, I'm talking in the media's eyes. In real life, single parents should be praised and admired, whatever gender they are.

I think dads are just as capable as moms to raise kids and should be given a fair chance in court and in divorce settlements.

That's my rant. I WISH people in the media would sympathize with this dad. If it was a woman up there fighting for women's rights, I don't think the media would be as harsh.

September 19th, 2005, 05:06 PM
I can sympathize as well, I have a friend with two boys, they lived with him all summer, and now the oldest (10) lives with him permantly. He still pays his ex $1000 a month, even when both kids lived with him. How is that fair? He is worried that if he cuts his ex off, she will want the one child to come back and live with her just so she can collect the money. He also worries about her taking him to court, which will usually favors the mother. I just feel bad for the situation he is in, when all he wants is the best for his children.

September 19th, 2005, 05:20 PM
i dont call them single mum or dad much, to me their sole parents. i ahve a very close friend thats a sole male parent, and he does a good job. we have had such protesters here, and in australia we have a good custody situation, both parents are often regarded in these cases and most of the time custody is shared, it is very rare to have sole custody here unless it is a very viloent situation. so as far as im concerned if you not dodgy you can go through the courts and get it sorted, tis the psychos that dont seem to get anywhere and protest.

well this is a hard issue, after watching men abuse my sister then leave her high and dry with the kids, and now they dont pay a cent for them, well its hard to decide. and many parents are not fit to call themselves such so custody should not be a uniform issue,

should the man who spent 9mths in jail for trying to murder my sister, beating her so bad she miscarried, leaving her a blodied mess and so scarred inside it makes my heart bleed, does that man deserve any form of custody or rights, HELL NO, he should not be alowed to call himself human.

another man who is an abusive drunk, but cant remember his crimes the next day, does he deserve to see his child?? does it matter if he puts that family through hell by harrassing when drunk?? he is certainly not a fit person let alon e a parent and will cause more trauma then love, hell no he should not have rights.

oh and what about the aussie dad recently that was granted custody right, within 24hrs of picking up the kids they were dead, himslef included in a suicide. he did not deserve those rights.

and as far as im concerned if they dont want to pay their child support they should not see the kid, and it happens alot here, i know many sole parents recieving no support from the other parent at all. unlessthe other parent makes the effort to be a parent, and that includes paying for a child, they should have no access. *sarcasm to follow* oh yeah i love it over here, the other parent is rarely forced to pay for their kids, yet expect ppl like my sister to pay for their entire up bringing asnd then had them over to the supposedly great dad/mum that couldnt even be bothered provideing for them.

and i could go on and on and i have plenty of tales of stupid woman too.

but man or woman, love and protection ect is the issue of being a parent, not a person sex.

as many of us know some ppl are antagonistic toward each other, and there are cases where woman make it up to get the man a bad rep, but if its unfounded then thats easily proven, the courts here require proof, not jsut a hysterical womans testimony and she would get no where without proof. i dont know how your courts work but over here they are often more sympathetic toward the other parent, not the sole caregiver. as far as im concerned the other parent not providing sole care in this country have way to many rights and it stinks. too many ppl die in this system children and woman mostly, and that is horrid. we have had too many cases of parents commiting suicide with kids during custody visits, and its high time it stops, and to do that we need to tighten the contols more and stop allowng our courts to be so uniform in the access grated.

ok my vent is over, signed the hellishly angry sister of an abused heart broken woman :mad: (well she was but is better now). :angel:

September 19th, 2005, 05:38 PM
The problem is, when the moms are deadbeats, it doesn't make it to the news. It seems like there are more deadbeat dads, and there probably are, but that shouldn't make a deadbeat mom more acceptable, nor should it stop the dad from getting custody if he is really the better of the two. If my mom hadn't given us up, we'd probably have ended up with her. What a mess that would have been. :rolleyes:

love my dogs
September 19th, 2005, 05:42 PM
Oh boy, you don't want to get me started on this subject!

My hubby happens to be a great dad who got (and continues to get) totally screwed by his ex and the court system. Truthfully, I didn't beleive that the justice system would be that discriminatory until I experienced it first hand.

I spoke for my hubby at trial, and told the judge that we pay for every single expense from haircuts to clothes to dental to activities etc. the child is with us 75% (though the agreement is supposed to be shared 50/50). The mother refuses to contribute a dime. Says she can't afford to feed him (which is why he ends up being with us so much). Judge looks at me and says "come on are telling me she doen't contribute to these costs?"
"no, she does not" I'm holding a bag of receipts.
She gets on stand and says "I can't afford to contribute" BOO HOO, her income is same as my hubby......maybe she should quit smoking, drinking and drugs!!!

Anyway, guess who has to pay child support to who!!!!

September 19th, 2005, 05:53 PM
What year did Kramer vs Kramer come out? It was about this exact issue and still nothing has changed (and that was a lonnng time ago).

love my dogs
September 19th, 2005, 06:17 PM
I'm not familiar with kramer vs. kramer.....should I be? Was this in Ontario?

We are back in court. She now wants the order to read "primary residence with mother, with visitation to father every other week". She has gotten brave from the last court outcome, and thinks that wording the order this way will allow her to get the full amount (from the guidelines for full physical custody), instead of only a portion (like she was awarded for shared physical custody).

love my dogs
September 19th, 2005, 06:56 PM
melanie, I just want you to know that it is not so cut and dry. I'm not familiar with the way your courts work, but here it is not that simple.

It is not so easy to discredit crazy, manipulative, deceiptful mothers who make false accusations and think not of the children but only of how to hurt the other parent.

At the risk of steroetyping, women are usually more catty and manipulative then men.

To battle in court against someone like this takes years... and years....and thousands of $$$$$. After 4 years in court, and $20,000 later, we could not afford lawyer bills anymore. I decided to learn the law and court process myself to save on lawyer bills (which we are still making payments on). I can see why so many men just give up and can't be bothered (or can't afford) to continue the fight.

It is extremely sad when a parent of either sex is abusive to their spouse, or to their children, and I know this happens way too often. I was also once in an abusive relationship, and thank goodness no children, but if I did have children, I would have wanted them as far away from him as possible.

However, it is also sad when women (and sometimes men do this as well) make false accusations and use the court system to try to harm the ex with no regard for the children, (which also happens way too often).

It is also a form of abuse, when you use your children as pawns, and withhold them from visits with the other parent because you want to punish the dad or mom for not paying support.

If you don't allow vists to a parent who is not paying, then sure you are hurting the parent, but mostly your hurting the child. Robbing the child of a relationship with the other parent is not the way to deal with non payment of child support. Why would you punish the child?

Quite frankly, speaking from a step mom who pays child support for a child who is with us 75% of the time, and we cover every single expense, it should be us receiving child support.

However, even if she was supposed to pay us, but didn't, I would definately not tell the child about it (like he needs my problems) and certainly not say "no you can't see your mom because she hasn't paid her child support this month"!!

September 19th, 2005, 10:32 PM
I'm not familiar with kramer vs. kramer.....should I be? Was this in Ontario? No sorry- it's actually a movie. With Dustin Hoffman and Meryl Streep. It's about a woman who disappears and then comes back a year later and wants full custody of her son. Meanwhile Dustin Hoffman has raised him and basically loves him to death... I think it won Oscars in the 70's or early 80's when it came out...

I'm sorry your situation is so horrible. I know a few like that and it really is discrimination.

September 20th, 2005, 02:03 AM
as i said i have no idea about your court system, and over here a man has only to pay 10% of his weekly wage as child support, well thats if they want to anyway, we have no system to force them to pay. my siter pays 100% of her wage weekly tryign to raise these kids, and he adds only $50 per week, and that is all he is required, now to me thats not equitable, he should pay 50% of everything for the child that is his if he wnats shared custody. and my sister is lucky to get that, over here most woman dotn get a cent, thats why we have our welfare system, to make sure kids get fed.

in australia 35% of our children currently live in sole parent homes, and most of those homes are single income, with no child support.

but it is cut and dry here, its very uniform, psychotic ppl can access their kids, its a sad and stupid system. more rights are given to the non present parent, and the primary carer jsut has to cop it. but as i said, to make any claims of abuse or neglect over here is very difficult, i cant jsut go in and say "boof head' was mean and didnt like the kids, here i must provide proof of this, this can be in the form of police records, welfare records, medical and all that. its jsut not as simple as saying 'well hes mean and not nice so i wnat the kids', as i said earlier unless its a horrendously violent situation sole custody is no longer granted in australia.

and because of this system we have so many woman and children die each year, its sickening, i could spout at least 10 cases i have heard of in the last year, and its often suicide with children, it sucks and our system needs to be better designed, it should be tougher and more considerate fo individual situations, instead of the uniform crap we get now. and if toughening the system makes it harder for some, well i say thats tough, it may jsut stop one more childs life being destroyed.

love my dogs, i have heard rumors of your court situation esp relating to alimony payments, boy its tough and msut be hard, but it is not like that here, such manipulaiton is not tolerated and proof is needed for action. but its not as easy as your system but to uniform to be effective for all.

quote'If you don't allow vists to a parent who is not paying, then sure you are hurting the parent, but mostly your hurting the child'

well actually if one parent cant care enough about a child to help provide food and shelter, well i dont really think that is really a fit parent anyway and the child would be better off in my eyes, if you parents cant care to raise you, i dont think they are going to be a positive influence or a safe happy one. a sperm/egg provider is not a parent, its some one who nurtures, loves and cares for you.and if one parent cant provide that love and nurturing, well i dont think the child should be subject to it, jsut because you conceived does not make you a fit parent.. i certainly dont want my neice hanging out with an alcoholic abuser jsut because he provided some sperm, she deserves better than to be subject to such ppl.

its a hard area, and every case is different, but boy am i sick to death of ppl crying for their rights when they do little if anything to deserve them....

September 20th, 2005, 12:12 PM
Don't get me started.

10,000 bucks in the hole to get custody of my step daughter that has lived with us since March 04. Mother gets legal aid, has violated all first court orders (supervised visits, calling us within 48 hours to cancel, substaining from drugs/alcohol, child support) and she is STILL going for full custody and we are paying through are arses. She collected welfare on her child for a whole year and the kid has been with us since March 04. She just cancelled welfare some what recently. Court ordered supervised visits: missed, called to cancel: nope (she actually turns off her phone while we wait at the mutual location with her daughter). My SD hasn't seen her mom since Feb. 2005 and that caused my SD to tell the school that her mom on the last 3 visits with her mom her mom drank and drove (had drink in car) smoked pot with kids in car and hit SD about the face on several occasions. CCAS was called and we went for legal custody the same day we heard. She did SD's homework for her in her own writing and got 6 wrong! Gr. 3 math at that. She hadn't seen her daughter for 8 months but suddenly started to pick her up when welfare authorities started investigating (we didnt know this) to show her round to the landlord. Called SD's school yelling at the principle to write a letter saying that SD lives with her (principle asked SD and SD said hadnt seen my mom since I told the shcool about those incidents, havent lived with her in along time). This is just half of it, nevermind that she NEVER calls the kid and when the kid calls her the mom talks for like 10 minutes and ALWAYS says shes gonna call her back. You guessed it NEVER does. Also when SD says all the wonderful things she does and has, mom is rude to her and says well I took SD's half sister here and there and bought her this. She has even violated CCAS restrictions like obstaining from alcohol (suprise visits, she was hammered).
Not to mention the fact that we got The office of the childrens lawyer invloved (mutual court lawyer on the kids behalf) and she missed all the appoinments. Called on the day of and confirmed she was going to these meetings and never showed up. The office of the childrens lawyer said that she has never in 25 years seen a woman who is going for full custody act like this.
So childrens aid society places her as a high risk mother, Office of the children lawyer says she recommends full custody to us and no access or suspended access. Meaning she will have to go to court to even see her daughter. But guess what... we still have to go to court! We still have to pay big money. We are no lie at 10,000 and this is a pretty cut and dry case.

Wow sorry I didnt meant to blabber on but godang it I need to vent about this. Think about it we still have to fight for custody against a high risk mother? shouldn't that have been enough to end this court battle? Apparently not... but if it were a father that acte dthis way... I wonder?

love my dogs
September 20th, 2005, 12:38 PM
so mel, are you saying that I should tell my step son that since his mother does not contribute to his financial needs, that she is unfit, does not love him, and that he should not visit her?

I just think that would break his heart to be told that "your mom doesn't love you, is unfit, and doesn't deserve the right to see you". I think that he can figure out on his own, and as time goes by that she is not mentally well, instead of just being ripped away from her, and always wondering about her.

Or are you only talking about abuse cases?

September 20th, 2005, 01:01 PM
Love my dogs you are right I agree. Financial support should not be any reason to deny the child access to the parent. Even after no phone calls and no nothing with SD's mom we still let her take her the last 3 times (bad idea) but in the end I would do it again. The only person that child will regret is the parent not allowing the other to see them. In teh end in my case the daughter saw her mom for what she is. I never needed to tell her. I never said anything about her mom. Even went out of my way to defend her mom to SD when she didnt come or call. I would tell SD that her mom loved her. Sooner or later I believe people get seen for what they are even to a child infatuated with their parents love so much that they may not realize the bad things they do.

love my dogs
September 20th, 2005, 01:11 PM
exactly luvmypit.....I know what you mean, at least your ex (hubby's ex) is obvious and does the drinking and stuff with witnesses, and misses appt., so it is easier to prove.

Not that it is easy, I know!

Our situation is different, in that the mother is definately unfit....drinking and drugs, stealing money from kids, emotional abuse, feeding alcohol to the kids, but there is no proof, and the kids protect her.

The oldest son has PAS (parental alienation syndrome) because mother has convinced him that we have ruined her life, even told him that I attacked her (which is a complete lie, and she was actually the one who attacked me). She has broken into our home, vandalized our property proof!!!!!!

Unfortunately with PAS, child is likely to lie for the abusive parent....out of fear, or guilt or pity....who knows, but children's lawyer met with both kids, who would not confirm any negative about the mother. The appointment for the children to go see OCL, was agreed to by us, but set up by her. On 2nd appointment, (she was coming to pick up younger child for this app), younger child begged me not to go. He told me that his mother told him what to say the whole way there, and he could not tell the truth because she was right in the next room, and he was afraid she would hear him.

We told the OCL everything, but it was like they didn't beleive us at all. It makes me so mad, it seems they automatically beleive whatever the mother says.

Even with really good proof, these things can be drawn out for years, and thousands of $$$$, and in the end, it always seems like the woman gets sympathy no matter what she does.

Well, good luck to you, I know how stressfull and costly it all can be.

September 20th, 2005, 01:24 PM
And good luck to you!

We were so worried that we would never be able to prove anything but thank god shes a dumby and proved every thing we accused her off. She is also a pathological liar that even if we both are looking at the same pink wall she will put her life on the line to prove its blue. She is that bad. I was afraid she was so good at lying that she would be able to get past it.

BTW ask the OCL to have the mom tested for drugs and alcohol. My SD mom had to and we still haven't gotten the results but I could tell you what they would be... lol.... Its a hair strand test. If what you are accusing her off is alcohol and drug abuse it is worth it to get it down. She can't manipulate herself out of that one.

September 20th, 2005, 01:26 PM
One more thing... OCl when they do the drug test they even suggested we have the SD's hair tested cause it would even show mild contacts with these drugs. Even suggets to pay for yourself. If you can prove just that then you have at least a leg to stand on.

love my dogs
September 20th, 2005, 02:07 PM
luvmypit, thanks for the advice. If need be, we'll request that, I didn't know you could ask for a drug test.

Truthfully, we probably won't need to go that far with it this time, as youngest SS is now 14, and really cannot be forced either way. At that age, it is up to the kid, and his wish is to keep things the way they are (shared).

Custody has always been shared, so it would be really hard for her to get full unless that is child's wish.

If it was child's wish, at this point, we probably would not fight it, as we have spent too many years and $$ already.

The older SS lives with her because he was old enough to decide. He hates his dad and I, and chooses not to see us. We spent 2.5 years fighting for him, and then by the end we were just fighting for mandatory visits. Mom said SS did not want any visits, because he hates his dad. Hubby kept fighting, and judge finally ordered mother to allow counselling for hubby and son to rebuild relationship, but no mandatory visits. Judge basically said that even if mother was proven unfit, the child can decide due to his age.

We still don't see older SS, but have had to give up and move on as we are tired, and he is almost an adult.

From all that, if we have accomplished nothing else, at least we did fight for the boy, and can always tell him as much, regardless of what else he's been told.

With younger SS it's different because he's been with us longer, and knows we love him. I'll fight for him as long as it is what he wants, and not a minute longer.

September 20th, 2005, 04:59 PM
ok as i sad some men get it hard and are set up in some ways, and thats not fair. but i dont think this should turn into a woman bashing thing either.

naturally the courts prefer a mother to have custody, its kinda nautual and often thought the best way to do things. just imagine if your a good mum, you break up with your fella and he wants custody, your not mean, you love your kids, and it was an amicalbe break, yet he has a chance of taking them away, now to me that just downright unfair and good woman should be left with their children.

and any unfit person, does not matter if male or female, should not be allowed to have the kids, its not about woman scoring points, it should b about the safety of the child, plain and simple.

Quote'so mel, are you saying that I should tell my step son that since his mother does not contribute to his financial needs, that she is unfit, does not love him, and that he should not visit her?'

no it is no ones right to say a person does not love a child, BUT if a person has an income and refuse to pay a cent for a child that they claim to love and care for, ha, no they dont deserve the child. if a person claims to love a child yet does not even provide clothign or help with food and housing, well it makes me question their love for that child or the fact that they really care for the childs welfare. if you cant act like a parent then you simply are not one in my eyes.

yes most of our problems here are based on abusers, and boy do we have alot of them, but then there is jsut dead beat parents that dont care and have 4 different kids to 4 diff woman and he does not pay for one of them, sorry dead beat does not get the chance.

i truly believe we are at a point where we either start forcing them to pay and prentend to be parents, or they jsut bugger off. i dont know about your country, but over here our sole parent rates are on the rise and many factors contribute, and to me one of those is the fact that its easy to walk away and drop all responsibility. and the biggest issue in my mind, what do we teach children when we let them hang out with dead beats, esp if the kid is too young to realise.

i know one man who only has to contribute $5 a week from his welfare, yet his ex recieves a similar amount of welfare yet all hers go to the child, sorry but to me its a cop out and a joke. i have never met a child that costs $5 a week to raise.

the majority of ppl i know are sole parents as i said they make up 35% of our populaiton, and not many fo them have a good story, most were abused in some way as were the kids. we have a huge problem here, its out of control and must be stopped.

and yes because fo our system, we do have many children die each year, like last week, a victorian man on an access visit drove his car into a river after notifying the mother he was commiting suicide, and he killed those 3 little boys. or the other little girl in queensland this week that was found dead with her father in a car. or the woman who went to court to fight for custody and was shot dead outside the court house by her ex. have you ever seen what happens to a woman after a man kills her children, its wrong and unnatrural.

this happens time and time again over here, to many children are jsut handed over to parents even with severe protest from the primary carer. so as i sad before if we toughen our system and it makes it harder for some ppl, well thats fine by me, if it saves one little babies life it was worth it any decent caring person would be understandable.

in this counry if your a decent person (or even a psycho in most cases) you wont have a problem and shared access is always granted. sole custody is only ever given in extreme cases, such as my sisters after her life was almost taken, and even that was a hard thing to do.

perhaps your country and ours should get together and share the best bits fo our systems to create a better one. cause man this is not working and is to sad to even contemplate.

good luck with yours, i hope it works out.

September 20th, 2005, 05:25 PM
I don't think anyone is women bashing, just unfit mother bashing. I think any mother that uses her children to collect money from the father for her lifestyle, and not her kids, is a bad mother. Children should not be used as pawn for financial gain.

September 20th, 2005, 11:55 PM
Exactly. I think it's not women bashing, just saying that unfit mothers should be rated on the same scale as unfit fathers.

I also don't believe that it's more "natural" for kids to be with the mom. If you want to talk natural, then you have say because the kids need so much parental care before becoming adults, naturally both parents should be involved. I think moms bring half the skills to the table and dads bring the other half. There is a lot of overlap and there is a lot of room for one sex to learn the other's role.

Basically, I lived with a single dad who didn't get a penny from my mom, who saw us maximum twice a year, and like all parents, he wasn't perfect. That said, I have seen my friends interact with their moms and I actually am way more open communicating with my dad than my friends are with their moms. All the stereotypes put dads as "typical" men who can't communicate- but trust me on this, they learn. When they have to, they can learn anything, just like you would expect a mom to do. I just want them to have an equal chance at custody if they are as fit or more than the mom is.

September 21st, 2005, 11:14 AM
lovemypit, did the judge follow the OCL's recommendations in your case?

September 21st, 2005, 01:22 PM
OCL's report recommended to the judge which goes before a judge Oct. 5th that we should have sole custody with terminated access or suspended access. Both have the same consequences and both you need to go back to court for access rights but if you have terminated its much more harder to convince a judge your worthy of access. So in this case it worked b/c she showed her true colours.

She had three meetings with OCL. All three she called and confirmed she was coming. After waiting an hour or so OCL called on all three occasions the moms house where boyfriend said the same thing, she should be there already. After the 3rd time OCl closed the file b/c of mother not cooperating. She straight peed them off. We showed up for the meetings (we had one) and she decided after reviewing the Catholic CHildrens Aid file which had notes from mariahs teacher and principal about dad going to field trips and always available and willing to work on SD. And readin the bad things from her moms file including missin a couple appt.s with CCAS also. But that they have never spoken or seen the mom except for when she called to yell at the principle to get a note saying SD lived with her. She peed the school off too. So we were really lucky, not often do you get a recommendation for sole custody from the office of the childrens lawyer, childrens aid and the school. Also SD had a meeting with OCL and the lady said she never seen a 9 year old so smart and knows what she wants.

As for the drug test, the mom was supposed to bring that to the OCL meetings. She never went (she went to hospital for test but didnt bring to OCL) so I am not sure of the results but I could tell you easily what they are. All you have to do is talk to my SD and then you will wonder why she knows the words spliff, joint, ganja, and why when we lived in Melvern did she smile when the smell was in the air and ask me if I smell that and say thats what my mom smokes. Theres your test results.

Its been such a long $$$$$ road. 10,000 later and we still don't have a final order although this is what we are asking for and under the circumstances I believe we will get it come Oct. 5th!

September 21st, 2005, 02:17 PM
luvmypit, it's too bad the investigation was not "complete" ie mom's lack of involvment, but in your case i think her lack of interest in the case shows a lot of her character. It sounds as you will soon be over with this matter. Good luck, and i think your situation proves that not everyone automatically sides with the mom.

September 21st, 2005, 02:22 PM
your right not automatically but god were we scared before taking on this endevour. Its a known fact that courts favour mothers. Sometimes thats a good things and sometimes thats a bad thing. So when she kept proving over and over... we knew we had it in the bag... Or at least we hope we have it in the bag!

Check this out.. to apply for a baby bonus for SD my hubby can't apply b/c he is lving with a woman (me) and that the woman is the one who needs to file for it... Isn't that weird? So basically if I wasn't living with him then he would be allowed but b/c he is living with me even though I am not her mom I can file for baby bonus. I dunno I know they have their reasons but seems a little weird.

love my dogs
September 21st, 2005, 02:34 PM
savanna I'm not sure if you are asking love my dogs, or luvmypit about the OCL......In our case, OCL was not really helpfull because it is typical (in a case of PAS) for the child to be aligned with whatever the alienating parent wants. The purpose of OCL is strictly to relay what the child's wishes are, and not always what is in their best interest.

We would have had a better shot if the child was younger, but he was 14, and the court allows the child to decide at that age.

The OCL did not end up in trial with us, because a week before the trial, we went to a pre trial conference, and hubby screwed it all up. He had been suffering from panic attacks (ever since SS declared his hate for us and decided to move in with his mom), and was really nervous. The mother starts verbally attacking him, and more accusations. The judge won't let him speak, and he has full blown panic attack. He ends up agreeing to the child living with her, with the understanding that she will let the child go to counselling with his dad. The judge says, "ok, you finally agree, so I am going to make it an order now".(but she does not add the part about counselling to the order)

Issues of child support were put off to trial because hubby was obviously suffering, and could not focus or speak. He was like a scared, bullied child caving in to intimidation. It was so sad to watch, but I was not allowed to speak either, because he had not previously asked for permission from Judge, and at that point he did not know to.

The judge knew enough to put issues of child support off, but yet let the custody thing slide through. HHMMM

Anyway, OCL are not needed for support cases, so OCL was not there at our trial.

The more I think about the way things went down though, OCL had been pushing us really hard to settle because he did not want to appear in trial. We were all set up to discredit OCL (at trial) because there were strange things that went on. For example, OCL interviewed children with mother right in next room. Youngest son said he could hear her talking to older son (while they waited), so he knew she could hear him also. Also, OCL would not release the social worker's written report, or allow it to be used at trial. The social worker also worked for OCL, so OCL controlled who saw the report. In a meeting with all parties, social worker's advice was very different from OCL's.

September 27th, 2005, 01:02 PM
I am a single, sole support mother... who would DIE for my kids. No one and nothing will ever hurt them so long as momma bear is around :)
However,I have to wonder, just how many 'serial support' mothers there are out there??? You know the kind I'm refering to because you all are talking about them as it is.
They care nothing for what is best for the child, only the money. Someone has to pay for their fake nails, hair, boobs... etc... So, they have a kid with 1 man, then another with another.... apparently, it is much more lucrative if you collect for 2 kids from 2 dads?? Rather then having them with 1 man and going after him for support... Or better yet, having protected sex and not making babies they can't raise!! It makes me sick!!

I've recently witnessed a couple of serial mothers at work, and let me tell you all .... it really p*sses me off to see how a good father, who just wants to
help his kids grow up healthy and happy, can be abused. The things that are being said are unbelievably cruel and hurtful and totally unneccessary (not to mention untrue).... but, she gets away with it. Stops letting the child see the father..because she feels like it. Won't let the father speak to the child...because she feels like it. I dont' get it..... can someone explain to me how this can be? A woman can behave detrimentally toward her own child, yet the court still awards it all to her? Because she gave birth?? You know what folks, it's like the old saying goes "it takes a boy to make a baby, it takes a man to raise a child" only in many cases it should be "it takes a girl to make a baby, and a REAL woman with a HEART to raise a child!"

I'm all for that guy on the bridge..... GO DADDY!! I hope he raises awareness and if nothing else, his children will know he' fought for their rights too :)

September 27th, 2005, 03:57 PM
My mom has 5 kids and none of them live with her. She never paid a cent for us, and still asked my dad for money every chance she could. People say (in her case) it's because she's the oldest of a huge family (she has 6 sisters). She's taken care of people her whole life and now she resents it. So she takes care of NOBODY. She's also, as CK put it in another thread, "peter pan". That's the problem. When you're 20, having a youthful and spontaneous partner is fun. But pushing 30 and then 40, "youthful and spontaneous" becomes "never grows up". :rolleyes:

love my dogs
September 27th, 2005, 04:37 PM
wjranch it is so nice to hear that perspective from "the ex wife", or "Biological mother".

After the things I have been through with my hubby, his ex, and his 2 kids, I can't help but question in my mind everytime I hear an ex wife complain about the father.

"he's so terrible,.....he always lets them down....never pays support....blah, blah, blah,"

Yeah right.....I don't even beleive it anymore!

Alright, I'm sure it happens...both fathers and mothers are capable of letting their children down....both make mistakes.

But come on.....that is exactly the point....nobody is perfect.

So, the child leaves the house without his mitts and hat, before I can catch it. Well suddenly, a simple mistake that could happen to any parent is a federal case, but nobody seems to mind that the "mom" is never home, and the kids are always alone because she has to be at her boyfriend's house 24/, apparently that is her right, after all she is "THE MOTHER"!

Sorry-mini rant!

Anyway, my point is that if a parent really loved the child, they would:

a) not with hold the child from seeing the other parent (unless there is evidence of abuse)

b) not use or try to use the other parent's normal flaws and mistakes to make themselves appear like the better parent (children are a product of both parents, if you point out the other parent's flaws all the time, the child's own self esteem will be damaged)

c) teach the children to respect and love both the parents and step parents

Well, as I said, it is nice to hear that not all single mothers are father haters. LOL

September 27th, 2005, 04:39 PM
my point is that if a parent really loved the child, they would:
you forgot-- not use the child as a pawn...

love my dogs
September 28th, 2005, 07:48 PM
oh yeah, and not use children as pawns.

(thanks prin)

or spies...

September 29th, 2005, 09:57 AM
naturally the courts prefer a mother to have custody, its kinda nautual and often thought the best way to do things. just imagine if your a good mum, you break up with your fella and he wants custody, your not mean, you love your kids, and it was an amicalbe break, yet he has a chance of taking them away, now to me that just downright unfair and good woman should be left with their children.

You're right. It's just as unfair that that the man who is not mean and loves his kids has a chance of losing them. That's the attitude that makes the system so BS here.

When I was a personal banker, I lost count of the number of men who were paying out 80% of thier cheques for child support, who were on the verge of bankruptcy. Also, the number of men who were single and struggling, while the mom was re-married and still soaking the dad for the majority of the support. It's complete crap the way dads get screwed over. I've also seen oodles of men who are paying support, but out of spite, the mom either won't let them see thier children, or make it impossible. Then, if the father refuses to pay support, he is labled as a dead-beat and is dragged through the courts and put into financial ruin. Yet, Mom still won't let Dad see the kids, and she gets away with it. I'm usually one of the first to doubt those who say, "poor me", but in this case, dads definitely get the short end of the stick

I grew up with my Mom, and I listened to her slag my dad. I later learned there were three sides to the story. His, hers, and the truth. I've vowed that, heaven forbid, if anything ever happens with my marriage, my kids will always feel that I view thier mom as the best mom in the world. To have them think otherwise because of anything I would say would be a crime.

love my dogs
September 29th, 2005, 01:23 PM
I grew up with my Mom, and I listened to her slag my dad. I later learned there were three sides to the story. His, hers, and the truth

That is exactly what I have always told my 2 step sons...about 3 sides to every story.

I also learned "take everything with a grain of salt" from my own mom. It means don't buy into everything you hear.

I only hope that my older step son (the one we have not seen in 2 years, 3 months and 4 days) will one day realize this. It makes me hopeful to hear that you recognized this Schwinn, without actually having to "walk a mile".

I am so afraid that my older step son will never see the truth, I want him to so badly, but at the same time, I don't want him to have to learn it by going through what his father has been through. Also, recognizing the truth would also mean recognizing some painful thruths about the mother he has given up his dad for. So there is no happy ending either way.

The comments of mels that schwinn posted above, were bad enough the 1st time I read them.....because of my passionate fight AGAINST that point of view, I did not respond to them directly. I will now.

First of all, on the theory that a child is better with the mother, that is absolutely not true. A child is better when he/she has the love and guidance and parenting from both a mother and a father.

A child needs different things from each parent, depending on the sex of the child. A nursing baby, of course, I would say should be with the mom for that purpose. However, things like a woman's success in adult relationships with men, can be directly related to her relationship with her father...particularly between the ages of 12-15. Of course, she needs her mother to learn how to be a mother.

I was very lucky that I grew up with both my parents, and could not imagine not having had my dad in my life. I would not be the person I am today if I did not have my dad. Don't get me wrong, I love my mom....but dad was definatley the stronger role model.

As far as fair goes, it is not fair to a child to deprive him/her from having a relationship with both parents.

And if you want to talk about feelings.....I can tell you that it was devistating to both me and hubby when my older step son left. We kept his room in tact up until our recent move. Santa and the easter bunny came...they left stockings and hid eggs in his room...just in case, but he never came to get them.

We lived 2 blocks from his mom, but he never came to visit. We watched him walk by the house on his way to school......every single day hubby would watch him with tears in his eyes. We have lost a child....oh yes, he is still alive, but gone nonetheless. The pain we have felt cannot be effectively put in words. Bad for me, but way worse for hubby.

Grief counselling helped alot, but still hubby's degree of pain finally prompted him to suggest that we move farther another town. You cannot imagine how hurtful it is to have your phone calls rejected, your child's head filled with lies to make him hate you, and to see him growing up so close, but so far....and there is nothing to do but hope and pray.....eventually one must try to get on with life.

You see, fathers have feelings too.

Anyway sorry for the long post.....just a little venting.LOL...all better now.

September 29th, 2005, 01:30 PM
You're right, love my dogs, I can't imagine, and I'm sure you understand when I say I hope that never changes. When Cheryl and I were moving, we found a list I made years ago about life goals, and number one was "Be a superhero to my kids". Sometimes when I hold Gracie, my biggest fear is that I'll dissappoint her. Then she barfs on me, smiles, and all is good again...except my shirt...

love my dogs
September 29th, 2005, 01:43 PM
Then she barfs on me, smiles, and all is good again...except my shirt...

Yeah...I'd get a picture of that. When she is a teenager it will come in handy! :D

September 29th, 2005, 02:33 PM
I don't agree with the statement:Of course, she needs her mother to learn how to be a mother. My mom left when I was two and I have no doubt that I would be a good mom. Why? I have lived throught the extremes of good and bad parenting and I think I have seen enough of both sides to be able to come down the middle, whether I had a mom or not. I think you are right about dads shaping relationships with men, but I think the same is for moms. I think they shape how we deal with women too, but I wouldn't go so far as to say they teach us certain roles.

It took me a long time to respect women. I was always very condescending even when I was little because I thought I knew more about how things were than women did. I learned as a teenager that not all moms are horrible and not all women are disappointing and then I began to ease up on my judgements. I think I have a lot to learn from other women and men, but certainly not from my mother and I won't be a lesser person for learning everything elsewhere.

love my dogs
September 29th, 2005, 10:20 PM
Prin, I hope you did not take offense to that theory. It is part of the nurture theory.

Of course it does NOT mean you will be a bad mother if you grow up without your mother around, nor does it mean that you will be a bad father if you don't have that fatherly influence.

My own hubby is a good example of that.

There are lots of other resources, and relationships throughout life that shape and mould us as individuals. As with my own mother, she had alot of depression (so was somewhat emotionally absent) and I ended up having a kind of surroget mom in my early 20's.....I know, sounds strange, but it helped me with some of my own issues related to mom's depression.

All I am saying is that a child that is deprived of having either parent's love and affection is affected, if in no other way than feeling hurt and confused.

Every situation is different, and I'm not saying it is better for a child to be with a parent if the parent is abusive, because I beleive that would be more harmful than not having that parent around. Though even in that type of a case, the child will still be affected either way.

October 6th, 2005, 12:49 PM
Hey ya'll,

Didn't want to start a new thread for this so I thought I'd update you all on the court case that took place yesterday.

WE WON! It was easy b/c she didn't show up. Nice mom huh? Anyhow we got Sole Custody, 1500 in costs (which you never get but the judge thought she of all people deserved it - his words not mine) . He was clearly irratated with the fact that this woman was going for Sole (full) custody yet did not show up for supervised visits/ pay child support, cooperate with OCL, refrain from drinking and drug use order [childrens aid caught her on suprise visit], nor did she show up for the final order. usually you never ever get costs and he gave us. Her lawyer basically tried to get taken off the case b/c he cant get a hold of client and the judge said nope we will proceed (if he would have said yes we would have to start from the very beginning).

Also the access wasn't terminated but is left up to fathers discretion. Which is probably better. I have a feeling though she will not ask for visits. She will probably call us drunk and screaming and incoherent when she recieves the Family responsibilities office paperwork requesting 1500 and 80 dollars a month for child support. Thats all she cares about. I just couldn't believe that she didn't show up. She is still collecting a baby bonus on SD that we are in the process of blowing the horn on that one also.

So thought I'd let ya'll know. A great weight has been lifted off our shoulders.

October 6th, 2005, 01:13 PM
Congrats. I am glad to hear everything worked out for your family! :thumbs up

October 6th, 2005, 01:53 PM
Victory! Yey! That's really great. Thanks for the update.

October 6th, 2005, 02:52 PM
Thank you! Im just glad we don't have to pay through are arses anymore!

And the child is safe and secure and happier then she has ever been. That is truly all we wanted.

October 7th, 2005, 01:15 PM
Congratulations, Luvmypit. And I'm sure you will, but I hope that the kids will still be allowed to see thier mom (even though the mom doesn't deserve it) unless they are in danger. To me, it sounds that this women will self-destruct the relationship on her own and it won't be an issue anyway. I'm probably wasting my breath, though, because from what I've seen of you in here, it sounds as though you guys have already been doing the very best you can to make the best of a rotten situation.

Thank you! Im just glad we don't have to pay through are arses anymore!

Wouldn't a wallet be easier? I'm just saying...

October 7th, 2005, 02:33 PM
LOL yes I mean wallet.. I think that would be more comfortable.

Well the goal is happiness and stability for the child. If that means seeing her mom I am all for it. We always encouraged her to see her mom and call her.

After the allegations where made after her last visits in Feb. we had supervised visits imposed by the court and childrens aid in respect to child access. This is what she fought for. We confirmed with her on the first one and when we went she never came and then when she was called 1 hour into the visit she said her car was broken down. Fine. Benefit of the doubt. Next time, we called and confirmed but rumour had it she was going to a cottage that weekend so we called again and confirmed. Didn't show up and turned off her phone for the weekend. Never calls her daughter... ever and when her daughter calls her she says that she calls all the time and that WE don't give her the messages so we allowed SD to check all messages and caller logs . And on every call the child makes her mom and this never fails tells her she will call her right back and tell the child to make sure she picks up the phone and then guess what NEVER calls her back. My thing is if mom is as bad as I think she is then it will show to the child without any prompting from her dad or me. After that we never went to supervised again and she didn't either. Our lawyer said we should continue to go so it would look bad on her in court but its not about making her look bad it was too disapointing for the child. Could you imagine going and being disapointed by your mother over and over again.

SD doesn't ask about her mom anymore which is really sad. I think she is happy and just wants to move on. Mom blames her for welfare investigations/childrens aid involvement ect.. b/c SD told the school on her b/c she didn't want to go on visits any more b/c she was scared. Her mom has gotten worse and worse and I think about 3 weeks ago called us and told us that we can have her that she doesnt need her. Oh gee thanks cause we really needed your permission.

October 7th, 2005, 03:18 PM
That is really sad, but between you and me (okay, and everyone reading this thread), it sounds like it is for the best. Unfortunately, if the responsible parent makes the decision, it almost always backfires. Bottom line, if the SD is happy, then don't lament the lack of relationship with the mom too much. On one level, it might be sad, but in the grand scheme of things, it sounds like she has a good head on her shoulders, and ultimately, is better for it. 20 years from now, if anyone is going to suffer, it will be the mom, not her, or you.

love my dogs
October 9th, 2005, 01:45 PM
luvmypit I'm glad that everything has worked out.....well, it is a sad thing however you look at it, but you know it's nice that it has worked out the best that it can in this situation.

It is maddening that it takes this extent of negligence from the mother before a court will listen to the father, and the money spent in court is discusting.

I really hope that she does leave you alone, and doesn't try to take you back to court in another year or so.

October 11th, 2005, 12:47 PM
She won't go to court again. I just feel sorry for the child ofcourse.

I told her unfortunantly you can't pick your family.

It was a cut and dry case. I just wonder why we had to spend all this money to get custody of a child that we have had custody of for a year prior and whos mother is considered high risk and whos daughter was afraid of. Oh well its over and done with. We are all happy we have closed that chapter now we are just waiting for the mom to call when she realizes she actually has to pay us money (she thought that she was gonna get all this back child support, which was never even a threat but that is how distorted her vision of reality is).

Thanks guys!